Hysterical Thread From Across The Pond! — Page 2

OK sometimes Phantom Of London really angeres me....as much as i love him/her

The whole 'Broadway Sets are better' thing......no comment

---

Exactly, I could fill a whole thread here with the terrific designs I've seen on both sides of the pond in the last 30 odd years.

It will return- I've been rather busy the last few weeks!

Ur kidding right?
1. the Wicked set IS grand enough for the Apollo Vic.
2. yes, 9 to 5 is a great set, but how is it only grand enough for NYC? It would fit easily into the Palladium, Drury Lane, Prince Edward or the Dominion.
3. Shrek was designed by a Brit.
4. The West Side Story design (both sets and costumes) was the worst part about the lacklustre revival. Except for the scene change before the Rumble, it could've been taken straight from a high school.

Re the current Oliver - the sliding flats that create the incredible perspective are definitely breathtaking.

Snaps for Glorious :)

Most of that thread is navel-gazing ignorance. The only intelligent comments in it have already been made on this board, which the navel-gazers would know if they had the wit or energy to look.

Still that guy called Scripps2 makes some good comments - I always enjoy reading his posts.

I heart Glorious

The 9 to 5 set i dont think is great at all, sure the 1st time you see it turn in to the office after the opening song it looks great but after that i find it rather clunky looking.

The Wicked set is alright but the London one looks better

and the Shrek set was headache inducing

also the West Side Story set you mentioned is Horrendous, where is the great set there?

---

I think everyone is being a bit too jumpy here.

Of course we can re-create Broadway sets here, but the finance would not be there to create a spectacular set over here first, New York can get the financial backing to create wonderful sets you all mention, it's no coincidence that Spiderman is opening in New York, when it opens it maybe possible that the music and lyrics maybe drivel, but mark my words, yes sir, the set will be spectacular!!!

And look at the financing of Lord of the Rings, which only tried out in Toronto, knowing it would open in London- not on Broadway. At last count £12m for that show. So about $20m, which is really quite a considerable budget! London does not do things on the cheap.

The major difference is in the cost of staffing, not quality of design.

Boyfromoz2 is so right!
Well said!

But the Gershwin is so much better equiped than the Apollo Victoria and which set works best in every ones opinion?
The one at the very restricted Apollo Victoria.
I've seen both the New York and London productions of 'Wicked' and London wins hands down for the scale of the set.

You have to remember that the Apollo Victoria was built as a a mega cinema NOT a theatre, so to have a show on the scale as 'Wicked' grace its tiny stage is incredible!

Just want to put this in context!!!!!

I have been threatened to be slapped by SADM2, shouted at by Mama on this thread, but I have to agree with everything that everyone has said, apart from my own opinions, it did provide good jocular fun though and everyone got very good points across, which me playing devils advocate made a good platform for debate. If I started a thread what sets are better New York or London, it would probably garnered little interest.

I know New York make great sets just like London does.

One regret it did not go on for longer, big plus point a personal plea to Mama to post more photos which are always great!

Here is a question though I notice both at the Gershwin and Apollo there is a wooden beam that goes across the theatre in Wicked, its approx seats g-k, so it is intentionally there what is it for?