Next Les Mis Revival on Broadway

[Theatrefanboy1]

Posted: 1/29/25 at 10:53pm

With 2025 being the 40th anniversary of the show and 2027 being 40 years for the OBC do you think we’ll be seeing another revival ( it’s already been 9 years since the last revival) or do you think Les Mis will be waiting for the 50 for the next big revival on Broadway ?

[Jarethan]

Posted: 1/29/25 at 11:14pm

I vote for the 50th.  It is too soon if they want to have a chance at a real run.

I would also like to see a 100th anniversary revival of Show Boat.  I would be perfectly happy if they revived the Harold Prince production but, unless that is done by LCT, i.e., a major non-profit, that is never going to happen. 

I would also like a 60th anniversary production of Mame, as long as they can get a great Mame.

[Quinn Wilson]

Posted: 1/29/25 at 11:31pm

Jarethan said: "I vote for the 50th. It is too soon if they want to have a chance at a real run.

I would also like to see a 100th anniversary revival of Show Boat. I would be perfectly happy if they revived the Harold Prince production but, unless that is done by LCT, i.e., a major non-profit, that is never going to happen.

I would also like a 60th anniversary production of Mame, as long as they can get a great Mame."

The latest rumor for Mame is Trisha Paytas. 

[George in DC]

Posted: 1/30/25 at 4:32pm

^  LOL. That's a scary thought.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 1/30/25 at 7:19pm

Cameron will do what he wants and when he wants to.

I would love to see a contemporary-set production someday that actually has a POV on race. But I will not hold my breath for that to ever happen on Broadway, especially during Cameron's lifetime.

It's interesting to be nearing the end of the Cameron Mackintosh Era. He's 78, and at this point he's mostly just revisiting the same types of things he's done before (Oliver, Mary Poppins, Les Mis, Phantom, Sondheim revues), often to reduced success. He doesn't seem like the type who'd ever retire, and clearly that office will continue managing IP and running theaters after his death.

On the subject of anniversary revivals: Some people don't like producing them or labelling them as such because it makes a show sound old. Mounting a show in an anniversary year also takes a great deal of advance strategic planning because these things are so fluid.

Updated On: 1/30/25 at 07:19 PM

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 1/30/25 at 7:30pm

When, if ever, will Cameron lose the rights?

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 1/30/25 at 7:43pm

Call_me_jorge said: "When, if ever, will Cameron lose the rights?"

He probably has a verrrry unusual and comprehensive rights agreement for his big titles, which continues to renew. It may be the closest thing to "ownership" that an independent theatre producer has. (For those who don't know, in the theatre, authors own their copyright; as opposed to the film world, where a movie can be owned outright by a studio, and a writer/director is a hired hand; but some theatrical agreements stretch the definition of ownership.)

It might take all parties dying AND a level of mishandling and friction felt by the authors' heirs/estates.

[Rickr3]

Posted: 2/2/25 at 5:04am

Can anyone honestly say that there has been a better staging of this musical than the original John Caird / Trevor Nunn production? I've seen various non-replica productions and while some were quite good NONE surpassed the genius and thrill of the original to me. Not even close. So I'm of the opinion that if they don't bring the original production back, then why bother? Don't bring it back at all!

[Theatrefanboy1]

Posted: 2/2/25 at 7:02am

I agree. The original turntable staging was the best.  However I did prefer the modern tempos.  I would love an original revival. Not reimagining or cheap knockoff 

[thirtythirtyninety]

Posted: 2/2/25 at 1:47pm

I would pay any amount to see the original staging remounted, especially if it was performed with all the stupid latter day cuts reinstated!

[Lot666]

Posted: 2/3/25 at 7:40am

Theatrefanboy1 said: "I would love an original revival. Not reimagining or cheap knockoff"

A cheap "reimagined" knockoff is all you're likely to get from Cameron Mackintosh these days.

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 2/3/25 at 9:08am

While I did get to see the original Les Miz and Phantom in London in the 90s, I had planned to use my airline miles to revisit and see the original productions again. I trusted they would always be there. Now they are both gone. A year or two ago we took the "kids" of our extended family to see the new Les Miz tour, just like we had seen the original in the 80's/90's and it was such a letdown to not share that original staging with them. Something special certainly was lost with the removal of the revolve. 

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 2/3/25 at 5:03pm

I know that I am in the minority here, and I that it's an unpopular opinion, but , with the exception of the classic image of the post-battle tableau, I much prefer the current staging over the original turntable staging.

I was still relatively young when I saw the original staging, but it left me feeling largely unimpressed at the time. I don't find the new staging to be particularly cheap, it's just different. 

[Rickr3]

Posted: 2/3/25 at 7:12pm

Unimpressed? Did you have nosebleed seats? The original Les Mis has to be seen up close in order for it to be as effective as it could be. From afar, I agree it's a very unimpressive show, even with the revolve. I saw it one time at the very back of the orchestra section in a huge theatre and I have no memories of that performance and I really couldn't see much except people singing up front and some movement from the revolve. That's probably the original's biggest weakness; it is made for an intimate theatre like the Sondheim (formerly the Queens) in London and the Broadhurst on Broadway. Anything larger and the theatre swallows the show.

Every other time I saw it I sat very close and boy, what a beautiful production. So thrilling.

I liked the newer staging. It was actually pretty good but pales in comparison to the original.

[George in DC]

Posted: 2/3/25 at 7:45pm

Rickr3 said: "Can anyone honestly say that there has been a better staging of this musical than the original John Caird / Trevor Nunn production? I've seen various non-replica productions and while some were quite good NONE surpassed the genius and thrill of the original to me. Not even close. So I'm of the opinion that if they don't bring the original production back, then why bother?Don't bring it back at all!"

Yes. In 2009, Signature Theatre in Arlington did a production with full cast, orchestra, in a theatre of less that 300 audience members and it was sensational. The best production I've seen, and I saw the original production, with original cast in London.

Updated On: 2/3/25 at 07:45 PM

[scripps]

Posted: 2/3/25 at 11:28pm

No turntable, no dice. 

In all seriousness, my parents took me to see Les Miz at the Imperial when I was kid (Lea Michele was one of the Young Cosettes in the Playbill so we're going back in time here) and boy, did they create a monster. I read the novel unabridged a few years later when I was the ripe old age of 12, walked around with all 3 cassette tapes of the complete symphonic recording at all times, would occasionally second act a Wednesday matinee after school, and to this day of you asked me what my dream role would be I would say Enjolras (followed by Moritz, followed by Hélène). And yet, I really have no interest in sitting through this material now, traditionally restaged or reimagined. Perhaps my feelings will change, perhaps the show reminds me too much of my squandered youth.