have they fixed the Phantom sequel? | ★★★ Love Never Dies concert review (Theatre Royal, Drury Lane)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ส.ค. 2024
- Join my channel to gain access to exclusive content ⬇️
/ @mickeyjotheatre
check out our trip to see this show on @AeronJames channel ⬇️
• West End Theatre Trip:...
•
OHMYGOD HEY!
Earlier this week, LOVE NEVER DIES - the sequel to Andrew Lloyd Webber's The Phantom of the Opera, was staged in concert at Theatre Royal, Drury Lane in the West End.
This production starred Norm Lewis, Celinde Schoenmaker, Matthew Seadon-Young, Courtney Stapleton, Sally Dexter, and more.
Check out today's new review for my full thoughts on this show's material and plot as well as this new concert staging...
•
00:00 | introduction
03:03 | synopsis
10:34 | book / score
19:38 | staging / design
24:48 | performances
•
SUBSCRIBE to My Channel: @MickeyJoTheatre
#musical #westend #theatre - บันเทิง
I've said this for years, but Carlotta should have been the villain, and Meg and Mme Giry shouldn't be in this show at all. Carlotta has some serious bones to pick with both the Phantom (killed her husband) and Christine (stole her career). That could have been compelling.
...you are so right.
DAMN that's a good point, that's the story I'd like to see.
There are so many things they could have done. If they wanted another chandelier, they could have used a fake Phantom stalking Christine, which prompts the real Phantom to come out of hiding to protect her. Two Phantom musicals, two Phantoms. There's a hundred other ways they could have gone with this story and artistically it could have been satisfactory, equal with the music. Very frustrating musical.
yesssss! when I first found out about LND I was shocked as I had no clue...but even more shocked when Meg was the bad one....? like what lol. Meg was Christines bestie, and also found the phantoms mask at the end of the show kinda symbolizing that he had gone forever...maybe she was mad he returned lmao
I really liked the book that the show was originally devised from, The Phantom of Manhattan. It was just a new character that was from Coney island and it worked.
They should throw out the whole concert and have you sing it while telling the story with stuffed animals. You were hilarious.
YES...the stuffed animal production was WAY better than the Broadway touring company I saw! BRAVO!!
I will never get bored of people recounting the story of Love Never Dies. Especially illustrated by Bears. I was cackling.
I never need to see the show, honestly. I've gotten far more enjoyment by seeing the reviewed content on TH-cam.
I second that!
Love never dies is a very peculiar show - it's a fever dream fanfic from the original author. Which is weird by itself. And more so when you watch it develops as a full musical.
It's so weird that seeing it being played by bears makes it more... right... 😂
Poor eeyore raoul lol
The reenactment with the stuffed animals made my day, I laughed so much! 😂
IMHO, the material is inherently broken. It will never make sense to frame Phantom as not the villain he is and making Raoul as big of an asshat as he is means there's no one to root for in this. And then Meg is...I don't even know what the eff that was. My jaw dropped when she mentioned her new SW career.
(The bear review is A+ I would love more of it)
An excellent point - who am I rooting for, the child?!
@MickeyJoTheatre the child is only decent named human here! Maybe the bartender to get a better job?
I agree. The problem is the fact that they want to fix the ending of Phantom because people wanted originally the Phantom and Christine to get together. But the thing is that I feel Phantom never needed fixing because the Phantom was all about the idea of unrequited love (Plus dare I say he was willing to kill another person and force Christine into a marriage that she didn't want) so that is why it wasn't needed. And as well with Meg for me it was never made clear that of what she had done previously - to me personally it felt like she was just simply jealous of Christine and actually worried of being upstaged yet again because of her presence.
@@MickeyJoTheatre and listening to your review makes me realise....im not even hoping for Raoul because its awkward to remember he has been unsupportive and disrespectful since the first dressing room scene in Phantom
@danjon8799 Its implied early on with the Mr. Thomspon admirer line, but made exlicit in the finale when she literally says "...in their arms, in their beds..." its pretty fucked up, honestly.
When we were kids, my older sister wrote a sequel to Phantom. Whenever I hear the plot of LND (yours being the best rendition yet), I'm reminded that what my sister wrote at age 14 was much better. She did pull in some reincarnation stuff to avoid the need to retcon so drastically, but even she rolled her eyes at LND.
Ooh don't be shy, tell us the plot she came up with
Funny that you say that because about a decade ago, I started writing my own version of Phantom. It was basically another sequel since one of the songs was called “Why Meg?” lol, but it was definitely better than the story of Love Never Dies. The talking stuffed animals might be the best version tho.😅
The whole redemptive arc of the Phantom was negated. He had a moment of hope of changing for better at the end of POTO. Here, he's was still up to his gaslighting, trickery, and cruelty. He threatened to kidnap the kid, for heaven's sake. BTW, am I the only one who thinks part of the "Beneath the Moonless Sky" sounds like "Cell Block Tango" from "Chicago"? Loved your stuffed animal version!!!!
“He had it coming…”
“And I touched you…”
OH MY GOD. I’m singing one to the tune of the other and I am _DYING-_
The puppet show was very entertaining. I'd pay for that before paying for the actual show.
Same here! 🙋🏻♀️
Love Never Dies has always been an example of retcon. How did these two people conceive a child when he makes reference to his deformity not allowing him to enjoy the sins of the flesh.
There is nowhere in phantom that she demonstrates any love for phantom pity yes but not love Their treatment of the Raoul is almost a sacrilege I mean the poor bloke rescues Christine. Is willing to die for her and we are now supposed to believe he is just a drunk.
The reason this show failed was because of the retconning. Those who loved Phantom hated the way the characters had been altered. Frankly this show should have been left in ALWs mind. One final point. Hannah Waddingham singing Our Kind of Love. Is a million miles better than the song Love Never Dies
Also they never showed that Raoul and Christine loved each other. I would argue it was more of reminiscing their childhood and that they had more of a high school fling going on in Phantom. Plus he started off as the wild payboy type so it it more easy to believe he would become a drunk due to gambling away his fortune in Monti Carlo
I’ll stand by liking the real Raoul. He was a good person in the original musical. He and Christine were cute together and he was obviously the option that respected her more. Anyone who acts like Erik was the better choice is kind of in support of his incel-esque lashing out.
@@Nightman221kyeah, the sequel really glosses over the fact that Phantom literally killed people and threatened to murder Raoul similarly if she refused Phantom.
I think Love Never Dies says that right before she married Raoul Christine ran back to The Phantom, who she somehow knew the hiding place of, had sex with him, and wanted to ditch Raoul for him, and that's why she got knocked up with a Phantom baby. It's still absurd, but strictly speaking doesn't contradict The Phantom mentioning being a virgin at the end of the first play. I would agree that Christine doesn't ever show love for The Phantom in the first play and goes from thinking he's a literal angel sent by her father to realizing he's a creepy, menacing stalker. The "Love Triangle" is in the minds of people who think the Phantom is sexy and mysterious, even though that's supposed to be just as much of a mask for something horrible underneath as his literally mask.
@@OrangeStrayCat yes I forgot that. Just makes the whole idea of LND even more thoroughly absurd. It’s just complete retcon. Most Phantom fans I know just work in a universe where LND does not exist. A bit like Independence Day 2. Having watched it we then ignore it’s very existence. That Raoul and Christine lived happily ever after until she died from some unspecified illness leaving a heartbroken Raoul and an army of their children.
You are right about the love triangle sexy phantom angle. That’s only recent. Phantom was always about unrequited love. And I certainly know many women who hate LND because at it’s core is a woman seemingly under the coercive control of her abuser. There is zero romance in that. It’s considered sexy mainly because Ramin was a “sexy” phantom but what if Michael Crawford had played him. Given Crawford was more the right age than Ramin.
“I try not to think about it too often, because the nightmares persist.” Is EXACTLY how I feel about this show. Like if I think about it too much, it’ll give me a headache so I’m happier pretending it doesn’t exist
This recap should be the definitive version of Love Never Dies
Maybe he's even finally found a way to fix Cinderella- Using stuffed animals.
@@Nikki-tx6kh Let's petition for Mickey Jo to do a Cindebearla
@@if3359 Stuffed Cinderella
I honestly think I would enjoy LND so much more if it was featuring entirely different characters. Could have been great with originals characters, (I shamefully enjoy the Coney Island aesthetic and score)
see what you (and I) really want is more Tim Burton musicals
Yes! Separated from the Phantom, it could be a cool show. As a sequel, it's just nonsensical.
This!! Even if people might complain about Webber just retreading the same ground like the mysterious figure being in love with the singer and wanting to pull her away from her current lover, fans of the show would probably be enjoying and analyzing the comparisons because of how the plots are handled differently. Sure in Phantom we root for Raoul to save Christine as Erik becomes more unhinged as the show goes on, but Mr. Y could be argued as eccentric and has his underhanded way of dealing with the love triangle and Christine leaving her family for him would be understandable since she's in a loveless, potentially abusive relationship with her husband. They already had songs to explain what happened between the opera house and the circus, there's no reason why an original production couldn't have something to explain maybe Christine's counterpart was once a member of the circus who ran off with some rich suitor and Meg is jealous because she was a rival act who thought she'd be the star once Christine left but it's been years and she's STILL being overlooked. In fact, if doing a different show, Christine could have a different talent than singer to make her stand out more from the original. And it would make the history between Mr. Y and Christine more believable because they don't have to spell out how Gustave was possible, we just know these two used to be lovers and Mr. Y starts off bitter because she left him for money and now has come crawling back to him now that she's broke. Raoul and Madame Giry wouldn't have to change at all in their plots because they got done so dirty in this that the original characters could stand on their own. (I too am in love with the set. That opening number in the version I saw on tour really drew you into the carnival atmosphere)
@@Kahtisemo YES! It would do so much to prevent the plot holes LDN has *as a sequel*. I love your idea of the Christine counterpart having a different talent - maybe it can be something related to the circus universe (aerial silk???) where she can also sing the LND song, except this time she sings it to express how she feels about Mr. Y not as a mere performance song. And her making the choice to go ahead with the aerial silk number Mr. Y conceived for her would have much higher stakes (re: trusting him) than singing.
@@camille6933 Oh I like the idea of the title song being her idea because then it makes the love feel more genuine. I was trying to think of what acts could be easily shown on stage and hadn't thought of aerial silk. My first thought was a tightrope walker (made safe by stage magic) but I could see that too. Either pausing mid performance or seeming to freeze before or after when she sees her husband off stage one direction and Mr. Y the other and then starts singing. The audience thinks it's part of the show but the men know she's making a decision and Raoul walks off.
On that note, I wonder if that could also come up when Raoul yells at the paparazzi earlier. They ask Christine if she's going to be doing any tricks in her new show and Raoul snaps that the Viscountess doesn't do that anymore, she's here to be a serious singer. But Mr. Y is convinced she can still do it and Christine has a very real fear at first about his proposal because she hasn't done it in years. But after the performance just solidifies for her that she can and she misses it badly. Would also make the Devil Takes the Highmost scene more interesting because WE know that Christine was threatened earlier but doesn't know about the bet. Raoul made the bet, but doesn't know about the threat, but is more than sure even if Christine goes on stage, she'll back out. This is crazy and dangerous and she'll come back to him when she realizes it. Then she ends up doing amazing and he realizes she's not coming back. Also Mr. Y realizing Gustave is similar to him because of his creative musical / mechanical talents could still be there because that's more distinctly Mr. Y's thing if his mother wasn't also a musical superstar.
OMG the synopsis with the stuffed animals (including Anne Bearlyn!). I’m laughing so much.
I think Hadley Fraser would be an amazing LND Raoul. He received a lot of criticism for playing a more serious and frustrated Raoul in the 25th anniversary (which I don’t agree with) and he has had quite a lot of experience playing drunk people like Grantaire in Les Mis. Hearing Hadley and Ramin Karimloo sing Devil Take The Hindmost would just be so beautiful
Good news, he was indeed Raoul on a LND cast recording, and Ramin was the phantom there, so you can hear that duet
@@katherinecleary425 Which one and where can I find it?
@@hannahbrennan2131 I just checked, and actually I was wrong about that, I just got confused cause Ramin and Sierra Boggess were on it and I hadn’t listened to it in a while. So sorry for misleading you
@@katherinecleary425 It's OK. We all make mistakes.
i liked his raoul though, and it felt like matt blaker was similar
Did you ever see Lindsay Ellis' great video essay on this show? I loved her take that this was all the Phantom fanfic distilled and thrown up onstage.
Mickey Jo, you have a whole new career ahead of you, musical synopses with stuffed animals! Genius 😂
I saw the show at the Adelphi. I thought that, overall, what it needed to make sense was a framing device - the real Phantom, broken, decrepit, feverishly scribbling down a vengeful fantasy on the woman who(very gently, all things considered) rejected him(her marriage is miserable AND she dies AND he doesn't even want her any more), the man he lost her to(he's bankrupt AND a violent drunk AND he can't get it up) and everyone else who just happened to be there, including completely impossible details like a half hour medley of songs all about that one time they totally did it, guys, while you weren't looking, and that's why her son is actually his, and an absurd depiction of himself as a young, dashing, handsome genius who all the girls are falling over themselves for.
If it was all from his warped and disintegrating perspective, it would make sense.
Except Meg shooting Christine by accident. That was such an anticlimax. There was no foreshadowing, no sense of her being doomed by narrative forces beyond her control, just whoops - should have stood six inches to the left.
It does have some good numbers, out of context, though. I even enjoyed "Bathing Beauty", though it was in completely the wrong part of the show and slammed the brakes on the momentum that was trying to get going.
Yeah, the best thing about LND is how it's an exact repeat of Don Juan Triumphant
I may never fully love this show, but Mickey's bear show was a highlight of my day! "Seriously, why are you like this?" to Phantom Bear....hysterical.
If anyone is interested in a more in-depth history and analysis of this show, I highly recommend Lindsay Ellis' video on it! Her recap of the plot, even though it lacks plush bears like this one, is equally as hilarious.
10 Years Olddddd!!!
I second the recommendation.
@@MissEricaFlowers Give me the gun Meeeeeeg!
@@IWillBeHerssaid the phantom of the opera.
Also, is her final video on TH-cam.
@@Nadia1989thank god for that
Bravo the bears! Brill review ..
Hear hear!
Standing O for the cuddly toy retelling 👏
Til I Hear You Sing is quite beautiful, I listen to Ramin's version repeatedly and it brings tears to my eyes.
It's the only thing about this show I acknowledge. The song exists for me completely separately of the show.
I do love Norm and Celinde as performers, I wouldn't have thought of them performing Phantom and Christine together. I'm sure they were great.
Norm Lewis is one of my favorite performers ever so I am glad to hear he's killing it again.
I saw it in Baltimore during the tour and have 3 distinct memories.
1. Phantom wasn’t hitting his notes and they switched to the understudy DURING INTERMISSION.
2. In the first scene of Act Two when the bar is being brought on I spotted the phantom hiding under it, hilarious.
3. THEY STILL CHANGED THINGS FROM THE AUSTRALIAN RECORDING!! The beauty underneath was a totally different song!
Anyways I love Love Never Dies and I can’t decide if it’s ironically or unironically.
Just one friendly aside: Coney Island isn't an island per se. It is a neighborhood sort of on a peninsula in southern Brooklyn. So here in New York, we just refer to it like any other neighborhood (in Coney Island rather than on Coney Island). Hope this is helpful and not offensive. Love your channel.
"and if you don't know what Phantom of the Opera is, I don't know what you are doing here" LMAO! Loved your stuffed animal recreation. You are so much fun!
About the story - I understand Raoul's downfall. After all he was married to a woman who passionately loved someone else and he knew it. How do you live with that?
I agree Til I Hear You Sing should have been put back til later in the show.
I would love to hear a cast recording of this performance. Any chance that happened?
but she didn't. There was no indication of it in Phantom. The story just feels so cheaply fabricated and toxic....it's just not a "love"story I want to see in 2023 and the characters themselves are not compelling and authentically ambiguous enough to make it an awful yet interesting tale to tell.
I saw it on tour a few years ago in California. I understand why people either love or hate it. I thought it was an interesting take on the next chapter of that story. The prince (Raoul) turned into a toad, Christine chooses her past abductor/stalker (phantom) as her true love and then she gets shot to death. Wow. Lastly, what the hell happened to Meg?!?! I did not see that coming!
It's literally ALW self insert fanfiction. I'm shocked anyone can watch it and feel clean afterwards
@@Chibbykins - Actually, this dumpster fire is based on the novel “The Phantom of Manhattan”.
@@Chibbykins and that, in my opinion, is how it needs to be presented - as the rantings of a vengeful reject, fantasising about what he wishes would happen to everyone who he perceives as having slighted him.
@@ChienaAvtzon iirc Lloyd Webber actually had it commissioned.
@@Seal0626 - You are confusing this train wreck with “Sweeney Todd”, the later of which is a masterpiece.
Andrew Lloyd Webber, for all his issues, was still a well-regarded composer prior to “Love Never Dies”. This is the musical that killed his legacy. He just refused to believe Christine deserved better than both Raul and the Phantom. Honestly, both men are creeps.
I bought the cast recording several months before seeing the original in London. I loved the music and was really optimistic about seeing it live. Upon arrival, we were upgraded to a better part of the auditorium. Not a good sign as this means the show was far from ‘house full’. By the interval, I wanted out. But I stayed. By the time we get to the final scene, I was completely done. I almost wanted Christine to hurry up and…. I won’t say why, for spoilers. One critic dubbed it ‘paint never dries’. This was very apt. But, I still love the music and listen to it, often.
I love your story! Haha yeah I engaged with the music a lot more than the recording. That being said if I ever need to be cheered up I watch Beneath a Moonless Sky and cackle hysterically.
I went to see the third and final performance of this on the Tuesday. Norm Lewis blew me away with Til I Hear You Sing, and Celinde Schoenmaker's performance of Love Never Dies was the best I've ever heard - a literal showstopper, resulting in a 3-minute standing ovation which I've never seen midway through a show. There wasn't really a weak link in the cast vocally - the lad who played Gustave actually made the role likeable, whereas every other portrayal I've just found saccharine / wet. (I did think Sally Dexter fluffed a few of Madame Giry's lines, but she got all the key bits - Dear Old Friends and the act one finale - right, which is the main thing.) The orchestra was INCREDIBLE - LND is easily one of ALW's most lush scores, and I don't think it's ever sounded better. Clearly, everyone there in the audience knew the show, knew its faults and foibles, knew what they were getting and had come anyway - there was a lot of love in the room for LND, which definitely helped.
Now, plot. This has always been LND's problem, and what I can't fathom is how it's been tweaked so many times and yet it STILL doesn't work - probably because the fundamentals of the narrative are broken already.
• Christine never displays physical attraction or lust for the Phantom in POTO. In one of the very last lines she speaks in the show, she calls him 'pitiful creature'. She pities him. She sees him as a creature. So I can't buy them having a night of passion - even with the justification that "well, she was able to get it on with him because he kept the lights off". It says a lot that when they reprise 'Twisted Every Way', they have to leave out the lyrics 'He kills without a thought, he murders all that's good'. Because that's true of the Phantom in POTO, but they don't want us to remember that now because now we're meant to think of him as a love interest and gloss over his past murders, lies, and gaslighting.
• Although characters can and should change, and narratively and creatively it may seem a bold twist to take a formerly heroic character and turn them into a drunken, self-pitying arse, the show really does Raoul dirty. The problem is, if you're going to have a sequel, you have to change something in the dynamics - you can't have a sequel where Christine and Raoul are happy, have no secrets, and at the end everything is the same as it was at the end of POTO. So you have to break the fairytale, poignant, romantic ending of POTO to create the conditions for a follow-up. I just think the change is too jarring - the fact they turned Raoul in the 25th anniversary recording of POTO into an arrogant, cold, dismissive arse felt to me like trying to foreshadow / justify the Raoul they created in LND and I did not like that.
• I personally never had a big problem with what LND did to Meg. She wasn't so well-developed in POTO that I felt her character was fixed or defined. Easy to explain that she had some resentment for being in Christine's shadow, and her mother being so focussed on Christine rather than her. The big problem in LND now is, they've removed ALL that explanation. The scene from the original version after 'Only For You' where she tries to flirt with the Phantom, telling us she's romantically interested in him - gone. The suggestion that she has 'admirers' ("Is he important?") who she's bedding to get investment and permissions for the Phantom to build his empire - gone. Her hope that the Phantom is writing a beautiful aria for her, allowing her to be more than merely 'cheap Vaudeville trash', only to have those hopes dashed when she discovers he's written it for Christine - gone. Her frustration / upset / annoyance to find she's sharing the bill with Christine - gone. Now, she goes from being excited that Christine is coming, to looking briefly upset then cheerful about sharing the billing with Christine, to - now out of nowhere - having an anguished meltdown that the Phantom didn't watch her performance of Bathing Beauty. Removing ALL that background, explanation, motivation for her character means the last 30 minutes make no sense at all. Whether or not you liked the change in Meg in the original, at least narratively it was justified, it made sense. Now it's happy little Meg to mentally broken psycho Meg in one step. Given her bitterness and rage at the end of act 1, it would have made more sense for it to be Madame Giry I think. (I think, anyway. I haven't played that through in my mind to be sure it would work narratively, but instinctively I feel like it would be less out of left field.)
• The Phantom's scheming makes no sense! By the end of act one, he's broken by Christine's revelation and tells her to just go. She says she'll stay to sing for him once more, perform this new song of his, then go. Then at the start of act two, he's apparently changed his mind and is making a deal / bet with Raoul whereby, if he wins, Christine stays there forever. Make up your mind, man. "I just want to hear you sing again!" to "I'll kidnap your son if you don't" to "Just go" to "If she sings, she stays here forever". It's helplessly inconsistent.
Musically, I love LND. It shows what a great composer ALW is. But it's such a shame this gorgeous score is stuck with this irredeemable mess of a plot. It will never happen, but it needs a completely new book writing from scratch to make sense, and to give ALW's score a show it is fit to be attached to.
24:06 "sing for me just like your mother used to" had my dying, that was EXACTLY what was going through my mind when I watched the matinee performance. Sadly in that one Norm forgot some of TIHYS, though the rest of his performance was stellar.
He forgot lyrics every night apparently 😮
This has got to be the best synopsis of the show I’ve heard. It’s such a weird show that I don’t hate but I always wanted to like more. And you should always use plushies when explaining the plot.
RE the pre-recorded part - not only did the Gustave part look pre-recorded but the WHOLE of the beauty underneath was pre-recorded and lipsynced. I was front row and the phantom lipsyncing incorrect lyrics gave it away very clearly. Felt incredibly awkward. I imagine it was harder to tell further back.
I can understand the choice to have Madame change the backstory - as people do re write their own history if it will serve them now.
In phantom I see her wanting to cling onto Christine’s success and therefore helping Raoul save her in the hope she can continue riding the coattails of success. When that fails she moves to stay with the Phantom and pushes Meg into anything for her own gain/survival. Overall between the two musicals I see her as a complete manipulator and gaslighter!
Totally agree with you, I prefer the original version of the show!
To me, she pitied the Phantom, because the way he was being treated at the circus. When she rescued him, she didn't realize what would end up happening at the Opera House. She'd gotten in too deep. That's why she helps Raoul to save Christine, because the Phantom is just going too far, first the murders and now this. I think she would have been relieved to be shot of him.
Confusing story aside, I love (most of) the musical numbers in this show. It was on my bucket list to see, if it ever did show again, so I jumped at the chance to see it in concert! I'm so glad I did - the simplicity of the scaled down performance, whilst still engaging, really created an amazing atmosphere to appreciate the gorgeousness of the cast and orchestra. I'd definitely go again!
This was the most hilarious plot description I've heard. Well done!!
Fun fact - "The Beauty Underneath" started life in the Denise van Outen production of _Tell Me On A Sunday,_ as "Haven in the Sky", before jumping across to the 2003 US tour of _Starlight Express_ as "A Whole Lotta Locomotion", then being written into its current form, at which point the _Starlight Express_ copy had to invert the melody a little bit to try to make it sound like they weren't the exact same song.
Love Never Dies is a reused melody too. It used to be The Heart is Slow to Learn which I think was from The Beautiful Game.
@@ArrowOdenn it was "Our Kind of Love"(inexplicably not intended as a gay anthem) at that time, but yes.
And then The Beauty Underneath turned into Beauty Has a Price from ALW's Cinderella😂
Already waiting for the MickeyJo Christmas panto with bears!!!!
I saw Norm as the Phantom 10 years ago and he immediately became one of my favorite performers. Love Never Dies sounds ridiculous but I’d see it to see him.
I don't believe that Christine loved the Phantom. He practically drove her crazy, and she loved Raoul. The plot of LND is poor fan fiction. I prefer the original and i don't believe Christine could have given concent to her abductor so he raped her. Argh
I don’t think that Christine could ever had true feelings for Erik because of how manipulated their relationship was from the start. He gaslit and abused her and took advantage of her trust. For all the faults people say Raoul has he had a normal past with her, they enjoyed each other’s company, they kept each other safe. It’s not the most interesting option cause they’re just a happy and healthy relationship. It’s why her leaving with him and living a happy life with him before she passed away was her happy ending. LND turned her into a skanky adulterer (sleeping with a murderer the night before your wedding? Classy.) and Raoul an alcoholic both just done to make Erik look better.
You probably don't know what rape looks like..... He took her with him because he was desperate for love, but he didn't even raise a hand against her or assaulted her. Did he beat and brutalize her, did he slap and smack her!? No, he did none of those things. In other words, you are wrong. But yes, she didn't love him.... So it makes sense that she chose the perfect guy with the perfect life. She just didn't want to live in a cave for the rest of her life. In that song( All I ask of you) Christine is basically just saying she wants the opposite of what the phantom wants to give her and she wants Raoul to give her what she think she needs.
@@ingridmay66Well, no, but Erik does tend to treat Christine more as his property than as a person. Heck, in the book, he thinks having a wife is the same as owning a pet and threatens to blow up the opera house with Raoul inside if Christine refuses to marry him after she tried to self harm herself to escape.
@@annieandelsieofarendelle3294 In the book he's a total creep....But Andrew Webber took that story and made his own version. Yes, compare it to the novel of course, but the story is a bit different and so are the characters. In Webber's version he's really not that way!( in the movie version he was a kind, sensitive and sad person, sometimes he was angry - it's understandable given what he's been through). The phantom is a good example of just what a good person can do when too many bad things happen to them. Although he made some mistakes, and at first he just couldn’t understand love and how to care for someone... However, he learned what love was in the end(when he kissed Christine)... He really proved how much he loved her and how much he had improved... Also, I think the sequel should have been without Christine. I mean Christine didn't love the Phantom, and I don't think she was a good match for the phantom. She is too weak.... I like the idea of this dude moving on and finding someone else. He needs someone with fire and passion....
@@ingridmay66Calling Christine weak is wrong. She wasn't. She was terrified that the angel she had trusted and thought of as a father was actually the insane creeper who lived under the Opera Hous and would kill anyone, included her lover, in order to keep her to himself
"You know what that'll actually do me, you can go" is killing me!
LND is my guilty pleasure. I loved the OLC, the filmed Australian one is pretty but I didn't love all the changes, and I've seen the US tour twice. The changes to Beauty Underneath from the tour was surprising but it flows so much better with the rest of the show.
I found a lot of the characterization lost from the OLC, but a lot of the lyrics got better. I miss the creepy opening that sets the stage similar to the original production and all of the backstage moments we get from Meg that really help solidify her character arc.
That said, I think the tour is the best version, giving nods to both and still outstanding.
Who in their right mind told Andrew Lloyd Webber that adapting “The Phantom of Manhattan” into a musical was a good idea? That novel was a bizarre and trashy fan-fiction sequel. “Love Never Dies” is such a silly title, when the lead female character dies. Honestly, it is a shame, because a Coney Island carnival freak show could be a great setting for a musical, if it were based on stronger source material.
Even though, I am someone who hates Raul and thinks he is possessive. I still do not understand people who wanted Christine to end up with the Phantom. The Phantom, while sympathetic, is a violent serial killer.
PS: Norm Lewis is a great actor and baritone. Not only was he King Triton, but Sierra Boggess was Christine when he was the Phantom.
In theory, a Phantom of the Opera sequel sounds like an interesting idea, but not the Forsyth book or "Love Never Dies".
@@madhatterster - Ummmm, no…. sequels to musicals are never a good idea, especially to a composer’s magnum opus. There is a reason the story ends the way it does.
The entire issue with “Love Never Dies”, is the plot relies on the audience believing Christine and the Phantom had a one night stand. Meaning, the very existence of a child is what creates the problem. Raul being an alcoholic and gambler makes sense, because he was abusive in “Phantom of the Opera”. The Phantom ending up running a Coney Island carnival freak show makes sense, because he is deformed and in need of a family. Women being jealous of a Christine, to the point of killing her, also makes sense. As her career was handed to her on a silver platter. That said, no one actually wanted a sequel to the story. The majority of the audience enjoyed the ambiguous ending to “Phantom of the Opera”.
@@ChienaAvtzon Sorry, I'm not going to believe that sequels to musicals are bad ideas because a few shows mucked up the storyline.
This was the most entertaining musical theater review I've ever seen. MickeyJo should do a one man show❤😂
I second that! Such a laugh 😂
The Christine Daae bear is PERFECT, I AM WEEPING.
The bears & your commentary were the best things I’ve seen in a while. And we share the same opinion on this show.
I’m only 7 minutes in and this is already my favourite review video ever 👏 🐻
This musical was actually based off of a book called "The Phantom of Manhattan." (It basically was fan fiction before that was a thing.) The villian in that is different from "Love Never Dies" however. I don't think either of them work because the characters are changed so much. A prequel probably made more sense to see how Erik became so twisted. But a sequel where a murderer is turned into the hero, that doesn't jive with the original book or the 1st musical.
There's a book written by Susan Kay titled 'Phantom' that gives the Phantom an in-depth and compelling backstory. I would have loved to see it adapted into a stage musical or even a play.
I think I was there on the same night as you! The storyline is bizarre, but I think the music is stunning, and honestly I was just ecstatic to get to hear it live as I never saw the original. Also to hear it with a full orchestra was just an incredible experience!
I knew this was going to be a fun review when you opened with "Phantom of the Opera 2 Operatic Boogaloo" 😂
I agree that a few of the revisions are baffling and I don’t understand why the creative team thought this version is better. Till I Hear You Sing was better in its original placement. If they wanted to cut the original prologue they could have just opened the show with the revised company version of the Coney Island Waltz. I think The Beauty Underneath is supposed to be a nod to the title song in Phantom of the Opera but the music isn’t integrated as well into the score as in Phantom so the shift in style feels more jarring. I also prefer the original version of the song vs the revised version that was used in the US tour and re-recorded for the Australian cast album.
You could open it, deliberately jarringly, with "Bathing Beauty" and then just have a partial reprise of the song where it went before, so it doesn't slow down the action at the end.
Saw this production twice : Monday evening and just HAD to come back for the Tuesday evening performance .Norm Lewis reduced me to jelly after " Til I hear you sing ". I've never felt that way after just one song . The end of Les Misérables does that to me, as does the end of Blood Brothers , but the story has had time to build up to these moments . Having Norm Lewis walk in stage, sing and have that effect is why I went back on the Tuesday
Norm Lewis was so magnificent and his pain and despair felt totally believable .
I wonder if the gold/bronze mask was to suit his skin tone .
During "Love never dies" he was stood v still in the box on the left hand side of the audience . I saw him creep in and also disappear .
I like the series of concerts that have been staged at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane , it enables us to see shows at a lower price (no expensive props/staging ) and to experience the shows in a different way
I’m obsessed whenever you give us a recap of any musical but especially the ones that don’t make sense. 😂😂😂 I’m getting ready for work and CACKLING!
“..and if you don’t know what phantom of the opera is I honestly don’t know what your doing here” 😂😂😂love it, also love the use of the cuddley toys!
I loved this video. You made me laugh over and over. The stuffed animals,,, the snark that isn’t too snarky. So fun. Thank you
Omg the stuffed animal reenactment of the show is everything 🤣 can this be added to all videos please??
Saw it in Melbourne 5 times - including the filmed performance- whilst the staging of the Australian production is incredible and I think it is one of ALW's best scores - it's almost impossible to get over the weak story and how it basically ignores a lot of the story and ending of the original
Agree.
Saw the Tuesday matinee, having flown from the States because of huge Norm adoration.
Your review is Life.
It's my guiltiest pleasure; it's ultra fanservicey service. I saw the US tour (teeny orchestra mostly synths) and just love the original recorded score (Karimloo/Burgess are vocally wonderful together). Almost as much as I love this video, which is the best thing you have done. More stuffed animal versions of shows please.
That recap was everything! Had me laughing so much I had to watch again! 🤣
Totally keen for more plot recaps with toys!
Your plot summary is the best thing about this show -- especially with (but even without) the puppets.
Very much enjoyed the recap with the 🐻🐻🐻 😍😅 - how informative in an engaging way! Brava! 👏👏👏 🌹 🌹🌹I have no desire to see this show but really enjoyed this review, thank you. 🎉
Haha, glad you enjoyed - I had fun 😂
I could tell 😂 ❤️
*Bravo!
Please include a plot reenactment with stuffed animals in every video. It had me rolling XD
I saw it in Sydney twice in January 2012. Honestly, I loved and still love this show. For me, the score has two of my favourite songs “Love Never Dies,” and “Once Upon Another Time.” I would honestly be thrilled to see this revived in a bigger production!
I loathe LND, but I will happily rewatch your bear version many, many times. Bravo! 😂😂😂
I've seen the original of this and had no memory of Meg trying to drown the boy or the shooting so now I'm wondering if I left early 😂😂
Interesting review again. I will say from the get-go Phantom is my favourite musical of all time so imagine 13 year old me that was so intrigued like you when I heard that it was getting a sequel and when I saw the Australian recording I thought lots of things at the same time. I will say this which is I do think that this does have its good moments (I particularly love all the songs you've mentioned but as well the Quartet sung by Raoul, Phantom, Giry and Gustave before the performance and also Devil Takes the Hindmost) but the thing is I feel what impresses me is the music and partly because at that point ALW had made some musicals which have not been revived for a reason (I know everyone talks about how he's incredible but the thing I always question is why he bring these shows back this year and not ones that were definitive flops such as The Woman in White, The Boys in the Photograph and Stephen Ward and in my opinion those shows have extremely questionable content but also content that is simply not good one bit).
But even then I think of your point where you say you have to compare the two and the thing is when you compare it musically it just is not good one bit (even the songs in Phantom which some would say are not the standouts (e.g. Notes, Prima Donna) are better than the whole score of LND in my opinion) and I think the issue particularly is that the plot sounds so much like a fan fiction. To be honest, I know I sound stupid but up until now I didn't realise that Meg had prostituted before but once again that is the fault of the show because it isn't made clear one bit (I think it shows how damning the show is even though I am a massive fan of Phantom and that went over my head).
If anything, as I said it is a guilty pleasure of mine but I think there's a reason why some things should never be revived and the problem is with LND they were trying to capture another lightning in a bottle when it was impossible to replicate it. I think especially when you look at the plot of Phantom it can be a tad flimsy at times but the thing that keeps it intact is the spectacle so when you are trying to replicate it with another flimsy plot that will never happen. Plus unlike Phantom I actually think they don't know what the plot of it needs to be because one minute its high romance, the next its trying to be campy horror and then its trying to be a sequel at the same time and unlike where Phantom did achieve that (I think weirdly by leaning into the concept that it was set behind the scenes of a theatre) this doesn't work.
But that being said it is still a guilty pleasure.
I have been waiting for your review!! Amazing.
I went on Monday evening and Tuesday matinee and even though I definitely think the plot is bananas, and needs serious re-working to be at the level of Phantom (if it ever could?) but the music is some of ALW's best.
The whole cast were phenonenal too.
I totally agree that Till I Hear You Sing should be brought later - it almost could be the final song of the show after Christine is dead.
In the Australian version, it’s literally the first song. I could see why it maybe could’ve come in a bit later.
*Listening to the plot for the first time* WTH ; /
However, love your reenactment 😂
Love the synopsis recap via bears.... "and her mother Mme. Giry...who is ...a cat"
Thoroughly enjoyable review. You made my morning 🤣.
This explanation of the plot is truly comedy gold. Please do more
😂 One of your best reviews. 'one of these things is not like the others'
Excellent review! Very entertaining! Thank you so much! Love the bears! By the way, regarding the full phantom mask in the poster...I once heard that originally, the phantom costume was designed to have a full mask, but Michael Crawford couldn't sing in it and complained that it felt claustrophobic, so they redesigned it to be just a half mask. Interesting. I've always assumed this story to be true.
I love this! The bears are amazing!
I saw the original production at the Adelphi Theatre. I’ll never forget it, it was wonderful, darkly fascinating and of course Sierra and Ramin were outstanding. In my humble opinion, that was the best version of the show.
I saw this version too. I absolutely loved it. I cried for a solid 10 minutes after it had finished - I was so moved by it all. I always felt that Christine loved the Phantom and should have been with him. (I missed all the evil, killing parts of him because he could sing beautifully!!) ❤
Thank you, so much, needed this.
I remember listening to the soundtrack non-stop when it first came out and I listened to the 'Twisted Everyway' bit on repeat because it was the most beautiful part of the whole score, only realising later that it was from the original. I think that's sort of the theme of the whole show - all the best bits come from Phantom.
let´s be real: your puppet version is much better than the actual show, can we have that as a live performance please?
Thanks for the review. I always knew Christine loved the Phantom. i'm shocked he had a speech after Bad Cinderella & was there. I always sing the title number of the musical "Phantom of the Opera". Ramin and Sierra will always be the best casting of phantom and christine.
I think the teddy bear really added to this review :)
🤣🤣🤣 I love your narration of the story plot line 😂😂😂
Your retelling! I haven't laughed so much in ages!😂
I was invited to the UK premiere of the very first performances and loved it. When you re-look at Phantom of the Opera it's also a sparse set staging. I always wanted them to do a Phantom day where we go and see Phantom in the afternoon with Ramin and Sierra then in the evening we go and see Love Never Dies with Ramin and Sierra in the roles.
The synopsis is giving me life! Thank you MickeyJo!
At least it was a concert production without Julian Ovenden.
Uh I don’t think anyone could fix love never dies as long as lord Andy is still around and kicking
You definitely should consider this as workshopping this version of LND and shop investors because it definitely deserves at least a limited theatre run. ❤
Living for the Bears....
Due to a strange twist of job location, I have actually seen all versions off this show - original London, London v2.0, Melbourne, US tour and now the concert...
It seems each rewrite, more of the music from the original is squeezed in. I am 99.9% certain that the only music from Phantom in London v1 was the "twisted every way" passage just before love nver dies.
IMO - the original opening sequence was far superior, but this was gone by V2.0..... as you rightly said, opening with till I hear you sing just doesn't work.
If there was ever a production made with the original opening sequence and a hybrid of the London and Melbourne staging, it might approach being a good show....
I never realized the full mask concert poster vs the half mask in the show. 😮 Mind blown.
I saw an interview with Norm once and he was talking to casting directors about how he figured he could never be up for the role in phantom because he’s not a tenor. And they said “yes, but do you think you can sing the notes beautifully eight times a week?” And he said, yes, he could do it, so they cast him. And then he went and played the extreme bass of Caiaphas in Jesus Christ Superstar live, so 🤷🏼♀️
but he clearly isn't a bass - he has the range but not the timbre. He did a fine job with Caiaphas but the bottom notes lacked the power a true bass would have brought (just as John Legend obiously is not a tenor and Jesus really IS a tenor role). There are barely any basses in mt though since there is almost no material for them. In modern mt there is also barely any material for baritones left - you have to at least be able to "baritenor" a lot if you want to work.
I 100% agree with you on the changes. I have had the absolute pleasure of seeing LND 3 times in the span of 5 days during a trip to London in 2012 (and one of those 3 times it was a matinee show after which we went straight to Her Majesty's to watch the original, lmao. We binge-watched Phantom in the wrong order that day.) and to this day it remains of one of my favorite theatre experiences. Was it good? Hell no. Was it hysterical? Yes. I love it to bits. But even back then I remember being a bit upset that they had changed it compared to the original cast recording which always felt like the only version that truly had a strong, cohesive vision. I love Fleck, Squelch and Dr.Gangle in the CD.
I tried to watch Love Never Dies when it came through 3 years ago and I wound up leaving at intermission. I just couldn't take the madness and the plot. I will admit as a teenager I had the idea in my head of Christine winding up with the phantom but I hate how dirty they did Raoul in this.
There's a version of "The List" from Mikado with the line
"They say love never dies, but I wish it would"
and I think that just about sums it up
The stuffed animal recap is everything
Genuinely think this was the best video I’ve ever watched
I first saw the show on the video version but got to see it live on a tour. I gotta say the tour version caught me off guard because I'm not sure if the cast intended to ham up everything or if it just came out way funnier than it should have been due to overdramatics. 😂 I think they did it on purpose though since some scenes were touching and others (particularly showcasing DTtH how petty Raoul and Phantom are being while trying to act intimidating but also taking turns keeping a chair between them to keep the other from attacking first?) seemed like cast was having fun with the plot. Either way, I was amused.
The more I look at your reviews, the more amazed I am at the relevance of your comments, the detail of all your analyses and the accuracy of your remarks. It's really excellent professional work. And on the subject of Love Never Dies (as I said in a comment on another of your videos), the music is interesting, but the very first production in London (which I saw at the time) was a real mess, sometimes bordering on the ridiculous.
Just as I don't consider Harry Potter and the Cursed Child canon, I don't consider Love Never Dies canon - bar none.
Would be nice to have more modern MT repertoire for Bass Baritones for performers like Norm Lewis, he performed the role beautifully and did incredibly well to hit the high notes however I feel it’s shame that there’s not more out there for his natural voice. I guess now a days you can’t be a Bass or Baritone, you have to be Baritenor!
Great video btw
I saw the original before any changes and it was one of the first musicals I’d ever seen, so it’s really dear to me and I’ve listened to the recording a lot since (even though the plot is nonsense). I didn’t know about any of the changes so I was really confused throughout. Performances were lovely but I preferred Ramin Karimloo as the phantom - might just be be cause I was used to his voice. Really cool to hear your thoughts on this
I was sat at the first performance wondering if you were there too 😂