Okay, but why does Les Miz seem to be the example? Why not by liking Phantom, or Spamalot, or Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat?

I usually see either Phantom or Cats used as the example of over-the-top eighties musicals.

I think Phantom would have the same reaction, because I think the reaction is to the earnestness of the love, and not really doing "new" things other than spectacle. Spam a lot ( and Jiseph) don't take themselves so seriously

Yeah, Andrew Lloyd Weber musicals are generally not actually taken seriously (Phantom does well when when the tourists are in town). And Spamalot is too self-aware of its ridiculousness to be the exemplar. Les Mis is just traditional enough to be accessible (as opposed to Sunday in the Park with George), but also has enough depth to not be fluff, and its earnestness is intensely mockable, if your tendencies lean that way.

I also cry during Phantom.

Not Spamalot so much.

Also, I was in college for theatre when Les Mis was super-popular, and I personally quickly learned that liking it put you in the same camp as people who did theatre for a "hobby". I am not claiming that college theatre students aren't often pretentious twats.

Yeah, Les Miz was always in that "too popular to be cool" category. Along with Phantom and Cats and the other mega-hits on Broadway in the 80s.

That may be why I avoided Les Mis for so long. I love it to pieces now. I tried Cats...but nope, not for me. And I love, adore, cherish musicals.

My father is one of those who thinks musicals are not serious business but when ACT did Urinetown and Phantom he loved them. I think he even saw Jersey Boys at ACT. I guess if it is on THAT stage, it is ok, but if it is at the Golden Gate Theater or the Orpheum, then it isn't worthy.

I was immersed in the musical theater culture in New York pretty heavily, and most people in that culture had a decent, if occasionally grudging, respect for Les Miz. I'd say that in the opinion of most people I met, it was by far the best of the 1980s British mega-musicals. That's certainly my opinion.

A lot of people didn't really like that genre much at all, though. Compared to traditional musical comedies or more sparse clever Sondheimian musicals, the British spectacle mega-musicals like Phantom, Cats, Les Miz, and Miss Saigon, as well as some of the other BIG AND SERIOUS musicals they spawned (Jekyl and Hyde, The Scarlet Pimpernel) simply feel too earnest, over-the-top, bombastic, commercial, and melodramatic. I will also say that when they "revived" Les Miz three years after it closed with nearly the exact same set (but an unfortunate series of cuts that greatly reduced the power of the show in my opinion) it felt crass and stupid, and definitely undermined some of the grudging respect that was there.

Personally, I always thought the mega-musicals got a bad rap. In their heyday, they were popular because they fit the time AND had something good going for them (well, except Miss Saigon, which is the Michael Bay movie of musicals). And a lot of people associate that level of melodrama and spectacle with Broadway musicals - now they mostly get it through slightly more comedic or Disney big shows like Wicked, Mary Poppins, The (also feeling sadly dated) Lion King, Billy Elliot, etc, but it's the same idea.

Of course, plenty of people in the scene don't like any of those either. But I think that pretty much does boil down to too-popular-to-be-cool.

when ACT did Urinetown and Phantom

Wow, I'm not sure I can think of two more dissimilar musicals.