4,631 posts
|
Post by Phantom of London on Apr 13, 2021 17:20:47 GMT
If the London Les Mis went to New York, they would laugh it out of town. Errr, it did, in 2014. And received three Tony nominations. It also ran a lot longer than the 2006 Broadway revival of the original production. I saw that New York production and also saw the try out in Toronto, it was not stripped back as much as the current London production.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 17:22:54 GMT
No need to be rude even if what you say is contradictory. You called someone militant for speaking out when let go from a job and scaremongering that it will result in retaliation. These are completely outrageous charges and should be countered. I’m sure the musicians will have support from empathetic professionals across the industry. Ok Shirley I’ll stop discussing. I find pushing you’re blinkered ‘how dare they change my show’ attitude incredibly blinkered & frustrating. If you want it to survive, this might be the only way. You are absolutely right Dan. There is so much charged emotion when people talk about changes to long runners that people completely fail to understand how musicals are made viable in 2021 and indeed in a post pandemic world. I also feel the discussion doesn't need to be so polarised. You can be sad that the orchestra is being reduced AND understand the logical (and I am afraid inevitable) reasons behind this.
|
|
18,808 posts
|
Post by BurlyBeaR on Apr 13, 2021 17:25:26 GMT
⬆️ Voice of reason.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 17:25:29 GMT
Part of Phantom's unique appeal and selling point was the size of the orchestra and it's sound. To purists perhaps, but not to most tourists or probably 9/10 theatre goers. If people want to hear a full orchestra they go to the Proms, not the West End. As a musician I would rather hear a larger orchestra but I am a realist and understand that commercially there is no place for a large orchestra in the West End anymore, if there ever really was (who knows, Phantom could have been as much of a success if it had opened with a 14 piece orchestra - it hasn't hurt Wicked or Hamilton or many others!). People can of course be sad at the change, but you have to be realistic rather than wearing the rose-tinted spectacles that many on this thread seem to have on. Completely agree.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 17:26:46 GMT
Also for those arguing that this is nothing that the changes will not be noticed look at the 'new' Christine Masquerade costume. theatreboard.co.uk/post/372985It's poor plagiarism which shouldn't be accepted by artists. This is from the Laurence Connor production, which is not what's going into Her Majesty's.
|
|
1,445 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Apr 13, 2021 17:51:27 GMT
Whether it’s “inevitable” or not, why not just be open about it? Stop claiming the “Brilliant Original” will be back when it very clearly won’t. It’s insulting to fans, let alone the devastating effect it has on those losing their jobs.
|
|
1,639 posts
|
Post by fiyero on Apr 13, 2021 18:31:01 GMT
Like it or not The Phantom of the Opera which was playing has closed. We are getting a revival, the waters are muddied because it is in the same theatre with no other shows in between. I'm excited to see it, as I would be if the tour came around again. I know it is a shame for the people involved (except the ones at the top getting the profit) but it is happening. Other shows won't be back.
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 13, 2021 18:44:12 GMT
Ok Shirley I’ll stop discussing. I find pushing you’re blinkered ‘how dare they change my show’ attitude incredibly blinkered & frustrating. If you want it to survive, this might be the only way. You are absolutely right Dan. There is so much charged emotion when people talk about changes to long runners that people completely fail to understand how musicals are made viable in 2021 and indeed in a post pandemic world. I also feel the discussion doesn't need to be so polarised. You can be sad that the orchestra is being reduced AND understand the logical (and I am afraid inevitable) reasons behind this. Then close the show and put something else in. Rather than pretending nothing's changed and charging higher prices for a lesser product. There is just no truth in the charge that the original production wasn't viable. If anything it played to smaller audiences (in a bigger house) on Broadway...and that will reopen at full scale. I'm not saying it would have always been viable. But what they've done is prematurely end its run and then replace it with an inferior substitute and gaslight the audience.
|
|
|
Post by westendboy on Apr 13, 2021 19:27:06 GMT
|
|
2,757 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Apr 13, 2021 19:32:31 GMT
I'll still go to see it. If its crap, we'll all know.
|
|
249 posts
|
Post by gmoneyoutlaw on Apr 13, 2021 20:02:20 GMT
The musicians' union in New York would not allow them to reduce the orchestra ... and not pay the musicians. Which means they could probably reduce the labor to 14 but have to pay for 27 whether they play or not.
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 13, 2021 20:40:23 GMT
The musicians' union in New York would not allow them to reduce the orchestra ... and not pay the musicians. Which means they could probably reduce the labor to 14 but have to pay for 27 whether they play or not. As I understand it, the only way around that is (assuming the contracts are for "run of show") to shut down the entire production and then reopen. Which is what they've done in London, though maybe doing that on Broadway would jeopardise the longest-running title. Also I know for a fact Cameron's share on Broadway is 40%; perhaps it is higher in London. A Broadway musician also told me that there is a minimum number of players required for any show that plays each house. If that's true, then not sure that 14 would fit the requirements of the Majestic. This was the statement re the decision in London by the President of the American Federation of Musicians: Is Thatcher to blame here for the lack of similar clout on the side of the pond?
|
|
61 posts
|
Post by TheatreTwittic on Apr 13, 2021 22:35:01 GMT
Surely those who argue people won't know the difference, can't listen to the above and go yeah people are going to hear that and go yes that was £100 well spent?
Sure, that may be an extreme example, but at the same time I feel it shows you can, very easily tell the difference between brass and a keyboard setting.
Seating plans across the board are sparse at the moment and you certainly won't lure back the returners to fill the void by cheaping a production.
Probably the best example of this, the reaction by the mega fans of Ghost when star casting in the second tour went so so wrong, as well as an overall design that was so different to the original.
They're going to need one heck of a production design to distract from the no doubt smaller company as well as the smaller orchestra.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 23:34:59 GMT
No need to be rude even if what you say is contradictory. You called someone militant for speaking out when let go from a job and scaremongering that it will result in retaliation. These are completely outrageous charges and should be countered. I’m sure the musicians will have support from empathetic professionals across the industry. Ok Shirley I’ll stop discussing. I find pushing you’re blinkered ‘how dare they change my show’ attitude incredibly naive & frustrating. “Showbiz” isn’t fair. Very often it isn’t their own money they are playing with. If you want it to survive, this might be the only way. Don’t make things up. I’ve travelled the world for non-replica productions. All I ask is don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining. It’s not the original Phantom and ‘showbiz isn’t fair’ is blinkered? It takes brave people to speak up, look at what happened with Hamilton Broadway, how many of them have been blacklisted? Calling out the sham of the cheapened Maria Bjornson design isn’t blinkered or against change, I would prefer the show to close and bring in the revival reimagined Connor version if they can stand by it. The fact is the original creative team were artists and they’ve got in accountants to direct the new versions. Being involved in the industry I love change but change without improvement is pointless.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2021 23:42:47 GMT
You are absolutely right Dan. There is so much charged emotion when people talk about changes to long runners that people completely fail to understand how musicals are made viable in 2021 and indeed in a post pandemic world. I also feel the discussion doesn't need to be so polarised. You can be sad that the orchestra is being reduced AND understand the logical (and I am afraid inevitable) reasons behind this. Then close the show and put something else in. Rather than pretending nothing's changed and charging higher prices for a lesser product. There is just no truth in the charge that the original production wasn't viable. If anything it played to smaller audiences (in a bigger house) on Broadway...and that will reopen at full scale. I'm not saying it would have always been viable. But what they've done is prematurely end its run and then replace it with an inferior substitute and gaslight the audience. I couldn’t agree more. Les Miserables viability was declining and they downgraded theatres a decade or more ago I believe to save money by 400 approx seats a performance. They then further changed the show to reduce running costs. Phantom hasn’t changed theatres, of course a difficult move but no now after ripping it out. Phantom can has around 70k more seats a year than Les Mis. The show toured the world for nearly three decades and then suddenly it became too ‘difficult’ to tour because of the theatres. The reason I’m frustrated is the lies. Just say I want to make more money and be done with it.
|
|
572 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by princeton on Apr 13, 2021 23:53:06 GMT
A Broadway musician also told me that there is a minimum number of players required for any show that plays each house. If that's true, then not sure that 14 would fit the requirements of the Majestic. That is correct. The current agreement is that the minimum requirement for the Majestic is 18 musicians. It's because of this that there was the bizarre situation of having fewer musicians in the first Broadway revival of Les Mis (which played the Longacre - 12 musician minimum) which was based on the original tour, than in the second revival which was the 'new' version and orchestrations but as it was on at the Imperial it had an 18 musician minimum requirement.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Apr 14, 2021 0:08:16 GMT
You are absolutely right Dan. There is so much charged emotion when people talk about changes to long runners that people completely fail to understand how musicals are made viable in 2021 and indeed in a post pandemic world. I also feel the discussion doesn't need to be so polarised. You can be sad that the orchestra is being reduced AND understand the logical (and I am afraid inevitable) reasons behind this. Then close the show and put something else in. Rather than pretending nothing's changed and charging higher prices for a lesser product. There is just no truth in the charge that the original production wasn't viable. If anything it played to smaller audiences (in a bigger house) on Broadway...and that will reopen at full scale. I'm not saying it would have always been viable. But what they've done is prematurely end its run and then replace it with an inferior substitute and gaslight the audience. Gosh, for so-called Phantom fans some of you seem very determined for the whole lot to be out of a job and not just the half of the orchestra who have been let go! If you'd really rather see it close than keep going in one form or another then you might as well stop complaining at all and just never buy another ticket! You may never see it in the West End again then. Shows change and close all the time, it's business. And it isn't false advertising to say it is the same show, because it is - same characters, smae musical numbers, same opening number, interval at the same point, same plot, same ending. That is all that most of the predominantly tourist audience will see and will understand. So they will still buy tickets, the show will make more money as it will now be cheaper to run and the investors will be happy. It's about as basic as economics gets.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Apr 14, 2021 0:11:02 GMT
The reason I’m frustrated is the lies. Just say I want to make more money and be done with it. No-one is lying, it's still the same show. And anyone with half an ounce of common sense can work out it is for profit, you don't need to be spoon fed that. The thing to be angry about is how the musicians were told (or rather not told). Reducing the orchestra size was pretty much inevitable, but there are nicer ways to go about it and they haven't done that.
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on Apr 14, 2021 3:33:33 GMT
Then close the show and put something else in. Rather than pretending nothing's changed and charging higher prices for a lesser product. There is just no truth in the charge that the original production wasn't viable. If anything it played to smaller audiences (in a bigger house) on Broadway...and that will reopen at full scale. I'm not saying it would have always been viable. But what they've done is prematurely end its run and then replace it with an inferior substitute and gaslight the audience. Gosh, for so-called Phantom fans some of you seem very determined for the whole lot to be out of a job and not just the half of the orchestra who have been let go! If you'd really rather see it close than keep going in one form or another then you might as well stop complaining at all and just never buy another ticket! You may never see it in the West End again then. Shows change and close all the time, it's business. And it isn't false advertising to say it is the same show, because it is - same characters, smae musical numbers, same opening number, interval at the same point, same plot, same ending. That is all that most of the predominantly tourist audience will see and will understand. So they will still buy tickets, the show will make more money as it will now be cheaper to run and the investors will be happy. It's about as basic as economics gets. Calling it the "brilliant original" so prominently is disingenuous at best, though, at this stage. That, frankly, is false advertising. It quite demonstrably isn't the original. A part of what is very strange, and many feel misleading, has been the dreadful marketing and optics surrounding the whole situation. You've got ALW saying one thing, Cameron Mackintosh Ltd saying another, awful communications re: box office. The whole thing has been a mess.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2021 6:55:45 GMT
Clearly an emotive subject.
Of course it it sad when the sizes of orchestras are massively reduced. The Phantom of The Opera was truly one of the mega musicals and with that came a no expense spared approach to all elements of the production in 1986. And nobody could deny that it is wonderful to have 30+ musicians in a West End pit.
But times have completely changed. There really are no musicals made in the model of the 80s and 90s anymore and there is no producer shelling out that kind of money. Theatre is a business and it is simply not a realistic part of the business model for a long running musical in 2021. 14-16 musicians is pretty much the maximum any show needs so Phantom remains at the top end. And although the finer tuned ear can tell the difference, 99% of the theatre going public will have no idea. Phantom is not unique. Aspects of Love, Sunset Boulevard, Woman in White, Love Never Dies all have lush scores with extensive use of strings and have all sounded sensational with the standard 14-16 piece orchestra.
Further, technology has massively, insanely moved on since 1986 and synthesised sound blended in with the other instruments can sound great. The thing is, you need to either decide to use synthesised strings or not - there isn't really a half way house, and that is why the orchestra has been almost cut in half and not reduced. You either have a full strings section, or you have fully synthesised 'backing' strings with a real violin/viola/cello playing solo lines across the top - as Les Mis now has. In fact Les Mis is a good example of this. As they gradually chipped away at the orchestra, I agree the quality did indeed go down. But when they fully re-orchestrated it 10 years ago and went fully with the synthesised strings plus solo lines over this, I think it sounded sensational. The current tour and London (pre covid) productions have never sounded better.
Yes of course a massive orchestra would be wonderful. But it is a luxury that cannot be afforded. And doesn't make sense. The drop in quality, to the average member of the public is minuscule compared to the cost saving.
And I really think people are underestimating how tough it's gonna be for shows like Phantom coming out of lockdown. A quick lock at the seating plans shows weeks and weeks of barely sold houses. It relies massively on tourism which isn't gonna be back at a meaningful level for ages. It absolutely HAS to re open as a lean efficient machine, otherwise it really will not survive. And that would be a far bigger tragedy than anything else we are discussing.
The argument that it has made huge profits in the past so they should be plunged into a bigger orchestra now is I am afraid a complete nonsense and shows no understanding of how businesses work. The profits go back to the shareholders, they don't sit in a safe somewhere and have long been dissipated around the world. Every business in the world has to be profitable TODAY. It doesn't matter what has gone before, to be a going concern it needs to work now. Otherwise you are pouring money away and ultimately the business will go. M&S were hugely profitable in the 90s and have massively struggled in later years. They don't use the profits from the 90s to give away free food and clothes now, that would clearly be ridiculous.
As for the old orchestra, yes of course this is very sad. People losing their jobs is tragic and everything that has gone with Coronavirus has been truly heartbreaking. But they are not alone. Covid has carved through jobs, lives, communities, industries. It's dreadful. But there really isn't a huge amount that can be done at individual production level. The recent outbursts on Twitter I understand, but are without substance really. The entire team was made redundant with no promise whatsoever that they would be re-employed. So they are cross about something that they were never told would happen anyway. Again, it's tragic how this effects individuals as they clearly hoped they would be re-employed but producers sadly don't owe them anything. Further, none of us will truly ever have any idea how CM/RUG have managed this. Nobody ever takes to Twitter to say "thrilled with my redundancy, bosses have managed it so well." Just doesn't happen. Social media in this regard is where the hurt and the the upset speak out. So one must understand their emotions and the hard time they are going through, but not necessarily draw conclusions about their former employer.
And re ALW and Cam Mac - again, God knows what the relationship is between them. Am sure ALW the purist and composer would always want the biggest orchestra, but ALW the businessman would understand he can't always have this. I think, Cam Mac holds the more power at Phantom London so perhaps could have overridden what ALW wanted. That said, I think they get on better than the media would have us believe.
"The Brilliant original." Well, clearly not for most people on here. But again I think definitely will be for Joe Public. My mates would-not-have-a-clue how many people are in the pit which you can't see. Plus it's an advertising strap line. It doesn't need to be true. It's designed to go on a poster and sell tickets. Advertisers make claims all the time. Is Bounty the taste of paradise? I mean it's a matter of opinion but not really. Is Gillette the best a man can get? No lol, it just rhymes.
So yes. Sad to see this epic orchestra halved, very sad for people that has lost their jobs. But IMHO essential in what will be a very harsh post corona world for theatre and necessary for the show's survival. Plus I do think if it's as good as Les Mis then the new orchestrations could be very exciting. And I for one, can't wait to see the show and am literally counting the days until can be in Her Majesty's again. I still think it's going to be a truly wonderful moment!
Now - if maybe we could have some casting info and communication about rescheduled dates!
|
|
6,337 posts
|
Post by danb on Apr 14, 2021 8:25:37 GMT
All of this ^ 🙂
I just wish I could communicate it as elegantly as Dom. x
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 8:47:39 GMT
Yes of course a massive orchestra would be wonderful. But it is a luxury that cannot be afforded. And doesn't make sense. The drop in quality, to the average member of the public is minuscule compared to the cost saving. Well at least we've moved on from the nonsense that it is going to be "bigger and better" and "more spectacular than ever" to an admission that the quality will drop. Because it will.
|
|
1,445 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Apr 14, 2021 8:51:59 GMT
"The Brilliant original." Well, clearly not for most people on here. But again I think definitely will be for Joe Public. My mates would-not-have-a-clue how many people are in the pit which you can't see. Plus it's an advertising strap line. It doesn't need to be true. It's designed to go on a poster and sell tickets. Advertisers make claims all the time. Is Bounty the taste of paradise? I mean it's a matter of opinion but not really. Is Gillette the best a man can get? No lol, it just rhymes. That argument works for the word “brilliant”. Yes, that’s just advertising speak. Obviously it’s subjective and there are people who actually think Phantom is crap rather than brilliant. But it doesn’t work for “original”. How can you reduce the orchestra, reduce the set, tell the investors the production has closed, stop paying rights to the creatives, and claim to be the “original”? My problem* with all of this is the lack of honesty. In fact, although CM is painted as the “villain” at least he’s actually been saying for a long time that it would not be the same show coming back. It’s ALW who is either being naive or deliberately misleading here. (* aside from the $hitty treatment of the orchestra and creatives, which you can argue is “necessary”, “inevitable” or whatever, but is still $hitty)
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 8:52:57 GMT
The reason I’m frustrated is the lies. Just say I want to make more money and be done with it. No-one is lying, it's still the same show. And anyone with half an ounce of common sense can work out it is for profit, you don't need to be spoon fed that. The thing to be angry about is how the musicians were told (or rather not told). Reducing the orchestra size was pretty much inevitable, but there are nicer ways to go about it and they haven't done that. Yes, saying that something is "showbusiness" and that is the way it's always done does not excuse it. There is simply no excuse to treat the musicians like that. Cameron would have known for some time if he planned to cut the musicians. Rather than leaving them in the dark throughout this horrendous past year, he could have done the decent thing rather than cause needless anxiety to those who have been loyal to this particular production since...well, in some cases since it opened. It's also clearly not the same show. On Broadway they can claim it is. If they brought back the original designs as Jessica Koravos and ALW repeatedly claimed would happened, then maybe. But that's obviously not going to happen.
|
|
4,458 posts
|
Post by poster J on Apr 14, 2021 8:54:12 GMT
Yes of course a massive orchestra would be wonderful. But it is a luxury that cannot be afforded. And doesn't make sense. The drop in quality, to the average member of the public is minuscule compared to the cost saving. Well at least we've moved on from the nonsense that it is going to be "bigger and better" and "more spectacular than ever" to an admission that the quality will drop. Because it will. For mega fans yes, for Joe Public no. That is the fundamental lack of understanding on this thread between those who clearly have more of an emotional attachment to the show and those who are able to step back and understand and accept that the commercial realities of 2021 are the only thing that matters in terms of the business of show, not what was viable in 1987. You can argue all you like, but the show is still the same show, just because the costumes or orchestrations change doesn't remove the fundamental plot and musical numbers that make it the Phantom of the Opera that everyone will recognise. You might notice the change in details, but the simple fact is that probably 9 out of 10 people won't.
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 9:05:30 GMT
Well at least we've moved on from the nonsense that it is going to be "bigger and better" and "more spectacular than ever" to an admission that the quality will drop. Because it will. For mega fans yes, for Joe Public no. That is the fundamental lack of understanding on this thread between those who clearly have more of an emotional attachment to the show and those who are able to step back and understand and accept that the commercial realities of 2021 are the only thing that matters in terms of the business of show, not what was viable in 1987. You can argue all you like, but the show is still the same show, just because the costumes or orchestrations change doesn't remove the fundamental plot and musical numbers that make it the Phantom of the Opera that everyone will recognise. You might notice the change in details, but the simple fact is that probably 9 out of 10 people won't. Maybe it's just me, but doing something just because one can apparently get away with it without being caught out isn't a very good reason to do it. I don't hold "Joe Public" in such contempt. And, frankly, the comments on social media have been very surprising in terms of the sheer numbers objecting to this. Almost every post that is made by the powers-that-be seems to attract comments criticising what is going on. The very look of the show is being altered. It may be the same show, but not the same production, and certainly not the production that was branded for years as the "brilliant original". For a start, Cameron hasn't even committed to rehiring the remaining 14 musicians. All of them have been let go. Secondly, isn't that the very "showbusiness" you repeatedly invoke? *If* it is the case that a show ceases to become profitable (which in Phantom's case I highly doubt - we don't have the London grosses, but the reports from cast members was that it was still selling out and I don't recall seeing it regularly on TKTS in recent years), then it would be usual to close the show. Not hack away at it.
|
|
|
Post by undercovercroc on Apr 14, 2021 9:51:33 GMT
I can't believe people are defending this. A billionaire is cutting corners so he can increase his wealth, and leaving people out on the street during a pandemic. It it disgusting. CamMac could lose £100,000 a week of his personal wealth (not even the companies) for 190 YEARS and would still have 200 million in the bank to live on! As I understand it, by closing the show it meant no one could be furloughed as they wouldn't have a job to go back to. The show was built on the hard work of creatives that he has decided don't deserve a share on what they created. It is absolutely appalling what he is doing to Phantom, and has done to Les Mis. He has given no support to the industry through this cesspit of a year, and yet people still support him at every turn. I'm sure you'll all look forward to his revival of Miss Saigon with a cast of three and a toddler with a Casio keyboard for the orchestra.
|
|
6,337 posts
|
Post by danb on Apr 14, 2021 10:44:26 GMT
Again to our ‘new member’, people aren’t so much defending it as acknowledging & understanding the circumstances in which it has happened. Theres no denying that it isn’t a crappy thing to do but I suspect it would have happened pandemic or not.
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Apr 14, 2021 11:43:09 GMT
|
|
|
Post by c4ndyc4ne on Apr 14, 2021 12:07:26 GMT
|
|