Las Vegas Production

They're destroying the sets? The props, too? This is sad. Someone, do what Jeff did, raid those skiffs!

TheMaskedLion wrote:The Venetian hotel has purchased the chandelier, and it will be displayed most likely in the Lobby. I have heard this from several trusted sources within the L.V Production.

Well, that's something at least. It's nice to know a memorial of the production will be present at the Venetian, at least for a little while longer (nothing ever lasts in Vegas, sadly).

~LCD

So I saw this last night and, while I'm too busy running around Las Vegas to give a detailed report, I really enjoyed it. Will provide a full review once I'm home and have time to process.

~LCD

Raphael wrote:

Scorp wrote:This has probably been asked, if not answered, but did the Vegas production recoup? I don't know how you judge it given that the theatre was custom-built, but I assume we don't factor it into the costs since it's not as if they're destroying the theatre once Phantom leaves. What will happen to the sets and costumes, I wonder?

I've been told that the sets will be destroyed and the costumes (and I assume props) will be sold off to the new US Tour. The chandelier will remain in fixed position until the theatre is occupied by another sit-down production.

That is if the new US tour isn't a copy of the new UK tour and sticks to the Prince/Björnson formula...otherwise I guess they would save the props/costumes as replacements for anything that gets worn down on Broadway maybe?

While attendance has been very good from what I've heard, various reports say that the production will close around $20-$30 million in the red on a $70 million cost to mount the production. $40 million of that went into creating the auditorium (the space used to be a museum) and $5 million into constructing the chandelier.

If the cost of building the auditorium is taken out though, then didn't it turn a profit? Considering the auditorium will be used for other shows it doesn't seem right to consider it a cost for Phantom. I don't really know how these things are judged. If the Vegas production didn't recoup, doesn't that mean it'll be the first one not to after the Swiss production, which as far as I know is the only production of Phantom anywhere that made a loss (thanks to Really Useless being the sole producers).

Anyway, happy anniversary to the Las Vegas production!

Happy 6th Anniversary Phantom Las Vegas!


(cover of card)


(phan messages inside the card)

R.

What a great card!

Scorp wrote:
That is if the new US tour isn't a copy of the new UK tour and sticks to the Prince/Björnson formula...otherwise I guess they would save the props/costumes as replacements for anything that gets worn down on Broadway maybe?

That would be my assumption as well. Considering there's always the possibility of a Vegas cast member joining the Broadway company, it would be advantageous to have their costumes available.

If the cost of building the auditorium is taken out though, then didn't it turn a profit? Considering the auditorium will be used for other shows it doesn't seem right to consider it a cost for Phantom. I don't really know how these things are judged. If the Vegas production didn't recoup, doesn't that mean it'll be the first one not to after the Swiss production, which as far as I know is the only production of Phantom anywhere that made a loss (thanks to Really Useless being the sole producers).

I think if the start up costs were eliminated, I'm pretty sure they made a profit. Maybe something can be worked out with the Venetian, but once the show's gone, the auditorium "dressings" definitely have to go since they specifically pertain to the show (unless, say, they decide the Vegas version of Spider-Man takes place in Paris). And keeping or removing the machinery below the stage is going to be dictated on how much of it can be reused for the next sit down show, I imagine. I don't know much about how this is judged either, so I'm just taking a wild guess.

R.

Great job. There's another board member who lives in Raleigh?

Raphael wrote:

Scorp wrote:This has probably been asked, if not answered, but did the Vegas production recoup? I don't know how you judge it given that the theatre was custom-built, but I assume we don't factor it into the costs since it's not as if they're destroying the theatre once Phantom leaves. What will happen to the sets and costumes, I wonder?

I've been told that the sets will be destroyed and the costumes (and I assume props) will be sold off to the new US Tour. The chandelier will remain in fixed position until the theatre is occupied by another sit-down production.

R.

Aww, I was hoping they would make all new costumes for the new US tour like they apparently did with the UK one (unless they really did just Frankenstein the old ones ) If this still somehow happens, I might get to work on them *crosses fingers*

The thought of those sets being destroyed is like the saddest thing ever. Where are those dumpsters located?

Scorp wrote:If the cost of building the auditorium is taken out though, then didn't it turn a profit? Considering the auditorium will be used for other shows it doesn't seem right to consider it a cost for Phantom. I don't really know how these things are judged. If the Vegas production didn't recoup, doesn't that mean it'll be the first one not to after the Swiss production, which as far as I know is the only production of Phantom anywhere that made a loss (thanks to Really Useless being the sole producers).

This has always been my opinion as well. I think it's rather far-fetched to assume ONE musical will pay for the cost of the construction of a whole theatre. I mean, no-one expected "Europa riconosciuta" to finance La Scala in Milan, right?

Anyhow, major congrats to the Las Vegas production and SIX fantastic years!!

And Raphael, your card and picture is fantastic. As always. *applauds*

I'm not sure how accurate this is, but I recall hearing somewhere that not many shows in Vegas actually turn a profit, or are expected to--like a lot of other things, they exist to get people into the casino where the real money is made. On the other hand, the gaming industry has taken hits along with the rest of the economy lately, so who knows how things actually stand on that front.

~LCD

By all outward appearances, the gambling industry is thriving. In some ways, they do better than in a good economy because a lot of down-and-out folks try to get lucky and hit a payload. And we know the Sands Corporation itself, which owns the Venetian complex, is booming because its owner, Shel Adelson, has personally donated tens of millions of dollars, with no end in sight, first to the Super PAC supporting Newt Gingrich and now to the one backing Mitt Romney.

SenorSwanky wrote:By all outward appearances, the gambling industry is thriving. In some ways, they do better than in a good economy because a lot of down-and-out folks try to get lucky and hit a payload. And we know the Sands Corporation itself, which owns the Venetian complex, is booming because its owner, Shel Adelson, has personally donated tens of millions of dollars, with no end in sight, first to the Super PAC supporting Newt Gingrich and now to the one backing Mitt Romney.

I fail to see why it's necessary to raise the unpleasant spectre of politics here. So Mr. Adelson is wealthy, good for him. It is irrelevant to this conversation what he does with that money as far as expenditures that are unrelated to financing the Venetian.

True--but at the same time Vegas has taken a hit since the boom of the 90s and early 00s, when new casinos were popping up like weeds and each one tried to outdo the other for sheer spectacle. The Strip has also gone upscale to a ridiculous degree--less $5.99 prime rib and more uber-expensive restaurants run by Food Network personalities.

~LCD

Yeah, there were upstart casinos that are now vacant or strugging, and Nevada has one of the worst economies of any state in the country, but I think most of the major established casino corporations are doing quite fine compared to how their employees and customers are doing.

Raphael - The card you made looks fantastic!

Also, I posted this on Facebook but wanted to share it here as well. I have two spare tickets that I no longer need to final performance in Vegas on 9/2. The seats are in the Golden Circle: Row L, Seats 20-21. Please send me a PM if you are interested.

Thanks you guys

In other news, former Christine Rene Knapp visited PLV recently:

http://lasvegas.broadwayworld.com/article/Photo-Flash-International-PHANTOM-OF-THE-OPERA-Star-Rene-Knapp-Visits-PHANTOM-Las-Vegas-20120626

R.

HEY EVERYONE!! It would mean a TON if everyone PLEASE voted for me!! I've never won anything before, and this would mean the WORLD! Voting starts tonight at midnight and everyone can vote once per-day. Please please PLEASE VOTE and pass on!!! Thank you SO MUCH!!! http://bit.ly/LUvHqz

Bad retitling aside, "Phantom - The Las Vegas Spectacular" is the definitive version of Andrew Lloyd Webber's "Phantom of the Opera." The only people who would disagree are die-hards who would want to hear the theater managers sing twice.

You would have to be that reverent about the 1986 musical not to consider The Venetian's 95-minute trim to be an improvement to the repetitive score.

Source: http://www.lvrj.com/neon/catch-las-vegas-spectacular-phantom-before-curtain-falls-161540035.html?ref=035

I guess as a supposed 'die-hard' my opinion doesn't count, but I disagree completely. What are others' thoughts?

Scorp wrote:

Bad retitling aside, "Phantom - The Las Vegas Spectacular" is the definitive version of Andrew Lloyd Webber's "Phantom of the Opera." The only people who would disagree are die-hards who would want to hear the theater managers sing twice.

You would have to be that reverent about the 1986 musical not to consider The Venetian's 95-minute trim to be an improvement to the repetitive score.

Source: http://www.lvrj.com/neon/catch-las-vegas-spectacular-phantom-before-curtain-falls-161540035.html?ref=035

I guess as a supposed 'die-hard' my opinion doesn't count, but I disagree completely. What are others' thoughts?

Yeeeah, I have to say, I'm seeing a few "die-hard" fans here who seem to love this production. I know I do!

I'll admit to being skeptical about the trims when I first heard about the Vegas production, but having seen it I will agree that the shortened version holds up rather well for the most part--PonR is rather too rushed and I would like a little more material for the supporting cast, but the tension and emotional impact of the central love triangle remains intact. With some modifications (see above) you could make a reasonably good film version out of it.

~LCD

I wouldn't call the Vegas production the definitive version of Phantom. There are some amazing features I love. But there are also changes/additions I dislike. So something gained, something lost. Overall awesome, and totally the grandest Phantom experience in the world, but not necessarily more awesome than the original.

I do, however, think that the Vegas production is by far the best to come from the world of recent Phantom besides the original. The Vegas production has managed to maintain the spirit of the original in all the changes done. Other things to come out of the Phantom universe in recent years - cheap imitation musicals, the 2004 movie, Love Never Dies - just don't manage to capture the essence of what thrilled people in the first place. Vegas do to the full.

As for being "definitive", I don't think any version keeping the full AIAOY while chopping PONR to pieces can claim that title...

operafantomet wrote:I wouldn't call the Vegas production the definitive version of Phantom. There are some amazing features I love. But there are also changes/additions I dislike. So something gained, something lost. Overall awesome, and totally the grandest Phantom experience in the world, but not necessarily more awesome than the original.

I do, however, think that the Vegas production is by far the best to come from the world of recent Phantom besides the original. The Vegas production has managed to maintain the spirit of the original in all the changes done. Other things to come out of the Phantom universe in recent years - cheap imitation musicals, the 2004 movie, Love Never Dies - just don't manage to capture the essence of what thrilled people in the first place. Vegas do to the full.

As for being "definitive", I don't think any version keeping the full AIAOY while chopping PONR to pieces can claim that title...

LIKE. I absolutely agree. Just the other day I was thinking about how the Vegas production also had so many changes, yet people don't react to it with the same horror as the new UK Tour (which frankly, just goes to show that we don't flip our collective shits every time they try to change the show we love so much).

And I think you hit the nail right on the head there, the changes they made didn't detract from the grandeur of the show which is something that happened with all the non-replica shows is that they look cheap and tacky. What I think is that it's hard to make a Phantom production look acceptable if it's scaled down in any way because the original is done so perfectly. So Vegas scaled UP.

The thing about movie is that however bad the sets and costumes were, it did not look like a *cheap* production (I guess thanks to their budget), which is the case with the recent stage shows.

Exactly. I think it's pretty clear the Vegas production wanted to do right by the material, and they did a good job of retaining the mix of romance, terror, and tragedy that makes the original production so good. (Of course they retained Hal Prince as a director, which was a very smart move.)

~LCD

I agree with both of you. I think the key to the success of the original is the magic Andrew Lloyd Webber, Hal Prince, Maria Bjørnson and Gillian Lynne created TOGETHER. You can't single out one of them as the master brain behind the success.

The Las Vegas production kept the magic created by these four, and enlarged it. As you say, Viscountess, it's hard to get away with scaling POTO down, but the scaling-up Vegas did definitely worked. I do think the scaling-up worked because they had a good basis to put it on, though.

I guess the RAH event should be mentioned in this context. I just don't bother.

I still say mounting the original version in the Las Vegas theatre (and maybe adding some lyres to the Vegas chandelier as long as they don't get caught up in the guide wires) would be a definitive version of ALW's Phantom.

R.

I tend to agree with operafantomet. It's clear a lot of love and respect for the piece and the original vision of the show went into this production and the Vegas production is without question the best, by far, of recent incarnations of the show (discounting things like the productions that have been seen recently in Denmark and South Africa, which were effectively revivals). I would much rather see the Vegas show than the RAH event and the current UK tour. It's hard to go wrong when you have both Hal Prince and Gillian Lynne working on the production.

However, I don't think it is THE definitive incarnation of the show. For me, that remains the original production. Although I thought the specially constructed theatre was impressive, there were things I thought were 'off' in the design that seemed a bit too überglitzy (e.g. the extra lights on the mirror, which seemed to remove the atmosphere of gloom), moments that I thought were a little cheesy ("Bring down the chandelier!!!!") and for me, personally, I failed to get engrossed in the show when I saw it in Vegas. It felt more like a case of there being enough time to serenade the audience with the songs they were expecting but not enough time to develop fully the dramatic tensions and characterisations. I disagree completely with the journalist's claim the 90-minute Phantom is a significant improvement over the two-and-a-half hour original.

Raphael wrote:I still say mounting the original version in the Las Vegas theatre (and maybe adding some lyres to the Vegas chandelier as long as they don't get caught up in the guide wires) would be a definitive version of ALW's Phantom.

R.

That would make for an awesome US 25th event. It'll never happen, of course, but it's nice to dream....

~LCD

So..it looks like I just may make it to the closing show this Sept.! A bit last minute but, better late than never. I take it some phans from here are going? As long as Machintosh isnt there I should be able to show my face, after that lovely episode involving myself and the Bjornson archive