The Hunchback of Notre Dame- Page 2

[darquegk]

Posted: 10/2/12 at 3:57pm

Disney did a very scaled-down run of "Hercules: the Muse-Ical" for a cruise show for a while, and it was commonly regarded as "not very good." The production was a show within a show of the fictional Greek classic "Hercules" being revised on the spot by a ragtag group of comic performers after the whole cast got food poisoning. The director stepped in as Phil, many of the muses were men in drag, and the appearances of awesome gods and frightening monsters were simulated humorously with intentionally underwhelming props and stage devices.

However, it can be seen as an inspiration for "Aladdin," which in its Seattle pilot production used a similar "poor theatre" style and improv-based presentation. However, it looks like later pilot productions have again ditched this presentational style. Apparently people want wide-eyed wonder and sincerity from the Disney Theatricals, not irony and self-deprecation.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/2/12 at 6:03pm

I still have no idea why anyone thinks Hunchback is darker than The Lion King, thus making it less accessible. Except that it's the go-to response for every Hunchback discussion and therefore requires no explanation. But then, this topic is discussed as a brand new topic every other month, at the very least, so I'll just keep my thoughts on the German production on all the previous threads.

Updated On: 10/2/12 at 06:03 PM

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 10/2/12 at 6:52pm

The only real element that I see people making it more adult (aside from the stage version having Esmeralda die at the climax) is the fact that it's more blatant in its involvement of church and sex.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 10/12/12 at 6:38pm

Did anyone catch Hunchback on the Disney channel today? I hadn't watched it in years, but I thought the movie's church and sex themes were pretty blatant as well. It didn't really phase me as a kid, but watching it now it's hard to believe that "Hellfire" made it into the final print.

[Starship]

Posted: 10/12/12 at 7:21pm

I'm laughing at whomever is basing a Hercules the Musical's potential based off of what they saw on the Disney Cruise Line. I mean, that's like saying that a high school's adaptation of a film is the what a Broadway adaptation of the show would look like. Absolutely not.

Hercules could be pure MAGIC on stage if Disney assembled the right creative team. Whoever is using the "there's too many scenes that wouldn't be able to work on stage..." think about the Lion freaking King. An all animal cast. If someone twenty years suggested Disney adapt Lion King for the stage, I don't think anybody wouldn't laugh and say it wasn't possible. But, Disney tried it anyways and look where Lion King is now on the Broadway show list.

Updated On: 10/12/12 at 07:21 PM

[Playbilly]

Posted: 10/12/12 at 9:06pm

The version I saw of "Hercules" on the Disney Cruise was done straight. No show-within-a-show. It was entertaining, and could easily be strengthened for a legit run. Broadway, I'm not sure.

[TheatreKid3]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 4:22pm

"Hercules could be pure MAGIC on stage if Disney assembled the right creative team. Whoever is using the "there's too many scenes that wouldn't be able to work on stage..." think about the Lion freaking King. An all animal cast. If someone twenty years suggested Disney adapt Lion King for the stage, I don't think anybody wouldn't laugh and say it wasn't possible. But, Disney tried it anyways and look where Lion King is now on the Broadway show list."

^ I love this.


Well, now we know that HUNCHBACK is apparently coming to New York, just no specific timeline. Peter Parnell is writing the new book, so at least we have SOME info.

HERCULES would be amazing. Some ideas, for the poster who asked for them, I've had were:

-'possibly' cutting the number of muses from 5 to 3 (might just be too many people to have on stage all the time in a group - 3 may look better).
-Pegasus as a WAR HORSE puppet.
-I would like to see something done with neon make-up/costumes with black lights for the Gods. Might be an idea.
-Pre-show curtain could be the vase, with a spot for the muses at the top that normally is opaque, but when back-lit would become transparent and the real muses would take their place.
-Puppets for the monsters/titans.

Those are just a few.

[Jonwo]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 5:00pm

I think Pegasus would be cut rather than recreate him as a puppet, he's not a central character and he doesn't talk. I think Abu will be left out of Aladdin for the same reason although in the pilot production in Seattle he was replaced by Bhakak, Omar and Kaseem which I imagine will remain in the Broadway production.

[TheHappyPhantom]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 7:34pm

Hercules marked the downfall of Disney animation. Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, Pocahontas, Hunchback, all beautiful dramatic animated films. Then they do a 90 minute saturday morning sketch comedy and piss it all away. That movie was an insult to the studio's legacy. The gospel music is decent, but the pop songs don't belong on Broadway and the show would be brainless fluff. Hunchback is incredible and long overdue, but it needs a director with a pair of balls, not interested in pleasing shallow tourist. Otherwise you end up with Scar being a comedic character, a Beast who jumps up and down like a spoiled kid, instead of screaming angrily and the disaster that was Little Mermaid.

[michellek45]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 9:29pm

Mister Matt- I think the reason that Hunchback is considered much darker is because of the clear sexual overtones of Frollo's relationship with Esmeralda. Americans are weird about sex, and when you mix sex with the church? Forget it. The darker material in The Lion King is about violence, not sex, and we are ready to accept that. Plus add in the new ending of the stage show (Esmeralda dies and Quasi pushes Frollo off Notre Dame on purpose), and you have a show you might not want to bring the kids to. Scar was allowed to kill Mufasa because he was a villain; I don't think Disney audiences would be as accepting of a hero like Quasi killing someone out of anger.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 10:06pm

Happy Phantom--I have to agree, though it's an unpopular opinion now. But in reality Hercules WAS the lowest-grossing Disney Animated feature of the 90s "golden age" and really marked the beginning of the end.

In response to an earlier post, I think that a major reason Hunchback is considered darker than The Lion King (besides the religious and sexual themes, which are not to be sneezed at) is that the cast is entirely adult. There are no "surrogate" principal characters for kids in the film. And there's the thing about the protagonist being an abused, deformed orphan.

Updated On: 1/26/13 at 10:06 PM

[amoni2]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 10:13pm

Disney is no hurry for "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" because there is no long term audience for it. The movie flopped by Disney Classic standards. The score is unremarkable, no single song was nominated and the score lost the Oscar. Those are important factors towards their decision when investing $20 million on a show.

[ReggieonBway]

Posted: 1/25/13 at 11:43pm

I could see Ben Platt playing Quasi.

[sephyr]

Posted: 1/26/13 at 12:04am

What about Out There, God Help The Outcast, Heaven's Light/Hellfire? I think those songs are very remarkable, as well as others from the movie. They were well written.

[ReggieonBway]

Posted: 1/26/13 at 12:54am

Hunchback has a fabulous score. Opinions are opinions, but that's a pretty well accepted notion.

[TheatreKid3]

Posted: 1/26/13 at 1:01am

None of NEWSIES' songs were nominated for Oscars either, and it has an incredible score. In fact, one of its songs (although no longer in the show) won the Razzie for worst song.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/26/13 at 9:27pm

Whether or not a song was nominated for the Oscar is not really any sensible, consistent, or effective measure of any kind of quality. It's more like darts.

[amoni2]

Posted: 1/26/13 at 11:17pm

"Newsies" had a built in video following. "Hunchback" doesn't. It's on par with "The Emperor's New Groove" & "Oliver & Company", not considered Disney's top tier.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/26/13 at 11:34pm

It was more critically and commercially successful than either of those, but you're right...it's true that it is not top tier in recognizability. It's recognizable enough that Disney still uses the characters in their parks (they're incorporating Clopin into new Fantasyland elements in Disneyland right now). I think they recognize that the material is strong enough for it to have a shot as a good new musical--not a Disney commodity onstage.

[michellek45]

Posted: 1/27/13 at 12:05am

I think it would be smart of them to do what they did with Peter and the Starcatchers. Even though it's a Disney-owned property, they didn't really advertise it as one. Hunchback would be a little harder to do this with, since people are more familiar with the movie than they are with Peter's book, but I think it would be wise to separate it from other Disney properties, especially with how they've changed the ending. Like Scarywarhol said, if people see it as an original musical and not a Disney property, they'll be less likely to freak out about it's not-so-family-friendly nature.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/27/13 at 12:15am

I absolutely agree that they should go the Starcatcher route with this.

Updated On: 1/27/13 at 12:15 AM

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 1/27/13 at 12:31am

Unfortunately, they've already hired a new book writer, and new songs are going into the score, so... looks like Disney's taking ownership seriously.

[michellek45]

Posted: 1/27/13 at 12:53am

They might be taking an interest in it, which I think is good, but that doesn't mean they'll necessarily give it the full-on Disney treatment when it gets out. The people who know about the book writer and the song changes are people like you and me, who are already (not) interested regardless of Disney's involvement. The show itself, musically, is good enough to do well with critics, I think, and if they market it right, they could have a hit on their hands as well.