Love Likley to Die...

From the New York Post.

At the opening-night party in London for Andrew Lloyd Webber's "Love Never Dies," the gossip was that Lloyd Webber was going to ask his old friend Hal Prince to help revamp the show before it headed to New York.
The chatter made sense since "Love Never Dies" is the sequel to "The Phantom of the Opera," which Prince directed, brilliantly, and which is now in its 22nd year on Broadway. (Last week's gross: $825,000, thank you very much.)
But back in March, when I ran the gossip past Andre Ptaszynski, who runs Lloyd Webber's theater empire, he laughed and said: "The mention of Hal Prince is a stunner to Andrew and me. No such thing was anywhere on the radar."

Well -- ping, ping, ping -- something's on my radar.
Prince was in London last month directing a new show, "Paradise Found," at the Menier Chocolate Factory. He took time out to see "Love Never Dies." Lloyd Webber took him to lunch and, sure enough, asked him to come on board, production sources say.
The prospect was enticing, largely because Lloyd Webber is prepared to spend vast amounts of money to fix "Love Never Dies."
"Most producers say, 'No! You can't do that -- it costs too much,' " says a source. "Andrew says, 'Let's hire more acrobats!' "
But after mulling it over a few days, Prince, I'm told, declined. He's going to concentrate on fixing "Paradise Found," which took a drubbing from the critics and has its own problems.
This leaves Lloyd Webber in a tricky spot because the director of "Love Never Dies," Jack O'Brien, has had it with the show, sources say. So has the choreographer, Jerry Mitchell.
"Jack and Jerry are sick of it," says a source. "They've been going back and forth to London working on it, but nothing seems to please Andrew. They're fed up. The problem is the book, and they didn't write the book.

O'Brien and Mitchell have moved on to their next show, "Catch Me If You Can," which is due on Broadway in the spring. Ironically, it may end up at the Neil Simon Theatre, which was being held for "Love Never Dies" before its "indefinite" postponement.
Lloyd Webber continues to hunt for a new director. Rob Marshall, who won an Oscar nod for the movie "Chicago," is in the mix.
After his disastrous movie version of "Nine," Marshall could use a comeback, and an Andrew Lloyd Webber musical is a good place to stage one.
"Love Never Dies" needs a lot of work. The plot's a muddle, the pacing is agonizingly slow, and the dramatic fireworks are damp squibs. But the score is very good. Lloyd Webber's written some gorgeous, soaring tunes that'll make the hair stand up on the back of your neck.
The songs deserve a better production, if not a better show.

PLEASE let this utter drivel die. It is so bad it is past saving, even by a genius like Hal Prince. Worst score ever to grace a West End stage and worst lyrics to grace just about any stage. (Sorry if I'm sitting on the fence here lol).

---

Die show, DIE!

I've found more dramatic depth in a bowl of soup, to be honest. And I found the story more ludicrously laughable than tense - the only thing gripping about it was my having to grip the arms of my seat to prevent myself from getting up and leaving LOL.

The two quotes below were written by the late great Broadway critic Walter Kerr about the shows "Kelly" and "Joyful Noise", which were real turkeys in their day. I believe either of them would apply to "Love Never Dies":

"....a bad idea gone wrong".

"There is a double difficulty. One is to know in what century the musical takes place. The other is to know in what century it was written."

---

Because Gaston Leroux's original story is tense and thrilling, for a start. There is no tension in the love triangle at the heart of LND. There is also very little threat- the first musical involved deaths and risks of death, whereas the second involves an accident.

There is also the issue of the sumptuous design and fluid staging on multiple levels of the first. It tapped into an 80s zeitgeist, whereas LND has created very little buzz, because, as a show, it has the "so-what?" factor.

Finally, ALW has been his own worst enemy as a publicist, making wildly hyperbolic claims- such as the opening in 3 cities at once debacle. None of the publicity has suggested that this is an unmissable story.

And then, there's the word of mouth...

Eastwickian, I agree - the Phantom score is bland and boring and the story and characters are pretty un-interesting to say the least. But the show's success I think can be summed up in two words - Hal Prince. The genius of his direction turned an otherwise highly mediocre show into a piece of theatrical magic. It is not coincidence that POTO won Tonys for Best Musical and Best Director and not best score and best book (those awards were won by Stephen Sondheim and James Lapine for the infinitely superior Into The Woods).

---

Yeah, 'cos that show really needs a lot of fixing!

Well I'm holding my breathe on Wizard. The sets are shaping up to look great and the casting talks are very promising... but he'll do something ruin it...

No, actually the Oz sets are incredible. Doesn't mean the show won't be badly produced though.

Panto stunt casting with popular names, would probably make this show a success however for Webber indespite of still bad producing..!

Does anyone have any pics of the WOZ set design, i'd love to see how it shapes up!
As would I!

---

While I agree ALW is a poor producer of his own shows and revivals, I thought he did well with Bombay Dreams which is one of my favourite shows to listen to.

Wizard of Oz will be interesting as previous productions have struggled to make it more than just the film on stage. The RSC production is still regarded as the best production so ALW will have to work hard to make it half as good as the RSC production. They need to flesh it out and if neccessary make changes so that it can work as a stage musical.