Shrek: The Musical

[Cordy_Biddle]

She still has a lovely singing voice; it'd be a shame if it wasn't properly utilised in the show.

[zackisthewalrus]

This really doesn't surprise me. When I first heard about "Shrek the Musical," I was literally thinking, "What the hell?" Haha. The show's going on tour. I know this because it's coming to Dallas for next year's state fair. So, if you really wanna see it, look for tour dates.

[Cordy_Biddle]

This really doesn't surprise me. When I first heard about "Shrek the Musical," I was literally thinking, "What the hell?" Haha. The show's going on tour. I know this because it's coming to Dallas for next year's state fair. So, if you really wanna see it, look for tour dates.

Yep..."Shrek" will be spreading it's banality nation-wide very, very soon.

[yakkofan725]

Well, I can't blame them, taking an 88-minute long movie and turning it into a 135 minute musical, they should be cancelled

[The Little Merman]

Well I saw both TLM and Shrek within a day of each other back in April and I can tell you without a doubt that the first was legions, legions, legions better than the second. Shrek was just painful.

And I nodded off during it. So, yeah. Good riddance!

[ajmrowland]

Interesting. I saw the footage on the Monsters Vs. Aliens DVD and thought the show looked good.

Well, I guess I can't judge it until I see it.

[SpringHeelJack]

The problem wasn't really the physical aspects (the production design was about as good as it could be, and the actors were all talented), it's that the songs were for the most part lousy. They weren't particularly clever or funny. You could have done alot with doing really on-the-nose parodies (ala "Avenue Q") and some genuinely sweet stuff, but the only songs that really sort of should have been indicative of the show were "Story of My Life" and "I Know It's Today". More needed to be along those lines, and they just weren't. In the end, it was just unnecessary. Why pay upwards of $100 to see it onstage when you could just watch the DVD? Then adding "I'm a Believer" as a curtain call was really just a pathetic attempt to grab more tourists in that failed.

Granted, "The Little Mermaid" was a mess too. At least "Shrek" had sets, not enormous underwater bongs on wheels, and costumes that resembled their characters, as opposed to a kid in a yellow T-Shirt. All in all, I really hope Dreamworks and Disney both learned something from them.

[Cordy_Biddle]

Disney's still doing good business with "Mary Poppins" and doubt they've been signifantly wounded - finally-speaking - by the closure of "Little Mermaid".

I think TLM will undergo some revisions before it hits the road - just like 'Mary Poppins' receiving a scaled-back set which replaced the gargantuan "Banks dollhouse set" that could never have gone on tour without creating major headaches for the tech crew.

[SpringHeelJack]

I'm not necessarily saying from a financial standpoint (still, did the show break even? I don't think it did), but if it closed, it clearly lacked both the critical and popular acclaim to run for a long time ala "The Lion King" and "Beauty and the Beast".

Changing the sets for the tour is only one problem, really. The direction, book, and new songs were all less great. With "Mary Poppins", I at least give them props for trying to do something different by combining traits of the book with the film, and not just copy the movie to the stage.

[Cordy_Biddle]

No, I dont think 'Mermaid' repaid it's initial costs. For the tour I'd love to see Zambello return to the drawing-board and re-configure some of the aspects which seemed awkward on Broadway. Tours are a good way to "right wrongs", and this show is a perfect example.

[SpringHeelJack]

Yeah, but the problem here is that Disney won't feel the need to. "Just okay" works on tour.

[PrincePhillipFan]

Well, I finally went to see Shrek The Musical today with the family, and was rather detered by all the negative comments, but I must say that I'm happy that I still decided to go, and I had a blast at it.

I petty much side with Siren's opinion on it. Is it another Music Man or My Fair Lady? Hell no, and it's not supposed to be. It's supposed to be a musical comedy that does not take itself seriously, but still had its share of very warm moments and amazing sets. I went expecting not high art, but just to sit down and be entertained by nothing but a musical comedy and I didn't leave disappointed.

First for the good, all of the leads are very good in their parts, but I must single out Christopher Sieber as Lord Farquaad. I absolutely loved his part and he made the entire show for me! His much needed over-the-top performance was perfectly hilarious to watch, and in my opinion he had the best songs in the entire musical. Sutton Foster (who I also adore) was wonderful as Fiona, and she really soared in her singing on I Know It's Today and Morning Person. I loved the first fairy tale creatures number, with probably the Witch and Peter Pan being my fave of the group. The dragon puppet I must say was quite amazing too to see in person.

As for the bad, I admit with Brenders that some of the songs are rather lackluster and forgettable, most notably I'd say Shrek's songs more than anything else, and I think the whole "I Got You Beat" number could be expendable. Which brings me to the point of another downside I thought could be gotten rid of was the potty humor in that number. Thankfully most of the musical strayed away from that the entire musical, but it's rather prevalant in that number and I found it kind of useless. But I suppose it's just there for the kids to giggle at, and the rest of the music made it up for me. The character of Donkey was fun, but like Murphy's character, he can grate on me after a while.

All in all, I'd personally say for me it was a very enjoyable show. I didn't expect more than anything of it than to be just entertained by a comedy, and that's what I got. So as was stated earlier, I guess then I'm just a liker of banality.

[PeterPanfan]

I'm glad you enjoyed it, Tim.