520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Aug 7, 2021 22:25:14 GMT
Can't edit the above post, but on the lyric changes during the final lair, in the opening night audio uploaded to YouTube, Killian does sing "this is an unparalleled delight". I'm not sure why he decided to sing about it being a pleasure that Raoul has arrived during the matinee today instead. I'm glad that it seems to be him making it up as he goes along, rather than an official lyric change!
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Aug 7, 2021 21:22:53 GMT
Eventually saw it. Before I go into the actual show, I have to say that I wasn't too happy about the experience of getting into the theatre...
So I live just outside of London, but my family live near the Scottish border. For my grandfather, he travelled to London specifically to see Phantom after wanting to see it for over 2 decades. He specifically wanted to see the chandelier rise. Him travelling down here was a big thing for him - he is anxious of travelling. The *moment* the overture started, we were upped from our seats for late comers. I know this can't be helped, but my near 80 year old grandfather naturally took a while to get up and out of the way for these people. I know late comers need to be admitted, but I'd argue that the *moment* the chandelier starts to rise is not a suitable moment, given the show we are seeing? Given the premium that certain seats in theatre attract for this moment alone. It also meant that I also missed pretty much the entirety of the overture, so I can't comment on that cool barrier moment everyone was talking about earlier, because I literally missed the entire thing. Equally, someone decided to go to the shop during the interval on our row (I am not joking...) and *MID-WAY* through Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again, we were upped for this person returning from the interval late. Just not really suitable... literally during the song.
In terms of lyrical changes, there were a couple which jumped out to me. Some made sense and others just seemed to be about making a change for the sake of it, rather than anything else? In 'Angel of Music', Meg used to say "Your face, Christine, it's white!", she now says "Christine, are you alright?". It obviously makes sense for this change to happen, although it sounds somewhat jarring as it doesn't 100% fit into the music. Raoul then had some new bits in 'Prima Donna' towards the end of the song. I couldn't work out what he was singing, other than it being about the audacity of Christine being given a silent role. During the final lair, when Raoul appears Phantom used to sing "Sir, this is indeed an unparalleled delight!" he now sings something along the lines of it being a pleasure that Raoul has arrived. Seemed like a silly change to me? One that I can't quite understand.
I actually like the horse at the end of Act 1... It looked really trashy at the start (although I think this owes largely to the set, which is almost painted in a comic book style? Doesn't match any other set piece at all). Once the horse moves to the front of the stage and turns around, it's actually quite large and genuinely looks physically impressive. Actually a little bit annoyed at how brilliant it looks, haha.
In terms of the band, the only time I noticed it being a bit thin was during Masquerade, in which the singers were literally drowning out the band. Other than that, I can't say I noticed it too much, if I'm honest. With lighting, it's just amazing. The manager's office scenes in particular really benefit from the new lighting. When Raoul jumps during the final lair, the switch between Phantom and Christine and him was just amazing? I can't really explain it. But it was almost magically and like I was watching a screen rather than stage? Just great.
In terms of the cast... I have to say, I wasn't a huge fan of the cast as a whole? Greg Castiglioni was brilliant at Piangi, but Saori Oda didn't really do it as Carlotta for me? Her timing was off - she literally didn't get a single laugh throughout the entire thing. I quite like Rhys' forcefulness as Raoul and he was probably the strongest in his role out of the trio. Killian and Lucy had some brilliant moments (their final lair genuinely made me tear up - Lucy plays it like she's chosen the Phantom and Raoul literally drags her away. It's a really interesting take on Christine that I haven't seen before - she clearly chose Phantom. Even in PONR, it's obvious she's made her mind up once she realises it's Phantom.) I've seen Phantom around 20 times and this was the first time I've ever seen it where the cast didn't get a standing ovation.
As a whole, I actually enjoyed it. Phans go in with an open mind and you'll enjoy it!
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Aug 6, 2021 12:09:47 GMT
Is the spoken bit when the Phantom says his "sing for me"s on tape? "Sing for me" is live, leading into "I have brought you" which is all live. The pre-recorded parts in the show are (were?), all of the title track until it switches to live for "sing my angel of a music", but only live for the Phantom, Christine remains a prerecorded vocal. - the Phantom in Notes I/II - the Phantom at the end of Prima Donna - the Phantom in Il Muto - Christine: "we must go to the roof, we'll be safe there" - the Phantom's laugh in All I ask of you reprise - the Phantom in Seal my Fate Tonight - the Phantom in Why So Silent I think that's it. Was Why So Silent always pre-recorded? I only ask because I saw the German production in Essen about 13 years ago and Uwe Kroeger, who was playing the Phantom, messed up his lines. As a side note, someone has uploaded audios of the (re-)opening night performance onto YouTube for those interested.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Aug 1, 2021 11:19:18 GMT
How long is it taking to get into the theatre? I’ve seen pictures of queues around the theatre.
Going next week with an elderly relative (not my decision - IMO it’s too risky at the moment!). I’m concerned about him not being able to stand for so long outside, especially given the heat as apparently we will be in the middle of another heatwave…
Email says to arrive 30mins-1hour before curtain.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 31, 2021 20:20:39 GMT
Over here I think Phantom on Broadway currently is regarded by regular or serious theatregoers as a tourist show or for diehard fans. It generally is not talked about unless some interesting casting occurs in the leads. I’d say much more esteemed in London. A handful of hardcore Phans aside, a true tourist trap in NYC. Like Chicago, plodding on forever in the lower half of the weekly published grosses. Must do better then break even I guess but keeping the record possibly a factor in them not putting it out of it’s misery. Desperately needs some TLC and decent resident direction. Did chuckle when people said they’d boycott London and only go in NYC now as they still have the “full” orchestra. Good luck being able to tell the difference over the talking/rustling/fumbling/eating! That’s one risky plane fare…. I just can't get over Christine falling to the floor at the end of 'Music of the Night' and the lower-quality version of 'Wandering Child' on Broadway...
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 31, 2021 17:56:26 GMT
So act 2 was much better.
Just want to give a shout out to the theatre manager who, during the interval, was going around to the maskless people and asking them to put masks on - few obliged. There were 13 masks in the whole of the royal circle. He then appeared on stage and asked everyone to put masks on prior to act 2, which seemed to work!
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 31, 2021 15:18:56 GMT
Currently at the matinee. Interval. Firstly I’ll be amazed if I make it out of here without Covid. There are very few masks. Secondly… this is honestly the worst thing I’ve ever seen. Act 1 goes on and on and on and on. I am shocked at its popularity when it’s so badly written
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 28, 2021 23:57:12 GMT
What exactly is shameful? People are allowed their own opinions - and hers, that people should comment when they've seen it and not be negative about changes made for safety reasons, isn't outlandish. People here have made the same observations over the last year or so. Yes, there's a potential problem with tone here, but the substance isn't problematic - certainly not enough to be fired for as at least one commentator suggested. Plus, she's in a far better position than the rest of us to know if the original creatives are spoken about in the rehearsal room / theatre. And I'm sure you realise yesterday would not have been her first day on the job. Yeah, not shameful at all for a representative of the show to say that people who aren't happy with the changes should "get laid".
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 23:42:45 GMT
The show felt much smoother tonight, fresher, modern. I wasn't a huge fan of the angel and quite like the horse - I enjoyed the way it pivoted around to the audience (and the audience seemed yo like it too). I'd recommend you go and see it to see what bits you like and the bits you don't - I've tried writing my comments with an open mind, including my disappointment that the reduction in orchestra is noticeable to me. Yet, another person felt it was barely noticeable and really liked it. Guess it comes down to taste. Many people around me (row C stalls) were diehard Phans, and they were animatedly discussing what they liked/didn't like at the interval and the end. My hunch is that this new production has won over some of those who were doubting how good it might be (and, bizarrely, left me feeling they didn't go far enough). There is plenty left of the original to satisfy even the harshest critics. So other than the replacement of the Angel, was there anything you preferred in terms of the production? I'm just trying to understand what everyone considered "dated" that is no longer the case. I mean, even the original production could (and did) feel fresher and smoother once the director's been in to check up on it. To be fair, the set was in terrible need of being re-created. A few years ago now, I had the misfortune of seeing David Shannon as The Phantom. I really disliked his performance (nothing against him personally or his voice - I just didn't like his Phantom.) This left me with some time to look around the theatre. Frankly, it was filthy. Shockingly dirty. The sets were dusty. Some peeling. It did look... old. But then, maybe that was part of the charm. Speaking of charm - is the chandelier still pushed off stage at the start and caught when it comes back down? << actually one of my favourite things about the show!
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 23:31:28 GMT
What did you you consider outdated and creaky that this production has now addressed? It sounds like, if anything, anything that anyone ever complained about was retained and bits people liked were axed. The show felt much smoother tonight, fresher, modern. I wasn't a huge fan of the angel and quite like the horse - I enjoyed the way it pivoted around to the audience (and the audience seemed yo like it too). I'd recommend you go and see it to see what bits you like and the bits you don't - I've tried writing my comments with an open mind, including my disappointment that the reduction in orchestra is noticeable to me. Yet, another person felt it was barely noticeable and really liked it. Guess it comes down to taste. Many people around me (row C stalls) were diehard Phans, and they were animatedly discussing what they liked/didn't like at the interval and the end. My hunch is that this new production has won over some of those who were doubting how good it might be (and, bizarrely, left me feeling they didn't go far enough). There is plenty left of the original to satisfy even the harshest critics. I think that if they were honest about their approach from the start, whilst people would still be angry, it would be more understandable. Instead, they have continuously spouted that this is the "brilliant original". Webber himself has said countless times it would be "the brilliant original" and implying only technological changes and the re-production of the same sets (which, to be fair, was sorely needed.) However, this was all clearly lies... and the fact that the official social media of the show leave "the brilliant original" in their bio UNTIL THE NIGHT OF THE SHOW, only to remove it after the curtain falls. It's just... Yeah. People should be angry. And even doing things like putting the original chandelier outside of the theatre, days before reopening, which got fans on social media excited because it looked like the chandelier was staying the same... only for the chandelier to be different and for it to be nothing more than a publicity stunt? The whole way they've went about it is just weird.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 23:13:04 GMT
So, Phantom's official Twitter has removed 'The Brilliant Original' from it's bio. I guess at least they're sort of acknowledging it...
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 23:07:48 GMT
"I would maintain the once again the proscenium design - the picture frame - is key to the show. Its magnificently carved gilt figures erotically entwined. And when it is revealed after the prologue, I don't believe the audience examines it, but I'm certain that it casts a heavy erotic atmosphere over the entire show" - Hal Price in his 2017 memoir. This ain't a tribute to Prince, it's the opposite. Given that he died less than a year prior to theatre closures, it can't help but make you feel that those involved with these decisions started planning the moment his death was announced.
Grim.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 23:02:10 GMT
You know, the thing which annoys me most is Piangi's sudden realisation that he's gay. I can sort of understand the changing of the set and the trimming down of the orchestra (although I completely disagree with it!), but changing elements of the plot?!?!?!? I assume that means there must be subtle lyric changes too?
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 22:45:51 GMT
On the train home it’s been an interesting night at Her Majesty’s. I’ve been lurking on the board for years, and feel compelled to write after observing the angst of this thread for the past 18 months, I’ve seen the show numerous times over the year and enjoyed it tonight was I believe, my 7th time. This review will be disjointed I imagine. SPOILERS AHEAD as I’m not technically minded enough to add the spoiler tags!! The elephant in the room (or should that be horse?!) is that the pros. does look naff. There’s no other way to put it. It looks like the decorators have started well and then got bored as they’ve moved down to the bottom. Did this put me off before it started? No. Although those dubious bits of rag “covering” it..?- let’s say no more about that! The show was Almost 10 minutes late of going up - Cameron came on and did a very coy speech and welcomed us to “the new version of phantom”. There was a chandelier. It rose. The audience clapped. It’s a new one. And looks better than the old. The naff pyros are still there. I thought the new bits of scenery looked great during the overture. THE GOOD Quite rightly, it looks fresh (finally). The last time I saw it you could see the dust sitting on so I’m delighted that it looks better. And for 90% of it, it looks no different and sounds no different. For the purists, the travelator is still there, the candles still rise, as do the candelabras (albeit not tracking!) the trap doors are still there and phantom still disappears at the end of masquerade. Killian Donnelly as The Phantom was terrific. I wasn’t sure at first but was converted by the end. The orchestra played well and I thought the sound was fabulous. Shoot me down in flames but there’s not that much difference of orchestration REALLY, it doesn’t sound thin, as the fearmongers forecast. THE BAD I thought the casting on the whole was bang average. Everybody was servicable, the crowd whooped and cheered as it seems to have become custom - but in all honesty I didn’t think much of any of the principals apart from The Phantom. There was plenty of scenery chewing to be had, namely after the hanging, and either Andre or Firmin (the one who looked a bit like him off homes under the hammer) did his one man comedy routine which wouldn’t have looked out of place in Hi-De-Hi. Very strange. I’ve always thought that Meg was a bit of a non-role - and the business at the end with the mask I’ve always found over indulgent (shoot me!) I don’t know what was different this time but I cared even less for megs character than I have done before. (Sorry Meg!) Back to the scenery - It’s like they’ve kept everything naff from the old version and decided to pay homage (with the exception of the thunderbolts!!) The skull on the stick that shoots flames, the self playing piano, those flamin’ mannequins in masquerade, the noose on the bit of fishing wire, the clunky magic chair. All still there in all their former glory. The rooftop scene I thought was the worst of the “new” - it just doesn’t have the finesse of the version 1.0. The clouds still roll by though and look gorgeous and yes, the Angel is gone but as I always say - why have a flying Angel, when you can have the phantom wheel downstage on a mechanical horse??! Say no more. All of the phantom interactions during “poor fool” was all a bit eggy. A light on some sort of owl in the prosc didn’t quite cut the mustard (although I did titter). There was a very tense moment where I thought the chandelier wasn’t going to drop - But it did. I could go on, but to summarise. I had a really lovely evening and the show will settle and to the general public, it will be marvellous as it always was. I just felt a bit frustrated as all the things that the creative team COULD have done, as they’ve clearly spent some money bringing it into town - why not make the old naff bits I’ve mentioned - well, less naff! For me, what has brought me back to phantom time and time again is the stagecraft of the entire piece. You still get the moments where you think, “where did that come from” which all stems back to how extraordinary the original designs were. Whilst the cut backs are frustrating and to some may seem a sin - somebody, somewhere will have worked out how much money it would cost to remount the original over bringing this new verison in - they probably also looked to see if it was indeed financially viable to bring it back at all. We all have our memories of the “brilliant original” but given the choice of having this verison or no Phantom at all - I’d much rather we have Phantom 2.0 so that the next generation can be inspired by it for however long it may run. See it. Support It. But most of all, enjoy it! Wait... what's this about a horse? Is it as bad as it sounds? :S
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 27, 2021 22:44:17 GMT
Oops sorry for the weird boost - it took me to page 1 for some odd reason :S
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 31, 2020 10:13:47 GMT
They used the Broadway version of Wandering Child for the UK tour?! That can't happen! The London version is soooooo, sooooo much better?!?
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 30, 2020 14:31:56 GMT
On this, I don't think there is any issue with replacing the set - as long as the set, staging, costumes, etc are the same... otherwise you could make the argument that every single time a new actor takes on a role and a new costume or set piece is produced to accommodate that actor that it's a new production...
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 30, 2020 12:09:19 GMT
why? its still les mis, just an other set - the show itself is the same Because it closed and reopened a with an entirely new production. Not sure if you're being purposefully obtuse or not.................
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 30, 2020 12:05:57 GMT
and? Phantom is also closing and re-opening, so les mis is still longer running Not entirely the point, but I'll bite: Phantom is closing after it overtook Les Mis' record. Phantom closing and reopening doesn't discard that feat.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 30, 2020 12:01:55 GMT
reading it with the sentence "longest-running musical" , do they really want to deceive themselves?thats les Mis dream on phantom, good that the show stays, but this is just a lie!# alsoooo.. why saying it ends, today not, what is tomorrow? what is this bullsh... Phantom technically became the longest running West End musical last month. Les Mis closed and reopened a new production. The lie is Mackintosh's les mis PR spin That's another discussion, though...
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 30, 2020 11:48:28 GMT
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 29, 2020 11:55:06 GMT
ALW and CM are lifelong collaborators. I’d be astonished if they weren’t both on exactly the same page with this, regardless of what PR spin they’re choosing to put on it. I'm not sure what kind of PR spin CM would agree to in which he is seen as the villain? It's a very, very odd decision? I think this "beef" is genuine - for Webber to come out in disagreement with CM so publically twice in a few weeks, in which ALW is on the side of the fans seems pretty... unscripted. Saying that, I do think ALW is trying to play the "angel" card here... his tweet is very carefully worded and actually gives no reassurances about the future of the show.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 28, 2020 15:54:09 GMT
I wouldn't be surprised if ALW makes a statement on twitter about the show's closure tomorrow, or maybe even today. remind the higher-ups that many fans feel passionately about this and will be paying attention to their every move regarding the production. Fans did the same thing when it was announced that he was making changes to Les Mis, with even a former cast member (I don't recall how) being vocal about the changes. But this didn't stop Mackintosh from replacing the original, so who says that the Phantom petition will stop him from doing the same? I know the Phantom petition has more signatures than the Les Mis one, but I digress. Well, it helps that ALW wants to retain the original production also, I guess. Not sure what Schönberg's view on Les Mis was, though.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 28, 2020 15:44:13 GMT
As if Cameron and Andrew really want people bothering them at this time. Considering Mackintosh and Lloyd Webber seem to be on opposing sides on the production, I imagine this is exactly the kind of reaction and reassurance Lloyd Webber would want, actually.
|
|
520 posts
|
Post by anthony on Jul 28, 2020 15:43:04 GMT
If it is to do a Les Mis (which I suspect is the end game here - I can imagine ALW not agreeing to this, especially with his tweet about wanting to protect the original staging) then the chandelier better be a non-negotiable. A Las Vegas type crash (in which it falls onto the audience, before the auditorium is plunged to darkness and the chandelier is removed from the auditorium, out of view - I imagine this would be impossible with the infrastructure of Her Majesty's anyway), a Hungarian crash (the chandelier falls from the top of the stage, through a hole in the stage) or worse, the last UK tour where it's just some light pyrotechnics, would be totally unacceptable!
I don't know... I know it's dated (in fact, I think I complained on the old forum about the set being visably dusty and dirty!), but there is something really lovely and iconic about the current chandelier being pushed off the stage and caught again when it comes down - it really adds to the performance, in my opinion. I can understand why they'd want to change that element, for example... but for me, a fan of the show, I'd be gutted if the chandelier fall gets updated.
|
|