Advertisement

‘Shrek The Musical’ coming to L.A. with a lighter tone of green

Share

Nearly 18 feet high and weighing about 1,200 pounds, this was one big dragon.

The scaly pink puppet was meant to be a super-sized crowd-pleaser, says Jason Moore, director of the Broadway production of “Shrek The Musical,” the stage version of DreamWorks Animation’s hit movie. However it proved to be a super-sized distraction. “She was supposed to be endearing but ended up being kind of scary and off-putting.”

Which is why the metallic behemoth, set on a rolling platform, was replaced by a large but nimbler, more engaging creature for the first national tour of “Shrek,” which arrives at the Pantages Theatre on Tuesday. The new dragon — made of fabric on a metal frame held aloft by puppeteers — is among what Moore said are several post-New York changes that are designed “to streamline the plot, clarify the tone and make things more fun for the audience.”

The story of a grouchy ogre who finds happiness in a fractured-fairy tale world opened on Broadway in December 2008 to a range of reviews. Dreamworks’ first stage venture, which cost an estimated $20 million to $25 million to create, won a Tony and ran for about 13 months.

Advertisement

The yearlong tour, which ends in L.A., has offered a chance to polish “the best stuff” and “get under the hood and rethink some things,” says Bill Damaschke, chief creative officer of DreamWorks Animation. “Things that were much more literal in New York are now more lightweight and lighter in tone,” he says, not just because of the road company’s logistical needs but “to benefit the show. This helped us focus more on the characters ... and friendships that are really the heart of the story.”

“Shrek” the movie was loosely based on William Steig’s 1990 picture book, whose wicked humor appealed to children and adults. DreamWorks transformed Steig’s tale into an offbeat adventure that tweaks a variety of storybook cliches: Shrek, aided by fast-talking Donkey, tries to preserve the solitude of his beloved swamp by requesting a favor from cruel Lord Farquaad. In return, Farquaad wants Shrek to bring him Princess Fiona for his bride — even though she is guarded by a fierce dragon. The feisty princess turns out to have more in common with her bilious green rescuer than anyone imagined. (The dragon has a few surprises of her own.)

The idea of making a musical out of this irreverent mix of classic quest and love story started with director Sam Mendes, who shared his thoughts with Jeffrey Katzenberg, chief executive officer of DreamWorks Animation. The tour, like the Broadway production of “Shrek,” is being produced by DreamWorks Theatricals and Neal Street Productions, which Mendes co-founded. (Other projects from DreamWorks Theatricals — which produces the studio’s stage shows — include a “Madagascar Live” show and future shows inspired by “How to Train Your Dragon” and “Kung Fu Panda.”)

The ogre’s odyssey, which hit the big screen in 2001, won the first Oscar for animated feature, showcased DreamWorks’ use of computer-generated animation and spawned a Hollywood franchise. But could it make the often-tricky transition to the stage?

Katzenberg, who was studio chief at Disney when “Beauty and the Beast” went to Broadway in 1994, was familiar with the joys of such crossovers and the challenges — among them, how to translate the worlds of animation and fantasy to the theater and how to make a familiar property feel fresh.

“Jeffrey said, ‘We’re not interested in just putting it on the stage,’” says Damaschke. “We should do something theatrical and do more than tell the story. Enhance it. Expand what people know about Shrek” — while remembering that, in the end, “Shrek has got to be Shrek, Fiona has to be Fiona.”

Advertisement

Moore (“Avenue Q”) directed the Seattle tryout and the New York production. Director and choreographer Rob Ashford, a Tony winner whose credits include the current Broadway revival of “How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying,” served as an unbilled consultant, starting in Seattle, and joined Moore as co-director for the tour and the London production, which opened in June.

The book and lyrics were written by David Lindsay-Abaire, known for quirky comedies as well as dramas such as the Pulitzer-winning “Rabbit Hole” and the recent “Good People.” Jeanine Tesori (“Thoroughly Modern Millie,” “Caroline, or Change”) composed the show’s eclectic music.

Sets and costumes are by Tim Hatley, who won his second Tony for his designs for an odd menagerie of fairy-tale figures with unusual demands. Shrek, for instance, requires a fat suit, foam latex cowl, green makeup and prosthetic pieces. The performer playing the pint-sized Farquaad must walk on his knees.

Given such constraints, says Moore, “we had to cast actors with big hearts whose emotions come through the prosthetics and costumes.”

In New York, Brian d’Arcy James and Tony winner Sutton Foster starred as Shrek and Fiona, Daniel Breaker was Donkey and Christopher Sieber was Farquaad. On the road, Eric Petersen and Haven Burton play the couple, Alan Mingo Jr. is Donkey and David F.M. Vaughn is Farquaad.

While the musical’s creators say they plan to keep refining, the critics’ response suggests their revisions are moving in the right direction. The Chicago Tribune thought the Broadway version was “overly anxious to please,” but the tour — which started in Chicago — had “discovered a human scale.” In London, the Daily Mail called the show “fairy tale meets panto meets Monty Python,” and the Times of London said its “magic lies in wit, character and story rather than technology.”

Advertisement

For some playgoers, (including kids), the standard for comparison is the motion picture. Characters may be linked to their movie voices, including those of Mike Myers (Shrek), Eddie Murphy (Donkey) and Cameron Diaz (Fiona). Certain traits are the same — Shrek’s accent is still Scottish — “but these are by no means copies,” says Moore. “We have good actors who take the qualities and interpret them.”

The screen “Shrek’s” popularity has been a boon in at least one regard. The show’s pacing, especially in the first act, was a challenge because of the amount of plot exposition, plus, Moore says, “we were working too hard to gain a connection” between ogre and audience. “We found we didn’t need all that stuff. People had seen the movie. Even if they hadn’t, they got the idea.”

Ashford says that from scenery to storytelling, “everyone was concerned with bringing the film’s subversive nature and magical moments to the stage. But we came to see we could use a different set of tools. As long as we were delivering the same emotional effect as the film we didn’t need to do it exactly the same way.”

The Broadway dragon, for example, may have fit a more cinematic approach, but the show’s creators realized it ran the risk of overwhelming the story and the stage. So they gave the creature not only a new look but a new song designed to better dramatize her feelings.

In the end, says Ashford, “what works best are the moments that feel more like a pop-up storybook and less like a wild ride. Moments of heart and humor that make the audience want to come on board with these characters and follow them on their journey.”

calendar@latimes.com

Advertisement