Disney AND Broadway - The Survival of the Musical

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 6:09pm

Over the years I have read and participated in several discussions about Disney ON Broadway. Discussions about BEAUTY & THE BEAST, THE LION KING, and AIDA. How they are liked and disliked. How they should never have been adapted to stage - why they should have. Discussions about Disney's starting to monopolize Broadway. How they had three shows running at once. Their reviving the New Amsterdam Theatre. Their touching up 42nd Street. Their merchandising.

I will conclude with my thoughts on the above, but first let's discuss something else.

It's time for people to stop thinking about Disney ON Broadway and start thinking about Disney AND Broadway. Two separate entertainment venues, for the most part - that is until 1989 when THE LITTLE MERMAID came to theatres.

In 1937, SNOW WHITE & THE SEVEN DWARFS was released and thus began the success of Disney and animation in general. The Disney Company made animation (especially in film format) what it is today - but that is an entirely different story.

Throughout the years, Disney has brought us SNOW WHITE, PINOCCHIO, PETER PAN, ALICE IN WONDERLAND, 101 DALMATIANS, DUMBO, BAMBI, CINDERELLA, LADY & THE TRAMP, SLEEPING BEAUTY, THE SWORD IN THE STONE, THE JUNGLE BOOK, THE RECUERS, ROBIN HOOD, THE ARISTOCATS, THE FOX AND THE HOUND, and several other films.

The above films have two things in common:

1) They were all released before 1989.

2) They are all movies. Not really musicals, nor movie musicals, but movies with music. They are films that have songs in them. Some more than others, if hardly any at all. Great films with great songs.

Really starting pretty much in 1977, with the release of THE RESCUERS, Disney films began to degrade in the magical quality level previous films had. THE FOX AND THE HOUND, THE BLACK CAULDRON, and THE GREAT MOUSE DETECTIVE followed. Nice films, but not as good as others.

In 1988, OLIVER & COMPANY was released. This was based on the stage play of OLIVER, except in this film, the characters were animals, and it was set in contemporary New York City. Songs were written for the characters to sing. Another song was written to open the film "Once Upon A Time In New York City." Although the film was not a big success, it was a sign of the direction the company was heading towards.

The following year, THE LITTLE MERMAID was released. This was the key film in Disney's comeback, and it was all because of the music.

Howard Ashman and Alan Menken, who together did LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS, teamed up for this project, and for it both took home Oscars. With songs like "A Part of Your World," "Under the Sea," "Poor Unfortunate Souls," and "Kiss the Girl," the film turned into more of a musical theatre style, and that is how the storyline developed. Disney contributed as they always have - added great animation and very fun, memorable characters that we love to love or love to hate.

THE LITTLE MERMAID was a huge success, and many members of the creative process, including Menken & Ashman, teamed up again for the next Disney project: BEAUTY & THE BEAST.

This time having the entire development team working from scratch, an old story was turned into a spectacular animated musical, which was nominated for BEST PICTURE at the Academy Awards - the first fully animated film to achieve such honor.

Again, Oscars were given to Menken & Ashman for Best Score and Best Song ("Beauty and the Beast"). The film competed against itself in the Best Song category, with "Belle" and "Be Our Guest" also nominated.

Disney continued in this reformatted style of animated musicals, with ALADDIN, THE LION KING, POCAHONTAS, THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME, HERCULES, and MULAN to follow - all of which were musically outstanding. Each received awards and nominations for Best Song.

Several songs during this era made the Billboard Top 10, including "A Whole New World" which made #1.

Sadly, MULAN was the last animated musical Disney would have success with. The company has degraded in recent years, releasing FANTASIA 2000, THE EMPORER'S NEW GROOVE, ATLANTIS, TREASURE PLANET, BROTHER BEAR, and HOME ON THE RANGE. Two successes thrown into the mix were TARZAN and LILO & STITCH.

There is your BRIEF history lesson on the Disney Company. And now, the point.

Broadway has had hits and flops throughout its history, same as Disney. But one thing is for certain; there hasn't been a flop on Broadway produced by Disney. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, THE LION KING, and AIDA have had great success. But why bring Disney films to stage?

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST is a very beautiful story, with great music. It's a musical - that just happened to be animated. They could have done it for live-action film, or for the stage, but it was done as an animated film, and it was a success. Why not bring it to Broadway? The story is good enough, as is the music.

Same with THE LION KING. More of a challenge, but they accomplished their tasks and then some.

AIDA was Disney's first attempt for an original stage production. I, myself, loved it. It may not have had success with critics or at the Tonys, but fans enjoyed it.

And what has it hurt? Disney's being on Broadway has only rejuvenated it. Children are falling in love with the stage.

Disney is failing. Broadway is struggling.

What Disney needs to do is go back to is musical roots. Get Alan Menken back (he also did Disney's NEWSIES - Disney's first original musical for television, in addition to the recent HOME ON THE RANGE (but only a few songs for that film)).

If Disney revives its animated musical - I believe the company will thrive once again on the silver screen.

And that is my first point. Disney needs to revive the animated musical.

I spoke about Disney, I spoke briefly about Broadway, and I spoke about Disney On Broadway. Let's discuss Disney Going To Broadway.

MARY POPPINS, produced by Disney and Cameron Mackintosh, has recently opened to an ENORMOUS SUCCESS. I read that they already got back their investment in advanced ticket sales alone. POPPINS was a successful movie musical, adapted to the stage.

This is the direction it should take. If they are to bring Disney films to the stage, bring animated musicals - NOT movies with music.

TARZAN is Disney's next project for late 2005/early 2006. This is a movie with music. I believe this to be a bad choice to bring to Broadway. It sounds like a nice theme park show, but nothing more. As is the case with Disney's touring musical (musical review is more like it), ON THE RECORD.

HOWEVER, in 2006/2007, Disney is planning to bring THE LITTLE MERMAID to the stage. THIS is the film that began the animated musical. I believe this is a brilliant choice (if they MUST adapt a film) and I highly look forward to it.

Now whenever it is discussed at this or other Broadway (or Disney) message boards which film to adapt next, I read these outrageous ideas. Take PETER PAN, for example. Can you imagine this 'movie with music' on stage? I can't. I LOVE PETER PAN - both the Disney film and the stage musical - and I think this would be horrific on stage. Half the songs aren't even sung by characters. Good songs, good movie, but bad for theatre.

The same with ALICE IN WONDERLAND and other earlier Disney 'movies with music.' It won't work out.

And yes, I am sure new songs would be written, but its Disney. They HAVE to have most, if not all, of the songs from the film in the show. It’s how audiences recognize its a Disney film. [Disney wishes for the world to think THEY created PETER PAN, THE JUNGLE BOOK, ALICE IN WONDERLAND, SNOW WHITE, PINOCCHIO, and other films - but they didn't. If they were to do a totally new adaptation of a former film, there are many factors as to why they would have trouble: repayment of royalty fees for copyright, losing the Disney reputation, the Disney trademark, etc.)]

Now, all this being said, if Disney were to adapt ANY Disney film to the stage, it would HAVE to be an animated musical:

THE LITTLE MERMAID
BEAUTY AND THE BEAST
ALADDIN
THE LION KING
POCAHONTAS
THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME
HERCULES
MULAN
(and NEWSIES)

BEAST and LION KING have been done. MERMAID is in the works. ALADDIN is a stage musical at their Disneyland theme park. HUNCHBACK was a musical in Europe.

Anyone can make a case for other films, and give excuses that "new songs can be written, its Disney - anything can happen, etc." But in the end, this is the only list of films that are good musical theatre.

Now remember, this does not mean the STORIES these Disney films were based on cannot be done on stage. PETER PAN, CINDERELLA, and a version of ALICE IN WONDERLAND have already been done. Not Disney, but they have been done. And PETER PAN and CINDERELLA were huge successes.

I love Disney, and I love Broadway. I love Disney And Broadway. I love Disney On Broadway. They can succeed with or without each other - but again, one thing is for sure - together, they have never failed. And when I say together - that’s on stage and on film.

And this is all I really have to say about it all. The longest post I have ever written here. I would love to read feedback. Agree? Disagree? Discuss!

Updated On: 12/17/04 at 06:09 PM

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 6:18pm

I don't have a lot of time, but I do support Disney on Broadway, so...

AIDA. I agree with you... but for me to re-hash a lot is pointless. It had flaws, but it also had a lot of strengths that made it easy to love, IMO, within the right audience. I miss it terribly.

The two shows that are still running... maybe not Broadway's best, but you can't concievably deny the fact that these are the kinds of things that are drawing young kids into theatre, and that's got to be a good thing.

Tarzan - I agree about the "theme park" comment. It doesn't seem like something that will have a smoothe translation, but I know a lot of the production people from AIDA are probably involved, so I feel like I should have faith. The score is also pretty strong, and I know that should the casting remain as was in the workshops, I'm there for sure.

I think they certainly have a wealth of things that could work very well on stage; maybe looking to the older, wildly successful material is the way to go.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 6:27pm

It's not like every show on Broadway is a Disney show right now, so do I see anything wrong with it? No. Broadway needs Disney shows - they are good family shows.

[jacobtsf]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 6:28pm

Capn-That was a GREAT article...you should send it to Disney corp.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 6:36pm

The main point of my post wasn't to force a view that Disney on Broadway is a good thing - anything on Broadway can be good. A show doesn't have to be Disney to be good.

My main point was that the animated film needs to make a comeback. The Disney Company is in trouble with its stockholders. There is the entire Eisner mess. They can't just forget about the money and work on the story again. Money ALWAYS has had influence on their productions, and it always will. But Walt cared about the story. And even after his death, the creative team did too.

But a lot of more recent films are just for flash. I rented the DVD of HOME ON THE RANGE and watched the Making Of special feature...

It was basically "OK, what can we do that would be cool?"

"I know! How about a roller coaster ride on a train track!"

"I know! How about cows doing karate Matrix style?"

"I know! How about a yodeling bad guy?"

"GREAT! Now write a story to put it all together. We'll write some music that will be filler - plus we can make a soundtrack. Let's go people! We have money to make. Oh yeah - we don't want to spend a lot of money on this, so you have 6 months to do it in."

Wrong attitude.

Another point was to put an end to all this "I want to see this Disney movie on stage!" As I mentioned, only some will work.

Disney needs to be original. They may adapt back and forth - but they need to be original. (I would love to see an animated musical of AIDA).

Updated On: 12/17/04 at 06:36 PM

[commasplice]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 7:07pm

This was excellent. I enjoyed reading it.

As much as I hate to say it, I think Disney animation, at least on a theatrical level, is probably dead (closure of the animation studios over the years, most recently in Florida, has sealed it). For one, they've already run through most of their adaptable source material in terms of fairy tales and famous stories, and minus Lilo and Stitch, their recent original animated films haven't had the quality of some of the others they've had over the years. Their direct-to-video sequels are popular and profitable (though imo, they're abysmal. I've watched them while babysitting, and I can barely stand them), which is why they keep coming out. I think that if Disney came up with a high-quality hand-drawn production, it would do very well, but for now, hand-drawn animation on the theatrical level is a dying art. You can blame this on the rise of CG-movies, but it's also undeniable that the Disney/Pixar collaborations (as well as non-Disney films like Shrek 1 and 2) are VERY high-quality not only in animation, but in storyline, script, character development, and other aspects that current animated films are lacking (Disney also screwed up majorly by botching their relations with Pixar, but that's another story entirely). I really do think that even though a film like Finding Nemo or Monsters Inc. wouldn't be as aesthetically breathtaking as a hand-drawn movie, it still would have done well because all the essential elements of quality were there. Quality of animation isn't the only problem Disney's having.

As for Disney on stage, I agree that the best-suited films for stage are the actual musicals. As much as I love movies like Oliver and Company and the Fox and the Hound, they would be terrible on stage. Tarzan really doesn't strike me as stageworthy either. The Little Mermaid will be good for kids.

Something else interesting to note is that, minus Aida and Mary Poppins, almost every Disney Broadway show (including the planned ones) have previously existed in the theme parks as live shows. Maybe that contributes even further into a built-in audience appeal (sort of a "It'll be like what we saw at Disney World - but bigger!!" attitude, or knowing that it's been done before successfully, so it would also work on Broadway. This might not work for Tarzan, since on the theme park level, Tarzan is more of a stunt show set to the movie music).

(also, Newsies wasn't a made-for-TV musical - it was a theatrical release but performed poorly at the box-office)

(I was a huge Disney geek in my childhood, can you tell? I wanted to be an animator for the longest time...)

[MusicMan]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 7:38pm

But in the end, these are ALL essentially family entertainments and glorified kiddie theater. Where are the musicals that incorporate entertainment AND an idea for ADULTS? Gone with the wind. Broadway has essentially gone Hollywood and targets either the youth market or the nostalgia market with its presold commodities. And with the singular exception of THE LION KING, these shows are not the result of a personal vision but, rather, corporate-think and a bottom-line mentality. I doubt that even Jerry Robbins would be employable today. Just another depressing example of the continuing dumbing-down of culture.

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 8:03pm

I love this thread.

It's something I've struggled to come to terms with for years. The fact of the matter is that I haven't liked ANY of the Disney shows that have made their way to Broadway (including THE LION KING). I prefer my musical theatre to have more adult ideas and themes.

But here's how I look at it: The Disney musicals are perpetuating the musical theatre as an art form, by getting young kids to accept the structure. I was an ANNIE kid, and let me tell you, whatever one may think about ANNIE, it exposed an entire generation of future theatregoers to the musical form. Many people who experience musical theatre as a small child grow up to buy tickets for new, interesting, adult musicals. They don't end up being adults who are puzzled by people who sing to each other in movies. And regardless of whatever opinion one might have about the specific Disney musicals, this is, in my opinion, the overriding value of them.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 8:49pm

Of the animated musicals I have mentioned, the following have attractions at a Disney theme park:

BEAUTY AND THE BEAST (Broadway style show)
THE LITTLE MERMAID (Broadway style show, with puppets and special effects)
THE LION KING (old puppet show closed, new festival show in Animal Kingdom)
TARZAN (rock style concert show)
THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME (Broadway style show, now closed)

They are/were all nice entertainment. THE LITTLE MERMAID is my favorite. Ursula is HUGE, gorgeous, and horrifying! I love it! Basically a puppet on wheels, with an actor inside to move the arms. Mouth moves electronically.

Are we forgetting AIDA? I don't believe the target audience was children at all! I think it was targeted to adults - but made suitable for families (hence "Strongest Suit").

TARZAN works on stage in the fact that they are using a narrator to sing the songs. I don't think the story is strong enough to be a moving piece. The movie didn't touch me. I liked the STOMP-style "Trashin' the Camp" number, and the songs, but the plot was dull. The characters, even Tarzan, weren't too developed. I hated Jane's character. Jane's Father was poorly comical. The villain is forgettable.

I didn't include anything about Disney and Pixar, simply because its an entirely different story. Didn't really affect the animated musical AT THE TIME.

TOY STORY came, was new, and was a huge success. A BUG'S LIFE came and was less of a success, but Disney/Pixar made up for it with TOY STORY 2. During the time of A BUG'S LIFE, ANTZ (a non-Disney/Pixar film) was released. It had more adult humour, but wasn't too popular.

MONSTER'S INC. is my favorite Disney/Pixar film. Adventurous, cute, and great characters. FINDING NEMO was an enormous success. All of the Disney/Pixar films were movies with music - none musicals.

SHREK and SHREK 2 are OK, but lack the Disney magic. Appealing to kids, jokes for adults, funny characters voiced by celebrities, and a developed plot to include it all. I enjoy most of Disney's films more than SHREK, but its OK.

I must also mention ANASTASIA. Not a Disney film, but an animated musical produced by Fox, songs by Ahrens & Flaherty. VERY good - up to par with Disney's animated musicals of the '90s. In fact, better than some. It came out during the same time as HERCULES. I remember Burger King doing several toy promotions during Christmas. One of the best animated films ever done from a company other than Disney.

Hand-drawn animation may be dead or dying, but it WILL make a comeback. I guarantee it. Disney will eventually go back to its roots. And when they do - they will thrive again.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 11:15pm

Animated AIDA? Please no.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 12:22am

Why not? I think it could work...

in the sense that they don't kiddie up the film. Keep the songs, no need to add any. Delete some, I would say. This film doesn't have to be targeted towards kids, but teens/adults.

"Strongest Suit"
"Dance of the Robe"
"The Gods Love Nubia"
"A Step Too Far"
"I Know the Truth"
and the opening/ending scenes in the museum! These stick out as great animated scenes, without my thinking too hard remembering the story.

My goodness, perhaps this story would be better as an enimated film! Think THE PRINCE OF EGYPT style animation, but more Egyptian-style done in a Disney way.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 12:37am

Prince of Egypt style would probably work, but I'm envisioning a really childish version. I'm just biased and elitist and stupid, though. Ah, well... it could happen.

Posted: 12/18/04 at 1:05am

MusicMan hits the mark.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 11:53am

MusicMan,

Exactly - and that is why Disney's animated films are failing, as well. All corporate think. What can bring in some quick cash? What can make the stockholders happy? Wrong attitude. The stockholders don't care if they make six sequels to SNOW WHITE, as long as it makes money.

I don't know why on earth Disney thinks ON THE RECORD will succeed on Broadway. Eisner will have to explain that one to us.

[Rentaholic2]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 12:16pm

I agree with the first post, hook.

I'm still trying to figure out what so many people's dislike towards the Lion King is. Lets see: amazing costumes, amazing music, an awesome culture twist on something familiar...people want to say they don't like it because it's shallow and has nothing for adults...really? Interesting to me that many people that don't like LK for that reason seem to love shows like Hairspray, Thoroughly Modern Millie, Oklahoma! (for cryin out loud!), Mamma Mia!, Wonderful Town, Grease, 42nd Street, Hello, Dolly!, Guys and Dolls, Annie, The Music Man, Kiss Me Kate, Camelot, etc, etc, etc. It goes on and on. I know, everyone can argue the deep themes of each of these (please spare us). But if you look at the Lion King in its true form, forget it was every a Disney cartoon, it is not less thematic and adult themed than many many many successful, loved musicals. Don't get me wrong, I ADORE musicals that have a strong often controversial statement or that really make you think, but since when does a musical HAVE to be this way for it to be good? I honestly think that if The Lion King had opened on Broadway before it was a movie many of the skeptics (sp?) would have loved it.

I don't, however, agree that they should bring back the Disney movie musical cartoon, for this reason:

Although I would love to see it come back, that time is over. If you are a teen or 20something right now, these movie musicals (BandtheB, Little Mermaid, Lion King, etc.) are what you grew up on. They are part of your childhood. But the disney animation is a constantly evolving format...before the movie musicals, it was something else that many people were raised on. I think the Pixar/Disney movies have replaced the musicals. Ten, twenty years from now, teens and twentysomethings will have grown up on Nemo, Monsters Inc, Toy Story, etc. I think this is a good change, even if I miss the disney musicals.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 12:28pm

Evolving? Really? I don't think so at all.

Sure, animation wise, they have evolved. But not story-wise. They have de-volved.

Most of the computer animated films were good. And this does not mean a computer animated film can't be a musical.

A musical is another form of telling a story. A movie with music is another way to tell a story. A movie with no music is a third way to tell a story.

Not ONE of Disney's animated musicals have failed. Not ONE. Financially, critically, etc. Not ONE.

You're very much right about THE LION KING. I love LION KING much more than MAMMA MIA!, and look at the numbers for MAMMA MIA - 102%!!!

Look at HAIRSPRAY. Won several Tonys, adults love it, and its very campy.

Everyone loved the LION KING film. Now when it goes to stage, people say "oh, that won't work!" and think its an awful idea. They see it on stage - and love it to death. Later, they decide its too campy.

AIDA wasn't really campy at all! It made me cry! Its a touching story, with outstanding music, and a great story. Awesome sets and costumes. Great talent. But they had to ruin it and bring in the likes of Michelle T. Williams et al.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 12:32pm

The only thing that was truly campy about AIDA may have been the wardrobe scene; but people who accuse it of taking away from the show's merit may be overlooking the need for some sort of comic relief, which was part of Amneris' character, at least in the beginning. It wasn't necessary to the story line, but it was fun, and with a semi-serious story, they kind of needed that. I always said that was the scene that really made the show "Disney."

Agree x 1000000000000000 that the casting ruined it. That's all I'll say.

[kangaroo]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 1:58pm

I agree... great article. And you made great points. Plus I love Mulan... and Aida, Lion King, and Beauty and the Beast are great musicals.
It stinks that Aida shut down, but I'm glad I got the oppurtunity to enjoy it. I personally loved Amneris's character, she was very funny, but in the end forgiving and gracious to two of her best friends. I thought the wardrobe scene was awesome... I don't see why you wouldn't like it? It tells us about Amneris, and how she truly feels about clothes in the next song she sings with Aida.
I think that Lion King has amazing harmony, but the chanter is kinda annoying. But it's still an amazing show, and the singing is just amazing to watch. I think this is more of a chorus show than Aida is.
Beauty and the Beast is just a classic, because I've always loved the movie. I think it's dumb that the even stevens girl got to be Beauty, when there are so many more qualified... but I think the show is a lot of fun to watch.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 2:14pm

Oh, don't get me wrong. I LOVED the wardrobe scene. I loved the lights, and the set, and always had a lot of fun with it. I can just see where it's not quite necessary.... but I'm glad it was there.

[timote316]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 3:13pm

Honestly, I don't understand why Disney moved away from the animated musicals. They made mucho amounts of money, especially in comparison with their latest efforts. What surprises me more is that they haven't tried to go back and make more. It just shows that Disney isn't on-par with much these days.

If the latest wave of movie musicals is successful (films like Chicago, The Producers, Rent, Hairspray, La Cage), would it really surprise if Disney jumped on the bandwagon and created some movie musicals?

[bwayballerina]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 3:39pm

Going back to the idea of adapting Disney movie musicals...
I would love to see Pocahontas turned into a musical. The plot is not completely accurate historically, but it is probably the first Disney movie that made me think- most likely becuase it didn't have a very happy ending. I can see this movie/show appealing more to teens/adults than little kids (although my younger brother found some of the antics w/ the animals to be amusing). And being the modern dancer/choreographer that I am, I can definately see some songs (ie: Colors of the Wind, Virginia Company, Mine, Mine, Mine) being turned into well-choreographed musical numbers.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 4:01pm

After seeing Beauty and the Beast, I got up from my seat and looked for the moving sidewalk to take me to my next attraction. Just didn't care for it and I had to meet Disney people and the cast and try to figure out a way to tell them that I really enjoyed the show without actually saying it! (It was opening night in Denver). It is good that these shows get kids into the theatre. But I feel that the Lion King and Beauty are reeling them in is because people are already familiar with the show from the movies and then probably having the DVD. They are "safe" shows, so to speak. Of all three of the Disney shows, the most original, AIDA, has been the 1st to close. And in my opinion it was the best of the three. I also read something last year about how Disney has been allowed to report their receipts a week behind all other shows. My first thought was, If they want to be a part of the Broadway community then you have to follow the same rules. Even if you cleaned a street up and refurbished an old theatre.

Also, CapnHook. Peter Pan is onstage with Kathy Rigby (It will be here in Denver for the second time in January). It has enjoyed a successful tour for a few years now. And I read that they want her to finish her very long run in the part on Broadway. Just my thoughts.

Updated On: 12/18/04 at 04:01 PM

[magruder]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 4:04pm

Disney reports its box office figures the same as all other shows.

[bjivie2]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 4:44pm

It is my opinion that Disney on Broadway needs to be embraced and not shunned. It's true that they treat their actors like crap, paying the lowest salaries on Broadway (or so I've been told), but they had three GIANT musicals playing at the same time, giving work to probably over 100 actors any given moment. I'm not so much a fan of directly adapting an animated movie to the stage in the fashion that Beauty and the Beast was, because it can never capture the magic that occured on screen (although it comes close). I DO support reimagining these classic animated films, though, like with The Lion King. But I think Disney is really going to thrive when they start working on new musicals. AIDA was hit or miss with most people, but they've got Hoops (some new musical about The Harlem Globetrotters - I might have the wrong name) and some other projects in the works.

As for the other shows that Disney is adapting to the stage, Mulan, Cinderella, Alladin and Newsies are all in development at Music Theatre International to be available for performance by middle schools, high schools, community theatre and regional theatre.

If Disney stays committed to producing quality stage productions, I'm all for it.

[uncageg]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 4:53pm

Then it is possible that I read that they wanted to report them a week behind. It has been over a year since I read the article. But the article was about them reporting their receipts a week behind. Either way, they should abide by the rules.