Will Pocahontas ever become a broadway musical?

[musicaltheatregurl]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 9:50am

does anybody know?..is there talk about it coming to the stage?

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 10:31am

Do you mean Disney's horrendously misinformed and historically inaccurate movie, or are you talking about the real story?

[Lizzya9]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 10:43am

shut up Fosse76, Disney never said they were trying to be historically accurate with "Pocahontas", they are not a textbook. They were telling a beautiful love story. That's why on the poster it says "An American LEGEND"!!!! Get over it, just watch it for what it is and stop trying to pick everything about it apart for accuracy, just watch it like you would any other fictional movie.

To answer your question, Disney said they were trying to put it into the works but they soon realized that trying to put the grandeur of the scale of the land and doing the numbers like "Colors of the Wind" and "Just Around the Riverbend" would be impossible on a stage. I think if done right it would be incredible, but unfortunately people judge the film too much so tickets probably would not sell too well.

Posted: 12/27/06 at 10:53am

I think Disney is working their way through their films from MOST successful to LEAST successful, so Pocahontas will be the 1,437th film to move to Broadway: Projected date 3087. It will open right after Newsies and right before the Computer Wore Tennis Shoes.

[Craig]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:04am

Oh Joe.. Newsies was far more palpable than Pocahontas.

Oliver and Company would open before Pocahontas. So would The Black Cauldron. In fact, even Pete's Dragon would get onto the stage faster.

In short - Pocahontas (Disney's) will probably never be on Broadway. It just wasnt a successful movie, and as Joe said - there are hundreds of projects Disney would probably engage in first - not including the ones that haven't even been written yet.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:10am

Well, Craig I would have to disagre with the "not successful" statement as the film grossed $141,000,000 on a $55 million budget....

But the film was not particularly well received by critics. Not that that has stopped Disney before, but they would never be able to get past all the negative publicity they would inevitably receive regarding all the "historical inaccuracies" and they would probably receive a lot of flack for casting non Native-Americans, which they would surely have to do to sustain a Broadway production.

Don't expect it on Broadway anytime soon.

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:11am

Hopefully not. We don't need anymore Disney taking up theater space.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:14am

Disney Theatricals gives a lot of people jobs and pay their rent at the Theatres they use.
Heather Hedley won her TONY in a Disney Show, and yes they have their misses but they produce Theatre and should continue doing so.
Don't be such a snob.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:19am

"shut up Fosse76, Disney never said they were trying to be historically accurate with "Pocahontas", they are not a textbook. They were telling a beautiful love story. That's why on the poster it says "An American LEGEND"!!!! "

Oh that's mature, what are you, 6? Disney are nothing more than an exercise in manipulation and fascism. Pocahontas is not a legend, she was as real as you or I, and even the simplest of historical research (and I'm talking a basic encylopedic search) would trounce the accuracy of the Disney film.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:19am

NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:22am

"Disney Theatricals gives a lot of people jobs and pay their rent at the Theatres they use."

And if not Disney, another producer, so this point is moot.

"Heather Hedley won her TONY in a Disney Show, and yes they have their misses but they produce Theatre and should continue doing so."

A greivous error on the part of the Tony voters, for sure. Talking like Jesse Jackson in a Broadway show is hardly acting, and I found the show itself to be excruciating. Plus, Disney has yet to produce anything anyone over the age of 6 would want to see.

[Becoz_i_knew_you21]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:24am

"Heather Hedley won her TONY in a Disney Show, and yes they have their misses but they produce Theatre and should continue doing so.
Don't be such a snob."

Downer, I wouldn't be the one to talk about being a snob. Disney is great for kids and we don't need more Disney shows then we have now(actually Tarzan should close). AIDA isn't based on anything Disney and happens to be one of my favorite musicals.AIDA is based on an opera by Verdi. I am fully aware Heather Headley won a Tony for her performance.


Updated On: 12/27/06 at 11:24 AM

[StageManager2]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:50am

Craig: The reason many consider Pocahontas (domestic: $141,579,773; foreign: $204,500,000; total: $346,079,773) a failure is because it had the misfortune of following the behemoth footsteps of THE LION KING (domestic: $328,541,776; foreign: $455,300,000; total: $783,841,776). However, it did much better than THE LITTLE MERMAID (domestic: $111,543,479; foreign: $99,800,000; total: $211,343,479) and slightly less than BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (domestic: $145,863,363; foreign: $206,000,000; total: $377,350,553), but no one considers those two failures. If POCAHONTAS had been any other movie, it would have been deemed a box office success.

Updated On: 12/27/06 at 11:50 AM

[Lizzya9]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:52am

I know that Pocahontas was real. But the love story is a legend. That is what I am saying, Disney NEVER SAID they were going to make a film about history, so why do you care if it is innacurate? It is a fictional film, just deal with it. Why do people complain about it not being historically accurate? Who cares if it is or not, it a beautiful film. again, they were not shooting for accuracy, they were telling a legendary love story. I mean, if your going to complain about that, why not complain about every other film that is not exactly like history?? Film is meant for entertainment, and unless you are in a classroom watching a boring History Channel learning movie, don't go to the theatre to watch history. Go to the theatre to be entertained.

[Boq101]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:56am

I think that if Disney were to build a new theater in the city then they can put up whatever show they want. My main problem with them is that everytime they put up a show they take up space. They already took up FOUR theaters! and soon it will be five!I think that even though they did remodel the New Amsterdam they should stil make a new theater, call it the Walt Disney Theater or something...

[bwaybabe3]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:57am

I think it could work! Can't you imagine a cliff, kind of like in the lion king, that moves across the stage during colors of the wind?! And the lights would be beautiful. As long as it wasn't overdone and cheesy, I think I could handle seeing it - historically accurate or not, I do enjoy the music and imagery.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 11:59am

Lizzy, as long as we live in an uber-PC world, a fictional film based on a historical story with questionable facts is going to be chastised, particularly when it is animated, involves minorities and adds animal characters.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:00pm

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST already did it at GYPSY OF THE YEAR and it was FIERCE!

[Craig]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:04pm

SM2 - that doesn't factor in at least two important things

1. inflation
2. previous successes

Every movie AFTER The Little Mermaid benefitted by the re-invigoration of Disney Animation because of that film. Had The Little Mermaid not paved the road, who can honestly say how suebsequent movies would have done.

In fact - had TLM been a failure, it's a topic often agreed upon that Disney Animation would have died.

I didn't say Pocahontas wasn't a money maker. In fact, with home video, cable, etc - it's hard for ANY movie not to make it's money back or even more. I said it wasn't successful

And box office receipts aren't the only factor. If you ask any vendor that created merchandise surrounding Pocahontas - they will ALL tell you that it was a "disaster" from their standpoint. Not terribly surprising though.

It's no "accident" that there are cute animal sidekicks in the movie. There was little for vendors to latch onto otherwise. Unfortunately - even the characters manufactured for the movie didn't help the merchandising aspect of the film

Sad, but true - these days merchandising plays a huge part in the overall marketability and perceived success of a franchise.

[Smartful Dodger]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:04pm

If Disney were to mount yet another Broadway production, which have thus far all been musicals, then we will continue to find challenges in marketing brave new shows like GREY GARDENS and SPRING AWAKENING. The tourist dollar is now driving the legitimate business here in New York and only shows with the marketing muscle of a Disney Theatricals will be able to compete. Don't get me wrong, I loved THE LION KING just as much as anyone but I wish Disney would build a New York "DisneyLand" and stage stuff there before continuing to deflate the box office potential on non-Disney shows. Disney does huge brands (TARZAN, BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, MARY POPPINS) -- they don't take risks or create niche properties. There will be no place left for experimentation other than Off-Broadway and smaller houses that are only accessible to those New Yorkers "in the know." Very sad!
Updated On: 12/27/06 at 12:04 PM

[Craig]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:10pm

Smartful

Oh - for example Disney taking a risk on an all new musical based on "The Man in the Ceiling" with music by Andrew Lippa?

For anyone, a risk - for Disney I'd say even more so since they HAVE (in the past) relied on their own properties.

I give them kudos for nurturing other projects.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:21pm

"But the love story is a legend. "

And this is one of the reasons Americans seem so stupid, they rely on Hollywood for history lessons, and Disney never advertised the film as faux history. They got in trouble over advertising Hildago as a true story (which, in truth, was pure fiction and not based on anything remotely resembling reality) Americans are infamous the world over for not knowing our own history.

There is no such factual basis for the assertion of a love story between John Smith and Pocahontas. Pocahontas would have been around 12 when she met John Smith, who was about 28. Ahe was kidnapped by settlers in exchange for prisoners and weapons, and it was during her captivity that she was indoctrinated into Christianity and improved her English. She met her future husband John Rolfe during this time as well. She refused to be rescued by her tribe because her father did not go to battle to fee her. When John Smith left to return to England and she met with him a few years later, they only had brief words. She caught ill on her return voyage home and died, at the age of 17 (roughly, since we don't know her exact age).

[Smartful Dodger]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:23pm

After more than 10 years on Broadway and hundreds of millions of dollars in profit, you offer but one example as evidence of the moral courage coursing through the veins of executives at Disney Theatricals? You on the mouse's payroll?

[Craig]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:33pm

I do offer that as evidence based on the number of theatrical endeavors they've produced.

AIDA wasn't their property - nor was the ill-fated King David.

So, if you look at their 10 year history as you state, you're talking about 6 total productions (not including the quirky "Largely New York" non-musical they produced)

Why people always "condemn" disney is beyond me. I am no on their payroll and never have been. Are you aware of all the projects they invest in that are either not (or not yet) on broadway or are in development that are not even their productions?

Is it less "courageous" to only produce revivals? Only to produce musicals based on films?

As I have always maintained - I could care less who's producing and what the show is or was based on. I care about seeing a GOOD play/musical.

Oh.. and also obvious to anyone who's paid attention to the theater community over the last decade would know that had it not been for Disney's residency on Broadway, several other producers and shows would have never been able to see the light of day.

So g'head and gripe all you want - everyone's entitled.

[Smartful Dodger]

Posted: 12/27/06 at 12:49pm

I'm not an apologetic for juke box musicals, revivals, or movie-inspired theatrical transfers. Please don't confuse the argument, Craig.

Indeed, Disney, while having some wonderfully positive effects in bringing theatre to a new generation, has fundamentally shifted the business model and economics of mounting a Broadway show.

You can put Disney above the title of a lackluster production like TARZAN and it will still make money. Then, you can try to put 35 names above critically celebrated productions like SPRING AWAKENING or GREY GARDENS and still lose money each week.

Forgive me for being disappointed and frustrated.