Phantom of the Opera Returns!

You're right, it is not the original Hal/Maria production, but it is based on it and it does have a lot of similar scenic elements.

We have to accept that the original 1986/1988 Hal Prince/Maria Bjornson productions are gone forever. This updated tour, which is what the London production really is, is better than the Lawrence Conner mess of a tour we had to endure.

My big question is what sets will be used? They could use the old 3NT sets or some of the old Broadway sets theoretically. I can't wait to see what the chandelier looks like.

Yes I agree. This whole thing has been fumbled ever since the London reopening was announced.

Now I'm worried about those dreadful painted flat backdrops instead of Maria's sumptuous curtains.

bwayphreak234 said: "The Laurence Connor helmed tour was an abomination of epic proportions. It was ghastly - tacky, ugly, and just really, really bad."

Add to that a few directorial choices which simply made no sense to the story.

While we know better that it's not our beloved original staging, I agree with the comments that it's better to tour this than the Laurence Connor version. The average subscription theatergoers in the USA will still be dazzled by this watered-down imitation, and I have no doubt Cameron is very well aware of that.

Updated On: 11/1/24 at 10:19 AM

This article implies it will be the revamped West End production that will be touring the states - which, truly, is not bad by any stretch of the imagination.

I get that the lifelong hyper-fixating Phans are personally offended by the changes, but seriously, you would think they took the show and butchered it scene-by-scene, number-by-number, with the way they react to it. It’s sincerely not that big of a difference (having seen several original Phantom productions since 1995, including the London revamp). There are still statues/figures on the proscenium (just not as many as before). The new chandelier looks ten times better than the worn out ones that were jostled around the West End and Broadway for three decades and elicited chuckles as opposed to gasps. Just because it’s different and you don’t like it, doesn’t translate to it being objectively bad.

I would rather have the West End production be the new standard, rather than the 2013 reimagined tour.

Even if it is the revamped London production without the proscenium angel and the new chandelier it'll still be better than the Laurence Connor version. I like the idea that they might just use the 3rd national tour sets if those are still in storage, though I imagine they would still cut the proscenium angel since it'll be easier to tour it that way.

Updated On: 11/1/24 at 12:37 PM

Maria is listed as the designer of the new production, but so is Matt Kinley. Harold Prince and Seth are both listed as director too. It's just another way that Mackintosh tried to muddle the difference between the original and this reduced-to-save-money version that's now playing in London.

And Smaxie, you're probably my favorite poster on here ever so it pains me to criticize your post, but you haven't seen the show since the 90's and you're commenting on the differences? That's what Cameron is banking on; that people who are just casual observers of the show won't notice if there's no Angel or if the candles don't move once they're onstage or if they travelator is simplified or if there are fewer statues on the proscenium or if there are painted flats instead of the gorgeous curtains or if they lighting is all wrong now. We Phans are a mighty bunch but there are only so many of us and even on this board, we take quite a beating fairly frequently.

The "hand-wringing" comes from the fact that the changes were made ONLY to save money, not for any artistic or aesthetic reason. Then to add insult to that injury, Cameron and even ALW insist on treating the London show as if nothing has changed and any changes that were made were improvements, as if Prince and Bjornson's work could be improved upon.

Also, could you imagine anyone laughing at Maria's chandelier? I certainly could never.

Phantom4ever said: "Maria is listed as the designer of the new production, but so is Matt Kinley. Harold Prince and Seth are both listed as director too. It's just another way that Mackintosh tried to muddle the difference between the original and this reduced-to-save-money version that's now playing in London.

And Smaxie, you're probably my favorite poster on here ever so it pains me to criticize your post, but you haven't seen the show since the 90's and you're commenting on the differences? That's what Cameron is banking on; that people who are just casual observers of the show won't notice if there's no Angel or if the candles don't move once they're onstage or if they travelator is simplified or if there are fewer statues on the proscenium or if there are painted flats instead of the gorgeous curtains or if they lighting is all wrong now. We Phans are a mighty bunch but there are only so many of us and even on this board, we take quite a beating fairly frequently.

The "hand-wringing" comes from the fact that the changes were made ONLY to save money, not for any artistic or aesthetic reason. Then to add insult to that injury, Cameron and even ALW insist on treating the London show as if nothing has changed and any changes that were made were improvements, as if Prince and Bjornson's work could be improved upon.

Also, could you imagine anyone laughing at Maria's chandelier? I certainly could never."

I sure hope you are registered to vote, and care about this current election as much as you care about these minute physical details of a show you’re not involved with. It sounds as if you’re a disgruntled member of the Bjornson estate. Woof.

It’s a commercial endeavor that became unsustainable. Most businesses will execute cost-saving measures before giving up and folding altogether.

I’m rather happy that the show is still running in London and audiences are able to get some Phantom magic (no matter what percentage of the original production from nearly 40 years ago) as opposed to closing and being left with newly designed productions of arguable quality.

All four times I saw the Broadway production post-Covid (but pre-closing announcement) elicited chuckles and straight up laughs from various parts of the audience and various non-comedic parts of the show, but most notably the rickety chandelier being slowly yanked towards the stage at the end of act 1.

joevitus said: "the more money put into it, the larger the box office is likely to be"

That might be the case on Broadway or in London, but this is a tour, and a large percentage of seats will be pre-sold via subscriptions, and if you advertise that PHANTOM will be playing it's going to sell nearly the exact same number of tickets whether it's a karaoke track + a bare stage, or the Hal Prince production, or the Laurence Connor production, or something in between.

When I see some of the outrage here regarding the “changes” in this touring production, I get it. Now, I will say to the younger PHANTOM OF THE OPERA audience, who saw the production on Broadway pre-COVID and before the run finally closed on Broadway, your outrage is what some of us felt when a stripped-down production of SUNSET BOULEVARD opened on Broadway and became the “must see” show right now.

The original production of SUNSET BOULEVARD was every bit as elaborate as the original PHANTOM OF THE OPERA production was…maybe even more so. Since many of the younger members of this board never saw the original production of SUNSET BOULEVARD, they cannot compare it to the version now playing. So your reaction to this new PHANTOM production is understandable. Just realize that you have absolutely no idea what you missed by not being able to see the original production of SUNSET BOULEVARD. I thought the same thing when people were paying through the nose to see Glenn Close with scaffolding and a large orchestra in 2017.


I have not seen this new SUNSET BOULEVARD production, but I have listened to the new cast recording from start to finish at least 8 times now. It is fast becoming my favorite recording of the score. It is brilliant and, in my dreams, I wish I could see this current cast with the opulence of the original production!

RE: The London production, while it may no longer be the original production I think it's a pretty safe claim to suggest it's a carbon copy with some cost savings, right? What I don't understand is how can Cameron Mack (?)/ALW get away taking Hal Prince's name off the direction given these circumstances? Maybe it's not like this but I can't help but wonder whether they royally screwed him/his estate over but denying royalty payments....

Updated On: 11/2/24 at 05:54 AM