Profile for ArtfulAmy17

RippedMan said: "I just think there's no merit in saying it's the longest running musical when it's not the original production anymore?"

Yup, I feel the same way.

Lott666 said: "A concert version? For 16 weeks?!? I can't imagine they'll be selling those performances out."

I'm very skeptical too, although the announcement has surprisingly garnered a lot of general enthusiasm in the official "Les Miserables" Facebook page comments. To me, this concert version at the Gielgud just seems like a tacked-on buffer to fill the gap between the staging transitions at the Queen's so that the show can illogically and bogusly somehow retain its "longest running musical" title. I wish I could view it less cynically but the arbitrary scrapping of the original staging by Mackintosh, because it somehow suits him, with no public statement from the man himself, has made every successive announcement of post-original-staging plans all the more painful, including this one. 

 

Mister Matt said: "I'm glad I got tickets to see it again in March.  I have a very deep and personal emotional connection to this show, so I'll probably be a mess as soon as Fantine makes her ghostly appearance at the end of the second act."

I'll be right there with you! I'm in the process of booking a trip to London to see it one last time and I also expect to be an absolute crying mess during the Epilogue (or really, from the overture onwards). Losing the original staging in the US (on Broadway twice and the discontinuation of the Third National Tour) was devastating to me, having grown up with it, and I expected it would last at least another decade or so in London...

 

RippedMan said: "There's no way they can still say it's the longest running musical in the world right? I mean, to have it morph from old version to concert version to revival version doesn't quite make sense?"

I completely agree, it really doesn't make sense to me either. The Stage reported that "Les Miserables" will retain the title (https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2019/les-miserables-retain-world-record-despite-switching-productions/) which fails to stand to reason. In a very broad sense, really stretching it, yes, there will be a Mackintosh-produced "Les Miserables" of some sort selling tickets in the West End, but in name and logo only. Each of these various renditions, however confusing and crowded under the Mackintosh umbrella as they may be, are all separate productions with different crews and teams and do not and should not combine to count as one thing just because the Mackintosh name is on them, especially when the original staging doesn't survive. 

 

There's been news reported about the details of the Gielgud run, this interim "transfer" to the Gielgud will be a 16-week staged concert version: https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Michael-Ball-Alfie-Boe-Will-Reunite-for-Concert-Version-of-LES-MISERABLES-20190205

Is a 16-week concert run sustainable when people can just watch either the 10th or 25th Anniversary DVDs in their own living rooms? Other than the draw of seeing a Alfie Boe/Michael Ball "Confrontation" sung in person, will theatergoers pay for a concert version, if they know that the "new staging" is coming along anyway?  

None of this situation and saga makes much sense to me.

If the original staging is figuratively being thrown into the sewer, I wish Mr. Mackintosh could wait until the 34th anniversary of the show on October 8th so it would at least meet a valid milestone and the turntable/revolve would literally come full circle. Just the thought of the "new staging" being recognized in October as a 34-year run in the West End is like insult to injury.

The Stage reports today that royalty negotiation talks have started between the RSC and Mackintosh (https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2019/rsc-begins-crunch-talks-cameron-mackintosh-les-miserables-royalties/). To quote from it, "RSC chief executive Catherine Mallyon confirmed to The Stage that negotiations with Mackintosh were ongoing in light of the changes. 'As part of the conversation we will be discussing the level of change around the royalties for the two productions,' she said. She added that the company was 'sad to see the groundbreaking original production leave the West End'."

It's just such a shame that the grandeur of the original production has to end like this. It's almost like a divorce settlement between the RSC and Mackintosh, like Mackintosh figuratively had an affair with another creative production team, filed for divorce from the RSC and gets to keep the house and redecorate it charge people to look around like it was always his own. The way Mackintosh has conducted this process, from the conception of the 25th Anniversary touring staging that left Trevor Nunn in the dark, to the current situation in the West End, leaves a bitter taste.

Is there any correlation between this announcement and the profit loss to Delfont Mackintosh Ltd. from the over-budget refurbishment of the Victoria Palace Theatre that was reported today? I understand that theatre refurbishments are necessary but is sacrificing the masterpiece of "the longest running musical" and mecca of the West End that cemented Mackintosh's career really worth the cost?

https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2019/budget-60m-victoria-palace-redevelopment-halves-cameron-mackintoshs-profits/