Brock07
|
Madam Girey Question...Perhaps my question was awnsered in the actual stage show or the book (I've only seen the movie...  ), but is the Madam Girey from the prologue (very old Madam Girey) the same Madam Girey in the rest of the play (regular old Madam Girey) or is it Meg (Madam Girey's daughter)?
I think she looks too young to be the real Madam Girey and think it may be Meg....I mean, old Raoul looks ancient next to her, but she deffinatly looks a bit older in the rest of the show.
I hope that isn't too confusing!! Thanks!
|
Angel-of-Music*
|
Its the normal Madame Giry.
She's a myserious one, the ageing thing making her even more so.
|
operafantomet
|
Old Madame Giry in the Auction scene is intended to be the same as the ballet mistress Madame Giry (not Meg Giry).
I can see why you are confused about this, because (as you say) Raoul looks quite a bit older than her. But the actress playing Madame Giry in the movie is the same in both the auction scene and the other scenes (ditto for the stage shows), and it's meant to show one last interactment between Raoul and the mysterious Madame.
Personally I also believe that had they intended it to be Meg (Madame Giry's daughter) they would have used the girl playing Meg. Seeing how old they got fairly young Patrick Wilson to appear old, they would manage the same with Jennifer Ellison. And if it were indeed Meg, she would not have been titulated "Madame Giry" - she would either have married and not kept her maiden name, or remained Mademoiselle (Miss) Giry.
If that makes sense....
|
Brock07
|
Yes it does. Thank you. My biggest thing was that I couldn't tell if it was Miranda Richardson or Jennifer Ellison.
I think that something else that made me question it was that Meg found the music box, and I thought that maybe that would be significant to the auction scene.
But I see now that it is norman Madam Girey. Thank you for your help!
|
Mistress
|
You mean that was actually Patrick Wilson inthe Prologue?  I always though that they just got some old guy who could sing decently to do that part...Though I am aware that in the stage show they use the same actor for old and young Raoul...I was also confused about the prologue in both the stage show and movie. I've always assumed that Madame Giry was too old to survive until that point...I'm mean Raoul was about ready to kick the bucket himself, and considering that Madame Giry was quite a bit older than him...I would have assumed she'd already be dead, so it would be Meg at the auction instead. But everyone here says it IS Madame Giry, not Meg at the auction. I guess I can kind ofsee that because Madame is a very mysterious character and we never really k ow exactly how old she is. Personally I like ALW's Madame Giry better then Leroux's who origianlly wrote her a superticious old bag. anyway, just my opinion.
|
pish123c
|
When I saw the stage show, I always assumed it was just regular Madame.
But another user right above me made a good point that she would have been very old by that point, and in those days, probably dead.
So it very well could be Meg. We may never know.
|
Fantine
|
The stage show is different from the film in that aspect. In the stage show it is just a random woman, but in the film she's Madame Giry.
About Madame Giry being dead and all... She and the Phantom have the same age and the Phantom is still alive (--> the rose at Christine's tomb), so why wouldn't she be?
|
kozafluitmusique
|
I personally thought at the beginning, the old woman was intended to be Meg...but however, they might make her the normal Mme Giry for a twist?
|
Paula74
|
| pish123c wrote: |
So it very well could be Meg. We may never know. |
Yes, we will know. The screenplay was included in the "Companion Book" that was published at the time the film was released and it clearly states that it is MADAME Giry, not Meg Giry.
|
Fantine
|
Yes. And it has been stated above that it is in fact Madame Giry and not Meg, so I guess that answers the question and this is a done deal.
|
Brock07
|
However, as Meg got older, what stopped the community from calling HER Madam Giry?
|
Paula74
|
| Brock07 wrote: | | However, as Meg got older, what stopped the community from calling HER Madam Giry? |
Because Madame is used for married women. If Meg had married, she'd have become Madame So-and-So. She would have remained Mademoiselle Giry as long as she was unmarried, regardless of age.
For example, my favorite French teacher was a very beautiful elderly woman who had never married. She was always Mademoiselle Tribot-Laspierre, regardless of her age.
Besides, the screenplay is fairly specific in noting that it's MADAME Giry, not her daughter, in those scenes. If I could find my copy of the book, I'd quote it.
|
Brock07
|
Ahhh... I took Spanish, not French in high school so I didn't understand the whole Madame thing. Thanks for clarifying!
|
operafantomet
|
| Fantine wrote: | | The stage show is different from the film in that aspect. In the stage show it is just a random woman, but in the film she's Madame Giry. |
Yes and no - most stage librettis name her specifically as "Madame Giry" (not for the audience to hear, but what's written in the script). It might just indicate that the role is to be played by the same person playing Madame Giry, but a common opinion is that it's meant to be the Madame herself (especially seeing her relationship to the stuff being sold + her attitude towards Raoul). Similar, the guy next to her is the same as whoever plays Piangi, but I have yet to see him being named "Piangi" in the librettis. I assume it's because HE is supposed to be a random guy (Piangi is dead, poor guy), whereas Madame Giry is not.
As for the whole age and year issue.... Little makes sense, no matter the angle. The stage musical was originally meant to be set in the early 1870's - an early Hamburg program specifically writes 1871, and the costume design is 1873-75-ish. Furthermore, most graveyard sets claims 1870 to be the year Daddy Daaé died, and his death was rather recent according to Leroux's book + ALWs stage musical (the movie has a different take on it).
A London WYWSHA lyric even had a verse saying "Three long years I've knelt in silence, held your memory near me... three long years of murmured sorrow, willing you to hear me....." Indicating that his death was three years before WYWSHA, and at least 2,5 years before "Hannibal".
But on an early stage the year was pushed forward to 1881, not quite sure why (maybe to be more in sync with Leroux and the building of Palais Garnier).
The actual auction scene was originally claimed to be set in 1905, but at the same time they wrote that Raoul is "...seventy now, but still bright of eye". So if the auction is in 1905 and Raoul is 70, he must have been.... 46 when the story takes place? Even RUG faced that this made little sense. So the auction scene was pushed forward to 1911, making Raoul "only" 40... hehehe. Had they kept the original 1871/72ish timeline, he would not be more than 30, and everything would make more sense. But alas!
And as for your good point: Madame Giry and the Phantom were in the movie about the same age, and if HE is still around..... Etc. Also, the age gap between Raoul and the Phantom doesn't appear too big in the movie? [/i]
|
Fantine
|
Ah I didn't know that was in the Libretto.
| Brock07 wrote: | | Ahhh... I took Spanish, not French in high school so I didn't understand the whole Madame thing. Thanks for clarifying! |
Isn't it the same thing for English titles? It's the same rule for Dutch titles too. Unmarried woman remain Miss (or Ms) with their born surname.
|
Paula74
|
| Fantine wrote: | Ah I didn't know that was in the Libretto.
| Brock07 wrote: | | Ahhh... I took Spanish, not French in high school so I didn't understand the whole Madame thing. Thanks for clarifying! |
Isn't it the same thing for English titles? It's the same rule for Dutch titles too. Unmarried woman remain Miss (or Ms) with their born surname. |
Yes...Mademoiselle is the equivalent of Miss and Madame is the equivalent of Mrs.
|
Brock07
|
But it seems in American culture anyway, that eventually a woman becomes maam, verses miss, reguardless of marriage or not (its assumed that they are married, but they may not be). I thought this may happen else where as well.
|
Paula74
|
| Brock07 wrote: | | But it seems in American culture anyway, that eventually a woman becomes maam, verses miss, reguardless of marriage or not (its assumed that they are married, but they may not be). I thought this may happen else where as well. |
Ma'am is a sort of formal slang derived from Madam or Madame (which in turn comes from the French for "my lady," ma dame[/].
It's mainly a spoken thing...I'm single and fairly young, but I've had people use "Ma'am" like "What size coffee do you want, ma'am?" It's also a bit more common in the South.
But a woman wouldn't write "Ma'am So-and-So" on her return address or something. It would be "Mrs. So-and-So."
|
Fantine
|
| Paula74 wrote: | | Fantine wrote: | Ah I didn't know that was in the Libretto.
| Brock07 wrote: | | Ahhh... I took Spanish, not French in high school so I didn't understand the whole Madame thing. Thanks for clarifying! |
Isn't it the same thing for English titles? It's the same rule for Dutch titles too. Unmarried woman remain Miss (or Ms) with their born surname. |
Yes...Mademoiselle is the equivalent of Miss and Madame is the equivalent of Mrs. |
I know that.
| Brock07 wrote: | | But it seems in American culture anyway, that eventually a woman becomes maam, verses miss, reguardless of marriage or not (its assumed that they are married, but they may not be). I thought this may happen else where as well. |
Well we are talking about the 19th century here and people were far more into the titles thing back then. I think things have losened up these days.
|
christinadaae
|
I'll just make a quick sidenote about how much alike Jennifer Ellison and Miranda Richardson look alike. Uncanny.
|
Fantine
|
I noticed it too. I think it's sweet 
Real mother and daughter like.
|
jcstar
|
| Mistress wrote: | | You mean that was actually Patrick Wilson inthe Prologue? I always though that they just got some old guy who could sing decently to do that part... |
I'm not sure if Old Raoul is played by Wilson. I'll have to watch the credits.
Even if it's another actor playing the part, Wilson's vocal is looped into the soundtrack.
Andy.
|
Paula74
|
| jcstar wrote: | | Mistress wrote: | | You mean that was actually Patrick Wilson inthe Prologue? I always though that they just got some old guy who could sing decently to do that part... |
I'm not sure if Old Raoul is played by Wilson. I'll have to watch the credits.
Even if it's another actor playing the part, Wilson's vocal is looped into the soundtrack.
Andy. |
It's Patrick. A friend and I met him last spring. I already assumed it was, but she asked him and he said yes.
|
