935 posts
|
Post by max on Aug 2, 2023 8:41:57 GMT
I'm wondering what effect Disney shows have had on Musical Theatre.
I've mainly shied away from watching them tbh, but think I see the influence on the wider industry.**
Is there a singing style that's spread more widely?
Are stories elsewhere now influenced by the tropes of Disney story-shaping? Or applied to existing shows retrospectively?
Simply brilliant production values, and well written songs already honed through the rigour of film production?
**I suppose my main brush with Disney was when I had to let my prejudices crumble, having seen the beautiful puppetry of The Lion King on TV. But attending the show, the wonderful creatures amass on stage in the opening number, and arriving at the waterhole....nothing happens. A front curtain comes down, which some muskrat (or whatever it was) describes as "an IKEA shower curtain" and the magic and good taste go down the plughole.
|
|
2,820 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Aug 2, 2023 8:51:29 GMT
Good thread and question. I don't object to Disney franchises but think that their theatre productions tend to be skin deep (perhaps with the exception of Mary Poppins, which I thought was fantastic). To me Disney is the "junk food" of theatre: evocatively engineered for mass appeal to as broad a demographic as possible with an agreed "standard recipe" that must be applied consistently. Lion King is visually attractive but gets a bit tedious after a while. I found Frozen appalling - boring, pandering to the market, with production gimmicks that are done better by other shows. Beauty and the Beast was quite impressive, but again the characterisations felt skin deep. Disney has successfully created, filled and commoditised a niche in theatre, and for that they should be congratulated. They're just not my cup of tea.
|
|
267 posts
|
Post by theatrenerd on Aug 2, 2023 9:11:02 GMT
Of the 3 shows I’ve seen, I agree that Mary Poppins is a fantastic example of a stage adaptation combining the magic of the film with a lot of unfamiliar elements from the book and on the whole the characters and the story are in my opinion better for it.
The Lion King is stunning visually and music-wise, but doesn’t add much more to the story than the film does.
Bedknobs and Broomsticks plot-wise didn’t deviate too much from the film but I felt did a good job character-wise, but on the whole found it a very creative way in telling the story using both magical illusions and the magic of theatre.
So on the whole, I think it really depends on the source material and its adaptation just like any other non-Disney musical does. But I think these shows are important for families who are coming to the theatre for the first time as no doubt people’s love of it are ignited by these shows.
|
|
165 posts
|
Post by MoreLife on Aug 2, 2023 9:27:06 GMT
I would say that there is a "Disney sound" that vocals in Disney productions tend to have, but that has been influenced by years of Disney movies before these started to be turned into stage shows.
I know that an awful lot of work goes into making them look and sound "practically perfect", to quote from one of their hits. Once I saw the MD of a Disney production at work for a one-off performance of a number from the show, a performance they would even not be conducting personally... and I was left speechless by how strict they were on having the number performed at the same exact bpm used for the West End production (by which I mean: not a single bpm more, not a single bpm less!).
However, I have not seen loads of Disney stage musicals, the main reason being that, whilst impeccably executed from a technical viewpoint, I've generally found them to lack heart, and I have not been able to respond emotionally all that much. They always look super polished, to the point that to me they feel artificial and insincere... Sure, they're meant to depict a fantasy world, but once it's real human beings in front of me telling those stories, I should be able to see their humanity and relate to that, otherwise it's just an exercise in beautiful visuals and sounds.
Having said that - which is of course a matter of personal taste - Disney productions have done a lot in terms of providing a steady income for performers, crew, FOH staff, etc. for years and their economic success has done good to the industry, because along with the high technical standards associated with anything Disney, I understand these productions have also set the bar higher in terms of how they manage the people who make that success possible, in ways that smaller productions would never be able to afford.
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Aug 2, 2023 9:41:01 GMT
I think that they aim more for goosebump moments rather than cohesive wholes. (MP ASIDE). As long as people leave remembering them it is job done. But there is a definite cynicism to their productions post pandemic, and it does all feel more money grabbing (B&TB tour, I’m looking at you!).
|
|
1,896 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Aug 2, 2023 10:38:43 GMT
There needs to be a thesis written on this!
|
|
196 posts
|
Post by Peter on Aug 2, 2023 10:44:33 GMT
They fill a gap for large well produced family shows that aren’t pantomimes (though Beauty and the Beast skirts close sometimes!). Apart from Joseph I can’t think of any other musicals that were previously pitched at that market - most children’s shows (Hey Duggee, Peppa Pig, Zog etc), tend to aim very young, but there is little else for the 6 - 12 age range. For me it was the Disney films in that ‘renaissance’ period from 1989 that were my first exposure to telling stories with music and are partly responsible for then getting into live musicals.
In terms of legacy to musical theatre, if nothing else Disney’s early successes have resulted in more of these family friendly shows - mostly also film adaptations such as Doctor Dolittle, Chitty, Shrek, SpongeBob etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by SuttonPeron on Aug 2, 2023 15:08:42 GMT
Disney shows used to be masterpieces. Great scores, incredible sets, gorgeous costumes, large orchestras, large casts... Think the original Beauty and the Beast, Lion King or Mary Poppins. They pushed the boundaries of what a big, spectacular Broadway show could be. It also fueled up the start of the corporate musical. Shows like Wicked, Hairspray, Billy Elliot... might have not existed without Disney taking the risk and showing Broadway could be family friendly.
But after Little Mermaid flopping and a West End/touring/international market happier to pay the same price for an inferior product (my guess is since the Stage Entertainment non-replica Beauty and the Beast in 2005) and without the technical capabilities of a Broadway stage, they´ve opted to cheapen the shows a lot more while still being very satisfying products for families and the general public... not so much the frequent theatregoer who will notice those cheapenings.
Compare the original Beauty and the Beast with the last UK tour. I think it sums it up perfectly.
|
|
6,381 posts
|
Post by Jon on Aug 2, 2023 16:25:22 GMT
I would say in fairness, the original BATB hasn't been seen since 1999 because the Broadway production downsized when it moved theatres.
Surely Cats should be credited for making Disney making the leap on Broadway, that along with Les Mis, Phantom etc proved you make a lot of money from theatre.
|
|
|
|
42ndBlvd
Ensemble
come and meet those dancing feet!
|
Post by 42ndBlvd on Aug 2, 2023 16:49:36 GMT
Disney shows used to be masterpieces. Great scores, incredible sets, gorgeous costumes, large orchestras, large casts... Think the original Beauty and the Beast, Lion King or Mary Poppins. They pushed the boundaries of what a big, spectacular Broadway show could be. It also fueled up the start of the corporate musical. Shows like Wicked, Hairspray, Billy Elliot... might have not existed without Disney taking the risk and showing Broadway could be family friendly. But after Little Mermaid flopping and a West End/touring/international market happier to pay the same price for an inferior product (my guess is since the Stage Entertainment non-replica Beauty and the Beast in 2005) and without the technical capabilities of a Broadway stage, they´ve opted to cheapen the shows a lot more while still being very satisfying products for families and the general public... not so much the frequent theatregoer who will notice those cheapenings. Compare the original Beauty and the Beast with the last UK tour. I think it sums it up perfectly. The current Aladdin National tour is a huge disappointment compared to the previous tour is what I'm hearing. They've heavily scaled down everything and resorted to cheap 2d backdrops for the cave of wonders. |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Aug 2, 2023 16:50:59 GMT
I would say in fairness, the original BATB hasn't been seen since 1999 because the Broadway production downsized when it moved theatres. Semantics. The original Dominion production, and even the subsequent tour were far superior to what has been slopped out since. The fact that the Lion King has clogged up the Bristol Hippodrome (our only large musicals house) for nearly a quarter of the last 2 years indicates the lazy ‘if it ain’t broke’ attitude they have displayed of late. |
|
3,826 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Aug 2, 2023 16:51:57 GMT
My extremely limited understanding is that it was when Alan Menkin and Howard Ashman came on board, the music was so good first with The Little Mermaid and then Beauty and the Beast that it almost screamed to be staged. And so Part of Your World and Kiss the Girl were staged for the Academy Awards, with the songs Belle and Beauty and the Beast performed the following year.
A Whole New World from Aladdin was performed the following year.
From that the whole Disney staged musical was born, along with the idea of trialing shorter versions being performed in the the theme parks.
This then became an entity within itself- Disney Theatrical Productions.
So when being written, the songs themselves become catchy and (where possible) performed by well recognised voices, they are sometimes released as singles, reaching varying levels of success in the charts, and the earworm is plant.
So before a ticket is even purchased, most theatregoers know what they're getting- a reproduction of the film on stage and that song that they already know.
And they shows themselves have varying levels of success in different countries.
And they're no fools. After getting Elton John and Tim Rice on board on the back of the success of The Lion King animated feature, they then put on an original musical- AIDA- not based upon an animated feature film at all.
Hercules is the next stage musical and there are plans underway for Tangled and Encanto to be staged. I've also heard a rumour of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.
|
|
|
|
Post by SuttonPeron on Aug 2, 2023 20:27:19 GMT
Disney shows used to be masterpieces. Great scores, incredible sets, gorgeous costumes, large orchestras, large casts... Think the original Beauty and the Beast, Lion King or Mary Poppins. They pushed the boundaries of what a big, spectacular Broadway show could be. It also fueled up the start of the corporate musical. Shows like Wicked, Hairspray, Billy Elliot... might have not existed without Disney taking the risk and showing Broadway could be family friendly. But after Little Mermaid flopping and a West End/touring/international market happier to pay the same price for an inferior product (my guess is since the Stage Entertainment non-replica Beauty and the Beast in 2005) and without the technical capabilities of a Broadway stage, they´ve opted to cheapen the shows a lot more while still being very satisfying products for families and the general public... not so much the frequent theatregoer who will notice those cheapenings. Compare the original Beauty and the Beast with the last UK tour. I think it sums it up perfectly. The current Aladdin National tour is a huge disappointment compared to the previous tour is what I'm hearing. They've heavily scaled down everything and resorted to cheap 2d backdrops for the cave of wonders. Seen a replica of that tour in Spain (the creatives told me it was almost 100% identical), and while it´s certainly not the original production; it´s still a very enjoyable show. The Cave of Wonders set is still mindblowing and I don´t think it is 2D backdrops, and the carpet is stunning. |
|
1,115 posts
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 2, 2023 21:11:16 GMT
I think that it's important to remember that Mary Poppins is also Cameron Mackintosh, with few exceptions, his productions are gold!
|
|
|
|
Post by danb on Aug 2, 2023 21:13:37 GMT
He will have tempered some of the cost cutting. He likes to start high end then find ways to do it cheaper.
|
|
|
|
Post by ntherooh on Aug 2, 2023 22:15:08 GMT
In my opinion theyve lost the magic and grandeur recently. The BatB tour, Frozen, new Aida and Hercules don’t hold a candle to Lion King, Mary and the original Aida and BatB. They’re playing it so safe it’s not even entertaining anymore and they’re butchering their own hits.
Still believe they can do it though.
|
|
