Les Mis to Be Revamped...

Quique

Where's the reviews, where are the reports?????

Maybe we're being PUNISHED; virtually being sent to the corner, if you will, for being OFF TOPIC?!!! Shocked

*Dies forever*

Elbow

I am going to post a review - I do have a lot to write Very Happy

I am in Edinburgh staying with friends at the moment so I shall do it in a few days.

The whole show left me totally gobsmacked. In a mixture of ways. I hated the orchestrations. The staging was odd. Some parts however, were very effective.

Quique

Oh cool!!! Can't wait! Smile

(I was kidding in my previous post btw, lol.)

beyondthebarricade

Elbow: Yeah review! And don't forget to talk about the costumes, did they work out well and were they "more Hugo" which if I'm right was the image they were kinda looking for? The cast too. Have they improved? (I think I trust your review more than the "professional" ones which says that Eponine's big duet was Heart Full Of Love.)

Finally.

riverdawn

Not to annoy anyone or anything ( Wink

), but I, at least, would be really interested to read a review of the tour from Elbow (or anyone else who has been recently).

Hope you haven't forgotten us in all the drama. Very Happy

realitybites

l'ivrogne transfigur�

According to JOJ's twitter, the tour cast are filming an EPK. Judging by Cammack's priorities atm, I bet that will be released way quicker than the London one...

In other news, I'm going to see the tour in Manchester tomorrow!!!! Very Happy

MizzieFan

oh really? That's an interesting news. Where are they going to release it? Do they have a webpage or not? I only know about their Facebook fan page Embarassed

Oh! Exciting! PLEASE, don't forget to review later, can't wait to hear more of it Very Happy

Elbow

Right, actual review. Here we go. I've tried to remember everything, but it was two weeks ago now.

So to start with my hopes fell as soon as it started. The beginning prologue music seemed totally out of place,it sounded too light, and too electric and it lacked that dramatic gravitas that I am so used to. The lone string instrument sounded odd and I was already doing a D colon face(D: ) by that point. It just sounded less... well, miserable. The scenery in the Prologue seemed so odd and out of place to me. It wasn't that it was wrong, as such, more of a case of "Why mess with what already works?" There were strange sound effects coming out left, right and centre and I wanted to cry/scream/laugh. The ship, while effectic and dramatic looking, didn't add up.

The addition of children at the beginning was good, having Petit Gervais seemed like a nice little nod.

The bishop, I thought was horrendous! Oh my god. I didn't realise (well, I did) how lucky we were to have Gavin James in London. This man could not carry the notes and sounded like a lawnmower with added vibrato. He really didn�t have the range.

In some parts, the new orchestrations seemed to drown the singing out and in other parts it seemed too quiet (See: Lovely Ladies). ATEOTD was fine. ATEOT seemed to go into IDAD so quickly though. There was no pause, it literally stopped and then "There was a time..." I really liked Fantine though, she sounded fantastic, I later found out it was actually the Fantine understudy though, so I was obviously quite lucky to see her. I preferred her to Rebecca Seale and Allyson Brown for sure. She was youthful and delicate and yet still feisty and dignified. A grand mixture with a lovely voice. Lovely Ladies was a letdown. Seagull sound effects for a start, and it was too bright! I like the seedy orange lighting. The ladies were all towards one side of the stage and there didn't seem to be enough music, and they didn't sound very desperate and ill and dead. The "Lord I'm weary, sick enough to drop" etc was just sung to the normal "Lovely ladies waiting for the call" tune which seemed like a strange thing to change.

The Runaway Cart was quite good I thought, mainly because the cart had quite a load on it and was at a strange angle, therefore making it more obvious as to why people were not inclined to help. On a side note, I do not get the John Owen Jones thing. I don't think he's a bad Valjean, he was good, but not great. I've seen him the role a few times and each time I've thought "I must be missing something". I'd take David Shannon or Jonathan Williams over him any day. Earl Carpenter however was just as amazing as I remember Very Happy

SO good. I adored The Confrontation, it was one of the only parts of the show for me where the new orchestrations came into their own. I thought having the chain there was a great idea and thought it worked really well.

The little Cosette I had was great. No idea who she was but she sung and acted it well. There was no belting and she sounded genuinely woeful.
The Thenardiers... Well, Madame T was totally forgettable. If there was such thing as a text book way to act the role and deliver the lines, she was doing it. Very lack-lustre. Thenardier himself, oh my God. He was really awful. There was a lot of strange dancing on tables and he was just going through the motions really. He is also quite short. I didn't like that. There was nothing stand out-y about MOTH or The Bargain. The orchestrations were sickening and like a caricature of.. drunk music. I don't quite know how to describe it.

Look Down lacked a lot. There is always this amazing feeling I get in London when the staging comes out from each side, with dark people sat all over it. There was none of that. Just line singing. It wasn't angry or gritty and it was too tuneful? Well, no... more like, in London there always seems to be at least one person just shouting the lyrics at the top of their voice, and there wasn't really any of that in the tour, so it seemed less dramatic. The staging was changing so quickly it was hard to follow. I have to say, I really enjoyed Jon Robyns as Enjolras. And I don't even know why. He is by no means an Enjolras, he isn't commanding enough and his voice is a bit whiney and not strong enough, but I liked him, I really did. I think I just like Jon Robyns in general. Eponine made me D: D: D: Earl�s rendition of Stars was lovely. The staging for Stars worked reasonably, with the projections and the bridge but again, why change it?
Having thought I�d probably really like Gareth Gates as Marius, I thought he was actually very weak for the most part. He was forgettable in The ABC Cafe and lacked a lot of power vocally. I took great issue with the guy playing Grantaire. It was as though the director had said to him �And you will be playing the drunk!� and he had just ran with that and not done any research into the part at all. He didn�t seem cynical and depressed and sad enough, he was just jolly and drunk and happy. Not right at all. There wasn�t an awful lot of student interaction that I could see (I was very near the back so I could be wrong...) but they seemed relatively glued to their seats. I did however LOVE Feuilly( Owain Williams, his name is I think.). He was the only one who seemed to be properly aware of what was going on the whole time, on the ball with everything Enjolras was saying and had a lovely strong voice. I also noticed he is first understudy Enjolras, now that I would l like to see.

It was nice to see Katie Hall again as Cosette, she has such a pretty voice. I wasn�t so sure about the blonde wig, but it was nice enough. I don�t like her In My Life dress though. Horrid shiny material. The black London one for me, is preferable. Having the extra verse back in In My Life was a very nice little addition too. The balcony bits were unnecessary and cheesey though. Blurgh. The Attack On Rue Plumet was forgettable. I didn�t like the Patron Minette at all. They didn�t seem very in character. One Day More was One Day More. With added cheesey bits though, obviously.

On My Own was... good God. In was fine, I suppose but I didn�t like the little spins she put on it. Her �Pretending� was horrible. It sounded a bit karaoke really. The barricades were not nearly as effective, especially without the turntable, but PRAISE THE LORD �Let�s give them a screwing they�ll never forget!� was back! Yay. The �Shoot the bastard� had NOTHING on Dugdale�s. ALFOR was average, although I did a secret �yay!� when Eponine died. Again, like with the earlier student scenes, Drink With Me wasn�t great because it didn�t really seem like the students knew each other that well. JOJ�s Bring Him Home was nice, possibly the highlight of his performance for me. The dramaticness (that�s not a word is it?) was lost between the second and final battle because of lack of turntable. Only funny thing was some shouting �NOOOOOOoooo!� for ages after Gavroche�s death. Gareth Gates came to life a bit in the second battle though, he was quite on the ball and I like the way he said �And the same is true for any MAN here!�, he sounded really outraged about why Enjolras would value his life above anyone else�s.

When the barricades were cleared, dead Enjolras and dead Gavroche were on a cart together, which was quite effective. The projections I thought came into their own in the sewer scenes, from where I was they looked damn effective and somehow more �professional� than the London version, although, I�ve never really taken issue with the way it�s done in London. But yes, they worked fantastically in that scene.
The start of Dog Eats Dog sounded bizarre. I don�t know what that was about. Thenardier didn�t have a strong enough voice to carry off the big notes. One of my favourite bits in the whole musical is �I raise my eyes to see the heavens, and only the moon looks down� etc., so that was a bit of a letdown.

The Suicide was without fault on Earl�s part, however, the death itself is inexplicably bizarre. It was like Javert�s Suicide coupled with Wicked. I�m not even quite sure how it happened, Earl was stood on top of the bridge, then suddenly there was no bridge and he was suspended in midair surrounded by billowing cloaks. I was in a state of confusion and was expecting him to come out with �SO IF YOU CARE TO FIIIIND ME, LOOOK TO THE WESTERN SKIIIIIES� fortunately, he didn�t.

The candle thing in Turning � How strange! (women come out, with candles, they leave the candles on the stage, then a dead student comes out and picks up a candle. Yeah. I don�t know either.) And then Gareth Gates hobbling out of the darkness between the women, and.. no.. just no. His ECAET was pretty weak I thought, the orchestrations were drowning him out. His acting in Valjean�s confession was okay though, he actually had some form of reaction to what Valjean was telling him. Beggars At The Feast was fine, but lost that sort of... grotesqueness without everyone dancing out and the big shadows. The costumes were too bright and I wanted to kill Thenardier.

Nice to see Fantine back with hair in the epilogue. (at least, I think that happened? It�s been so long now I might have imagined it.)
Interesting show, but I think I will stick to the London one, thanks very much.

riverdawn

Thanks for the lovely long review, Elbow!

Very interesting. It would definitely be nice to see the tour, if only for comparison's sake. It sounds like it had some annoying things, but also a few things that are intriguing.

I'm curious: how does the ship scene in the prologue work out? Do you still have the prisoners miming work or are they doing something else?

About the candle scene, I'm assuming the idea was that the women are laying out candles for the souls of the students, and then each student-ghost/soul takes his candle. So there probably is a logic behind it. That being said, there is also an utter lack of logic in singing ECAET without any, you know, chairs or tables. I love that scene as it's done in London. It is remarkably effective. I can't imagine why someone would take away the empty cafe when designing or directing the scene.

Anyway, again, thanks for the review.

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Unfortunately, from what I've heard here, this tour sounds rather like Les Mis + gratuitous cheese. Which it really doesn't need.

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Right. I've just got back. It was ... surreal. Especially with Earl and Katie there. And Jonjolras. Give me time to gather my thoughts, make a cup of tea and settle down, and I'll do a proper review. Warning: It'll be long and very rambly - I have lots to get off my chest! Wink

Watch this space.

ETA: This is proving hard. I don't know where to start. I really don't.

Elbow

I look forward to the review!

The Very Angry Woman

Well, this is interesting.

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/8efl9

l'ivrogne transfigur�

OK. Here goes. Sorry this is so late, the wifi at the hotel stopped working last night so I had to wait until I got home, and then I had loads of stuff to do first. But here it is. I have pages of notes that I took before the show and during the interval. And that just covers the first half.... They are pretty illegible and unintelligible, but I'll have a go at writing everything I can remember. [I have notes like 'Ashley Artus? WTF? NOOOOOO!!!'] Apologies in advance to those who don't know the London production or the current cast well, as I will probably keep comparing it to them. And a health warning: VERY LONG REVIEW COMING UP. Make sure you are sitting comfortably before you begin to read.

.......................

It was a bizarre experience. For several reasons. First, it was the closest I'm probably going to get to the sort of experience you have seeing it for the first time. Yeah, I knew all the words back to front and stuff, and was constantly comparing it to a version I know really well, but they were almost all actors I didn't know and couldn't therefore recognise, and it was new blockings and sets, so I wasn't just seeing what I knew would happen like in London. Then there was the fact that, well, it just didn't really feel like Les Mis. I don't know why, I think I just have a very strong association between the words and music and the original production, that I find it very hard to have one without the other. So yeah. I spent most of the show staring at the stage in disbelief. I even said 'What the hell' a bit too loudly at one point, which got me some odd looks... :S.

The theatre was much bigger than the Queen's. I prefer the intimacy in London, and the interior is just nicer in general, IMO. But then, I can't see some of their sets working very well on a smaller stage. I wish I could remember the time I saw Les Mis at the Palace to be able to compare, because I think the staging would be a bit more comparable.

Set wise, I have mixed views, really. A lot of it looked good when it was on. Like in the production photos. But I didn't think a lot of the transitions worked very well. It was all a bit clunky and cumbersome. It did, I think, lose something because of the lack of revolve. It made some parts really quite static, and meant that you didn't have smooth scene changes. Like during the prologue you had the farm workers all running onto stage, then off, and then running back on as inn people. Whereas with the revolve it really feels that Valjean is walking into each of the scenes which are ready prepared. I liked the projections, they fitted well, but I must admit that a lot of the time they didn't really add a lot. The animated sewer sequence worked quite well, but I was less sure about the backdrop for the Suicide and times of walking/marching like ODM. As has been mentioned there were no indicators of time and place. Given that one of the articles in the souvenir brochure is Matt Kinley talking about he wanted to anchor it in particular locations, this seemed rather odd. I'd have been rather lost had I not known it already or had a programme. Also 'Les Miserables' was projected after the prologue in that stupid new font they've started using. It looked ridiculous and like it was trying to be a film.

I bought a souvenir brochure when I arrived (I may be able to upload some pics later in the week if people are interested?), and spent the time before it started getting some first impressions from it. I didn't like the look of quite a lot of the costumes, particularly the whores, and I didn't like a lot of the hair. The production was really quite lightly wigged compared to the London production. Jon had his awful blond wig, JOJ had a couple of wigs, the girls all had wigs, but other than that I don't think there were any. The bishop for instance, and all the students, and Patron-Minette were all wigless, which meant the hairstyles all looked a bit too modern for me.

Anyway. It opened with the prologue. First few bars were OK, then the orchestrations kicked in. The changes, which were present throughout, were almost invariably rubbish. They didn't seem to support the singing in many places. They sounded too artificial in many places, and there were lots of rather incongruous sounds. Some bits had extra 'frills', which often sounded like a bizarre synthesised blend of trills, tremolo and flutter tonguing. Really didn't add anything. Then there were bits that were too loud. Like I swear they massively amped some of the drums. And then there were other bits that sounded like holes. Quite literally, like someone had missed a cue. Then there were lots of bits of ornamentation that were really not necessary. And just some poor choices of instruments in general. Like there was something sounding kind of like a pan flute in most of Castle on a Cloud and in a couple of other parts that sounded simply wrong. I think there were some bits where the harmonies were kind of 'filled in' or 'padded out' for want of a better phrase. Like bare fifths would be turned into triads and such. Basically, orchestration = major fail. Very disappointed.

I got the feeling that the first scene on the boat was meant to give a really good first impression - it was one of the most complex bits of scenery. And I didn't really feel it worked. It was unnecessarily over the top. The guards weren't half as nasty as in London, partly because they couldn't really get to the convicts. Already at this point, I was sure they weren't a dream cast. I just didn't like a lot of the voices. It got worse when we got to the female ensemble, there were only a couple of them I liked vocally. I'm now very dubious about the recording. Especially as it's a live one. Anyway, back to the boat. I thought the whole 'let's all pull on these rods that are meant to oars' looked rather naff. Earl was wonderful as Javert, one of the few redeeming features of the show. What I did quite like was that, instead of doing the thing where he holds Valjean's head up with the truncheon, that one of his minions did the equivalent. But more roughly. It gave Javert that greater sense of authority and control.

The rest of the prologue was OK. I liked the fact that the children were on for these parts as it really gave it a sense of every day life. However, it also looked like a big mass of people on stage all doing random stuff, and Valjean could easily get lost in the throng. Then when he got to the inn, all the people had to run on stage, which I though looked odd. Kind of like the inn came to him rather than the other way around. The bishop was rubbish. He just sang his lines like there was no significance to them. There was no sense of length or depth of meaning like Gavin puts into it. And he didn't act particularly well either. It was like it was all in a day's work. Then when he gave Valjean the candlesticks, JOJ completely broke down (which I thought was a bit OTT, at least at this point) and the bishop knelt behind him giving him a back massage. It looked very odd and didn't have that gravitas that London has.

I wasn't particularly impressed by John Owen-Jones. He was fine, but as people have already said, I don't really get the hype about him. There were some bits that were really really good. But there were others which I thought were rather mediocre. Overall, he was a bit too emotional for my taste. I didn't really like the soliloquy - it bordered on Bowman-esque with the hands, and he lacked many of the subtelties which I loved about David Shannon and Jonathan Williams. For instance, on 'I am reaching but I fall' he held out his hands as if he was reaching. Many Valjeans do this, but I really love the fact that Jonathan doesn't. The lyrics are powerful enough that you don't need to demonstrate them with your body. We all speak English.

ATEOTD was too choreographed for my taste. This was a problem I had at other points as well, particularly ODM. I know that's a strange thing to fault it for in comparison to London, but in London it is very stylistic. What didn't work in this version was that it was kind of meant to look realistic. The ODM in London has no set, and hardly any props to indicate location, and the people on stage are clearly not all in the same place. Whereas in this version you had different people alternately at different balconies, Enjolras and co. walking along the street (with the animated backdrop and everything), and yet they were still in neat rows overtaking eachother at set moments as if in a dance. It didn't work. But returning to ATEOTD there was a similar problem there with the poor people who crouched there in formation. And all the blocking in the factory looked rather artificial. This is where I started noticing little bits that were lacking in attention to detail. In London you get the women queueing up with George Miller handing out money (after his wonderful 'Laadies!'). Here they all formed a line and walked past Fantine for no apparent reason whatsoever. Looked odd. And there wasn't really any indication of why the factory bitch was being mean to Fantine. Apparently she's just not a nice person. And it showed the foreman giving Fantine the letter, but there wasn't much suggestion of him coming onto her like there is in London where it is blatantly obvious. Only listening to the lines told you that.

I was massively disappointed in Fantine. I hated her voice, and I must admit I was close to preferring Susan Boyle's IDAD. I didn't like her hair, not that that's her fault. It didn't look very Fantine-y. It was a rather boring shade of blonde and it didn't look like she took any pride in it. It was just scraped back and hung there a bit limply. I mean, it doesn't have to be all ringletty, but it should look like she actually takes care of it, and it should look nice. Otherwise, why should she care about chopping it off? I didn't like IDAD. The intro was cut - it went straight into 'There was a time' after the end of ATEOTD. And that bit sounded really rushed, like she was just stating a load of facts. I didn't like how she sang it, and I didn't like how she acted it. She seemed to feel the need to take all the lines literally in how she acted instead of having an overall arc, if that makes sense. So if it was a sad line she looked sad, and if it was a happy line she looked happy, and you were left with the feeling that she didn't have any overall emotion. It was like 'He slept a summer by my side' Smile

... 'But he was gone when autumn came' Sad

'And still I dream he'll come to me' Smile

... 'But there are dreams that cannot be' Sad

. And those were the only two emotions that she showed.

Lovely ladies was .... interesting. I didn't like the whores' costumes. Some were in full dresses, which were in fairly good condition, and others were literally in just their underclothes, and others in between. They also did a lot of literally sort of hanging around and leaning right over stuff. Katie was by far the best whore, really going for it and all. There was one of them who got loads of customers and most of the others just sat there and very occasionally went off. Yes, there were seagull sounds. Really loud and off-putting. And I think this was an example where the scenery really rather overshadowed the action. I love that the London production can get away with just a clump of whores in the middle, and can evoke various moods just by switching the lighting. Also, there was way too much sex going on on stage. During one part (the bit where she sold her hair, I think), the whore in the red dress was really going at it with a guy in the corner. In full view. It was really much more than I wanted to see. Especially when he turned her round to, er, 'take her from behind'. Fantine's necklace was a big, rather clunky thing, and you had no sense of special connection to it as there had been none of the holding it in IDAD that gives it that sentimental value to her. So that meant there was less sadness in her selling it. I did like that the two women buying the locket and hair weren't similarly dressed. One was, I think, an old woman, looking quite similar to the London ones. The other was a younger woman looking perfectly normal (well, pretty scary with the scissors actually). I didn't like Fantine in this. I got no sense of dignity from her, and therefore no sense of degradation. It was just 'Damn, my life's shit and getting worse. How annoying'. There wasn't really any tragedy.

I quite liked Bamatabois. Interestingly, his costume was very similar to the London one, although without the poofy wig. They restored the 'It's the same with the tart as it is with the grocer' part, which I like. I think the lines themselves are a bit stupid, but it gives the audience more of a reason to dislike him. Jon and Gareth were the two extra policeman here, as in London, and Jon got to scare off a whore, like David does. But he wasn't half as scary. I can't really remember much about Fantine's Arrest. I think, on the whole, it was fairly similar to the original. Correct me if I'm wrong, those of you who have seen it.

The runaway cart scene restored another cut - it took Valjean two attempts to lift the cart. I think, in terms of pacing, this scene works better in its extended version, just because, in London, I always get the impression that it's a silly plot device to get to Who Am I? that they've just thrown in there, and it always seems out of place. Over before it's begun. However, I don't know whether I'd rather they restored some of the lines beforehand or not. I don't think I've mentioned yet that last night was captioned. Well, it was. This was generally well done, although it was a little distracting. But when Valjean was lifting the cart, it told us there were 'raised voices'. Everyone on stage was completely silent!

Earl was still good. I love how he walks as Javert. I also really liked Who Am I? There was a lot of emotion in it that I thought came across really well. And gosh, the judges are high up in the coutroom! This was another bit that looked a lot like the London production, with three judges (inc. Marius and Enjolras) in practically the same costumes as in London, all banging their gavels. However, I was too busy watching them - Jon was getting very annoyed, and shouted something I couldn't quite catch right at the end - to remember what happened down below, I'm afraid. I have no recollection of the end, but I assume he opened his shirt like in London, because it was open later.

Fantine's death. Still didn't like Fantine, although I thought this was perhaps her best scene. She didn't do the crawling on the floor, just stayed in bed the whole time. And this was a moment when I thought the blocking looked really artificial. Her bed was arranged so that she was lying perpendicular to the stage, and JOJ crouched behind her. This arrangement led to them both facing the audience as much as possible, which just looked unnatural. I don't know if it's to do with the set design, with everything coming on and off from the side it might be harder to arrange stuff at funny angles? Or perhaps it was simply what they wanted. I didn't like it. I didn't feel particularly sad when Fantine died, because she'd never at any point made me like her. I was just like, Oh Well. Off to Montfermeil... I'm not sure about the chain in the Confrontation. I liked the idea of it, and it was fine when Earl was just holding it. But, what was with them playing tug of war? I understand and appreciate how it built up to the moment where, in the London production he smashes the chair, that duh-duh-DUH. But it looked a bit contrived somehow. And will give Valjean/Javert fans a lot to squee over. I couldn't get that thought out of my head for quite a lot of it. The scene was really well acted and sung by both of them, so I felt the chain didn't really serve much of a purpose, and, if anything, detracted from what was going on on stage.

And now we get to where the badness and WTF-ness really begins. The Thenardiers were categorically awful. They really really were. And why the stupid accents? So was young Cosette. Not only could she not act, which you come to expect of them, and is only fair considering how young they are, but she was massively, painfully out of tune. I know I have perfect pitch and am really very sensitive to tuning and all - but really, I don't think anyone could have not noticed this. She was about a semitone flat at points. I was practically clawing my ears out. Also, with Katie blonde and a dark Eponine, why do they still have little Cosette with brown hair, and a blonde little Eponine. This little Cosette had hair really similar to the grown Eponine's. Had I not known the story, I think I would have been massively confused over who was who. Mme Thenardier didn't get any laughs. Not even on the 'Or I'll forget to be nice' line, which usually gets a good response even if others don't. Maybe it was partly the audience, but I didn't find her funny at all. I liked the set for MOTH - though I still think it works better with the revolve and that less literal, kind of round the edge of a circle layout - you can see more, but I didn't like how it came on. The intro of Castle on a Cloud started with Cosette stood under this construction that was meant to be both entrance and a kind of upper level at the back of the stage, and then walking forward with her broom into a sort of nothingness. Then the set came on from the sides as she was singing, and the thing at the back came forward. It just looked odd. MOTH itself was probably one of the bizarrest things I've ever seen. It was kind of like a Disney cartoon in way too many ways. I don't know how to describe it's awfulness. It was played completely for comedy - there was no sense of the Thenardiers being evil, or even not particularly nice. Ashley Artus played it as a complete fool. He looked like a little kid whose parents had left him in the house by himself for the weekend crossed with a travelling entertainer. The whole thing was too choreographed, and looked like a big dance. When the first traveller came in, he tucked one of his hands up his sleeve and went around as if he'd lost his hand, and then on 'Ready with a handshake and an open palm' he put his 'stump' right in front of the first traveller's face, and then shot his hand out and started laughing. The second traveller was blind. WHY? He came in with a stick and spent the whole thing grappling around. He also had a canary (or other yellow bird) in a cage, which was what Thenardier took on 'This weighs a ton' and it later found it's way into someone's dinner. Again WTF??? This was basically my reaction all the way through. Thenardier also took the blind man's shoes and other stuff, and spent most of the song looking totally ridiculous. Seriously, this thing has got to be seen to believed. I can't describe it. Mme T's verse was completely random. She was standing in the kitchen by herself singing it to the audience, while everyone else was following Thenardiers ridiculous dancing. It didn't work - it made it look like she felt sorry for herself. And what was with the loaf of bread on 'there's not much there', which she then proceeded to hack up violently??? Also, there was no sense of little subplots or any connecting threads. Like in London each table is doing their own thing, you have the Gavin and Laura pair, you have the table with Mark, Martin, Joe and Jonathan etc. and you could watch just one little group and get a whole little scene. There was none of that. Partly because there were so many people in the same space, and partly because it was all about Thenardier. There was no 'running joke' either, like the bottle Martin Ball urinates in that can then be followed around the whole room. Or if there was, I missed it. I hope a video of this surfaces - it is utterly nonsensical and ridiculous. I think, if I were to see it again, I'd probably enjoy it more and be able to laugh at it. This time, though, I was just thinking 'What the HELL have they done??' I really didn't like Ashley Artus. A lot of this may have been down to direction, I don't know, but he couldn't sing either. The Bargain was pretty much in the same vein as everything else. And we got to see the Thenardiers getting off with each other at the end. Really really really didn't need to see that. Also, what happened to putting Cosette in mourning? She got a blue coat. She didn't even get a new outfit. She was still in her rags. I know in London the dress and bonnet quite clearly go over her rags, but at least she looks like she's wearing new clothes. Here she didn't. And her doll was tiny! And I missed Valjean's yellow coat.

Then we were finally in Paris. I didn't like the set for this. It consisted of random bits sticking up on the stage, and looked more like a rooftop scene from Mary Poppins. Gavroche had blonde curly hair and looked much more like a little cherub than a bratty street boy. I think his outfit was also too complete. Not like random bits of clothing he'd managed to pick up. Also they kind of used the set as curtains at the beginning, where the two bits of building that were usually on the side of the stage which contained the balconies moved into the middle at the point where the London set does the same. This would have been very good, had they not literally been curtains beyond the first metre or so on each side. It just ended up looking rather naff.

And now we come to Jonjolras... I really really really wanted to like him. And I did like him. But only because he was Jon Robyns and I was trying to. The wig was awful. It looked very unnatural and fake, and it didn't really suit him. However, it was blond, and I think that was the only way I could have seen him as an Enjolras. Otherwise I'd have felt that I was watching two Marii. He didn't really have the necessary stage presence, and his Enjolras seemed much more about going out and stirring up violence for the sake of it than about republics and ideals. I must admit that I wasn't a huge fan of his voice as Marius either, but it kind of suited the character, and he acted the part well. Unfortunately, his voice doesn't suit Enjolras at all. It sounded like he was straining for most of the high notes, whereas with David Thaxton the high notes sound almost like he could go on forever just because he's so damn into it, and it's his way of expressing how excited he is (that doesn't really express what I'm trying to say - I hope you know what I mean), and Jon's 'before the barricades arise' didn't have the conviction that David's does.

I don't really know what I think of Gareth Gates. I liked his voice well enough, but I couldn't really understand his acting at all. I couldn't get much of a hold on his character. At no point did I really have any idea what he might be thinking or feeling. He also had an annoying habit of sucking in his breath through his teeth, particularly when 'distressed' that carried over his microphone and started to really irritate me. I didn't like his hair. And I genuinely think it didn't help his acting, just because it gave him rather an evil look.

Katie's costume was nowhere near as bad as I feared, although I do still prefer the black dress. (In the brochure the photos have her in a purple dress. Yesterday she wore that for Every Day but wore a different dress for Paris, AHFOL etc.) She looked very pretty, too. In this production, Valjean didn't really notice Marius. I liked the fact that this gave the two of them a little more time together, which I thought was done really well with Marius following her about the stage like an idiot, and Katie trying to ignore him, but not being able to stop continuously glancing at him. However, you do lose that protective, jealous side of Valjean. The robbery was a bit odd. Again, I think the stage was just too full with all the random bits of set and lots of people all over it. Then there was some really strange music before Javert's entry. It wasn't the usual 'police theme' but something else I didn't really recognise. Needless to say, I didn't like it! Thenardier was still acting like a fool. He reminded me of the class clown, who knows he's being stupid and really plays it up. Like he looked really pleased with himself on 'you will have a job to catch him' and 'in the absence of a victim...' and then made a really stupid face when Javert ignored him. Talking of Javert - Earl's wig was horrible. I think I had an issue with hair throughout this production really.

Stars was wonderful. Earl has something very Javert-y in his face. The backdrop and scenery for this was very effective. My one issue is that the stars looked like yellow light bulbs. Stars aren't that colour. And then Earl turned round to face them on 'Lord, let me find them' - the stars aren't only behind him, they're all over the sky. He didn't need to turn round to find them. Then Gavroche wandered on and did his little bit and got applause for it....

How have I not mentioned Eponine yet?!! She was terrible. I didn't like her voice. I mean, it was nice enough but totally unsuitable for Eponine. She acted the part kind of bitterly and cynically but in a really modern way that didn't fit. I'd defy even the most deluded Eppie-bopper to prefer her bitchy Eponine to Katie's adorable Cosette. I didn't feel any sympathy for her at all, it was a case of 'how does she ever expect Marius to like her', and I felt really sorry for Gareth being hounded by her. And I couldn't believe that she loved him at all. It just came across as her wanting him because she was a spoiled child and wanted a pretty boy to show off. And her idea of flirting... I just didn't get it. It looked like she was trying to be comical or something. I just wanted her to hurry up and die already.

I liked the set for the cafe. It actually looks like a cafe. And goes a long way to dispel the notion that it is in fact called the ABC Cafe with 'Cafe Musain' on the wall. I wasn't very impressed by the students as a bunch. They were a bit all over the place, and Jon didn't really seem to have any control over them. This was partly him, but also partly the fact that they didn't give him any special notice either. Like they didn't realise he was meant to be a leader. After Grantaire's bit in Red and Black, loads of the students were egging him on, especially one (who I think was Feuilly, but don't take my word for it), and there was no-one telling him to sit down and shut up. Which brings me onto Grantaire. I didn't get him. I couldn't work out what he was trying to do, or how he was trying to play the character. There were moments when he was playing it just as a drunk, but then others where there was much more of the unaccepted Pylades. And, 'the hug' was bizarre - but I'll get to that later. In the cafe he was definitely drunk, and in some ways he played it a bit like Jeff, in the sense of ignoring what's going on and stuff. But whereas you can't help but like Jeff, this Grantaire just came across as drunk and annoying. There wasn't really much interaction between him and Jonjolras here, although he did get a stare. But I got the impression that at this point Jon was annoyed at everyone rather than just Grantaire. Unfortunately I don't think Jon's voice was strong enough - the quieter bits were really nice, but he didn't then have that extra something for Red and Black. I thought he also rushed some of his lines a bit, like the ones on one note such as 'we need a sign, to rally the people, to call them to arms, to bring them in line'. It just sounded slightly as if he were muttering to himself, instead of rallying the people and calling them to arms. Gavroche came in and shouted 'listeneverybodygenerallamarqueisdead' which was a bit odd. The pause afterwards was quite long, but I didn't see much reaction of the students. They just stood there. Jon's LiD started promisingly, but unfortunately he couldn't really sustain the higher bits towards the end. And had the same rushing problem. DYHTPS was sung well enough by all concerned, but it looked a bit odd when the women came out for the 2nd verse, and they literally all paired up with a man each and walked out in a line. It looked like a wedding procession. And I do love Davidjolras on the cart, and his smile, and... Jon just marched out looking determined. They kind of inverted the little bit with Marius and Eponine. Grantaire got Marius, then he spoke to Eponine, she ran off and then came back and pulled him with her. I don't see how that makes sense.

I loved the restoration of In My Life. That's the cut that has always annoyed me the most (followed by 'now we pledge ourselves...' which they also restored Very Happy

) On the whole, I didn't really like the relationship between Valjean and Cosette. I never really got the impression that Cosette meant a lot to Valjean, or vice versa. It didn't really help that they had hardly any time together, except in IML. In the robbery they were always in different parts of the stage, and in ODM they were also constantly in different places. That is something I prefer about even Simon Bowman, even if he does go a little overboard with the nosetapping thing. However, I did really like the tension that developed in In My Life. Katie was perhaps a little on the stroppy side with the whole door slamming thing, but it really gave a sense of what a threat Marius is to their life together. This was another place where I missed the revolve. They just had the gate (which was impressive, by the way) at an angle in the middle, and then the LHS of the stage was one side of the gate with Cosette, Valjean and their house, and the RHS had Marius and Eponine. I didn't like the house set. It was the same as they used for various bits of Paris when it came in, and always sat at the edge of the stage, so it was a sort of style that would fit the slums. It really didn't look right behind that big gate, even with the front door appearing. Also, it was too close to the gate - there was no sense of a big garden that you get with an empty stage. It was an example of what I felt for a lot of the production in terms of the set, and also, to a certain extent, the acting, that the audience were being spoonfed. They don't trust us or our imaginations to realise that if there's a garden there'll be a house nearby, so they have to show it to us. I'll say it now, and I'll probably say it again - I didn't like the balcony. For a start, it made the scene too complicated. And it also involved Marius throwing stones at the window, which I can't see him ever doing. This is the guy who leaves a notebook of random ramblings about love on a bench as an introduction. Katie was very sweet, although possibly less so than in London, but I really didn't get that impression of innocent love or whatever, and there didn't really seem to be much chemistry between them. Again, I have to admit, I blame it partly on the hair.

Because of the lack of revolve, Patron-Minette decided to come inside the gate, and even got as far as climbing up the wall of the house. This made it rather implausible that neither Cosette and Marius, who were still in the garden, nor Valjean, who was presumably in the house (I very much doubt the musical so far as to put him in a shed at the end of the garden) heard them. Their Brujon was a total imbecile. He just sat there looking vacant. Er, he's in the dominating criminal gang of Paris - he might not be clever per se, but he ain't gonna sit there blankly without a clue what's going on. None of them really made an impression on me. And none of them were really particularly in character. Yes, Montparnasse had a knife, and in the robbery he touched Eponine, but that was about as Montparnassey as he got. (I do have to admit, though, that there might have been more that got completely lost in the crowd.) Eponine wasn't very impressive here either - she didn't show much spirit, and her scream was not impressive at all. In fact, I thought it was pretty feeble.

I don't know what to say about ODM. It was very strange. There was the fact that Katie and JOJ kept popping in and out of the doors of their house. Like JOJ appeared on the balcony just to sing 'one day more' and then popped back in. It seemed rather odd. Then Gareth was on the balcony on the other side of the stage for the first bit, while Eponine was on the ground between them. I prefer the London version, where she still can't help looking up to him and following him around everywhere and being generally miserable. Then Jon had to run right into the centre of the stage, and he and everyone else were marching down the middle, with an animated background that made it look like they were walking down a street. Because of the speed they were walking at (I think a step per minim?), it just looked like they were going really slowly and dawdling while trying to look really purposeful. And instead of their V formation they were in rows which kept weaving in front of each other, and looked like a primary school dance routine. And yeah, then Marius came down and he and Eponine joined the students. I assume Javert did too - I must admit I didn't really notice. And Gareth was replaced in the right hand balcony by the Thenardiers. Who still looked like fools. And JOJ and Katie came down in travelling gear all ready to set off on the other side. And that was it. Except for the overloads of sex they insist on throwing at you. Even in the last bit of ODM. The Thenardiers ... in the balcony ... really, not a nice sight.

.................................................

INTERVAL

Just to break up this review, a few things I overheard.

Before the show:
"All you need to know is that the main characters are Jean Valjean and Javert, who is always trying to get his own back on Valjean."
A recording of Castle on a Cloud was playing in the bar. "Is that Susan Boyle?"

During the interval:
"Valjean was in jail for something he didn't do."
"Who's that old man? There's a policeman chasing him, isn't there?" *looks through program* "Is it Javert?"

Afterwards:
"I hated it. I didn't enjoy it at all."

/INTERVAL

...................................

I don't really remember the beginning of the second half much. But that means it can't have been very impressive. They just kind of ran on stage and sang their lines I think. I don't think they actually built it. Earl's 'in the days of my youth' was actually very weak, and I remember it being like that in London too. I think that's his worst bit. The Marius/Eponine bit was dull and not really noteworthy. When Eponine arrived at the Rue Plumet, Valjean was carrying suitcases out. This was quite a nice touch, because it reminded you of the fact they were going, which I think is very easy to forget, or to feel is ignored, in the second half. I like what Nancy does where she gives Valjean an annoyed look before leaving, but she just ran straight out of the gate. I have to say, OMO wasn't as bad as I feared. In no way was it good, but I think I had been preparing myself for the absolute worst. It wasn't as poppy as I'd feared either. But still, she didn't act at all. She stood there for ages like she was feeling the wind. And then stood there for the rest. And didn't really seem to care.

The music for the entrance of the barricade was nice and dramatic - and the barricade itself was a total letdown. The wall thing they sometimes used as a curtain opened as Eponine walked towards it. She saw it and ran off to the side - which really doesn't make sense because the whole point of a barricade is that it blocks your way, surely? And it was pathetic anyway. It was only as thick as one pile of stuff, and you could see right through it at points to the other side, where they had simply hung some material to block the view. And it was really small. There were also the buildings down the side of set, which did admittedly give it a better sense of location than in the original, but also made it look pretty small and insignificant. I love its symbolic hugeness in the London production, and it lost its menacing effect somewhat.

'Now we pledge ourselves to hold this barricade' is back in. I love it, because it's always jarred with me how in London they all come running on and the first thing they have to do is 'get down!'. I quite liked Jon's 'Damn their warnings, damn their lies'. It wasn't the most epic I've heard, but it was very solid and determined and leaderlike. Javert's Arrival in general was rather a let down. He came back and had to kind of clamber through a hole in the barricade, which looked rather awkward and ungainly. Then, when Gavroche revealed him, there wasn't really any sort of scuffle. He just sat there and the students let him sit there. While that might be quite Bricklike on his part, I can't believe the students wouldn't react more violently. I mean in London we have a couple of them holding him down, David kicking his gun away, Mark looking generally furious etc. And Little People appears to have been the price that had to paid for the restoration of the other cuts. Here it only went as far as 'this only goes to show what little people can do'. (In his death it was cut as well - he skipped from 'we've got some bite' to 'we'll fight like 20 armies...'. And there were only two gunshots, both of which hit him.) There was no 'shoot the bastard!', just a couple of mutterings of 'kill him'. No-one seemed hugely bothered though.

Eponine was horrible in ALFOR. She got over the barricade, and for the first bit she looked absolutely fine. She stood there talking to Marius as if nothing was the matter, and then on 'don't think I can stand anymore' she just randomly collapsed. And her coat fell open so everyone could see all the blood way before Marius noticed anything wet on her hair. I didn't get Gareth's acting here at all. If I hadn't known better, I would honestly have thought he was head over heels in love with her, and was deeply remorseful for ever thinking of Cosette. But why that would ever be the case with this Eponine, I have no idea. Instead of Grantaire fetching the other students, he and Jonjolras came on arguing. I would have been very interested to hear what about. It certainly set up more disagreement between them to be resolved in DWM. The Night of Anguish seemed to be an exercise in 'How Many Amis Does It Take To Lift A Young Woman?'. There were loads of them clustered around her, and four ended up taking her away.

When Valjean came over the barricade, most of the students had their guns pointed at him. Including Jon. For ages. I think it would have been better if he hadn't. One gun would have been plenty against a single unarmed man. First attack was fine. I thought the lighting behind the barricade was perhaps a bit bright, but overall it looked OK. Apart from the fact that a barricade of that strength should have been blown up at one shot. After the sniper incident, Jon went back up on the barricade - it works well in principle, except he didn't have a gun or anywhere to stand, so he just ended up looking rather lost and at a loose end. He didn't really seem to hesitate about handing over Javert either, which was a pity.

I liked both Earl and JOJ in Valjean's revenge. Particularly Earl's face at 'How right you should kill with a knife'. When Valjean fired the gun, though, it was kind of pointed towards the barricade which looked a bit odd. Like he was actually trying to shoot Jon in the back. I guess it was to save the confusion of people thinking that he had actually shot Javert, but it could have been simply done in the air. When he came back, there wasn't any gun tapping, but there were people saying things like 'Well Done, M'sieur'. Or something along those lines. This was my favourite Jonjolras moment. I absolutely loved the look he gave JOJ. It looked like it was taken straight from the book, a sort of mixture of the Le Cabuc and artillery sergeant moments. Courfeyrac took the watch just because Jon felt like it though. He wasn't behaving any differently to the others. His 'Marius, rest.' was also different to what I'm used to. David does it in a kind of slightly impatient way. Jon just said it like he was genuinely concerned. There didn't seem to be much of a relationship between Marius and Grantaire in this version. While in London they are quite chummy, they never really seemed to notice each other much here. After ALFOR, Jon gave Marius Eponine's hat and comforted him. And in DWM there wasn't really any interaction between them at all, as is often done. DWM was, er, interesting. It was certainly a different take on what I've seen done before. The first verse saw Feuilly, Joly, Jehan and, I think, a couple of other guys in a big huddle that looked unintentionally really rather slashy, despite the one pretty/witty girl in their midst. Then Grantaire sang the second verse mainly directed at everyone, not, I thought, in a particularly accusing manner, more in a 'Why the hell are you and I here?' sort of way. And all the others got really angry with him. They were literally shouting at him and stuff. And he went off in a huff to the side of the stage. And in the third verse there was a travesty: Jonjolras drank. I know some people like it, but to me, that is about the worst thing an Enjolras can do. I was just starting to like him a bit more and he did that. He went up to Grantaire and held out his hand for the bottle. He then took a swig and gave it back, kind of looking meaningfully at Grantaire the whole time. And then there was a kind of twisted version of the hug. Grantaire put his arms round Jon's waist, and just sort of hung there looking miserable for the rest of the verse. And gave Marius a dirty look when he started singing about Cosette. I didn't like it, I'm afraid.

Bring Him Home was very good. It was sung really well, and JOJs acting was fine, if nothing to write home about. I didn't like the Dawn of Anguish though. Jon's problem of rushing lines came back majorly here. There was no sense of importance to what he was saying, let alone any of the weight or tragedy assoicated with what he was saying. It felt like 'Well, folks, the people aren't stirring so let's get back to work.' Which was a pity, because if it's done well, I really like that scene (perhaps because it's practically quoting the Brick Wink

). Second attack saw the closest we got to David's Jump. Jon jumped down from quite high up for 'How do we stand...', and it looked impressive, but he didn't launch himself into the rafters like David does. There was a bit of a fight, and then after JOJ broke it up and headed off to get bullets himself, Jon ran after him, and looked like he'd have fought him too had Gavroche not gone over. This caused a lot of mayhem, and it once more showed up some of Jon's lack of control, unfortunately. He scrambled up the barricade and seemed to be begging him to come back, and looked rather hopeless. I'm not sure about the offstage death. I really like the concept of it, but in realilty it did feel like a bit of a letdown. I couldn't help the feeling that they did it like that because they had no choice, rather than as an artistic choice. Also, I do like watching Gavroche dodging bullets. Although given the cuts, he was rather less successful at that than he is in London.

Final battle was OK. Jon went for the top B flat, and pulled it off much better than I expected. Of course, if I'm going to judge it by Thaxton standards, then it certainly wasn't amazing, but I wouldn't be disappointed or think it was a duff note if I hadn't seen David do it many times before. Shockingly, I can't really remember what there was in terms of E/R interaction in the Final Battle. I remember Jon coming down to Marius when he was shot, and I think Grantaire was down there too, but that's all I can say, I'm afraid. There was one student on all fours on the ground and he looked like he was coughing up a hairball. Literally. I think he was meant to be despairing or something. If I'm being fussy, I have to say that I didn't like how Jon waved the flag. It seemed a bit perfunctory, and he held it almost horizontally so you couldn't see much of it, and it was a bit too quick and didn't have the style that other Enjolrati flag-wavers have. But that's probably me being very pedantic. It certainly took a lot of bullets to get him to fall off, but I thought it looked quite realistic. Instead of dying altogether, the students died one by one, without any slowmo. Again, while this may be more literal, I think I prefer the stylistic approach. Especially when you could hear them reacting to getting hit and seeing each other die. There was a very loud shout of 'No! Joly!' from one of the students. It just seemed to take something away from the nobility of it and make them more like the schoolboys who never held a gun. The sewers weren't a hole in the ground but in the set on the side - it worked well enough, but I prefer Valjean having to lift it. Javert came over the top of the barricade with another policeman. Who was very definitely a woman. I thought that could lead to some very bad fanfic... I prefer the rotating barricade to the splitting in half one. It looked very odd splitting in half while Javert and his ladyfriend were still clambering about on it. I did like the imagery of Enjolras and Gavroche on the cart, but you couldn't see it very well - it was quite a way back in the stage. And, after rather lengthy discussion on this topic back in the London thread, I'm afraid that Earl did run away off to the sewers. Shame.

DED was abysmal. It was absolutely ruined. Ashley Artus couldn't sing it - it was mostly half shouted. He couldn't act it - he was still playing it entirely for the laughs. IMO, that is the one place where Thenardier should be completely uncomical. And the orchestrations completely finished off the ruination. He seemed extremely amused by himself the whole way through and there was nothing sinister or anything at all. And then, when he tried to rob Valjean he shouted 'Valjean! Ain't the world a remarkable place!' WTF? Surely he should be running off, not proclaiming it to the world? I think the sewers were the most impressive bit of staging. I loved how there was a thick layer of smoke that clung to the stage. And the animated backdrops worked amazingly well. They did the trick of getting bigger to show motion, as they did in e.g. ODM, but it was much more effective here. Perhaps because the stage was dark, so you could actually believe it was part of the backdrop. However, he did suddenly appear at ground level again - it wasn't at all clear how he got there. JOJ missed out the 'Give way, Javert'. I don't know if it was deliberate or a blooper - but the words were on the captions.

Javert's suicide was really good from Earl's point of view. But the orchestrations really didn't help. There were some points where there were way too many layers, particularly higher ones, and then from 'And must I now begin to doubt' it sounded like half the orchestra had gone home, and it really didn't support Earl who was getting pretty dramatic and had climbed onto the parapet by this point. And then on 'I'll escape now from that world' they turned awful. There was a sort of chromatic pattern going over the top, a kind of motif that was completely incongrous. I think it went B flat - A - G sharp - A over and over again, getting increasingly more clashy. It was horrible. And I didn't understand the staging or what was meant to be happening at all really. He was standing on the parapet, then the bridge disappeared and he was standing in mid air with his coat billowing a bit. And there were lots of water effects on the backdrop. I think our view was meant to have changed so we were looking down, but it didn't work.

I didn't like Turning at all. Apart from the layers of unnecessary cheese that the candles thing had, it lost any merit that it might have had in the first place. The only point I can see in the song is it looking at the effect on the women left behind. In London you have the pregnant one, and those pulling the cart etc. and you see how their life has to go on without the men and their hopeless situation etc. Here all there were were women in black putting candles on the floor, in some random place. Also they had little Eponine with them, and she got a line - Who will wake them? Which is very sweet and all, but then she went round to various of the women and span slowly around with them, a rather unsubtle reference to 'Turning' I assume that just looked really odd. I'm not quite sure where they were meant to be, but I assume it was the site of the barricade, because that's the only way that Gareth's singing ECAET there would make any sense at all. And in London, isn't it also at the barricade site - with them picking up Gavroche's flag and all?

I think I quite liked Gareth's ECAET, but I was too distracted by the ridiculous barricade boys holding candles thing to really pay much attention to him. They came on in a really strange formation, picked up the candles, and from then on it looked like they were a PG version of drinks. They held them up in a kind of toast for a while, and then blew them out before going out. And it honestly looked like Gareth was going to drink his when he blew it out. Was it really necessary? No. No. No.

Every Day and AHFOL reprise were good. Love Katie's top C Smile

. But there was no equivalent to the moment in London where Valjean puts their hands back together. So there wasn't much significance to that particular moment in time, which meant that Marius' 'This is a day I never can forget' seemed a bit random. Why was that day so special? I really liked JOJ in Valjean's Confession. It was very emotional but not over the top. Gareth's breathing thing got particularly bad here though, and became rather distracting. Again, however, the orchestrations ruined all the good moments. It's like the orchestrator hadn't read the lyrics, because all through I found that they didn't really support what was going on on stage in terms of emotional/dramatic moments or whatever.

The Wedding was just one massive WTF???????????? It was possibly even worse than MOTH. Marius and Cosette exchanged rings and it all looked rather perfunctory. I prefer the kneeling thing. And also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I doubt men wore wedding rings at that time? I thought that was a relatively modern thing. But, OMG, the dancing. Was terrible. It was all very choreographed. And some of the things they were doing with their hands - funny flicky things - and the dance reminded me of a cross between oriental and bollywood in too many places. The Thenardiers were as bad as the Thenardiers always were. Jon was in the usual Enjolras track as a waiter with an awful fluffy white wig. He spent most of it rather hunched over with a sticking-out lower lip and was completely hilarious, although I doubt for the right reasons. He spent ages scratching his calves with his feet. After Marius and Cosette left, it all became way too choreographed. Once more it was like the Thenardiers and their backing group of dancers. Surely the Thenardiers aren't going to have that effect - the dancers are dancing because that's what you do at a wedding celebration, not because the Thenardiers are singing...

Finally, the Epilogue. The end is in sight, my friends! This was fine. I still prefer Jonathan in this part though - he just acts an old man so incredibly convincingly, and I love it so much. JOJ was nowhere near Bowman standards, but he still didn't quite convinve me that he could pop his clogs at any minute. I quite liked how, at the entrance of Marius and Cosette, Fantine almost flew backwards. It gave her quite a ghostly sort of aura which I liked. And yeah, I liked her having her long hair back. Though I wish it would be nicer. When Eponine came on, their parts switched. Eponine was singing the tune and Fantine the harmonies. Didn't make a huge difference, I guess, but I wonder why they did it. Fairness?

I think the main difference between this and the London cast was that I didn't get the same impression that the actors really enjoy it, and care for the show, and, in many cases, care for Hugo's source material. They were just putting on a show as directed, without knowing much about it, or thinking very indepthly about it. This attitude seemed to be evident in the curtain call when the entire male ensemble came on together, all dressed as miscellaneous students. There was no Patron-Minette. It's a minor quibble, but it makes them seem like irrelevant characters, which didn't have distinct personalities or roles. I will admit that my having seen the London production so many times and really getting to know the cast, I've picked up on much more than I will have done in seeing this production once. That was just the overall impression I got. I will be interested to see if that changes in subsequent viewings, when I am no longer sitting there dumbstruck for most of it. Afterwards I was left with the feeling that it was a good show, good music, technically well managed, proficiently acted etc, but there was none of that feeling that I'd just been part of something epic and amazing like I get in London. I need to get down to London as soon as possible for some good quality detox!

ETA: That twitter thing. Unfortunately it looks fairly definite to me. If you read his last three tweets it really comes out like he's trying to cover up his slip. And surely they're not going to have two productions on in London at the same time? In which case this is VERY BAD NEWS!!!!

KatyRoseLand

WOW. What a review! Thank you so much!

I think the "Javert and his ladyfriend" thing might have made me laugh a bit too much. And also the image of the Thenardiers and their backing dancers. I got some pretty weird looks.

I will probably comment more tomorrow but for now, just, thanks for writing such an indepth review, it was really interesting.

Thanks to Elbow as well!

I really want to see this. I don't know if I can wait until April.

Vanessa20

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Violet

I always thought Marius should be distraught. Not just because his friend is dying, but because she was injured while delivering a letter for him. I don't get why his feelings then should be compared to anything seen for Cosette, because she never dies nor threatens to do so. I'd be disappointed if he brushed it aside as a minor disappointment.

It's an interesting choice of quotes from people in the auditorium. Completely different vibe to what I got, but if you were stuck near a person who thinks they are hearing Susan Boyle, then perhaps that's why they hated it all. Wink

There's probably no point in me giving my review, as I enjoyed most of it, and thought just about everyone was great, and so I'm sure my views will be dismissed as ignorant. However, I don't need to be a Les Mis expert to know that there was a fabulous reaction from the audience, and quite a few comments on what had changed since they last saw it, so I don't think they were all idiots who just went hoping to see Susan Boyle. So either a very unfortunate group of people to be sitting next to, or very selective quoting.

Javert's Truncheon

What a load of rubbish....as you can see, this is my first post on here - quite possibly it will be my last too.

I have never heard such drivel - and so personal too. I am sure that you know that some of the cast have read this column and specifically this thread - so put yourselves in their shoes when they read about themselves in such terms as 'WTF?' . Now I know you are going to say, that as actors you put yourselves up there for this - but please people, have some respect for the individual. Some of the comments on here have made some of the cast very angry and upset - so, before you post, please think about who your possible audience is. You are audience members trying to enjoy a new version of a classic musical - not a group of poison pen writers.

Yes I have seen the show - I have even met a number of the cast - professionally. Yes I enjoyed it - best production that I have ever seen of it - and yes I have seen it before - at least twice a year (in various locations) for the past 23 years.

Get a grip people. Not nice...not nice at all.

riverdawn

Erm....

When I teach a class, at the end of the semester my students need to fill out anonymous evaluation forms. On occasion, I get some pretty harsh comments. When I do, I get upset for a few minutes. Then I stop and think: "Do I agree with this criticism? Is it, in some way, fair?"

If the answer is "yes", I try to learn from the criticism and improve my teaching for the next time.
If the answer is "no", I say "ok, whatever, I completely disagree with that," and move on with my life.

I haven't seen the tour, so I can't say whether the criticism on this thread is accurate or inaccurate. However, while sometimes harsh, it has almost always focused on the professional (as in "I didn't like what the actor did with the character" rather than "that actor is an idiot!")

However, this is an an internet forum, where people are posting what are their legitimate opinions about the performance. They way I see it, if the cast *are* reading this thread (and I can only assume from your post that you are somehow associated with the production and know that they are), instead of getting "very angry and upset" over what some anonymous (?) reviewer on the internet says, they can do exactly what I do with my student evaluations:

Look at the criticism. If they think some of it might be justified, they can try to use it to improve their future performance [and even if it is "the best production ever" of Les Mis, there is always room for improvement].

If they think it's not justified at all, they should say "ok, whatever, I totally don't agree with this person, I'm going to ignore that and move on."

If they can't do either of those things, they should stop reading this forum. Seriously.

And again, this has nothing to do with any personal opinions I have about the tour. I haven't seen the tour, and I therefore have no opinion on it one way or another. Also, unlike some of the people on this forum, I have no previous familiarity with any of the tour cast (I've only every seen the current London cast), so I can't express any opinions - favorable or otherwise - about their performances.

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Javert's Truncheon

Hello,

A few things - No, I am not associated with the production other than in a writing capacity for a magazine article.

I apologise if my comments offended anyone....but there is the rub....it's perceptions I guess. I read that review and thought two things - one that it was overly long and two, that it was very pointed and personal. So - a lesson for us all there - before you post - have another look at it..and ask how much will I offend or upset someone.

I really like this show - have done for years - really enjoyed all productions that I have seen - apart from Broadway - which I am glad that they closed (original production)....so perhaps I take it to heart too much.

I am not getting into this further - as I really should take the advice of one of you and not read this anymore.

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Elbow

flying_pigs

The review wasn't too long at all! Some of us aren't lucky enough to see the tour so reading people's reviews here are the closest we can get to the tour. Furthermore, I trust these people's opinions because, like me, they know the London production well and I think we are all very lucky that they post here.

People have opinions, you can't like everything! Respect their opinions and why not trying to debate with us instead of shooting down everything we say just because you disagree?

Thanks for the review l'ivrogne transfigur�, it's the most indepth I've seen and I've learnt a lot more about the production. Still not sure if I should see it when I can just see the original though!

sohopad

The Very Angry Woman

Javert's Truncheon

[quote="Elbow"]

mm10

l'ivrogne transfigur�

The Very Angry Woman

riverdawn

I understand why it would be expensive (and judging by the description of the sets, possibly quite difficult to do in a smaller theater like the Queen's), but how do you mean "illegal"? Because they've already sold tickets to the current West End production?

At any rate, I'm also hoping it doesn't mean they are going to replace one with the other. Also, what about the hints that the tour was going to go to the US at one points? Haven't heard anything about that in a while, but offhand I would think that would be a more likely development. (Of course, that could just be wishful thinking. I've been fantasizing about seeing the Les Mis tour at my home town Razz

)

The Very Angry Woman

riverdawn

Oh, I see. Yeah, that makes sense.

KatyRoseLand

riverdawn

realitybites

Well that rant at the very detailed review (thank you) was so obviously from someone involved with the new tour - especially as they took what was simple critical piece of writing so personally. I've noticed that if someone posts a less than gushing review on the WOS site, it immediately gets a gushing report straight after it.
The mackintosh marketting team are obviously hot on the case! I wish they would just let people give their opinion and not get involved in spin.... Rolling Eyes

Javert's Truncheon

aquirkofmatter

Orestes Fasting

I'm actually quite curious to see the tour now, because it seems like most of the people who've reviewed it so far are either non-fans or London regulars who are very attached to the West End version. I've kinda seen the full gamut of Les Mis productions (three different versions of the original with half a dozen different casts, plus at least ten regionals), so it will be interesting to see where the tour fits in.

I have to say I'm not surprised that the ensemble work in the tour isn't as refined as in London; replica productions consistently seem to have an easier time of this than new ones. Copenhagen is the only exception I can think of--it was as though they let the London or Bway revival ensemble loose on the show and told them to come up with their own blocking. Laughing

The Very Angry Woman

Quique

Thanks for the review, l'ivrogne. It was a very interesting read. I like that you didn't do a direct comparison with the London production and instead judged it scene by scene and gave your opinion on whether it simply worked or not. I liked it so much, I read it twice. It has also made me even more curious to see the tour. Gracias!

I'm perplexed by that 'ordinary bloke' person's posts. If, for example, l'ivrogne had said JOJ was a stupid Valjean with nothing to show for his fangirl following, you'd have a point. If she had said the tour blows because it's not a carbon copy of the London version, you'd have a point.

So someone has an opinion that differs from yours--tough cookies.

The Very Angry Woman

Violet

This is what I don't get. People are ever so defensive if anyone suggests that their own review might be too heavily coloured by being a devotee of the London production, but if someone is too glowing about the touring production then they must be in the pockets of Cammack. That's presuming they have demonstrated a knowledge of the show. If they don't demonstrate enough knowledge of the show, then they are just some poor soul who can't possibly judge because they don't know what they are talking about.

I'm sure most people believe they are being fair, but as someone a bit less involved (and really, I'm not) I do struggle to believe that the reviewer is trying to give a fair representation of a show when they select quotes from fellow audience members that poke fun at their ignorance of the plot. When I went it was apparent from the conversations that many of them had seen the show several times before, and with theatre staff saying that it's probably the best show they've had their with the best audience feedback, it's wrong and makes me think that claims of being open minded appear insincere. I accept it might be subconscious, but the style of writing is revealing, whether or not the author realised it at the time.

The presumption that those who are positive and knowledgable can't be honest suggests either a snobbery towards the presumed audience, or reveals something of the mind-set of the person making the accusation.

And I'm sorry, but if you are going to claim that it's obvious that he cast don't care or enjoy the show, then is personal. It is questioning the actors' professional integrity, so they would have good reason to be offended by that. It goes way beyond "I didn't like the blocking for this", or even "the hair made him look evil" or other such superficial, and arguably petty critiques.

riverdawn

Violet - I, for one, would be very interested to read your review of the tour and which aspects you particularly liked.

As I've said before, I've not seen the tour, and have no opinion of it one way or the other. I'm getting what I can out of reviews here, and I would very much like to read a more positive review (even if it's not as detailed as some of the others).

MizzieFan

Thank you so much for all your lovely detailed reviews. And as for the arguing going on here - I don't think MdN members, the ones who didn't particularly liked the production offended or insulted the performers. You are obviously too protective.

But anyway. I'd love to read you review too, Violet! Nothing is better than different opinion and a different aspect Smile

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Moci

operafantomet

Being another outsider, I somewhat agree with Violet about the various reviews. This is not aimed at one specific person, but rather the general sentiment in this thread.

There seems to be an overall disappointment that the London production don't get the recognition it deserves, and that all the "spectacle" goes to the tour. That, combined with people preferring the London version when they go see the tour, makes the reviews somewhat coloured although there are claims of going in with an open mind.

I haven't commented upon it because I know how it feels. I'm not as avid Les Mis fan as some of you, but on the other hand I'm a life-long "Phantom of the Opera" fan. And I KNOW that I prefer the original all the way. When someone mess with it (be it crappy movie version, horrific sequels or cheap Polish non-replicas... see, I'm doing it again.... Laughing

), I'm getting rather defensive. I think I would react very much the same way as you if a revamped tour of POTO was put on the roads, and everyone hailed it as the hottest thing since sliced bread.

That said, I have three (unrelated) Les Mis friends who's been to see the tour and loved it. One is a rabiat life-long fan of the show, and I was quote surprised to read his very positive review after being a lurker in this thread for some months. Reading some of the reviews again gave me the impression that the tour could be perfect in every way and many wouldn't like it anyway - because it wasn't the London production. But, as mentioned, I would probably react the same way, so I'm not saying it's wrong...

Quique

I think that's oversimplifying the matter. I agree that one may initially feel betrayed by the producer's constant, random, unnecessary tinkering of the material itself and might write from that perspective but, in the end, if the way in which it is presented on tour works, then it works, and I doubt anybody here who calls themselves a true fan would go against that instinctual feeling and call the show stupid for not being the London production's identical twin.

Javert's Truncheon

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Javert's Truncheon

Yep - thats me - sad, shallow and not much going on in my life. I was drawn back in because my life is so empty and hollow.

pastaeater

Orestes Fasting

Aaargh, all this discussion of how closely the reviews are tied to a love of the original London production just makes me want to see the tour even more. Because yeah, I'm getting a certain amount of defensiveness of the London version out of some of these reviews, which is perfectly understandable--I used to be the same way for Broadway revival, and you probably still don't want to interrogate me too closely on David Thaxton vs. Aaron Lazar. But I would be seriously interested in either seeing the tour (er, before June I mean) or reading a review from someone who's a fan of the show but not too attached to the West End production.

The first few regionals I saw, I definitely held them up against the revival. Sometimes this was completely unjust, since some of the things that made me go "uuuuh" were a matter of budget, or things that simply could not be copied, or genuinely innovative changes. But sometimes the original "this is not [production I'm familiar with], DO NOT WANT" reaction is quite justified. It's a telltale sign that they took something out and didn't replace it with something that worked.

It can be kinda hard to distinguish sometimes when it's petty attachment to a familiar, well-loved production, and when it's a sign that they dropped the ball. I'm still working on it, honestly.

realitybites

aquirkofmatter

Jon Robyns has put his holiday dates on his blog (4th, 5th and 6th of March; 4th 5th and 6th of June; 2nd 3rd and 4th of July; 5th 6th and 7th of August). Does anyone know of any other principal holiday dates?

[I hope nobody minds me posting this here, too, but would anyone be interested in two Birmingham tickets? They're in the stalls, Saturday 10th April (evening) - my friend is having an operation just before so we won't be able to go Sad

]

Eponines_Hat

Hmmmm..... I am finding this whole "You just don't like the tour because you like London too much" a bit annoying. If I remember correctly - most people on the board were really excited about the prospect of some fresh ideas on the tour show. Speaking personally, why would I bother spending �400 on a weekend in Cardiff to see a show I had decided I hated before I even got there?

It makes sense that people think fans such as myself don't like the tour "because it's not London," but I simply don't think its true. There are lots of things I did like about the tour - but as I said in my review, I cant see why you couldn't add some of the different blocking to the London show. Goodness knows things have changed in London in the last 25 years - just look at the back cover of the program. 80's wigs? Ergh. The show does need to evolve to survive - but I see no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so to speak. The thing that frustrated me about the tour was that the changes felt like change for the sake of it. It didn't feel like a whole new, from scratch approach - it felt like they'd said "Ok, here's the original. What can we change" - if you can see the difference.

I just find it really weird that people seem to be really aggressive about tour criticism. I don't think anyone has been particularly nasty about it - it's not like anyone has openly said "it's shit, don't see it" but the whole purpose of the boards is to share ideas about the show. So you mightn't agree - that's fine. You don't see me arguing with people who liked to tour saying "this is why you shouldn't like it". I'd like my opinion respected, without it being dismissed just because I liked the London show first.

MizzieFan

Eppie-Sue

Ah, but they're in Paris for more than just those few days, and I doubt that any Les Mis people (except Mark Dugdale because we totally explained it to him, even though he probably got confused by it all) know about the concept of Barricade Day Wink

.

Eponines_Hat

Lauraa

I don't know if anyone's seen this yet but it's been confirmed that the tour will be coming to London on 14th September to 2nd October and will be on at the same time as the original production.

I'm so tempted to do a two show day and see both productions... Very Happy

Vanessa20

OHHHH GOOOOD!! Mad

I'm sure my college schedule won't allow it, but I'd give anything to be in London when both productions are there and do a two-show day! It's been almost two years since I last saw the show in any form and I need a fix! Damn you, UCLA! Mad

l'ivrogne transfigur�

mm10

Quique

Anyone know when tickets will go on sale?

I'm officially moving my travel plans to September.

EDIT: Ahhhhhhh. They're onsale nowwwww.

Looks like I will be seeing the tour as well after all!

Eponines_Hat

jdeng

The official website has made the announcement:
http://www.lesmis.com/news/les-miz-returns-to-the-barbican/

But strangely, the Barbican online booking does not show 1st and 2nd Oct shows. Already sold out?

Has anyone booked either of these two-date performances? Via online or telephone?

l'ivrogne transfigur�

jdeng

Thank you for your redirection.

Have just looked at WOS. The complaints there are that the entire booking link is not working [unless the webmaster has removed earlier complaints].

The Barbican booking link only lists 14 to 30 Sept shows, but neither 1st nor 2nd Oct ones.

mm10

Not sure if this has been mentioned already but I saw it on the Dress Circle board - JOJ and Gareth Gates appearing on Friday Night is Music night - of course may not be Les Mis related I just assumed it was

http://www.bbc.co.uk/showsandtours/shows/shows/friday_night

Quique

Eponines_Hat

@Quique ahhh... well, it will be a different London cast then, of course, but I am sure it will still be good.

Quique

Ahh, I wanna see them badly!

I have stalled on buying tix cause i realized the tour is coming here later this year. I was wooed by the thought of seeing it at the Barbican, I guess. I shall leeeave the tour alone for now and see3 my beloved original production threeee tiiiimes. Mr. Green

I was watching a Berlin boot last night and it never ceases to amaze me what is on in London right now is absolutely beautiful, perfect, amazing, precious!!!

When is the current cast leaving? They've all grown on me and would love to catch them before they part ways.

Eppie-Sue

Quique

Aaaack. June is too soon. I have to go either July or August. I'm purchasing the airfare and booking hotel next month (when I get paid, hehe). If anyone knows of any good, clean hotels in the area around the Queen's (I'll take farther though if it's a great deal), let me know. I can really use some discounts and I'm not picky. As long as the room has a private bathroom and it has a bed, that's all that matters. It could be tiny, cramped, or whatever for all I care. I'll only use it to sleep!

The Very Angry Woman

I stayed at the George in London last year. It had a shower en suite, which was nice, but the shared bathrooms weren't bad either.

mm10

I always use www.travelodge.co.uk

Basic but clean and en suite and good value for money (although some are better than others). The Covent Garden one is most central but also tends to be the dearest. The further out you go the cheaper they are

music is my life!!!

^^^ Travelodge is very conveniant and cheap, i agree Smile

anywho, i saw the opening night of Les Mis UK tour last night at the Birmingham Hippodrome, and i have to say that some bits did surprise me. Earl was just as amazing onstage as on the radio, and JOJ was fab as always. However i did not think the opening setting went very well, although i think it was a very original way or doing it. It took me ages to work out where they were lol
anddddddd cosette was blonde! Shocked

lmao she was very good. she made cosette less of a "pretty" role, and more real, which worked well Smile

Gareth Gates surprised me too, how good he was in the acting bit of Marius. I had to try to stop myself tearing up in his solo

either way, i thought it was awesome Smile

and i'm sooooo annoyed i didn't get to got stage-dooring, but i might pop along some day Laughing

pastaeater

Saw this on Wednesday 24th in Birmingham. I must admit that I went without the highest of expectations (partly due to following JOJ on Twitter and thinking that he seems really self-satisfied - I know that this hasn't got anything to do with his performance but I felt a bit lacking in enthusiasm for him!) However, although his Valjean took a little while to grow on me, by the end I was totally hooked. His version of Bring Him Home was astonishing - it was so lovely I almost cried!
The rest of the cast were a bit of a mixed bag, in my opinion. I was very pleasantly surprised by Gareth Gates - his voice was lovely and his acting good. Katie Hall and Earl Carpenter were excellent too, and I didn't dislike Rosalind James as Eponine - I know her voice has had a lot of criticism for being too "poppy" but I didn't really notice that - maybe she has toned it down a bit. I didn't like the Thenardiers - especially Lynne Wilmot. I know that they don't have to have the strongest of voices but I thought that her voice was so poor that it really detracted from the role. Madalena Alberto as Fantine had a reasonable voice but her acting was dreadful. Now I come to the bit that makes me saddest. Jon Robyns. I mean I love Jon Robyns - I liked him as Marius and thought he was brilliant in Avenue Q. I just don't think Enjolras is a part that suits him. He just didn't seem to command the stage in the way that Thaxton does so effortlessly at Queens. He seemed to be rattling around getting more and more frantic as the night went on - and I really didn't think that his voice sounded very strong. I sat there wondering if seeing Thaxton has now ruined the part of Enjolras for me - maybe no one else will ever quite measure up!! Another problem was the way the death of Enjolras is shown - I realise of course that this wasn't Jon's fault, and I don't want to talk about it in too much detail in case it spoils it for those who haven't seen it, but the way it is done - the way you see the body at the end - is so awful it seemed almost comical..............(Also the blond wig is terrible Shocked

)
With all these "ifs" and "buts", still a very enjoyable night. If you haven't seen it yet go along with an open mind!!

Dawnstar

This is very belated but I've only recently come across this forum & have been back-reading pages & pages!

music is my life!!!

I have to admit, Enjy's death was very anticlimactical, but i think the hidden Gavroche death worked beautifully! Smile

Anddddd.... James' riffs in OMO - weird but kind of cool, she made the song so effortless when i saw it Smile

On the contrary, i quite liked the Thenardiers, i found that the interpretation was very original, and i aprticularly liked how sleazy the Mr was! Laughing

although, when i was madame thenardier, i did the wedding wayyyy better Razz

lol

flying_pigs

JOJ on BBC Breakfast, including a look at part of the new EPK:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/breakfast/8596812.stm

The marching in One Day More is.....different.

riverdawn

Ok, I'm a little confused about why Jon Robyns is made up to look like he's a heroin addict or very ill. It's very strange.

But other than that, the bit of the tour EPK looks quite nice (not having seen the tour to comment on it in any more detail).

Eppie-Sue

l'ivrogne transfigur�

That little bit of the EPK really doesn't show Jon at his best. He sounds quite weak, and yeah, the make-up...
But in terms of the interview ... JOJ said Valjean is wrongly imprisoned. Er, "just for stealing a mouthful of bread", I think you'll find, mate. Why do people insist on trying to make Valjean completely innocent? The strength of his character and the story lies in the fact that he DID do something wrong, and he did become an unpleasant man - hence the fact that he needed redemption. In the other version, he's an innocent man - so why is he seeking redemption? The best characterisations I've seen on stage are those that show the knowledge that they have done something wrong, that they are a criminal, and behave accordingly. If JOJ takes the attitude that he is innocent - then I'm a bit worried. Best performer ever in Les Mis but doesn't know his own character?
OK, maybe he was just condensing it a bit too much, but still. I wish people wouldn't keep saying Valjean is innocent all the way through.

riverdawn

Well, to give him the benefit of the doubt, I'd say that most people today would consider sending someone to jail for 5 years of hard labor over stealing some bread is "wrongful"... however legally justified it may have been early in the 19th century.

But yes, I agree, Valjean isn't meant to be an innocent and certainly doesn't see himself as an innocent throughout the book, so that characterization is inaccurate at best.

l'ivrogne transfigur�

Ooh, ooh, ooh.
Tour EPK here!

Eppie-Sue

WTF?! The exact same songs as the London EPK? What's the point of that? Putting the principals up next to each other? But... I don't know. Right choice for the tour?
No Earl, no Katie... I don't get it. To me, they were the strongest parts of the production... That's disappointing.
I quite like the EPK, in the way that it's well-made, but it really creates this "We're staging a movie" feeling, that, I guess, they were going for, whereas the London one emphasises the fact that it's theatre, I suppose.

I don't know... it mirrors what stuck with me from the tour, but I can't judge it, because I didn't like the tour to begin with. But I remember JOJ gesturing this much in BHH, too. Ah well.

The Very Angry Woman

beyondthebarricade

Well. Yes, using the same songs isn't exactly the right choice. It's like they're re-emphasizing the fact that the London principals are vocally stronger? I felt that Madalena Alberto pronounced her words too much, a bit like Bowman. It gave this weird feeling, because during IDAD the audience is supposed to sympathise with her plight and all that but now for the Tour! Fantine it just seems like she's spitting out the words into their faces, giving this "Hey look at me pity me!" feeling.

Parts like the ATEOTD scene where all the workers all crowd around Fantine (and the factory fight too!) as it seems more realistic.
The students' costumes also seem more 19th Century France, too.

Eppie-Sue

The students' costumes on the tour are exactly the same style as the London ones for all I know, I don't think you can actually spot a big difference.

I have to rant a bit. I've just watched the EPK again, it's on YouTube, and I'm very upset about how little there is of Earl. I don't get it. At all. That man is absolutely amazing, and yet they show more of him in the LONDON EPK, even. I don't know what it is, in the London one there is a bigger emphasis on, well, Enjolras, but apart from that, the scenes they chose to show are almost the same, and yet they cut what little Earl/Javert could have gotten. There is a little little bit of Stars, a little little bit from where he gives JOJ/Valjean the ticket of leave and then there is the fall. Oh and a very very short bit at the end in ODM. That's ALL.

Why did they choose those scenes and those songs? If they had wanted to show Jon as Enjolras, looking like a zombie or not, why didn't they go for "DYHTPS", that's the one part I can remember when his voice sounded well for role.

But the Earl part really, really bothers me.

Quique

Wow. Never thought I'd say this but that EPK was impressive.

The scenes reminded me a LOT of the original production. Is the tour THAT massive and look that good? Or is it just wisely edited/shot to make it look that way?

The look of the show is nice but the orchestrations still suck donkey ass.

Eppie-Sue

No, the tour isn't that massive. Especially the barricade - the barricade on the tour looks like a fence, maybe 10 feet at the highest point...?! I was really disappointed by that, even people who I know liked the tour thought the barricade was a let-down. It's about a third of the London barricade's overall size, so what it looks like in the EPK is not what it really is like.
How they shot the scenes is really good, I agree. Very cinematical, and I think that is what the whole production feels like: Like it has been a movie musical and is now being put on stage...

All in all, I thought the choreography on the tour actually seemed more "staged", the change of scenery, too, because they had to get those big "walls" that divide the front of the stage from the rest on and closed for some scenes, you can see those walls when they open for Eponine to reveal the barricade. And people have to move a lot more because of the lacking revolve.

What I thought looked really impressive was the Prolgue. The ship does look great, and I liked the cafe, not because it was impressive, but because it said "Cafe Musain" on the wall, which was awesome. And the projections in the sewers were the only ones that really impressed me.
But it doesn't have the atmosphere that the original production has to me, and certainly didn't look like it, especially because the lighting and smoke didn't play any role, it seemed.

Quique

While it looks good, nothing will top the original production's effectiveness. I've never been one to believe that simple scenery is somehow better than elaborate, but in the case of Les Mis, I feel the original production's simpler, suggestive scenery works far better.

I've said it before, but one thing that the original staging has that I think will always make it superior to many other versions is the unforgettable images or "stage pictures," as I call them, that it creates. They're iconic, strong, symbolic, beautiful, and evocative.

Eppie-Sue

The Very Angry Woman

"Viljean."

LOL.

http://www.birminghampost.net/life-leisure-birmingham-guide/birmingham-culture/theatre-in-birmingham/2010/04/02/theatre-review-les-miserables-at-the-birmingham-hippodrome-65233-26157138/

Eppie-Sue

That review is AWESOME.

I have to copy it.

	Musicals.Net Forums -> Les Miserables	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next
Page 4 of 6

The Resource For Musicals