POTO notes

Sep 16, 2007 15:39

Continued as promised. This is basically straight from my notes, so I'm going to stick to point form in chronological order as far as possible.
Notes on POTO, West End production )

reviews, poto

Leave a comment

Comments 23

cila81 September 16 2007, 21:36:25 UTC
I personally belive that The Phantom loved Christine deeply, and not just for his music, she was his muse and in a way an extension of his music, but I feel that the love was real. When he lost her he lost his only chance of love, that's what makes it so tragic. But of course that's just my opinion :)

As for Christine I think you might have had a very different impression of the character if you had seen some of the other actresses who's portrayed the role. It has everything to do with the actress, and the way Leila portrays the character is very different from anything I've seen before. :)

Reply

tangofiction September 16 2007, 23:08:03 UTC
Yeah, I agree about losing his one chance at love -- although it was also kind of a no-hope situation from the beginning, so it doesn't feel frustrating, just tragic.

I know it would be different with a different cast, but that's part of the fun. I think that's one reason why I enjoyed it so much -- it was just so way-out from my expectations (especially Christine)!

Reply

cila81 September 17 2007, 11:11:51 UTC
Yes I was very surprised the first time a saw Leila as Christine, I wasn't sure I liked her interpretation, but seeing her a second time she grew on me :)

I would love to see the new cast, I'm sure it has a very different feeling now with a new Phantom.

Reply

tangofiction September 17 2007, 13:44:58 UTC
I enjoyed her interpretation, actually. It was refreshing and funny (not always intentionally) -- and she and Ramin were well-matched. It's such a different dynamic when they are both aggressive, and when Christine is so ... common, for want of a better term. I would love to see it again to appreciate it properly.

That is not to say that I found Leila's Christine a particularly sympathetic character. She is not *unpleasant*, mostly, but I didn't really feel for her except at the very end. Still, perhaps it's the closest thing out there to Leroux's Christine!

Reply


dracschick September 17 2007, 00:32:45 UTC
Thanks for that great detailed update. I really enjoyed reading it:)

Reply

tangofiction September 17 2007, 13:45:35 UTC
:)

Reply


anonymous September 17 2007, 06:27:22 UTC
You're pretty much guaranteed to be in for a surprise every time they change the cast. It really is such a diverse story when you interpret the emotions involved in different ways.

I’m still jealous.

:-D

Reply

tali_sarah September 17 2007, 06:27:58 UTC
...and I wasn't logged in oops

Reply

tangofiction September 17 2007, 13:45:24 UTC
Come here and I'll see it again with you! ;)

Reply


(The comment has been removed)

tangofiction September 17 2007, 18:57:50 UTC
Hmm... This sounds kind of tackier than what I saw - the way they played it on the night, it didn't seem at all 'masturbatory' on either the Phantom's or Christine's part. Christine didn't do anything untoward with the apple, just moved it from hand to hand I think -- can't remember the details, but there was a moment when she went to take a bite and the Phantom snatched it from her. That's about it. It was very aggressive, but the sexuality seemed to me part of the opera itself, with Christine deliberately exaggerating it, throwing it into the Phantom's face.

Re spiked drink - it looked to me like she is expecting it to be drugged, but it's not. A challenge, like playing chicken.

When Christine/Aminta was touching him (on the bench), he was totally still -- particularly effective, since both he and Christine spend a lot of time thrashing around. He seemed to be both focused on what she is doing and just frozen in disbelief. (Cue Madonna's "Like a virgin...") I don't remember the scene in any more detail than that, unfortunately.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

tangofiction September 17 2007, 21:21:16 UTC
What did you think of Mme. Giry in the stage production? She's really different from Giry in the movie.
I thought she was amusing, in a somewhat stereotypical (do people like that really exist?) Like something out of "Rebecca"... But then, it's a comic treatment really, even if it isn't overt -- you can pretty much imagine the German accent and the entire Mel Brooks-style film that could go with this character. Although I really liked one Leroux-ish moment when one of the managers touches her (or something) and she looks scandalised. Reminded me of Giry getting a kick out of the managers' office in the book.

And I found the treatment of stage!Christine to not be so exalted. Her father was the "Swedish violinist," not "*famous* Swedish violinist." Her dancing wasn't so hot ("her head is in the clouds.")
I don't think we had the 'head in the clouds' line... Or if we did, I missed it. But Giry does say "a promsing dancer" rather than "a promising talent", which is rather generous given Christine's efforts on pointe.

As far as Piangi ( ... )

Reply


ceridwen_daae September 18 2007, 19:00:44 UTC
I really liked your review, I still hope to view the London show one day. But I'm planning a lot 'one day' ;)

Your description of the roles of Christine and the Phantom are very interesting, they seem so very equal to each other, even on different levels. The Phantom you describe seems to have an enormous history, tragically. Christine is more confident, even than Leroux's original it seems, but deals with the history in her short life as well.

And that leads to my question about the 'Cemetery Scene'. The sound of 'fireballs' seems a little 'out of story'. Leroux's Phantom used 'illusion', Webbers Phantom uses the shadows and his voice. Thus the sword fight seemed really into place to me during the movie. What did you think of the Cemetery scene-fireballs?

Reply

tangofiction September 18 2007, 20:09:17 UTC
I thought the fireballs were a trick, like Leroux-Erik's various gadgets -- not magic, just chemistry. I know a lot of people see the stage Phantom as having some magical ability, but I didn't see it that way.

There are several other moments that could be 'magical', particularly the piano that plays by itself and the cast in Notes II singing mechanically. The libretto suggests that the Phantom somehow makes these happen. The way I saw the show, though, it seemed more like a theatrical technique -- like we are suddenly in the Phantom's head and see what he *wants* to happen, rather than what is happening in reality. It added to the sense of his frustration.

Reply

ceridwen_daae September 18 2007, 20:29:58 UTC
It's what makes me unsure of watching the stage show... I once read a book which was full of mystery and imagination but in the end there was nothing. It might be the power, but to me it was frustration because all of the mysticism ended in pure reality. A reality which I didn't wanted to know.

Phantom is on the edge of reality and mystery. I adore the mystery, I wish it had more mystery especially the stage show. Not the magic, but mystery, in the atmosphere and it can be dark and gloomy etc. Reality can be very mysterious...

The first impression I had about Phantom, before I read the book and saw the movie, was the most beautiful image. I can't explain really, I hope to capture such an image one day...

Reply

tangofiction September 18 2007, 20:45:49 UTC
The show has a lot of mystery, I think -- as long as you don't sit close so close that you can see how they do all the special effects. :D

Anyway, don't let the magic/lack thereof stop you if you want to see the show (and have the chance to see it). So much of it is up to your own interpretation -- I think that's a big part of why it's so successful. To a certain extent, everyone sees in it what they want to see.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up