#lincoln 1988

[isopodretina]

ana ng is just davejade more at 10

[claudia1829things]

"LINCOLN" (1988) Review

"LINCOLN" (1988) Review

Can anyone recall the number of Abraham Lincoln biopics seen in movie theaters or on television? I certainly cannot. In fact, I do not know how many Lincoln biopics I have seen. Perhaps this is not surprising. Hollywood has created more productions (both movie and television) about the 16th President of the United States than any other who has occupied the White House. One of those productions was the 1988 two-part miniseries, "LINCOLN".

Based on Gore Vidal's 1984 novel, "Lincoln: A Novel", "LINCOLN" followed Abraham Lincoln's years in the White House, during the U.S. Civil War. Actually, both the novel and the miniseries began with President-elect Lincoln arrival in Washington D.C. in late February 1861, at least a week before his inauguration. Although the limited series covered his complete four years in office, the majority of the production only covered his first years in the nation's capital. During those years, Lincoln not only faced his struggles in conducting a civil war against those Southern states that had succeeded, but also his political enemies (from both parties) and the mental condition of his wife, First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln.

Without a doubt, I believe "LINCOLN" is one of the better Hollywood productions made about the 16th president. I would place it up there with Steven Spielberg's 2012 movie of the same title and the 1974-1976 limited series, which starred Hal Holbrook. In regard to the 1988 miniseries, director One aspect of this series that struck me as innovative was the cynical tone that seemed to surround Lincoln's portrayal and the miniseries' narrative. Past productions have touched on Lincoln's political oratory skills. Yet, these productions could not help but tried to portray the 16th president as some ideal statesman. Which would explain why I had occasional trouble finding him interesting in these productions.

This did not seemed to be the case in both Gore Vidal's novel and the 1988 miniseries. I tried to recall any moment in which Ernest Kinoy's screenplay and Gore Vidal's novel had dipped into some kind of sentimental idealism toward Lincoln, his Administration and even his family. The closest to any kind of idealism I could find proved to be two scenes. One included a conversation in which the First Lady revealed her abolitionist views to the biracial modiste, Elizabeth Keckley. Another also featured Mrs. Lincoln's militant response to Confederate troops attacking Union installations on the outskirts of Washington D.C. Instead of the noble and ideal statesman forced to guide the country through a civil war and a social revolution, Vidal's Lincoln seemed to be an astute and at times, cynical man who seemed to be a bit possessive about his presidential power. Part One featured one marvelous scene in which Lincoln smartly nipped in the bud, his Secretary of State William Seward's attempt to transform him into a powerless head of state. And there were those moments in Part Two that featured Lincoln's clashes with the Army of the Potomac's commander, George McClellan.

Lincoln's pragmatic nature seemed to permeate his dealings regarding emancipation and with his family. Many are now aware of the president's initial support of the American Colonization Society, an organization formed to encourage free African-Americans to immigrate to and form colonies in West Africa. His support had continued during the early years of the Civil War and the miniseries featured it in an interesting and emotionally complex scene that involved Lincoln's White House meeting with a delegation of African-American leaders during the summer of 1862. What made this scene even more interesting was Lincoln's disappointed response to the delegates' refusal to convince many Blacks as possible to resettle in Chiriquí province of Panama. Lincoln's interactions with his immediate family proved to be more emotional, especially with his wife and younger sons. Yet, even in some scenes with the First Lady, the President could be cool, sardonic and sometimes dismissive. I find it even more interesting that the next major production about the President - namely the 2012 Spielberg movie - seemed to have adopted some of the miniseries' ambiguous portrayal of him.

One of the major issues I have with "LINCOLN" is its production values. I found them to be a mixed affair. I certainly had no problems with R. Lynn Smartt's Emmy nominated set decorations. They struck me as a strong recreation of mid-19th century interior decor. However, William Wages had received an Emmy nomination for his cinematography. I must admit that I am at a bit of a loss at this nomination. I never found his photography particularly mind-blowing. Not even the photography featured in various montages featuring well-known Civil War battles. And I disliked his use of natural lighting in many night time shots - both interior and exterior. Both Joseph G. Aulisi and George L. Little had received Emmy nominations for the miniseries' costume designs. I believe both had deserved the nominations, namely for those beautiful costumes worn by the female characters. Aulisi and Little did excellent jobs in re-creating the fashions worn by high-ranking women during the early and mid-1860s. As for those costumes worn by male characters . . . I was not that impressed. The men's costumes looked as if they had arrived directly from a costume warehouse for second-rate stage productions.

I thought the casting director did a pretty decent job in finding the right actors and actresses for the roles. Mind you, I noticed that a good number of the cast bore little or no similarity to the historical characters they had portrayed. This seemed to be the case for the likes of Deborah Adair (Kate Chase), John McMartin (Salmon P. Chase), Richard Mulligan (William H. Seward), Ruby Dee (Elizabeth Keckley), James Gammon (Ulysses S. Grant), and especially Mary Tyler Moore (Mary Todd Lincoln). But . . . I cannot deny that all of them either gave solid or excellent performances. I was especially impressed by Adair, Mulligan and Moore. The miniseries also featured first-rate performances from the likes of Stephen Culp as one of Lincoln's secretaries, John Hay; Gregory Cooke as the Lincolns' oldest son Robert; Jeffrey DeMunn as William Herdon, Lincoln's former law partner; Robin Gammell as Stephen Douglas; Cleavon Little as Frederick Douglass; and John Houseman as Winfield Scott.

I had a problem with two particular performance. I had a problem with Thomas Gibson's portrayal of Kate Chase's future husband, William Sprague IV during Part One. I thought Gibson gave an exaggerated performance that was further marred by a questionable New England accent. And although Ruby Dee had received an Emmy nomination for her portrayal of Elizabeth Keckley, I could not find anything particularly outstanding about her performance. Do not get me wrong. The actress gave a very solid performance as Keckley. But the miniseries gave Dee little opportunity to truly display her skills as an actress. Because of this, I found myself more impressed by Gloria Reuben's portrayal of the modiste in 2012's "LINCOLN".

Mary Tyler Moore had also received an Emmy nomination for her portrayal of First Lady Mary Todd Lincoln. And I can honestly say that she had more than deserved it. Moore did an excellent job of conveying the First Lady's volatile personality, sharp wit and political astuteness. And while I had a small issue with the transcript's portrayal of Mrs. Lincoln, a part of me wishes that Moore had won that Emmy. I was astounded that Sam Waterston did not receive an Emmy nomination for his portrayal of Abraham Lincoln. Astounded and disappointed. Perhaps the competition for the Emmy's Outstanding Lead Actor in a Limited Series category had been too heavy for Waterston to garner a nomination. You know what? I still believe the actor had deserved that nomination. I believe Waterston gave one of the best on-screen interpretations of the 16th president I have ever seen on film. And his portrayal of Lincoln had fortunately avoided the usual sentimental idealism that have dangerously come close to making Lincoln a one-note saint. Waterston's performance sharply reminded me of Lincoln's real skills as a politician.

Aside from two performances, I have few other issues with "LINCOLN". What film stock was this miniseries shot on? Because visually, it did not age very well. I already had a problem with Wages' use of natural lighting. But the miniseries looked as if it had aged a good deal over the past thirty-six years in compared to other television productions filmed during the same decade. Over the years I have learned to tolerate historical inaccuracies in dramas like "LINCOLN". But there were three inaccuracies that did not sit well with me. One of them featured black activist/abolitionist Frederick Douglass at the August 1862 White House meeting between Lincoln and five leading members of Washington's black community regarding colonization. One, Douglass did not live in Washington during the war years. And two, he was never at that meeting.

The other two inaccuracies involved former law clerk-turned-Union officer and close friend of the Lincolns, Elmer E. Ellsworth. Following his death at the hands of a Virginia tavern owner, the miniseries had the First Lady having an emotional fit during his funeral. I believe this scene was supposed to indicate Mrs. Lincoln's mental instability. The thing is . . . this never happened, especially since Ellsworth was closer to the President than the First Lady. And it was Lincoln who had emotional difficulty accepting the officer's death, not his wife. The miniseries also indicated that following Ellsworth funeral, Mrs. Lincoln had passed out and remained unconscious for three days, waking up during the outbreak of the First Battle of Bull Run. I have already pointed out that the First Lady had never been traumatized by Ellsworth's death. I would also like to point out that Ellsworth had been killed in May 1861. The First Battle of Bull Run occurred on July 21, 1861. So, Mrs. Lincoln had remained unconscious . . . for two months? Seriously? One more thing, why did most of the miniseries' narrative occurred during the twelve months between February 1861 and February 1862? By the time the miniseries had moved beyond this time period, one-quarter of Part Two had played out. By the time the narrative had reached 1863, only 45 minutes had remained of the production. And the next two years were practically rushed. I believe this problem had stemmed from the 1984 novel, in which the majority of it had only covered those twelve months.

As I had just pointed out, "LINCOLN" was not a perfect production about the 16th president. The miniseries had its flaws. But I cannot deny that I believe it was one of the better ones ever produced by Hollywood. Based on Gore Vidal's novel, "LINCOLN" gave a deep and lively account of Abraham Lincoln's four years in the White House. And one can credit Ernest Kinoy's transcript, Lamont Johnson's Emmy winning direction and excellent performances from a cast led by Sam Waterston and Mary Tyler Moore.

[nerds-yearbook]

In 1805, Napoleon was accidentally picked up by Time Travelers Bill and Ted and dropped off in 1988. While the time travelers were picking up other historical figures Billy the Kid, Socrates, Sigmund Freud, Beethoven, Joan of Arc, Genghis Kahn, and Abraham Lincoln, Napoleon spent his time bowling, eating ice cream and going to a water park in San Dimas, CA (Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, Flm)

[gelarshiesprofruitboarder]

ana ng is so bill and ted. tbh.

[balthazar-sketti]

Friday the 13th VII: The New Blood

Dir. John Carl Buechler, 1988

[thezombiegeekinthehawaiianshirt]

[flmboyz]

[spookyfoxdreamer]

[isopodretina]

𝐻𝑒𝓁𝓁𝑜 𝒷𝓇𝑜 🧡

[musicandotherdelights]

Daily Listening, Day #1,102 - January 6th, 2023

Album: Lincoln (Bar/None, 1988)

Artist: They Might Be Giants

Genre: Alternative Rock, Indie Pop

Track Listing: 

"Ana Ng"

"Cowtown"

"Lie Still, Little Bottle"

"Purple Toupee"

"Cage & Aquarium"

"Where Your Eyes Don't Go"

"Piece Of Dirt"

"Mr. Me"

"Pencil Rain"

"The World's Address"

"I've Got A Match"

"Santa's Beard"

"You'll Miss Me"

"They'll Need A Crane"

"Shoehorn With Teeth"

"Stand On Your Own Head"

"Snowball In Hell"

"Kiss Me, Son Of God"

Favorite Song: "Mr. Me"

[therealmrpositive]

Thank Goodness it's Thursday Part 7 - Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood (1988)

In today's review, I find psychic abilities might finally stop the undead Jason. As I attempt a #positive review of Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood #KaneHodder #LarParkLincoln #KevinSpirtas #SusanBlu #TerryKiser #ElizabethKaitan #HeidiKozak

Much like the murky depth of the lake, that Jason lurks in, our minds hold potential, and possibilities of their true dormant power remain the realm of fantasy and discovery. One that can be drawn for artistic potential, say if a certain franchise needs a creative jolt. In 1988, requiring a new direction to go in for the sequel, tapping into her latent abilities, a peculiar teenager, a young…

[nerds-yearbook]

In 1863, Abraham Lincoln was taken from time along with other historical figures by the time travelers Bill and Ted. The historical figures Napoleon, Billy the Kid, Socrates, Sigmund Freud, Beethoven, Joan of Arc, Genghis Kahn, and Abraham Lincoln were taken to 1988 to spend the day in San Dimas, CA. (Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, Flm)

[petercushings]

You're more interested in this telekinetic stuff than you are in me!

LAR PARK-LINCOLN as TINA SHEPARD in FRIDAY THE 13TH PART VII: THE NEW BLOOD (1988) dir. John Carl Buechler

[emotionalmotionsicknessxx]

So you want to see the 1988 Phantom of the Opera proshot at the New York Public Library...

If you know one thing about me on this internet it's that I love when things are spelled out and easy. This weekend my friends and I went to the New York Public Library (NYPL) Theatre on Film and Tape Archive (TOFT) located at Lincoln Center to watch the Phantom of the Opera proshot. I saw some how-tos and asked friends who have already seen it, but it was still a little confusing and I wanted to clarify how my experience went:

Bottom line: if you can make your way to NYC, you too can see the Phantom proshot from 1988 starring Michael Crawford, Sarah Brightman, and Steve Barton and lose your mind :)

Here's how I did it:

I showed up to the New York Public Library Library of the Performing Arts located at Lincoln Center with my two (2) also phanatical friends. We were vibrating. We went when the archive opened at noon. Hours can be found here.

We were directed to the third floor where the archive is. We had to check our bags (but were able to bring whatever in - I brought my phone, a pen, and a notebook for notes)

We met the sweetest librarian who was so helpful - he got us on computers to apply for NYPL library cards AND special collections cards. If you live in NY, you can get a regular NYPL card. If you are from out of town, they will give you a NYPL visitor card (good for 3 months!) We filled out applications you can find here and here if you are curious about the questions asked. Many questions are optional! Note: there was some scuttlebutt about needing to be a student or researcher or even an expert in the field - you don't need to say why you're there unless you want to! I kept it brief: said I was an independent researcher and there for personal interest. They are just happy people are using our libraries! Sign the letter here to stop the mayor from closing our libraries

Once we had our cards (NYPL Card AND a special collections card/number) we were told to head to the archive, where we met a second, lovely librarian who was excited we were there. You can ask for any show that isn't currently running (sorry Hadestown nation). You can find a list of what they have here. All titles available at TOFT begin with the call number NCOV, NCOX, or NCOW. Note: we did not make an appt ahead of time, and luckily no one was watching Phantom but our friend wanted to watch Great Comet and someone already had it. To avoid this, make an appt. To make an appointment, call (212) 870-1642 or email toft@nypl.org.

We signed off to use the archive and were off to the races! That's it! We were put on three monitors and I controlled the pausing and replaying of the tapes. You can replay as much as you want, and can even ask for other plays/musicals that you want to watch during your session there. I took notes in a notebook, I saw other people taking notes on their phone. There are cameras to make sure you aren't doing any recording or photo taking. Note that you can only see this proshot once without special permission, so if you want to come back you'll need to look into what that permission is.

If you're interested in what was actually IN the beautiful, spectacular, amazing, never before been done proshot (it's from May 25, 1988 by the way) listen to my/our podcast, Leroux Less Travelled!

My inbox is open if you have more questions! I hope this clarifies how easy it is if you're ever in NYC!! We will get through phantom-drought together :)

[seat-safety-switch]

In my town, there are a surprising number of people who have been killed by leprechauns. Whenever I travel, I always ask folks: how many did the Lucky Charms guy "get" here? After some confusion, the answer is always zero, and I could never figure out what was going on.

Now, I'd traveled to some shitholes on business, back when I had a real job and hiring managers didn't spontaneously combust upon reviewing my resume. Akron, Ohio. Dayton, Ohio. Toledo, Ohio. Columbus, Ohio. None of these places had feral fae coming out of the woodwork and slaughtering innocent folks in the woods. Not a single one. So there had to be something wrong with where I lived.

Fearful of death, I constructed in my place a homunculus: an artificial human. This crude replica, soulless and doomed to a short life of excruciating pain, would travel into the woods in my stead and collect valuable data vis-a-vis leprechaun-being-killed-by. A lot of people ask about this part, and honestly it's one of those things you just can't teach. You either know or you don't know how to fabricate a lifelike humanoid that will learn unimaginable suffering for little reason other than idle curiosity about where all those football players went to that one year.

Anyway, after only a few dozen attempts, I was able to at least figure out the general geographic area where the leprechaun lived. Sure, I had to go through a lot of curses, blood sacrifices, and expired luncheon meat, but it was all worth it in the end. Got a show on Discovery Channel about the whole deal. The only stipulation in their contract was that I can never reveal the truth about the leprechauns, because then folks would stop watching.

So come and check me out at 9pm (8 central) as I attempt to figure out a small, but tantalizing, truth about the Ethereal Killers Beyond Our Realm. We're also going to restore and paint a 1988 Lincoln Continental for a celebrity.

[flagbridge]

Q&A: The Phantom Broadway Proshot

Happy 36th Birthday to Phantom of the Opera's opening night on Broadway! We should be celebrating at the Majestic. The show never should have closed.

In order to create "new" ish POTO Broadway content, @or-what-you-will and I promised to answer your questions about the proshot on POTO Broadway's birthday. Find our summary of the Proshot here.

We got dozens of questions, which we've consolidated into 14 questions. Read them all past the cut!

Wait, what’s the Phantom Proshot?

The Phantom Proshot is an archival copy of the original Broadway cast and production of Phantom of the Opera, filmed at the evening performance with a live audience on May 25, 1988. The New York Public Library, Theatre on Film and Tape Archive at the Performing Arts Library at Lincoln Center has archival copies of Broadway, Off-Broadway, and Regional theater going back to 1970. You can’t view currently running shows, so since Phantom ran for so long, it was under lock and key.

2. How do I see the Pro-Shot? 

Pretty simple how to guide here on the NYPL website. 

We are both NYPL cardholders and made a reservation in advance. You are required to state why you are accessing the recording as they exist for archival and research purpose. Both of us are published authors and researchers under our real names. 

Here's a picture of the room we were in from NYPL's website. We had an appointment and were set up in a room with lots of monitors. We were seated at monitors next to each other with two sets of headphones and had one set of controls to pause/rewind etc. There are 20 monitors in the room and it was pretty full that day. This was not my first time at the TOFT and it’s always had a good number of people around. 

3. Can someone get a boot of it/send me the link to it? Pleeeeease? 

No. Seriously, stop asking about this. Stop joking about this. It’s not online, and never will be. All of the recordings are on digital media (videodiscs or DvDs) in the basement and only library staff get to touch them. Don’t be the person who tried to do this and ruins the archive for everyone else. You can’t even bring electronic devices into the room.

4. Why won’t they release it to the public? And who the heck does it benefit to keep this locked away?

It isn’t. It was locked away when the show was actually running. It is available to the public. We are the public! We have library cards and went to a public library and watched it for $0! It’s owned by the library so the public can see it! At the library! 

The availability of us to access it now that the show has closed is what constitutes public release. There were several other phans, members of the public there to see it after us, and the library allowed them to max out the number of monitors the library allows people to view on. They had a later appointment and were watching disc one when we were on disc two. I’m sure there was someone after them too. Were we all wearing Phantom gear? Also yes. 

(@or-what-you-will here) The library is not allowed to show recordings of anything currently running on Broadway, presumably because of fears about economic loss from those who own the rights to the musicals. The library does not own the rights to the musicals in the archive, and there are likely a lot of stipulations the library has to follow to be able to have recordings like this. 

As someone who works in a library doing digitization work, libraries and the media they contain are very complicated. TOFT likely has the rights to show it under a very limited license, and to make copies for preservation purposes only, but things like this mean they would not be able to do anything like put it online or charge for it or do anything that would be them acting as though they owned the copyright (as opposed to the physical media). This is why when a library or archive has a book or tapes they don’t usually have the right to photocopy the entire book or digitize the entire tape and put it online (unless it is in public domain), however, if you go in person you can see it all you want. Someone else (usually the creator) owns the right to distribute or copy, and libraries and archives can get in a lot of trouble for violating it. 

The copyright is still owned by the holders of each respective musical’s copyright. It’s essentially like when you buy a DVD and you are technically not supposed to copy that DVD but you can invite your friends over to watch it at your house. Copying it and distributing it violates copyright. Putting it online violates copyright. If the library violated copyright it would likely lose the ability to archive musicals altogether. If you copied the DVD it would be a lot harder to find out who put it up because the DVD is owned by lots of people, though you could still be prosecuted by the law. If the library did, they would know immediately who did it because they are presumably the only ones with a copy of this recording. 

Likewise if someone took a bootleg recording of a show and distributed it, the copyright holders wouldn’t know it existed. If they found out that individual would then be eligible to be prosecuted under the law. Because the library is a public institution, if they were found out to be doing this, it would be the library itself that would get in trouble and it would damage their reputation, their funding, and quite possibly the funding and reputation of libraries around the world. A lot of this is done on trust. The copyright holders trust the library as a public institution and the library has a lot more stakes in the game than a single person recording the show and distributing it.

It’s a very tenuous agreement at times, and likely the library is only allowed to even record because there are so many protections in place and they have a history of enforcing these rules. These agreements also usually cover digitization and preservation, but again, violating them could have those abilities taken away as well. It’s all tied up in copyright law and the library has no control over that. I have talked to archivists where I live who have to record performances with tape over the lens because it’s considered for preservation and they want to make sure it cannot be possible to profit off of it in any way. 

When the show goes into public domain they will be able to put it online all they want without fear of repercussions, but until then, unless those agreements change, we are all limited by the whim of the copyright holders.

5. Hello! Is the pro shot you watched what this clip is from https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cp2_80CJqI3/?igsh=MWNja2wwYWw4OHUwbw== ?

I know all of us here on Tumblr were freaking out that they maybe had a copy of the pro shot when this came out. Thank you! (@imstillhere-butallislost)

Not the proshot, it's a press reel. It has its own cool story though! Answered this here.

6. How good of a shot was it? I know you said ProShot but is it a ProShot like Hamilton or just a camera recording the whole stage at once?

I���d definitely say it was Hamilton pro-shot quality as to what was available at the time between image quality and mixing up of close ups and wide shots. I’ve watched other proshots and many just park a camera in the back of the orchestra and call it good. Cats in particular had multiple cameras but just did close-ups when they felt like it, not when it made sense or added anything. As @or-what-you-will explained in their re-blog, Phantom was one of the first proshots where they had a soundboard plug in, and let me tell you, with the exception of a few moments in Act 1 where Sarah Brightman maxes out her mic, the sound was delicious. Have we talked about how Judy Kaye is singing over the overture (yes, that’s Judy Kaye, original Carlotta, warming up!)? Or that you can hear every single word of Notes I and Prima Donna and Notes II, which usually just sounds garbled because everyone is singing over one another? Actually hearing words that I sort of know exist changed my experience of the show for me. 

7. How did the tempo seem, compared to the pace of the show at the end of its run? I saw the show a few times in the last few years, and the music seemed significantly faster in person than it sounded on the London cast recording. I’ve always wondered if that was just a difference between the London and NY productions, or if the tempo just sped up over the years.

Uh…normal pace??? I’ve watched a lot of boots and most solidly clock in 2:15 of run time. This was no different. There are definitely some that run a little faster. London during Earl Carpenter’s 2023 run was notorious as he had to catch a train. It does seem to have settled back out. I will say, the music does always feel more intense in person because the whole place just vibrates. 

8. I'm curious about the comment about the Ratcatcher? I think I remember that character from a film adaptation, but was he ever in the ALW musical? (@lord-valery-mimes)

Yes, Ratcatcher is still in the musical, even now. It’s a blink or you miss it type of moment. If you hear a thud and a scream right before Madame Giry tells Raoul “He lives across the Lake, Monsieur”, the thud is the ratcatcher running across the travelator.

9. Does Christine really recognize the Phantom in PONR from his boner? 

No, but at this point she probably already know it’s him and has been trying to get through the scene, but definitely acts surprised because, well, that’s surprising. But it’s definitely the moment where the Vibes Are Officially Off. 

10. Can Sarah Brightman act? 

Yes! All three of the trio have far more nuanced performances on stage. Sarah doesn’t act the way that we do see many later Christines (including late 80s and early 90s Christines), but she absolutely created the blueprint for the role. Her “Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again” is missing some soul, but at the end of the day she was one of a kind, and she made some very strong acting choices. 

11. there anything unexpected? Any interpretation that stood out to you and particularly striking but didn’t stick around as others took on the roles and put their own spin on things?

Guys, I want to talk about Steve Barton as Raoul. The man made choice, after choice, after choice. And yet we have had so many Raoul’s that are kind of just strutting about looking pretty. Some seem to even forget they’re onstage during Final Lair. It can be such a juicy role if the actors choose to make it that way but so few do. 

Besides some small details I mentioned, the show did maintain its integrity through its 35 year run, which is truly remarkable. 

(@or-what-you-will here) Seconding what Flag said, Steve Barton brought so much more to the role than I’m used to seeing, and it really opened my mind to what Raoul could be. 

The blocking in PONR did surprise me, I knew they had changed it but I hadn’t realized how much. I always found the kind of pinwheeling arm thing Christine does with the phantom strange, so it was a pleasant surprise to find that they didn’t do that at all, the embrace from behind made more sense to me.

I also found after she took his hood off no one really ran out, the phantom and Christine got to have their moment. The blocking where they (the managers and Raoul) run out and tell Christine to stay makes no sense with their motivations to stop him. The more recent blocking where Christine motions them to stay in place as the phantom sings the All I Ask of You Reprise makes way more sense with the characters’ motives and matches this original blocking much more. 

12. Also are you truly working on a research project? If so, how is progress and where might we find your final results when it’s complete?

To quote Dr. Who, “Spoilers.” Yes, always. Both of us have day jobs that have us doing research, but I can’t promise I’ll put it on here when complete since I keep fandom and real life separate. Sorry to dodge this one but getting into specifics about this starts to identify us. 

(@or-what-you-will here) Seconding what Flag said. 

13. Hi there, I was wondering if I could ask you a general question about the NPL’s archive. Something about the language on their website made it sound like viewers could only watch a recording “once”. I wasn’t sure if that meant “once per visit” (i.e. you can’t sit there for 8 hours restarting the tape every time it ends) or “once” as in forever (like, once you’ve watched a recording you are never allowed to request it again). Did you have any clarification? I wasn't sure if the librarians explain the policies when you arrive at your appointment. Thank you for providing so many details about the Phantom pro-shot and offering to answer our questions! That's really kind of you!

You’re welcome! So if there’s nobody after you, you can hang out with the media as long as you want. However, we did have another group come in about 90 minutes after us. That gave us enough time to watch both acts with all the rewinds we wanted. We watched PONR and parts of Final Lair like five times. On a previous TOFT trip I watched two shows and was there for like six hours.  The prohibition is on coming back and watching the recording again. I have no idea how strict they are about this, although I suspect it’s to keep people from monopolizing certain media. Would I want to try to watch the proshot again in the future? Probably! I know there’s stuff I missed, or I’d see something different depending on what I’m working on. The TOFT is also an absolutely incredible resource and I have so many other shows I’d like to check out. 

(Will here) They do log on your library account when you visit that you visited and what you saw. However, if you have accessibility needs that would require you to watch in multiple viewings or something along those lines, I would talk to them about it, because I’m sure they’d be able to work with you to figure out something so you wouldn’t have to sit through the whole thing in one shot.

14. > Barton Raoul’s “There is no Phantom of the Opera” comes off more as “Christine this is just some dude” vs “he doesn’t exist at all.” 

Could you elaborate on this part? I'm having trouble imagining how that would be conveyed. (also, thanks for sharing your notes on the procast!) @clutzyangel

You're welcome! Yes, he's telling Christine that the Phantom is a human, flesh-and-blood man, not some fantastical creature. I've seen many Raouls who seem to try to convince Christine that the Phantom doesn't exist at all. Barton's Raoul seems to understand that he's a man with ulterior motives possibly duping Christine.

And he's not wrong.