Phantom to change to "re-staged" production in flagship productions? — Page 22

Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.

#526

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/20/21 at 7:45pm

Tag said: "saxpower said: "Well, there's one change in the script right there "Lott 666, a chandalier until recently believed destroyed" instead of "Lot 666, a chandalier in pieces" Relatively minor change. They don't say anthing about it being "wired for the new electric light", but that may have just been an edut for the video."

It might just be a tongue in cheek thing they did for the voiceover on this video."

They changed this line in the London production as well, but the auctioneer still says, “Our workshops have restored it and fitted parts of it with wiring for the new electric light…”.

“I am furious, but I am sailing.”

#527

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/21/21 at 2:59pm

Tag said: "saxpower said: "Well, there's one change in the script right there "Lott 666, a chandalier until recently believed destroyed" instead of "Lot 666, a chandalier in pieces" Relatively minor change. They don't say anthing about it being "wired for the new electric light", but that may have just been an edut for the video."

It might just be a tongue in cheek thing they did for the voiceover on this video."

I'm 99% certain this is a definite change. I was told by an inside source that the auctioneer's lines about the chandelier had been updated.

==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage

#528

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/21/21 at 4:53pm

Lot666 said: "Tag said: "saxpower said: "Well, there's one change in the script right there "Lott 666, a chandalier until recently believed destroyed" instead of "Lot 666, a chandalier in pieces" Relatively minor change. They don't say anthing about it being "wired for the new electric light", but that may have just been an edut for the video."

It might just be a tongue in cheek thing they did for the voiceover on this video."

I'm 99% certain this is a definite change. I was told by an inside source that the auctioneer's lines about the chandelier had been updated."

It's a definite change. The script they're using was done for the most recent (and prematurely aborted) UK tour that falsely claimed it was identical to the Broadway/original London productions but in fact was a hybrid of the Connor tour and the Hal Prince original (and a variant of that is now what has replaced the original London production).

The reason for the change is that the chandelier that Cameron Mackintosh devised for the new UK tour did not rise from the stage, and neither was the one they were going to use for the new London production. Instead it was going to hang low over the audience in the stalls (orchestra) and then do a little rise up, with the drapes sucked into the chandelier itself. But that was abandoned and I understand ALW had something to do with that as he wanted the chandelier to rise from the stage.

#529

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/21/21 at 5:06pm

The Scorpion said: "Lot666 said: "Tag said: "saxpower said: "Well, there's one change in the script right there "Lott 666, a chandalier until recently believed destroyed" instead of "Lot 666, a chandalier in pieces" Relatively minor change. They don't say anthing about it being "wired for the new electric light", but that may have just been an edut for the video."

It might just be a tongue in cheek thing they did for the voiceover on this video."

I'm 99% certain this is a definite change. I was told by an inside source that the auctioneer's lines about the chandelier had been updated."

It's a definite change. The script they're using was done for the most recent (and prematurely aborted) UK tour that falsely claimed it was identical to the Broadway/original London productions but in fact was a hybrid of the Connor tour and the Hal Prince original (and a variant of that is now what has replaced the original London production).

The reason for the change is that the chandelier that Cameron Mackintosh devised for the new UK tour did not rise from the stage, and neither was the one they were going to use for the new London production. Instead it was going to hang low over the audience in the stalls (orchestra) and then do a little rise up, with the drapes sucked into the chandelier itself. But that was abandoned and I understand ALW had something to do with that as he wanted the chandelier to rise from the stage."

Two thoughts:

First, seems like ALW may keep the changes from getting too bad. As I've said before, I'm not sure how much control he has here vs. in London. I actually take the fact he came over here for the reopening as reassuring.

Second, and its not that I'm doubting the poster, but making the change the chandalier from being "in pieces" to "until recently believed destroyed" make any sense for CM's attempted change. The opera house is supposed to be long-closed. If it was "believed destroyed" it wasn't being used when the opera house initially closed. So why bother hanging it again? (Yes, "in pieces" doesn't work for that either but find some other line.... "A chandelier from the opera house's glory days" or something like that.)

#530

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/22/21 at 2:40pm

saxpower said: "The Scorpion said: "Lot666 said: "Tag said: "saxpower said: "Well, there's one change in the script right there "Lott 666, a chandalier until recently believed destroyed" instead of "Lot 666, a chandalier in pieces" Relatively minor change. They don't say anthing about it being "wired for the new electric light", but that may have just been an edut for the video."

It might just be a tongue in cheek thing they did for the voiceover on this video."

I'm 99% certain this is a definite change. I was told by an inside source that the auctioneer's lines about the chandelier had been updated."

It's a definite change. The script they're using was done for the most recent (and prematurely aborted) UK tour that falsely claimed it was identical to the Broadway/original London productions but in fact was a hybrid of the Connor tour and the Hal Prince original (and a variant of that is now what has replaced the original London production).

The reason for the change is that the chandelier that Cameron Mackintosh devised for the new UK tour did not rise from the stage, and neither was the one they were going to use for the new London production. Instead it was going to hang low over the audience in the stalls (orchestra) and then do a little rise up, with the drapes sucked into the chandelier itself. But that was abandoned and I understand ALW had something to do with that as he wanted the chandelier to rise from the stage."

Two thoughts:

First, seems like ALW may keep the changes from getting too bad. As I've said before, I'm not sure how much control he has here vs. in London. I actually take the fact he came over here for the reopening as reassuring.

Second, and its not that I'm doubting the poster, but making the change the chandalier from being "in pieces" to "until recently believed destroyed" make any sense for CM's attempted change. The opera house is supposed to be long-closed. If it was "believed destroyed" it wasn't being used when the opera house initially closed. So why bother hanging it again? (Yes, "in pieces" doesn't work for that either but find some other line.... "A chandelier from the opera house's glory days" or something like that.)"

I believe ALW has more control over the Broadway production, where the split is 70 (ALW) versus 30 (CM). I'm not sure what the split is in London.

I think I may have jumped the gun in thinking Seth's present wouldn't mean too drastic changes. Reports from the dress rehearsal indicate quite a few staging changes, including (unfortunately IMHO, as this was one of my favourite bits) the excision of the doubles in the title song, with the ballet girls roaming around instead when the title song starts. To me that deprives the show of one of its 'WOW' moments and destroys some of the cinematic fluidity of that sequence. Hal Prince said that one scene had to start before the other finished, so difficult to see how this change achieves that.

Re the chandelier, the new one that they use in London (and which wasn't originally intended to land on/rise from the stage) isn't collapsible like Maria Björnson's original. Hence "in pieces" doesn't work for it.

Updated On: 10/22/21 at 02:40 PM

#531

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/23/21 at 12:13pm

There is a live discount link for Phantom tickets into next year. It's been mailed to out of state fans.

https://us.thephantomoftheopera.com/mail/

#532

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/23/21 at 4:19pm

The "electric lighting" dialogue is there. I think the "believe destroyed" dialogue does make sense: the chandelier crashed and was replaced, so it would make sense to think it had been destroyed and then only recently discovered to have been stored somewhere.

Some of the changes are difficult to assign as a " directorial change" or "actor choice." The "enhanced" comedic moments seemed to basically make the moments that were already meant to be funny "pop" more, so there doesn't seem anything to worry about in that regard. I didn't mind the change with Raoul passing the ballet girls and Mme. Giry... though it doesn't add anything new. It did seem like they enhanced Mme. Giry a little bit.

The pandemic almost seemed necessary in order to refresh the show.

#533

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/23/21 at 7:59pm

Fosse76 said:
'The pandemic almost seemed necessary in order to refresh the show."

WTF? Tell that to the families of the 736K who died in this country. This show has been running on Broadway since 1986. If the powers that be wanted to refresh the show over the years, they would have found a way. If you really believe your comment, you have no humanity.

#534

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/23/21 at 8:51pm

A Director said: "Fosse76 said:
'The pandemic almost seemed necessary in order to refresh the show."

WTF? Tell that to the families of the 736K who died in this country. This show has been running on Broadway since 1986. If the powers that be wanted to refresh the show over the years, they would have found a way. If you really believe your comment, you have no humanity."

I was being a bit facetious. Grow up.

#535

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/23/21 at 9:57pm

Did anyone notice the chandelier falling more slowly? I personally didn't but overheard a few people saying they did.

#536

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/23/21 at 10:10pm

Well I've seen it twice now, once from the mezz and once from the orchestra and I do not think the chandelier fell any slower or faster than before. A Director, I get what you're saying, but it was pretty clear Fosse wasn't suggesting it was worth all of the pandemic death in order to have an updated Phantom---that's quite a stretch. Also, it's been on Broadway since 1988, not 1986.

#537

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 12:08pm

Interesting article in Reuters about the rehearsal process and some of the changes made

"For the returning cast, there were tweaks to lyrics and staging to learn, making it more straightforward to cast non-white actors in principal roles."

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/broadways-phantom-opera-plots-cautious-return-stage-2021-10-24/

#538

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 1:32pm

I love that the changes to accommodate casting non-white actors were so slight, if Phantom can do it, so can so many others!

"Hey little girls, look at all the men in shiny shirts and no wives!" - Jackie Hoffman, Xanadu, 19 Feb 2008

#539

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 1:58pm

anonanimal1218 said: "Interesting article in Reuters about the rehearsal process and some of the changes made

"For the returning cast, there were tweaks to lyrics and staging to learn, making it more straightforward to cast non-white actors in principal roles."

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/broadways-phantom-opera-plots-cautious-return-stage-2021-10-24/"

Some of these make sense, like the lyric change from "your face, Christine, it's white!" to "Christine, are you alright?" and that is why the title song doubles were taken out, because they don't have a diverse enough cast to have doubles that match when Emilie is on... which is just disappointing on a lot of fronts.

Some, like the complete mirroring of the blocking of AIAOY seem superfluous, though the average person obviously wouldn't notice that they start walking stage left instead of stage right at certain points. It is admittedly jarring to hear "I had rather hoped we'd be so blessed" "Why of course, sir!" instead of "I had rather hoped that you would come" and "Be my guest, sir"

I'm not a huge fan of the revamped blocking at the end of PONR, but maybe they'll grown into it and I'll like it more when Emilie does it or something.

#540

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 2:54pm

labellaragazza1 said: Some of these make sense, like the lyric change from "your face, Christine, it's white!" to "Christine, are you alright?" and that is why the title song doubles were taken out, because they don't have a diverse enough cast to have doubles that match when Emilie is on... which is just disappointing on a lot of fronts."

What did they do when Robert Guillaume or Norm were in it?

#541

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 3:33pm

labellaragazza1 said: "Some of these make sense, like the lyric change from "your face, Christine, it's white!" to "Christine, are you alright?"

Meg is telling her she looks pale. She's not being literal. Ever hear the idiom "white as a ghost" used to describe some who has the look of fear? Do we now have to spoonfeed the public?

and that is why the title song doubles were taken out, because they don't have a diverse enough cast to have doubles that match when Emilie is on... which is just disappointing on a lot of fronts.

As you imply, that's an issue with casting. The doubles were underlit for the purpose of hiding the fact that they were doubles. I doubt "diverse" leads was the true reason for cutting them.

Some, like the complete mirroring of the blocking of AIAOY seem superfluous, though the average person obviously wouldn't notice that they start walking stage left instead of stage right at certain points.

Long running shows often revisit the blocking of certain moments. Whether or not the change works is an entirely different matter. Perhaps it was decided they wanted them to move around the stage a little more.

It is admittedly jarring to hear "I had rather hoped we'd be so blessed" "Why of course, sir!" instead of "I had rather hoped that you would come" and "Be my guest, sir"

These cosmetic changes are baffling. The average tourist won't notice, and it doesn’t really hurt the "poetry of the flow of the dialogue/lyrics (unlike most of the changes to Miss Saigon). Which makes one ask, why?

I'm not a huge fan of the revamped blocking at the end of PONR, but maybe they'll grown into it and I'll like it more when Emilie does it or something."

Are you referring to the reveal? I think it makes more sense...I always found it odd they would back off and not go in to protect her.

Updated On: 10/27/21 at 03:33 PM

#542

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 5:59pm

Tag said: "labellaragazza1 said:Some of these make sense, like the lyric change from "your face, Christine, it's white!" to "Christine, are you alright?" and that is why the title song doubles were taken out, because they don't have a diverse enough cast to have doubles that match when Emilie is on... which is just disappointing on a lot of fronts."

What did they do when Robert Guillaume or Norm were in it?

"

No idea, but I’ve just heard that as a possible reason for the change.

Fosse, I mean the part on the bench where she feels his mask and he kind of scampers off a bit then they sing “The bridge is crossed” and she sort of grab hugs him? Then reveals him? I like her staying on and I waving them away.

Updated On: 10/27/21 at 05:59 PM

#543

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 6:08pm

I only saw Norm once, but from the mid-mezz, if I hadn't known better, it was very hard to tell that the double wasn't Norm. I'm not sure if it was distance or they'd added more fog or what (and I've seen Phantom many times).

P.S. I'm now remembering, from Miss Saigon, that "stop drooling, white boy" became "farm boy" if the actor playing John was also white. Not great, but fine. Things change! Theatre doesn't have to sit in monoethnic amber.

"This thread reads like a series of White House memos." — Mister Matt

Updated On: 10/27/21 at 06:08 PM

#544

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/27/21 at 10:29pm

Yeah I saw Norm many times from the first couple rows and it never even entered my mind to think "wait a minute! that Phantom on the top of that travelator and the one who just went into that trapdoor were WHITE!" Christine does show a lot more skin. But still. Put it back the way it was, Seth. Daisy Prince---you gotta hook us up here!

#545

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/28/21 at 10:11am

labellaragazza1 said: "Some of these make sense, like the lyric change from "your face, Christine, it's white!" to "Christine, are you alright?"

Good point.

labellaragazza1 said: "and that is why the title song doubles were taken out, because they don't have a diverse enough cast to have doubles that match when Emilie is on"

I'm not sure it's necessary for the doubles' skin color to match those of the leads. I saw Norm Lewis twice from the first few rows of center orchestra and never detected anything jarring during the descent to the lair. I think the blocking and lighting design sufficiently concealed any such inconsistencies from the audience.

labellaragazza1 said: "It is admittedly jarring to hear "I had rather hoped we'd be so blessed" "Why of course, sir!" instead of "I had rather hoped that you would come" and "Be my guest, sir"

This lyric change is one of the most egregious and pointless. Does anyone have any idea what this was intended to accomplish?

==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage

#546

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/28/21 at 10:46am

I don't have any inside information but my guess is that someone behind the scenes was nitpicking the lyrics and really wanted it to be an ABAB rhyme. Guest/blessed, delight/night. And then maybe they got rid of "be my guest" because he had just said "guest".

Elsewhere they also changed "applause" to "encores" so it rhymed better with "yours", and other similar small grammar police-y adjustments, so this tracks.

#547

Phantom to change to

Posted: 10/28/21 at 11:59am

^ ALW and co. are notorious for that; Jim Steinman kvetched numerous times about his insistence on perfect rhymes when writing Whistle Down the Wind, and how he'd had to fight to keep a few false or near rhymes in there, and Tim Rice has famously gone back to JCS several times to refine rhyme-schemes.

Formerly gvendo2005
Broadway Legend
joined: 5/1/05

Blocked: After Eight, suestorm, david_fick, emlodik, lovebwy, Dave28282, joevitus, BorisTomashevsky, Seb28

#548

Phantom to change to

Posted: 11/5/21 at 3:28pm

How would you feel if this version of the overture, with its authentic percussion instruments replacing the vintage 80s drum machine and synths, was used in the Broadway production? Gorgeous, or blasphemous?

==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene"
- Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage

Updated On: 11/5/21 at 03:28 PM

#549

Phantom to change to

Posted: 11/6/21 at 1:51pm

Lot666 said: "How would you feel if this version of the overture, with its authentic percussion instruments replacing the vintage 80s drum machine and synths, was used in the Broadway production? Gorgeous, or blasphemous?

That probably wouldn’t work very well imo.

#550

Phantom to change to

Posted: 11/7/21 at 1:26pm

I’ve been friendly with and know the woman who has been credited as the associate scenic designer for the Broadway production when it came to Broadway (as well as all the subsequent sit downs the show had in its hay day.) She and I were talking and she said that the new production was one she came up with about 20 years ago for the us tour. They were looking for a way to tour the show that could fit smaller markets as well as big ones. That never came into fruition but that is the basis of the new physical production in London.

← Back to Message Board ← Back to The Phantom of the Opera Board

View all Videos

Tickets From $59

Tickets From $71