3,444 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Feb 9, 2021 12:18:31 GMT
The chandelier will rise, and fall, better than ever before. Stop fretting peeps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2021 13:38:09 GMT
A chandelier will rise, and fall, better than ever before. Stop fretting peeps. Corrected |
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Feb 9, 2021 16:11:40 GMT
At the moment, I'm still going with the "wait and see" mindset, but it's fair to be concerned about what Phantom will be like when it returns. I do have a feeling that we will see the chandelier rise again, but like what danb said, in what form will it be in? Not to mention the Angel, candelabra, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Feb 9, 2021 17:57:45 GMT
Presumably its mostly Camerons cash rather than ALW’s so it’ll be whatever makes financial sense rather than self indulgent flights of fancy.
|
|
42ndBlvd
Swing
I'll be back where I was born to be
|
Post by 42ndBlvd on Feb 11, 2021 12:42:51 GMT
“As with the original 1986 production, the new set design will not be limited to the stage area and will move into the auditorium, covering the proscenium and parts of the boxes. This is important to the production which, for dramatic effect, requires a connection between stage and auditorium – this is particularly important for The Phantom of the Opera, which seeks to blur the boundary between stage and auditorium such that the auditorium and the audience become part of the production.”
- The proscenium and the opera boxes blend together making the proscenium overall look extremely obese.
- Maria Björnson's favourite set piece, the angel is gone!
- Hating the "fragmented" look to the proscenium, it looked fine in the UK tour but not here.
- The new chandelier is more close to the Garnier one, but looks smaller, a lot less ornate than Maria's!
- The auditoriums side boxes draw too much attention from the overall proscenium! They should have been kept black.
- The main curtain looks worse here: too much of it hidden by the opera boxes, this rendering seems to show the openning of act 2.
So much for "brilliant original"!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 13:04:36 GMT
urg
It looks really bitty.
Mega shame they've just shoehorned the touring proscenium in.
How tiny will the actual stage be with those boxes permanently onstage. Jeepers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 13:14:08 GMT
I personally don’t hate it, besides it’s only a piece of concept art. It’s difficult to get a feel for it until seen in person.
|
|
1,057 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by David J on Feb 11, 2021 13:46:37 GMT
urg It looks really bitty. Mega shame they've just shoehorned the touring proscenium in. How tiny will the actual stage be with those boxes permanently onstage. Jeepers. Where does it say in the article that the onstage boxes are permanently there. As far as I can see the picture is just showing them when they're on. And no way would they reduce the width of the space that way And how can we tell how ornate the chandelier is compared to the original when we can see only the underside? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2021 13:53:33 GMT
urg It looks really bitty. Mega shame they've just shoehorned the touring proscenium in. How tiny will the actual stage be with those boxes permanently onstage. Jeepers. Where does it say in the article that the onstage boxes are permanently there. As far as I can see the picture is just showing them when they're on. And no way would they reduce the width of the space that way And how can we tell how ornate the chandelier is compared to the original when we can see only the underside? It's a presumption based on images from the UK tour, which after the gilded stacks, had a permanent false gold arch proscenium, very much the same shape as depicted in the mock up.  |
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Feb 11, 2021 14:33:47 GMT
To me it looks similar to the original set design, but with noticeable differences. The Angel being gone is the most noticeable, as well as some sculptures at the side. It actually looks close to how I imagined it would look like. And besides, it is just concept art like what @tom89 said, so this may not be final and it's too early to judge. We could see the Angel implemented, but that's not certain.
|
|
42ndBlvd
Swing
I'll be back where I was born to be
|
Post by 42ndBlvd on Feb 11, 2021 15:30:54 GMT
To me it looks similar to the original set design, but with noticeable differences. The Angel being gone is the most noticeable, as well as some sculptures at the side. It actually looks close to how I imagined it would look like. And besides, it is just concept art like what @tom89 said, so this may not be final and it's too early to judge. We could see the Angel implemented, but that's not certain. The designs are apart of a planning permission submitted to the local council so seems to be finalised-ish |
|
1,210 posts
|
Post by musicalmarge on Feb 11, 2021 16:29:21 GMT
The only reason this was done is due to MONEY.
It needs to be cheaper to run. Period.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Feb 11, 2021 16:34:10 GMT
Not a surprise at all, but very disappointing. They are literally just repurposing the tour sets so we have those ugly gaps between the parts of the false proscenium. I was hoping that they would at least replace the proscenium statues and a put a false Angel in (even if it didn't levitate), but no, they just don't want to spend anything.
The planning documentation is interesting because it says the original production is officially gone, contrary to the PR nonsense spouted by RUG.
You only need to scroll back a few pages to see how many of us said this would happen and we were told we were just wrong. I don't like being vindicated on this occasion.
Waiting for the Cameron defenders to praise him in 3...2...1...
|
|
1,057 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by David J on Feb 11, 2021 17:39:23 GMT
Where does it say in the article that the onstage boxes are permanently there. As far as I can see the picture is just showing them when they're on. And no way would they reduce the width of the space that way And how can we tell how ornate the chandelier is compared to the original when we can see only the underside? It's a presumption based on images from the UK tour, which after the gilded stacks, had a permanent false gold arch proscenium, very much the same shape as depicted in the mock up. Unless that's a photo of the UK tour's short lived run at Manchester, that's the 2012 chandelier being used because the Curve Theatre couldn't accommodate whatever new chandelier is going to be used. From that I can see in the concept art, it looks better than that. I'm more concerned about whether the candelabras are still going to rise through the stage |
|
2,248 posts
|
Post by richey on Feb 11, 2021 17:47:08 GMT
It's a presumption based on images from the UK tour, which after the gilded stacks, had a permanent false gold arch proscenium, very much the same shape as depicted in the mock up. Unless that's a photo of the UK tour's short lived run at Manchester, that's the 2012 chandelier being used because the Curve Theatre couldn't accommodate The tour never made it as far as Manchester. If it had we may have found out whether the chandelier at the Curve was indeed a temporary measure |
|
19,696 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Feb 11, 2021 17:55:44 GMT
Not a surprise at all, but very disappointing. They are literally just repurposing the tour sets so we have those ugly gaps between the parts of the false proscenium. I was hoping that they would at least replace the proscenium statues and a put a false Angel in (even if it didn't levitate), but no, they just don't want to spend anything. The planning documentation is interesting because it says the original production is officially gone, contrary to the PR nonsense spouted by RUG. You only need to scroll back a few pages to see how many of us said this would happen and we were told we were just wrong. I don't like being vindicated on this occasion. Waiting for the Cameron defenders to praise him in 3...2...1...All hail the Cameron! 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻 🙂 Seriously, I think what some of us have said is that the producers of this show should be allowed to modernise the backstage elements of the production and that doing that to reduce running costs is not a punishable offence. No one wants to see it changed, everyone wants the classic set pieces to remain, but we understand that today’s technology can do it without people physically pulling on ropes and that this should be allowed to happen. It’s not a case of defending him, it’s a case of understanding that things move on. |
|
|
|
Post by 141920grm on Feb 11, 2021 18:56:38 GMT
But when the backstage tinkering results in the dismemberment of the most iconic set piece of the entire production... one has got to draw the line somewhere??
A grievous insult to the original 1986 work, not going to lie.
Tactless, tasteless, on his way out, Mr Mackintosh.
|
|
42ndBlvd
Swing
I'll be back where I was born to be
|
Post by 42ndBlvd on Feb 11, 2021 19:33:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Feb 11, 2021 20:51:40 GMT
I think there is just a hint of overreaction here.
Yes, it is a series 9f bigger and smaller changes and the Phans don't like that sort of thing.
But for the audience seeing the show for the first time, as long as there is a big chandelier moment and it all looks abd sounds opulent, they will be happy and fully entertained.
I saw the show on Broadway about 25 years ago and it looked tired then. A refresh is overdue and necessary.
|
|
1,736 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Feb 11, 2021 21:02:18 GMT
I think there is just a hint of overreaction here. Yes, it is a series 9f bigger and smaller changes and the Phans don't like that sort of thing. But for the audience seeing the show for the first time, as long as there is a big chandelier moment and it all looks abd sounds opulent, they will be happy and fully entertained. I saw the show on Broadway about 25 years ago and it looked tired then. A refresh is overdue and necessary. I see it that Phantom of the Opera has closed. The choice Is bring back a slightly technically different version or put something else in. It is tricky as unlike Les Mis nobody had a chance to say goodbye but the changes seem nowhere near as drastic. I was lucky enough to be at closing night of the original Les Miserables and have seen the new version and loved them both (and the concert which I may get to see at some point this year). But this isn't Rent Remixed. For the vast majority of people it will be Phantom of the Opera with no noticeable issues. |
|
5,832 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Feb 12, 2021 0:41:31 GMT
The way they are handling this whole thing is bizarre. I love how they are trying to make it all exciting by saying the show will ‘blur the boundaries between stage and auditorium’ like no other show has ever done it.
It just looks like the uk tour set shoehorned into the theatre.
They should just never reopen it and let’s have a lovely news show in there instead! At least the theatre itself is getting some loving.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2021 10:00:27 GMT
Not a surprise at all, but very disappointing. They are literally just repurposing the tour sets so we have those ugly gaps between the parts of the false proscenium. I was hoping that they would at least replace the proscenium statues and a put a false Angel in (even if it didn't levitate), but no, they just don't want to spend anything. The planning documentation is interesting because it says the original production is officially gone, contrary to the PR nonsense spouted by RUG. You only need to scroll back a few pages to see how many of us said this would happen and we were told we were just wrong. I don't like being vindicated on this occasion. Waiting for the Cameron defenders to praise him in 3...2...1...All hail the Cameron! 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻 🙂 Seriously, I think what some of us have said is that the producers of this show should be allowed to modernise the backstage elements of the production and that doing that to reduce running costs is not a punishable offence. No one wants to see it changed, everyone wants the classic set pieces to remain, but we understand that today’s technology can do it without people physically pulling on ropes and that this should be allowed to happen. It’s not a case of defending him, it’s a case of understanding that things move on. Precisely this! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2021 10:02:28 GMT
I think there is just a hint of overreaction here. Yes, it is a series 9f bigger and smaller changes and the Phans don't like that sort of thing. But for the audience seeing the show for the first time, as long as there is a big chandelier moment and it all looks abd sounds opulent, they will be happy and fully entertained. I saw the show on Broadway about 25 years ago and it looked tired then. A refresh is overdue and necessary. Again, completely agree. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Feb 12, 2021 18:56:42 GMT
All hail the Cameron! 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻 🙂 Seriously, I think what some of us have said is that the producers of this show should be allowed to modernise the backstage elements of the production and that doing that to reduce running costs is not a punishable offence. No one wants to see it changed, everyone wants the classic set pieces to remain, but we understand that today’s technology can do it without people physically pulling on ropes and that this should be allowed to happen. It’s not a case of defending him, it’s a case of understanding that things move on. Precisely this! Except they ARE changing the set pieces and there is no reason any of this can't be done with modern technology. They are downscaling the show, ruining its aesthetic, and chucking out key concepts that Hal and Maria conceived. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2021 19:22:47 GMT
Except they ARE changing the set pieces and there is no reason any of this can't be done with modern technology. They are downscaling the show, ruining its aesthetic, and chucking out key concepts that Hal and Maria conceived. But surely for good reason. Even if that's financial, it's still a valid reason seeing as it's the producers who are funding it, not you. Theatre's have taken a beating in the last 12 months, so I wouldn't expect any producer to be pouring unnecessary money into productions at the moment. POTO was running in London as a museum piece, with sets that were designed and installed 34 years ago, so it was clear they needed to do a lot of work in updating the sets/mechanics. It makes sense to install the fresh new sets of the UK tour, which are ready and waiting. And let's face it, most people who go and see the show won't see any difference, other than a fresh production of a show/staging/set they recognise. Also, did someone not previously mention health and safety implications of the angel scene? This could be a valid reason as to why it's no longer used in new productions in the UK (and the World Tour). |
|
