Beauty and the Beast

"Anyway, my major concern was "Be Our Guest". I didn't recall specifics from my first visit, but I did recall a big, splashy number full of people. What I saw on Tuesday was 2/3 of the number performed in front of a closed curtain, three plates, a few gadgets... Mark told me the show had been scaled down since its move from the Palace, but what I'm wondering is, how much?? Was the number always this small, and I simply remembered it bigger because it was my first taste of live theatre, or was "Be Our Guest" more of a showstopper rather than just the showstopper-by-comparison-to-the-other-numbers that I attended this week?"

SETS: The purple drape has always been in for the top of the number and flown out at exactly the same time, so what you remember about the reveal is probably what was behind it. At the Palace, there was one more big pink circular portal, a taller platform, an elevator, and plate stairs that changed positions for the entrance of the Can-Can Napkins. Also, the champagne bottles fired sparklers at the Palace, and now they fire CO2 (a concession to the musicians' union's complaints about smoke and pyro).

CAST: At the Palace, the cast was bigger by four people (2 singers and 2 dancers), so you saw two full sets of flatware instead of the one that exists now, you saw 5 Plates instead of 3, you saw 8 singers in the object parade instead of the current 6, you saw 6 Napkins instead of the current 5, and at the end of the number, there was a total of four more people onstage.

I am pretty sure that everyone I've ever talked to who saw the show more than once (whether the first time was at the Palace or not) was surprised by how small Be Our Guest seemed after they had seen it once already. Not to say that the downsizing isn't noticeable and frequently disappointing for people who did see it at the Palace.

But the show is still running and employing people and bringing young kids into the theatre.

Updated On: 1/13/06 at 08:49 AM

Beauty & the Beast - which I also saw very early in its run at the PALACE, now, in its current state (which I saw about 2 months ago) is a WASTE OF TIME, ENERGY, SPACE, AIR, AND A GREAT THEATRE! I wish I could say talent too, but every single performance was phoned in beyond belief. I HATE saying this, because I love the story...but it was dreadfully awful. It is beyond time to put this one out of its missery.

dancinfan, thank you for the in-depth explanation. Be Our Guest was the number that left the biggest impression on me when I first saw BatB as a 9-year-old back in '95, and although it was still pretty impressive when I saw it again back in October, something just didn't quite seem the same.

---

This show needs to close. IT is absolutely DREADFUL.

---

While I can't make comparisons to how it was at the Palace, I could never wish for this show to close as long as Ashley Brown is in it. She's great as Belle! While it's a common meme on this board that the rest of the cast phones it in, I didn't find that to be the case when I saw it in October (expressly to see Ashley Brown in the lead role). However, I do agree that Steve Blanchard's performance as the Beast left a lot to be desired, particularly with regard to the speak-singing.

When I saw it my first time which was at the Lunt, Be Our Guest did not impress me too much. In fact i chuckled to myself that the pictures out side the theatre show the Be Our Guest set that was used at the Palace with the Objects dancing down the plate staircase, then not seeing that in the show was odd. Steve Blanchard was ok, but nothing great, however Ashley Brown was amazing. I didnt like the theatre much, the balcony was very high up and far back, and the way the balcony is designed, if you sit in the very last row the front of the balcony appears to hang over the stage and blocks your view of the very front of the stage and and of the Orch. Thank goodness it was only 1/2 full and i moved up to mid balcony at intermission. I wont say that the show "needs to close" but i do believe its begining to die out and near the end of its run within a year or so. I plan to go back before Ashley Brown leaves and do SRO. Id rather stand and have a good view than pay $40 for a ticket where the theatre blocks my view. And no it was not a partial view seat.

---

Thanks dancinfan-- I guess it was part reality, and part just the exaggeration of my childhood memory =)


And I agree, Beauty and the Beast does *NOT* need to close! Were it not for B&tB, I couldn't predict when my first exposure to live theatre would have been. Although it's far from perfect, it remains a charming, fun show that pleases adults and kids alike.


Can't say I'd object to a new beast, though... or maybe the original

---

U who are saying it must close do not understand BROADWAY these days.
The Show made 1 Million 2 Hundred Thousand Dollars Xmas Week!
It ain't going anywhere till those number go down.
Keepin it Fresh and Exciting ain't easy.
Ashley Brown is One Way, She is Amazing!
Getting a New Younger Beast would be another.
and yes It has been a lot of younger audiences first B'way Show and a great Memory, The Lion King may make more Money but Beauty has More Heart.

Could someone answer my question please? ::does puppy dog face::

---

munkustrap, just out of curiosity, when was the last time you saw the show? When I saw it in October, I deliberately scrutinized the ensemble very carefully because of the oft-repeated mantra on here that they aren't into the show, but I just couldn't find any evidence to support that. At best, it strikes me as an exaggeration. Maybe I lucked out and they were having a rare good night? Or maybe Ashley Brown's radiance has given the ensemble a much-needed boost?

I will agree that the show is not as tight as it was when it first opened. I saw it at the Palace in 1996, and I was not that crazy about it. I enjoyed it for what its worth. (Prefer the Film much better) About 3 years ago I saw it again at the Lunt-Fontaine Theatre when Jamie Lynn Sigler was Belle. She was great, but the show seemed tired then, and I was 8th row center in the orchestra, and there was no one behind me, and the balcony was empty too. I was shocked then how it was still running. The only thing I can think of is Disney will keep it open at a loss no matter what. I would rather close the show than perform to an empty house for half a week, assuming it sold out on the weekends.

Steve Blanchard has gotten worse, I agree with that. I saw him about 4 years ago, when Ann Sanders was Belle, and he was really good. The most recent time I saw him (opposite Ashley Brown), he was doing exactly what you describe- speak-singing and not holding out any of the notes. It was disappointing.

The last time I saw the show, it did look a bit tired, but it was still cute and enjoyable, though I miss the days when it was at the Palace.

Ashley Brown is amazing and knocks the roof off the place. She's going to be a star, I think. You can tell she loves playing this role, because she has this awesome energy. It was refreshing to see, since many members of the cast seemed to be "phoning it in."

I don't see any reason for the show "needing" to close when it is as profitable as it is.