Phantom of the Opera Returns!

[brdwybound04]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:17am

Touring North America beginning Fall 2025… will be based on the original staging and costumes…

http://www.theatermania.com/news/phantom-of-the-opera-will-tour-again-in-new-production-based-on-original-staging_1754556/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1sYkmp5vuLSz7RJpGcGCBpMJ9cc0S0Np3EkP47RDBb7MU6GfX9Pqak-XQ_aem_xvfixOge-00vuqbWZX4fCQ

[Dylan Smith4]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:28am

The current West End production is NOT the original Hal Prince production. That version is now a thing of history. 

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:39am

Dylan Smith4 said: "The current West End production is NOT the original Hal Prince production. That version is now a thing of history."

Indeed, and it's really sad. While it is "based" on it, it is not the same and reflects our times (not in a good way). No matter what ALW tries to tell you, Cameron Mackintosh is clear that this is a new version. No proscenium statues, reduced fog/candles, cheaper and less elaborate costumes, painted flats instead of sweeping curtains, a decimated orchestra (with some really bad reorchestration in some parts of the second act), garish lighting, and some really stupid staging choices.

Admittedly if you only ever saw Phantom a long time ago and once, then you might not notice.

I don't like what Cameron did to the show but at least he's honest about it, unlike his co-producer (i.e. the composer).

Anyone expecting the lushness of the original with Hal Prince's and Maria's Björnson's full-bodied 19th-century eroticism will be disappointed. This is Phantom gone plastic.

I have no doubt this will go to Broadway as soon as the tour's over. Updated On: 11/1/24 at 08:39 AM

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:39am

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. 

[The Scorpion]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:42am

Phantom4ever said: "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."

They might try to repurpose the hideous Laurence Connor version's chandelier as I don't think the intention is to have the chandelier rise from the stage any more in the touring versions.

As far as tours go this is OK but replacing the original with this and pretending nothing had changed in London left a bad taste.

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:46am

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

[Lot666]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 8:57am

Phantom4ever said: "I can't wait to see what the chandelier looks like."

The Scorpion said: "I don't think the intention is to have the chandelier rise from the stage any more in the touring versions."

The BroadwayWorld version of this article quotes Mackintosh as saying:

"in just a year’s time, when we raise our even more sensational chandelier, you can once again thrill to Andrew’s soaring music of the night and be swept away by a revitalized PHANTOM in all its glory!” 

Use of the word "raise" suggests to me that the chandelier will rise and fall, and I expect it will be a replica of the round one in the current London production so that he doesn't have to pay Maria's estate.

<sigh> At least it won't be Mackintosh's "reimagined" touring production from several years ago.
 

Updated On: 11/1/24 at 08:57 AM

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 9:08am

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

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 9:26am

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

[sbflyfan]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 10:19am

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

[joevitus]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 10:25am

The Scorpion said: "Dylan Smith4 said: "The current West End production is NOT the original Hal Prince production. That version is now a thing of history."

Indeed, and it's really sad. While it is "based" on it, it is not the same and reflects our times (not in a good way). No matter what ALW tries to tell you, Cameron Mackintosh is clear that this is a new version. No proscenium statues, reduced fog/candles, cheaper and less elaborate costumes, painted flats instead of sweeping curtains, a decimated orchestra (with some really bad reorchestration in some parts of the second act), garish lighting, and some really stupid staging choices.

Admittedly if you only ever saw Phantom a long time ago and once, then you might not notice.

I don't like what Cameron did to the show but at least he's honest about it, unlike his co-producer (i.e. the composer).

Anyone expecting the lushness of the original with Hal Prince's and Maria's Björnson's full-bodied 19th-century eroticism will be disappointed. This is Phantom gone plastic.

I have no doubt this will go to Broadway as soon as the tour's over."

What baffles me about this is that these two are so incredibly wealthy--and neither of them will be spending their own money (that's not what producers do). Yet this show hangs on spectacle, and the more money put into it, the larger the box office is likely to be. It's an entirely win-win. But I guess all they can see is a wider margin between cost and profit for themselves personally. Just strikes me as staggeringly misguided. And I say this as one who isn't remotely a fan of the show. It's just common sense. 

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 10:42am

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. 

[Smaxie]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 11:05am

Agree with you, Giants. I saw the West End production a couple of months ago on a whim after not seeing the show in decades and it looks and sounds wonderful. Overall, I think two set pieces looked different to me, but it was still an incredibly lavish affair. Moreover, the three principal actors were giving it their all, with a particularly energized and empowered Christine. I don't know what all the hand-wringing on this thread is about. 

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 12:37pm

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

[Fosse76]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 3:52pm

Lot666 said: "Use of the word "raise" suggests to me that the chandelier will rise and fall, and I expect it will be a replica of the round one in the current London production so that he doesn't have to pay Maria's estate."

Isn't she also the credited designer of this "new" production as well? So she is getting paid. Even if she isn't, someone *is* getting paid for the designs. They aren't free. 

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 4:05pm

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. 

[Smaxie]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 5:06pm

I know there are differences. But the economics of the show as originally staged are no longer sustainable. Mackintosh, in a piece in the NY Times in 2022 said that the running costs on Broadway had risen to $950,000 a week, $100,000 more than it had been pre-pandemic, and national and international tourism is still not back to pre-pandemic numbers. I think what's on stage in London is still more lavish and luxe than almost any other show out there. It appears from the announcement today that the road will be getting that version, so I think it's worth celebrating, rather than bemoaning what is no longer the same. 

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 5:49pm

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.

[QueenTwinnied]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 10:51pm

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."

Mighty annoying maybe. I'm so glad this show closed and couldn't care less what version goes out for the umpteenth tour.

[ErmengardeStopSniveling]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 11:33pm

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.

[Flyboy_46259]

Posted: 11/1/24 at 11:45pm

I've been hyper fixated on the Phantom set, costumes, and special effects since I was 9 and I am now 31. Phantom as a whole was like watching a living museum. For me, the creeky sets and slow chandelier were what made it historic. 

I still remember my first time seeing Phantom at the Majestic when I was 14 and going to the Ben and Jerry's nearby after the show. Multiple people who had just goten out of Phantom were making fun of how dated it was. They were upset about the loud sets, swinging angel, and slow chandelier. They kept saying how much more epic the movie was ( I obviously disagree). 

I also remember going multiple times during the years before Covid and having the ushers move us so only the first half of the orchestra was filled. That happened multiple times. I genuinely remember not being worried about it closing, because I figured if attendance was this bad and it was still going, then money was not object. I would rather take the scaled down updated Phantom than no Phantom at all. We have already lost the historic museum worthy Phantom, even bringing it back in its original state diminishes that. The greatest shame is that there is no official high quality recording of the production. It's a shame my younger family members will associate the new staging as what Phantom has always been. 

 

Updated On: 11/1/24 at 11:45 PM

[MichelleCraig]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 1:04am

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! 

[AKarp2013]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 1:40am

So what are we thinking? Tour from 2025-2027, reopen on Broadway for the 40th anniversary of the original Broadway production? I see that being the end goal. And I have zero qualms if it's essentially the current production in London.

If it were to return to Broadway, would they try to reclaim the Majestic? Maybe a house with not as many seats to try and fill? If not the Majestic, I could see them slipping it right into the Imperial quite easily.

[binau]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 5:54am

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

[Pernigraniline]

Posted: 11/2/24 at 6:23am

Flyboy_46259 said: "I The greatest shame is that there is no official high quality recording of the production. 

"

There are several, just not totally in the public domain. Theres several proshots of London at least held by CamMac/RUG, large chunks of which were released on the POTO film DVD as extras in the documentary, and the OLC has a large amount of filmed footage.