I was just reading the The Toronto Star online and this article came up. It's always interesting to read a review before going to see a play or movie. While I did agree to some of the points but to give it a 1.5 out of 4? And called the 2.5hr show a life sentence? Give me a break! How do people hire these "critics" and give these terrible reviews?
Here's my honest opinion on the show itself:
As I said, I have not seen the original Broadway/Toronto production so I don't know of the "extravagant" settings. For what it's worth, the stage is only so big and I think they did a wonderful job of using what they had to change scenes by rolling different sets, turning it around and placing them in a different area on stage. It's hardly worth complaining the "fact that it’s a touring production is reflected in sets and costumes." For people who are did not grow up in the Broadway stage settings or understand how it should be lay out on stage. This is a terrible reason to put down a show.
Costumes were fine. You can only do so much with Beast's mane. Lumiere, Cogsworth, Mrs. Potts, Babette, and Madame de la Grande Bouche, their costume did reflect their animation counter parts. I can't imagine really putting Madame de la Grande Bouche in a real closet costume and what they did I thought was ingenious. Oh and the way Chip was presented - brilliant.
The story itself is near identical of the Disney animation, extra songs were added and humour is a large part of the show. Gaston, in particular, is the funniest character on the play. He really emphasized the ego, playboy and as thestar article stated narcissistic personality. You actually enjoyed the Broadway Gaston more the animation Gaston.
Music is my expertise and I can tell you, I really enjoyed the music, from the overture to the songs themselves were memorable. I was surprise about the fact that the cast of Beauty and the Beast had a near identical voice to the Disney movie. I certainly think that is a plus. Because when you are reproducing something, people have certain expectations and wants to hear familiarity.
Emily Behny played Belle and her voice was absolutely beautiful. She carried the Belle tune exactly the way you would remember it in the movie. And when she hit the high note, it was a thing of beauty.
Matt Farcher played Gaston and I believe he really stole the show. He had the powerful tenor voice and his personality brought Gaston to life that made Gaston an enjoyable character and not the jerk that's in the movie.
Michael Haller as Lumiere was also likeable but I wonder if that's because it's Lumiere. Afterall, he is the French candle romantic guy.
Jessica Lorion played Babette and I loved the character. It's pretty funny that everytime she's on stage, she has to "shake it." I mean, she is the brush...
James May as Cogsworth was also likeable. He was very close to the movie character as well but wasn't my favourite.
Julia Louise Hosack as Mrs. Potts. Who doesn't love Mrs. Potts? Of course Julia is no Angela Lansbury and while she didn't sound like her, Julia brought a different character voice to Mrs. Potts that was pleasantly good. I sort of feel bad for her to have to keep her left arm up as the stout of the tea pot.
Leaving the last important character to review but unfortunately not the good is Beast played by Dane Agostinis. This is where I agreed the the thestar article. The original Beast in the movie is voiced by Robby Benson. While his voice was altered for the movie, it was kind of disappointed to hear Beast's voice and missing that depth. I don't think it helped that he was a tenor. One voice that is very distinct is that of David Keith of Disney's Gargoyle fame. He has the perfect tone and deepness in his voice that was needed for Beast. Unfortunately, Dane Agostinis didn't have it. It really took away the sad, tortured soul persona.
All in all though, it is still a good show. I definitely rate the show a lot better then what thestar gave. It is not a perfect show but it is definitely worth going to watch with friends.
No comments:
Post a Comment