Les Miserables Tour Coming to Broadway?- Page 2

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 9/21/12 at 5:00pm

I saw this production last winter and didn't care for it. Betsey Morgan stood out, as did the actress who play Eponine (forgot her name), but I found the production tired and loathed the video-game-projections, and missed the turntable.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 9/21/12 at 6:26pm

I saw this production the week it premièred in the UK and saw it a further two times. The UK cast was one of the best casts I have ever seen and the production itself was one of the best if not the best production of a musical I have ever seen. As soon as they announced the US I thought it might go to Broadway eventually.

EDIT: I should point out that I saw the tour years after I first saw the show in London. Updated On: 9/22/12 at 06:26 PM

[kec]

Posted: 9/21/12 at 7:27pm

This article appeared in the Hollywood Reporter a few days before the Playbill article appeared.

Would really LOVE to see Alfie Boe and Andrew Varele in this production, if/when it goes to Broadway.
Tony Winner Alfie Boe Could Revive 'Les Miserables' Role on Broadway

[ACL2006]

Posted: 9/22/12 at 12:10am

if the tour is doing so well, why not simply launch a separate Broadway company & keep the tour going?

[My Oh My]

Posted: 9/22/12 at 12:20am

Saw it in the summer of 2011 in Los Angeles. I recommend it, especially to anyone who hasn't seen any production of it.

The absence of the revolve doesn't ruin the show. This musical works perfectly well without one, and no, that isn't news. There was never any question, even in fan circles, that the musical could work without one. For some reason, some people feel the need to reassure everyone that it works just fine without a revolve, as if the musical ever worked due to the use of one. I'm glad the current tour has no revolve.

The revolve belongs to the Nunn/Caird original, and was never intended to act as a gimmick, which is what it would be if paired alongside a different approach that includes it for the wrong reasons. I did not miss the revolve. At all.

Misguided choices aside, the cast were all excellent, top notch talent. The dedication in their keeping with the director's vision is apparent throughout.

The revised orchestration will sound fresh and pretty to most and it will instill the appropriate response to those eager to feel whatever they think they should feel at Les Mis. The show's "updated" sound, still heavily based on the John Cameron orchestration, does away with the wall of harmony that the complex originals supported the musical storytelling with and rids the piece of a huge portion of its operatic identity, which it can't rid itself of completely, but manages to slide further into its pop roots by asserting much of what it formerly suggested and evoked. The result is it immediately grabs you--more immediately than it already did in its original orchs, just as most pop routinely does in under 4 minute chunks. Also, people seem to get a kick out of being able to identify exactly what instrument they're hearing as the streamlined orchestration allows that to be possible. The number of musicians required has been updated from its original 25 to a modern 14 and world class instruments such as a variety of recorder ups the "glorious" nature of this budding new Mis.

The direction features lots of activity that the original avoided due to that version's vision/concept not requiring it. It is flashier and sometimes shakes things up in its tendency to prove this or that scene CAN be staged differently. This is in response to...um, who knows? But it's real important, I'm sure.

This 2nd revival in less than a couple years after the first 'revival,' which came merely 3 years after the original 16-year run ended, is eager to prove that it CAN do a lot of things, even if nothing was ever in its way, all while not being the original production. A lot of people respond to this in the form of encouragement, great enthusiasm, and they relish the opportunity to experience the 'birth' of a musical they thought required a time machine to experience in its infancy. The promise of improvement has made the desire to experience something so far out of reach as the original when it was a newcomer, easy to abandon and replace with something that is possible. Meanwhile, it assures the public, it is the same musical they love, but with "new" stuff added, the value of which is measured in superlatives.

This version was created to sit comfy alongside the brilliant original, some of the early press releases claimed. "It isn't intended to replace the original," they reassured.

Continue Dreamin' the Dream, y'all.

[My Oh My]

Posted: 9/22/12 at 12:43am

"And My Oh My will be here in 3... 2..."

I wrote 6 other Les Mis/orchs/****ty revival related rants this week. Not for posting here. It's a hobby of mine. Posting them here is sharing my hobbies with y'all. How sweet of me, huh? XD

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 9/22/12 at 10:43am

i'll never forget during 'Master of the House' seeing a random couple from the inn on the upper balcony having simulated sex for the last 2 minutes of the song. Truly cringe-worthy. I really don't want this soul-less production on broadway.

[ClapYo'Hands]

Posted: 9/22/12 at 10:51am

We all know that sex hath no soul.

Updated On: 9/22/12 at 10:51 AM

[My Oh My]

Posted: 9/22/12 at 8:17pm

I doubt it's that simplistic, Clap, and I'm sure people find the added f*cking in "Master of the House" tasteless for reasons unrelated to perceptions limited to sex and soul alone.

For me, it was actually not as explicit as reports claimed and I surprisingly giggled at the way the guy maintained a rhythmic thrusting along with the beat of the song.

Giggles often equate to GOOD TIMES and GOOD TIMES are synonymous with quality. Sadly, I'm not that gullible and it added nothing of value to the scene. It was juvenile and a cheap attempt at shock value at best. It was as far away from focusing on the storytelling as one can get and was the type of distraction that fools people who've become bored with the original into thinking they're seeing something brand spanking new.

What they're actually seeing is a bunch of diversion from the stuff that matters. The fully-clothed simulated screwing was really lame but even more lame was the celebration of the cutesy Thenardiers, who sure know how to have a good time. Emphasis on GOOD TIME.

Not that the original portrayed them correctly and a production can't be blamed or praised too much for individual acting choices. But with the function of providing sinister comedic value in a heavy story already in place, the dialing of that to 10 and in the most obvious manner, was, well, a tad heavy handed and decidedly stupid.

My head is throbbing. Blood pressure. LOL.

[Jamminman]

Posted: 9/24/12 at 2:28pm

If it transfers to Broadway, Anthony Warlow as Valjean PLEASE!!!! I need to hear him in this role before I can die happy. In my opinion, there is no better singer (which makes listening to Constantine in Jekyll very hard).