Jump to content


- - - - -

Phantom Of The Opera ~ 2012, Uk Tour


  • Please log in to reply
451 replies to this topic

#311 SHk

SHk

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts

Posted 11 April 2012 - 06:41 PM

View PostBricabrac, on 11 April 2012 - 05:36 PM, said:

<br />It might not be. I don't know yet as I have neither seen the Tour nor have I read a really detailed account of what happens in the first scene down in the Lair. I was responding to this:<br />----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />QUOTE:  As for the un-masking, again I too appreciate that it was there in the respected film version, but it's a NEW production.  So the director should not be blamed for creating his own version of the same story because that's exactly what he was paid to do, I imagine.<br />----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------<br /><br />A director of any production, new or not, can be blamed if he doesn't make good choices. Being hired doesn't mean he is infallible. <br /><br />I am concerned that having the Phantom unmasked earlier in the scene that has been the case might not be a good idea, but I need more information to have a firm opinion<br /><br />--By the way, if the poster was referring to the 2004 film version, it was hardly universally respected. It got many bad reviews, and a lot of Phantom of the Opera fans didn't like it..<br />
<br /><br /><br />

Sorry, I am a little confused what you are offended by. But I'd say that Christine was deceived by the Phantom in going to his Lair might not be totally accurate. I would like to think that whenever she hears Phantom's voice, she is transfixed and just can't help following him. Or at least, with JOJ in the title role, I can certainly believe anyone would be.

As for Christine being kind-hearted, I might have put it too simply, but the un-masking at that point has always always troubled me.  It just doesn't look right that she should do at all.  In the original, queite frankly, we are at loss at what Christine is thining. She says or does one thing and the next moment she is up to something totaly out of the blue.  I think this new version gave her character more coherence as well as to Raoul  

And Ron Charney (spelling right?)'s version is a different story as it's a horror film, not primarily a gothic love sotry.

In the new version, she just walks up to the Phantom from behind and sees his face when he turns around. In this way, Phantom's emotions are more of sadness than anger.  And I think that it works beautifully because it balances out the amount of anger and sorrow in the show as a whole. Do we want to see JOJ as the Phantom shouting his way through the show? I suppose not. We appreciate his vulnerable side as well, don't we?

In total, I agree with the long reveiw above, except that I think some of the new costumes are on the boring side.


I just sense that some people are so up against anything that are not the brilliant original (LND was a good case in point).  Open up your mind and enjoy the world of PotO as the new director imagines it.


BTW,I didn't mean the 2004 film version in my earlier post. But I may add that it is hugely admired in my own country.  I admit it is quite totally different from the original stage version, but it has its own merits, which is, at the risk of being attacked for saying this, to show the beauty of Gerard Butler as the Phantom.  In doing so, the director employed some very talented designers and we appreciate the athetic value of that production. And which nation first "discovered" Queen (not of the Windor variety)?

#312 Bricabrac

Bricabrac

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:US

Posted 12 April 2012 - 07:17 AM

View PostSHk, on 11 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:



Sorry, I am a little confused what you are offended by. But I'd say that Christine was deceived by the Phantom in going to his Lair might not be totally accurate. I would like to think that whenever she hears Phantom's voice, she is transfixed and just can't help following him. Or at least, with JOJ in the title role, I can certainly believe anyone would be.

I'm not offended by anything. I said I was *concerned* about the unmasking, when it took place, and what, if anything, it changed about the scene.  

LAUGHINGNOMSTA said that the Phantom isn't unmasked while Christine is asleep so I might be concerned about nothing.

View PostSHk, on 11 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

As for Christine being kind-hearted, I might have put it too simply, but the un-masking at that point has always always troubled me.  It just doesn't look right that she should do at all.  In the original, queite frankly, we are at loss at what Christine is thining. She says or does one thing and the next moment she is up to something totaly out of the blue.  I think this new version gave her character more coherence as well as to Raoul


I agree. Those things are, or can, be confusing.

View PostSHk, on 11 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

And Ron Charney (spelling right?)'s version is a different story as it's a horror film, not primarily a gothic love sotry.


In the new version, she just walks up to the Phantom from behind and sees his face when he turns around. In this way, Phantom's emotions are more of sadness than anger.  And I think that it works beautifully because it balances out the amount of anger and sorrow in the show as a whole. Do we want to see JOJ as the Phantom shouting his way through the show? I suppose not. We appreciate his vulnerable side as well, don't we?

Lon Chaney
Yes, I prefer a Phantom that has a vulnerable side. The role has often been played that way. I don't care for a TOO angry Phantom but prefer both sides to be shown.

View PostSHk, on 11 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

I just sense that some people are so up against anything that are not the brilliant original (LND was a good case in point).  Open up your mind and enjoy the world of PotO as the new director imagines it.

I would rather not be told what I should do, but as it happens, unlike LND about which I have LONG known quite enough to dislike it, I am open to this Tour production and hope it is good and comes to the US. That doesn't mean I might not find some things I don't like about it when I know more.

View PostSHk, on 11 April 2012 - 06:41 PM, said:

BTW,I didn't mean the 2004 film version in my earlier post. But I may add that it is hugely admired in my own country.  I admit it is quite totally different from the original stage version, but it has its own merits, which is, at the risk of being attacked for saying this, to show the beauty of Gerard Butler as the Phantom.  In doing so, the director employed some very talented designers and we appreciate the athetic value of that production. And which nation first "discovered" Queen (not of the Windor variety)?

No attacks from me. I don't like it and I know that many Phantom fans don't, but others do.

#313 Bricabrac

Bricabrac

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:US

Posted 12 April 2012 - 07:24 AM

View PostLaughingmonsta, on 11 April 2012 - 06:34 PM, said:

SPOILER: RE UNMASKING

In the tour he isn't unmasked - whilst Christine is asleep - the Phantom tends to his seeping wounds (Its all their in the lyrics)Christine awakes and see his mask and this intrigues her to see the person who hides the mask, turning him around and thus the rest is pretty similar!

It works very well and actually makes more sense within the narrative structure of the piece

Thanks for the information. That sounds better than what I had heard before

---but "seeping wounds" !

Unless they have changed the lyrics, there is nothing about seeping wounds in the lyrics.
In the original, after Christine removes his mask, he says,

"Damn you! You little prying Pandora!
You little demon! Is this what you wanted to see?
Curse you! You little lying Delilah!

You little viper! Now you cannot ever be free!
Damn you!
Curse you!

Stranger than you dreamt it
Can you even dare to look?
Or bear to think of me?
This loathsome gargoyle who burns in hell,
but secretly, yearns for heaven,
secretly, secretly ...

But, Christine,
fear can turn to love
You'll learn to see, to find the man behind the monster,
this repulsive carcass ... who seems a beast,
but secretly, dreams of beauty,
Secretly, secretly ... Oh, Christine ...
Come, we must return!
Those two fools who run my theatre will be missing you."

#314 SHk

SHk

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 08:08 PM

Bricabrac, thanks for the spelling correction. I made more spelling/grammatical mistakes in the post above than usual as my mum-in-law was lurking impatiently behind me to send an e-mail!


Anyway, I really hope the tour versoin will travel to the USA and other countries. But we don't want to lose JOJ for overseas tours!



Seeping wounds don't appear in the lyrics, but we don't really expect them to, do we? Wounds in a song? He was just peacfully (?) and quietly attending to his sore skin while she was asleep. This secene really does stand out.  It just makes you wake up about the Phantom - he feels pain, his skin bleeds and oozes just like anyone else. This is one of favourite scenes in the new version.  Is it only me?

#315 achilles

achilles

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 09:53 PM

Actually, among all the improvements that this production has made to the story telling, I had hoped it would correct something that has seemed a little clumsy to me for twenty five years. The narrative is a flashback, propelled by the auction scene. Usually the point of a flashback is to see a change of perspective in the characters, to see how much they have learnt or not learnt, by the time we come back out of the flashback. But here we don't leave the flashback. I suspect the flashback is here not really for narrative purposes but rather to make use of a very expensive chandelier, and to kick start the show with somethign spectacular. But by not coming out of the flashback, I always feel a scene is missing. A rather lazy narrative structure, but it probably makes the most of a theatrical asset, in the way that the helicopter in act two of Miss Saigon is inthe perfect place for something spectacular, even though this is coincidentally a flashback, throwing out any chronology. Sacrificing narrative sense for pure theatre.....and I guess there's not that much wrong with that.

#316 djp

djp

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 429 posts

Posted 12 April 2012 - 10:26 PM

View Postachilles, on 12 April 2012 - 09:53 PM, said:

<br />Actually, among all the improvements that this production has made to the story telling, I had hoped it would correct something that has seemed a little clumsy to me for twenty five years. The narrative is a flashback, propelled by the auction scene. Usually the point of a flashback is to see a change of perspective in the characters, to see how much they have learnt or not learnt, by the time we come back out of the flashback. But here we don't leave the flashback. I suspect the flashback is here not really for narrative purposes but rather to make use of a very expensive chandelier, and to kick start the show with somethign spectacular. But by not coming out of the flashback, I always feel a scene is missing. A rather lazy narrative structure, but it probably makes the most of a theatrical asset, in the way that the helicopter in act two of Miss Saigon is inthe perfect place for something spectacular, even though this is coincidentally a flashback, throwing out any chronology. Sacrificing narrative sense for pure theatre.....and I guess there's not that much wrong with that.<br />
<br /><br /><br />

it does beg the question "where is Christine?" -  which looks a bit pointless unless ALW had already decided to write LND too......?

#317 Bricabrac

Bricabrac

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 454 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:US

Posted 13 April 2012 - 12:08 AM

View PostSHk, on 12 April 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:


Seeping wounds don't appear in the lyrics, but we don't really expect them to, do we?


I mentioned it only because Laughingmonsta said,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"In the tour he isn't unmasked - whilst Christine is asleep - the Phantom tends to his seeping wounds (Its all their in the lyrics)

Christine awakes and see his mask and this intrigues her to see the person who hides the mask, turning him around and thus the rest is pretty similar!"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View PostSHk, on 12 April 2012 - 08:08 PM, said:

Wounds in a song? He was just peacfully (?) and quietly attending to his sore skin while she was asleep. This secene really does stand out.  It just makes you wake up about the Phantom - he feels pain, his skin bleeds and oozes just like anyone else. This is one of favourite scenes in the new version.  Is it only me?

I don't know. Do you mean this literally? Is that what he is doing in the scene, attending to his skin and not composing? Maybe I misunderstood you.

#318 achilles

achilles

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 07:32 AM

maybe not composing, but decomposing perhaps?

#319 Laughingmonsta

Laughingmonsta

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2424 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cheshire

Posted 13 April 2012 - 10:04 AM

Ok - maybe I was using some artistic licence in the lyrics but think this makes sense of it

"This face the infection
Which poisons our love
This face which earned
A mother's fear and loathing
A mask, my first
Unfeeling scrap of clothing
Pity comes too late"
This is my street, I smile at the faces I've known all my life, They regard me with pride.

#320 SHk

SHk

    Advanced Member

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 593 posts

Posted 13 April 2012 - 03:08 PM

Yes, the Phantom physically dabs some sort of liquid medecine with a piece of cloth to the bad side of his face.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users