Why didn't Hunchback of Notre Dame make it to Broadway?

[mormonsandglindas]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 1:15am

Did anyone see the Paper Mill version of Hunchback of Notre Dame? I found a recorded version of it on YouTube and downloaded the soundtrack. I aboustely loved it. I really love that they stuck more to the original Victor Hugo plot. Why didn't it make it to Broadway like Disney orginally planned? I heard it had to do something with budget cuts, but I'm really not sure.

Updated On: 4/16/16 at 01:15 AM

[Wildcard]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 1:20am

It was never planned to go to Broadway. The intention of the production was to make it available for licensing which had a bigger return on investment on the show. 

[RippedMan]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 1:23am

Juding from Arden's tweet, I'd say it wasn't the initial plan. Sounds like they wanted to bring it to Broadway, and I'm sure if the response had been overwhelming, they would have brought it in. I think it was poorly director and crafted. The ensemble narrating, the show all taking place in one location, etc were just poor mistakes. The music is some of my favorite in recent memory, but I found the show a total bore. 

[CindersGolightly]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 1:25am

Broadway isn't the end all be all.

[Tag]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 1:52am

If it had done well, it'd be on Broadway.

[¿Macavity?]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 2:04am

I'm not really sure, but Wikipedia (I know it's not the best source) says that it had a Pre-Boradway tryout at La Jolla Playhouse, then it transferred to Paper Mill Playhouse for another tryout.  Maybe Disney just didn't feel that it was a good season for the show. Or maybe like other posters said, it wasn't Disney's plan to send it to Broadway in the first place. I never saw the show but I love the cast album.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 2:51am

Of course Broadway was the goal. However, it got mixed reviews and is quite dark for a Disney show. A PG-13 Disney musical would have been a financial risk and the money bags simply didn't want to risk it.

It's a tough show to produce, but it will have a healthy regional life.

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 4:44am

It was a production of mixed merit we will just say.

[Melissa25]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 5:02am

Did people really think Disney would endorse a show for Broadway where everyone dies, there is little humor and they forgot to include the dancing gargoyles?  It was way too dark for a family outing.  

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 5:07am

I loved what I saw on stage in La Jolla, it needed to be dark and thankfully it was. Did the show have some issues, sadly yes. The narration didn't need to be there at all, it should have been a bigger physical production as well.In saying all of that , it was a a stunning show. 

Its a pity that this is the licensed production.

[DramaTeach]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 7:37am

I agree that while Broadway wasn't the plan, that's where they were hoping it would end up.  Worked for Newsies.  I think that's Disney's go-to response to things when they don't work out - "That was never the plan."

 

The music is some of the most beautiful I've heard in a while (Alan Menken is a modern icon), but I agree that the show is very dark and not quite Disney enough.  It's a shame because if it wasn't a Disney production, I think audiences would respond well to it.  They wouldn't expect a bright, sunny musical.  Maybe one day...

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 11:20am

As beautiful as this musical was (and putting the technical and creative choices aside for a moment), I do think it might have had a problem finding an audience.  Mainly because, despite the fact that Disney did not put their name over the title on this one, many would have known it as one of the movies from the latest renaissance of Disney cinematic features.

Certainly it's not as known as some of the others, nor has it been seen by as many as such films as Beauty and the Beast or The Little Mermaid. Heck, I even have friends from the decade I spent working for Disney who will say, 'That is the one I still haven't seen.' Even so, it's obviously Disney.

As to the audience though.  Would you see a line of adults (only) at the box office, or a line of adults (only) walking into the theater?  Probably not.  They'd still see it as "Disney," so unless they're just big theater fans who want to have a taste of everything, many would take a pass.  

Conversely, can you see a line of families with kids waiting to walk into the theater or at the box office?  You probably would if it was those who didn't know much about its themes and were just going off the Disney brand.  But then what would you see walking out of the theater after the show?  Certainly not the smiles on the kid faces you see coming out of Aladdin or BATB or TLM.

It would have been a risk.  

I will admit that when I saw it there were very few kids in the audience to be honest.  It was early in its run so a lot of older (presumably) subscribers.  And the response of the audience walking out of the theater was more of a mature, 'Wow. That was pretty powerful.'  You could tell people liked it, but it was a different kind of response. Thought provoking almost.

But being Disney, it just might not draw that initial interest from adults to get them in the seats to begin with on a wider, Broadway scale.  

As for kids?  Too dark the way it was presented. I think the word of mouth would have gotten out about its intense themes.

It was an interesting piece to say the least. And while I partly agree with what many have said about the narration, when I saw it a second time with another group of friends who wanted to see it, the narration didn't bother me as much.   And the performances, led by Arden, Page, Renee and Samonsky, were just great.  Especially Arden and Page.  Arden was heartbreaking as the Hunchback, and Page a true force as his nemesis.

Even despite some of the critiques and mild ridicule it gets in the reviews of some, I am really glad I saw it. I can say that everyone with whom I saw it loved it just as much as I did. And for the record, all seasoned Broadway theater-goers as well, being either from the northeast coast originally or CA natives who have wide experience of seeing shows in NY themselves. (And I only bring this up because the first few times this discussion circulated it was inferred by a poster or two that LA audiences aren't the same as NY audiences and don't expect as much. However, there are a lot of transplants here who bring with them those expectations, and those with whom I saw this show really liked it).  So it all comes down to personal opinion and what does or doesn't work for you.

I thought it was an important message with some fantastic performances and some of the most beautiful music ever heard in a Disney movie.

[MayAudraBlessYou2]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 11:30am

Disney was trying something different with the show, it was the first time that they had below the title billing on one of their musicals (Instead of "Disney's Aladdin" for example). They kept the "Disney" brand mostly out of the advertising due to the darker nature of the piece. It was their first real attempt at something more adult oriented. But in the end they didn't think they would be able to find the necessary audience to justify the huge Broadway costs (I know someone with the production who cited the large choir as a major concern of producers for a Broadway run as it made for a very expensive cast to hire. But obviously that aspect was integral to the vision behind this incarnation).  

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 12:21pm

Of course the intention was Broadway. The cast and team were hoping until after the Papermill reviews were out and rightly panned a turgid, amateurishly directed production plagued by nepotism and awful ideas. It was a real step back for the material. There is a long thread here somewhere from that run. 

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 2:11pm

There were way more misses than hits with the production of Hunchback. I can definitely see why it did not come to Broadway.

[Notreallysilent 2]

Posted: 4/16/16 at 7:21pm

Someone told me that the chorus was too large and Alan or the producers didn't want to make it smaller, so equity didn't allow it or something like that. Hunchback was really good, but I don't think it could have lasted on Broadway tbh but who knows. It'll be nice to see some of the regional productions though