I’ve seen several world or U.S. premiere musicals at La Jolla Playhouse in the past and it’s always exciting to see a new musical. Disclaimer: I like watching Disney musical animation films, and my favorite ones are Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin (recently Frozen too), yes I love Alan Menken’s music. I have seen both stage versions and think Disney succeeded the staging BATB very well. I remember watching Hunchback of Notre Dame film only once but don’t remember too much about it. The animation film is rated G, but the stage version is much darker and it would be rated PG-13 for sure. In the program, the creators talked about wanting to go back to the original novel by Victor Hugo; thus, the story is darker than the film. And I think there lies a problem. In that case, they should have departed from the Disney version altogether (yes ditch the existing numbers too) and create a whole new musical about Hunchback of Notre Dame.
It’s not like I didn’t like all the aspects of the show: I was pleased with strong performance by Michael Arden (Quasimodo) and Patrick Page (Frollo), and Ciara Renee’s (Esmeralda) voice was perfect for Alan Menken’s tune. The simple set that transforms to the Bell Tower of the massive Cathedral was beautiful and the lighting was effective. The huge orchestra for a regional production (backed by Disney Theatrical) as well as San Diego’s own SACRA/PROFANA choral ensemble was impressive.
The main trouble I had was the book. There was too much narrative, and I thought it was ironic as in the program they said in two occasions that they want the audience to use their imagination! Then why do they have to describe in the narrative that Quasimodo and Phoebus (Andrew Samonsky) were going through different streets of Paris to find Esmeralda, or how Quasimodo jumped from the Tower to rescue Esmeralda from being burnt?
Also it took a while for the story to start as it started out as Frollo’s backstory. I think the story can be told as flashback when Esmeralda visits the Cathedral so that they can introduce Quasimodo sooner. Speaking of introduction, there are two scenes that transformation of Quasimodo occurs, and I understand why they wanted to do it, but it’s (the set up) not consistent with other characters (Esmeralda or Clopin), so if they had to do the transformation, I think they can omit the first one.
Another book problem for me was that although Quasimodo is the main character in the show, as Michael Arden takes the final bow during the curtain call, throughout the show it feels like this is Frollo’s story. Even he is very much like Jevert in another Hugo musical, righteous and conflicted, I wouldn’t say he is totally a villain (not until the end) because he has a strong arch in his story and you know why he behaves like that. On the other hand, to me Quasimodo’s arch is rather weak for a leading character. Maybe in 1831, the message (don’t judge people by its appearance) was actually a refreshing idea. If they cut down the narrative, bring back a little more focus on Quasimodo, we will be able to see him grow in the story.
|