Shrek? Could it? — Page 2

Smaxie, I agree 100%

It's not a perfect show. But it does have some stand out qualities. That said, it has a snowball's chance of winning that tony. Methinks Billy Elliot has that in the bag.


and strike me dead for saying this, I had a better time at Shrek, which I thought was fun and clever, than I had at BE, which I thought was dull and bordering on pretentious.

---

You know, it's interesting. I very much enjoyed both BE and Shrek, but as I was watching Shrek, I found myself way more willing to forgive its flaws than I did when I was watching Billy. I'm not sure if it was because of the people involved or its fun and positive message, but I was a lot less likely to get annoyed when it seemed misguided than with Billy Elliot.

Updated On: 5/6/09 at 11:13 AM

I couldn't agree with you more, Smaxie!

The show is a funny, charming and surprisingly touching! Whenever I go and I hear the beginning notes of "Who I'd Be" I know by the end of the song, I'll be crying. The song is beautiful, and just one of the many well-written songs in score. The book is very funny and enjoyable in that it sticks to the movie's plot but also allows for changes that were made to make sense.

I personally love Shrek, and while I don't think it will win the Tony for Best Musical, I think it will certainly pick up a few here and there [Christopher Sieber and costume design come to mind]. I totally agree with PiraguaGuy in that people who judge it so harshly, haven't seen it other than clips from talk shows or bootlegs. Like I said before, it's funny, charming and surprisingly touching and truly gives kid's a great message about how it's okay to be a freak and an outcast.

---

Updated On: 5/6/09 at 12:33 PM

I think it could get the Tony award for best costumes. You do have to give them some credit for that. I haven't seen it or any of the other nominated shows for Best Musical to have an opinion on that.

---

I really hope that Shrek does win Best Musical simply because it's a heartwarming show. I have yet to see Billy Elliot and NEVER will. It doesn not appeal to any of my tastes and i hate that they must have 4 Billy's.. Like are you kidding me. You can't have two like most of the other shows that deal with kids as actors. I know Billy Elliot will win, but I am praying every night that it doesn't, simply because there are better shows out there besides that.

I don't think Best Musical is in the cards, but I do think Sieber will get a win, and possibly Orchestrations - there is a lot of stuff going on in the orchestra for that show (musically) and I hope that it gets recognized

I don't know who you guys think you're kidding. Sieber plays a cartoon character.

Yep. Actors never get Tonys for being over-the-top and campy.

Just ask Tony losers Carol Channing, Roger Bart, Beth Leavel, Sara Ramirez, Harriet Harris, Gary Beach, Bill McCutcheon, Harvey Fierstein, Nathan Lane and Zero Mostel.

---

Tourism is actually half the factor. Half of the Tony voters are from out of state, representing theatres from across the country, and considering Shrek's road conference presentation was the best that's ever been, there's a very good chance it wins.

Shrek is much better than most high school drama kids think.

Half of the Tony voters are from out of state, representing theatres from across the country, and considering Shrek's road conference presentation was the best that's ever been, there's a very good chance it wins.

Billy Elliot will tour and if popularity holds, may even be a strong contender for sit-down productions as seen with Wicked and Jersey Boys. Shrek hasn't displayed as much financial success to warrant that. If you're talking about the potential for financial success in tours and out-of-town sit-down productions, Billy Elliot has the edge, I'm afraid. I'm not saying it is THE factor is determining the Best Musical award, but that it's hard to ignore when bringing up the subject.

---

Am a bit relieved to see some people valuing the small treasure Shrek is. I am unabashedly a fan, but even by trying to bias out of the equation, I don't get the hate. It's not perfect, but the performances are amazing, the costumes are ingenious, some of the lyrics are clever (others are cringe-worthy, so they even themselves out), and it's just plain fluffy fun. I do not understand the Billy Elliot love. Yes, the kids are fantastic dancers, but singing/acting wise, they are average (with the exception of David B as Michael who I was seriously impressed with). I literally checked my watch 6 times during that show, and I NEVER do that. That being said, it wasn't bad, but unless Billy was dancing, I didn't care. And someone please explain to me the Greg J. love? I find him totally dull in a character that was boring and poorly written to begin with. Next to Normal is very good, in my opinion, though it took me a while to get used to the cast recording (I almost didn't see it as first as my initial reaction to it was pretty negative). However, it's depressing. I can't speak to RoA as I have no desire to see it, but I think there may be a SLIM SLIM SLIM chance of Shrek winning the big prize, only due to a split in votes over Billy and N2N. I do see it taking the statue of Best Leading Actor, Best Supporting, and Best Costumes... MAYBE Orchestrations, and in my own little biased world, a SLIM SLIM chance of Sutton stealing her second Tony from Alice.

If anyone has actually seen Shrek and seen Billy Elliot, and is well voiced in theatre... then there is no question in mind who is going to win, or who deserves to win the tony.

I just need to say this, and as succinctly as possible. Keep in mind that I have not seen "Billy Elliot" and saw "Shrek" completely FREE of charge, so I have no axe to grind...

I have never thoroughly *loathed* anything meant for entertainment - a show, a television program, a film - the way I loathed more than 80% of the time spent watching "Shrek." There were groans around me as well - it was hardly just me. I would not bring a young child to see it, either, as I believe any message it tries to impart becomes not only more than a tad hypocritical but buried deep, DEEP, within the show's weak, unentertaining mix full of hollowed-out Stephen Schwarz rip-offs.

When I heard the song "Freak Flag" I was waiting for Ashton Kutcher to leap out from somewhere - "let's put as many trite, politically correct phrases into a dance song as we possibly can!" Just imagine - "We're wood, we're good, get used to it!" - when I heard that line uttered I just could not believe it.

Sutton doesn't have enough time to show off her voice, and when she does I wish she would keep it to herself. She brings absolutely zero charm to Princess Fiona. The relationship between Shrek and Donkey seems a little unscrupulous, to put it mildly, far removed from that of the film.

I think the moment I knew the show had no chance to redeem itself, if the embarrassing "Morning Song" was not enough, was the three characters, one of them a princess, trying to out-burp each other. It's juvenile in an animated film, but simply shocking on the stage. Who wants to pay $100 to see this?

I will say that "Big Bright Beautiful World" and "Who I'd Be" are quite pretty, and even manage to be a little moving because James is a strong actor, but still feel like Steven Schwarz retreads.

Also, I have to say that I absolutely will be happy in the event that Christopher Sieber wins his Tony for this show. He is positively the BEST aspect of it, in my critique. Every moment he was on stage was full of fun. He completely holds the audience's attention. Like myself, I know many in the audience who were not happy to be there actually smiled during the moments he was out on stage. Without him, the show would need intense life support. Heavy duty.

I went in not expecting something positive or negative, but hoping for a bright, original, catchy score grafted onto the script of the original movie with perhaps some eye-catching effects that altogether translates well to the stage. What I got instead was an over 2-hour dentist's appointment. I don't think I could be paid to sit in a theatre and see this show again, even if it were the last show on broadway, which, I emphasize, it is not.

As far as I'm concerned, there is a lot of covering up going on with the show. They absolute need the fire-breathing dragon, the talking mirror, the puppeteers, the wooden nose that expands and contracts for comic effect - they need these to cover up the fact that the show has little if any substance.

I am not attacking those who enjoy the show, so please, no defensive posts, just discussion, if you like. I just had to let off some steam. I feel very strongly about this show. I would even sit through "Dracula the Musical" again, in a heartbeat, long before I would consider *touching* this show again.

---

Updated On: 5/13/09 at 11:07 AM

?and strike me dead for saying this, I had a better time at Shrek, which I thought was ?fun and clever, than I had at BE, which I thought was dull and bordering on pretentious?

?BE, to me, is HIGHLY overrated - unlike Shrek, which gets the term thrown at it a lot, BE is a corporate musical. It's got a mediocre score by a pop star, one-dimensional performances, and elements that seem tailored to the Matusick family flying in for a week in the city; a flamboyantly effeminate character who's just gay enough to be hilarious but not too gay as to offend the bluehairs - a historical backdrop that gives the show "signifigance in our times" and some pretentious directorial choices (the little boy watching the opening film...hmmm, what does THAT symbolize?) It's a good show, but not life-changing.?

COMPLETELY agree. Though I would give the award to Shrek over Billy, I?m rooting for Next to Normal.