Theatre Memphis’ ornate “Beauty and the Beast” captivates with filigree and finesse.
Folks who now may feel as old as time can recall that magical era when Disney rediscovered animated musicals after a long hiatus. The one-two punch of hit films “The Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast” did more than prove there was a market for cartoon movies or, rather, good cartoon movies. Thanks to a parade of new Disney soundtracks, Millennial youth were connecting with musical theater in a way that hadn’t been felt in a couple of decades. Kids were once again singing showtunes, and even the jocks started auditioning for the big high school musical (or so the plot of “High School Musical” informs me.)
This was not serendipitous. When the songwriting duo of composer Alan Menken and lyricist Howard Ashman started writing tunes for “The Little Mermaid” after their moderately successful “Little Shop of Horrors,” they consciously took a musical theater approach to the project. They doubled down with “Beauty and the Beast.” The result is some of the most dramatic and memorable music in the Disney canon.
In many ways, the films are mirror images. Heroines Arial and Belle open with their big “I Want” numbers: “Part of that World” and “Belle,” respectively. Each film has an eye-popping showstopper “Under the Sea” and “Be our Guest.” Attempts to expedite the protagonists’ love match are summarized the now-classic songs “Kiss the Girl” and “Beauty and the Beast” (the latter with lyrics by Tim Rice after Ashman’s untimely death.)
Other Broadway influences abound. Animators drew choreography from Busby Berkeley, and used Broadway actors as reference for graceful, natural movement. Supporting characters sport foreign accents galore. The heels – Ursula and Gaston – have epic villain moments, their motives and malices brilliantly encapsulated in “Poor Unfortunate Soul” and “Gaston.”
What Disney didn’t have back in the early 1990s was any institutional experience bringing movies to the stage. “Beauty and the Beast” was — on a practical level — a more obvious first choice for the Broadway treatment. Still, it’s hard to imagine that this show was, at least for the corporate giant, “experimental.” Disney Theatricals did not exist. The big question for producers, and one that is still wrestled with today, was: what’s the point of a stage adaptation? To imitate the film or to reinterpret it for a new genre?
To critics, Broadway’s “Beauty” in 1994 revealed a lack of faith in audiences. In an attempt to satisfy all expectations, producers opted for a show that hewed closely to the film. That decision would forever curse and bless — blurse, as they say — productions with technical impositions for which no amount of sequins can substitute. May the gods of theater forever smile upon the actors who – then and now – maintain that the mere opportunity to don those cumbersome costumes justifies the cost of physical therapy.
Where “Beauty and the Beast” fell short in terms of theatrical wit, it succeeded wildly as a proof-of-concept that Disney films could have extended life on the stage. Its box office bonanza gave the company greater confidence in more artistic undertakings such as “The Lion King,” and even original works such as “Aida.”
Over the decades, “Beauty and the Beast” has remained one of Disney Theatricals most popular titles, staged and re-staged by amateur groups and high schools. And while it still does a significant amount of hamstringing for those who dare take it on, the difficulty has consequently given the show the reputation of a flex. To meet or exceed the audience’s expectations, a theater group must be ready and willing to enter what gamers call “Beast Mode.”
Only one company in Memphis – and maybe the Mid-South – has the capacity to rival a big-budget national tour. I’m sorry to report that all the tickets to Theatre Memphis’ current production are spoken for. This “Beauty” is as marvelous and epic a production that can be seen outside of New York or Chicago.
Those same cartoonish costumes that I’ve lamented as overwrought took me on a fact-finding mission after the first act. How many, I inquired, had been rented from some professional regional theater costume shop, or pulled out of storage?
None of them, allegedly. TM’s costume designer Amie Eoff and her sewing machine warriors have outdone themselves with the level of detail poured into every outfit. There are scores of them, from provincial villagers to dancing cutlery. I don’t remember a cheese grater in the original cast. But here it adds Brie to the brio that is the “Be Our Guest” celebration. By the time Belle appears for her date with the Beast wearing her iconic yellow dress festooned with roses, the audience had long been primed for the ovation these costumes deserved for the sheer technical difficulty.
First staged by Theatre Memphis in 2016 and directed by Amy Hanford, that production, too, received smiling reviews and some praise for perhaps a slightly more humanistic tone. (Included below are some photos from that production for those who enjoy comparisons; the design team is largely the same.) But if there is one thing that director-choreographer combo of Jordan Nichols and Travis Bradley do better than most it’s creating a fairy tale vibe – where darkness and light, music and movement and innocence and sophistication combine in a dreamlike swirl of momentum.
This time around scenic designer Jack Netzel-Yates frames the stage with an expressionistic array of gothic architectural elements. Some set pieces are gently cartoonified – like Belle’s cottage – and evoke storybook illustrations. Lighting designer Nicole Northinton bathes the stage in electric, moody hues. The contrast between the cooler backgrounds and the highlighted performers make the action and storytelling pop.
To act in “Beauty and the Beast” is to, on one hand, reassure audiences that every line pays homage to the audience’s memory of the film. Expectations must be met. On the other, creative people desire to make these characters their own. It’s a fine line to walk. These performers deliver both accuracy and originality.
Sure, Braxton Gilliland’s Lumière — a living candelabra with flaming wicks for hands — has the over-the-top French accent and flirtatious foppery of the role’s originator. But some of his comic takes are clever indeed, and I suspect if the Ostranders are still around in August, he’ll be a nominee to beat. Similarly Claiborne Thomas, Jr.’s Cogsworth — the fussbudget majordomo who is transforming into a clock — brings a relatable hysteria to fears of shortly becoming inanimate.
“Beauty and the Beast” is well-stocked with pairings that showcase actors’ ability to share the spotlight. For physical comedy, Camden Douglas as the narcissistic muscleman Gaston and Bentley Black as his sniveling toady LeFou are equally matched, one pushing the other to their greatest extremes.
Of course, the titular pair — Beauty and the Beast — are as enchanting a duo that could be hoped for. Last seen in another Jordan-Bradley production, “Cinderella,” Jasmine Gillenwaters seems equipped from birth, and named, to play Disney princesses. A lyric soprano with a dazzling smile, she portrays the first “feminist” Disney heroine as a compassionate optimist who values books over looks. Though buried under hair and make up, Jimmy Rustenhaven shows wonderful range as the ferocious Beast who, underneath the horns and fangs, reveals he’s more of a wounded teddy bear. A hard crush can make even the surliest prince pout and sulk like a lovestruck teen, and some of the show’s sweetest comedy comes from his efforts to surrender his pride and behave like a human being should.
Many in this ensemble deserve mention for their ability to project humanity from the confines of their costumes. Among them: Lydia Hart as the teapot Mrs. Potts, Amy P. Nabors as the opera singing wardrobe Madame de la Grande Bouche, and Cameron Crawford as the flouncy feather duster Babette. The performances exude generosity of spirit.
Finally, wig and makeup designer Buddy Hart must be applauded for a cinematic beast that looks as good in close up as he does from the back of the theater — further testament to the level of detail poured into this gorgeous production. These touches add dimension and elegance to a show that would no doubt still appeal to audiences if Theatre Memphis simply had limned the cartoon. But it’s sure nice that diehard theatergoers can still walk away from (yet another) Disney show feeling the magic as if for the first time. ✒ C.B.
The Burdens of two “Beasts”
After “Beauty and the Beast” closed on Broadway, the title quickly became a staple of theater groups and high schools. The costumes and special effects still prove challenging.
Playhouse on the Square staged the first local production in 2005, in what is now Circuit Playhouse on a considerably smaller scale. Theatre Memphis picked up the title a decade later with a splashy production that won scenic designer Jack Netzel-Yates an Ostrander, but was surprisingly snubbed in the other categories. (It was a strong season all around, locally.)
For the curious, below are some production photos comparing the first TM production and the current staging that illustrate the technical demands. Though it may be impossible to reinvent “Beauty and the Beast” from scratch, it’s useful to see how Netzel-Yates and costume designer Amie Eoff revisited and arguably improved upon the previous production a decade later.
As a final note, I’m told that this may be the last local production for at least a few years as a new Disney re-mount of “Beauty and the Beast” embarks on a new national tour starting this summer. See the trailer here.
Photo credit: Carla McDonald
