Love Never Dies - all views allowed

I know this is going to sound hypocritical of me because POTO has the chandelier which is considered a gimmick by many, but since ALW appears to be trying to out-do himself with further special effects in LND...the music should be the special effect. I know all I have to go on is 30 second clips and apart from a few nice melodies, however recycled they may sound, the rest just did not impress me. At all. I figured that if the plot was obscene but the music was solid, I might be able to stomach it. But now I don't see that happening. The plot of Woman in White didn't really work as a stage show, but the score gave me chills and it was beautiful to listen to.

If he had kept the same exact plot from Phantom of Manhattan, that would have been an improvement. At least then, Raoul wouldn't have become a drunk. Also,

Spoiler:

I absolutely despise the fact that Christine is torn now between two abusive men. The Phantom decided not to kill Raoul and he lets Christine go in the end...that doesn't make him a saint. He's still a manipulative murderer. Did we forget that fact? I guess so. Hey, let's have the Phantom lead a 10 year old kid through your magical murder maze. It'll be cute. And now we've got a drunken, abusive Raoul...I think of all things, that offends me the most. I feel like the kids on South Park when they saw Indiana Jones get raped LOL

Let's not forget, ALW was surrounded by an incredibly talented and intelligent production team for POTO. This time around, I don't think he had a single person on hand who would let him know if certain things just weren't working for the story. I don't even know if the people he had in his team would recognize if something was out of joint here.

Oh man, this whole thing breaks my heart. I've been a phan now for almost two decades. I would definitely say POTO brought me to my theater career now. It was always very special to me and obviously had a tremendous impact on my life. So to see how it could be violated like this, because "the phans wanted it", it's a slap in the face. I understand how one could ignore this whole travesty and go on enjoying POTO, but I'll never look at the characters the same way again for a long time. There's a grief that can't be spoken. There's a pain goes on and on...

justin-from-barbados wrote: Mind you I have read very little about costume.

I was thinking the same thing here. Very little has been said about the costumes so I'm feeling as if there wasn't much worth mentioning. Which is another disappointment.

Amy, I know what you mean about the original chandelier. Sure, it's a gimmick and I remember a LOT of buzz about it during the show's first year or two. But while it can be considered a gimmick, it does have relevance to the plot and, frankly, while there's a bit of buzz in the audience about the chandelier at intermission, by the end of the show, that Falling Light Fixture of Doom is secondary to the story, the performances, the music. People are in tears at the end because "it's over now." Not because the big ball of beads and brass fell down.

What is the big buzz surrounding the 13th March performance of LND in regards to LSD? I have family going that day... and just wondering if something is actually happening around the theatre or if it is something merely symbolic.

Cape Twirl of Doom wrote:

MasqPhan wrote:

(off topic - Thanks to the US ice dancers who skated an awesome Phantom program tonight. You have truly made my night )

That was so cool!! They were amazing!

One of the men's skaters (Canadian, I think) also did PotO for his free skate, but I found the arrangement odd (the end cut off right in the middle of the "Masquerade" dance break, for example). I liked the ice dancing arrangement better--especially as it had Crawford's MotN

~LCD

dolly-ry wrote:What is the big buzz surrounding the 13th March performance of LND in regards to LSD? I have family going that day... and just wondering if something is actually happening around the theatre or if it is something merely symbolic.

Wait, LSD is doing something on March 13?

Apparently? I read about it on Twitter and then LSD had replied to someone "Well the 13th is an unlucky day..." and said something about did they expect it to go off without a hitch or something. I don't know I need to find it again:

13 is not a particularly lucky number. And Love Never Dies is a woeful show. Can two pieces of misfortune annul each other?

This was in reply to: Monsieur Le Fantome, I must ask again what disaster is planned for the 13th March. I don't want my life at risk!

ETA: and also this To see @loveneverdies on the 13th must bring such bad luck that you would be ill-advised to even get out of bed. The Phantom.

Can I be honest? I am starting to find LSD not so funny any more... sorry.

I agree, it's getting kind of lame.

I actually worried about clicking to see your reply, I was expecting to be crucified. I agree with what you said. Also I don't really like how they interact with some people, the things they say (as in the example above) the notes were funny at first but then the Sierra one (okay I know it was apologised for) and saying things like 13 being an unlucky number and not to even get out of bed, it just seems a tad lame but also threatening.

On reflection I don't think anything is actually planned on the 13th, re-reading it it just seems like something they are saying in connecting 13 and the show.

So wait, is anything happening on 13th? That's...4 days after the opening night. What's special about that?

I saw the Sierra note this morning but found it very tame compared to what I was expecting given the controversy. I was almost expecting a death threat or something. Didn't seem threatening to me, especially since the link to the newspaper report was underneath, but maybe it was because of the Leroux connection in my head.

I'm quite happy frankly to read that thanks to LSD and other initiatives the media are apparently starting to take notice that not all 'Phans' or fans or whatever are in favour of this. There was an article in the Telegraph today and, despite ALW editing last Sunday's one (or was it the Sunday before? I can't remember) to promote the show, it was surprisingly unbiased and actually mentioned "die-hard fans" who were sceptical. And if it's true what I've just read on the Facebook wall that Ben Brantley has agreed to take notice of this, then I'm positively delighted. And glad that LSD chose to use the email I forwarded them.

Very interested to read the press reviews whenever they do come out. And I wrote a letter to the Telegraph today actually; doubt it'll be published but I'll look out in their letters to the editor section for the next week (seeing "Gaston Leroux's 1911 novel" written YET AGAIN annoyed me, I couldn't resist...).

BTW I'm not clear on this...what exactly happens to the Phantom after Meg kills Christine? I can't be bothered to read through all the spoilers as they give me a headache with the amount of random soap opera plot in them...

Amyable_Nature wrote:If he had kept the same exact plot from Phantom of Manhattan, that would have been an improvement. At least then, Raoul wouldn't have become a drunk. Also,

Spoiler:

I absolutely despise the fact that Christine is torn now between two abusive men. The Phantom decided not to kill Raoul and he lets Christine go in the end...that doesn't make him a saint. He's still a manipulative murderer. Did we forget that fact? I guess so. Hey, let's have the Phantom lead a 10 year old kid through your magical murder maze. It'll be cute. And now we've got a drunken, abusive Raoul...I think of all things, that offends me the most. I feel like the kids on South Park when they saw Indiana Jones get raped LOL

I never thought I was to say this, but... yeah... I wish he would stick closer to "Phantom of Manhattan". Because although Phantom II is largely based on the book, and although I absolutely despised it when I first read it (and later too), I agree with your comments about what was better in the book than on stage.

Also, the part I genuinely liked in that novel was the description of the new opera house. I'm very sad that is cut from the stage version, I', pretty sure I would prefer that to Coney Island.

And I agree with you point about Christine being attracted to abusive men (and the "solution" being her death) it's quite unattractive.

operafantomet wrote:And I agree with you point about Christine being attracted to abusive men (and the "solution" being her death) it's quite unattractive.

At least that should stop Webber from creating a threequel...

Hopefully.

phantomphan1992 wrote:

operafantomet wrote:And I agree with you point about Christine being attracted to abusive men (and the "solution" being her death) it's quite unattractive.

At least that should stop Webber from creating a threequel...

Hopefully.

Hah! Soon he want to share the dramatic story of the caring father Erik, the genius son Gustave and the eh-vul Girys... And of course Raoul will have a brief comeback in a swordfight scene, and he runs away with Meg. A winner!


ETA: Oh no, I should delete this post to Andrew Lloyd-Webber doesn't read it. He might actually consider this idea...

dolly-ry wrote:Apparently? I read about it on Twitter and then LSD had replied to someone "Well the 13th is an unlucky day..." and said something about did they expect it to go off without a hitch or something. I don't know I need to find it again:

13 is not a particularly lucky number. And Love Never Dies is a woeful show. Can two pieces of misfortune annul each other?

This was in reply to: Monsieur Le Fantome, I must ask again what disaster is planned for the 13th March. I don't want my life at risk!

ETA: and also this To see @loveneverdies on the 13th must bring such bad luck that you would be ill-advised to even get out of bed. The Phantom.

Can I be honest? I am starting to find LSD not so funny any more... sorry.

For the 13 thing: oh... that could be it? idk.

As for LSD: I think they're okay. I think now that previews are starting, people are going to come to LSD as an official group against it. Is it because they post a lot of information? I noticed that some of the humor is gone, too. But, it might come back when the show officially opens.

Scorp wrote:
BTW I'm not clear on this...what exactly happens to the Phantom after Meg kills Christine? I can't be bothered to read through all the spoilers as they give me a headache with the amount of random soap opera plot in them...

As far as I have been able to figure out...

Spoiler:

Bleh.

~LCD

I know I've been away for a while. Certainly haven't posted anything in a long time, even though I have occasionally lurked. Don't have a good reason, other than a couple months ago, I was asked to be a moderator over on another phantom board (you can probably guess which one) and so I've been hanging out there more often than not, learning the ropes of being a mod. (At least it's something new I can add to my resume...right? )

So anyway, now that LND has had its preview, I thought this would be as good a time as any to see what folks over here have to say. Sadly, everything I have heard only confirms what I've feared all along. Rather than rehash what has already been said over and over and over...I'll just add a "Me, too!" to most of the objections that have been raised.

On a more positive note (for me, at least)...I have loved the whole Phantom experience for more than 40 years, long before ALW wrote his version of Phantom. I'm not as into musical theater as many of you, and perhaps that is why this whole cluster f*** doesn't upset me as much as it does others. I've seen too many bad Phantoms in the movies to take this to heart. That doesn't mean that LND doesn't trouble me (although I must say I've enjoyed a certain amount of vicarious fun in reading some of the posts that have been made).

Instead, I'm now concerned with the thought of all the bad fics that will come about as a result of this farce. And that there will be a whole group of people for whom this will be their canon. Oh well...nothing I can do about that other than to say, "Their loss."

HDKingsbury wrote:I know I've been away for a while. Certainly haven't posted anything in a long time, even though I have occasionally lurked. Don't have a good reason, other than a couple months ago, I was asked to be a moderator over on another phantom board (you can probably guess which one) and so I've been hanging out there more often than not, learning the ropes of being a mod.

You're allowed to name it here, you know. Link, even! Never been a fan of pretending other Phantom forums don't exist.

I'm actually surprised that reviews so far has been either very negative or at their best lukewarm. I've come across ONE positive review and two lukewarm, and tons of negative ones. I had honestly expected the number to be a bit more balanced.

Here are various reviews (sorry if some has been posted before):

http://tttcritic.blogspot.com/2010/02/love-never-dies.html
Pretty balanced, but also pretty negative. Actually, ouch! Interesting observation: "Throughout, the designs fail to fill the large stage with virtually no vertical components. (...) There are so many black curtains it's like a piece by Brecht's Berliner Ensemble"

http://www.whatsonstage.com/board/index.php?s=fa9f3f46d0f8573dd551084dd29cb9a8&showtopic=16096&st=190&p=108190&#entry108190
Rather positive, still I don't get the "OMG awesome" feeling from the author. Points out a lot of things that seems to be mirroring the original; the "going back to glorious past" in beginning of the musical. dancers rehearsing in the background in the beginning of act 1, the mob chasing the villain (here: Meg) in the end of act 2 etc. Independent piece my ass! It's lifting the whole structure, and even some of the music, from the original.

http://www.stagetalk.co.uk/reviews/review-you-will-believe-love-never-dies-after-seeing-this/
The most positive so far. Using lots of adjectives and adverbs always makes me a bit suspicious. I mean, "The Phantom is absolutely perfectly played by the talented Ramin Karimloo" is so overkill... This reviewer does it a lot. But by far the most positive review I've read so far.

http://www.geniimagazine.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=216496
A review praising the magical tricks, but not the rest.

http://oughttobeclowns.blogspot.com/2010/02/review-phantom-love-never-dies-adelphi.html
Slightly positive, but the negative parts seems to outweigh the positive ones. Sierra Boggess is critizised for the acting, but Ramin Karimloo is mostly praised. Another interesting observation: "Given that no less than four people worked on the book (ALW and Ben Elton, with Glenn Slater and Frederick Forsyth), there's little attempt to build any suspense, the childish characterisations point exactly to how Christine will choose from the word go and therefore remove any real sense of emotion being built up (...)"

This wasn't exactly complimentary...a mention of LND from Mike Riedel's piece on Evita.

The production is said to cost more than $20 million, making it one of the most expensive shows in West End history.

It's already become a lightning rod for some "Phantom" fanatics, who've been e-mailing theater critics and reporters in London and New York denouncing the show, even though they haven't seen it yet.

I got 15 such e-mails yesterday.

But don't worry, Andrew. I deleted all of them.

See you in London!

http://www.nypost.com/f/print/entertainment/theater/evita_to_repeat_B6mC9LrNA5nkF4oJqpefPP

Sigh. Illustrates my earlier point really. It was a matter of time before those denouncing the show got painted as annoying and fanatics. However, I guess it is sort of getting the point across that not everyone is excited for the sequel.

Sometimes, there's no happy medium when it comes to fandom (not just this one) and how it's perceived from the outside.

Support a show too enthusiastically and you're some sort of fanatic...

Criticize a show too enthusiastically and you're some sort of fanatic...

LOL! I love Michael Riedel. I'd take his comments with a pinch of salt, he likes to be bitchy about everything (and I love him for it). And I know he'll rip LND to shreds...if I'm not mistaken he's the one that called the idea bizarre to start with and came up with the whole sexbot rumour.

dolly-ry wrote:Sigh. Illustrates my earlier point really. It was a matter of time before those denouncing the show got painted as annoying and fanatics. However, I guess it is sort of getting the point across that not everyone is excited for the sequel.

Yeah, I see your point, but this is nothing new. Any fans speaking out against anything = fanatics in the press. It was the same deal with TMCPMC back in the day (which was way more intense and aggressive than any of this). Personally, I'm delighted that this isn't another 'it's the sequel Phantom fans have been waiting years for!' article.

You're allowed to name it here, you know. Link, even! Smile Never been a fan of pretending other Phantom forums don't exist.

LOL! I didn't want to come across tacky or anything. So yes, I'm over on phantomoftheopera.com. I've been working very hard to help keep things on an even keel over there, especially over LND. There were some unpleasant incidents over the past year, and as part of a brand new mod team, I've been working hard to keep the board a fun place to visit. But anyhoodles...about LND...

Over on poto.com, the overwhelming response to the preview has been mixed at best, but generally negative. We even opened a thread where those who love/can't wait to see/adore the show can squee away, but the activity in that one is extremely limited--suggesting that most of our members are not pleased with what they're hearing and seeing. We had a few who attended the preview, and lukewarm would be how I'd describe their comments.

Most positive comments have been about the sets and the technology used, and some of the songs. As for the story? Well, the less said on that, the better.

So if Andy thinks that the entire fandom has been waiting for this and will embrace it with open arms, I fear he is going to be disappointed. Oh, I'm sure it will decent run...for a while. Curiosity at the very least will ensure that. Even some who are less than thrilled with all this will go to see it for that very reason. Me? Don't have to worry about that myself. Not only am I not the least bit curious, even if I were, I can't afford to be flying off to go see it--even when/if it comes to Broadway!

Not sure if this has been posted yet, but here's a rather descriptive play-by-play of the show to chew on:

Spoilers ahoy!

Oh, and regarding the OLC worldwide playback. While I think it would be cool if the same recording was cascading across the globe at 7pm on March 9th, feel free to play whichever cast recording of the original show you prefer. It's all in good fun

R.

ONE thing surprise me... How come no reviews has commented on the costumes yet (apart from minor details)?

I mean... how much has the Phantom's appearance changed? Does he basically wear one costume, as in the original (minus "Red Death" and the Mandarine coat, + various hats and cloaks)? What about the bar scene? Is the supposed to be recognized?

Mask - half mask or different?

Christine - any pretty frocks? Still curly, long wig? Blood stained dress when she is shot?

The apparently amazing peacock cloak - was it amazing on stage?

Any goodies? Anything particularly appalling?

Two people I follow on Twitter I managed to pick up on and this is an exact quotation "So glad they gave him the hot movie costume." This was referring to The Phantom... The only other thing I've heard is Christine wears a very noticeable colour when she arrives.

ETA: I've heard the mask and deformity are the same but I am sure I picked up on that The Phantom doesn't always wear the mask...

The bar scene I can't make out I've heard "poses as a barman" which would say he is wearing something different somehow hiding his mask? But then I have also heard that The Phantom sometimes works as a barman? I'm inclined to go with the first description.

dolly-ry wrote:Two people I follow on Twitter I managed to pick up on and this is an exact quotation "So glad they gave him the hot movie costume." This was referring to The Phantom... The only other thing I've heard is Christine wears a very noticeable colour when she arrives.

ETA: I've heard the mask and deformity are the same but I am sure I picked up on that The Phantom doesn't always wear the mask...

The bar scene I can't make out I've heard "poses as a barman" which would say he is wearing something different somehow hiding his mask? But then I have also heard that The Phantom sometimes works as a barman? I'm inclined to go with the first description.

Interesting. I think I read somewhere that Christine, Raoul and Gustave wears white/bright colours when they arrive, as the perfect Edwardian couple, while everyone else wears garish colours. One commented that they seemed to belong to different productions.

Spoiler:

But I think the lack of costume comments in general is a bit odd, both because they have a talented designer on board and because we were promised great things. And I would also think people would compare it to the original in terms of continuity and recognizability. Hmmm. I guess that's a task for die-hard fans.

But "hot movie costume"? Bleeeeeeeeh....

I definitely remember a review mentioning Christine sticks out quite a bit at the beginning and said something along the lines of "so the audience notice her about 5 minutes before the cast does." It is weird no one has commented on the costumes... all I've heard is about the quick change act Meg does, but even that I've not heard much on.

I love hearing about costumes so it is a shame no one has commented on it... I suppose pretty soon the brochure will be released and we will start seeing scans of that...

This has just been posted on WOS "I notice Fleck has a kind of leg brace designed into her costume" I am just going over there to type a question along the lines of "Speaking of costumes, can anyone describe what some of them are like?"

ETA: They are straight out of a book on turn of the century period costume - apart from the Freaks who look like 70's rock stars as described by other posters.

Oh how informative, I do remember reading that the Freaks were dressed in leather and PVC though, I'd like a more detailed description. Sigh, I go on March 19th, if no one has truly commented by then (which I doubt) I promise I'll take notes, it will give me something to distract me...

Another thread at All That Chat.

The second or third post calls it "a big ZERO."

http://www.talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/d.php?id=1827873

I for one, am delighted with Love Never Dies, and for one reason only:

FORBIDDEN BROADWAY is going to go to town with this!

I can hardly wait...

~Madame~

Madame Giry wrote:I for one, am delighted with Love Never Dies, and for one reason only:

FORBIDDEN BROADWAY is going to go to town with this!

I can hardly wait...

~Madame~

*chuckles*