PHANTOM Current Tour vs Original

My main issue is with the 'look' of the show, like the movie, they can't seem to decide on a clear 'period' of style. It just looks campy, whereas the original is stylistically elegant throughout (even though I can see some people thinking it old fashioned) but that is part of the charm. I will however concede that the tour has a better chandelier crash (but back to the original point, the chandelier itself looks NOTHING like the one it is supposed to be based on.

I have seen both productions. I enjoyed the tour. I liked the set with revolving tower, but I have to say that it pales in comparison to the Original. I have seen the original staging over 5 times, and some of the images (The boat ride) still fill me with awe. There was nothing about the tour that did that for me. There is a reason why its running 30 years. It was a well thought out and constructed piece.

What's interesting was that it was rumored that this new touring production would be easier to tour and be able to fit into smaller venues. However, that central set piece reportedly weighs in around 10 tons, and many venues, even ones that hosted the original, have had to do some major modifications to their stages to support that piece. The show also travels in about 20 trucks (I seem to recall that the original was around 22 or 24) so any reduction in the size is pretty negligible.

I also enjoyed the prologue! I thought the transition between the prologue scene to the opera house was brilliant, with the backdrops coming down and the periaktoi turning. I think the giant curved wall on the turntable was used cleverly during the title song with the staircase that came out of it, and during “Poor Fool”. I guess I would have to see the original staging to add more, but this discussion has just made me want to see it even more. I personally thought the boat ride during the title song was a little lackluster, because there was just a fog and with a few candlelights. The pictures I’ve seen from the original looked more dramatic and elaborate.

Although the mirrored set for Masquerade is pretty, you REALLY do miss the staircase from the original version.

This post below from another thread comparing the “Masquerade” ballroom scene. I haven’t seen the Broadway version, but the Phantom doesn’t just “walk across the stage” as mentioned above. He appears from behind the party-goers as the mirrored panels of the ballroom walls open, and the lightening goes from normal to red. I thought it rather a dramatic entrance. In person the set piece was gorgeous, and especially not bad for one that tours week in and week out cross-country.



"johannabarker said: "Masquerade is bland and I've seen high school productions better than that. "





MovieInMyMind2 said: Masquerade isn't bland - it actually looks like a masquerade ballroom, now. The set for the masquerade is probably my favorite in the whole production. In reality, if one were to throw a masqiuerade ball, the majority of the dancing wouldn't be done on one giant staircase like in the Broadway production. In that regard, I do feel that the masquerade scene on Broadway is dated. A giant staircase with dummies can only go so far to convey the grandeur of a masquerade ballroom. Could the tour have made the ballroom more grand and with better quality sets? Sure. But it looks more like a masquerade ball than the Broadway version, even if it is a bit stripped down. It is a tour and it was very expensive to travel with an ensemble big enough to fill up a giant staircase. VS In my opinion, the Broadway masquerade scene is dated. There needs to be more than just a giant staircase that everyone is singing and dancing on. And likewise, the tour's masquerade scene, while lavish in its own way, could benefit from more quality propsto make the sets (not just the masquerade scene) look more rich and vibrant. In many ways, the Broadway production's sets look dated. And also, in many ways, the tours sets look cheap and flimsy. I feel that if they somehow revamped the Broadway version to have the grandeur of the Australian Love Never Dies production, then it'd be a completely different story.”

Updated On: 12/29/17 at 04:48 PM

Many theatres had to rebuild stage houses for PHANTOM - Buffalo, and Memphis immediately spring to mind but there's many more. Beyond having to reinforce in the ceilings for the chandelier, they had to expand their stage areas to accommodate the larger decks that PHANTOM (original and current) used. They also often had to reinforce the stages from underground to hold the weight.

For me, there's simply no comparison; the tour was a huge letdown. Give me the "brilliant original" any day.

RemlapLBC said: "...I finally saw the original on Broadway, and I called it my purging the "new Production"".

Exactly! After seeing the tour twice, I couldn't wait to see it in New York again to restore my perception of the show.

As for the original tour fitting into theatres--as I remember it, the 1st national tour (which started in chicago) required a fairly deep stage (I seem to remember about 36 feet) while the 2nd national tour (i think starting in Seattle) wasn't as deep (I recall 29 feet). Both tours were huge compared to most other shows and required the front of house rigging points discussed in previous posts and had an extended loadin time. (with some items duplicated for pre-loadin and the show generally closing on a saturday in one city and having its first performance on wednesday in the next city.

As for making changes to theatres. The story I heard about the Fox theatre in St Louis was that the first engagement of the 2nd national tour was so successful they really wanted to get the tour back again as soon as possible and rebuild the back of the theatre to add more depth and be able to get the 1st national tour sooner than the 2nd was available. (though the expansion probably was also to better fit future shows (especially Miss Siagon).

tourboi said: "Lot666 said: "When I saw the tour, the chandelier did not "crash" at all. It just shook a little and made some sparks."

Perhaps there was a malfunction that day."

I saw the touring production twice and the chandelier did the same thing both times (it essentially did what the one at the Royal Albert Hall did for the London 25th).

tourboi said: "...it explodes, jerks back and forth, then free falls very, very fast, stopping quite close to the audience during a blackout during which an explosion is heard and fake glass shatters on top of the audiences heads."

There was no "free fall" when I saw it (there was no "fall" at all). Perhaps the effect was "enhanced" at some point further into the tour.