"Wicked" Downsizes?

I recentely attended a production of Wicked last Friday and was pleased by the production, but was suprised at the opening. I know that before, a gigantic witches hat would be onstage when the curtain opens. I was suprised to see, instead, a projection of a green, witch-like shadow. Is this a permanent change, or is it something they do every once in a while? (I'll post a full review of Wicked and BATB later)

They hadn't had the hat in ages, I thought. It's not in the London production at all.

---

It wasn't when I saw it for the first time in January.

---

That was one of the changes made over in the London show and brought to the Broadway producition. The hat has never been in the tour.

---

True that they cut the hat for the tour. It was one of the things that they had to alter for the tour because not every theatre has trap doors. They just never did it in the london production. But, along with the projection of Elphaba melting there have been a couple of other changes that were in new in the London production that they recently added to broadway. The only one that comes to mind is Fyearo's arrival to shiz. Apperently, his cart almost runs into Elphaba as she is walking around campus and they have a little chat and that is how they meet. Whereas they originally met at the party.

---

I love how removing a giant witch's hat and a simple trap door effect is considered downsizing...

I just don't understand why they'd cut it. It certainly isn't because they are lacking in funds.

I an interview I read a while ago about the tour, one cast member remarks that it was widely believed that the hat was unnecessary and sort of ridiculous, and ultimartely unneeded. It wasn't a budget thing. It was a "this is just not working" thing.

---

I saw Wicked in London and wasn't overly enamoured - it sorely needed a big number at the end, the show just fizzled out. And humour based on malapropisms is lazy. Also, I found the songs rather unmemorable, though I now like about four from repeated CD listens. And the wheelchair sister was cloying.

Apart from that, it was great

Anyway, to scenery - I was most confused by the huge dragon over the stage, and clock dial at the back. Neither came into play, though the occasional dragon flashing was cute. I understand that these bits of design make sense if you've read the book, but what's the point of including them on the stage if they're not referenced? Was it Chandler or Hammet who had that rule about that said (I paraphrase) if you introduce a gun into the first chapter, it's got to be used by the last.

---

In the beginning of the novel it talkes about how there is this magical clock that is traveling from town to town preforming different shows that give the reader the impression that the clock is acting out sex acts. That cloc is the time dragon clock. SweeneyPhanatic, your right that it could be a clock puppet show. But, prior to reading anything of the original novel I thought of the clock in the backround part of what Glinda said. She mentions something like the time the time dragon clock struck when elphaba was killed or something like that. So, I have always assocated the clcok backround and the dragon as the time dragon clock that rang when elphaba died. I mean she says time dragon clock and people look above the stage and see a huge robatic dragon so i guess they put two and two together. I don't know. I think I am thinking about this too much.

---

A friend of mine, who has seen Wicked a ridiculous amount of times, said that when she saw it on Broadway in March (for the 8th time?) she was extremely bummed at how different it was.

She said they cut the hat (which makes me sad and mad! i LOVED that hat effect!) and also changed some of the coreography in some of the numbers. In her opinion, none of the changes were needed and most were downgrades, not upgrades. If anything I'd think they'd be ADDING affects and such with all the money theyre making. OR... better yet... leave the dang thing alone! Why change an already amazing thing? Unless of course it makes some vast improvement... which clearly it does not.

And since when does a London production set the precedent for the Broadway show? Broadway's production was the original... so shouldn't they be making London's show exactly like the NY show rather than the NY shoe just like London's? Lacks logic to me!

I'm seeing it twice in May... once in NY and once on tour. I'm very interested in seeing the changes and also to see how the show is keeping up!

Also, are the minor script/coreography changes on the tour as well?

You call those electrocution-inspired seizures "choreography"???
If anything Wayne Cilento should be run out of town and forever be subjected to "choregraphing" for the Donald Trump Follies. The choreography in Little Miss Sunshine was more inspired than the mess on stage at the Gershwin.

The hat never made it to Chicago, but the London changes are being implemented here including new projections. And, Stone is purging the Chicago principals to save a few bucks.