|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2019 18:59:40 GMT
More I think about it, I wonder if Gielgud something totally different.
Dunno what though!
Concert version with a dream cast selected from previous casts?
Fingers crossed for something fabulous.
Patti could just kept her current dressing room.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2019 19:01:41 GMT
Plays into their hand really. No such thing as bad publicity. And the powers that be know that! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2019 23:52:43 GMT
|
|
4,985 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Jan 10, 2019 0:35:03 GMT
From the official press release: "The Original London production at the Queen’s Theatre will play until 13 July 2019. The theatre will then close for four months of rebuilding work both backstage and in the auditorium as well as adding many much-needed new lavatories to the front of house. This work will restore architect W.G. Sprague’s original boxes and loges which, along with the entire front of house, were destroyed by a bomb in 1940 and caused the theatre to be closed for 20 years. The restored Queen’s Theatre will reopen in December of 2019 with the New production of LES MISÉRABLES, continuing its phenomenal run indefinitely. A brilliant company is now being put together and bookings will open in February. While the Queen’s Theatre is being restored, LES MISÉRABLES will continue in performance on Shaftesbury Avenue with exciting plans being announced shortly for a four-month season at the Gielgud Theatre from the end of July 2019." So, though I did take it to mean the new version, but there now appears room for doubt, on re-reading. I was walking down Shaftesbury Avenue to go to the Gielgud to see Company and if you look at the Les Miserable sign the one that stands proud to the theatre. Look closely at poor Cosette, you can now see a tear run down her cheek. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2019 1:09:31 GMT
I find it hysterical that some of those who want new things in the West End are signing to save the original Les Mis, which has run for over 35 years. Don't get me wrong, I don't want the show to close. I just thought that's a fun fact.
And those comparing the Les Mis revolve to the umbrella, the chandelier, the helicopter, etc... Those are part of the story. The revolve is just a device to help telling the story. Yes, it's ICONIC, I know, but still, I think people are overreacting. But hey, that's just my opinion, I'm sorry if that's an unpopular one.
|
|
|
|
Post by knutinkerbell on Jan 10, 2019 5:38:35 GMT
It is hysterical. Saw Les Mis 1995 for the first time at the Palace. It was pure theatre magic for me. The set in that theatre was just perfect. Saw it about thirty times after my first visit.
What I still miss is the orchestra and the orchestral parts that were cut.
It doesn't matter for me if there's a revolve and Eljoras hanging between dolls. I'm looking forward to see a new version.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Jan 10, 2019 10:25:37 GMT
I think the problem is that the Connor version is not a genuinely new version. As Trevor Nunn himself says, it's a variant production of which all the good bits come straight out of the Nunn/Caird original. Change for change's sake doesn't really make much sense when you're replacing something superior with something inferior.
If people want a new Miz, then fine - get a brand new creative team with a brand new vision who aren't simply trying to ape the Nunn/Caird original to keep familiarity yet cut costs for Sir Cameron who doesn't fancy paying any more royalties to the original creatives, rather than replacing a much more detailed and considered piece with an already decade-old touring production.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2019 11:08:10 GMT
I find it hysterical that some of those who want new things in the West End are signing to save the original Les Mis, which has run for over 35 years. Don't get me wrong, I don't want the show to close. I just thought that's a fun fact. And those comparing the Les Mis revolve to the umbrella, the chandelier, the helicopter, etc... Those are part of the story. The revolve is just a device to help telling the story. Yes, it's ICONIC, I know, but still, I think people are overreacting. But hey, that's just my opinion, I'm sorry if that's an unpopular one. But the revolve is part of the storytelling, certain scenes are simply not as affective without it. And you don't need an actual helicopter in miss Saigon or the chandelier doesn't have to fall in Phantom either. It's not just about the loss of the revolve though, as has been highlighted in a variety of posts. to me the biggest one is the moral one regarding the original creative team. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2019 12:29:13 GMT
If the West End gets a new production, do we get a new thread?
hypothetical
|
|
7,060 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jan 10, 2019 16:46:41 GMT
Surely when a show downsizes like Les Mis has already and other shows like Mamma Mia! then those shows aren't the original production either? There are shows like Wicked or The Lion King where they make changes to the production even during the lifespan of the show so really it's very rare for a show to still be exactly the same after so many decades.
|
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Jan 10, 2019 17:29:54 GMT
Surely when a show downsizes like Les Mis has already and other shows like Mamma Mia! then those shows aren't the original production either? There are shows like Wicked or The Lion King where they make changes to the production even during the lifespan of the show so really it's very rare for a show to still be exactly the same after so many decades. They're the same production if they largely follow the format of the original and have the same creative team. In this case, the entire creative team is being ditched and replaced with a new one. Once you change the director, set designer, lighting designer etc and the blocking is completely different, you can't legitimately claim it's the same production. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2019 21:37:57 GMT
Surely when a show downsizes like Les Mis has already and other shows like Mamma Mia! then those shows aren't the original production either? There are shows like Wicked or The Lion King where they make changes to the production even during the lifespan of the show so really it's very rare for a show to still be exactly the same after so many decades. They're the same production if they largely follow the format of the original and have the same creative team. In this case, the entire creative team is being ditched and replaced with a new one. Once you change the director, set designer, lighting designer etc and the blocking is completely different, you can't legitimately claim it's the same production. Agree - that's where the crux lies for me - different creative team = different production (all be it the new team have taken huge influence from the original). Quite surprised the final show hasn't sold out yet - reckon it's cos most of the fan base don't know that it's bye-bye to the original yet.... |
|
268 posts
|
Post by gmoneyoutlaw on Jan 11, 2019 1:28:48 GMT
Just think about it. Les Miz can be nominated for best revival in 2020.
Shows change every night, ask an actor. Long running shows change over time. I saw School Of Rock on Monday and the doubling has changed to eliminate/reduce the cast. They may have done this a while ago to cut expenses.
When you bring in a different director and designers, it's a revival. If the Olivier's don't acknowledge this I'd be surprised.
Did Les Miz make it to 35 years?
|
|
700 posts
|
Post by cheesy116 on Jan 11, 2019 3:01:13 GMT
Just think about it. Les Miz can be nominated for best revival in 2020. Shows change every night, ask an actor. Long running shows change over time. I saw School Of Rock on Monday and the doubling has changed to eliminate/reduce the cast. They may have done this a while ago to cut expenses. When you bring in a different director and designers, it's a revival. If the Olivier's don't acknowledge this I'd be surprised. Did Les Miz make it to 35 years? I'm not sure what you mean by the 'doubling' in School of Rock ? What's changed in the show since it opened ? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2019 3:07:56 GMT
Just think about it. Les Miz can be nominated for best revival in 2020. Shows change every night, ask an actor. Long running shows change over time. I saw School Of Rock on Monday and the doubling has changed to eliminate/reduce the cast. They may have done this a while ago to cut expenses. When you bring in a different director and designers, it's a revival. If the Olivier's don't acknowledge this I'd be surprised. Did Les Miz make it to 35 years? I'm not sure what you mean by the 'doubling' in School of Rock ? What's changed in the show since it opened ? I'm assuming actors playing multiple characters. |
|
879 posts
|
Post by daisy24601 on Jan 11, 2019 10:26:14 GMT
Just think about it. Les Miz can be nominated for best revival in 2020. Shows change every night, ask an actor. Long running shows change over time. I saw School Of Rock on Monday and the doubling has changed to eliminate/reduce the cast. They may have done this a while ago to cut expenses. When you bring in a different director and designers, it's a revival. If the Olivier's don't acknowledge this I'd be surprised. Did Les Miz make it to 35 years? 33, it opened October 1985. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2019 10:37:42 GMT
It also sets an interesting presedent for other producers. Look at Hamilton and at how much profit share was offered to so many people. when the show starts to slow down or they want to make more money they can change the show up a bit (but not too much that the average theatre goes would notice or care) and save a fortune
|
|
1,736 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Jan 11, 2019 15:24:55 GMT
Just to complicate, the printed Stage newspaper yesterday said the revolve was going into the Gielgud. Maybe they haven't decided yet. It's an odd one, The new production isn't a brand new one so it isn't obvious to save it for the 'glorious return' to the Queens. It even ran in London before during the anniversary didn't it? So the last night of the revolve is a bigger deal and you'd think that would happen with leaving queens rather than leaving Gielgud. |
|
4,021 posts
|
Post by Dawnstar on Jan 11, 2019 15:33:27 GMT
Maybe they haven't decided yet. It's an odd one, The new production isn't a brand new one so it isn't obvious to save it for the 'glorious return' to the Queens. It even ran in London before during the anniversary didn't it? Yes, at the Barbican for 3 weeks in September 2010. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 11, 2019 15:50:28 GMT
Just to complicate, the printed Stage newspaper yesterday said the revolve was going into the Gielgud. Maybe they haven't decided yet. It's an odd one, The new production isn't a brand new one so it isn't obvious to save it for the 'glorious return' to the Queens. It even ran in London before during the anniversary didn't it? So the last night of the revolve is a bigger deal and you'd think that would happen with leaving queens rather than leaving Gielgud. I think it will have been decided long before the press release which production is going where. My interpretation of the press release is that it's the original production with the revolve that's going to the Gielgud. Which makes sense to me, for reasons I've said before. Plus, the performance on the 13th July seems low key in terms of the press release - would they not make it more of an event if it were the final night of the last remaining original production? There's clearly another press release to follow in February confirming what "exciting plans" they have for the Gielgud, so I guess we'll have to wait for that. |
|
3,539 posts
|
Post by Rory on Jan 11, 2019 18:59:45 GMT
It seems very clear to me the existing London production will go to the Gielgud and end there.
The 'new' touring / Broadway production will reopen the Queens in December.
|
|
349 posts
|
Post by kimbahorel on Jan 11, 2019 19:32:39 GMT
This is very confusing because some of the cast have posted about the last time you see the show as it is on 13th July. But it moving and still having the revolve is it the current version or the new one? Then if it's the new production why is it saying the new production opens at Queens with a new cast. If it is the current one why did they not just announce it in the press release?
If its not the 13th I can ditch a ticket I bought for another one but I hope they announce something soon. Plus they must have to build another revolve into the stage because there is no way that's coming out of Queens I assume it will start back up next door on the 15th.
To be honest aside probably the "last show" I really want to know when my fave actors in the cast are leaving so I can see their last day. Because the other rumour going around is they are ditching all the current cast. But I thought by December the tour will probably be doing a cast change and I'll except some of them to end up in the London one.
|
|
7,060 posts
|
Post by Jon on Jan 11, 2019 20:15:47 GMT
I do think the Gielgud will be a dry run for the new production, I don't think Cameron would want to move the existing set to the Gielgud for cost reasons.
|
|
1,749 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by FrontroverPaul on Jan 11, 2019 21:09:47 GMT
Advice please.
I want to see the current London production from a front row seat before it closes and on several of the suitable dates for me one or both of the two seats behind the conductor are available - A13 and A14 - and cost up to £25 less than the remainder of the front row.
I have been in a seat behind a conductor a few times in the past and after a while I didn't really notice him that much. Being tall probably helped. However this is the first show I've known where the seats cost less, suggesting the restriction on the view may be more extreme. Is the saving worth making ? - and is there any preference between the two as A13 seems more available than A14 though that may just be down to superstition ?
|
|
23 posts
|
Post by crunchemhall on Jan 11, 2019 22:06:06 GMT
Advice please. I want to see the current London production from a front row seat before it closes and on several of the suitable dates for me one or both of the two seats behind the conductor are available - A13 and A14 - and cost up to £25 less than the remainder of the front row. I have been in a seat behind a conductor a few times in the past and after a while I didn't really notice him that much. Being tall probably helped. However this is the first show I've known where the seats cost less, suggesting the restriction on the view may be more extreme. Is the saving worth making ? - and is there any preference between the two as A13 seems more available than A14 though that may just be down to superstition ? Both seats are fabulous, you are right into the action. Go ahead, being behind the conductor is not a problem at all. |
|
