Whenever Broadway first comes back, shows that need tourists (and Phantom is at the front of that line) will not be among them. My guess: Spring '22 if ever. (It's not clear if these evergreen shows will be a part of the new normal.)
IF it comes back, while it is true that the load out/in costs are much higher in NY, it would nonetheless pay for itself. (Assuming the show doesn't come back and fall flat on its face, an assumption that Cam would not indulge.)
Ben Crawford has no idea, and even if he did, if he jumped the gun, he'd be kicked to the curb. (He wouldn't, so he won't be.)
I think Broadway is safe because they don't have a 'modern' replica 9n the US just sitting there and ready to load in like they did in the UK. So, besides load out and load in, they would also have to front a whole new production out of nowhere. Unless they take one of the replicas in storage (like the one that was in Brazil until 2019 -- I don't think it was sent to any other country), but those are also on the older side, so I don't see the benefit of replacing it.
HogansHero said: "IF it comes back, while it is true that the load out/in costs are much higher in NY, it would nonetheless pay for itself. (Assuming the show doesn't come back and fall flat on its face, an assumption that Cam would not indulge.)"
Phantom is not as profitable as it once was. And a significant percentage of its audience is foreign tourists and school groups. Without a stop clause, it's up to ALW and CM how much of a loss they would bear if they managed to reopen as-is.
Also, it should be noted that Broadway shows don't have what would be considered a lease (i.e., they aren't renting a space in a typical tenant-landlord fashion). They can't simply just load out an old set and then load in a new one. It could take several months if not a year to recoup a new set and the load out, load in costs. And the notoriously cheap Shubert Organization likely would not permit it (it would certainly reduce their financial benefit).
Fosse76 said: "Also, it should be noted that Broadway shows don't have what would be considered a lease (i.e., they aren't renting a space in a typical tenant-landlord fashion). They can't simply just load out an old set and then load in a new one. It could take several months if not a yearto recoup a new set and the load out, load in costs. And the notoriously cheap Shubert Organization likely would not permit it (it would certainly reduce their financial benefit)."
I am not following everything you are saying here. Perhaps something is missing?
I am of course aware how the relationship is structured but how does that relate to the time it would cost to recoup the load-out/in etc? (I agree with your timeline.) Also, since this work would presumably be done at a time when there were no shows running, it would be revenue neutral to the Shuberts. I think, btw, that it is going to be several years before stop clauses are ever spoken of again in the theatre district, and of course no one would ever mention one to CM or ALW regardless. I think tenants (or licensees if you prefer) are going to be in the driver's seat for quite a while.
Phantom4ever said: "The real question is what this means for New York. Has anybody seen a loadout at the Majestic? There is still more than enough time to do the same changes in New York even if Broadway really does reopen in June. I'm still hoping against hope that they somehow spare the Broadway production this horrible fate."
Broadway is still untouched since the shut-down. At the moment no loadout has taken place nor is there a planned one. Obviously that's very much just at the moment.
I have no information one way or the other, but one would not expect this transition to take place until there is a firm date for reopening. Why? Because if you did any work now, it would then sit and deteriorate which would necessitate more expense and effort.
sparksatmidnight said: "I think Broadway is safe because they don't have a 'modern' replica 9n the US just sitting there and ready to load in like they did in the UK. So, besides load out and load in, they would also have to front a whole new production out of nowhere. Unless they take one of the replicas in storage (like the one that was in Brazil until 2019 -- I don't think it was sent to any other country), but those are also on the older side, so I don't see the benefit of replacing it."
I can easily see CamMack using the last U.S. tour production elements. If this happens, I'm done.
==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene" - Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
Lot666 said: I can easily see CamMack using the last U.S. tour production elements. If this happens, I'm done."
Can it with that tour, will you? You've been all over this thread talking about that widely hated tour despite people saying that it wasn't going to happen, now it's confirmed that isn't going to happen and you still won't shut up about it. Geez, stop being overfixated on it.
sparksatmidnight said: "Lot666 said: I can easily see CamMack using the last U.S. tour production elements. If this happens, I'm done."
Can it with that tour, will you? You've been all over this thread talking about that widely hated tour despite people saying that it wasn't going to happen, now it's confirmed that isn't going to happen and you still won't shut up about it. Geez, stop being overfixated on it."
What are you going on about? No one has "confirmed" anything.
==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene" - Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
This new video about to load-out and “update” of the theater/show is very interesting. I look forward to seeing what they do with the theater itself...
I just recently spent a whole night revisiting Phantom via YouTube for the first time in ages. I have also seen ads that place the show's reopening in London for later this year. I then remembered that there was a special U.K. tour that was advertised as "The Brilliant Original" that folded after having played its premiere venue due to the pandemic. At the time, I had searched and searched for reviews and video clips, and photographs of that new tour but failed to find anything that satisfied my curiosity about it. Was it a scaled down version that remained true to the original designs and direction? Was it yet another one of Cammacks's money grubbing schemes, which means a vastly inferior version that he touts as "an inprovement over the original' that HE created? I never got the answers I was looking for.
There are so many full performances of the show on YouTube. It was comforting to, once again, revisit that show that brought so much wonder and awe to me as a kid and young adult even if it was via grainy camcorder video. I've lost track of exactly how many times I've seen the original Phantom but I know I've seen all three U.S. national tours (the Christine, Raoul, and Music Box companies) as well as the original Broadway production several times. I've definitely seen it at least 20 times.
One frustrating thing during my YouTube revisit was the lack of good video of the overture. There are some HD videos of the overture on Broadway that were recorded several years back but the angles and distance left me unsatisfied. I thought I hit the jackpot with a video of a recent Swedish production of the original that was crystal clear and filmed from the front row. It was a bit jumpy but was exactly what I was looking for and as the chandelier began to make its way over the audience's head, the person filming failed to follow its ascent. Damn.
After more searching, I found my perfect original production Phantom overture video:
Phantom @ MDM Theatre, Moscow:
I will miss the Phantom.
I wish Les Mis and Phantom were produced by someone else.
Recreation of original John Cameron orchestration to "On My Own" by yours truly. Click player below to hear.
And yeah, the recent "Brilliant Original" tour was a watered-down rebuild of the original designs and direction, with some stuff ported in from the 25th anniversary restaging.
Had Phantom and Les Mis been produced by someone else they wouldn’t have been what they originally were. Why not just wish for Cameron to stop fussing with them?
CATSNYrevival said: "Had Phantom and Les Mis been produced by someone else they wouldn’t have been what they originally were. Why not just wish for Cameron to stop fussing with them?"
I have wished for Cameron to "stop fussing with them", but he continues to do so and it's starting to feel like a trend.
==> this board is a nest of vipers <==
"Michael Riedel...The Perez Hilton of the New York Theatre scene" - Craig Hepworth, What's On Stage
It really doesn’t look like the concept art is that different from what I see on proscenium photos online. They got rid of the angel, made the box seats permanent,are repainting & removing things from other parts of the theater?
It also appears that the updated chandelier will remain with this new production. This means no more rising from the stage during the Overture (one of the most thrilling moments in this show) or crashing to the stage at the end of Act I.
Hardly the "Brilliant Original." How I wish we still had Hal Prince with us.
So they have definitely gotten rid of the Angel and reduced the beauty of the proscenium (not sure how else to put it) and now they are most likely going with a cheaper chandelier that doesn't rise from or crash to the stage. Aren't they also reducing the traps, so the candleabras track on, and Raoul runs off the travelator instead of jumping into a trap?