Les Mis: What a Shame!!! — Page 2

I got the impression while reading the original poster's message that English (one of the toughest languages to master) is not his primary language either. Even if it is, I've made the mistake myself of typing too fast/occasionally demonstrating the wrong subject-verb agreement/seeing others' misspellings/grammatical errors, etc. on numerous boards to draw attention to that. I don't follow "Les Mis" religiously and would not have known about the revisions if I were not a frequent reader of this board. I AM aware that "Les Mis" is a Cameron MacKintosh (sp?)-produced show and that Cameron has a reputation for ensuring that official productions replicate/maintain the high-quality values of the original ("Les Mis," "Cats," "Phantom"). Maybe the version that's been done internationally has been based on the original London/Broadway production with the turntable. I don't know. I can empathize with the original poster on many points but agree it is unfair to compare this new version to the original, simply because it is not meant to be a carbon copy.

I think the OP just really needs to research/realize what a 'revival' is.

Certainly agree with the OP about the sheer speed of the tempi in the current Les Mis (this frantic pace has also been adopted in the London production which still uses the original design and staging). It makes emotional connection very hard when the cast and band are rushing through the score as though there's someplace they have to be within minutes of the curtain coming down. "At The End Of The Day" was always fast but now it has turned into the kind of tonguetwister that might give Danny Kaye pause for thought.

This is kind of a stretch, but this OP reminds me of why original restaurants that franchise eventually give up & close. Once a standardized menu is established & customers become those who visit for a kind of predictability - surprises of fresh approaches most of the time are frowned upon. Boring familiarity IMHO. On the other hand though, I guess there is meaning to the idiom "Don't throw out the baby with the wash water" & I esp. liked the observation of how the selling & eating of snacks has denigrated the nobility of our beloved temples.

Updated On: 5/27/14 at 02:56 PM

In several hundred theatre experiences I have NEVER been late. It can be done

Good for you. Of course, your experience has nothing to do with the unforeseen circumstances of others.

---

I've never been late to anything in my life. I would rather be 1 hour early than 1 minute late!

I also think it's funny how the OP was shocked, SHOCKED that latecomers were sat during At the End of the Day. They've been doing that since the beginning, in every production I've seen since I first saw LM in the mid '90s.

---

Glad to see that some have opted not to take a negative tone with the OP. Interesting to see how broadway is regarded and to what standards it is looked at from all over the world. It SHOULD be a event. The latecomers SHOULD be looked down on ( yes.. things happen.. that is understood) . And NO ONE should have to research a production before going. What counts is what is up there on stage. That for many of you this quick money making sh*t is ok with you is what is so sad and pathetic.


Question.. Are they really selling popcorn? When I saw the show in Madrid they were selling popcorn. But I thought maybe that was a local thing.. and it certainly was not Broadway.

---

Updated On: 5/27/14 at 06:19 PM

And the unforeseen circumstances of others shouldn't interrupt my enjoyment of my experience in any way

Plan ahead and get there on time

The recent touring company here in Toronto was an excellent and a refreshing take on the original. Several scenes were cut - namely the women's chorus (Turning, Turning) - and the opening was staged to resemble the film, where you see Jean Valjean working at a ship yard, rather than in a chain gang. Having seen Les Mis 4-5 times over the last 15 years I was actually very pleasantly surprised by how well this revival was done. Can't say the same about the Phantom with its score revisions and recent casting choices.

The recent touring company here in Toronto was an excellent and a refreshing take on the original.

That wasn't the tour. (And all the changes you mentioned are standard to the 25th anniversary staging.)

---

My thoughts:

1. clearly the OP has a first language other than English. Nothing wrong with that, some should ask themselves if they are half as fluid in a second language as the OP obviously is in English, so please show some respect.
2. I second the comparison with opera houses both in terms of food and in terms of dealing with late comers. What is it with food and beverages on Broadway, that is just so extremely wrong and profane. and there was a time when not only men were kind but food was forbidden in a theater.... As for late comers, yes, things happen, but then again, like with kids: what message does it give if late coming is not "sanctionized"? It starts with being OK b/c traffic was a mess and then it is sort of OK b/c some people just don't care. the inhouse TV seems like an OK option as well as letting people stand all the way back. By the way, in terms of comparing to opera houses: those two little things in a way show that people tend to "respect" opera more than musical theater (being more "serious" or "difficult"), which of course is another discussion on its own. still, I consider both being a sign of respect which should be granted to musicals just as much!!
3. In terms of an original production with a revival: another interesting discussion on its own! Think about the great Russian ballets or Balanchine: there, I think of any alteration a NO, but then again, there have been some remarkable modern approaches, think Matthew Bourne or Mats Ek on Swan Lake. Still, at least to me, the original will always have a superiority which cannot be outdone. In musical theater, revivals of original shows ( even those hard core original productions of Cam Mack) happen in a mere 30 years of its original premiere, which I find remarkable, without saying it is bad, even though I think some original productions should never be touched ( like "Cats"), b/c I think it would simply alter but not improve. So to sum this long posting up, I would find it interesting to discuss when a revival is due or well done or even exceeding the original and when it is indeed a shame on the original.

Updated On: 5/28/14 at 12:39 PM