Phantom to change to "re-staged" production in flagship productions?- Page 18

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/14/21 at 2:49pm

Lunalaaaaaaaa said: "I thought Ben Crawford was basically confirmed already?"

He was, as were most of this cast. The Broadway production did not dismiss the pre-shutdown cast as CamMack did to the London cast, so virtually all of them are returning (yay!). The Christine alternate is really the only notable change.

 

Updated On: 9/14/21 at 02:49 PM

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/20/21 at 2:38pm

Some cast members are returning to The Majestic today to begin rehearsals of The Brilliant Original.



(Yes, I hate that it's from the movie, but it's all I could find.)

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 7:50am

A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production. 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 8:31am

Lot666 said: "A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production."

Sadly, I am not surprised. I knew it would only be a matter of time.

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 9:32am

bwayphreak234 said: "Lot666 said: "A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production."

Sadly, I am not surprised. I knew it would only be a matter of time."

I'm wondering how/when they will make the changes. As the show is scheduled to reopen next month, are they going to close it down again at some point to let Mackintosh shred it?

[saxpower]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 10:06am

Lot666 said: "bwayphreak234 said: "Lot666 said: "A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production."

Sadly, I am not surprised. I knew it would only be a matter of time."

I'm wondering how/when they will make the changes. As the show is scheduled toreopen next month, are they going to close it down again at some point to let Mackintosh shred it?"

The question is what type of changes?  I'd think if they were going to do something as wholesale as London they'd have done it during the shutdown.   I believe its been pointed out somewhere in this thread that some of the technology used in the original production is no longer being made- which may end up forcing some changes to adopt to new technology.  To use an analogy, at the time Phantom opened, Windows was in version 1 and the Mac OS was in version 4.   You can't even get a computer to run either of those today- while modern computers do things better, the user experience is different.  There may be similar situation with the original (or even previously updated) technolgy which force some sort of visual change. 

   The question to me (as a theatre goer) is the extent the changes will be noticeable to the audience in general (not those who might notice there's one less arm on one of the candelabras, for example).   I'm not doubting the original poster, just saying lets see what the "changes" are. 

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 10:55am

Lot666 said: "A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production."

I'm not opposed to some general technological updates with some of the effects. I've been saying for years the show would be improved with a faster chandelier fall that could include some sparks and better lighting to really 'up' the thrill factor. I think it could also be a great marketing tool to get people to come back and see the show. I can imagine the advertising oppurtunities - 'FALL for Phantom all over again' or 'You've never FALLEN like this!!!"

Updated On: 9/21/21 at 10:55 AM

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 11:03am

FANtomFollies said: "I'm not opposed to some general technological updates with some of the effects. I've been saying for years the show would be improved with a faster chandelier fall that could include some sparks and better lighting to really 'up' the thrill factor. I think it could also be a great marketing tool to get people to come back and see the show. I can imagine the advertising oppurtunities - 'FALL for Phantom all over again' or 'You've never FALLEN like this!!!""

I'm not at all opposed to modernizing technology to make the visual effects more seamless and impactful. I'm just concerned that Mackintosh will enact obvious removals/replacements, e.g., the proscenium figures and the descending angel.

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 11:29am

Lot666 said:
I'm not at all opposed to modernizing technology to make the visual effects more seamless and impactful. I'm just concerned that Mackintosh will enact obvious removals/replacements, e.g., the proscenium figures and the descending angel."

Yes I totally agree -those are my concerns as well. I will have to plan a return trip sooner than later because if Mac ever makes changes like that I will never be returning to see the production.

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 11:45am

Well, cutting down the orchestra to 14 players would be the easiest change and quite cost effective too. 

Fantom follies, suggestions like yours are pretty much what led to what's happened in London. The show is perfect the way it is, the way that Hal and Maria left it for us and if someone is enticed into seeing the show because the chandelier has sparks now, well, they can have my seat. And posts like this come up pretty much anytime Phantom is mentioned on this board, and with so many people seeing the new London version and saying "I barely noticed anything different!" it's no wonder that Cameron will now bulldoze the Broadway production and yes probably use a corny tagline like "Fall for the cheap new Phantom!  Now with 80% fewer royalties to pay each week!"  

The lighting used on the show and the fact that the parts and tech for it no longer exist are likely contenders for replacement. and while all the lighting rigs are down.....hey why don't we pull down all these heavy 1980's era Bjornson curtains and replace them with cheap flats?  

If ticket sales are depressed for months/years because of Covid, I am sure they show can take a week or two off to install whatever new things need to be installed. In 2008, they removed the entire proscenium and put it all back in the span of just 4 days to install the new sound system. So to replace the levitating Angel might just take the show's dark day to get done.  

Yes I am saddened that my beloved original Phantom is not long for this world, but I spent the better part of quarantine preparing myself for it. I have tix to see it at least 3 more times, which would make 77 times for me at the Majestic. 

It might actually be nice to plan a theater binge trip and not always have to leave a spot open for Phantom anymore.  

[The8re phan]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 11:52am

FANtomFollies said: "Lot666 said: "A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production."

I'm not opposed to some general technological updates with some of the effects. I've been saying for years the show would be improved with a faster chandelier fall that could include some sparks and better lighting to really 'up' the thrill factor. I think it could also be a great marketing tool to get people to come back and see the show. I can imagine the advertising oppurtunities - 'FALL for Phantom all over again' or 'You've never FALLEN like this!!!""

 

Yes, this is all well and good. And yes, let's bring this technically up-to-date on what's behind the curtain.  But we all know that Cam Mac has aleterior motives for these 'reductions'.  He is wanting to nullify any contractual obligations and get out of paying royalties to the original designers. Because he just hasn't made nearly enough off their work for the past 30 years.............  

 

To be honest, I'm shocked he hasn't tried to re-stage this show with a new composer :/

Updated On: 9/21/21 at 11:52 AM

[saxpower]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 12:35pm

The8re phan said: "FANtomFollies said: "Lot666 said: "A reliable source (sorry, cannot name names) has informed me that changes are coming to the Broadway production."

I'm not opposed to some general technological updates with some of the effects. I've been saying for years the show would be improved with a faster chandelier fall that could include some sparks and better lighting to really 'up' the thrill factor. I think it could also be a great marketing tool to get people to come back and see the show. I can imagine the advertising oppurtunities - 'FALL for Phantom all over again' or 'You've never FALLEN like this!!!""



Yes, this is all well and good. And yes, let's bring this technically up-to-date on what's behind the curtain. But we all know that Cam Mac has aleterior motives for these 'reductions'. He is wanting to nullify any contractual obligations and get out ofpayingroyalties to the original designers.Because he just hasn't made nearly enough off their workfor the past 30 years.............



To be honest, I'm shocked he hasn't tried to re-stage this show with a new composer :/"

There's probably some reason the London changes were not made to the Broadway version.   Part of it may have to do with the contracts over here and what right/say the interested parties have in such matters.  I'm assuming ALW may have more power here and the Shuberts have more power than was given to the owners of Her Majesty's at the time of opening [Really Useful Group owns it now, but were not parties to the original contracts].  My recollection of ALW's response to the closing of the London production was that he wasn't happy with it but couldn't stop it. 

There may also be differences between US and UK contract law which make Mackintosh's London actions impractical here.   There is a requirement of "good faith" in any contract in the US. Closing a production then essentially opening a new production of the same show as a means to get out of contractual obligations may not work here. 

All that to say- if he wanted to and had the power to, Mackintosh could have done the same thing here.  Hopefully, the fact the changes weren't made indicates they are not as easily made here- which hopefully means any changes are not as dramatic (no pun intended). 

BTW- I do recall one of the ads for Phantom reopening noting it has the largest orchestra on Broadway.  If they are using this fact for promo, they may be hesitent to change it,. 

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 1:11pm

Saxpower I agree with everything you said, but those ads about Phantom's orchestra, were they put out by the production or were they added by Playbill, BWW, etc to the press release? 

And Lot666, since you have an insider giving you classified info, is there any way you could find out for us what the changes involve?  

[Lot666]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 2:43pm

Phantom4ever said: "Saxpower I agree with everything you said, but those ads about Phantom's orchestra, were they put out by the production or were they added by Playbill, BWW, etc to the press release?

And Lot666, since you have an insider giving you classified info, is there any way you could find out for us what the changes involve?"

I've already poked for details and gotten none, although I did specifically ask about the orchestra and was advised that it was remaining intact, but it wasn't 100% clear whether that meant for good, or for now. This is a show that I've seen literally every time I've been to New York, and I agree with the individual above who said that changes like those in London will compel me to abandon it. I can't bear the thought of seeing a hacked up, cheapened production. I'll keep my memories if it comes to that.

Updated On: 9/21/21 at 02:43 PM

[cwilliams]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 4:23pm

It would take more than one month, Phantom opens on Oct.22nd, to load out the original production, build and install the new sets, (the new London version is using sets that were already built for the new tour) complete the tech process with actors,,etc...Now, could I see the show closing in a year or two and then being revived in a scaled down version in a smaller house like was done with Les Miz, Cats, and Miss Saigon? yes 

[Phantom4ever]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 5:10pm

Yeah CWilliams that sounds more likely and just the kind of tricky marketing campaign CM would go for. Say that Phantom's ticket sales are too low to continue. Announce the closing. It'll make everyone sad. As the closing gets closer, Cameron will announce that he has miraculous found a way to "save" Phantom and that it'll re-open at the Broadhurst or somewhere like that. He will put out a press release saying that he found a way to keep Phantom open (and oh by the way there will be the tiniest of cuts to the show but overall it will be spectacular and new for the 21st century)  Everybody will be so thrilled that Phantom is returning (except for some old lame phanatics on some message board smh) that they will forgive the SLIGHT (no Angel, no Bjornson curtains and drapes, half the orchestra, a horse onstage, a bare proscenium) changes. And the legions of tourists will love the show, this board will love the show because now the chandelier has sparks! And we phanatics will occasionally walk past the Majestic (or Broadhurst) and cast some side eye, sigh, and keep on walking. 

[saxpower]

Posted: 9/21/21 at 11:47pm

Phantom4ever said: "Saxpower I agree with everything you said, but those ads about Phantom's orchestra, were they put out by the production or were they added by Playbill, BWW, etc to the press release?

And Lot666, since you have an insider giving you classified info, is there any way you could find out for us what the changes involve?"

  To my best recollection it was an ad.  I looked at Playbill, BWW, etc coverage of the cast announcement and all used substantially the same language (suggesting it was copied fro a press release), which included the fact the full orchestra remains. 

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 9/27/21 at 10:01pm

I just bought a ticket for Thursday, November 4th at 7pm. There isn't a matinee that day, so I'm wondering if anyone knows if I'll be seeing Meghan Picerno or Emilie Kouatchou as Christine?

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 10/1/21 at 2:36pm

Several non-premium seats just opened up for Phantom's re-opening performance! For anyone interested in attending...

[chrishuyen]

Posted: 10/1/21 at 3:05pm

GreasedLightning said: "Several non-premium seats just opened up for Phantom's re-opening performance! For anyone interested in attending..."

THANK YOU! I was hoping some seats would open up and I was just able to grab rear mezzanine!

[GreasedLightning]

Posted: 10/1/21 at 6:01pm

chrishuyen said: "GreasedLightning said: "Several non-premium seats just opened up for Phantom's re-opening performance! For anyone interested in attending..."

THANK YOU! I was hoping some seats would open up and I was just able to grab rear mezzanine!"

You are so welcome! 

[sparksatmidnight]

Posted: 10/1/21 at 10:32pm

May I ask something to the superphans in this thread?

 

How do you feel about international replica productions (like the 2018 Brazilian revival) that uses basically the same set, choreography, costumes and direction? It has a faster chandelier and modernized tech  behind the scenes, but everything is (I assume) just like Hal Prince and Maria Bjornson wanted to (down to the angel). What if they were to replace the original, allegedelly worn Broadway sets by one of those productions?

 

On a kinda side note that just gets my curiosity going, many costumes from replica productions aren't exactly equal while still somewhat obeying the original designs. Do you feel like that's cheating and they all should be exact like Maria Bjornson left them for the opening night or it's all valid?

[Lot666]

Posted: 10/2/21 at 2:24pm

sparksatmidnight said: "May I ask something to the superphans in this thread?

How do you feel about international replica productions (like the 2018 Brazilian revival) that uses basically the same set, choreography, costumes and direction? It has a faster chandelier and modernized tech behind the scenes, but everything is (I assume) just like Hal Prince and Maria Bjornson wanted to (down to the angel). What if they were to replace the original, allegedelly worn Broadway sets by one of those productions?

On a kinda side note that just gets my curiosity going, many costumes from replica productions aren't exactly equal while still somewhat obeying the original designs. Do you feel like that's cheating and they all should be exact like Maria Bjornson left them for the opening night or it's all valid?"

I've said before that I have no problem with updating technology to make things work more smoothly, efficiently, and safely. For example, I'm all for a more thrilling chandelier descent if such a thing can be achieved safely via contemporary technology. However, I draw the line at removing set pieces and costumes designed so lovingly and painstakingly by Maria Bjornson and replacing them with cheap-looking knock-offs or completely different manifestations (e.g., scrapping the descending angel and shoving a Pegasus figure out onto the stage instead).

IMHO, any proposed changes should have to pass one simple test: Will this make the show look and feel different to the audience? If the answer is yes, then the proposal should be abandoned. For example, if a light fixture can be replaced with a new, more reliable type that consumes less energy and generates less heat, but will still exude the same gothic atmosphere which Hal and Maria worked so hard to produce, then by all means do it. However, if the light produced by the new fixture is lurid and diminishes the intentional gloom specified by the original creatives, then the proposed change should be aborted.

Updated On: 10/2/21 at 02:24 PM

[FANtomFollies]

Posted: 10/3/21 at 10:00am

As a fellow 'Super-phan' I agree 100% with everything Lot666 said. I truly feel that Maria and Hal would have loved to have a faster chandelier fall when the show opened, if the technology had allowed. 

[cwilliams]

Posted: 10/3/21 at 10:05am

Phantom's broadway site has been updated, the creative team section now includes the individuals involved in the new London version, not sure what that means, but I assume with only a few weeks left to go before opening, if the Broadway production was being scaled down it would have been reported on by now. I mean, that would be news worthy right?