25th Anniversary Restaged Tour

This article was posted over on phantomoftheopera.com:

http://www.thisiscornwall.co.uk/Phantom-star-musical-s-rebirth/story-15295373-detail/story.html

Not sure how I feel. I guess I'm glad JOJ is the one who gets to re-imagine the character. He's well-liked in the POTO community so hopefully that will translate over in to creating a great character.

This bothers me a little bit:

Taking a break from tech rehearsals at the Theatre Royal, John said: "The whole show has been redesigned from the bottom up, it's totally different from the West End show, but even more spectacular, if that's possible.

"The sets were so huge that it would be impossible to take them down and reassemble them on tour, so Cameron decided to redesign everything and give the show a 21st-century makeover.

We know it's possible to tour this show so it's not impossible to do just the way the show was.

I just hope it'll be good. (4 days to go)

I hope the first reviews will come soon..

Hello, everyone!

I've been lurking for a little while now, but I've popped my head above the parapet to let you know that JOJ linked to this interview on Twitter yesterday:

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Fans-favourite-Phantom/story-15306207-detail/story.html

He goes into a tiny bit more detail about the 'reimagining' of the tour.

CG

Yeah, that was linked a few posts above you. But welcome.

Edit: Never mind. Different article, but same site design. I think I saw it on FB. Either way, JOJ is out of his mind.

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Fans-favourite-Phantom/story-15306207-detail/story.html

Factual errors, factual errors everywhere. It seems our MasqPhan has already commented the article, hopefully it's fixed soon.

SenorSwanky wrote:Yeah, that was linked a few posts above you. But welcome.

Edit: Never mind. Different article, but same site design. I think I saw it on FB. Either way, JOJ is out of his mind.

I think they're both offshoots of the same site - I had to look twice.

The more tidbits that filter out, the less encouraging it sounds.

And thanks for the welcome.

TheFinnishPhantom wrote:

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Fans-favourite-Phantom/story-15306207-detail/story.html

Factual errors, factual errors everywhere. It seems our MasqPhan has already commented the article, hopefully it's fixed soon.

"The story is more real – there's less melodrama – and it's more emotionally connected.

For whom? A romantic show don't run for 25 years if the audience don't emotionally connect with it. I can see how the leads might connect more with the roles, as they're creating them anew instead of following someone else's path. But I don't think you can automatically transfer that to the audience, that THEY will see it as more real and more emotional.

Why do they always have to talk down the original to talk up the new ones, be it LND, the revamped tour or the 2004 movie? Talking down the original is, believe it or not, lessening their own product. As a non-knowing customer I would have been more intrigued if JOJ now had said that "The original is beyond fantastic. We hope to top that".

And how can they even be creating a new story? They're just re-staging the existing book and score.

operafantomet wrote:

TheFinnishPhantom wrote:

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Fans-favourite-Phantom/story-15306207-detail/story.html

Factual errors, factual errors everywhere. It seems our MasqPhan has already commented the article, hopefully it's fixed soon.

"The story is more real – there's less melodrama – and it's more emotionally connected.

For whom? A romantic show don't run for 25 years if the audience don't emotionally connect with it. I can see how the leads might connect more with the roles, as they're creating them anew instead of following someone else's path. But I don't think you can automatically transfer that to the audience, that THEY will see it as more real and more emotional.

Why do they always have to talk down the original to talk up the new ones, be it LND, the revamped tour or the 2004 movie? Talking down the original is, believe it or not, lessening their own product. As a non-knowing customer I would have been more intrigued if JOJ now had said that "The original is beyond fantastic. We hope to top that".

I don´t understand why they talked down the original. Some people are out of mind.
Its great that there (maybe) come something new and a re-staged version, but maybe it´s better or not. Have the same success or not.
They shouldn´t do that with the original. It deserved more..

And the part in the article that said: JOJ ist the Fans favorite Phantom. Not for all.

operafantomet wrote:

TheFinnishPhantom wrote:

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/Fans-favourite-Phantom/story-15306207-detail/story.html

Factual errors, factual errors everywhere. It seems our MasqPhan has already commented the article, hopefully it's fixed soon.

"The story is more real – there's less melodrama – and it's more emotionally connected.

For whom? A romantic show don't run for 25 years if the audience don't emotionally connect with it. I can see how the leads might connect more with the roles, as they're creating them anew instead of following someone else's path. But I don't think you can automatically transfer that to the audience, that THEY will see it as more real and more emotional.

Why do they always have to talk down the original to talk up the new ones, be it LND, the revamped tour or the 2004 movie? Talking down the original is, believe it or not, lessening their own product. As a non-knowing customer I would have been more intrigued if JOJ now had said that "The original is beyond fantastic. We hope to top that".

Frankly I'm not sure how they can get away from the melodrama. I mean look at it--you've got this guy in a mask and a cape who lives in this supervillain lair below the earth, this naive young girl he's obsessed with, her dashing lover, and a whole bunch of showbusiness archetypes (the prima donna, the beleaguered producers, etc.) all sighing and raging and hurling imprecations and singing at the top of their lungs. And that's okay--in fact the grandeur of it all is one of the things I like about it--as long as the actors inhabit the roles with conviction and emotional honesty. And I don't think PotO would have lasted half as long as it has if the performers weren't doing that for the most part. It's good that JOJ recognizes that on some level, but I'm surprised he doesn't acknowledge that kind of honesty is a constant whether you're playing an intimate drama or a grand opera.

~LCD

operafantomet wrote:
"The story is more real – there's less melodrama – and it's more emotionally connected.

For whom? A romantic show don't run for 25 years if the audience don't emotionally connect with it. I can see how the leads might connect more with the roles, as they're creating them anew instead of following someone else's path. But I don't think you can automatically transfer that to the audience, that THEY will see it as more real and more emotional.

Why do they always have to talk down the original to talk up the new ones, be it LND, the revamped tour or the 2004 movie? Talking down the original is, believe it or not, lessening their own product. As a non-knowing customer I would have been more intrigued if JOJ now had said that "The original is beyond fantastic. We hope to top that".

Doesn't this sound almost exactly like how the London LND actors and creative team described their take on the characters -- "we took these characters and put them on a psychiatrist's couch to analyze what they'd really be like". When they mounted the Las Vegas production, the original cast was given free reign to create their versions of the characters from scratch by the creative team - while still being tethered to what came before them to some degree.

As Swanky said, they're working within the confines of the original plot and lyrics. Any variances will come through the blocking, the choreography and the direction. And as we saw in the RAH, that variance can result in drastically skewing the way the story is interpreted. Doesn't automatically mean a change for the worse, though, so we'll just have to wait for the eyewitness reports to come in from phans who are intimately familiar with "Classic Phantom" and can spot the differences.

R.

Yes we have to wait how the tour will be. I hope the best and for many reviews and more to see it live.

I don't know how accurate this source is, but according to a new member over at What's On Stage:

1. The use of projections is limited.
2. There will be a real chandelier, and apparently very spectacular.
3. The first couple of previews are cancelled.
4. The actual premiere date might be pushed back as well.

Nope, Pilgrim Pete is right. Rehearsals are behind and Carlotta still has nothing to sing to bring down. In other words the chandelier has yet to arrive. Monday is definately cancelled and it wouldn't surprise me if more dates also drop off. In short, not audience ready yet.

Whilst here let's dispell one rumour: there aren't any projections on the scale of the RAH production and the chandelier, when it turns up, is real and is set to be rigged to drop in highly spectacular fashion. The set is gorgeous and what there is of the actual staging is very tight and very, very visually impressive with every modern theatrical trick thrown into the mix in almost a complete reversal of the original's mostly old school staging.

http://www.whatsonstage.com/board/index.php?/topic/39478-phantom-of-the-opera-2012-uk-tour/page__st__170

Old school or new any version of PotO is going to be technically complicated, so it doesn't surprise me there are wrinkles to iron out (this could also explain the lack of promo photos). I'm happy that they're not completely relying on projections. In the end, however, what matters most is that they generate that eerie, haunting atmosphere, not which tools they go about doing it with.

~LCD

LadyCDaae wrote:In the end, however, what matters most is that they generate that eerie, haunting atmosphere, not which tools they go about doing it with.

Absolutely. The Vegas production uses modern tech to do a lot of their effects, and it doesn't change how it looks onstage. Of course, in tinkering with the throne, they also made it overly-complicated to use; but when the designers start doing that, I say just wave something shiny in their faces to distract them.

R.

Amen to LadyCDaae. Also, they changed the way the throne works in Vegas?

That's what I was told. Does the exact same thing, but instead of the actor having to do, say, 3 things to make it work; he has to do like, 5 or 6 things. Sounded like tinkering for the sake of tinkering to me.

R.

Confirmation that the first preview has been cancelled:

http://blog.musicaltheatrenews.com/2012/02/phantom-first-preview-cancelled.html?m=1

I don't really understand what this article is trying to say:
http://www.westendtheatre.com/tag/the-phantom-of-the-opera-uk-tour/

Are they suggesting that the tour version may replace the london production?
Or am I being stupid?
OG

thephanfullerton wrote:I don't really understand what this article is trying to say:
http://www.westendtheatre.com/tag/the-phantom-of-the-opera-uk-tour/

Are they suggesting that the tour version may replace the london production?
Or am I being stupid?

If they mean the new Phantom tour will do what the Les Mis tour did, they mean that the original production will be playing alongside the tour, alongside the grand concert, all three in London. However, the RAH concert has already passed, so three of three is not possible. But two of three? Definitely. Would actually be cool if the tour visited London, so people had the chance to see both.

If it was to replace the original, though, I would be mighty pissed.

So the latest "rumour" is that the chandelier doesn't actually rise or fall (like the RAH) but that something amazing happens at the end of Act 1. It better be very amazing because I thought the chandelier not falling at the RAH made the end of Act 1 fall flat.

Seems there's a few people online going tonight so seems we may have a few initial reports not too far in the future.

starryeyed wrote:So the latest "rumour" is that the chandelier doesn't actually rise or fall (like the RAH) but that something amazing happens at the end of Act 1. It better be very amazing because I thought the chandelier not falling at the RAH made the end of Act 1 fall flat.

Seems there's a few people online going tonight so seems we may have a few initial reports not too far in the future.

If they make it work, I'm probably a fan. But I was SO disappointed about the RAH ending. I'd rather that they didn't have a chandelier at all. The point of the chandelier is that it's a threat, it crashes, it kills. It's not supposed to just be a nice trinket adorning the theatre.

But if they make something spectacular for the tour, a chandelier truly rocking the audience, I'll applaud.

That's an article written out of observation. And it's a poorly written one. CamMac has said he has no plans of replacing the show at Her Majesty's... Can't remember the source I read that from, however.

I think it is a safe thing to assume that they won;t replace the 'brilliant original' with the revised tour. It is all about finance and the bottom line.

They wont go to the expense of bringing in a new one to replace the original that has recouped ages ago and basically makes money, rather than now have to start from scratch to recoup innitial capital just for the sake of change.

What can happen though is like what happened with Les Mis and the tour may make a london stop close to the end of the run, particularly if it happens around an anniversary.

Also more far fetched would be if they really wanted to do some serious theatre and set maintenance at HMT they could at the end of the tour, close briefly to do the work while the tour plays another theatre to take up the slack of the closure. But that in itself will be a logistical nightmare with contracts and sallaries and all that.

starryeyed wrote:So the latest "rumour" is that the chandelier doesn't actually rise or fall (like the RAH) but that something amazing happens at the end of Act 1. It better be very amazing because I thought the chandelier not falling at the RAH made the end of Act 1 fall flat.

Seems there's a few people online going tonight so seems we may have a few initial reports not too far in the future.

Hmmm... I'm not sure about this. I don't mean to be cynical, but if there is no chandelier fall, then I'm going to be very grumpy. I really do hope that it falls, but this 'amazing thingy' could be good also. But aside from falling and exploding like the RAH, what more can it do? Any suggestions? Perhaps the proscenium will do something?
OG

thephanfullerton wrote:Hmmm... I'm not sure about this. I don't mean to be cynical, but if there is no chandelier fall, then I'm going to be very grumpy. I really do hope that it falls, but this 'amazing thingy' could be good also. But aside from falling and exploding like the RAH, what more can it do? Any suggestions? Perhaps the proscenium will do something?
OG

My immediate thought was that it was an "opposite of Vegas" chandelier, that it dissembles instead of coming together, and that the pieces disappears. But somehow that sounds too advanced for a tour which doesn't play all that long in the various locations.

Maybe the chandelier won't fall but will split apart before a blackout?

operafantomet wrote:

starryeyed wrote:So the latest "rumour" is that the chandelier doesn't actually rise or fall (like the RAH) but that something amazing happens at the end of Act 1. It better be very amazing because I thought the chandelier not falling at the RAH made the end of Act 1 fall flat.

Seems there's a few people online going tonight so seems we may have a few initial reports not too far in the future.

If they make it work, I'm probably a fan. But I was SO disappointed about the RAH ending. I'd rather that they didn't have a chandelier at all. The point of the chandelier is that it's a threat, it crashes, it kills. It's not supposed to just be a nice trinket adorning the theatre.

But if they make something spectacular for the tour, a chandelier truly rocking the audience, I'll applaud.

My sentiments exactly. Theater is a more suggestive art form than, say, film or television, so the chandelier doesn't have to physically fall as long as the panic and destruction it causes is otherwise effectively presented. I'd have to see what exactly they do with it before deciding whether or not it works. The RAH chandelier did indeed look disappointing on film, although I can imagine it was probably a bit more spectacular live.

~LCD

LadyCDaae wrote:

operafantomet wrote:

starryeyed wrote:So the latest "rumour" is that the chandelier doesn't actually rise or fall (like the RAH) but that something amazing happens at the end of Act 1. It better be very amazing because I thought the chandelier not falling at the RAH made the end of Act 1 fall flat.

Seems there's a few people online going tonight so seems we may have a few initial reports not too far in the future.

If they make it work, I'm probably a fan. But I was SO disappointed about the RAH ending. I'd rather that they didn't have a chandelier at all. The point of the chandelier is that it's a threat, it crashes, it kills. It's not supposed to just be a nice trinket adorning the theatre.

But if they make something spectacular for the tour, a chandelier truly rocking the audience, I'll applaud.

My sentiments exactly. Theater is a more suggestive art form than, say, film or television, so the chandelier doesn't have to physically fall as long as the panic and destruction it causes is otherwise effectively presented. I'd have to see what exactly they do with it before deciding whether or not it works. The RAH chandelier did indeed look disappointing on film, although I can imagine it was probably a bit more spectacular live.

~LCD

So it seems to hold true with various reports that the chandelier is MASSIVE ( and rumoured to be similar to the RAH design) but will not "crash"...however I keep seeing "BUT something amazing does happen" and I honestly am optimistic that whatever this amazing thing/effect is will be executed with awe; however a small part of me is a bit doubtful, because even when the chandelier crashes slowly (tour/broadway) it's still a spectacle to see ; but Im also a bit concerned about the effect this will have on the Overture...so they have to tweak the crash...but to have no reveal and rise of the beautiful chandelier during the opening number will be very hard to replace, I remember reading an interview with Webber about the importance of that opening scene and not to mention how iconic it is now with the haunting overture. So I suppose we'll know soon enough; I'll be in the screening for LND tonight, so rest assured I will be checking for updates all around the web during intermission lol.

New Promo:
http://www.thephantomoftheoperatour.com/#!prettyPhoto
No footage or photos from the tour, but htought that I ought to post it.
Is anyone on the board going tonight?? I really want to hear about the tour!! I don't know where else to look...
OG