The Official Musical Theatre Thread II

[Pink Ranger]

I saw the touring production of West Side Story last week. The Tony was terrific, and the Anita stole the show as that character always does.

[DACrowe]

So, I just discovered something hilarious. I was watching and Runt and Rita cartoon from old Animaniacs in the Les Mis movie thread (they did a parody of it) and I remember always loving Rita's voice on that show as a kid. Anyway, on youtube I saw it posted that Bernadette Peters voiced Rita and that stunned me. That got Ms. Peters to do a children's cartoon? The clout of Spielberg truly must be legendary.

And the oddest/funniest thing is I saw Bernadette Peters in the A Little Night Music revival on Broadway in 2010. I would have loved so much more if I'd known it was Rita.

Funny old world.

[Marx]

...so I finally saw "Love Never Dies".

[Pink Ranger]

Was it any good? I've heard a variety of opinions about it.

[danoyse]

I sooo would have seen Love Never Dies if it was playing the last time I was in London. Just out of morbid curiosity.

That was my rationale for seeing Spiderman on Broadway.

[Angel_Faerie]

Why does Love Never Dies have to have such pretty music? It'd be so much easier to ignore its existence and ruination of Phantom of The Opera if the music sucked too. Well, Bathing Beauty....that ****'s a mess.

[DACrowe]

Originally Posted by Marx

...so I finally saw "Love Never Dies".

And you're still alive? Impressive you could survive such an assault.

To be fair, I've only listened to the OCR of London. It has a few pretty melodies (most notably, "Until I Hear You Sing Again"), but the story is just so awful. Following up on perfection, which is what POTO is, nearly 25 years later with some hackneyed fan fiction is just so.

I'm not a fan.

[danoyse]

One year and two major cast changes later, still the funniest damn thing on Broadway:

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

[Marx]

Originally Posted by Pink Ranger

Was it any good? I've heard a variety of opinions about it.

Originally Posted by DACrowe

And you're still alive? Impressive you could survive such an assault.

To be fair, I've only listened to the OCR of London. It has a few pretty melodies (most notably, "Until I Hear You Sing Again"), but the story is just so awful. Following up on perfection, which is what POTO is, nearly 25 years later with some hackneyed fan fiction is just so.

I'm not a fan.

I thought it was OK. I just don't see why it needed a sequel. The score is pretty good though.

[Majik1387]

So I managed to download an audio recording of the 2012 Carrie revival cast in Europe, and I'm so elated.

The opening definitely sounds more goth rock, and the harmonies are haunting.

[JP]

Fierce sweater, Carrie.

[Majik1387]

Hahaha that poem was Epic!

[Maximum Carnage]

I'm gonna be working the fly rail for a local theatre, production of "All Shook Up" - interesting show to say the least.... Lol..

[theShape]

Originally Posted by Marx

I thought it was OK. I just don't see why it needed a sequel. The score is pretty good though.

I watched Love Never Dies on demand (Australian production) and thought it was great. Had all of the high drama of the original show with some tweaks and twists. It was cool to see the characters at a different stage in their lives. Also, some truly great music and performances and the staging was superb. Apparently, it's quite different than the London version.

[DACrowe]

But turning Raoul into an impotent, drunk who runs away from Christine and who he perceives as his son? The Phantom and Christine getting it on right after the end of POTO? Meg killing Christine because the Phantom doens't love her?

Ugh. It ruins the characters and the beauty of the original's ending, in my opinion.

[Pink Ranger]

Besides, I thought POTO made it clear that the Phantom was incapable of fathering a child?

[Majik1387]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

But turning Raoul into an impotent, drunk who runs away from Christine and who he perceives as his son?

Yeah, I really hated this. I mean, I can understand having some qualms about his son possibly not being his, but I don't see it being handled the way LND has it

The Phantom and Christine getting it on right after the end of POTO?

Yeah, agreed here, if anything and I'm being very generous with this thought, if they were to have gotten it on at any point, I think it would have happened in Christine's first visit to the Phantom's lair.

Meg killing Christine because the Phantom doens't love her?

I quite liked the jealousy thing in terms of attention given to Christine though Meg stayed with him, but not the love aspect.

Ugh. It ruins the characters and the beauty of the original's ending, in my opinion.

Entirely agreed. It just would have been better if Christine and Raoul's story arc ended in POTO, and LND continued on with Phantom, Madame Giry, and Meg.

Originally Posted by Pink Ranger

Besides, I thought POTO made it clear that the Phantom was incapable of fathering a child?

Does it? Maybe I didn't pay close enough attention.

[Pink Ranger]

Originally Posted by Majik1387

Does it? Maybe I didn't pay close enough attention.

I draw the conclusion from the part of the book of the show that goes like this, after Phantom kills Ubaldo and grabs Christine and flees underground:


CHRISTINE: Have you gorged yourself at last, in your lust for blood? Am I now to be prey, to your lust for flesh?

PHANTOM: That fate which condemns me, to wallow in blood. Has also denied me, the joys of the flesh.


Basically I've interpreted this scene as Christine fearing the Phantom will rape her, but the Phantom telling her that his physical and mental deformity make him incapable of sex.

[Majik1387]

Ah, I always took it as no matter what he tries, no one would love him enough to give themselves(flesh) to him.

[Pink Ranger]

Originally Posted by Majik1387

Ah, I always took it as no matter what he tries, no one would love him enough to give themselves(flesh) to him.

Maybe, but then the answer doesn't really match Christine's question. To me, the dialogue there is basically Christine asking, "Are you forcing me to have sex with you?" and the Phantom saying, "I can't."

[Majik1387]

I guess I took it more as he can't rape her because he loves her too much. I don't know, I guess it's open for interpretation.

[Angel_Faerie]

Originally Posted by Majik1387

Ah, I always took it as no matter what he tries, no one would love him enough to give themselves(flesh) to him.

Originally Posted by Majik1387

I guess I took it more as he can't rape her because he loves her too much. I don't know, I guess it's open for interpretation.

I always interpreted it that way as well. I also always thought Christine gave her v-card to Raoul the night act one ends too, not to the Phantom the night before her wedding to Raoul as LND states. Damn you, Andrew! Why did you have to write such gorgeous music (sans Bathing Beauty...gag) for such a mess of a show?

Say what you will about the Phantom movie (which I personally like save a few complaints), at least it kind of ruins the idea of a LND movie, based off the dates on Christine's tombstone at the end.

[theShape]

Originally Posted by DACrowe

But turning Raoul into an impotent, drunk who runs away from Christine and who he perceives as his son? The Phantom and Christine getting it on right after the end of POTO? Meg killing Christine because the Phantom doens't love her?

Ugh. It ruins the characters and the beauty of the original's ending, in my opinion.

This show implies that Raul essentially was not that "great guy" he was always perceived to be, and he failed to live up to his expectations. He did not do what he promised in "All I Ask of You". Meanwhile, Christine lived on to have doubts about the decision she made and was suspicious of who might be the true father of her son.

As far as how she and the Phantom got it onnn, i believe its been stated that the "one night" for them was the night the Phantom first brought her down to his lair (during the song "POTO").

Meg was also clearly not as stable and level-headed as Christine was during her encounters with the Phantom. It was cool to see the Phantom having his same seductive effect on another girl, but with drastically different results. She didn't mean to kill Christine, but the Phantom instead.

[theShape]

Originally Posted by Pink Ranger

I draw the conclusion from the part of the book of the show that goes like this, after Phantom kills Ubaldo and grabs Christine and flees underground:


CHRISTINE: Have you gorged yourself at last, in your lust for blood? Am I now to be prey, to your lust for flesh?

PHANTOM: That fate which condemns me, to wallow in blood. Has also denied me, the joys of the flesh.


Basically I've interpreted this scene as Christine fearing the Phantom will rape her, but the Phantom telling her that his physical and mental deformity make him incapable of sex.

Absolutely not. Christine is basically asking him if he's satisfied with what he's done ("lust for blood" = killing Buquet, Piangi) and if she's about to be his next victim. The Phantom replies by saying the reason he's so ****ed up is the same reason he's never experienced sex or love ("joys of the flesh"), which is his facial deformity.

[Angel_Faerie]

Originally Posted by theShape

As far as how she and the Phantom got it onnn, i believe its been stated that the "one night" for them was the night the Phantom first brought her down to his lair (during the song "POTO").

That makes no sense.

"You came and found where I hid"

That says to me that Christine went looking for the Phantom (swore someone said the night before her wedding to Raoul) after the end of the the first one, found him, and bow-chicka-bow-wow occurred.