Beauty and Beast Palace Theater

[karatekid1]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 5:36pm

Are There any photos of the stage/curtain, of beauty at the palace theater so i can see how different it is from the scaled down sets and stuff at the lunt
please.....thanx

[karatekid1]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:19pm

bump.....anything of the show at the palace?

[BroadwayBound062]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:27pm

sorry, I don't have any but I was wondering why did they move it/scale it back..

[Producer2]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:30pm

at the palace in the "be our guest" number there was this row of candles that stood up at the edge of the stage near the orchestra pit. this does not happen at the lunt-fontanne. of course in every "be our guest" photo, the candles are there.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:32pm

"sorry, I don't have any but I was wondering why did they move it/scale it back.."

They moved it because it was cheaper to run if they downsized it. The show was no longer a "huge" hit, and it made sense financially to move it. They closed for the mandatory six weeks, and reopened with smaller sets, and a smaller cast.

They also wanted the Palace for Aida.

[vmlinnie]

Posted: 9/2/06 at 6:51pm

Have they changed the Transformation and all that? I saw it in London and the UK & Ireland tour, and it was brilliant, but I didn't realise they had scaled it back in New York. Currently listening to the OLCR, and it's fab, apart from some suspect accents!

[dancinfan]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 12:36pm

There was an elevator full of plate-stairs that came up during Be Our Guest at the Palace. Also, the castle was taller and had more levels (with the dungeon under the West Wing instead of in the center archway). Another big difference was look of the terrace set. In the Lunt it's sort of tea garden gate and sunset drop. At the Palace it was more of a collonade. There were a lot more fireworks at the Palace, many of them replaced by CO2 blasts or cut for the Palace.

The transformation stayed the same in the transfer.

[Victoria Grant]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 2:58pm

This show really needs to close, I thought it was a cute show
but its done and over with. Let's make way for some more shows
that need a theater.

[Yero]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 3:09pm

"This show really needs to close, I thought it was a cute show
but its done and over with. Let's make way for some more shows
that need a theater."
I do
agree.

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 3:24pm

I agree.

The show was once very magical, but now it is just a joke.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 3:28pm

As long as it's making money, it won't close. It won't be "over and done with" until it's no longer profitable.

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 6:32pm

At the Palace, it was incredible, at the Lunt...it's become second string for thsoe who experienced it at the Palace.

[James885]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 7:34pm

Very interesting. I never got to see the show at the Palace so I don't have anything to compare it to, but when I saw it at the Lunt-Fontanne, I thought the sets were great and had no idea that they were scaled down.

However, I was at Barnes and Noble a few months ago and came across one of those Broadway history books (can't remember the title) and there were a few pictures of B&TB at the Palace, including a picture of the finale of "Be Our Guest" with the fireworks, the plate stair elevator, and the row of candles at the edge of the stage.

After seeing those pictures, I can really see now how the set has been reduced in size for the Lunt-Fontanne.

Updated On: 9/3/06 at 07:34 PM

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 10:31pm

I didn't see it at the Palace, only the Lunt-Fontanne - I thought it was great. Of course most die hard theatre fans won't like it compared to the Palace production, but the bulk audience that Beauty and the Beast attracts - families with children - will be wowed by the performance. The show is still profitable and probably won't close for a while.

[folkyboy]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 10:35pm

most die-hard theatre fans with credibility wouldn't like Beauty & the Beast to begin with.

[Copeman63]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 10:36pm

I wouldn't say it's a joke... And when there's a show coming featuring Bob Dylan songs, I don't think a show like BATB should close to give a show a theatre... As long as it's making money, what company (esp. Disney!?!) would close it?

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 10:37pm

"most die-hard theatre fans with credibility wouldn't like Beauty & the Beast to begin with"

No...to each his (or her) own.

[misto625]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 11:12pm

I have to agree with millie_dillmount on this one. The show has always been a Broadway musical, even when it was a movie. It was written that way, and I think the show could use some new blood and possible revamping, but it's still turning a good profit, and frankly I would rather see Beauty and the Beast run three more years than have John Doyle's production of Company run three months. Actually make that one month.

[Copeman63]

Posted: 9/3/06 at 11:17pm

This makes me think of the Season Four episode opener for Family Guy, when Peter tells the family they've been canceled. Lois asked Peter if there's anything they can do, and Peter says there's not enough room for the show anymore because there's too many high quality shows waiting to come out, and he names them all... Sure, BATB is no Family Guy, but saying it should close for shows that need a theatre (Lennon, In My Life, Dracula, Dance of the Vampires, Good Vibrations, Lestat...) is wrong.

[Producer2]

Posted: 9/4/06 at 12:07am

It will last forever because there will always be another generation of children to see it.