|
|
| Should there be a sequel to The Phantom of the Opera? |
| Yes!!! I want more!!! |
|
7% |
[ 2 ] |
| No!!! We must preserve Erik's character!!! |
|
92% |
[ 25 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:48 am
Utakan PhantomoftheFox Phantom was the last good show Webber did. Well at least he's admitting that the plot has problems... that's a good sign. On the other hand, he's still working with Forsythe, who we know has absolutely no respect for the source material. I think the Phantom movie gave him an ego trip, personally. It boosted the takes for the stage show a bit and got him all those squealy new fangirls, so he thinks it's time to drag out the old sequel and try to recapture his success with the original show. Which won't happen. If Disney has taught us anything, it's that sequals don't live up to the originals and basically flop. That is true. I cannot believe how far they are going with Cinderella. Sequels more often than not ruin the first story. The Die Hard, Indiana Jones, and James Bond films were great for sequels and stuff, but stories for POTO, Les Miserables, just don't work.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:22 pm
Ghostly Phantomess Utakan PhantomoftheFox Phantom was the last good show Webber did. Well at least he's admitting that the plot has problems... that's a good sign. On the other hand, he's still working with Forsythe, who we know has absolutely no respect for the source material. I think the Phantom movie gave him an ego trip, personally. It boosted the takes for the stage show a bit and got him all those squealy new fangirls, so he thinks it's time to drag out the old sequel and try to recapture his success with the original show. Which won't happen. If Disney has taught us anything, it's that sequals don't live up to the originals and basically flop. That is true. I cannot believe how far they are going with Cinderella. Sequels more often than not ruin the first story. The Die Hard, Indiana Jones, and James Bond films were great for sequels and stuff, but stories for POTO, Les Miserables, just don't work. That and PotO HAS an ending. Christine and Raoul run off together and Erik (in the book at least) died. Where Erik ends up in the musical, one can only guess but I have a firm belief he just went somewhere to be AWAY from the human race, not go bother a whole other set of people in Manhatten. On another note, I went to Webber's own site (where he blogs about business BS and all) and sent him some feedback about his wanting to produce the sequal. I may or may not hear back from him, but I at least tried to tell him in a civil manner the uselessness of doing so and the fact he may be jumping the gun, thinking he can get more out of that one show thanks to the 2004 film.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:22 pm
O_O;;;; Nooooooooooo!!!!! *falls into spasms*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:42 pm
Lately it seems like Webber is trying too hard to make a new mega musical.
I hope he realizes that sequels to musicals have a history of flopping royally (ex. Bring Back Birdie, The Best Little Whorehouse Goes Public). It will probably end up being another Jeeves.
Though if it is actually produced I will still look into it and offer my enthusiasm, since it's POTO after all 3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:23 pm
I have never actually seen a musical sequel, nor have I seen a musical that warranted one at all. o_o
I mean, damn, it's like making a sequel to... Sweeney Todd!! Everybody that matters has a definite ending!! And we can probably assume that Erik's dead, Webber, because it's been, oh, what, 50 years at the very end? Erik(Gerik, at least) was probably 30-50 years old when the story happened, and it was in very early 1900s France. He wouldn't've lived that long.
... I dare ALW to make a sequel to Jesus Christ Superstar. xd No, I DOUBLE dare him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:11 am
Utakan Ghostly Phantomess Utakan PhantomoftheFox Phantom was the last good show Webber did. Well at least he's admitting that the plot has problems... that's a good sign. On the other hand, he's still working with Forsythe, who we know has absolutely no respect for the source material. I think the Phantom movie gave him an ego trip, personally. It boosted the takes for the stage show a bit and got him all those squealy new fangirls, so he thinks it's time to drag out the old sequel and try to recapture his success with the original show. Which won't happen. If Disney has taught us anything, it's that sequals don't live up to the originals and basically flop. That is true. I cannot believe how far they are going with Cinderella. Sequels more often than not ruin the first story. The Die Hard, Indiana Jones, and James Bond films were great for sequels and stuff, but stories for POTO, Les Miserables, just don't work. That and PotO HAS an ending. Christine and Raoul run off together and Erik (in the book at least) died. Where Erik ends up in the musical, one can only guess but I have a firm belief he just went somewhere to be AWAY from the human race, not go bother a whole other set of people in Manhatten. On another note, I went to Webber's own site (where he blogs about business BS and all) and sent him some feedback about his wanting to produce the sequal. I may or may not hear back from him, but I at least tried to tell him in a civil manner the uselessness of doing so and the fact he may be jumping the gun, thinking he can get more out of that one show thanks to the 2004 film. I take my black fedora off to you my friend. I did not even think of doing any feedback. I think I will do that now. I think I will try and get The Phantom of Manhattan. I have been trying to find it for a while, but people kept on telling me that it was not really worth it. But this I believe has sparked a reason to get it. I also agree that ALW got a little cocky after he did the 2004 film. Many more people liked it because they had never even heard or considered POTO. That movie really only gave a booster to Gerard Butler. Everyone thinks that he is really sexy and hot. I hate how people do not take in anything about the plot or the characters. It is infuriating and insulting to the original novel.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:15 am
Sho-Totoron I have never actually seen a musical sequel, nor have I seen a musical that warranted one at all. o_o I mean, damn, it's like making a sequel to... Sweeney Todd!! Everybody that matters has a definite ending!! And we can probably assume that Erik's dead, Webber, because it's been, oh, what, 50 years at the very end? Erik(Gerik, at least) was probably 30-50 years old when the story happened, and it was in very early 1900s France. He wouldn't've lived that long. ... I dare ALW to make a sequel to Jesus Christ Superstar. xd No, I DOUBLE dare him. I agree. It sort of puzzles me though. In the 2004 movie, we know that Christine is dead and that she is still married to Raoul and they have kids. I wonder exactly if ALW will remember that when he starts this sequel, or if he makes it past the infuriated Phans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:17 am
Kitsune Ookami Lately it seems like Webber is trying too hard to make a new mega musical. I hope he realizes that sequels to musicals have a history of flopping royally (ex. Bring Back Birdie, The Best Little Whorehouse Goes Public). It will probably end up being another Jeeves. Though if it is actually produced I will still look into it and offer my enthusiasm, since it's POTO after all 3nodding Yes. ALW has lost a bit of his talent I think, he got an ego boost and it is showing now since he thinks he can pull off a sequel to POTO. If he did do something, I would see it as well, but I think it will still just ruin the original story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:28 am
Ghostly Phantomess Sho-Totoron I have never actually seen a musical sequel, nor have I seen a musical that warranted one at all. o_o I mean, damn, it's like making a sequel to... Sweeney Todd!! Everybody that matters has a definite ending!! And we can probably assume that Erik's dead, Webber, because it's been, oh, what, 50 years at the very end? Erik(Gerik, at least) was probably 30-50 years old when the story happened, and it was in very early 1900s France. He wouldn't've lived that long. ... I dare ALW to make a sequel to Jesus Christ Superstar. xd No, I DOUBLE dare him. I agree. It sort of puzzles me though. In the 2004 movie, we know that Christine is dead and that she is still married to Raoul and they have kids. I wonder exactly if ALW will remember that when he starts this sequel, or if he makes it past the infuriated Phans. However, he may follow the original musical plot, in which you don't know what happens in the future. That wouldn't really help much but that could be an excuse. I really hope he doesn't. I'm just worried that if he doesn't, on the other hand, he may feel PoTO is all washed up and call its quits on the show that's running now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:39 am
Kira the wanderer Ghostly Phantomess Sho-Totoron I have never actually seen a musical sequel, nor have I seen a musical that warranted one at all. o_o I mean, damn, it's like making a sequel to... Sweeney Todd!! Everybody that matters has a definite ending!! And we can probably assume that Erik's dead, Webber, because it's been, oh, what, 50 years at the very end? Erik(Gerik, at least) was probably 30-50 years old when the story happened, and it was in very early 1900s France. He wouldn't've lived that long. ... I dare ALW to make a sequel to Jesus Christ Superstar. xd No, I DOUBLE dare him. I agree. It sort of puzzles me though. In the 2004 movie, we know that Christine is dead and that she is still married to Raoul and they have kids. I wonder exactly if ALW will remember that when he starts this sequel, or if he makes it past the infuriated Phans. However, he may follow the original musical plot, in which you don't know what happens in the future. That wouldn't really help much but that could be an excuse. I really hope he doesn't. I'm just worried that if he doesn't, on the other hand, he may feel PoTO is all washed up and call its quits on the show that's running now. there are so many possibilities. I think he is in over his head this time. As great of a composer he is, I think he should quit while he is ahead.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:01 pm
T-T It can't be true.
I've heard many reviews of that book, and, everyone I've ever spoken to has said it was awful. T__T
And I don't want him to do this.
DOESN'T HE UNDERSTAND WHAT HE'S TAMPERING WITH?!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:19 pm
Ghostly Phantomess Utakan Ghostly Phantomess Utakan PhantomoftheFox Phantom was the last good show Webber did. Well at least he's admitting that the plot has problems... that's a good sign. On the other hand, he's still working with Forsythe, who we know has absolutely no respect for the source material. I think the Phantom movie gave him an ego trip, personally. It boosted the takes for the stage show a bit and got him all those squealy new fangirls, so he thinks it's time to drag out the old sequel and try to recapture his success with the original show. Which won't happen. If Disney has taught us anything, it's that sequals don't live up to the originals and basically flop. That is true. I cannot believe how far they are going with Cinderella. Sequels more often than not ruin the first story. The Die Hard, Indiana Jones, and James Bond films were great for sequels and stuff, but stories for POTO, Les Miserables, just don't work. That and PotO HAS an ending. Christine and Raoul run off together and Erik (in the book at least) died. Where Erik ends up in the musical, one can only guess but I have a firm belief he just went somewhere to be AWAY from the human race, not go bother a whole other set of people in Manhatten. On another note, I went to Webber's own site (where he blogs about business BS and all) and sent him some feedback about his wanting to produce the sequal. I may or may not hear back from him, but I at least tried to tell him in a civil manner the uselessness of doing so and the fact he may be jumping the gun, thinking he can get more out of that one show thanks to the 2004 film. I take my black fedora off to you my friend. I did not even think of doing any feedback. I think I will do that now. I think I will try and get The Phantom of Manhattan. I have been trying to find it for a while, but people kept on telling me that it was not really worth it. But this I believe has sparked a reason to get it. I also agree that ALW got a little cocky after he did the 2004 film. Many more people liked it because they had never even heard or considered POTO. That movie really only gave a booster to Gerard Butler. Everyone thinks that he is really sexy and hot. I hate how people do not take in anything about the plot or the characters. It is infuriating and insulting to the original novel. Well, Webber is a bit heartless when it comes to Phantom of the Opera. Instead of being faithful to the phans and wanting to please them, he simply wants the money. To him, PotO has been the prize cow giving the cream to enrichen his pockets. As long as he can stretch it out, he's happy whether or not it ruins the original story and whatever he first planted as a gift for his (now ex) wife, Sarah Brightman. Schumacher was basically the same way with the film. You can look at his other films based on books (Batman, for example) and see he makes god-awful tweaks. With both of them bucking heads together in a giddy frenzy, some very disreputable messes spurted forth. Those unfamiliar with the story may embrace his piddlings, but he does not count in the fact that there are thousands if not millions of Phans around the world, ready for the literary throw-down of the century.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2007 5:54 pm
Funny thing is, the phans ARE the money, and Webber isn't going to realize that until he goes too far and pisses them all off. Don't get me started on Schumacher. I still say we torch him home for that remark about not wanting stage phans to see his movie. *shakes fist* Ghostly Phantomess I agree. It sort of puzzles me though. In the 2004 movie, we know that Christine is dead and that she is still married to Raoul and they have kids. I wonder exactly if ALW will remember that when he starts this sequel, or if he makes it past the infuriated Phans. Actually, the ending to the movie is almost completely compatable with the Phantom of Manhatten storyline. In PoM Christine is married to Raoul and has a son, but the kid is actually Erik's and the plot is basically a big custody battle between him and Christine. The only thing that wouldn't jive is- highlight for PoM spoiler (as if anyone cares): ... the date on Christine's headstone. She's killed at the end of PoM, 12 or so years after the main POTO plot. Don't worry, Kira- as long as the original show is still making money (and it is), Webber isn't going to close it. ESPECIALLY not when they just spent millions opening the Vegas production. Besides, I don't think Webber actually has the authority to single-handedly close a show, and even if he did it would probably take ten years for them to shut down every far-flung production.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:20 am
Utakan Well, Webber is a bit heartless when it comes to Phantom of the Opera. Instead of being faithful to the phans and wanting to please them, he simply wants the money. To him, PotO has been the prize cow giving the cream to enrichen his pockets. As long as he can stretch it out, he's happy whether or not it ruins the original story and whatever he first planted as a gift for his (now ex) wife, Sarah Brightman. Schumacher was basically the same way with the film. You can look at his other films based on books (Batman, for example) and see he makes god-awful tweaks. With both of them bucking heads together in a giddy frenzy, some very disreputable messes spurted forth. Those unfamiliar with the story may embrace his piddlings, but he does not count in the fact that there are thousands if not millions of Phans around the world, ready for the literary throw-down of the century. I believe that even if he does not stick closely with the novel for a sequel, which phans can't really hope for considering the alterations made to the current, he should at least honor his own play. Obviously transisting from novel to play will be a bumpy transfusion, things will have to be changed and cut. However, a sequel has never been made into a musical so he has the power to at least make something new. It should be good though, not PoM. If we can't hope for anything cannon, then let's at least hope for something fitting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 1:39 pm
Dear Mr. Webber:
I hear that you are going to write a sequel to the Phantom of the Opera. I consider this a very bad decision on your part. What is there to tell? Raoul gets Christine, Erik (the Phantom) dies, the end. Although I love your original Phantom musical dearly, I think that a continuation would just be useless. If you produce a sequel to your musical, you will make many fans angry. People won't want to watch your original after seeing the new one. You will lose what you have gained. I don't want the Phantom to fall! For your own good, I ask you, please rethink your decision.
Your fan,
M. A.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
