Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for discussion of the May 16th Jim On Film column on Disney on Broadway at <a href="News-ID180060.asp" target="_blank">http://LaughingPlace.com/News-ID180060.asp</a>.
Originally Posted By poweraap The tone of the end of the article would leave readers who have not seen any of the Disney Broadway musicals to believe that Disney has taken no creative license whatsoever in the production of their musicals. While I understand Jim's point about Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King being "safe" recreations of films, I think that he fails to recognize that Aida was a stray from their typical animated feature formula. While it is a contemporary adaptation of Verdi's opera, I believe that it is a sign of Disney's creative leap into Broadway musicals. Additionally, above all, the Walt Disney Co. is a business that needs to protect its own interests. I believe that Disney's decision to make theatrical productions of already successful animated features was the company testing the waters. I think that they were introducing the public to the notion of Disney on Stage with the tried and true. Also, I believe that it was their way of introducing Broadway to a non-Broadway audience, thereby increasing the likelihood that these satisfied consumers would return in the future to see new Disney musicals, whether they are based on previous successes or on brand new concepts. And I believe that the Tony-voters negligence of Aida as a Best Musical candidate was based on their fear of Disney as a force to be reckoned with. The fact that Aida was nominated for and, more significantly, won a number of different awards in many different categories speaks for itself - it was the best musical of the year. But those people who make the important decisions were unable to swallow their pride and allow it to actually win the award.
Originally Posted By TheRedhead As far as the Tony's treatment of Aida, it's important to remember that there is a small select group of people who nominate the candidates, and then a larger set of completely different people that do the actual voting. The Tony committee obviously had a big problem with the show (and I'm not sure if it can be said that it was specifically a Disney issue), but the voting reflected what most people knew: the theatre community generally liked the show, and that it would wind up winning any award it could. I remember hearing from many many people that Aida winning Best Score was a given, especially since it was not given a slot in the Best Musical actegory. And I have to disagree with article's conclusion too. I actually see the three current shows as the right progression: you start with Beauty and the Beast and you don't do anything intersting with it whatsoever, so you have a very very safe beginning. You then take the Lion King, still safe, but you take a risk and hand it to someone who is unknown to the mainstream. For your third show, you take a risk by introducing a new topic, but you attach it with writers associated with Disney (exactly what King David did, but that was such a god awful mess I'm not sure where it falls). Makes sense to me. The Little Mermaid project is following the same pattern as Lion King - big name with yet-unknown-to-the-mainstream-director, and Hoopz has some incredible Off-Broadway talent attached. Give Pinocchio to Julie Taymor. Pray that they do something intersting with When You Wish (I don't entirely trust Tina Landau, but she has done some good stuff). Looks good to me.
Originally Posted By kyle2me I tend to diagree with comments that Aida was overlooked in it's nomination for a best musical tony. Having seen all of the nominated shows that season, I felt that Contact, The Wild Party, James Joyce's The Dead, and Swing were all deserving of the nomination - and that Contact was justified in it's winning that award. I saw Aida in it's world premiere and left feeling flat. The show at that time had no way to bring to two lovers to life and the most interesting character was Amneris, the third wheel out. On Broadway, the Amneris character was less prominant, but nothing had been done to beef up the Aida and Radames characters. While the music was superb, the book suffered a lot. It was uneven in tone, and many scenes carried less diminsion than an animated feature. The best musical tony should be presented to the show that successfully combines all elements of production. Aida did not carry that out. I think that the backlash against Disney on Broadway is greatly overrated. But I do think that Disney Theatricals is just as subject to the foibles of live musical theatre as anyone else. We tend to forget that Disney Theatricals is new to the Broadway scene still. While there is a certain amount of quality that one expects from the Disney name, we might also remember that they are still babes in the woods when it comes to Broadway.
Originally Posted By SJHYM I have never been a big Disney musical fan. I thought the original version of Beauty and the Beast was better than the scaled back one now playing on B'way. And I enjoyed Lion King and Aida but neither left me feeling like they are the best things in theater. I do however give Disney applause for opening shows that bring families to the theater. And both Beauty and Lion King are wonderful shows for families and for that Disney should get recognition.
Originally Posted By iluvdisneyland I am a theatre artist, and I have to contradict this article. It's not that the theatre world is AFRAID of Disney, it's that we resent them. They come into our world with limitless money and advertising resources and you expect us to be happy? Disney is focused on making a spectacle, not real art. I am a huge Disney fan too, but I personally do not approve of their musicals.
