Les Mis back to Broadway?

[tking001]

Posted: 12/21/12 at 9:36pm

How long do you guys think till we get another revival on Broadway?
Would the current tour transfer?
I've never seen a production of Les Mis and would love to see one on Broadway soon

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 12/21/12 at 9:38pm

The tour could play the Marquis or the Neil Simon.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 12/21/12 at 9:38pm

The tour could play the Marquis or the Neil Simon.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 12/21/12 at 9:43pm

Or any of the other houses that are going to sit empty for a while.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 12/21/12 at 9:45pm

https://forum.broadwayworld.com/readmessage.php?page=1&boardname=bway&thread=1051071

[jpbran]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 12:05am

If so, wonder if "Suddenly" will be added.

[aasjb4ever]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 12:24am

Mackintosh all but confirmed that the tour will hit Broadway in 2014.

[My Oh My]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 4:04am

After the film, I'm sure it will be "reinvented."

Again.

[dreaming]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 8:08am

I heard they had talked to Alfie Boe about bringing him over to make his Broadway debut as Jean Valjean. (I'd take him or Ramin Karimloo, either of whom is excellent in the role.)

[Outoftowner2]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 11:38am

Maybe they could rework the tour version to be a little more like the original. I did like the artwork in the touring production.
I did not like (spoiler alert!) only hearing and not seeing the death of Gavroche...I missed the rotating barricade. I didn't like "Empty Chairs at Empty Tables"..with no empty chairs or empty tables. I was worried that characters returning from the dead would accidentally step on the tiny little candles sitting on the empty stage. Maybe a hybrid for Broadway...or just the original. It's still amazing in London.

[DEClarke]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 12:40pm

I doubt "Suddenly" will find its way into the stage version for union rules reasons. They don't want to risk running over 3 hours (at least not on tour).

[tazber]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 3:02pm

I remember reading that Alfie Boe was going to bring it to NY also, dreaming.

Don't recall where I read it though.

[My Oh My]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 5:21pm

I hope they rework the tour before bringing it to Broadway, too.

It's such a spotty production lacking creativity. It didn't move me one bit and came off rather desperate. It's a tiny production that also looks sort of cheap and 90% of the staging is so close to the original, it makes you wonder why not just go ahead and stage that much more innovative, cinematic, provocative, and efficient original staging?

The projections were some of the most over hyped ever, as they were used almost never and when they were there, could not be seen too clearly. I sat 3rd row, orchestra center in Los Angeles. Had my glasses on, and had trouble seeing some of them.

The lighting design was just weird. And the concept was taken directly from the original by David Hersey, reproducing much of the original color scheme and even techniques but doing it in an odd "flashlight aimed at the stage" fashion for nearly the entire show.

I liked the barricade because it was clever and efficient but I did miss John Napier's carefully constructed original, which was obviously designed to "frame" Enjolras whenever he was on top of it, but in a manner that wasn't obvious and still appeared like a random hunk of bric-a-brac spontaneously thrown together.

I LOVE the revolve and its cinematically innovative use in the show, but I'm actually OK with their not including it in the new production. I do, however, feel it was a massive missed opportunity in not allowing original directors Trevor Nunn and John Caird themselves have a hand at adapting their own award winning work for a production without a revolve.

I honestly gave the new production more than just a fair chance. I was actually expecting to surprisingly love it. But one can't deny what is there before them, and to me, it was just mediocre through and through. Much of the promises and claims made were empty, the staging concepts were a mess and couldn't make up their mind. The sets, while not terrible or bad at all, were nothing reflecting modern innovation whatsoever, not with their use of a wall of shutters that would slide in in order to conceal ancient set change methods. The designs, with both abstract and naturalistic elements often colliding on stage at the same time and not in a strategic or aesthetically pleasing way.

Some of it made me laugh where laughing isn't really an intended response. "Look Down" took the cake, because for all its claims of innovation and snubbing of the original, it directly copied the original in a very lazy, boldfaced manner. In the original, the barricade halves slowly come together center stage, turn, and separate slightly and a bridge is lowered onto it, creating an abstract representation of a city slum. In the new version, two buildings slowly come together center stage and basically mimic what was done before. The bridge isn't lowered from above, but manually wheeled about by cast members. That's not innovation, that's taking Nunn and Caird's vision and changing it up...a little, and calling it "new" and waaaay better than that tired, 1985 staging.

Other parts are puzzling in how ambitiously they resist being even close to the original when the production could have benefited greatly from the carrying over of some of the original's most iconic images, like one of my favorites, "On My Own." It can't be too hard or expensive to scatter a bunch of shuttered windows around in the background and light them from behind. In fact, that would be a PERFECTLY efficient use of projections right there and project the darn windows! Instead, the song is sung in total darkness where the original had this incredible atmosphere with all those glowing windows on that crumbling set.

I know this sounds like yet another bashing post toward the anniversary edition but that's not the intention. I'm not pissed as usual, but more just wondering why bother bringing a production that feels like a cheap rehash of a far superior production to Broadway? Mackintosh seems to think that the original staging wasn't liked (he mockingly said in an interview that he wants to bring a staging of Les Mis that people ACTUALLY like) and it seems the somewhat cold reception the 2006 revival got is why he thinks that. Not to mention Brantley's NYT review in which he spent the entire review not reviewing but bemoaning the show's return only 3 years after it closed its 16-year original run.

Yes, people have seen that version already. Some have seen it many times. I've seen it 30 times. I do see the rationale for change, but that is why I hope they rework the new production and I hope they focus on telling the story and NOT patting themselves on the back. Trust me, there is nothing in the new production that warrants a pat on the back, not when you also make unfounded commentary about the original version that was copied and cheapened, with some CGI scribble scrabble thrown in.

I'm usually very against cloning film versions for the stage, and I am not going to condone that now, but a stage version inspired by the film that also gives shout outs to the original and is an improvement over the lackluster anniversary edition?

Just a wild suggestion, hehe.

[Phantom of London]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 5:59pm

"Imagine, for one drowsy second, that you are a child who has asked Daddy to recite a favorite bedtime story: the one about the kindly escaped convict who is chased around France by an evil policeman.

It’s still a good story, but Daddy has delivered it so many times before — night after night after night — that his heart just isn’t in it. In fact he seems kind of bored by even the most exciting parts. Lulled instead of stimulated by the familiar tale, you find yourself slipping into dreamland sooner than you ever planned."

Ben Brantley 2006 Broadhurst Broadway revival.

Think the above observation by Ben Brantly, I guess persuaded Cameroon Mackintosh to go with a much refreshed production of Les Miserables.

"The tour could play the Marquis or the Neil Simon."

Cameroon mackintosh has always had a very good relationship with the Shubert organization.

[My Oh My]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 7:54pm

^ That's it. Thanks.

I agree with him, btw.

Brantley says, "been there, done that." Fine.

I can see it 30 more times without dying midway, but that's just me.

But how does that say anything about the original production sucking? Is he still butthurt over Tevor's refusal to chuck "Stars," which he felt was a useless ditty 'bout, er, stars? =P

Oh! Mr. Producer! =P

[Dubliner]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 8:54pm

It wouldn't be Alfie Boe's Broadway debut - wasn't he one of the Rodolfo's in Baz Luhrmann's La Boheme?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 9:13pm

Yes.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 10:10pm

Other parts are puzzling in how ambitiously they resist being even close to the original when the production could have benefited greatly from the carrying over of some of the original's most iconic images, like one of my favorites, "On My Own." It can't be too hard or expensive to scatter a bunch of shuttered windows around in the background and light them from behind. In fact, that would be a PERFECTLY efficient use of projections right there and project the darn windows! Instead, the song is sung in total darkness where the original had this incredible atmosphere with all those glowing windows on that crumbling set.

When I saw the tour back in September I am almost positive there were projections on the sliding panels for my On My Own.

[Johnnycantdecide]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 10:44pm

My Oh My just seems to go from Les Miz thread to Les Miz thread and moan about how things are not exactly like the original Broadway run of the show. Be it the movie or the new tour.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/22/12 at 11:12pm

^ Well, he sure is passionate, lol. I think he posts more about LES MIS than any of us FOLLIES fanatics have ever posted about Follies.

[My Oh My]

Posted: 12/23/12 at 8:20pm

JohnnyCantDecide, and apparently, also needs reading comprehension remediation.

I admit the tone of some of my posts are strong, angry, butthurt, what have you, but I've been upbeat all week, thanks to the shockingly wonderful orchestration they've done for the film version.

You make it seem as if moaning from thread to thread is something shameful that needs to be pointed out to everyone else.

Eh, I guess it can get irritating, but there isn't a chance in hell I'll ever feel shame for ruffling your feathers, and doing so by merely discussing musical theatre on a musical theatre message forum. Besides, half of this supposed moaning is really discussion, some of it opinion, all explained and supported. Gosh, I'm so generous.

At least I'm moaning and am on topic about it.

You're just moaning.

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 12/25/12 at 8:45pm

I hope they rework the tour before bringing it to Broadway, too.

It's such a spotty production lacking creativity. It didn't move me one bit and came off rather desperate. It's a tiny production that also looks sort of cheap and 90% of the staging is so close to the original, it makes you wonder why not just go ahead and stage that much more innovative, cinematic, provocative, and efficient original staging?

If you thought the 25th anniversary tour of Les Mis was bad (I enjoyed it thanks to some amazing performances, but agree that it was done on the cheap and unimaginative and the claims about it being a spectacular reinvention of the show in every superlative way possible were complete and utter BS, especially since it was so indebted to the Nunn and Caird original but simply watered it down), then stay WELL away from the 25th anniversary tour of Phantom, which is far, far, far worse. It looks cheap as hell and the direction is all over the place. Cameron's new aim in life is to milk his 80s cash cows for all that they're worth without spending more than a few pennies/cents. And hiring a failed-actor-turned-wannabe-third-rate-director (who couldn't hold a candle to the likes of Trevor Nunn and Hal Prince) to put it all together for him. Sad, really, to think that the new generation of theatregoers will get mere shadows of the great originals. I'm not against new productions that are totally reconceived and use first-rate creatives, but that's not what these supposedly "spectacular new productions" from Cameron are about. They are simply cost-cutting exercises for these times of austerity, with more than a hint of plagiarism about them.





Updated On: 12/25/12 at 08:45 PM

[My Oh My]

Posted: 12/26/12 at 1:17am

Couldn't agree more, Scorpion.

What gets me is they use the success of the original to hype up the new tours. But most of all, they go about the "reinvention" thing in a totally clueless way. I'm sorry, but the new Les Mis isn't reinvented. It's the same exact musical given a far cheaper production and a whole lot of distraction shoved into the pit so that it can seem brand new.

I don't know if the same thing can be said about Phantom, but one thing that I've always felt Nunn and Caird have that ensures basically every production the world over will always look to their ideas even if they don't carbon copy them, is they both focus exclusively on telling the story every step of the way. They did this by creating the most efficient possible staging that could be performed with or without a revolve. Their staging is so to the point and so focused, doing it any other way that is significantly different would only complicate it and come off as desperately trying to shed their definitive approach.

That doesn't mean enormous barricades and motorized giant lazy susans are required to fulfill their vision. Or that the show is bound to forever be carbon copied off of their exact original blocking and direction.

But they've done something so intuitively effective, it will always be their ideas with variation applied until someone envisions an approach that either equals or tops theirs. That variation is good but when you completely want to shun even a semblance of what they did, you end up doing something really conscious of itself and oddly defiant and that's the problem with the new tour, they were specifically instructed to "forget about the original production" and take the show in a different direction. The result was mediocre when honoring what had worked brilliantly would have made those hungry for change as well as those who love the original both happy.

Having characters do all sorts of things while singing their solos has yet to be done in a way that doesn't look as if they are constantly thinking up excuses to have them not be center stage singing. I saw video of a German production of Les Mis that wasn't the original, where they had Eponine do all sorts of bizarre activity during her big solo that included strutting about the stage, sitting on a big rock at one point, and doing all these distracting hand gestures to the words.

I saw a video of a radically different production in Norway that did not have a hint of the original design-wise, but also did not resist doing things that were similar to what Nunn and Caird did. So they had Eponine stand in a specified spot, look out toward the audience, and sing her heart out for "On My Own." It worked a lot better than having her do all sorts of lame, graspy business during the song and those hand gestures...ugh, kill me now.

I've seen productions that resist the iconic marching in "One Day More" and it makes me laugh because they just stand there when doing something similar to the original would have brought the house down. Let me make it clear that I am not about cloning the original of anything. But it doesn't make sense to not borrow things that worked if one can't think of a better way to do it.

Not everything they did was perfect. I can't stand the "Runaway Cart" sequence in the original, the one part of that production that makes my skin crawl. The current 25th anniversary tour improved on that. It's the one scene of the tour that made me smile.

But everything else, made me want to jump atop the stage and scream, "THIS IS AN IMPROVEMENT???? I WANT THE AWARD-WINNING "FLAWS" REINSTATED...IMMEDIATELY!!!"

Updated On: 12/26/12 at 01:17 AM

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 12/26/12 at 10:14am

It's the superlative-laden press hype that Cameron and co. spew out that makes it irritating for those of us who have seen better. And there are good many of us that have; the original productions of Miz and Phantom aren't going to be forgotten in a hurry, especially when they're still running somewhere in the world.

I did enjoy the new tour of Miz but I noticed that the staging elements I liked were basically copied and pasted from the original, so they clearly did not forget about the original production as they were supposedly asked to do. So much was borrowed that Trevor Nunn remarked that all the good bits were his and Caird's. Because of the fall-out with Nunn over the new tour, Cameron trod more carefully when it came to Phantom and seems to have paid Hal Prince off to stay away and keep complete silence over the new tour (Variety reported that it was "by way of agreement with Hal Prince"). I think a lot of pressure was put on Hal by Cameron to stay away since Hal is clearly and rightly proprietal over the show (he insisted on directing the Vegas incarnation). I have also heard not-so-nice stories about how Cameron has treated Hal vis-à-vis his continued involvement with Phantom and I'm not impressed, especially since I previously considered Cameron a far nobler man than ALW.

Hal must have insisted nothing was borrowed from his production, but Mr Connor whom Cameron keeps hiring is not talented enough to reconceive the piece entirely from scratch. So while the new production of Phantom doesn't copy and paste in the way the Miz tour does, it's not very good either because Laurence Connor can't pilfer all the good bits again. Particularly annoying in the claims about how wonderful the new Phantom is is supposedly how it is "as opulent as the Prince/Björnson original" (HAHAHAHA! Seriously, no-one can claim that with a straight face) and how Björnson's costumes were retained, when in fact they were butchered beyond belief in a way that would make their creator roll in her grave. Once fans started pointing this out, these claims interestingly stopped appearing in the press. At least with Phantom the orchestrations haven't been messed with in the way they were in Les Mis thanks to ALW being particularly protective of them. Really sad that the tour orchestrations went into the West End production of Les Mis, they are really not great and are merely specifically designed to hide the fact that the pit-size is enormously reduced from when the show first started going out on the road.

[Mildred Plotka]

Posted: 12/26/12 at 12:15pm

They should add "Listen" from the Dreamgirls movie as a duet between Cosette and Eponine.