Love Never Dies - all views allowed

I'm probably going to add to my review and flesh it out a bit but just wanted to get it all down.

Also a piece of information I've just discovered and for some reason I found it interesting, others may not but I do, but the half skeleton/half woman has different coloured shoes depending on who is playing the role. The usual actress wears silver and if it is a stand-in she wears black shoes apparently.

Raphael wrote:

LadyCDaae wrote:Health problems. Riiiiiiiight. *hikes up pants to keep them out of the bull-hockey*

~LCD

I dunno, LCD. Personally, I think Head-Up-Your-Arse is a serious medical condition

Touche, Raphael. Sadly no cure has been found for it yet.

~LCD

LadyCDaae wrote:
Touche, Raphael. Sadly no cure has been found for it yet.

~LCD

Well, actually....there is a cure for it. Take a laxative. Then all this crap comes out (the new show), airs out, and will be recycled at a later date....

Surgery is expensive and messy anyway.

What's happened since last time? In short:

The Broadway production has been postponed to spring 2011 instead, Ramin Karimloo is angry at people questioning Andrew Lloyd-Webber's health (and I totally see where he's coming from on that one), and the West End production has discount tickets and good availability all days except Saturdays.

Do you think "Love Never Dies" will be nominated for any theatre awards in the UK? If so, which one(s) and why? I'm thinking the score might get some recognition. And possibly also the design, though it's not a favourite of mine. I would also be surprised if some of the cast members isn't singled out as best male or female lead or supporting role.

You really won't believe what happened after this evening's performance of LND with Tam Mutu (excellent btw): I came out of the Fire Exit next to the Stage Door. I'm not an autograph type person, but as I had inadvertently come out by there I thought I'd stick around across the street while I wait for my train, see who I could see....and there is this well spoken, handsome guy with black hair two women and a shorter chap with his back to me. I was sure I recognised the black haired fellow and it hit me CHARLES HART. Then I clue in to the shorter guy, no it couldn't be, he turns around, yes it bloody is, RICHARD STILGOE! Didn't even know they were friends. Was funny standing across the street, since there were people with their programmes waiting for Sierra et al. and none of them clued in to who they were for a good 10 minutes. Anyhoo once pens were thrust in their faces they bailed in separate directions before they could congratulate any of the cast. Guess they decided to avoid the high profile opening and just see it on a average night. Incidentally they both seemed very smiley.

They were probably smiling, glad they hadn't been part of it.

I know the lyrics of "The Phantom of the Opera" has its critics, but boy are they Shakespeare compared to the lyrics of "Love Never Dies". I hope they picked up some ideas of what to avoid when writing lyrics for a musical...

But awesome to see them there and get their autograph!

Who's Tam Mutu, BTW. u/s "Myster-Y"?

operafantomet wrote:Who's Tam Mutu, BTW. u/s "Myster-Y"?

Yes.

Yes and scarily looks very like Ramin (on stage at least.) I remember during the bar scene having to remind myself that Ramin didn't come on as the morning shift anymore because Tam Mutu looked SO like him and it is he who plays the barman who comes in for the morning shift. It was really freaky.

dolly-ry wrote:Yes and scarily looks very like Ramin (on stage at least.) I remember during the bar scene having to remind myself that Ramin didn't come on as the morning shift anymore because Tam Mutu looked SO like him and it is he who plays the barman who comes in for the morning shift. It was really freaky.

I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. Mutu plays the barman normally? And what's the morning shift?

There is a barman who says the line "Here's the morning shift, maybe he'll know what to do with you." He then leaves and the morning shift comes in (as in the barman who takes over the next shift) and it is Tam.

It used to be Ramin came on at that point, but it was addressed that this was too obvious and they then had Tam go down the trapdoor and switch with Ramin at a later point.

dolly-ry wrote:There is a barman who says the line "Here's the morning shift, maybe he'll know what to do with you." He then leaves and the morning shift comes in (as in the barman who takes over the next shift) and it is Tam.

It used to be Ramin came on at that point, but it was addressed that this was too obvious and they then had Tam go down the trapdoor and switch with Ramin at a later point.

Gotcha...I think. I still haven't listened to any of the score but two or three songs, nor have I read any of the detailed plot synopses or reviews or watched any videos of the staging, so I'm pretty clueless as to what the show is actually like or the scene-by-scene plot.

Oh sorry Senor. Didn't realise, my mistake. Why Does She Love Me? and Devil Take the Hindmost the first two numbers in the second act take place in a bar. The switch in shifts is between the two songs.

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=561503&publicationSubCategoryId=70

A fairly positive review, though not ecstatic about the storyline. The reviewer seems to know what he is talking about, analyzing the music and spotting where ALW has re-used stuff. And some amusing and accurate quotes there:

When Christine and the Phantom finally meet, they sing the show’s first, rather soupy, duet (Beneath a Moonless Sky). The back story, which defies belief, is briefly recounted. From there, the show takes as many twists as a fairground roller coaster ride: Secrets are exposed, bets placed, and loyalties tested, until the show reaches its 14-minute finale.

...Love Never Dies suffers because the liberties it takes neither build on the strengths of the original material nor cast the first show in a new light. As such, Love Never Dies comes across as fan fiction more than genuine sequel. The Phantom ceases to be that mixture of menace, romantic aspiration, and wicked humor which made him an attractive figure in the original show. Raoul’s downward spiral from courtier to cavalier seems sudden and unwarranted.

The lyrics, too, are unequal to the music. Surely, the best Webber compositions deserve more than pedestrian rhymes (like sleep/creep) and development by doggerel (e.g., “Love never dies. / Love never falters.”), which ever threaten to deflate them.

http://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Ramin_Karimloo_And_Sierra_Boggess_Talk_LOVE_NEVER_DIES_20100419

Does anyone else get the feeling that Ramin's starting to get annoyed at those of us who have ZERO interest in LND?

R.

We temporarily interrupt the indefinite hiatus of the members of the ‘Love Should Die’ team responsible for its official press announcements to bring you an important but brief message concerning a recent development from the London production of the non-awaited and unnecessary sequel to THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA.


* * *


In a recent interview with BroadwayWorld.com, linked to below, the two principal stars of LOVE NEVER DIES, Ramin Karimloo and Sierra Boggess, were asked about the overwhelmingly negative fan reaction to this horrendous show and the absurd plotline and character assassination that takes place within it.

Ramin Karimloo says the following (quoted verbatim):

“I get quite passionate about that. Why should [the characters] stay the same? What story are we going to tell if they're the same?”

Well, quite, Mr Karimloo. The point is that no story needed to be told. The final scene of the original THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA, which is based heavily on the original ending to the novel that started it all by Gaston Leroux, sees Christine grow up from a naïve girl to a compassionate woman, who gives the Phantom his one true taste of happiness that is to be his first and his last. This compassionate act – a simple kiss – is so overwhelming for the Phantom that, in expression of true sacrificial love, he releases Christine and lets her go free with her childhood love, Raoul. In doing so, he redeems his past crimes, before declaring that the music of the night is OVER. This scene has had audiences in tears for over two decades and has had readers of Leroux’s novel in tears for 100 years. It is a complete and fulfilling story, that, albeit tragic, is so emotionally moving it has stood the test of time.

LOVE NEVER DIES offers the Phantom a ‘second chance’. We do not deny that audiences have longed for this second chance; this was the intention of the legendary director Harold Prince from the outset. But it is important to note that Mr Prince also stated that it was important for audiences to realize that any other ending would be hugely unrealistic and unbelievable given the emotional and mental instability of the Phantom. But to see this second chance actually realized on stage simply panders to an adolescent wish that not only ignores reality and is emotionally untrue, but completely reverses the redemption of the Phantom and the character development of Christine. In other words, the characters already changed – for the better, some would say, despite the tragic ending – in the final scene of the original.

To undergo the changes incurred by the characters in LOVE NEVER DIES (The Phantom from a genius composer but also a psychopath to a banal composer of trashy vaudeville with no menace whatsoever; Christine from courageous woman to indecisive whore; Meg from innocent ballerina to a topless-dancing murderer; Raoul from a handsome nobleman to a drunken wreck) is not believable whatsoever. Change is all very well and good. But the changes in LOVE NEVER DIES are preposterous and cannot be taken seriously by audiences. This was evident right from the start when fans first read Frederick Forsyth’s abysmal THE PHANTOM OF MANHATTAN and is still evident today when audiences audibly laugh during ‘The Beauty Underneath’, a ridiculous scene from LOVE NEVER DIES.

It is of interest that Mr Karimloo believes in not telling the same story twice, when this is what, in reality, LOVE NEVER DIES. The overall structure is repeated for a second time (from the prologue set years later to the flashback to the Phantom and Raoul once again competing for Christine’s love) simply to allow Christine to change her final decision and stay with the Phantom in order to satisfy the adolescent wishes of fangirls whose artistic sensibilities can hardly be called informed. In short, it is pandering to the lowest common denominator.

“Take these extraordinary circumstances - they can't be the same people. They just can't be. As an actor I wouldn't want to play that same story in a different scenario. I've just done it for two years. They have to be different, and they are. You have to honour what happened, choices Christine and the Phantom would have made in their lives, all those repercussions. Let it be known that Sierra is nodding!”

Indeed, Mr Karimloo, these are extraordinary circumstances for all the principal characters to suddenly end up in the same place, Co(r)ney Island. And how extraordinary for “ten years later” to cover the period from 1881 to 1907. How extraordinary that the audience must assume Gustave to be the son of the Phantom and Christine merely on the basis that he is 10 years old, when he could quite legitimately be Raoul’s, especially since the duration of pregnancy would seem to favor the latter possibility as the reality. How extraordinary that the Phantom is years younger in a sequel to his original story. Does Dr Who feature in this story? It may serve to make it more plausible and even more kid-friendly.

“Just go and see the first one.”

This is excellent advice that we are sure most fans of the original PHANTOM will heed.

“How can [the fans] feel such passionate hatred for something? If they use their resources and energy for something useful, think of what could have happened. It's a piece of art.”

Ah, but Mr Karimloo, ‘Love Should Die’’s mission was by no means a futile exercise. Have a read of this: https://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=357082491949&1&index=0

We quote from the above link:

Our mission at 'Love Should Die' was very simple and consisted of two basic elements:

i) to provide a platform for PHANTOM fans to speak out against this illogical sequel;

ii) to alter completely the image perpetuated by the Really Useful Group and the world press that PHANTOM fans have been eagerly awaiting this sequel since the publication of Frederick Forsyth's THE PHANTOM OF MANHATTAN.

In both, we have succeeded. Concerning the second point, our efforts have most certainly not been in vain. Having originally declared that PHANTOM fans could not wait for the sequel in October 2009, Lloyd Webber's The Really Useful Group can no longer use this completely false image to promote LOVE NEVER DIES. All over the world, papers have been reporting about PHANTOM fans' discontent with the sequel. The result is the following media sources – just some of the many who have referred to us - have now acknowledged the fact that PHANTOM fans who support the original show and the original novel by Gaston Leroux cannot in good conscience support LOVE NEVER DIES:

- THE LONDON TIMES
- THE NEW YORK TIMES
- THE NEW YORK POST
- THE LONDON TELEGRAPH
- THE DAILY MAIL
- BBC
- EL MUNDO
- 20MINUTOS.ES
- ASSOCIATED PRESS
- THE DAILY EXPRESS
- THE GUARDIAN
- THE STAGE ONLINE
- THE AUSTRALIAN
- REUTERS

In a nutshell, we got you talking about us in your interview. That wouldn’t have happened without our “resources and energy,” would it? If you are still perplexed, Mr Karimloo, think not of these fans as directing hatred towards LOVE NEVER DIES so much as respect for the artistic integrity and legacy of THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA.

By the way, we’re saddened that you and Sierra Boggess have taken to regurgitating Lord Lloyd-Webber’s PR spin that the original was a piece of “hokum” with “two-dimensional” characters. We somehow doubt this is how Hal Prince encouraged you to view the piece when he directed you in it. If the characters were so two-dimensional, we have to wonder why you both chose to play them. It is a telling sign that, in order to promote LOVE NEVER DIES, Lloyd Webber, O’Brien and yourselves feel it necessary to put down the superior original.

Finally, LOVE NEVER DIES is many things, Mr Karimloo, but we cannot be so sure that one call it “art”. If it is “art”, then its quality is most certainly dubious.

LSD – April 2010.


* * *


See the interview referred to in its full original version at: http://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Ramin_Karimloo_And_Sierra_Boggess_Talk_LOVE_NEVER_DIES_20100419

We urge you to leave comments at the bottom of the webpage containing the interview. All comments from the thousands of fans protesting against the sequel are being deleted and censored by BroadwayWorld, which we consider an assault against freedom of speech. We urge you to save your comments and, if they are deleted, re-post them as long as it takes for the censorship to subside.

The fans will not be silent.

Someone seems to have spilt some milk all over the floor.

They are completely over-reacting. I HATE wicked but I don't see Rachel Tucker (the current Elphaba) slagging me off in an interview (I in fact really like Rachel for the record.)

dolly-ry wrote:They are completely over-reacting. I HATE wicked but I don't see Rachel Tucker (the current Elphaba) slagging me off in an interview (I in fact really like Rachel for the record.)

To be honest, if I was in a musical, I wouldn't even comment about people not liking it or giving it bad publicity. What in the world could I say that will get them to come to my show? Lie, and have my words even further quoted and mocked all over the interwebs? I think not. I hate that to sell a show, everyone a part of this thing has to lie to get them places.

They could have had better careers if they would have been true to themselves and stayed with the original show.

Someone could have told Webber that this was a bad decision, but no, "no one would listen"...

I've encountered people (of course) who don't care for POTO or don't care for musical theatre in general. I don't go slagging them off at every opportunity. Society would be boring if we were all clones who loved Love Never Dies. Being perfectly honest some do go to the extreme of their hatred of the show but I see the good and the bad and I've decided for me, there is more bad than good. I don't say I hate it, I just say I wouldn't go back.

I think both sides need to drop it. The anti- fans have been heard and so have the fans. It is getting out of hand now and affecting my enjoyment of the original... something which it had seemed to not have been doing until recently.

Really, really, really well said, LSD.

Well I read that article and found nothing offensive from what Ramin had said. I didn't feel he was responding to people not liking the show just the whole hype around it before they set foot on stage. He's been asked that many times and I never found him to insult any of the Phans and even said, well if they like it they like it. We just have to portray our characters as best we can to serve the piece. I've found Ramin to be a very laid back guy but he is passionate about the shows he does, and I'm glad he is. It comes across when he's on stage. He has always supported the Original and now supports the Love Never Dies which is not surprising. Also, I've never heard him say that the characters in the original were two dimensional or not good enough as it has been said on some sites which are opposed to LND. I also feel everyone is entitled to their opinion but some of the comments I've read based on this specific interview has left me confused. I have watched some earlier interviews when he was the Phantom at Her Majesty's and I see an actor who is passionate about the role and the show. He has always been friendly at stage door as well and I know that he does get shy with things like that because of some people do tend to over step the mark.

I just wanted to add my two cents into it as I really don't understand where he was offensive.

davd09 wrote:Well I read that article and found nothing offensive from what Ramin had said. I didn't feel he was responding to people not liking the show just the whole hype around it before they set foot on stage. He's been asked that many times and I never found him to insult any of the Phans and even said, well if they like it they like it. We just have to portray our characters as best we can to serve the piece. I've found Ramin to be a very laid back guy but he is passionate about the shows he does, and I'm glad he is. It comes across when he's on stage. He has always supported the Original and now supports the Love Never Dies which is not surprising. Also, I've never heard him say that the characters in the original were two dimensional or not good enough as it has been said on some sites which are opposed to LND. I also feel everyone is entitled to their opinion but some of the comments I've read based on this specific interview has left me confused. I have watched some earlier interviews when he was the Phantom at Her Majesty's and I see an actor who is passionate about the role and the show. He has always been friendly at stage door as well and I know that he does get shy with things like that because of some people do tend to over step the mark.

I just wanted to add my two cents into it as I really don't understand where he was offensive.

I think what people react to is how he, Sierra Boggess and others in the production dismiss the characters from the original. Especially since he, as you say, seems to have been passionate about the Phantom role in the past, and is also basing a new character on the original. Whereas I would be surprised if he DIDN'T defend the role he's created, I think it's low to talk down the original to promote the new musical. That goes for everyone in the production, and is not specific for Ramin Karimloo.

I do however agree that the hate comments are totally uncalled for. Everyone, be it fans, non-fans or cast members, are entitled to their opinions on LND, and should not be hated for it.

operafantomet wrote: I think what people react to is how he, Sierra Boggess and others in the production dismiss the characters from the original.

Interesting. That's not how I'd interpret it. I think it's more the cast/crew's justification of why a continuation of the story is a worthwhile affair. The kind of mental reconcilliation that goes through the mind of any creative working on any follow up. To use an (albeit weak) comparative; I adore the original series of 'Doctor Who' but I would argue that certain characters were lacking in emotional complexity, when compared to the newly revived version of the series. That is not to say I think any less of 'Classic Doctor Who' but rather it offers an insight into why I think continuing the series is furtive ground creatively. That is how I view Jack O'Brien etc comments on LND, HIS thoughts on why LND was an endeavour worth undertaking.

Another LND inspired parody by Jeff and I, for those who haven't seen it. Sometimes it's nice to take a break from the 'Phan Wars' and come together for a bit of a laugh

Very fun!

That looked like a lot of fun to make. Nice work, you guys.