Phantom Closing?- Page 38

[chernjam]

Posted: 4/10/23 at 11:44pm

Listener said: "
I don't really understand how ALW has so little control and is out-voted by Cameron, if that's really the case. Doesn't he basically run RUG? Don't they in turn run Phantom?

Is Cameron really the one giving the order to kill it, or was it mutually agreed upon, and ALW is saying "it's not me!" the same way he did when LuPone was fired "by Paramount" (that was his story, right? That they preferred Close and had more of a say, even though they later told the press they didn't?)

There's so much talk about "insiders" saying the show will return sooner rather than later, so I'm not entirely sure what to think."

In this instance, RUG is a co-producer.  Remember this was 36 years ago, I think ALW had only recently started RUG (maybe producing Starlight Express?).  I'm pretty sure that CM was the lead producer (sole?) for Cats.  So at this point with a show of this size and magnitude, he needed to relegate primary producer status to CM. That's why on the playbill it has CM name first.
  

[Listener]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 1:39am

Ahh ok.

But at this point, and at his age, can Andrew really wrestle control away from Cameron? And if he did, would he still go through the trouble of splitting the royalties with the estates of HP, GL and MB, just to keep the show as it was?

I wonder. Was ALW okay with the restaged UK tour of 2012 *shudder*? Does he just want the title of the longest-running show on Broadway for a few more years, or does he care that the show is preserved for future generations?

...and back to the original question, will he or anyone else exciting attend the closing? LOL

Updated On: 4/11/23 at 01:39 AM

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 2:59am

chernjam said: "I'm pretty sure that CM was the lead producer (sole?) for Cats."

Cameron was not the sole producer. Cats was produced on Broadway by Cameron Mackintosh, The Really Useful Company, David Geffen and the Shubert Organization. In later years ABC/Disney was listed in the playbill as a producer as well.

[poto19882023]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 5:12am

So I guess I’ll throw this in here, but take it with the same grain of salt all of these rumors should be taken with regardless of the source.

A couple weeks back I was waiting in line at the Majestic for the show, and one of the theater’s security guards who helps move people inside when the lobby opens was talking to us.

They proceeded to tell us that what we weren’t being told about this closing was that the show wasn’t actually going anywhere - yes they were closing the theatre down for renovations and the like - but when the theatre reopens it’s still gonna be Phantom. Said basically they were getting us to pay a bunch of money making people think it was actually going away.

I asked about how long they thought it would take until the show reopened and they said about a year or so.

Again I don’t really know what to believe at this point. Is that something they would even know or be given reliable information about? I meant to go back and ask them what their source was on that info but I’ve not seen them since. I will try if I see them again this week.

Anyway there’s that. Grain of salt and the like.

 

[Melissa25]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 7:20am

If you have Spectrum cable, Frank DiLella has an hour long special on Phantom Thursday 4/13/23 at 9pm on NY1.  I have set my DVR.  https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cq2z-wzAM2v/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

[Lot666]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 8:50am

Listener said: "I wonder who will be appearing as a special guest (if anyone?) at the charity performance Friday...and at the big finale on Sunday.

For Sunday, I would assume ALW and CM....and maaaaaybe Sarah Brightman? Is she on tour right now? What about Michael Crawford? Would he bother to make the trip? After the Phantom movie didn't work out for him, maybe there's some lingering frustration still there?

Would Ramin call out of Funny Girl?

I definitely think some recent alums (Ali Ewoldt?) might appear. But how many people will be brought on stage to say a few words, verses how many will just be in the audience or at the after party?"

Past cast members have been invited to attend the Sunday performance and were asked to RSVP by March 23. Personally, I don't think any of them are going to make speeches, unless perhaps Michael Crawford or Sarah Brightman will be in attendance, but even they didn't make speeches at any of the anniversary performances in London or New York (Crawford merely appeared briefly onstage at some curtain calls; Brightman performed, but did not speak, and I think it's highly unlikely that she will perform on Sunday). The only people who ever made speeches at milestone performances were ALW, Mackintosh, and Hal Prince.

Updated On: 4/11/23 at 08:50 AM

[Theatrefanboy1]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 8:51am

I’ve heard whispers that ALW. CM. Will be there. As well as Sarah Brightman and Michael Crawford have been invited.  Other people who I find interesting (but not surprising) Ramin Karmiloo.  Sierra Boggess. Judy Kaye. Howard McGillan. Hugh Panaro. Sarah Ford…. 
 

[Lot666]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 9:01am

poto19882023 said: "what we weren’t being told about this closing was that the show wasn’t actually going anywhere - yes they were closing the theatre down for renovations and the like - but when the theatre reopens it’s still gonna be Phantom. Said basically they were getting us to pay a bunch of money making people think it was actually going away."

I feel quite certain that they are "getting us to pay a bunch of money" because the Prince/Bjornson/Lynne production is closing permanently, and the disingenuous claim that "the show isn't going anywhere" is based on the eventual opening (maybe at the Majestic, maybe somewhere else) of the cheap Mackintosh touring production. It would be a PR nightmare (and downright fraudulent) to reopen the same production at the same theatre, after having sold absurdly priced tickets for months based on an official announcement to the public that the show was ending.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 9:39am

I REALLY hope they keep that godawful touring production far from Broadway. Though not ideal, I can tolerate a modification of the original staging like what they have in the West End right now. The Lawrence Connor-helmed production that toured the US is an absolute bastardization of the show in every single way under the sun.

[anonanimal1218]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 10:50am

Isn’t there something with the orchestra pit minimums at the Majestic that would make it difficult to do either the rest aged tour or West End production there? The orchestrations are for 14 or so and I vaguely recall the pit min at the Majestic being around 20

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 11:20am

It's the modification, bwayphreak, not the Connor tour. They realized long ago that that was not gonna fly like it had with Les Mis.

[Lot666]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 3:20pm

ALW: "What's really sad about it is that it's not necessary. It could easily, easily run on now but again, it's not my decision."

This article seems to suggest that there may not be the level of pomp and circumstance which some folks are expecting this weekend. 

Updated On: 4/11/23 at 03:20 PM

[Listener]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 3:50pm

I just read an article that said the show would return "with a facelift".

A facelift isn't how I'd describe the London show. A facelift is more than that.

...sigh.

POTO1988 - very interesting. I mean, sure, they could be mistaken, but they could also be right. Isn't the Majestic one of the biggest theatres, though? Would the Schuberts really want POTO back in after the renovations, if there was a chance the "new version" wouldn't do as well?

[Voter]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 4:15pm

chernjam said: "Listener said: "
I don't really understand how ALW has so little control and is out-voted by Cameron, if that's really the case. Doesn't he basically run RUG? Don't they in turn run Phantom?

Is Cameron really the one giving the order to kill it, or was it mutually agreed upon, and ALW is saying "it's not me!" the same way he did when LuPone was fired "by Paramount" (that was his story, right? That they preferred Close and had more of a say, even though they later told the press they didn't?)

There's so much talk about "insiders" saying the show will return sooner rather than later, so I'm not entirely sure what to think."

In this instance, RUG is a co-producer. Remember this was 36 years ago, I think ALW had only recently started RUG (maybe producing Starlight Express?). I'm pretty sure that CM was the lead producer (sole?) for Cats. So at this point with a show of this size and magnitude, he needed to relegate primary producer status to CM. That's why on the playbill it has CM name first.
"

My theory is that CM would only put money into Bad Cinderella in the states if ALW would let him close POTO...... 

Interesting ALW says it doesn't have to close now... but when BC was in rehearsals, he was ready to let Phantom go... 

[BroadwayPhan]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 4:28pm

The irony if a new Phantom production reopens at the same theater after renovations…

Imagine if they rename the Majestic the Hal Prince Theater (would they make the announcement on Sunday perhaps?)…only to have a non-Hal directed Phantom play at the theater. 
 

I believe there have been discussions to rename the theater based on what a member of the production said to me at the Flea Market last fall. 

[Penna2]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 4:36pm

Listener said: "I just read an article that said the show would return "with a facelift".

A facelift isn't how I'd describe the London show. A facelift is more than that.

...sigh.

POTO1988 - very interesting. I mean, sure, they could be mistaken, but they could also be right. Isn't the Majestic one of the biggest theatres, though? Would the Schuberts really want POTO back in after the renovations, if there was a chance the "new version" wouldn't do as well?"

The reason the show was closing in the first place was because the capacity was low, and they were losing money. The same cast and/or a rotation of swings are now bringing in audiences -with mixed or, in the case of Ben, negative or meh reviews (he seems to have blown his voice from what I have listened to on booted videos). A friend of mine who saw the show last year and then a week or so ago said that some of the tinkering they did with the direction was rectified (PONR specifically), which didn't seem to help get folks engaged. So why do they have an audience now? Because the show announced it is closing. A vast number of people are returning over and over - with some new audiences, and paying the exorbitant ticket prices to see a show that couldn't cut it earlier on. 

There is no doubt it's going to come back - likely in a smaller venue and opening with some specialty casting. For example, Sierra Boggess always said she wanted to play Madame Giry, although she would be a wonderful Carlotta, and Ramin has never done the show on Broadway. They just have to ditch any idea of using the tour as a model. Horrible, horrible, horrible. 

Same friend, noted above, who has seen the new West End production ago, said the UK version is fine - just scaled down. 

 

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 5:13pm

Penna2 said: "Listener said: "I just read an article that said the show would return "with a facelift".

A facelift isn't how I'd describe the London show. A facelift is more than that.

...sigh.

POTO1988 - very interesting. I mean, sure, they could be mistaken, but they could also be right. Isn't the Majestic one of the biggest theatres, though? Would the Schuberts really want POTO back in after the renovations, if there was a chance the "new version" wouldn't do as well?"

The reason the show was closing in the first place was because the capacity was low, and they were losing money. The same cast and/or a rotation of swings are now bringing in audiences -with mixed or, in the case of Ben, negative or meh reviews (he seems to have blown his voice from what I have listened to on booted videos). A friend of mine who saw the show last year and then a week or so ago said that some of the tinkering they did with the direction was rectified (PONR specifically), which didn't seem to help get folks engaged. So why do they have an audience now? Because the show announced it is closing. A vast number of people are returning over and over - with some new audiences, and paying the exorbitant ticket prices to see a show that couldn't cut it earlier on.

There is no doubt it's going to come back - likely in a smaller venue and opening with some specialty casting. For example, Sierra Boggess always said she wanted to play Madame Giry, although she would be a wonderful Carlotta, and Ramin has never done the show on Broadway. They just have to ditch any idea of using the tour as a model. Horrible, horrible, horrible.

Same friend, noted above, who has seen the new West End production ago, said the UK version is fine - just scaled down.

"

Cameron Mackintosh, is that you?  Sure sounds like you?  Will your next post be about how the orchestra pit must be happy the show is ending because who would want to keep playing the same songs night after night?  And this friend who said the new London version is fine (and presumably we should all stop asking about it), his name wouldn’t be Seth Skylar Heyn would it?  Nah.  

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 5:36pm

Lot666 said:  Personally, I don't think any of them are going to make speeches, unless perhaps Michael Crawford or Sarah Brightman will be in attendance, but even they didn't make speeches at any of the anniversary performances in London or New York (Crawford merely appeared briefly onstage at some curtain calls; Brightman performed, but did not speak, and I think it's highly unlikely that she will perform on Sunday). The only people who ever made speeches at milestone performances were ALW, Mackintosh, and Hal Prince."
 

Brightman definitely made a speech at the 20th in London (instead of performing), whereas she performed at the 10th and 30th. I don't recall MC making a speech at any occasion following his departure, and as far as I can recall the only time he appeared on stage at an anniversary performance of Hal's production was at London's 30th.

Voter said: My theory is that CM would only put money into Bad Cinderella in the states if ALW would let him close POTO...... 

CM has nothing to do with Bad Cinderella. CM and ALW haven't worked on anything together since Phantom. CM was going to do the 2006 Evita revival in London, but that fell through, and after the constant back-and-forth blame game between the two men over how London's Phantom was gutted, which seems now to be playing out here in light of ALW's comments in the video with NY1 about how the Broadway closure is "unnecessary", I don't think they will work on any show together again.

I do not understand, however, how ALW does not call the shots here. The production at the Majestic was ALW's 70 versus Cameron's 30. I suspect if one of them pulls out then it's game over, and back in 1988 ALW/RUG did not envision that Cameron would go all Bill Kenwright and start wanting to downscale all his productions to replace them with inferior ones.

Anyway, with Phantom exiting the Majestic the same week Wicked overtakes Cats in the longest-running record list, it's certainly the end of an era.

Updated On: 4/11/23 at 05:36 PM

[chernjam]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 6:08pm

The Scorpion said: "...I do not understand, however, how ALW does not call the shots here. The production at the Majestic was ALW's 70 versus Cameron's 30. I suspect if one of them pulls out then it's game over, and back in 1988 ALW/RUG did not envision that Cameron would go all Bill Kenwright and start wanting to downscale all his productions to replace them with inferior ones.

Anyway, with Phantomexiting the Majestic the same weekWickedovertakesCatsin the longest-running record list, it's certainly the end of an era."

I doubt it's 70 ALW / 30 CM - the fact that CM name is the first listed would seem to indicate he's the primary producer.  

And that's the first I've heard that the reason CM wasn't doing the Evita revival was over Phantom?  Why would that have been an issue as the gutting of Phantom didn't take place for some time after 2006

[Penna2]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 6:20pm

Just someone who thinks in more practical terms than many here. Tell me what part of what I wrote is wrong. The show was not doing well enough to pay the bills. Then everyone is shocked when the show closes. Just because it was Phantom doesn't mean it's exempt from the laws of supply and demand. I get the attachment, I'm a fan, but I'm guessing all the money being charged now is going to make up for the losses and not much else. Thanks to all of you, CM won't have to pay out of pocket.

As for ALW - I think 3 major losses at one time is a big deal. I think he should have fought harder to make POTO work, instead of trying to make BC work, but that's me. They all got lazy, but again, JMO.

[chernjam]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 6:58pm

Penna2 said: "Just someone who thinks in more practical terms than many here. Tell me what part of what I wrote is wrong. The show was not doing well enough to pay the bills. Then everyone is shocked when the show closes. Just because it was Phantom doesn't mean it's exempt from the laws of supply and demand. I get the attachment, I'm a fan, but I'm guessing all the money being charged now is going to make up for the losses and not much else. Thanks to all of you, CM won't have to pay out of pocket.

As for ALW - I think 3 major losses at one time is a big deal. I think he should have fought harder to make POTO work, instead of trying to make BC work, but that's me. They all got lazy, but again, JMO."

 

I think what's different here is that most shows when they announce a closing, there's not that much of a spike in ticket sales as you've seen with Phantom.  Yeah it was in the 700k-800k range so it was understandable that the rumblings would've started that it might close.  The fact that the week after they announced in September that it was closing in February and it was sold out shows that it suffered from the "it's always going to be there" mentality.   And as many on here have argued, had they done blocks of sales without a guarantee of an "open end" it might have stayed in the black for them without the 3 million dollar club that you're seeing now.  And most of the anger is that seeing what CM did in London, people who love this show are saddened they may never see the "brilliant original" again 

[John Adams]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 8:09pm

Cameron Mackintosh, is that you? Sure sounds like you? Will your next post be about how the orchestra pit must be happy the show is ending because who would want to keep playing the same songs night after night? 

Posted this before, but I still find it interesting: The musicians in the orchestra for Phantom of the Opera tell reporter Jay Caspian Kang about what it’s like to play the exact same music every single night—for decades—and how they’ve learned to make their peace with it.

 

[poto19882023]

Posted: 4/11/23 at 10:48pm

For those curious Ted was on tonight 

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 4/12/23 at 3:38am

chernjam said: "I doubt it's 70 ALW / 30 CM - the fact that CM name is the first listed would seem to indicate he's the primary producer.

And that's the first I've heard that the reason CM wasn't doing the Evita revival was over Phantom? Why would that have been an issue as the gutting of Phantom didn't take place for some time after 2006"

Read the post again - I didn't say the Evita issue was connected. Obviously, they weren't.

As for the proportions of the split, the 70/30 figure is the figure given by the Shuberts, so...

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 4/12/23 at 3:41am

Penna2 said: "Just someone who thinks in more practical terms than many here. Tell me what part of what I wrote is wrong. The show was not doing well enough to pay the bills. Then everyone is shocked when the show closes. Just because it was Phantom doesn't mean it's exempt from the laws of supply and demand.

The show wasn't doing well in the early 2000s either, but they kept it open and it bounced back and ran for another 20 years. I think if it was as simple as you suggested, then the co-producer wouldn't outright say on television that it is 'unnecessary'.