Beauty and the Beast NETworks tour question

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 6:03am

Good morning all,

I am taking my fianc to the tour in New Haven next week. She has never seen the show and I who have seen it on Broadway rave about the costumes, the scenery, etc. However, I heard the scenery and costumes have been scaled back so I was wondering if anyone who saw it can shed some light. Will it amaze her, or is it too scaled back? Will it appeal to me who sets the original to higher standards?

Please share your thoughts if you have a moment.

Thanks all!

[choitoy]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 6:19am

I saw the tour on it's recent Seattle stop. I've never seen the original on BWay/London, nor the first go around of the tour, so I can't compare, but for the most part, if you never seen a production, it does fine as a touring show.

Set wise, the village is three skinny revolving houses. Belle's house is just a set piece that wanders in from the side. "Be our Guest" is mostly done if front of curtains. Most of the Beast's castle is represented by a throne, a staircase, some platforms, and some curtains.

Costume wise, I thought for the most part they were fine, except Mrs. Potts teapot costume looked really cheap compared to Cogsworth and Lumiere. The "Be Our Guest" costumes were also a little cheapish looking.

Performances were fine all around, though the person playing the Beast seemed to mumble in his lower register a little too much, and I missed some of his quieter lines.

Also, be aware that there will be a lot of kids attending this show, and they have varying attention spans. Most of those around me lost interest in the book scenes (especially during act 1, when there seems to be a bunch). I cut kids a little more slack for misbehaving at a theater show (especially when it is geared towards kids) than adults, but your level of tolerance might be different than mine (note that most of the kids that really didn't have attention spans usually ended up leaving at intermission, at the performance I went to, it was about 10-15% of the audience).

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 6:53am

choitoy,

Thanks very much for your detailed answer. I saw a picture of Mrs. Potts and was surprised how cheapish her costume looked. On Broadway she was a huge well defined tea pot. The scenery you described sounds similar to Broadway but there is no way the castle can be represented nearly as grand. It does sound good though that there will be stairs, platforms, etc. At least it's not just a couch and curtains like in the Petula Clark "Sunset Blvd." tour. All the times I saw it on Broadway I was lucky to never have any kids who lost interest, just a few loud talkers. I think the amazing set and costumes had them mesmerized. My level of tolerance is better ok, providing the parents attempt to quiet the child down. At "The Lion King", there was a child behind me asking his mother questions in a full loud voice and she was answering in a full loud voice! I hope we can hear the Beast. He has some funny lines that I don't want to get lost. By the way, how does the transformation look? Is it still an amazing illusion that garners applause? I am glad to hear it tours well though. I know my fianc will love it, and I have to remember it's not Broadway, nor is it equity.

I am looking forward to revising it again though.

Thanks again for your detailed and helpful answers!

[sbflyfan]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 8:09am

I saw it about a year ago and it was in great shape... my only issue was the end of Act 1. A scrim lowered, but there wasn't a blackout drape behind it, so when the house lights came up you could clearly see The Beast climbing down the tower, and stage hands coming on to help him.

Thought it ruined the illusion just a bit...

But wait until he fights the wolves... wow, did that look great!

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 8:35am

Seeing him climb down would not look good. The wolve scene powered by strong music was always a thrilling scene so I'm glad to hear it transposed well to the tour.

[fashionguru_23]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 8:48am

I remember seeing I believe the 3rd or 4th national tour of Beauty and the Beast, and from what I can remember, the set wasn't that good. The main castle set had this fireplace, with what looked liked arrows sticking up from it. And a chair, and something else, but not much.

This looks like ti has some great qualities in sets, and some okay costumes. I don't think you'd be disappointed...Actually, the only way you'd be disappointed, would be if you time travelled back to 1994 at the Palace, and saw Susan Egan and Terence Mann...but, we really can't do that.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 12:10pm

I saw the show and loathed it. It's like they took a coloring book and inflated it to fit on a stage.

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 2:07pm

I was fortunate to have seen the original Broadway run of the musical: countless times at its original home the Palace Theatre and twice when it moved to the Lunt-Fontanne Theatre. I also saw the 1st National Tour.

The original Broadway production was visually spectacular in every possible way. The 1st National Tour was basically a carbon-copy of the Broadway production, with just a slightly scaled-down (not scaled-back) castle set (which eventually was used for the Lunt-Fontanne move).

Several months ago I revisited the show via this NETworks touring production. I left before intermission. It not only didn't resemble the original Broadway production but every single element on that stage looked like a low-budget community theater production. Gladly, I was given a full refund for my tickets after I wrote to the Arsht Center here in South Florida.

Other people I know who loved the original lavish Broadway production felt the same way I did. Sadly, they never wrote for a refund and sat thru both acts of this mess of a tour.

Save your money AND embarrassment and skip this tour.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 2:10pm

I saw the show in the summer of 2010 and I really enjoyed it. The cast, sets, and costumes, are terrific. The only complaint I have is the Beast's Library. It was just a large piece of cardboard.

Updated On: 5/1/12 at 02:10 PM

[DottieD'Luscia]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 2:16pm

I haven't seen a production of this show since its last performance at the Palace. It's going to be in DC next month, but after what BrodyFosse said, I think I'll skip it.

[minicko88]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 2:17pm

He will not be disappointed, because he does not know of the original production. It is a fairly nice set with a decent cast. I have seen the Original production twice, 2 tours, the TUTS production, and the NETworks production twice. You will be disappointed. No doubt about it... It doesn't even remotely come close to the original broadway production. Like previously stated, it was like someone made a coloring book and blew it up on stage! However, the cast is quite good and the story is still great. So, it is hard to go wrong with this show. I hope you both enjoy it...

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 5:43pm

Thanks all...I will let you all know what I thought after I see it. Seeing the incredible version at the Palace, then the Fontanne, I have higher standards that my fiance who never saw it. As Iminicko88 said, it's still a great cast and story. I will say I don't like hearing the Beast's library looks like a piece of cardbord though. With all the money pumped into the show from nearly selling out each show, the scenery does not have to be that cheap looking. I realize there are touring limitations, but I don't like cheap looking scenery.

[defyinggravity2]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 5:58pm

I was in my community theatre's production of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST, where I played "Maurice". It was litterally the exact Broadway script, just scaled-down and scaled-back, obviously, as we were in a 300 seating theatre with a 50 by 30 foot stage. I also have tickets to the NETworks production of the show next month when it stops in Charlotte, NC. Despite what others are saying, I think I will be quite impressed, seeing as though I have never seen any tours of it, never at the Palace, and never at the Lunt-Fontanne, and seeing as though my community production had pretty sucky sets & costumes.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 6:01pm

The worst part is that they cut "No Matter What" and replaced it with awkward dialogue between Belle and her father about Belle's mother.

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 6:09pm

Why cut "No Matter What"? It was a sweet endearing song.

[Returning Member]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 6:58pm

In addition to No Matter What, they've also cut Maison de Lunes. Neither cut bothered me, to be honest.

Unlike the previous tours which scaled back to Broadway set design, this tour uses an entirely different design. The lighting is darker than preferred and the cast is young (college aged), although talented.

I was offended by Belle's lack of energy when I saw the production a year ago, but there may be a new actress at this point.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/1/12 at 7:27pm

I saw it in London where it was in a MASSIVE theatre. I assume that production was essentially the original Broadway staging?

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 12:01am

Several months ago I revisited the show via this NETworks touring production. I left before intermission. It not only didn't resemble the original Broadway production but every single element on that stage looked like a low-budget community theater production. Gladly, I was given a full refund for my tickets after I wrote to the Arsht Center here in South Florida.

Boo Hoo. A Non-Equity Networks tour done on the cheap. Surely someone of YOUR VAST KNOWLEDGE knew what you were walking into and yet you essentially walked in with expectations of a high profile Disney backed Broadway tour. You ignore the cast because the set wasn't up to caliber so you threw a tantrum? Had you actually stuck around you would have seen they actually do pull off some interesting twists with staging. It was never billed as the Broadway Production, it was billed as a new production.

Updated On: 5/2/12 at 12:01 AM

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 6:08am

Basically as long as "The Beast" nails "If I can't love her", I'll be happy.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 6:32am

But it is billed as a PROFESSIONAL production, is it not? So you EXPECT a professional set, costumes AND performances. (I have no opinion on this production, just Brody's right to his expectation.)

Why so nasty, theaterfan?

[THEATRICAL100]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 7:22am

It DOES say 'the smash hit broadway musical' in the title.

[Huey's Pop]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 8:58am

I also saw the first national tour at the Shubert theater in Century City (Los Angeles). It was a great experience and the Disney Magic was thrilling.

We saw the latest tour at the Pantages and left at intermission. Cheap sets, and actually quite boring. Like a bad high school production.

[SondheimFan5]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 12:26pm

It looks very cheap and amateurish. I'm told the cast is nothing special, from a friend who saw it last week.

But (correct me if I'm wrong) Disney is not producing this, NETworks is, so I guess one cannot expect a big lavish production for a non-eq tour like this.

[CurtainCall2]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 2:20pm

"Basically as long as "The Beast" nails "If I can't love her", I'll be happy."

Well, Marway44, he certainly didn't when I saw the tour in Spokane in January — wrong notes all over the place.

The whole production was pretty amateurish, I thought — every line that could be funny was played for laughs, and the Beast acted like a whiny two-year-old. Gaston was pretty amazing, though!

[Marway44]

Posted: 5/2/12 at 5:56pm

I heard the Beast plays it for laughs so if the production is not that good, maybe it's not such a bad thing? I don't like hearing he was all over the place with that song though. If done right, it can move you to tears. Oh well... I'm just going in there remembering this is not Disney and not meant to be a carbon copy. I really can't see anyone who never saw it, not liking it. I would think the story would timeless story would hold anyones interest.