My review of Disney's "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" La Jolla Playhouse- Page 2

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 4:20pm

Might I add that it sounds like they've added too much new musical material to the show as well (which might be an explanation for Auggie27's point -- "Out There" is now lost in the mix)?

Admittedly, I haven't seen this one yet, but by far, I think the Berlin production handled fleshing out the movie much better. This seems to have thrown extraneous characters (no, I don't care if they're from the Victor Hugo novel or one of the numerous film adaptations, sorry purists) and songs at the wall in an effort to do two things: cover for the gargoyle-sized holes in the plot (granted, that's just my opinion), and be "deep" and "faithful to the novel" and whatever else I can fit in inverted quotes that suggests they're trying to be more sophisticated about this.

Alan, Stephen, everybody: you gave that up when you streamlined the story for an animated feature. This is Disney. Get over yourselves. You seem to be trying to be Notre Dame de Paris. Problem is, that was a crashing bore. Yours was better. Stop tinkering with it. Going with a new production design is yours (and Disney's) own affair, and make a bunch of alternates and understudies out of the people playing the new characters if you have to, but go back to the Lapine book and the associated score. Leave out the gypsy dance in Act Two, instrumental ballets are more of a German thing anyway, and put back "The Court of Miracles" since it was in that scene for so long in the workshops, but otherwise, you've got a working product already. Quit screwing around!

Updated On: 10/28/14 at 04:20 PM

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 6:04pm

Alan, Stephen, everybody: you gave that up when you streamlined the story for an animated feature. This is Disney.

And Disney was never happy with the reaction and results of the animated feature. Hence the book changes in the German production that not only fleshed out the film plot, but reinstated Esmeralda's death (and odd reappearance just before the finale). I saw Hunchback in Berlin and Notre Dame de Paris in London and though Hunchback in Germany was by no means perfect, some tinkering to the book and score would never come close to the disaster of Notre Dame de Paris. I would have liked to see them retain the gargoyles as imagined for the Berlin production (though visually, it's probably the only thing I'd retain), but I don't think cutting them as characters is any great loss. The story really won't suffer because they were always created to be fluff for the kids. Berlin just made them look more interesting.

Might I add that it sounds like they've added too much new musical material to the show as well

I might be wrong, but it looks like they just cut one song from the Berlin production and added one new song.

instrumental ballets are more of a German thing anyway

Since when?!?! I remember it being a rather short number in Berlin, but practically non-existent by the likes of Rodgers & Hammerstein and other creators of the golden age musicals.

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 6:49pm

"After initially attempting to cut them, as this production did, Lapine toned them down enough to actually work better than the film: he altered their names, made them less wacky, and shaped them into playing a much more integral role in the story than just comic relief. And unless they've completely revamped this in such a manner that taking out the gargoyles doesn't leave a big gap in the story's flow, I'm afraid Disney's lost one of the better elements of their version."

Agreed. Taking the Gargoyles completely out might have been a rash decision. Plus, I have always been under the impression that the Gargoyles weren't the problem of the show, but their song "A guy like you" was.

[dramaguy11]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 6:59pm

Ok, so I am going to give you the things that I hated. I am in no way related to Disney. I have my own production company in Socal. I simply liked the show for the most part. Here are a list of things that may be spoilers that I did not like STOP READING NOW IF YOU DO NOT WANT SPOILERS****




So one of the things that I hated was that they used performers in normal costumes to portray Gargoyles. Really they cut the idea of Gargoyles completely. It simply did not work. Often leaving people wondering who the heck Quasi was talking to.

Esmeralda dies. As much as I like the fact that Disney decided to honor the darker side of the book, I feel like this will keep the show from having appeal to younger audiences. It is much darker and brooding than the Disney film.

At the end after Esmeralda dies the members of the chorus take greasepaint and mark themselves across the face and put their bodies into a quasi-like position. It is meant to show that they are showing support for Quasi, but it looks ridicules. All they really needed to do was to show him love and support. It takes from the end and leaves you shaking your head because it looks so bad.

I thought that the pouring of the molten lead was a total dud. They had the most beautiful cauldron that flew in with giant chains and two girls grabbed a piece of silk and they proceeded to fly out the cauldron while they shook the silk. It was very JR. high production. It was better when they then fly in a silk curtain and shook it.... but still... lacked imagination. With the advances we have made in projections... I expected way more.

Out There is a beautiful number, but again the staging stopped it from being a showstopper. Wooden rails were moved around by actors to portray the balcony that Quasi resides. It never gave you the feeling of height that says look at me way up here! This also came into play when Frollo is tossed off of the balcony. Quasi holds him in some sort of odd Circus Balancing move so that his feet are off the ground and the cast removes the balcony as they tried to achieve a fall like Javert ala Les Miz. It is a fail. If you are off to the side at all it does not work. I want to see it from the front to see if it is any better..

Aside from those things, I still enjoyed the production. I did not dwell on those because I think they will all be fixed after feedback.

~Jess




This is a link to the program book. You will find a list of songs there.

[dramaguy11]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:03pm

"My review of Disney's
Posted: 10/27/14 at 08:49pm
I would go but all of the reasonably priced tickets have been snatched up. Do shills get discounts?
That's right! Underscore mother-fu@#ers!"


I would not know. I paid $92 for my wife and I to sit in opposite sections of the theatre.

Updated On: 10/28/14 at 07:03 PM

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:15pm

Why is Hellfire in act 1? Also, in the playbill, it says "Someday" is sung by Esmeralda and Phoebus. Did they cut the ensemble?

[dramaguy11]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:28pm

Not sure why they moved it. It would have been a far better end to act 1 than Esmeralda. Yep. Just Esmeralda and Phoebus.

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:37pm

Woah..really? There made "Someday" just a duet? Aw really really disappointed. So what's the deal with this becoming a passion play and having the whole show take place in the church?

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:41pm

They wanted to go for more of an old school approach with this production.

[dramaguy11]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:46pm

They bring in a little curtained stage and drop in a giant maypole for the Topsy Turvy, Rhythm of the Tambourine section. Also, The Court of Miracles has two giant stone pieces that fly in and a drop and giant circular stone entrance that covers the stained glass window area.

[dramaguy11]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 7:51pm

The attempt was to not use any modern technology, that is why they used the silk for hot lead etc... it just comes off as a cheap parlor trick though.

Updated On: 10/28/14 at 07:51 PM

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 10:22pm

I might be wrong, but it looks like they just cut one song from the Berlin production and added one new song.

So you missed the part where, in addition to said new songs (plural; there's more than one), they added music and lyrics to several of the pre-existing numbers.

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 10/28/14 at 10:42pm

Descriptive summary of the show:

http://enseeseven.tumblr.com/post/101223168017/hunchback-musical-spoilers

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 10:10am

That's why I said I might be wrong. I only had time for a cursory glance at the numbers from both productions. But if it has too many notes, then it must have too many notes.

[finebydesign]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 10:50am

Dunno why anyone is surprised by the Passion Play-style show here. I mentioned this months ago. Disney is simply not interested in turning out a multi-million dollar spectacular with this work. This concept or approach they are taking isn't new either. Someone VERY close to Peter and the Starcatcher actually created a treatment for this translation in 2000. This new licensed version can now be performed everywhere for very little.

The lavish literal film translation of the German show was an Eisner passion project. The creative team at Disney new this franchise was off-brand and not commercially viable to US audience. If anything it was a competitor to Beauty and the Beast which obviously has wider appeal.

I imagine if this does get a small Broadway venue at some point, the set design might be switched out to something more spectacular (ala Aladdin), but don't look for the concept to change. There wasn't mention of jeans in that description but in the treatment I read, the actors donned regular modern street clothes. Perhaps Quasi will get some make-up, but believe it or not Disney has a hard time with selling ugly. There is a reason Beast was never stunt cast.

Updated On: 10/29/14 at 10:50 AM

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 11:26am

The lavish literal film translation of the German show was an Eisner passion project. The creative team at Disney new this franchise was off-brand and not commercially viable to US audience.

So why not leave it the way it was? You don't have to go lavish to make the Lapine book work. Why did anyone feel the need to fix what wasn't broken? Again, I could see swapping out maybe one number. It works.

[Wildcard]

Posted: 10/29/14 at 12:50pm

I don't mind the passion play style. What I don't like is staging it in a manner that could have been staged back when the story was set. They should use the technology available to them. They are presenting to a modern audience after all. Also, I'd rather have them play the characters as the characters rather than as actors portraying characters (though I'm guessing after the initial pillow moment, you forget all that nonsense anyway). This doesn't have to be extravagant but I want to see where the expensive tickets I paid for went.

[dramaguy11]

Posted: 10/30/14 at 12:46am

I have to think that Disney is intent on bringing the show to Broadway. The dates in La Jolla have been extended and the show is selling pretty darn well. Guess we just have to wait and see.

[Nateben2]

Posted: 10/30/14 at 9:31pm

I think there is pretty apparent where the money has been spent on this show.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 10/31/14 at 12:18am

Where?
It's not apparent to me.
(Haven't seen it yet).