ShareThis Page
Review: Students stage strong ‘Phantom of the Opera’ |

Review: Students stage strong ‘Phantom of the Opera’

| Monday, October 25, 2010 12:00 a.m

Pittsburgh Musical Theater’s all-student production of “The Phantom of the Opera,” which played at the Byham Theater, Downtown, this weekend, was about as good as a student production could be — and, often, the play seemed quite professional.

Students from Pittsburgh Creative and Performing Arts school, the Richard E. Rauh Conservatory and Robert Morris Colonial Theatre performed the well-loved Andrew Lloyd Webber musical about the wretched but brilliant Phantom and his obsessive love for beautiful soprano Christine Daae.

The vocal roles of the Phantom and Christine are challenging for even seasoned professionals, and much of the time, Channing Frampton and Ashley Reichl — who played the Phantom and Christine, respectively, on Thursday night — hit the right notes. Reichl’s best moment of the evening was when she belted out “Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again.” Kate Queen — who played Carlotta, the opera’s prima donna — had the strongest voice on Thursday. Logan Williams also gave a good performance as Raoul, Christine’s fiance.

“The Phantom of the Opera” featured colorful costumes and many sets that were memorable and believable. The cast and crew did a good job of re-creating the scene in the Phantom’s underground lair, with a moving gondola, candelabras and smoke rising from the stage, simulating a river.

— Kellie B. Gormly

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.