25th Anniversary Restaged Tour

Yeah, the chandelier is pretty meh. It doesn't have much personality to it at all--it just looks like something that could be hanging over any large room anywhere. The curtain and boxes look nice, though.

~LCD

The curtain is lovely, but I'm guessing it's a projection (?) I do like the boxes, though.

Yeah, that chandelier...ughly. Reminds me too much of the movie, and looks so tiny.

I miss the proscenium which really helps to break down the 4th wall.

Meant to add:
I kept reading that this show was supposed to be scaled down to some extent so it could travel easier. From two of the descriptions I have now read and seeing these photos, it looks like they went the opposite way and have much larger set pieces..I wonder how well it travels...

No way that curtain's a projection. Looks pretty real. Though it hangs rumpled.

I dunno. It's definitely a replica curtain from the Palais Garnier, and hangs almost too perfectly to be real.

Hopefully Navarre will come back to reply to that post.

Right in the middle, where the policeman (?) is standing, there's something circular on the floor..Do they have a turntable?

Looking a bit closer, I think the scene is the beginning of DJT?

I think you're right about which scene it is. I noticed the policeman. The review mentioned the stage turning at least once, so it might be doing the reverse of Les Mis: instead of removing the revolving stage, adding one.

On second thought, it probably is a projection. Disappointing because that's one of the great things about the original.

PhantomsGhost wrote:Right in the middle, where the policeman (?) is standing, there's something circular on the floor..Do they have a turntable?

Looking a bit closer, I think the scene is the beginning of DJT?

For some reason I assumed it was Cam Mack and/or others giving a speech before or after the show. It didn't even occur to me it might be from the actual show.

I'm mighty disappointed about that chandelier. Like others said, it has no personality whatsoever, and looks too modern. I hope it does something fantastic during the crash, like falls apart midair and disappears. If it just sits there and goes "pfffft" it is more likely to make me laugh than gasp.

I do like that red curtain. But why make that a perfect replica of the Palais Garnier one, while the chandelier doesn't resemble the Garnier one at all? Kinda inconsistent.

Hmmm. I think it may all look better live. I mean, the photo quality is awful and probably doesn't do it justice. Also, that theatre really doesn't suit the show. Makes it look like a high school production. I know that it isn't set up to fall yet, but is the chandelier going to fall at manchester? If it does, I doubt it will explode into pieces or anything. Probably just a straight forward fall. It doesn't look like that chandelier is able to rise off the stage though...
I really hope red death come back! That would be an awesome sight; red death suddenly rising from the crowd....
OG

A little aside but it would seem Lee Jon Ormsby (Buquet) for whatever reason hasn't taken to kindly to that fan posting a blog.

"Meh meh meh meh meh and meh. I hope her womb falls out on her 16 hour coach journey home!" can be viewed on his Twitter. It's been discussed over at WOS that the remark is very uncalled for especially when there was nothing much bad written in the blog at all!

Also about those photos, I'd say that curtain is definitely a projection. The chandelier seems a bit "meh" to quote LJO but I am hoping that it is just the quality of the pictures not showing it to its full potential.

I actually think that the red curtain is a replica of the Garnier Opera's curtain in that it is - just like the Garnier curtain - a painted up (or in this case probably screen printed) flat scrim with an image of a lavish red and gold curtain on it. It's neither a real draped fabric curtain, nor a projection. At least, that's my thoughts.

And wow, that actor's comment was *really* uncalled for. Ugh.

~Madame~

Ah, I didn't know that about the real curtain. I think that sounds quite a plausible explanation as well and would be a nice tie in.

Yes, certainly uncalled for especially given the fact that if people didn't make such journey's etc then in reality he wouldn't have a job to go to. I think sometimes people forget just how important the audience is, no matter what their opinion of a show. I await with interest what he'll say if someone is to post a scathing review (and there have been some unkind comments on Theatre Royal Plymouth's FB page already.)

Yeah, that's just unprofessional. People have got to learn how to conduct themselves on social media when they're public figures.

starryeyed wrote:Ah, I didn't know that about the real curtain. I think that sounds quite a plausible explanation as well and would be a nice tie in.

Yup, you can see the Garnier's painted curtain (recently restored if I'm not mistaken) at the link below:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/iceninejon/289821433/



~Madame~

Thanks very much! I'm actually visiting there next week so hope to see it in person.

Also, I'd like to point out Lee Jon Ormsby has now deleted said tweet that I mentioned above and is apparently onto someone from backstage who was "stirring it up" on WOS. Can always count on Phantom for some drama these days.

starryeyed wrote:Also, I'd like to point out Lee Jon Ormsby has now deleted said tweet that I mentioned above and is apparently onto someone from backstage who was "stirring it up" on WOS. Can always count on Phantom for some drama these days.

I have no idea what caused his comment, but as the review in question was fairly positive it seems odd for him sending curses in her direction. Sounds like a general frustration, for something completely different, just ended up being directed at her?

I've followed the initial comments on different forums, facebook sites and blogs. The general consensus so far is that the lair scene, that is everything after the boat scene, is a major let down. There is also confusion as to whether Masquerade is finished or not. Let's hope they consider the feedback on these two aspects. These are two iconic scenes, and seems to head in the wrong direction. The boat scene is also iconic, and has gotten tons of praise. So it's not that people are stuck in the original version. There seem to be genuine issues with these scenes.

But on the other hand, we're still early in the progress, with stuff still unfinished and with the second act still in development. I X my fingers we only see the early draft here.

A question, though: do they charge full price for the preview tickets, or are they discounted?

Love the curtain and boxes, very similar to the Garnier, then there's that chandelier that throws it off...I don't think the chandelier is ugly per say, but I dont feel it's very "Phantom"; Even if they had to do a scaled down version could they not do a replica of the Palais Garnier chandelier? It would've been beautiful with what we've seen of the sets so far; I also feel that chandelier looks a bit..unfinished, which I hope is true, it seems near the top it hasnt been fully constructed so Im hoping it's just because they had to rig it up for previews that it will appear more finished once the show opens

--An interview with JOJ:


http://www.thisisnorthdevon.co.uk/Theatregoers-tempted-enticing-hints-new-phantom/story-15361637-detail/story.html


I tried to make it a link, but....

I know you can;t judge a whole production by a few grainy photos, but so far I amnot impressed. Reminds me of a school production, but I am still reserving judgement till I see proper pics and a vid or 2.

Maybe that shiny curtain is that house's safety curtain or something.

It is a very odd looking theatre, modern yet, but oddly unsymetrical. house left has a set of seats coming down the side, house right has traditional boxes.

Navarre confirmed on phantomoftheopera.com that the curtain was a projection....

FTA

"It's a completely brand new set design – unique. It's nothing like the London one, but recreated for touring and much more spectacular and bigger than in the West End."
(snip)
John says: "She designed the set and the Phantom story is a lot to do with her vision of how design works. Cameron bravely decided it was very expensive and difficult to tour with that set because it is unique to Her Majesty's theatre with its Victorian stage equipment."

Wait a sec John....first you say it's bigger than the West End, yet then go on to say the Classic Phantom was difficult to tour...? They did it before, re-engineered it so it would fit in to other theaters, not only in the UK but all over the world.... I'd think the new production, with it being bigger, may be more difficult to tour, more chances of the projection screens getting damaged...

John adds: "The make-up is realistic, exciting and horrible. It looks breathtakingly real but terrifying. Plymouth audiences are going to be in for a treat!"

I hope so. The reports I'm reading say the Phantom is completely bald though...tufts of white hair are now gone...

--And from the interview:

JOJ: Cameron bravely decided it was very expensive and difficult to tour with that set because it is unique to Her Majesty's theatre with its Victorian stage equipment."

SNIP

JOJ: "Cameron did not need to do anything. He could have just exported the original out on the road."

I don't see why they repeat that the original is impossible to tour, when it clearly has toured in the past, and still is touring Asia-Pacific... As I've commented on earlier, I think "impossible" in this context merely means "more expensive".

I've been looking closer at the new tour chandelier. I still really dislike it. But I wondered about the "amazing crash" they've promised us. Well, RUMOURS has promised us... The two golden tiers are set much closer in the tour chandelier than in the RAH and movie chandelier. It contributes to the unflattering look. But I also wonder if the chandelier might split in two here? I don't see why else they would put the tiers to close to eachother. Unless the designer has very poor taste, I mean...

Do you see what I mean? This is one of the pics Navarre posted over at the POTO forum I previously linked to:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v306/EttienneNavarre/005.jpg

I've been trying to avoid reading too much about this tour before I see it for myself in May, but I caved and am a bit alarmed by some of the staging. I am furious if it's true Laurence Connor went even further than he did at the RAH event in retrofitting this show to make it fit Paint Never Dries and even more furious with Cameron for allowing it. That chandelier also looks tacky as hell; I wasn't even a huge fan of the Vegas chandelier but I'd take that over this any day. I'd even take a projected chandelier à la Hungarian production over this. It looks absolutely nothing like the Garnier chandelier. Removing the staircase in Masquerade is also like removing the Phantom's deformity -- the staircase has been the backdrop of the masked ball since the original novel, through to the Lon Chaney film and Hal Prince's production. I'm pleased to hear the title song is supposed to be spectacular, though, as that's my favourite part of the whole show. I doubt the travelator and candle-filled lake can be topped, though.

I don't quite see how JOJ's comments that this production is bigger and more spectacular than the original make sense given that it's essentially a cost-cutting exercise. Guess I'll see for myself. JOJ is usually candid in his interviews, though.

Hey guys,

looking for some help from some of the UK folks here...

I booked a trip to London for the last week in March with the intention of a side trip to see the new Phantom tour wherever it was playing. Unfortunately I didn't check the tour schedule and I booked over top of their first move of the tour from Plymouth to Manchester. Since it opens in Manchester after I leave, I'm kind of stuck having to find a way to Plymouth on the last Saturday or Sunday (and back). Before I purchase a ticket, is it easy to get there by train or some other method for a matinee? Does anyone have any experience with this? Being from the states where there is no nation-wide rail system, I'm not familiar with what might be available on weekends.

I'll certainly be seeing the original production in the West End, but would also like to make it out to Plymouth. Thanks for any help.

No disrespect to JOJ or anything, but I usually take performer's comments with a large can of salt, they can;t exactly come out and say such and such looks like crap, or talk badly about whatever show they are in.

Let's hope they put out some photos soon.

ravnquest1 wrote:Hey guys,

looking for some help from some of the UK folks here...

I booked a trip to London for the last week in March with the intention of a side trip to see the new Phantom tour wherever it was playing. Unfortunately I didn't check the tour schedule and I booked over top of their first move of the tour from Plymouth to Manchester. Since it opens in Manchester after I leave, I'm kind of stuck having to find a way to Plymouth on the last Saturday or Sunday (and back). Before I purchase a ticket, is it easy to get there by train or some other method for a matinee? Does anyone have any experience with this? Being from the states where there is no nation-wide rail system, I'm not familiar with what might be available on weekends.

I'll certainly be seeing the original production in the West End, but would also like to make it out to Plymouth. Thanks for any help.

The journey will take around 3 and a half hours from Paddington station to Plymouth and depending on which train you go on could be quite expensive. If you book the train far enough in advance and pick a specific train to train to travel there and back on you could get tickets for around £40/£50.

justin-from-barbados wrote:No disrespect to JOJ or anything, but I usually take performer's comments with a large can of salt, they can;t exactly come out and say such and such looks like crap, or talk badly about whatever show they are in.

Let's hope they put out some photos soon.

Exactly. He's just shilling, like Ramin and Sierra and others were for LND. Though it's also hard to not be proud of what you're doing while you're doing it. You want to believe in what you're doing, or why show up to work? So you defensively, over-effusively justify it to the public. We've all been there.

Scorp wrote:I've been trying to avoid reading too much about this tour before I see it for myself in May, but I caved and am a bit alarmed by some of the staging. I am furious if it's true Laurence Connor went even further than he did at the RAH event in retrofitting this show to make it fit Paint Never Dries and even more furious with Cameron for allowing it. That chandelier also looks tacky as hell; I wasn't even a huge fan of the Vegas chandelier but I'd take that over this any day. I'd even take a projected chandelier à la Hungarian production over this. It looks absolutely nothing like the Garnier chandelier. Removing the staircase in Masquerade is also like removing the Phantom's deformity -- the staircase has been the backdrop of the masked ball since the original novel, through to the Lon Chaney film and Hal Prince's production. I'm pleased to hear the title song is supposed to be spectacular, though, as that's my favourite part of the whole show. I doubt the travelator and candle-filled lake can be topped, though.

I don't quite see how JOJ's comments that this production is bigger and more spectacular than the original make sense given that it's essentially a cost-cutting exercise. Guess I'll see for myself. JOJ is usually candid in his interviews, though.

Been waiting for your comments, Scorp.

I really thought that, given the background of the show, we would find more adaptations of the book, or better yet, the Opera Garnier. That's what I liked about Phantom, it made it feel like a combination of Webber/Leroux/real life. This, I don't know what this feels like yet.

Isn't Plymouth supposed to be a bit of a dump? No offence to anyone who may live there - feel free to contradict me if I'm wrong.

Meanwhile, ALW has this to say on the new Phantom (in an interview in the States, desperately trying to promote Paint Never Dries):

Andrew Lloyd Webber wrote:"One has to remember with musicals, there clearly comes a time when you do need to rethink them," he said.

"But nothing would ever completely equal the original ’Phantom.’"

Source: http://news.bostonherald.com/entertainment/movies/general/view.bg?&articleid=1407522&format=&page=1&listingType=movi#articleFull

I don't think Cameron would ever admit that! And I didn't think ALW would either. I mean, isn't Love Never Dies supposed to be infinitely better than the biggest piece of hokum ever written?

A rare bit of true candor.

SenorSwanky wrote:A rare bit of true candor.

He must have meant no revival of Phantom could ever equal the original. I mean, after all, Paint Never Dries Love Never Dies is just as heartbreaking, passionate, spectacular and financially/artistically successful, right?

Or maybe it was a rare moment of true candour. He even admits in that interview that he did "very little" rewriting for the Oz LND...which sort of goes against all the marketing hype about how it was extensively revised after bombing in London.

One thing I like about the original stage version is that it seldom contradicts Leroux's novel. It doesn't explicitly say that it went down like in the book, but it doesn't contradict it either. Christine's visit to the graveyard is one of these. The transition from "Don Juan Rehearsal" to the graveyard is only implied by violin music and by the other people kinda fading away. The actual journey is up to interpretation. Did she travel by train? We don't know. Did she travel alone? We don't know. Where the graveyard is? We don't know (other that the libretto and the scene listing writes Perros). And it doesn't really matter for the viewer. But it matters for the Leroux purists.

It's also where the re-imagined versions tend to step wrong. Whereas I don't know how it's staged in the Hungarian and Polish versions, I can compare to the 2004 movie version and the newly staged tour (if the reports are correct, I mean).

In the movie version Christine goes down to the street, outside the Opera, and asks a coach driver to take her to "My father's grave, please". Now, many questions leaps to mind here... How would a random Parisian coach driver know where her father's grave was, let alone know who SHE was? If this was a trip she took + a coach she used regularly, how in the world was she, a chorus girl, paying for it? Perros is far away, at the coast of Bretagne. Nothing about that scene makes sense. It would make more sense if they cut it entirely, and just jumped to the actual travel (with the nice deer shot in morning mist - though filmed by accident, it could be a nice symbol of Christine fleeing). Yes, yes, I KNOW it was the Phantom driving that coach that morning, but judging by Christine's conduct she had no idea it was him, and she automatically expected the world to know where that grave was. The result would be the same whether it was the Phantom or Mr. Frenchie behind those horses.

In the newly staged tour, the graveyard is now the neighbor of the Opera. Apparently you can see the set through a window in the background where they rehearse, and the stage turns to display the graveyard when Christine visits there. The reports were a bit unclear on whether it was intentional or not to show the graveyard set during the rehearsal, but if they've bothered to put in a window I assume they want to show something through that window. But when did Palais Garnier get a graveyard as nearest neighbor? Why the urge to make it so literal? Again, had they not tried to put in the physical transaction it would make more sense.

I like this about the Prince/Bjørnson version. They are very clear about where the story takes place (Palais Garnier, the main stage, the cellars, the rooftop, the grand staircase), but there are leaps in time and space which is not explained. The transition from rooftop to auditorium is another example, nicely solved by the use of the golden angel. You can go by Leroux for the finer details, or you can fill in the blanks yourself.

My point is that placing the graveyard set in the background of the DJR probably seemed like a good idea on paper, and it might add an eerie atmosphere. But they're also contradicting their source material for no other reason than "style over content".