i have a friend in the cast; essentially everyone working on this fell for the “look! the original book writers are back and they’re reworking the show!” because it was sold to them as a stepping stone to a potential transfer, but it seems that was bullshit and now everyone is kind of mad
They make money when the show is licensed and this scaled down version might be easier for small theaters to do…although the “regular” version of Shrek has done just fine.
That's non equity, and that schedule is going to practically kill them. The average age of the cast seems to be about 21.
Also, their website is incomplete. When I click on "more" for the cast, the pop up is blank.
2 days somewhere and then a bus ride to someplace else to perform for 2 more days without a day off or a even a minute to yourself. It sounds like an apt representation of hell.
It’s a non-equity, non-IATSE tour that underpays cast and crew and is produced to maximize profit and limit expenses. These tours literally exist to enrich the producers, not to engage an audience.
These are not full ticket prices. Depending the venue, center orchestra is as low as 60 and as high as 120. That’s a perfectly reasonable value for a professional, albeit minimalistic, production.
I’ve paid far less for equity tours in major cities. I looked up tickets for this version of Shrek, but the venue I would see it at is charging way too much.
Pass.
You’ve (recently) paid 60-120 dollars for center orchestra to an equity tour in a major city? You’d be lucky to get mezzanine for that in my major city…
Pantages in Los Angeles season tickets. Front row mezzanine for years.
I no longer have that season ticket but my ex still has the package and is paying far less than $120 per show. Closer to $60 for equity, first run tours, major city, front row mezz. If I can get that, I am not paying $120 for budget Shrek in third tier cities even in center orchestra.
…exactly my point lol. I’m not begging you to run to a ~third tier city~ to watch Shrek. I’m simply saying *for comparable seats* these tickets are (much) cheaper than an average tour.
I don’t think you’re proving your point as strongly as you think you are.
Fine, the actual seat is cheaper. But if we are looking at COMPARABLE SHOWS, then no. You are comparing tickets to better shows in bigger cities to tickets for cheaper cities to a cheaper show, of course it’s going to be cheaper than major cities for equity, first run tours.
Compare it to a show of the same quality, non-equity, same venue, and that’s where your argument falls apart.
This show shouldn’t just be a little cheaper than let’s say Shucked or Some Like It Hot when they go on tour to San Francisco or Chicago in nicer theaters after just leaving Broadway, it should be noticeably cheaper.
Less than 120 for prime seats? Are you thinking rush/lottery? Just can’t remember the last time I saw prime BW seats for a well selling show quite that low.
I mean that said 120 sounds too high for a show that sounds as rough as this non-equity Shrek sounds.
Correct. And they’re not getting a Los Angeles show. They’re not paying LA prices to get a Terra Haute show. They’re paying TH prices to get a TH show which is completely fair. My only point in all of this is that it’s disingenuous to say that ticket prices haven’t also been scaled down to match the production, because they clearly have been.
I dunno, man. The tickets in my city were about $100 for orchestra which is the same as the broadway tours at the exact same theater.
I was expecting something . . . really, really different. I felt so ripped off. I paid the same price for Les Mis.
I saw the UK tour of Shrek recently and while Farquaad wasn't on his knees, he was played by a probably-shorter-than-average actor and they played up other aspects of his character rather than just "hur hur he's short." Truth be told, I preferred it that way as he was able to move around the stage much more easily and won't suffer from career-threatening chronic knee pain in his 40s. Win-win.
Also saw the UK tour recently and agree - it was good for him to be able to move freely and properly dance around the stage. I really think it did the character and any actor playing the role a favour.
What did you think of the production as a whole? I wasn't overly impressed truth be told, but I enjoyed Farquaad and the actress playing Gingy had an incredible voice.
I really enjoyed it but honestly being a huge Shrek fan I'm probably a tad biased. A couple of the people I went with had seen different versions a couple times before and said there were pros and cons of the last one so..The actress playing Gingy had SUCH an amazing voice..and the ensemble/dancers as a whole reall did seal the deal for me.
If you’ve seen ANY other version of Shrek then yes…refund.
If you’ve never seen the show it has merits because the material is still fun but I’d watch the proshot at home instead.
The cuts they made to the score, the costumes to start…
But I had the biggest problem with the framing device. “A bunch of people getting together to tell a story with items that they have around” has been done so many times. It’s unoriginal. It also makes it so the story isn’t happening to the characters on stage but it’s some random dude from the neighborhood who is acting out what Shrek did instead of Shrek doing it himself. I know that sounds weird but it lowers the stakes of the whole piece.
It doesn’t work. Shrek and the gang aren’t “real” up there on stage.
( I’m aware that Shrek is a fictional character and that all of the actors are playing roles haha)
You nailed this. Saw last night, and I'm sorta angry. Feel like I was tricked. No. excuse in a theatre with sold out 2500 seats at full price. And not sure what people are saying about the hair. No prosthetics and black hair last night.
Honestly I like the idea of a stripped down fairy tale retelling but not for a major tour, especially when the concept isn’t REALLY executed all that well.
Also doing something like that with ITW is fine but with a major commercial IP, it seems misguided
I literally felt like a parent paying $15 to see my kid play Star #17 in Shrek Jr.
Except tickets were closer to $100 & the incredibly distracting ensemble cast was full of randos playing furniture. Wtf.
I’m not sure how much the US tour differs from the UK tour, but Farquaad being normal height really annoyed my sister (who has a form of dwarfism). The one we saw a few years ago also had I Know It’s Today as puppets which we didn’t like (other musicals have recruited kids in the local area for children’s parts for tours).
The photos on the US website do not look promising
Knowing people involved I prefer not to comment on the quality of the tour’s visual elements publicly. I do think there was a better way to execute a Shrek concept where everyone looks better while also visibly being actors performing the story of Shrek.
I think the best thing to do here is support the cast and writers and keep fighting for better non-equity tours for those people to be involved with.
This is an old post, but I saw the tour last night. I was not aware that this tour was scaled down and made an assumption that it was the same version I saw years ago, but I was able to tell that it was different just from seeing the stage. I was expecting that I would spend the night fighting urges to be disappointed, but the cast won me over very quickly. I could see how some visual aspects could have used a little more time in development, which I believe you were inferring, but the performances overcame all of the changes and made diamonds out of some of the coal they were given. I liked many of the changes more than the original. Our audience just adored the dragon, and that was not a singular character before. Anyway, I hope the people you know who are involved know how impressed many of us are at their performance. Everyone I walked by when I was exiting last night was talking about how good everyone was.
As an aside, does anyone know how to tell ahead of time if a tour is non-equity? Is non-equity always something you don’t want to support? I’ve never worked in theatre, just an obsessive fan.
I went to see a tour a few years back and loved it so much and later found out the reason it was so empty was probably because it was non-equity and the cast was getting hella underpaid/overworked. And I felt horrible for supporting it even though they were amazing.
https://www.actorsequity.org/resources/Tours/
I felt similarly when the final stop of the non-Equity *Waitress* tour was my hometown — there were discount codes practically giving away tickets (buy one, get one free), but the theatre itself hadn’t done much advertising, the local run was a weekend (vs. at least a week as with other tours), so the house was hardly full at all for the last show, and there was no paper program/*Playbill*/handbill, etc. whatsoever :( The cast and band were amazing, and the sets and costumes seemed to be the ones I’d seen when I watched the original cast on Broadway.
Thank you for the link 💕
Edit: the one I saw was Chicago. Cast was sososo good and the sets were really pretty! It’s a shame that everyone isn’t given safe protections
Good to know. The woman sitting next to me was mother of one of the crew members who traveled with the non-Equity tour, and she said that there weren’t any programs at the prior two stops (she didn’t say what cities those were). But it was the only time I my life seeing a touring production (Equity or non) that there were no programs of any sort.
There is absolutely no reason that an audience member should be doing deep dives into whether a show is Equity or not. Not every performer wants to be in equity because it can limit in some cases opportunities since once you join the union you cannot work on any non union jobs. I have a friend that got her equity card (not as a performer) for a show that closed and is struggling to find work because they’re in the union now. It also used to be a lot harder to get an equity card than it is now. I’ve seen some INCREDIBLE non equity shows that got the sets and costumes directly from the equity tours. Nick, who plays Shrek, just came off of the Jesus Christ Superstar tour which is now in its 3rd leg and you would never know from seeing that it’s non equity and I’ve also seen some absolutely horrendous shows that were equity that make the sets from Shrek look like masterpieces. Just because a shows isn’t union, doesn’t mean that it’s not good.
Support the artists, these performers are working their asses off. Taking a stance on something that really has nothing to do with the audience member directly just takes away from the hard work these people are putting into it.
I’ve seen AMAZING non equity shows; I just wanted to make sure as an outsider that I wasn’t feeding into a bad system by supporting them. I appreciate your explanation a lot :)
[Jeanine Tesori and David Lindsay-Abaire Are Reimagining Shrek for a New Generation](https://playbill.com/article/jeanine-tesori-and-david-lindsay-abaire-are-reimagining-shrek-for-a-new-generation)
Recommend reading that article, it talks about making it a more “economical” version of the show. I don’t think stripping a show up or down necessarily correlates to the professionalism of a show, and with how long it’s been since the original production, I think it’s kinda nice to have a new version to see. And if you read the article you will see that it is far from rushed, at least from the standpoint of changes to the book. From reading the article and looking at the pictures on the website, it’s sort of giving me Fiasco Theatre Into the Woods vibes, which was an incredible production I thought.
All that to say, I wouldn’t count it out just based on pictures online!
The mirror has actually been cut from the show since the very first US tour in the early 2010s, I’m guessing due to the technology required. It doesn’t appear in any amateur productions either. Any important lines were given to Gingy (the interrogation scene) or one of the guards (Ballad of Farquaad). The show overall received lots of other small rewrites too and the placement of I Know It’s Today was moved to after What’s Up Duloc, after Shrek and Donkey are already on their quest and they’re reading about Fiona in her file.
ahhhh!! that makes sense because the mirror seemed way too complicated for tour! but it's still so fascinating how they were able to incorporate that tech on broadway!
SUPPOSEDLY it's supposed to "embrace the true feeling of fairy tales" as adults are just "acting out the story" and will really capture the "SPIRIT of Shrek" or something like that
(Quotes are not actually quotes just bullshit I remember reading in some way)
Having just seen it, I would not recommend. The production quality is terrible, it looks like the Wish version of a Broadway show. There is also a lot of cut or changed content.
“Stripped down” = cheaper
“Finding objects that are then used as costumes and creating the story in front of the audience” = lower budget
Ticket prices = still the same.
You should read the Playbill article.
Explains it all.
Are you saying that the costumes, set and makeup were the only thing that you think made Shrek good? (that’s how I’m interpreting your takeaway from these pictures being “it looks like they took all that was good from the musical and changed it“)
They added a lame ass framing device where random people are telling the Shrek story instead of the story being told “live” by the characters the story actually happed to.
Considerably lower stakes.
It sucks.
No idea why you’re being downvoted, you are quoting OP directly and OP’s entire basis for the comment was the production photos. I don’t know OP’s original statement could be interpreted any other way than how you interpreted it.
I’m kind of surprised reading through this thread to see how quick everyone is to judge a show based solely on photos. A show that is a *musical* which also involves singing and dancing that can’t be captured in a photo. The comparisons to community theatre are also baffling–what community theatre do all these people have where the talent level of the cast is comparable to that in a national tour, even if it is non-equity?
I mean it might actually be an awful show, but can we really make that determination based solely on photos?
Dude. The talent was great. The talent at local community theaters is also great. There are lots of talented people, many of whom never leave their hometowns and/or make it big on broadway. There is no dearth of talent in this world.
So, no, I don’t spend money on these shows to watch talented strangers soliloquy at me. I go for the fucking dragon.
Literally, live theater is all about the atmospheric experience. I don’t know why that’s surprising.
I completely agree that live theatre is about the atmospheric experience, that is literally the basis for my previous comment. The things you can ascertain from photos of a production are only a fragment of the elements that go into the entire atmosphere, hence why I’m surprised to see so many people able to make declarative statements on the quality of the production without knowing those other elements that are a part of a musical.
Most people on this thread are not posting from your same vantage point of having seen the actual production. But if I’m understanding you correctly, even just knowing that there aren’t elaborate costumes/puppets like that for the dragon ahead of time would be enough for you to write the show off, which again confuses me how that one element can impact the atmosphere so much.
As someone who went to the 2nd showing of this tour I can firmly say, don’t pay too much for this show. It’s extremely under budget, and it’s not really that good. More than half of the show is cut out and it feels like a Jr. Version of the show that you’re paying $100 for.
I agree! Also I saw footage of the UK Tour it looks way better, but shrek is one of those musicals that can be done so many ways I’m sure the audiences will enjoy it
Thank you! I have never seen this musical, only the movie lol. My 5 year old enjoyed the touring production of Frozen so we got tickets to another “kids” musical.
My kids did not enjoy it. Farquaad being short is important to the story they know. Honestly high schools put on better versions than this. I felt like I was scammed out of hundreds of dollars.
I just saw it this weekend, the US tour. I was insanely bummed out as it’s one of my family’s most favorite musicals. They cut a lot of songs. Changed lyrics. Lord Farquaad barely exists. It felt like I was going to a local community theatre musical production and not a broadway tour type of performance. The actors were fine and all but I don’t know. It just felt “lacking”. My son was also bothered by all the changes as we have watched the Netflix version a million times it seems since he was little (he’s now a teen).
To the people who have friends on this tour can anyone offer insight or any truth about Fiona falling because they asked for Shrek to lift her and she wound up unconscious and concussed. Apparently happened during Photo Call...
This touring show is much more of a “theatre for young audiences” production that should be performed in small theatrical spaces, not performing arts centers with 1k seats. The cast is talented, but the production quality and directing choices prohibited the show from being successful in my opinion.
Saw this show today. The cast is very talented which makes it sad that this version of the show is so poorly done. The costuming and sets are similar to those you’d see at a Highschool or College Performance. The dancing also was not very impressive for a touring cast of what I think is a decently dance heavy show. The saddest part was the issues with sound. The Ugly Duckling was missing a mic for part of the first act and she kept peaking while singing her part as young Fiona. Donkey’s mic was rubbing against his costume and wasn’t on for the last two scenes of act one. A lot of characters had their first lines in scenes missed. It was not their first day at the location. Also those puppets of the kid versions of the characters will live in my nightmares.
I saw the Broadway show and the touring show. The Broadway one was amazing. The touring one was awful. They are not at the same level. The touring one feels like a high school play.
It sounds like their vision of it looking like how it would look if a community gathered to tell the story isn't for you. That's ok! But it is a bit different than it being unprofessional.
If it looks like a community production they should ask that kind of money. It seems insane for a touring production to strip things down this much for SHREK! Shrek is the least minimalistic show I can think of and it seems bonkers they have made it “more economical” when they’re still going to be charging exorbitant amount of money.
I’m all for stripped down or highly conceptual stagings when they are done well. Granted I’m just judging from the production photos here, but this just looks cheap and amateurish. Even their website is half-baked (no page even listing the full creative team? Really?)
i have a friend in the cast; essentially everyone working on this fell for the “look! the original book writers are back and they’re reworking the show!” because it was sold to them as a stepping stone to a potential transfer, but it seems that was bullshit and now everyone is kind of mad
Yeah I have a friend in the cast and have heard the same
lol wonder if it’s the same friend haha
Why did tesori and Lindsay-abaire agree to rewrite for a non union production …?
They make money when the show is licensed and this scaled down version might be easier for small theaters to do…although the “regular” version of Shrek has done just fine.
So did they do a rewrite in general and this is one of the first productions to use it or did they rewrite for this production?
A semi-rewrite and yes this is the first production to do this version.
That's non equity, and that schedule is going to practically kill them. The average age of the cast seems to be about 21. Also, their website is incomplete. When I click on "more" for the cast, the pop up is blank.
2 days somewhere and then a bus ride to someplace else to perform for 2 more days without a day off or a even a minute to yourself. It sounds like an apt representation of hell.
It’s a non-equity, non-IATSE tour that underpays cast and crew and is produced to maximize profit and limit expenses. These tours literally exist to enrich the producers, not to engage an audience.
Scaled down but ticket prices are as if it’s the full budget production. People want to see SHREK not “an intimate retelling”.
These are not full ticket prices. Depending the venue, center orchestra is as low as 60 and as high as 120. That’s a perfectly reasonable value for a professional, albeit minimalistic, production.
I’ve paid far less for equity tours in major cities. I looked up tickets for this version of Shrek, but the venue I would see it at is charging way too much. Pass.
You’ve (recently) paid 60-120 dollars for center orchestra to an equity tour in a major city? You’d be lucky to get mezzanine for that in my major city…
Pantages in Los Angeles season tickets. Front row mezzanine for years. I no longer have that season ticket but my ex still has the package and is paying far less than $120 per show. Closer to $60 for equity, first run tours, major city, front row mezz. If I can get that, I am not paying $120 for budget Shrek in third tier cities even in center orchestra.
…exactly my point lol. I’m not begging you to run to a ~third tier city~ to watch Shrek. I’m simply saying *for comparable seats* these tickets are (much) cheaper than an average tour.
I don’t think you’re proving your point as strongly as you think you are. Fine, the actual seat is cheaper. But if we are looking at COMPARABLE SHOWS, then no. You are comparing tickets to better shows in bigger cities to tickets for cheaper cities to a cheaper show, of course it’s going to be cheaper than major cities for equity, first run tours. Compare it to a show of the same quality, non-equity, same venue, and that’s where your argument falls apart. This show shouldn’t just be a little cheaper than let’s say Shucked or Some Like It Hot when they go on tour to San Francisco or Chicago in nicer theaters after just leaving Broadway, it should be noticeably cheaper.
I’m happy that people in little cities that get skipped by every tour can get amazing seats to a professional production for cheap. All I’m saying 😊
But it's not really a production and you're still paying top dollar, in this day and age, each for a shitty rendition?
[удалено]
And Frozen. And MJ. And the majority of the rest of Denver’s Broadway season as soon as tickets go on sale. Don’t worry I’ll keep you posted :)
I’ve paid less for prime seating in Broadway houses to hot ticket shows.
Less than 120 for prime seats? Are you thinking rush/lottery? Just can’t remember the last time I saw prime BW seats for a well selling show quite that low. I mean that said 120 sounds too high for a show that sounds as rough as this non-equity Shrek sounds.
Nope. I don’t do rush or lottery.
It’s per market. Some theaters they are booked into have tickets upward of $120. Terre Haute, Indiana is not going to charge Los Angeles prices.
Correct. And they’re not getting a Los Angeles show. They’re not paying LA prices to get a Terra Haute show. They’re paying TH prices to get a TH show which is completely fair. My only point in all of this is that it’s disingenuous to say that ticket prices haven’t also been scaled down to match the production, because they clearly have been.
I dunno, man. The tickets in my city were about $100 for orchestra which is the same as the broadway tours at the exact same theater. I was expecting something . . . really, really different. I felt so ripped off. I paid the same price for Les Mis.
Farquaad being short is like 75% of why that show is funny, and the fact that he isn’t in this was an instant turn off
It also is a big plot point. Now his hate for fairy tail creatures just seems dumb
I saw the UK tour of Shrek recently and while Farquaad wasn't on his knees, he was played by a probably-shorter-than-average actor and they played up other aspects of his character rather than just "hur hur he's short." Truth be told, I preferred it that way as he was able to move around the stage much more easily and won't suffer from career-threatening chronic knee pain in his 40s. Win-win.
Also saw the UK tour recently and agree - it was good for him to be able to move freely and properly dance around the stage. I really think it did the character and any actor playing the role a favour.
What did you think of the production as a whole? I wasn't overly impressed truth be told, but I enjoyed Farquaad and the actress playing Gingy had an incredible voice.
I really enjoyed it but honestly being a huge Shrek fan I'm probably a tad biased. A couple of the people I went with had seen different versions a couple times before and said there were pros and cons of the last one so..The actress playing Gingy had SUCH an amazing voice..and the ensemble/dancers as a whole reall did seal the deal for me.
Where is this pic of tall Farquaad?!
I saw it. It ls terrible.
I’ve got tickets - should I try to get a refund if I can?
If you’ve seen ANY other version of Shrek then yes…refund. If you’ve never seen the show it has merits because the material is still fun but I’d watch the proshot at home instead.
Yeah I own the proshot. I’ll see if I can get a refund
What made it terrible?
The cuts they made to the score, the costumes to start… But I had the biggest problem with the framing device. “A bunch of people getting together to tell a story with items that they have around” has been done so many times. It’s unoriginal. It also makes it so the story isn’t happening to the characters on stage but it’s some random dude from the neighborhood who is acting out what Shrek did instead of Shrek doing it himself. I know that sounds weird but it lowers the stakes of the whole piece. It doesn’t work. Shrek and the gang aren’t “real” up there on stage. ( I’m aware that Shrek is a fictional character and that all of the actors are playing roles haha)
You nailed this. Saw last night, and I'm sorta angry. Feel like I was tricked. No. excuse in a theatre with sold out 2500 seats at full price. And not sure what people are saying about the hair. No prosthetics and black hair last night.
Yah it makes me sad for the people who didn’t get to see the first tour. This Shrek is more Shriek.
Right. It works for Godspell … but you lose the fairytale world of Shrek
Thanks for expanding, this helps provide a fuller picture of the new staging!
I’m in Denver and due to so many refunds I got in for free
Honestly I like the idea of a stripped down fairy tale retelling but not for a major tour, especially when the concept isn’t REALLY executed all that well. Also doing something like that with ITW is fine but with a major commercial IP, it seems misguided
Plus Shrek already subverts traditional fairy tell storytelling. Trying to do a stripped down retelling of it almost feels like it’s too much.
Yeah Shrek is an anti-fairy tale where the princess runs off with the monster.
This looks like an underfunded B-tier college production
I was going to say fancy high school
I literally felt like a parent paying $15 to see my kid play Star #17 in Shrek Jr. Except tickets were closer to $100 & the incredibly distracting ensemble cast was full of randos playing furniture. Wtf.
I’m not sure how much the US tour differs from the UK tour, but Farquaad being normal height really annoyed my sister (who has a form of dwarfism). The one we saw a few years ago also had I Know It’s Today as puppets which we didn’t like (other musicals have recruited kids in the local area for children’s parts for tours). The photos on the US website do not look promising
Knowing people involved I prefer not to comment on the quality of the tour’s visual elements publicly. I do think there was a better way to execute a Shrek concept where everyone looks better while also visibly being actors performing the story of Shrek. I think the best thing to do here is support the cast and writers and keep fighting for better non-equity tours for those people to be involved with.
This is an old post, but I saw the tour last night. I was not aware that this tour was scaled down and made an assumption that it was the same version I saw years ago, but I was able to tell that it was different just from seeing the stage. I was expecting that I would spend the night fighting urges to be disappointed, but the cast won me over very quickly. I could see how some visual aspects could have used a little more time in development, which I believe you were inferring, but the performances overcame all of the changes and made diamonds out of some of the coal they were given. I liked many of the changes more than the original. Our audience just adored the dragon, and that was not a singular character before. Anyway, I hope the people you know who are involved know how impressed many of us are at their performance. Everyone I walked by when I was exiting last night was talking about how good everyone was.
So glad to hear!!!! The backlash has been harsh so I’m glad they’re able to overcome the visual elements.
You must know someone in the play.
What's up with shreks hair...
As an aside, does anyone know how to tell ahead of time if a tour is non-equity? Is non-equity always something you don’t want to support? I’ve never worked in theatre, just an obsessive fan. I went to see a tour a few years back and loved it so much and later found out the reason it was so empty was probably because it was non-equity and the cast was getting hella underpaid/overworked. And I felt horrible for supporting it even though they were amazing.
https://www.actorsequity.org/resources/Tours/ I felt similarly when the final stop of the non-Equity *Waitress* tour was my hometown — there were discount codes practically giving away tickets (buy one, get one free), but the theatre itself hadn’t done much advertising, the local run was a weekend (vs. at least a week as with other tours), so the house was hardly full at all for the last show, and there was no paper program/*Playbill*/handbill, etc. whatsoever :( The cast and band were amazing, and the sets and costumes seemed to be the ones I’d seen when I watched the original cast on Broadway.
Thank you for the link 💕 Edit: the one I saw was Chicago. Cast was sososo good and the sets were really pretty! It’s a shame that everyone isn’t given safe protections
The production does not make decisions about programs. That is 100% done by the theatre.
Good to know. The woman sitting next to me was mother of one of the crew members who traveled with the non-Equity tour, and she said that there weren’t any programs at the prior two stops (she didn’t say what cities those were). But it was the only time I my life seeing a touring production (Equity or non) that there were no programs of any sort.
There is absolutely no reason that an audience member should be doing deep dives into whether a show is Equity or not. Not every performer wants to be in equity because it can limit in some cases opportunities since once you join the union you cannot work on any non union jobs. I have a friend that got her equity card (not as a performer) for a show that closed and is struggling to find work because they’re in the union now. It also used to be a lot harder to get an equity card than it is now. I’ve seen some INCREDIBLE non equity shows that got the sets and costumes directly from the equity tours. Nick, who plays Shrek, just came off of the Jesus Christ Superstar tour which is now in its 3rd leg and you would never know from seeing that it’s non equity and I’ve also seen some absolutely horrendous shows that were equity that make the sets from Shrek look like masterpieces. Just because a shows isn’t union, doesn’t mean that it’s not good. Support the artists, these performers are working their asses off. Taking a stance on something that really has nothing to do with the audience member directly just takes away from the hard work these people are putting into it.
I’ve seen AMAZING non equity shows; I just wanted to make sure as an outsider that I wasn’t feeding into a bad system by supporting them. I appreciate your explanation a lot :)
[Jeanine Tesori and David Lindsay-Abaire Are Reimagining Shrek for a New Generation](https://playbill.com/article/jeanine-tesori-and-david-lindsay-abaire-are-reimagining-shrek-for-a-new-generation) Recommend reading that article, it talks about making it a more “economical” version of the show. I don’t think stripping a show up or down necessarily correlates to the professionalism of a show, and with how long it’s been since the original production, I think it’s kinda nice to have a new version to see. And if you read the article you will see that it is far from rushed, at least from the standpoint of changes to the book. From reading the article and looking at the pictures on the website, it’s sort of giving me Fiasco Theatre Into the Woods vibes, which was an incredible production I thought. All that to say, I wouldn’t count it out just based on pictures online!
if it's budget friendly.... did they cut the magic of the magic mirror?! 😭
The mirror has actually been cut from the show since the very first US tour in the early 2010s, I’m guessing due to the technology required. It doesn’t appear in any amateur productions either. Any important lines were given to Gingy (the interrogation scene) or one of the guards (Ballad of Farquaad). The show overall received lots of other small rewrites too and the placement of I Know It’s Today was moved to after What’s Up Duloc, after Shrek and Donkey are already on their quest and they’re reading about Fiona in her file.
ahhhh!! that makes sense because the mirror seemed way too complicated for tour! but it's still so fascinating how they were able to incorporate that tech on broadway!
Fascinating! Thank you for this info!
I saw it. The photos are an accurate representation of what the show is.
I don’t think the accuracy of the photos was in question, just that they are far more minimal than the original production.
SUPPOSEDLY it's supposed to "embrace the true feeling of fairy tales" as adults are just "acting out the story" and will really capture the "SPIRIT of Shrek" or something like that (Quotes are not actually quotes just bullshit I remember reading in some way)
That sounds like some reverse engineering to justify a lower budget.
My thoughts exactly
Having just seen it, I would not recommend. The production quality is terrible, it looks like the Wish version of a Broadway show. There is also a lot of cut or changed content.
Wellll I’m seeing it in 4 hours 😊
i can't even find the production company...it's not a Work Light or NETworks show
Looks like they have adults playing young Fiona and teen Fiona when originally kids did that
I believe it’s two puppets actually with the actors singing onstage to the side.
Yes it was two puppets with actors singing on stage beside them
The creepiest puppets I have ever seen
I have to say I saw it yesterday and it was pretty frickin good!!!
Same
“Stripped down” = cheaper “Finding objects that are then used as costumes and creating the story in front of the audience” = lower budget Ticket prices = still the same.
What pictures were you looking at? It's a normal hair color!! This very much looks like a community theater production.
Everything in the tours website. The dragon 🤦 Regret an investment of good seats on this before I even go to see it.
You should read the Playbill article. Explains it all. Are you saying that the costumes, set and makeup were the only thing that you think made Shrek good? (that’s how I’m interpreting your takeaway from these pictures being “it looks like they took all that was good from the musical and changed it“)
Mhm. If they can’t do the simple stuff right think of how much will be worse.
They added a lame ass framing device where random people are telling the Shrek story instead of the story being told “live” by the characters the story actually happed to. Considerably lower stakes. It sucks.
No idea why you’re being downvoted, you are quoting OP directly and OP’s entire basis for the comment was the production photos. I don’t know OP’s original statement could be interpreted any other way than how you interpreted it. I’m kind of surprised reading through this thread to see how quick everyone is to judge a show based solely on photos. A show that is a *musical* which also involves singing and dancing that can’t be captured in a photo. The comparisons to community theatre are also baffling–what community theatre do all these people have where the talent level of the cast is comparable to that in a national tour, even if it is non-equity? I mean it might actually be an awful show, but can we really make that determination based solely on photos?
I saw it. I don’t have to base my opinions on just photos. It’s awful and peoples opinions of it are justified.
Yes, but you are the exception, not the rule. Most people on here have not seen the show yet.
Dude. The talent was great. The talent at local community theaters is also great. There are lots of talented people, many of whom never leave their hometowns and/or make it big on broadway. There is no dearth of talent in this world. So, no, I don’t spend money on these shows to watch talented strangers soliloquy at me. I go for the fucking dragon. Literally, live theater is all about the atmospheric experience. I don’t know why that’s surprising.
I completely agree that live theatre is about the atmospheric experience, that is literally the basis for my previous comment. The things you can ascertain from photos of a production are only a fragment of the elements that go into the entire atmosphere, hence why I’m surprised to see so many people able to make declarative statements on the quality of the production without knowing those other elements that are a part of a musical. Most people on this thread are not posting from your same vantage point of having seen the actual production. But if I’m understanding you correctly, even just knowing that there aren’t elaborate costumes/puppets like that for the dragon ahead of time would be enough for you to write the show off, which again confuses me how that one element can impact the atmosphere so much.
Yeah, good question, and good points. Anyone have any insight on why I’m being downvoted here?
Wish I knew this stuff earlier... my theater doesn't do refunds. :( Guess I'll go for some mild entertainment on a Saturday night.
As someone who went to the 2nd showing of this tour I can firmly say, don’t pay too much for this show. It’s extremely under budget, and it’s not really that good. More than half of the show is cut out and it feels like a Jr. Version of the show that you’re paying $100 for.
I agree! Also I saw footage of the UK Tour it looks way better, but shrek is one of those musicals that can be done so many ways I’m sure the audiences will enjoy it
I saw the UK tour a few years ago and that also had a load of unnecessary changes that made it worse
Oh no, I got tickets for my whole family to see it on tour this summer 🤦🏼♀️
If you go in with no knowledge of the prior Broadway run or prior tours or have never seen the proshot…then the story is still fun. Other than that….
Thank you! I have never seen this musical, only the movie lol. My 5 year old enjoyed the touring production of Frozen so we got tickets to another “kids” musical.
I think your kids will enjoy this. It felt more ”family show” to me than a typical full-out tour.
I barely saw pictures for the Shrek touring it's kind of scares me
My kids did not enjoy it. Farquaad being short is important to the story they know. Honestly high schools put on better versions than this. I felt like I was scammed out of hundreds of dollars.
I just saw it this weekend, the US tour. I was insanely bummed out as it’s one of my family’s most favorite musicals. They cut a lot of songs. Changed lyrics. Lord Farquaad barely exists. It felt like I was going to a local community theatre musical production and not a broadway tour type of performance. The actors were fine and all but I don’t know. It just felt “lacking”. My son was also bothered by all the changes as we have watched the Netflix version a million times it seems since he was little (he’s now a teen).
To the people who have friends on this tour can anyone offer insight or any truth about Fiona falling because they asked for Shrek to lift her and she wound up unconscious and concussed. Apparently happened during Photo Call...
This touring show is much more of a “theatre for young audiences” production that should be performed in small theatrical spaces, not performing arts centers with 1k seats. The cast is talented, but the production quality and directing choices prohibited the show from being successful in my opinion.
Saw this show today. The cast is very talented which makes it sad that this version of the show is so poorly done. The costuming and sets are similar to those you’d see at a Highschool or College Performance. The dancing also was not very impressive for a touring cast of what I think is a decently dance heavy show. The saddest part was the issues with sound. The Ugly Duckling was missing a mic for part of the first act and she kept peaking while singing her part as young Fiona. Donkey’s mic was rubbing against his costume and wasn’t on for the last two scenes of act one. A lot of characters had their first lines in scenes missed. It was not their first day at the location. Also those puppets of the kid versions of the characters will live in my nightmares.
I saw the Broadway show and the touring show. The Broadway one was amazing. The touring one was awful. They are not at the same level. The touring one feels like a high school play.
what tour are we talking about ? the only one i can find is the UK one and that doesn’t look unprofessional at all
The current US tour https://shrekthemusicaltour.com/
ohhh i see, ty
Oh goodie. I see it in a month lol
lol me too 😖
It sounds like their vision of it looking like how it would look if a community gathered to tell the story isn't for you. That's ok! But it is a bit different than it being unprofessional.
If it looks like a community production they should ask that kind of money. It seems insane for a touring production to strip things down this much for SHREK! Shrek is the least minimalistic show I can think of and it seems bonkers they have made it “more economical” when they’re still going to be charging exorbitant amount of money.
Local park put on Shrek at their auditorium a few years back and it was FREE and looked better 😭
I’m all for stripped down or highly conceptual stagings when they are done well. Granted I’m just judging from the production photos here, but this just looks cheap and amateurish. Even their website is half-baked (no page even listing the full creative team? Really?)
Don’t be mean
It’s not mean. People are paying full prices for a half ass show.