I’ve previously written here about what a tough act to follow Andrew Lloyd Webber has given himself in re-visiting The Phantom of the Opera, as he’s long been planning to do.
And I’m not the only one who has doubted it: just yesterday, Lloyd Webber overheard two people preparing for today’s press launch of Love Never Dies saying, after they ran a short film listing the previous edition’s many accomplishments, that he must be mad to try to follow it - and wondered aloud what he proposed to call it: “Ugly Bastard 2?”
There have been several false starts over the years, including a prior collaboration with Frederick Forsyth that ended up with Forysth turning it into a novella of his own, “The Phantom of Manhattan”, instead of it into a musical; it marked a departure for Forsyth from his usual genre, but he said at the time, “I had done mercenaries, assassins, Nazis, murderers, terrorists, special forces soldiers, fighter pilots, you name it, and I got to think, could I actually write about the human heart?”
But for Lloyd Webber, of course, the original Phantom — which opened exactly 23 years ago tomorrow - was a return to writing about the human heart, after two musicals in which he had written about cats and trains. And it became a very personal cry from his own heart about the creative muse, with his then-wife Sarah Brightman cast as the adoring object of the Phantom’s veneration, the opera soprano Christine Daaé.
But this morning, as he formally announced the opening of Love Never Dies to the media at last, there were some strangely unanswered questions. Where, for instance, did Shanghai disappear to? Or, for that matter, to the original plan to open it simultaneously in London, New York and Shanghai? (Today’s announcement included dates for London and New York, and a proposed date for Australia). And though director Jack O’Brien confirmed that a New York theatre has been signed, they were not at liberty to divulge which one.
Nor, despite the fact that the entire cast has already been gathered together to record the full score (for release the day after the show opens in London next March), was Lloyd Webber able to announce who the rest of them were, besides Ramin Karimloo and Sierra Boggess. He let slip that Summer Strallen was confirmed to play Meg Giry, before censoring himself on the rest.
And asked whether Cameron Mackintosh, who co-produced the original Phantom, had sought to be involved in the sequel, Lloyd Webber replied, “I don’t want to talk about that”, before going on to say that Mackintosh had heard the score - and sent him the kindest and sweetest handwritten letter afterwards. Sarah Brightman, too, had heard the recording, and given him a couple of notes.
But though he was at great pains to insist that it was “not a sequel, but a stand-alone piece”, there also seemed to be some uncertainty about exactly who was being credited with writing the book: Lloyd Webber mentioned himself and Ben Elton (whom he had originally gone to after Forsyth) and Glenn Slater (who has written the lyrics), but Jack O’Brien - who wittily characterised himself as “the shrink”, asking the questions, “Yes, but why?” at every creative opportunity - pointed out that since the narrative is told through its songs, the responsibility for the book falls largely on the shoulders of the composer. Clearly no one has worked out what to put on the press release yet.
There’s also the question of the release of the album: stars Karimloo and Boggess didn’t know when it was being released, so I had to point out to them that the press release stated that it will be released on March 10 - the day after the world premiere in London. Lloyd Webber, asked why he has chosen to delay it until then instead of releasing it ahead of the opening as he had pioneered with Jesus Christ Superstar and Evita, mumbled something about piracy that he’d recently been speaking out against in the House of Lords (and pointed out that he feared that the song we’d heard that very morning, “Till I Hear You Sing Again”, was even now online somewhere as a result).
It’s true that The Phantom of the Opera has been a global phenomenon; as the press release puts it, it has been seen “by over 100m people, making it the single most successful entertainment entity in history.” But that means there are 100m people who already know something about the power of the Phantom, and may be keen to revisit it again. (In London, they’re even scheduling the matinee days for both on Tuesdays and Saturdays, so theatregoers who want to make a double-bill of it could potentially see one in the afternoon and the other in the evening). And if anyone can carry it off, Lloyd Webber can. I’ve already previously mentioned here how he’s breaking the marketing model for West End musicals by providing Twitter and Facebook updates.
But ultimately, the show will stand or fall by whether it delivers. And course, the received wisdom on sequels is that you have to be twice as good as the original, since people’s memories are unreliable and will remember something as better than it was; but when its actually as good as The Phantom still is, that responsibility is amplified even further.
I'm sick of it already. Shouldn't we be worried when the director of a musical can't name the book writer - and says that it doesn't really matter because it all falls on the composer's shoulders anyway? Surely Mr O Brien knows that the book to a musical is more than just the chat between tunes. And we're five months from the opening night in London and the cast album has been recorded? So that means the show and its songs are already set in stone? Has there ever been a musical that was set in stone? What's the point of recording a show so far in advance if one isn't going to make use of it? To build up anticipation? I'd say it's a mess. I'm sure it'll be grand to look at and lush to listen to and we'll be told by at least two critics that it's @Lloyd Webber's Best score since..." or "It's Lloyd Webber's Best score ever!" but the fact is that ALW hasn't written a new genuine hit since ...well let's be frank about this - Phantom. Think of the crap we've had to sit through since then...
So far the music released sounds bland. I don't think this will even be a hit amongst Phantom fans; what we know of the plot comes from the really bad Frederick Forsyth book with some minor changes, and it's all so totally against the characters.
I think Lloyd Webber must be hoping the 13 year old girls who flocked to the movie version will flock to see this on stage.
Here we go again, the launch and then within a few hours it starts. Lloyd Webber bland, Lloyd Webber rubbish etc. The thing about Lloyd Webber is that you may not LIKE his art, you may not buy into his particular brand of musical theatre but he is carrying out his plans and career in the way that he sees fit. He wants to produce a show which reaches a large public, most of his shows revolve around people in search of or scared of losing their audience and so is he.
At his best ALW is capable of delivering a musical that is full of rich, dramatic work, when he is engaged with the subject matter he writes from his heart and manages to enthrall and entertain millions of theatre goers who then go on to explore the genre and other writers.
I wish him well with Love Never Dies, the score released so far has a flair that we have not heard from him since Sunset Boulevard. When it comes to the book it is clear that ALW writes the structure and his shows are all about structure. In response to Mr Kirk who asks has there ever been a musical that is set in stone? The answer is yes, Jesus Christ Superstar and Evita and to some extent The Phantom were pretty set in stone by the preview period, it is the model that he has used throughout his career. He doesn't need to be a Wise Guy bouncing around in preview getting lost in the woods of his own writing, he prefers a clear visual and musical structure to frame the physical production around. He may not be the Midas that once he was, but let us not forget that the infrastructure, growth in audience and glamour of the West End has only been enhanced by Lloyd Webber through his career and any piece of work is worth judging on opening night, rather than judging through the green tinted specs of envy and derision.
It's not just people who dislike Lloyd Webber who are questioning this sequel, John, or finding the music bland. Fans of Phantom are saying exactly the same thing, even on the RUG's official web site.
I can understand that people are listening to the 7minutes of score that are available so far, and it is great they are having the debate about its merits. However, the score will be around Two and a Half Hours in total and as I outlined the scores that ALW tends to produce (since Starlight) tend to be visual and almost like movie scores that work in situ with the piece. As for the songs to judge a score on one moment is a bit odd. On the plus side at least he has us debating and talking about the musical theatre again, and this is probably the only original score opening in the West-End this season. Twenty Three years ago I think that people were saying the same thing about POTO
With respect Mr Richardson, The JCS score was set in stone and needed a visionary director to bring it to theatrical life , in New York it was Tom O Horgan and the production for the most part didn't work but the score was so strong that it outlived the production. The West End production had a different director and ran for years and years and was a success. Evita had the benefit of Harold Prince's vision and ability to form a sense of cohesiveness to the evening. And those two shows also had the extraordinary contributions of Tim Rice and they also had the benefit of a composer who was young and somewhat hungry. That was 30 years ago. Phantom again had the benefit of not only Harold Prince but of a co-producer who was willing to fight with ALW and Cameron Mackintosh's contribution to the success of that show shouldn't be under valued. Since that time ALW has called all the shots on his own shows - he has designated his collaborators, his subject matter, his marketing campaign , etc. And what is the result? Starlight Express, By Jeeves, Whistle Downthe Wind, Sunset Boulevard, The Beautiful Game, The Woman in White...
These are all shows that were kept afloat by ego and not by popularity. I think Sunset is a swell show with some terrific tunes but great? Not by a long shot. So what we are dealing with now is a rich and successful composer who is a lot older and who's creative prime was 30 years ago and he's still calling ALL the shots ( as is his right) as if the flops ( financial and/or creative) of the past 30 years haven't happened.
He was a better composer when all he worried about was the music before he became Franklin Shepard Inc. What I am dreading is the waves of hype and the force feeding of publicity that we are all going to be subjected to.
I understand what you mean Mr Kirk, I would say that EVERY show needs a Director who is going to shape and mould the piece. Evita works as a compositional piece by itself and yes it did help that Hal Prince was at the helm for the original production but some score languish before being rediscovered by a Prince, a Nunn or a Hytner, and surely this can be the case with ALW.
I understand that MANY have a distaste of the marketing that comes with Andrew's shows but that is part an parcel of what he does. In the same way the audience that embraces ALW tends to have an issue with the overt intellectual side of Sondheim's writing. I think the points you have made are very, very valid and it is clear that the shortcomings you point out have possibly made his later scores less successful. However, I feel that we too often swim in negativity toward Andrew and maybe I am not a fully payed up Sondhemite yet...a part of me likes the sheer brash showbiz marketing driven juggernaut that only Andrew seems to be providing. Well...with the possible exception of Platt and Stone and Schwartz.
Thanks for replying and keeping the conversation friendly! It's good that musical theatre makes us so passionate and that someone like Mark has this blog to let us air an opinion or two.
It's not just the score. It's the story (still looking to be uncomfortably close to Forysth's Phantom of Manhattan), and for some fans, the very notion.
Ithink you've made me realize exactly what it is that irks me about all this Phantom stuff and thatis that somehow the marketing campaign , the logo, the launch are all of equal if not greater imnportance in the ALW world rather than the show itself. They may not know who the bookwritter is but they sure as hell have their opening dates on two continents. I have no objection to a commercial creative impulse , I just hate, as an audience member being taken for a fool and condescended to. But before all this ALW stuff happens first we have to get through Legally Blonde!
The Phantom of the Opera needs no sequel, least of all one as ridiculous as LOVE NEVER DIES.
LOVE NEVER DIES may open (and close) across the world, but Phantom fans will not be silent.
http://twitter.com/loveshoulddie
http://facebook.com/luvshoulddie