Well, the "English mansion" probably wouldn't have helped anyway, seeing as Clayton is now a Southerner...  ;)

But anyway--Basically turning it into Disney's live-action "Jungle Book"?...Mm, nahh.
I'm for just going down with the ship and letting DT take their expensive lumps on this one (and Poppins)...And maybe it'll scare them out of their "$95 video-rental with the loopy changes" craze for a while, and in the future, only getting a show going when they have something *original* to show us.  Or "if".

PingBack from http://blog.mousekingdom.com/2006/04/24/tarzan-on-broadway/

I agree that DT needs to start coming up with some original ideas.  "Aida" has done well, and it didn't start out as a movie.  I'm thinking that, with all that fire in that screenplay, it would cost a lot of money, and why would Disney want to spend more money when they can produce the show for less?  I found that screenplay to be interesting; it captured my attention, but I, personally, like the more kid-friendly version.  I think that new songs will cause for new scenes, but, besides those new song scenes, they should stick more towards the storyline of the movie.  Some people are going because they love the movie, and if it differs too much, they might complain.  It's bad enough Clayton's a Southerner, and people will be complaining how that's different.  Sometimes people don't like familiar things to be different.

I think that more needed to be made of the ending in the Broadway version. It didn't seem to have enough of a kick, and the fact is that both the animated version and the screenplay above have strong endings. Why they chose to leave the ending kind of limp is beyond me.

Sounds too much like "George of the Jungle" to me.

----
blackcauldron85 said:
I think that new songs will cause for new scenes, but, besides those new song scenes, they should stick more towards the storyline of the movie.  Some people are going because they love the movie, and if it differs too much, they might complain.
----
There's an odd sort of audience paradox about putting "new scenes" into an old-movie paste-up:  
Audiences and producers assume that they have to bring *something* new to the table to justify the ticket price, but when they do, it seems like piling insult on injury--Not to come down too hard on the musicals, but we can assume most audiences in the back of their  minds are grumbling at least a little bit about seeing what they can rent at home, and are going in saying "Okay, if we're going to get a video pageant, do it ALL, and show me"...And then, when we do get loopy changes out of nowhere, it feels like a bit "They couldn't even grant the movie THAT shred of dignity?"

LIke we said before, it's a thankless task, that original musicals will never have to worry about.

Wow, that Act III had me riveted. Would liked to have seen that on screen. I'm guessing in that version,  Terk wasn't going to be played by Rose O'Donnell.
But would it help the play? Maybe. I just think doing Tarzan on Broadway was a bad idea to start with. Seems more like a theme park production to me. I just don't have any interest in seeing it. Am looking forward to Mary Poppins, though.

I saw Tarzan a few days ago and thought it was great. I was in the very last row in the Orchestra section expecting the worst but getting the best. So yes, sightline was not an issue. I do admit though, there are a few notable flaws in the show.....
1) The Clayton story is pointless. They took him from being a trully evil englishman who had all the other sailors allegience to a minor character who wasn't all that evil & who got walked away in cuffs. My advice to them, make the ending with Clayton a bit more dramatic.
2) The sets were not very good. The opening set looked extremely bad, but once the regular set came out, it was okay. At least the special effects made up for it though.
3) They have to find some way to hide the ropes that attatch to the characters. It just looks ugly.
4) Minor, but they need to refurbish the outside of the theater. Compared to the beautiful entrance to the Lunt-Fontaine and the grand entrance to the New Amsterdam, this theater's outside wasn't all that pretty.

That said, I thought it was great. The acting was good by everyone (especially Young Tarzan who got the biggest clap at the end). I also loved their adaptation of Terk, and the way they tweaked the story line to make more Tarzan/Mom moments. And just like the movie, the end (where Tarzan tells his mom that wherever he goes, she'll always be his mother) was very emotional and done very well.

So while not as good as The Lion King, I think this is a very good show that's definitely worth a visit.

I was skeptical when they announced all these new plays. Mary Poppins seems like a logical move to the stage, Tarzan though? I thought this was a bad idea from the beginning. While it was an okay movie, it wasn't a Beauty and the Beast. Or a Peter Pan, or even a Lion King. Not to mention, it wasnt the characters who supported the soundtrack, it was Phil Collins.

It just seems someone at Disney decided that "well, we made money with Beauty and the Beast, and the Lion King, so we'll make even more money if we start pumping out every animation we've done into a play" Whats next? Black Cauldron: The Musical?

Even Finding Nemo: the musical at Animal Kingdom is going to be a stretch I think.

Sorry for the pessimism, But aside from Everest, the last Disney attraction attempts have been almost suicide. (i.e. Stitch)

I just never thought Tarzan would have been a good idea in the first place.

I am thinking that Tarzan is a bit of a stretch because it has been done so many times it is a bit clicheed. That particular scene you have there reads somewhat ridiculously for me too. It doesn't hold the weightiness of a heavy dramatic theatrical production, but nonetheless expects to garner that sort of validation. So it strikes me as, well, silly more than anything; silly satire.

When I go out to see theater, I want to be treated to a new twist; something unexpected. Maybe Disney would do well to adapt some I.P.s explicitly for this purpose, instead of always trying to capitalize from hits in their line of animated features. It always stuck me as a bit, well, tacky, when commercial cinema hits are adapted to the theater. I realize it sometimes works, but maybe the trend is beginning to get a bit tired? I know everybody I know let out an audible moan of contempt when we heard that LOTR would be adapted to the theater…

And, if you can forgive me for stooping to include a third paragraph here, I would dare to suggest that it is not in Disney's best interests to base their decisions on anonymous posts from public message boards, which are not reliable sources of information. Many posters may appear to be credible, but there are so many ways of masking one's ID online, and an endless array of highly creative, malicious intent and subversion awaits the likes of Disney on the internet, and this could result in significant losses for the company in the long run. Just my two cents.

PingBack from http://originalweddingvows.weddingdressdream.com/2006/04/26/original-wedding-vows-could-tarzan-s-original-screenplay-provide-the-key-to-saving/

Interesting. I never knew that there was a treatment of the script that included the London trip. I'm finding myself dissapointed that it wasn't included in the movie. It's too bad that there's this magical U.S. animated movie running time of 85 minutes that all stories need to be whittled down to fill. That's why the Incredibles was so impressive—because they took however much time was needed to tell the story.

Regarding the broadway play, It seems like the change in the setting would do it justice and would be a refreshing change to the otherwise bland constant jungle scenery.

PingBack from http://creativeweddingideas.coolblogstuff.com/2006/04/27/creative-wedding-ideas-thinkfree-online-new-free-web-service-gives-consumers-a-complete/

PingBack from http://originalweddingvows.weddingdressdream.com/2006/04/27/original-wedding-vows-could-tarzan-s-original-screenplay-provide-the-key-to-saving-2/

PingBack from http://creativeweddingideas.coolblogstuff.com/2006/04/28/creative-wedding-ideas-thinkfree-online-new-free-web-service-gives-consumers-a-complete-2/

PingBack from http://originalweddingvows.weddingdressdream.com/2006/04/28/original-wedding-vows-could-tarzan-s-original-screenplay-provide-the-key-to-saving-3/

PingBack from http://originalweddingvows.coolblogstuff.com/2006/04/28/original-wedding-vows-could-tarzan-s-original-screenplay-provide-the-key-to-saving/

PingBack from http://originalweddingvows.weddingdressdream.com/2006/04/28/original-wedding-vows-could-tarzan-s-original-screenplay-provide-the-key-to-saving-4/

I think that act III sucks

PingBack from http://www.bullfrog117.com/unfiltered/?p=185

PingBack from http://theatercollect.com/blog/2006/04/jim-hill-could-tarzan-s-original-screenplay-provide-the-key/