Andrew Lloyd Webber Confirms 'Phantom' Sequel- Page 3

[BDavis0092]

Posted: 3/10/07 at 9:46pm

I don't think this will be completely horrible. As long as ALW doesn't rush and get it out as fast as he can. I wouldn't even mind some of the original Phantom score in the sequel.

As for all the negative posts and the complaints about them...how can a theatre fan NOT be negative? What do you say after you get out of a bad show? "Well I guess it could have been a little bit better." No you don't. You say the show was bad.

[Nellie_Leroux_6]

Posted: 3/10/07 at 9:48pm

ALW is an greedy idiot. That's pretty much sums it up.

[The White Half-Mask]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 1:22am

Although I'm a huge "Phantom Phan", I must admit I'm pretty opposed to the idea of a sequel. I don't mean to make a premature judgment, but I feel the ending of the original show is perfect & an excellent way to end the story. I don't want to know what happened after that. Plus, I've heard that this "Phantom in Manhattan" book is pretty bad, which deeply worries me. Like they say, "if it ain't broke. don't fix it".

I hope ALW isn't just doing this for the money. I know that he's said several times that he'll never be able to recreate Phantom's success, so why is he trying now? Just leave it be! I guess, in the end, I'm just worried about the sequel negatively affecting the Phantom legacy. If ALW really does go ahead with this, then I hope he puts all of his heart & soul into it to make it as good a show as possible. And I hope this doesn't mean an early closure for all the productions of the original Phantom.

[Type_A_Tiff]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 4:01am

Has anyone read The Phantom of Manhattan (which I'm assuming the stage sequel will be based on)? (Sorry, I haven't been on the on-topic board for a while. I seriously haven't a clue what The Pirate Queen is.) What a terrible book. If ALW plans on staying loyal to the original material, it won't be anything but BAD.

[Sant]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 8:37am

So, ALW is doing the Disney trick: creating a sequel to a classic. Did we really need to see what happened to Cinderella after "And they lived happily ever after"? No, but we got the sequel anyway.

That's what this whole sequel is about: business. He hasn't had a hit in years and by writing a sequel to his most successful show he's counting on the Phantom-fans to go and see it and since there are A LOT of those fans (me being one of them)...

I don't like the idea of having a sequel to this. Part of the charm of the show (TPOTO that is) IS the fact that we don't know what happens to the Phantom after he disappears.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 8:51am

"Did we really need to see what happened to Cinderella after 'And they lived happily ever after'?"

To be fair, Sant, Sondheim did just that with Cinderella (and others) for INTO THE WOODS.

Updated On: 3/11/07 at 08:51 AM

[pants2]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 12:29pm

You know, if ALW went into depression and never came out of his home again, he'd probably at least drive his career into the ground with some dignity.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 12:55pm

This whole project just reeks of desperation. And on his video blog he truly does seem like a nice guy and genuinely excited to start this. I feel sorry for him (artistically, not financially). Now I havent read this much maligned book that he is using for a basis, but there is just something so inherrently lush and sumptuous about 19th century Paris that made the music work. But rough and tough New York? I just can't see how that type of music even works in that setting. Unless he goes in a very different direction with the music, I just cannot see how this can possibly work.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 5:23pm

As your new identity will be as soon as a mod gets here.

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 6:23pm

huh?

[pants2]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 7:49pm

OR even better yet, he should write, like, the lestat phantom or something.

[Umbridge]

Posted: 3/11/07 at 8:32pm

Poor Dear. Still, I can see the financial temptation.

Posted: 3/11/07 at 10:34pm

Rockfenris--you know I love Steinman but comparing this to Bat Outa Hell II... I don't think there's a comparison. Hell II was a sequel in terms of revisiting past themes and the basic two major collaborators of the first one--call it a concept album but there's no clear narrative or characters, etc

[Sally]

Posted: 3/13/07 at 1:36pm

"I remember always thinking about how symbolic it was for Meg to pick up the mask at the end. It always made me wonder if the Phantom would move on to her.

I like being able to wonder and create my own theories.

The movie destroyed the image, but a sequel would crush that, and any other ideas that I'm left with at the end. It would take something away from the original story, imho."

----------------------------------------------------------

I agree with you. I think even those who are NOT fans might agree that the ending of the stage musical is very effective and lets the audience members, if they are of a mind to, imagine what happens after Meg holds up the mask, and the five chords fade away.

I can kind of shrug off the film, but for me, a stage musical sequel would diminish the orginal and to some extent spoil a "perfect" ending.

Some things just don't need sequels. MOST stage musicals don't need sequels. Maybe ALL stage musical don't need sequels.

The Phantom of Manhattan (Forsyth's book) is set in NYC, and the Phantom rises from selling balloons (I think it's balloons)at Coney Island to being a multimillionaire business man. It would be a good setting for another story, but the Phantom of the Opera?? There goes the dark, creepy atmosphere of the Paris Opera House that is so much a part of the original.

If this crap musical is actually produced, I'll probably buy the cast CD (if it lasts long enough to have one); I like ALW's music, but I don't think I'll have any trouble skipping the show itself.