The downfall of big budget family shows (Aka Disney)...

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/25/09 at 2:52pm

What an interesting read..


http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118006460.html?categoryId=2524&cs=1

[blaxx]

Posted: 7/25/09 at 3:04pm

Next on the downfall list: movies turned into musicals.

[ljay889]

Posted: 7/25/09 at 3:07pm

Agreed.

[BillFinn]

Posted: 7/25/09 at 3:13pm

I sort of agree, but I don't know if scaling down is the necessary thing to do for destined-pop musicals like the kind Disney, Universal, or Dreamworks produce.

Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, and Poppins are successful because of many factors. One of them being... we grew up with them AS musicals. They are already in the medium. What we see in the movie is what we get on stage (with a few additions and subtractions, but the general gist is there). Whatever was added or subtracted from these shows were done so for the sake of characterization. We learn more about these characters than we did when we saw the movie and that works.

I can't speak for Tarzan since I never saw it, but the movie does not beg to be musicalized. We didn't grow up with it as a musical. We grew up with it featuring Phil Collins hits, but that's very different from a character singing their greatest desire.

Mermaid could have potentially been another Beauty and the Beast or Lion King. The formula worked. All of the songs were where they needed to be. It was a fantastical journey. The new additions and changes just didn't work though, PLUS there was no real fantastical stage element. People are awed by Lion King's African costumes. People are awed when the Beast transforms in a split second. People are awed when the Banks' home expands it's multi-levels before your eyes or when Mary flies into the abyss. Mermaid didn't have that "Awe" factor. It had wheelies. Ursula's new vaudevillian spin could have worked if they kept the ending the same, but I think this whole "break the shell" business brought down the stakes and there was nothing of great threat to the journey. All of this on top of lackluster direction and a weak book.

If Disney were smart, they would hit up Hunchback, Aladdin, or Hercules. Those musicals are/were very popular at MGM, Disney Cruise Line, and California for a reason. Tourists ate them up...

[PitPro2004]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 12:16am

"Mermaid could have potentially been another Beauty and the Beast or Lion King. The formula worked. All of the songs were where they needed to be. It was a fantastical journey. The new additions and changes just didn't work though, PLUS there was no real fantastical stage element. People are awed by Lion King's African costumes. People are awed when the Beast transforms in a split second. People are awed when the Banks' home expands it's multi-levels before your eyes or when Mary flies into the abyss. Mermaid didn't have that "Awe" factor. It had wheelies"

Agreed. You can only suspend so much disbelief and this show just didn't work because it wasn't underwater and they weren't swimming.

LK is more puppetry to me and works pretty well because the suggestion of the African Plains just works. Pure and simple. Same for BaTB's inanimate objects who want to become human again. They have to be somewhat human even as candles, teapots and clocks because they started that way.

I seem to recall thinking how surprising it was that Starlight Express lasted as long as it did. Perhaps because they were on wheels, but who knows? I thought it was corny but somehow it lasted longer than I thought it would. Why didn't Tarzan last longer? I didn't see the show so I've no clue.

[BillFinn]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 12:20am

I've heard the book was weak to Tarzan, but I don't know. The clips I've seen of the show look amazing though. Maybe it's a hard show to pitch because the stakes aren't high enough. If Tarzan is your protagonist, then what physical obstacle is he fighting against? What journey does he take us onto? Lack of identity isn't enough. Being different isn't enough. I think I heard they didn't market the show well enough or something.

Updated On: 7/26/09 at 12:20 AM

[blaxx]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 12:23am

Wish you could have seen it.

It looked like they spent the entire budget on the first ten minutes of the show, and were left with left over pieces of green fabric for the set and thick rope from Home Depot for swinging.

[BillFinn]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 12:34am

Did Bob Crowley really direct/costume design/scene design the entire show???? wow.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 12:36am

I don't agree that the Tarzan movie didn't beg to be musicalized. If anything it begged to be finished. There were already some musical moments in the movie with "Trashing the Camp" and "You'll Be in My Heart" the songs that everyone remembered. It wasn't the same kind of musical as Mermaid or Beauty and the Beast, but there were songs.

The movie felt unfinished though, like there should have been more songs and more character songs, which I was happy with because the stage version provided that. I love Bob Crowley so I loved the sets and costumes, but I do agree that the book needed some work. It was Bob's first time directing and unfortunatly, I think a show like Tarzan maybe needed someone more expereinced.

[BwayTday]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 1:12am

I think the big spectacle that makes some of these shows work...imagine The Lion King without the spectacle.... ZZZZZ

[BillFinn]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 1:17am

Right but those musical moments served as a background to create mood and atmosphere. They didn't really progress the story. The only song blatantly sung out was "You'll Be In My Heart" and it was a lullaby.

[eatlasagna]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 1:38am

i felt Tarzan had an incredibly weak book. the act 1 finale was blah. the finale is supposed to leave you wanting more and this didn't. there was no conflict or real danger or sense of story. that and the new music was pretty bland. but hey, it had an awesome first ten minutes!

[BobbyBubby]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 1:41am

They did Tarzan for one reason: the special effects.

Why not go back to one of their true classics? I'm quite fond of the Radio City Snow While actually.

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 1:44am

think the big spectacle that makes some of these shows work...imagine The Lion King without the spectacle.... ZZZZZ

After the first ten minutes The Lion King just disovles into nothing.....

[BillFinn]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 2:18am

OMG! I KNOOOOOOW! I finally saw "Lion King" after all of these years in London and I have never been so bored in my life. Thank God me and my friends were drunk. It got us through Act 1. There was a point we started singing along, haha (mothers hated us, but we were in the last row in the mezz so wtf, you know?).

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 2:23am

OMG! I KNOOOOOOW! I finally saw "Lion King" after all of these years in London and I have never been so bored in my life. Thank God me and my friends were drunk. It got us through Act 1. There was a point we started singing along, haha (mothers hated us, but we were in the last row in the mezz so wtf, you know?).

How sad that you took pleasure out of being an obnoxious audience member, regardless of the show. Whether you were in the first row of the orchestra, or the last row of the mezz, it's rude and classless. The fact that you couldn't seem to take a hint from the "mother's who hated you" shows a lack of maturity also.

[BillFinn]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 2:33am

Did the Wizard forget to give you a heart?

[adamgreer]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 2:39am

Did your parents forget to teach you manners?

[TheatreDork2]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 2:41am

[GimmeABreak2]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 2:52am

"Even Disney has heard the siren call of less being more. On the road, its "High School Musical" did gangbuster biz, and the company may be on a similar trajectory with its long-gestating "Newsies.""

Newsies?? Are there any more details about this...I watched that movie soooo much when I was little (not to mention the soundtrack plays...)

[i am the one]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 10:06am

Don't worry adamgreer, as you can tell from BillFlinn's comments... and signature... and avatar, he is quite the lush.

And no, that's not a compliment for how smooth your hair is.

[Soliantu]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 10:56am

The post saying "Beauty & the Beast and the Lion King did well because we grew up with them...so liked them already..etc, but we didn't grow up with Tarzan.."

I think the age range of theatregoers is quite different, and most of the people who saw beauty and the beast and the lion king.. may have already been adults when both movies had originally come out.. So I don't think that point makes much sense honestly

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 11:25am

I HATED The Lion King. I would have left at intermission had I not been there with other people.

[sally1112]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 11:57am

The Lion King was the first (and so far only) time I have honestly been bored in the theater.

[log13124]

Posted: 7/26/09 at 12:16pm

I had a horrible theatre experience at Lion King. I was sitting in front of a group of daycare kids constantly opening wrappers, kicking my seat, talking, etc. I knew there would be more of that at that type of show than others, but I truly could not focus on the show. I was bored during it, but I do think part of it was the surroundings and not the show itself. I keep meaning to see it again to get a better judgment of it, but haven't really found the time/inclination to do so.

I will say, however, that I saw the tour stop of Mary Poppins in Cleveland yesterday and completely enjoyed it. I took my godson (9 years old) who was impressed by some of the extravagance and I found that I had completely forgotten that behind Mary Poppins, there was actually a decent story. I really enjoyed myself. I'm not saying I'd run back to see it again by myself or on a date, but for a family show it was really enjoyable to me.