Little Mermaid - Best it could of been?

[EvanK]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 9:51pm

Me and my friend are currently argueing.

He thinks Disney did the best they could with the resources they had. Where as I believe they could of done way better with Little Mermaid. Whether it be sets, costumes, or special effects.

What do you think? Could Disney have done better? How would you fix this show??

How would you change Ursala's Death (very anti-climactic)
How would you change Ariel's transformation at the end of Act 1 (incredibly pitiful)

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:06pm

I think the score was good. But I agree with you that the sets and costumes could've been a LOT better. I just posted in a thread about the costumes, if you wanna check it out.

SPOILER ABOUT MOVIE AND SHOW ENDING

They also changed the storyline and eliminated Vanessa, which de-emphasized Ariel's conflict to win Eric's love. It really made the struggle less complex. The way Eric tries to find the singing voice in the stage version was just stupid...to have girls compete in a singing contest? I liked the movie version where things got so conflicted that Eric thinks the voice is Vanessa's and almost marries her. In the musical, Ariel wasn't battling against any other woman. I know this doesn't make sense, but hopefully someone knows what I mean.

[BustopherPhantom]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:08pm

It could have been much, much, much, much, much better. There's no question.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:14pm

Yes, and I've said it time and time again on here. There was a lot of opportunity to make this show something more beautiful and magical. The Disney magic seriously lacked in this show. Thankfully, the score, in my opinion, saved the show from being absolutely terrible and made it more bearable. And I <3 the Little Mermaid movie.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:15pm

Could HAVE.
Could HAVE. Could HAVE. Could HAVE. Could HAVE. Could HAVE. Could HAVE.

HAAAAAVE!!!

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:25pm

Ahh, wow I didn't catch that Lizzie, and I go to a school that grills proper grammar into your brain...even though I mindlessly make mistakes on occasion.

[Drunk Chita Rivera]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:31pm

I think it looked like a middle school production they put together in 2 hours. If seemed very lazy an not well thought out.

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:41pm

Thank you, Lizzie. Now can you get on the runaway apostrophe abuse?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:48pm

Well, let's hire a director who is famous for Opera and has never done a Broadway Musical cause kids love THE RING.
And a set designer, costume designer, a book writer and a choreographer who have never done a Broadway Musical.
And throw a poop load of Money at them and see what happens.

Hey, it's making the dough.

[toanythingtaboo 2]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 10:56pm

1. The majority of the fish should have been played by 'abstract' puppets controlled by the actors, a la Lion King. It would have been far more effective. Blue hair and a yellow tshirt will not convince any kid that they are seeing Scuttle. *EDIT*, Flounder not Scuttle. My bad.

2. Probably would have faired better to have the sets more under watery. They look like plastic accessories to an Ariel doll. Have beautiful corals, lighting effects, projection of fish etc. It would not have been difficult.

3. They could have had the mermaids on wires. I understand why they probably decided not to, but it would have looked FAR MORE spectacular. They went down that road for the transformation of Ariel and Prince Erics drowning sequence. It would have made the under water scenes far more awe inspiring.

4. Include the Vanessa aspect of the story. It would have been SO EASILY DONE. They could have included the contest as well if they wished. Might have been a good introduction to Vanessa's character to have her sing in Ariels voice, and the fact Ariel would be there hearing/seeing it all go down would emphasize the struggle.

5. Make Ursula's 'rise to power' FAR more spectacular. It is shameful how poorly that is dealt with. All it needs is smoke, great lighting, booming voice. Come on, such an easy improvement.

They're all I can think of right now, but in conclusion; YES it could, and should have been a lot better.

Disney clearly didn't think this one through at all.



Updated On: 7/21/08 at 10:56 PM

[jagfkb]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 11:04pm

Unlike Mary Poppins, it failed to alter the storyline well, yet at the same time, unlike Beauty & the Beast, it failed to use the great source material given to them. Honestly, the costumes and sets are nice, but they still could have been better, and bigger. However, given the situation at the current time, with no theaters open on Broadway for Mermaid, nothing opened up, and it was squeezed into one of the smallest theaters on Broadway for musicals. Therefore, this challenged both the set and costume designers by having to deal with a restricted space, and thus, a musical which could have been the most successful musical of the year given the most amazing movie ever written at the time, became an okay musical which failed to step up to the plate such as the other Disney musicals.

[defyingravity11]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 11:05pm

1. They should have added songs that don't sound like they were rejected from other Alan Menken shows. They should sound as if they belong in a score with the previously existing songs.

2. The choreography should reflect fluid movment since we are under water.

3. Since wires are used in the production, they should have utilized them in a more effective manner.

4. The costumes should look less Vegas and more Disney.

5. The direction should have been less about making pretty pictures and more about narrative.
Updated On: 7/19/08 at 11:05 PM

[H.Higgins]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 11:13pm

-- "He thinks Disney did the best they could with the resources they had."

Oh dear, I think he's sadly mistaken. Disney Theatricals has more "resources" (i.e.- money and power) than any other entity in the business and they failed to use them here. They should be ashamed of what they did with The Little Mermaid on Broadway.

It really is a travesty.

[withoutlovewithoutU]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 11:20pm

It's sad really. They took something that was so magical for so many people and made it ridiculous.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 7/19/08 at 11:37pm

And then removed the best new song written for the show.

[fvalle24]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 2:06am

I agree with many of you about the story line. I think that was the weakest aspect of the musical, imo. The story had a good pace for Act I, but like other musicals, it rushed during the Act II trying to tie the loose ends. The omission of Vanessa's character was killer for me. I agree with others, there was a lack of conflict and it wasvery bland. They way Ariel kills Ursula was very shameful. Why couldn't she have done that before...

I thought the costumes were appropriate given the nature of the characters. Sure at points it was distracting, but I think it would been complex to have to many mermaids on wires.

Another thing, I thought the choreography was sloppy at times. For some numbers it was pretty good, but for others not so much. I feel like the choreographer didn't take account the costumes "movements" and choreographed for the naked body.

I know some of you may disagree but I thought that Flounder's costume was appropriate. I think that the fact that a child actor is playing this rule had a lot to do with the creation of the costume. Sure it looks cheap and rushed, but for me it makes me focus more on the performance.

Some of the costumes were somewhat "Vegas" as another poster noted. I enjoyed them as they were SOMEWHAT reminiscent of the Ziegfeld Follies.

[Not Barker, Todd.]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 2:21am

Doug Wright HAD done a Broadway Musical before, and brilliantly. Grey Gardens? Disney is known for taking Pulitzer Prize winning dramatists and turning them into poop. David Henry Hwang?

[COOOOLkid]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 2:49am

For the whole 2 hours, I was thinking that I was watching an overblown drag show, wondering when all of the guys are going to take off their ostentatious costumes.

[candydog2]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 12:51pm

I think Disney got a little too brave with this one. When Beauty and the Beast went to Broadway, they basically put the film on stage and fleshed it out a little, They added things rather than changed them. When Mary Poppins came to the stage, they departed from the movie, but it worked. Some things were cut, some things added, some things remained the same but were presented in different ways (supercali, spoonful of sugar etc). They tried with the Little Mermaid and it just didn't work. They took out too much of what the audience EXPECTED to see, which with a Disney show, is pretty important. Sure, it's selling on the name, but if you ask a lot of kids afterwards, I bet they'll point out what they liked about the movie that they missed in the show.

I remember hearing rumors in the development process which actually sound better than the final product, like having actor's playing fish having "fish-heads" with tails and fins coming from around the head and a bodysuit to blend in with underwater surroundings, or even puppets would have been effective.

Yes, Vanessa should have been there, that scene of her hypnotising the Prince with Ariel's voice as she walks along the beach is one of the most enchanting scenes in the movie, and having Sherie Rene Scott cast made her a perfect fit as she could then have played Ursula and Vanessa.

Saying, that, the "new" Ursula has grown on me, but the old one is one of the things we all WANTED to see.

I'm still not sure about flying the mermaids, it should definitely have been used in parts, BUT there could have been a much more creative way than heelies.

[wicked91]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 1:11pm

Even something like this would have been better.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RO3YpIELR9U&feature=related

[verynewyorkcurious]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 1:23pm

Like most things, this could have been better, yes..but I did enjoy it. It was kid-ish, and the kids and families loved it, no matter how bad the sets and costumes were.

[outdamnwench]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 2:58pm

I actually don't mind that thee aren't a lot of wires used. I think it makes the times that they are used really stand out.

[roquat]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 3:03pm

They should have chosen ALADDIN instead. Much easier to do and a lot funnier.

[James885]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 8:03pm

Disney completely dropped the ball with The Little Mermaid. They had a chance to create a brilliant, visually stunning and vibrant piece of musical theatre and they screwed it up.

I think cutting Vanessa was a fatal error, because it eliminates any sense of urgency and conflict in the 2nd act. Like someone else already said, it would have been easy to incorporate Vanessa into the singing contest. Have her be the mysterious seventh contestant who wins Eric over, then have Eric almost go through with the wedding. It really would have upped the stakes for Ariel.

The final face off between Ursula and Ariel is awful. I wish they would have had Ariel struggle a little more. Maybe have Ursuala zap her with the trident or something. At least make it a little hard for her to get to the shell.

I think they probably should have used wires a little more to simulate the sea creatures swimming though the water. There's life at all levels of the ocean. In the current production, everything looks very flat.

[degrassifan]

Posted: 7/20/08 at 8:12pm

Let's say they incorporated Vanessa in the Contest scene, then Eric falls under her spell and decides to marry her, what would Ariel have done? Wouldn't that make Ariel look stupid for just standing there while Vanessa steals Eric right in front of her, and also knowing that's her own voice Vanessa is using?