Can We Fix This?

http://www.playbill.com/news/article/145988-Lloyd-Webbers-Love-Never-Dies-Invites-London-Critics-Back-to-Review-West-End-Revamp

I saw the above article on Playbill.com recently, and decided now would probably be a good time to talk about Love Never Dies.

As I've mentioned in previous posts, I'm a big fan of The Phantom of the Opera. I've been listening to the music since I was a kid, and I love it. I love lots of Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals; Jesus Christ Superstar, Evita, There's some great songs in Song & Dance/Tell Me on A Sunday and Aspects of Love. However, I can't say I've enjoyed his work over the past 10 or so years. The stuff he's doing know would have worked 20 years ago, but you need to keep with the times to be relevant as an artist. And his incredible hubris leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Just watch any of the BBC reality shows where ingenue wannabes compete for roles in West End musicals--he's sitting in a huge gold throne the entire time.

So, not knowing when to quit, Lloyd Webber is continuing to milk his favorite cash cow with a sequel to The Phantom of the Opera, titled Love Never Dies. I was nervous about it when they first announced they were working on a sequel, because at the time it was supposedly going to be based on Frederick Forsyth's novel The Phantom of Manhattan. A well-meaning relative knew I was a fan of the original, and picked up a copy of the book for me. It was horrible. Parts of it were really goofy, there was some really contrived ret-cons (a nerd term meaning "retroactive continuity", i.e. changing stuff that already happened to suit the current plot), and huge sections were only slightly adapted from the first story.

(FAIR WARNING: Mild spoilers within)

Luckily, most of that was indeed thrown out. I was skeptical when reviews came out saying that they weren't using the story, because I was still hearing that it took place 10 years later on Coney Island, where the Phantom has used his skills as an architect and illusionist to build an amusement park, and Christine is now a famous opera singer who is coming to town with her husband Raoul and their young son, Gustave--which is exactly what happened in Forsyth's book. Luckily, it sounds like that's where the similarities end.

A big part of the plot of Love Never Dies are the jealousy issues between Raoul and the Phantom. Let's be honest, every woman wanted Christine to pick the Phantom. Raoul is rich and handsome and secure, but the Phantom is sexy, dangerous, and passionate. So Raoul is a bit dull, and the Phantom is a psychotic madman, but other than that they are both deserving of Christine's love; it's just that the Phantom needs her more, and you want to believe that her love can redeem him (as evidenced at the end of the original show--she kisses him, and he lets Raoul go free). But there's no tension unless you believe Christine could have chosen either of them.
So in my opinion, it's kind of cheating for Love Never Dies to turn Raoul into a complete heel. He is cruel to his son, he has a drinking problem and gambling debts. It's just too easy! Who would pick that guy?

And it sounds like that was one of the main problems with the production--the stakes weren't high enough, and it was lacking in tension (plus some of the plot being confusing when it wasn't being predictable). If the reviews are to be believed, they managed to clear up some of those issues, although it sounds like the book and pedestrian libretto are still the weakest part of the show.
The highest praise went to stars Ramin Karimloo and Sierra Boggess for their impressive singing, and to the set and projection designs. Many critics also liked the music, although some felt the show tried to squeeze too much out of just a few melodies.

Speaking of which, let's watch some clips! Here's the official music video for "Til' I Hear You Sing". Karimloo sounds gorgeous, but this song feels a bit like someone said "We need another 'Music of the Night'", instead of saying "We need a good song for the Phantom that sets up his motivation".



Here's the best video I could find of Sierra Boggess singing the title song. Her interpretation is great, but the end sounds a little uncomfortable for her. It might just be the quality of the recording, though; I feel like I've heard her sing better elsewhere.




So, for a man who sits on a throne on TV shows, I have to give Lloyd Webber I still don't think I'm very impressed with it, but I'm glad they're concerned about whether the rest of the audience is.

Opening Night Reviews:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/2010/mar/10/love-never-dies-review
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/10/theater/10love.html

Reviews after the revisions:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/8220295/Love-Never-Dies-Adelphi-Theatre-review.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/reviews/love-never-dies-adelphi-theatre-london-2167396.html

The Phantom of The Opera Tour- closing week

It really seems fitting to start this blog with “The Phantom of the Opera”. When the soundtrack came out in the US, I was barely out of training pants. I’ve been listening to it ever since. My family took long drives on every major holiday from Massachusetts to upstate Maine to see our relatives, and musical theater soundtracks are a REALLY good way to pass the time on a 5-hour drive. The power of the story both overwhelmed and inspired me as a girl—the great passion, the complicated adult emotions, and the beautiful music.

I finally saw “Phantom” on tour when I was 13 years old. I’d been saving up all summer to afford my ticket. Since then I’ve seen it three more times—when I was 16 while on an exchange trip to Hamburg, Germany, again on tour in Boston right after graduating college, and last night at the Pantages Theatre in Hollywood, on the final week before the tour closes.

I went last night with two close girlfriends of mine (one being my gorgeous roommate, who bought the tickets for me as a birthday treat) who had also seen the show multiple times. A friend of mine who is a theater critic reviewed the show favorably, but complained that the actors seemed slotted in, without much room for individual interpretation of the roles. However, my girlfriends and I had a very interesting time comparing the acting choices of the performer we saw that night in relation to other actors we’ve seen in what might be musical theater’s most iconic role.

Our Phantom was the tremendous Tim Martin Gleason, who blew us away with the exceptionally beautiful  top notes in his voice, and his strong acting, especially in the final scenes. Here’s a couple moments from the final scene I really loved (Um, spoiler alert? But if you don’t know how it ends, honestly, what are you doing here?):

-during the final reprise of “Masquerade”, he sat down next to the cymbal monkey, and clapped along with it. It was just the right mix of sweet and sad.

-When Christine kissed him, even though he put his arms around her, he never touched her with his hands. It was a simple choice that said so much.

-Anyone who’s listened to the CD know that the scene calls for one “Christine, I love you”, before the ingénue and her suitor reprise “All I Ask of You” in the distance. Mr. Gleason, however, kept repeating “I love you” softly, over and over, as the couple rowed away.

It’s interesting, as I’ve seen that show so many times, I assumed that while I still appreciate it, and enjoy it very much, it wouldn’t’ have the power to move me (unlike my former roommate Liz, who would burst into tears when she saw the show, watched the movie, or listened to the soundtrack). I’m happy to say I was very wrong; seeing the show live, it definitely has the power to affect me.

But from my many years working in the theater myself, and having a strong knowledge of what goes on backstage, I sometimes find myself distracted by thinking about the actors own lives (John Brooke in “Little Women” much? Maybe a little). During intermission we were talking about moments we’ve seen in other performances where a performer’s personal life creeps onto the stage. Hey, it’s hard to be in the moment all the time! Especially when you’re doing it 8 times a week for months or years on end. For example, the first time I watched “Point of No Return” live, the actor was clearly somewhere else—grocery shopping, car needs an oil change, whatever. During Christine’s solo, he was just sort of arranging the robe on his knees. It wasn’t until I next saw the show in Germany that I realized how intense and sensual the physical interaction between Christine and the Phantom is during that song, because the actor was actually in the moment. After all, his hands are the only thing visible during that scene. Do something with them!

One of my friends who came to the last show related a story she saw from a performance in New York: at the end of the Phantom’s lair scene (“Damn you, you little lying Delilah!”), the Phantom actually grabbed Christine around the waist, picked her up off her feet, and threw her across the stage.  She bounced twice on her bum and looked at the actor in shock. To quote my friend, “he had red swirlies in his eyes”. When she told me that story, my first thought was “Wow, that actor must’ve had a BIG fight with his girlfriend that day!” My second thought was that the Assistant Stage Manager must’ve been right there with an accident report when she got off the stage.

Well, I’ve probably rambled long enough. But I just wanted to share some of my long relationship with this show, and the fact that when the actors are giving an honest, committed performance, it has the power to move me like I’m seeing it for the first time, and I fall in love all over again.