Wikipedia says so but that’s been tagged for needing a citation forever. At this point it should probably be taken out of the article. Wiki also indicates there was a Danish production, or at least a Danish recording of the songs, but the article is a little unclear.
No (although the drama camp in the film is based on Stagedoor Manor, the camp that supposedly did the unauthorized performances). In Camp, all of the performances are authorized as far as we the audience know. You’re probably thinking of the plot thread with the alcoholic composer who’s written one hit show being convinced to allow the kids to do a revue of the song’s he’s written but never published or performed himself.
That’s it! I saw this about 3 years ago. I think I was getting the alcoholic composer and Sondheim mixed up (I remember that Sondheim came to their performance).
I still think Ivan or whatever his name is was being a dick to the poor gay kid…I might be…I might not be…I like her…I might like you…you never know… bleah.
Vlad, played by the delectable yet less-than-stellarly-talented Daniel Letterle (who went on to play unambiguously gay in the relatively atrocious “The Mostly Unfabulous Social Life of Ethan Green”). I don’t think he was being a dick to the gay kid so much as he had a bit of an ego problem and had no clue as to how to respond appropriately to Michael’s affection. Although I have to say Michael has more self-control than I do because if I’d been his age and Vlad offered himself up I’d have hit that. Hell, at my age I’d still hit that.
Rocky Horror, Urinetown & Bat Boy were all original musicals, not based on a previous story. Phantom of Manhattan is, by all accounts, a terrible book. The idea of a sequel to Phantom is not, in itself, what most people are objecting to. It’s that the source material is just laughably bad.
Apparently, Christine & Raoul have a child who is a musical genius who doesn’t at all resemble his father :rolleyes: who it turns out is actually the Phantom’s child, as Raoul is impotent and cannot father children. Oh, and the child was conceived during the timeline of Phantom of the Opera, which completely negates the final scene of the musical. And there’s a strong chance it was through rape. :rolleyes:
It was never a Broadway musical (as per the usual definitions), but it did play the West End.
My mistake…it WAS on Broadway at the Belasco for 45 performances. The Broadway production was either shortly before or shortly after the film, though, in 1975.
And, in response to jayjay: Yes, there is a long history of unlikely musicals succeeding. However, there is also a long history of musical sequels being disastrous in one form or another (two different sequels to Annie, Bring Back Birdie, The Best Little Whorehouse Goes Public, and, to go rather far back, Let 'Em Eat Cake all spring to mind). I suspect that the latter, in this case, will trump the former.
