My Thoughts on THE LITTLE MERMAID (Long) — Page 2

Well thought out review! I disagree with a lot of what you said, but I also had some of the same gripes. When I saw it, the choreography and sometimes the set was either chaotic (I'm looking at you "Under the Sea") or nonexistent. I believe that Zambello is very talented at directing operas but opera and Broadway are two different kinds of theater. I just don't think Zambello was the right choice.

The lighting was amazing and I thoroughly enjoyed the transitions from land to under water (especially the first one, after "Fathoms Below"). I had mixed feelings about the costumes, but overall pretty much the same as everyone else. I really liked the Mermaid costumes, and I loved Ursula's. I really disliked Scuttle's, and I didn't really like Sebastian's or Flounder's.

As for the cast, I have little complaints. Sierra was amazing, as was Sherie. I found no reason to dislike Norm, only the fact that he was underused. I saw a performance with Cody as Flounder and thought he was ok, not great.

To all of the people who are afraid to see it, let's not forget all of the good reviews it has gotten. There is a large chance you may like it. I liked it a lot, some people didn't. It all depends on your expectations.

Overall: B+

EDIT- Let's keep in mind, this review is for a preview in Denver (I just hadn't gotten around to typing one up) so a lot has changed from when I saw it.

Updated On: 12/16/07 at 01:27 PM

Warning...this is quite long.

I saw the show on Dec. 14th and LOVED it. It's not without it's flaws, but I have to say it was a magical experience to see it. Granted, it is to this day my favorite movie of all time (call me childlike if you must), so it was an amazing experience to see it. (AND... Alan Menken was two rows ahead of me so my childhood dream basically came true).

I have to say the lighting was spectacular. While I feel the set could have been improved, it worked for the most part. I would have maybe liked a "Beauty and the Beast"-like accuracy to the source material in that they make the sets a little avant garde for what it is. I mean, the underwater scenes CAN be abstract, and I think they're beautiful. However, the castle could really have been improved. It looked like they were in a rush to finish it.

Also, the tentacles at the end that come out of the proscenium were completely wasted. They're creepy but not creepy enough, and they totally have nothing to do with what's going on onstage.

I thought the book was a little "punny", and I agree that the best things in the show were those that were taken from the movie. I have to disagree with certain things that reviewers have posted, though. I think the roles are more fleshed out onstage than they are in the movie, in particular Eric, who although one-note at times, gets to grow as a character more than in the movie. I really believed that they were falling in love, whereas in the movie it's a much more shallow relationship on his part.

I feel the weakest moment is the denouement. There is no conflict. At no point do you really fear for Ariel or Eric's wellbeing. I think Vanessa is NECESSARY for the story. I'll never forget being a young child and always dreading when she came in the movie because I realized the conflict she creates. And honestly, based on the demo recording, you can tell that Vanessa was supposed to be in the story. I don't know why they dropped her at last minute, but I didn't like the contest, and I most certainly didn't like the end battle between Ursula and Ariel. I agree that it's cool that Ariel gets to stand up for herself, but I would have preferred to see her maybe rescue Eric or something.

SOOO... here's what I would do:
After "Kiss the Girl", Ursula realizes that she needs to take a stronger course of action. I realize that she can't get out of her costume and make-up in time to be Vanessa, but they could easily have one of the ensemble women play Vanessa and have Sierra pre-record her voice, like in the movie. I think the conflict of the other woman, and of Eric's trance, is a lot more emotional than having Ursula show up.

ALSO... I had a big gripe with the ending, because I didn't like that the two worlds were combined. Part of what makes the ending bittersweet in the original is that Ariel has to make her decision, and that the two worlds are effectively separate. So seeing the two worlds combined for the night really ruined it for me. I would have preferred to see the wedding scene on the ship and have the mermaids watching from underwater.

I know I have some criticisms of the show, but I still feel it was wonderfully staged. There's always room for improvement, but it is definitely a great show, and will serve its intended audience well. One of the things I really liked with this, like with "Beauty and the Beast" is that they added things to the characters to flesh them out a bit more.

As far as the cast is concerned, I think it's superb. The dancers are all top-notch, and everyone is very well cast. Sierra is flawless. Sherie takes a different interpretation, and honestly, it's not as scary or intimidating as the original. That's okay, though, because she sings the hell out of her music. I loved Titus and thought his voice, though different from the movie, was phenomenal. Sean did really well with his songs, and even though he was a little "stagey" at times with his acting, I really wanted him and Ariel to be together. Norm was definitely underused, but then again, Triton's scenes aren't necessarily fun to begin with. J.J. Singleton was amazing and I'm shocked he's only thirteen. I do feel he should have been used a little more, especially in "Poor Unfortunate Souls" like they do in the movie.

Though I doubt they'll change the book considerably, Doug Wright was at the preview I saw so maybe he'll see the flaws here and there.

jaystarr, I hope you are able to go to the show with an open mind and enjoy the show.

The reason BEAUTY AND THE BEAST works so much better than MERMAID is that we care about the core relationship. That relationship isn't clear in MERMAID.

We don't care and/or know anything about the Prince. Or, is this a story about father/daughter? If so, how come we rarely see Triton?

The other problem, one that can't be fixed, is that many of the iconic characters from the film really have no place in the show as written. Scuttle and Flounder add nothing to the story or character of the piece. Just plain pandering. Unfortunately, you'd get a riot on your hands if these characters were cut.

However, I didn't hate it. The critics will crucify it, but I still think it will have a decent if not spectacular run.

---

Bump

In a show like this, people clap out of recognition for the characters and songs.

I saw it the first night back from the strike, so the audience was pretty jazzed. But, I agree, they were applauding out of recognition of the characters/songs and not the performers.

Except for a few theatre queens who hooted for Sherrie!

I'm hoping that they'll keep fixing the book issues, since they've postponed the opening a month. We'll see.

---

WAT, you're going to get waterlogged if you spend so much time under that sea!!

Wrinkles, my dear, wrinkles...

---

Quick question: Did they take "Poor Unfortunate Souls" (Reprise) out of the show? I was just looking on Wikipedia, which I know is not trustworthy, and it says that it was cut prior to Broadway opening, but the recently announced track listing has it listed (that Playbill announced, with the error of not including "Poor Unfortunate Souls").

Is the reprise still in (towards the end of the show)?

There was a reprise.

I might add though that Wikipedia is still correct though. The "PUS Reprise" that was on the demo album was cut. There is still one in the current version however, just completely different and in a different place.

Well, I guess that's what I get for not actually looking at the article.

Ya caught me. ^_^

this is a little OT but what is going on during the "Sweet Child" reprise?

---