THE LITTLE MERMAID Reviews- Page 12

[Testing1232]

Posted: 1/12/08 at 7:59pm

<< I was shocked when I heard Roma Torre of NY 1 give it a qualified approval. She hates mostly everything.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just saw her review on "On Stage", and agree with you Roxy.. she really seemed to like it. (and I was surprised)

She called it "another Disney jewel" as far as family shows go.

Just curious- I walked near the theatre today, but didnt happen to pass it- (and sorry if this was previously posted. I didnt read the entire thread)

Anyone know if there any "pull quotes" up at the theatre yet?

They could definitely use a few of Torre's !!!

[Yankeefan007]

Posted: 1/12/08 at 8:02pm

None yet.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/13/08 at 11:02pm

Y'know, way back when, when I was regularly posting here and LM was still in Denver, I seriously questioned the director/designer team for this show (check my posting history, guys - it's there), but I was more than willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, even though I felt both were wrong, wrong choices. I hate to say I feel validated in my reservations, but there you are. The sets look absurd, and the costumes are just frightful. Sorry, but there are some people who just shouldnt work on Broadway.

Sadly though, this thing *will* run for at least a year, because of the tourist trade alone. The tourists dont know jack about what the critics say; they just see the Disney brand and the fact that it's LM, and they'll plunk down the hundreds of dollars needed for the tickets for Mom and Dad and the brood.

(And nope, Tarzan cant compare -- it was supposed to be a Disney "guy" show, and even the movie tripped up on what it was supposed to make at the box office. But a certified Disney "princess" show? That's a very different kettle of fish.)

[misschung]

Posted: 1/13/08 at 11:30pm

I'm probably out of the loop with this, but why is a Disney Princess show different?

[Wanna Be A Foster]

Posted: 1/13/08 at 11:39pm

Because every little girl wants to see Disney.

Little boys think Disney is gay.

[misschung]

Posted: 1/13/08 at 11:41pm

Right, but I don't understand the comparison with Tarzan. So it's "okay" for Tarzan to be less than perfect because it's a guy show?

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 12:03am

"Little boys think Disney is gay"


-isn't it?

[neddyfrank2]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 12:07am

Because every little girl wants to see Disney.

Little boys think Disney is gay.

I mean you can't really blame them when you have Tarzan being played by Josh Strickland.

[Not Barker, Todd.]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 12:14am

We all know who was the queen of that jungle.

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 12:25am

mmm i'd have let him swing from my vine.

[PotO2]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 12:37am

...and they'll plunk down the hundreds of dollars needed for the tickets for Mom and Dad and the brood.

And a lot will enjoy it too. A lot of tourists have thoroughly enjoyed it, and a large amount of the people who don't like the show are the critics.

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 6:00am

The whole "princess" thing: Disney has been pushing the "princess" branding for about three years now, taking the characters like Ariel, Jasmine, Cinderella, and Belle and treating them as some kind of commercial collective, with more manufactured crap aimed at that 6-12 year old little girl demographic. Walk into any toy store, and you'll find Princess totes, Princess DVDs, Princess costumes, Princess figurines. It's Disney's reponse to Mattel and Barbie.

Tarzan doesnt figure into it, not because little boys think Disney is gay, but because it just doesnt have the same marketing push behind it. Tarzan isnt as well known a Disney "brand" as Little Mermaid, not by a long shot... because Disney is honing its marketing more and more to that little girl audience. Look at their next big film: "The Frog Prince", whch will be set in New Orleans. Wanna know why? It's so they can develop a "Black" princess character for the pantheon. Pocohantas is their "native American" princess. Jasmine is their "middle eastern" princess. Mulan is their "asian" princess. They want to make sure they have all of their minority bases covered.

And sadly it works. The shows and movies might be dull as dishwater, but those little girls will bring their parents in droves. That's one of the reasons TARZAN flopped, I'm sure. Little boys dont like theatre, and little girls didnt like TARZAN the film. It was a demographic mis-fire.

>> A lot of tourists have thoroughly enjoyed it, and a large amount of the people who don't like the show are the critics

... as well as locals, Im sure, who have either (1) seen the show or (2) heard the word of mouth. What do you think killed COMPANY?

No, I've not seen MERMAID. I've seen the various photos and videos available on the internet, and I'm sorry but this thing is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too heavy a visual conceit for a show that should have been light and easy. But it's also clear they wanted a companion piece to LION KING, because so much of the show *looks* like Taymor's work as re-interpreted by someone who doesnt understand what Taymor pulled off far more successfully. If you look at Zambello's work (and Zambello has a web site so you can see it), it's all very big and very heavy and more often than not ponderous. But I'm betting Zambello got this gig because of LITTLE PRINCE, which was almost a blip on the resume -- but even that took subject material that was pretty light and simple and made it into an operatic extravaganza, which IMHO killed the score. It was reminiscent of what the first production of ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA was like at the new Met.

And Typsin's work just underscored every fear I had. Instead of using materials that flowed to suggest water, he goes for plastics: hard edged, hard lined, completely the opposite of what *should* have been on that stage. It's like the "ooo! bright! shiny!" approach instead of thinking, okay, what's going to give the water effect? Sorry, big, big disappointment because, for the most part, I love his work, because it's so conceptual and stylishly out there. But this time he was waaaay off his game. It may look, at first glance, stunning, but then you have to ask the harder question: is it supporting the material? Or is it just pretty for pretty's sake?

[misschung]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 7:47am

Thank you for your response. I agree with you - I felt like the set was spectacle for spectacle's sake, which is fine, to a degree. But not if it overwhelms the story and talent of the cast.

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 9:26am

"Little boys think Disney is gay."

Especially little gay boys

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 9:33am

I can't believe this thread is still going.

Press the back of a fork to this fillet. It's D-O-N-E.

[BrianIdol]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 9:33am

misschung - i didn't think the set had anything in it that wasn't necessary. Everything moved and helped to convey the transitions between air and sea.

[Scissorhands2]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 9:36am

Here there is a positive review by Jim Hill

http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/jim_hill/archive/2008/01/10/tune-thursday-there-s-big-fun-to-be-had-at-the-little-mermaid.aspx

He is a famous fan and expert of Disney stuff.
It could seem that he always say good things about Disney, but it is not true. In the past he says horrible things about it.
So I guess that in this review he is sincere

[SeanMartin]

Posted: 1/14/08 at 11:51am

>> I can't believe this thread is still going.

Oh please. If this were SPRING AWAKENING, we'd be looking at at least a dozen more pages.

[sgv123]

Posted: 2/9/08 at 9:21pm

im asking anyone who has sat in these seats or near the seats. are these good seats as far as view goes?

mmezz
row C
Seats 126-128
they are on the far left of the mezz.

[sgv123]

Posted: 2/10/08 at 10:31am

bump

[scaryclowns223]

Posted: 2/10/08 at 3:50pm

Beauty & the Beast got reviews that were just as bad. It ran 13 years. It's a pretty good show. It won't change your life, but it's not half bad, and it's a night of mindless entertainment, especially for kids.