top of page

Anastasia the Musical: From Screenplay to Stage Door (Pt. 1)

  • Lauren Elise Funaro
  • Nov 29, 2017
  • 5 min read

Updated: Feb 20, 2020


Today the film is celebrating its twenty year anniversary, and yet Anastasia has only recently taken Broadway by storm. In honor of this occasion, here is an in depth look at the transition from animated classic to onstage smash.

Anastasia, FOX Animation Studios, Movie Promo,

Original Promo for 1997's Anastasia

[Spoilerish Article... Most Spoilers will be in Part 2]

The animated classic Anastasia, arrived as FOX Animation Studios' response to the "Disney Renaissance" of the 1990s. (From The Little Mermaid to Mulan, these are the movies you binge watched as a kid.) Directed by Don Bluth and Gary Goldman, former Disney Animation figureheads, the movie took the plot from Fox's 1956 film of the same name, and dipped it in glitter left by every formulaic Disney production. The story, based on the very real and devastating assassinations of the Romanov family and rumors of one daughter's escape, became something else entirely. The cartoon features a big eyed princess, catchy music, a likable hero, mystical villain, and even a cute fun-sized sidekick for comic relief-- Rasputin's bat as a less obnoxious incarnation of Aladdin's Iago.

But the main thematic elements, and inevitable similarities between Anastasia and literally any other Disney film of the time, is the royal love story, and of course, a touch of magic (ie: Pixie Dust). Anastasia arrived with every last sprinkle stuffed in its arsenal. And it worked-- we got a movie that successfully mimicked Disney's best. So much so that some fans will swear on their grandma's grave it IS Disney. (It's not, I promise.) The film owes much of its exposure to this confusion, but there were other key factors-- a star studded cast, captivating musical score, and the pleasant surprise of it being a decent movie.

"Grandma, it's me. Anastasia"

Still, a beloved childhood cartoon, even an Oscar nominated one, is not an automatic Broadway smash, especially two decades after the film's release. For example, it's yet to happen for Hunchback of Notre Dame, which is arguably the greatest Disney Classic of modern times, but that's a tragedy for another day. Really, this poses a question: why now? The answer for FOX is the same as in the 90s: Disney's doing it, along with several other films, so why not? But for Lynn Ahrens and Stephen Flaherty, who co-wrote music for the animated classic, it was a long awaited dream. Even then, they had a vision of the legend that just didn't fit with that sure-fire Disney formula. So they dug up Rasputin and gave him a bat pal, and the bat pal got his own sequel, and they'd created a franchise.

Ahrens and Flaherty openly discussed their desire to fully develop the story in its move to Broadway. Becoming a stage production required dissection and conversion. They had to figure out what fit and didn't, determine tone, and develop a lengthier plot, all while remembering their audience would likely be made up of fans of the original movie, who'd serve as their harshest critics. They, along with playwright Terrence Mcnally, had three options. To articulate these choices, I'm going to compare Anastasia with popular Disney adaptations (older ones, since I've not yet seen the more recent Frozen and Aladdin productions). I do this because they are the only comparable medium of the time, and, arguably, Anastasia of 1997 would not exist without those Disney classics.

1) Transplant the movie

This uses puppetry and staging to pull off the more fantastical elements and is very similar in tone, character, costume, and set design to the original film. Doing this usually means adding "filler" songs to fulfill length requirements-- most often elaborate dance sequences that are really fun but do little to flesh out the original script. Beauty and the Beast on Broadway is a near carbon copy of the original, with colorful costumes and a walking teapot. It is fun and nostalgic with pointed references to itself, but other than revealing the Beast's illiteracy (this is in the Broadway production, not the 2016 movie remake), and adjusting the curse's logic to "explain, for example, a 6-foot-tall candelabra," like screenwriter turned playwright, Linda Woolverton explained in an interview in '93, it's hardly a stretch from the animated movie.

The Little Mermaid did something similar, infusing fluff into every chord. The show is visually dynamic, with creative choreography that blends rhythm with wheeled shoes (think the heelies your mom never let you get) to simulate under water movement. Still, the story feels saccharine, a gooier, flashier dose of that Disney treatment. We already have the villain, the ingénue, and the hunky guy. Do we really need a subplot where Flounder (Ariel's fish friend to Anastasia's loveable pup) has a crush on Ariel? Or a dance sequence featuring Scuttle and his tap dancing seagull friends?

2) Make a Metaphor

Elements like tone and character shift from literal to representative. This is a stylized simulation rather than actual interpretation of the original film. The Lion King on stage uses several languages (Swahili, Zulu, Sotho,Tswana, Congolese and Xhosa), additional music, and costumes to unite the movie with the expanses of Africa, creating an allegory reminiscent of African folktales and their long oral history. Costumes and the set are purposefully transparent; you always see the hand holding the puppet. It's a beautiful and transformative interpretation, taking a movie about a lion finding his path and creating a legend. The tone shifts easily from lighthearted to impactful. Motion and color scheme reflect character development. This falls slightly short with Timon and Pumbaa, two characters that worked well in a cartoon but couldn't really survive the stylistic alterations. Still, they make you laugh and are easily forgotten at the next scene change.

Off Broadway, Hunchback took its own film to task. The Paper Mill playhouse, and subsequent productions, created a darker, more speculative story. Where the 1997 movie ends with a lovable Quasimodo carried off by a stream of adoring townsfolk, the stage show ponders the question "What makes a monster and what makes a man?" and it's implications. Being based on a novel, this made the easy transition into allegory. The actor portraying Quasimodo "transforms" into his character in an impactful stage transition, and omniscient figures voice his internal strife. Frollo is vindicated, changed from the monstrous villain of the cartoon into a complex character. Unlike Lion King, Hunchback nixes its fun sidekicks completely, and what the play lacks in gargoyle jokes it makes up for in tonal consistency.

3) Root in Reality

history, Tsar, Romanov, Anastasia, Review

Tsar Nicholas II and his family.

Now, here's the thing. While countless Disney productions make it to Broadway, none of them have dealt with the unique challenge of portraying actual people. This is because Disney often revels in fairytale, and tends to dunk itself headfirst into insensitive and problematic storytelling when it ventures into history (anyone see Pocahontas?) Now, FOX's Anastasia was based loosely on fact, but the Romanov's absolutely existed. They were absolutely murdered. To shower all of this in spectacle would be tone-deaf, and to make a metaphor out of such a tumultuous time, would ruin its integrity. The complexities behind the Russian Revolution and Communist Regime never made the cut the first time around, but they are the foundation the story survives on. The best way to portray a legend based on real individuals is to dig into the history and figure out where your story fits.

But, in veering from childhood fantasy to historical fiction, would Anastasia writers isolate their audience? The fact remains that, regardless of original intent, we all quoted and sang along to a fantastical and lighthearted romp with a spunky heroine, straight up evil (and oddly undead) bad guy, and some "Fun New Friends" (insert talking bat and puppy, copyright FOX Animation Studios). The writers had a delicate wire to balance on, faced with the nearly impossible task of producing something with the same vibrancy of the movie we loved while delving into its bleak history. So, did the writers pull it off? Was the "Journey to Broadway" successful? I suppose you'll have to stick around for Part 2!

Comments


© Inkwell Spill Lauren E. Funaro 2020

Proudly created with Wix.com

  • Instagram
  • Grey Facebook Icon
  • Grey Twitter Icon
bottom of page