573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 3, 2019 13:10:53 GMT
Labour will organize a people's vote after coming up with any deal, Tories will do everything to prevent that because they know the don't have a majority. That's a big difference.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 3, 2019 8:55:03 GMT
It is very simple. The better Labour does, the worse for Brexit. The worse Labour does, the better for Brexit. I am not making a party point but a psephological one.
All the Leave votes go to Johnson. Remain vote is split.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 1, 2019 19:11:33 GMT
Women are ruining the arts? Seriously? Well, it's an interaction, but if you look at the bigger picture, people like that are ruining the arts yes. Which results in producers actually hiring the wrong people, which results in audiences only neighing when they see the guy from tv and never realizing the quality that could have been. It's an interaction. A downward spiral.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 1, 2019 19:07:51 GMT
I think it has more to do with the funny, amiable personality in interviews that appeals to housewives. That's often the case in the crossover world and mainstream area. In any case it's not about quality or suitability. I would have hoped that Cammack had more respect for his legacy and productions.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 1, 2019 18:46:11 GMT
I think that Cammack seriously underestimates the brand that Les Mis is. This is not a project to gratify some neighing British housewives, but this is a document for theatre history. A filmed version is supposed to have a long life. It should still sell 5/10/20 years from now. This is supposed to be a worldwide document. It is also hugely disrespectful to have such a big gap in quality and to not care about it. JOJ's performance might be one of the greatest in theatre history and what do we get? A one trick pony, a volatile domestic showbizz hype, who doesn't give the material, the notes, the writing or the music ANY nuance/color/emotion that is so very much needed for this part, who sings the whole show on 1 volume, in my humble opinion he sounds like a frog with a chastity belt, who has ruined a concert recording of the same material already..... What will people think in 100 years from now? Let’s face it, Alfie Boe has (for a certain type of woman and man) a sex appeal that JOJ does not. It’s not really about the acting or the voice for those folks, it’s the sex factor. After seeing AB live now I don’t get the appeal personally, but each to their own eh. It's a pity these women think with their ...... only. It's amazing how men are being treated as sex objects these days, and how it's socially accepted. Last week I saw a clip of a girl being arrested by a cop. Thousands of comments of women who wish they were in her shoes and grabbed by that cop. Not 1 comment from a man who wished he could grab that girl. And if there had been one, it would have been drama and hue and cry. Last summer, a friend of mine (actor) went to a ladies night movie premiere. He was taking pictures with housewives and they were squeezing him in the butt while taking pictures. He laughed it off (this is what society clearly expects of men nowadays) but afterwards he said: Isn't this weird? What if it had been the other way around and multiple men squeezed an actress' ass? This is to show the double standards and how women are ruining the arts. I am not easily offended and I always take care of situations myself in which others would probably make reports, call cops or dive into the victim role, but I just can't stand double standards in real life and even more so when it ruins the arts. Ps. I would choose JOJ over AB in all aspects.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 1, 2019 14:36:49 GMT
What I'm concerned about is that the general public isn't intelligent enough for tactical voting, whatever the political preference. Studies show that it's a very complicated process and that people tend to believe and convince themselves that their first preference will succeed because it's what they hope for but that does not necessarily translate to reality and it seems very difficult to actually go for the tactical vote in the end, it's human nature.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 1, 2019 12:58:16 GMT
I think that Cammack seriously underestimates the brand that Les Mis is. This is not a project to gratify some neighing British housewives, but this is a document for theatre history. A filmed version is supposed to have a long life. It should still sell 5/10/20 years from now. This is supposed to be a worldwide document.
It is also hugely disrespectful to have such a big gap in quality and to not care about it. JOJ's performance might be one of the greatest in theatre history and what do we get? A one trick pony, a volatile domestic showbizz hype, who doesn't give the material, the notes, the writing or the music ANY nuance/color/emotion that is so very much needed for this part, who sings the whole show on 1 volume, in my humble opinion he sounds like a frog with a chastity belt, who has ruined a concert recording of the same material already.....
What will people think in 100 years from now?
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Nov 1, 2019 9:35:54 GMT
So will the december 2nd show be broadcast live or the filmed shows from yesterday?
I pray to god that the camera's were still rolling yesterday when JOJ was on. Even if it's only for a technical rehearsal recording, just as they did with Jekyll & Hyde back in the day, there are 2 recordings now, one with David Hasselhof and one with Rob Evan.
So what would happen if AB is sick during the recordings (as he was now) or sick again on december 2nd (which is possible)? Is there a chance that JOJ will feature in the recording then? I mean, people are replaced all the time last minute, look at Cosette in the 25th anniversary concert or Carlotta in Phantom 25th.
If JOJ is in it I will definitely go to the cinema and buy the dvd/blu ray. If Alfie is in it again, I will definitely not. I find the 25th concert dvd completely unwatchable because of it. He performs like a wet newspaper and sang like a 1 trick pony. Why on earth would I spend money on that again? This could be the chance to have a good Les Mis recording after the 10th anniversary one.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 31, 2019 21:21:57 GMT
This HAS to be filmed with John Owen Jones. That would make it a true gem for generations to come. Please do not film this with Boe again, he is already on the 25th anniversary filmed version and this would add nothing to this recording and to the quality of the show for that matter.
|
|
573 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 30, 2019 9:17:07 GMT
Post by Dave25 on Oct 30, 2019 9:17:07 GMT
I agree that most people will vote with just Brexit in mind, but I'm worried that the remain votes will be completely split between Labour and Lib Dems, and therefore the Conservatives win a majority in parliament and push through the Brexit the actual majority of the country does not want. What would be the best way to vote for remainers?
I know the leave votes are split too between Conservatives and Brexit party, but I fear that has less impact as the conservatives will get a majority government anyway.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 24, 2019 21:27:27 GMT
The music is fantastic, but the spoken scenes in between are not very well written (and acted). I wish it would be sung through. That would lift this show to another level I think.
|
|
573 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 20, 2019 22:44:56 GMT
Post by Dave25 on Oct 20, 2019 22:44:56 GMT
I think there is a difference between a 2nd referendum and a confirmatory vote between any deal and remain.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 19, 2019 18:43:57 GMT
I am confused by some of the criticism. It's not billing itself as an acting masterclass. If you buy tickets to hear them sing, which is essentially what this production is, them singing, then I can't see you have any cause for complaint when they do just that. Singing is storytelling through notes. Which means that little colors and nuances in notes tell stories and convey emotions. This has nothing to do with acting in spite of song, over-acting every word on top of the notes (Hugh Jackman), or singing everything with a standard opera technique on 1 volume (Alfie Boe). This is a very delicate art and all about paining with colors, textures and nuances. For example one long soft note can convey 4 different colors and emotions if done right. People vastly underestimate this artform. There are singers who turn into the beste actors in the world while simply singing a song, without over-acting or exaggerating one word. People mistakenly think that "acting in spite of song" has anything to do with "acting through song".
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 18, 2019 12:57:15 GMT
And Hugh Hackman’s bring him home was the worst rendition I’ve heard from a professional actor. He might as well had had sung through his nose it sounded so nasally. Worse than any of Russel Crowe’s singing I’d say I agree. I think this film is a showcase of actors struggling with the material, and some of them try to pass it off as a struggle with the story line, by the use of crying.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 18, 2019 9:47:11 GMT
I think that's also my issue with the film (Anne Hathaway aside) If they'd cast "proper" musical theatre actors in the leads it would have been so much better. I have had many discussions about this with people. I totally agree that they should have cast "natural" singers, which naturally "act through song" instead of "in spite of song". And yes, often "proper" musical theatre actors can do that because they understand and master this language of acting through notes. Some people then said: "But this is film, not Broadway." That argument makes me angry. Because approaching this artform and language in a natural way works best on both film AND stage. What they do in the film is embarrassing. They speak 4 words, and then use a 5 second vibrato on the 5th word. They separate acted words from notes. Which makes it feel extremely broadway parody and insincere and embarrassing. Acting in spite of song. And then still sing a note. In the film Hugh Jackman speaks: "Now....come on....ladies...settle......and then he uses a 5 second forced fake Broadway vibrato on the word "dooooooooooooown". That is Broadway parody on not filmic and not natural. Every stage Valjean I have seen, and also in the ON SCREEN versions of both the 10th and 25th anniversary concerts this is much more natural, because both Valjeans (even Alfie Boe) are more filmic and natural than Hugh Jackman, and sing the line very natturally "now come on ladies, settle down (and they both keep the word "down" short, which is essential for that line to make it feel natural). Acting out every word on top of the note you hear is like children's theatre/pantomime and this over-acting/exaggeration ruins the material. It's double up. The material is already written like that for a reason and disrespecting that and acting in spite of song and over-acting is by no means the solution. About Anne Hathaway.....the only reason her scene somewhat worked is because she was crying her way through it. Using crying to apologize for non-singing always works, because crying revokes that per definition. If I see a stranger cry in the street I tend to cry too. For every other emotion and scene in the film it does not work. That's why the film is an unwatchable self-pitying crying drab. And still the notes don't make sense. It's just a showcase of "why the hell is she attempting singing at all between a sniff and an over-acted word".
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 18, 2019 9:30:09 GMT
As much as I like John Owen Jones, I'm fairly sure the run wouldn't have sold as fast at inflated prices if they had been cast in the roles full-time.
This is an interesting given, and it makes me think what actually makes a "name" or a "star"? It is definitely not about quality or talent. So what is it? Is it being quirkier or funnier in interviews? Are some actors too serious about their craft and not funny/amiable enough in the media? Which makes the fangirls/housewives less engaged? Is this ruining the quality of productions? Questions, questions.....
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 18, 2019 9:26:13 GMT
I don't know if he could've reached the current level had he always paired with his chum who should not have been cast in the first place simply because he is a singer and not an actor. JVJ is a role a beautiful voice alone isn't enough to do justice. Very well said, it's an interaction and I would also like to add that AB's singing is subpar for the role. AB sings the whole show, an I mean every note of the show on the same, even volume. There is no coloring of the notes, no nuances, no different intonations. 1 trick, 1 technique, 1 volume for every note. So it's not only the lack of acting that doesn't do it justice.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Oct 17, 2019 8:58:01 GMT
JOJ is brilliant at marrying the vocals with the acting. I think this is because he understands that the notes work as actors too and dares to let them flow. He does not over-act every note on top of the singing too. This is what Hugh Jackman does, he disrespects the material, by separating the acting from the singing and switches all the time (even 4 times in 1 line) and that is acting in spite of song and makes it very insincere, almost like a parody. I wish JOJ would have been in the film, it would have been much more natural and sincere. It is all about understanding the essence of this artform and language.
|
|
573 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 4, 2019 22:24:57 GMT
Post by Dave25 on Oct 4, 2019 22:24:57 GMT
I mean "anti brexit parties" are divided.
|
|
573 posts
|
Brexit
Oct 4, 2019 21:14:02 GMT
Post by Dave25 on Oct 4, 2019 21:14:02 GMT
So what happens next? Will Boris ask for an extension of 1 day? Or will there be a 3 month extension, elections next month and won by him and a no-deal Brexit next month with his newly chosen majority party? Because pro-Brexit parties are still very much divided/scattered.
|
|
573 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 26, 2019 15:03:02 GMT
Post by Dave25 on Sept 26, 2019 15:03:02 GMT
Thanks, Yes, I understand that. My fear is just that a general election after the October 31st is just as dangerous. Maybe even more.
Hopefully new bills/acts will be introduced indeed. A Government of unity for the next 6 weeks sounds interesting too.
|
|
573 posts
|
Brexit
Sept 26, 2019 14:24:22 GMT
Post by Dave25 on Sept 26, 2019 14:24:22 GMT
I have a question about the situation.
Boris Johnson is still threatening with a no-deal Brexit. In the meantime, he is hoping for a deal and trying to convince people that a general election should take place right now.
Now, the new bill says that Johnson is required to request a three-month Brexit delay by 19 October. So isn't a no-deal on October 31st per definition off the table?
Because there are only 2 scenarios in which Mr Johnson would not have to request an extension: 1. MPs approve a Brexit deal in another meaningful vote (which means deal instead of no deal) 2. MPs vote in favour of leaving the EU without a deal (which will not happen) In either of these scenarios, Mr Benn's law would not force any Brexit extension to be requested.
The only other option would be ignoring the law again, which would make Johnson a repeat offender. Which would have legal consequences and he would definitely not be eligible anymore in new elections.
So basically, why is the opposition still being held hostage with this "no-deal threat"? Because it seems to me that Johnson doesn't have that power anymore.
If they accept to be held hostage by this false threat, and there are no consequences at all implemented after him breaking the law last week, he might ask for the extension (as the bill says), and then have new elections and win and then push through whatever he wants the next month/after October 31st anyway.
My point is that the opposition is in power now. There is no thinkable scenario for a no-deal Brexit on October 31st, is there? If there is, can someone explain it to me? I am trying to understand why the opposition is still so worried about a no-deal on October 31st while that is already impossible, and says it wants elections after that date, but the real danger lies in having elections after that date. There should be no elections before Brexit is off the table, because opposition parties (and remain voters) are while in fact probably in the majority now, scattered. In my opinion that is wrong and dangerous to mix this debacle with general elections. Because if Johnson walks that route, he may be in the position to crash out with no-deal in January. In my opinion MP's must reject every deal, if there is no option for remain involved. Because otherwise it might end up with no-deal in january and we must be protected from that.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Sept 26, 2019 8:10:22 GMT
JOJ was so genuinely JVJ. He meant every single note and word, and listening to his singing was like having melted gold poured into my ears. Having a JVJ of this standard must surely be having a positive impact on the entire cast, especially as they remain on stage and can hear him sing. Everyone would want to up their games. Well said, I'm glad that more people recognize the genius that is JOJ. He really masters the delicate artform of acting in song. He uses the whole palette from soft silk to strong platinum, and everything in between. It really is like a painting, very fine art. He knows that some notes work as actors themselves so he dares to let them flow. Therefore he never "over-emotes" (such as the complete travesty that was Hugh Jackman, over-emoting every syllable which makes it double up and just funny and tiresome and it separates the acting from the notes which makes it look and sound like a cheap broadway parody. He has no clue about which notes to cut short or which notes to hold longer or what impact the written notes already have, or how to combine actual notes with acting, that is acting in spite of song, constantly switching (even in 1 line at times) and forcing the audience to do the same, which is not how this material is written). With JOJ it always feels natural. Because his singing is natural. And therefore his acting through song becomes natural. That works best on both stage and screen. JOJ's performance is incredibly filmic, refined and real. I am baffled that he is not promoted as the lead in this production. The difference between him and Alfie Boe in mastering the craft is gigantic.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Aug 11, 2019 12:54:13 GMT
Thanks for your reactions and insights!
"miss hearing the interplay between the strings and reeds so clearly"
I completely agree with this, that interplay is what gives me goosebumps in that scene.
"What a song the title song. The progressive key changes are adrenaline inducing."
Including the key changes, well said, thank you. Adrenaline inducing indeed.
"ALW seems to think adding in electric guitar to his shows makes him cool and up to date, when it often dates the shows"
It does indeed feel dated because of it, while the version I posted feels much more timeless.
It really is a shame, because aside from the dated feel, I think the scene is the climax of act one and this electric guitar distracts from the chords and makes the scene much more generic to me and I believe it takes audiences out of the right feel. The chords and key changes and intensity it takes away from are much more haunting.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Aug 10, 2019 23:55:37 GMT
Today I was watching some older clips of this show and I noticed how beautiful and haunting the original cadenza of the title song was, without the electric guitar. The newly added guitar is quite distracting from the moment and makes it sound cheaper to me. I also don't understand the intention, was it to make it more modern? The original is more modern/timeless to me and the electric guitar makes it sound more passe and it gives an 80's bold and the beautiful vibe.
Here is an example of how it used to be:
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Aug 10, 2019 23:42:21 GMT
Is the most beautiful part of the show in this production?
"I will pay what I must pay To take Cosette away. There is a duty I must heed There is a promise I have made For I was blind to one in need I did not see what stood before me Now her mother is with God Fantine's suffering is over And I speak here with her voice And I stand here in her place
And from this day and evermore Cosette shall live in my protection I shall not forget my vow Cosette shall have a father now"
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Jul 19, 2019 9:33:00 GMT
The faces are just the actors' faces on cat heads. There are no feline features. I think that's why they look creepy. Yes, that's what I was trying to say, human faces and bodies looking like they are dressed up as cats.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Jul 19, 2019 9:28:03 GMT
I think Tom Hooper stepped into the pitfall of too realistic choices once again and while he might think that something like Cats would prove the opposite, it does not.
This art form is all about fantasy, sung thoughts and a non-literal world per definition. Sung sequences should never be treated as literal (Les Mis) but more like Moulin Rouge, Rocketman, Chicago, Evita etc. Scenes with humans work beautifully that way, because it takes you on a journey in the character's mind, experience and emotions. The scenes have no limits because anything can happen in a character's mind and it is often bigger than real life. For example in Rocketman, where young Elton dreams of conducting a big orchestra and suddenly it happens. The swimming pool scene, the bar scene where the people float, all beautiful sung thoughts. The definition of this art form. The music is an actor. Or in Evita, the whole "The lady's got potential" scene, fantastic storytelling and sung thoughts. When they make a Miss Saigon film in the future, I truly hope they understand this, so that Last night of the world is romantic, bigger than life, warm, because that is how it was in their minds, and not in a cold, empty concrete room with a crate of beer and a spiders web. Same goes for "This is the hour", they should not be afraid to show Kim in a big black space with a choir of ghosts after she shoots Thuy, because her world ends in that moment, instead of her standing between a clothes line and a bin and looking for the photo-realism.
Cats is not about humans, but about cats. So the only way this works on feature film is to go all the way in. Create a fantasy world, more like animation, but definitely not photo realistic animation (so no real looking cats), but also definitely not characters that look like humans in a suit. And they chose the latter. In many scenes it looks like the suits of the characters in a theme park. It might be cgi, but it looks like a human face and body in a suit, dressed up.
The 2 biggest pitfalls here were either too realistically animated animals, because then it would be very silly if they speak like humans and dance (lion king) or too realistically looking humans who look like they are dressed up in cat suits. (Which they chose). And I don't think the public is going to buy it.
I feel that "Cats" in general was a terrible thing to choose. Especially for Tom Hooper. I knew his urge for too realistic animals or too realistic humans looking dressed up as cats would be too high.
Fact is, in this art form on film, realistic emotions lie in other things.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Jul 17, 2019 18:50:17 GMT
Has anyone notice this is now being branded as "Les Miserables - for the 21st century". Cringe. Perhaps they should all be crawling round the barricade taking selfies and doing that weird pose with one leg cocked out. Bizarre marketing. To what century did the past 19 years belong in Cameron's mind?
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Jul 16, 2019 21:04:47 GMT
He gave us like an impromptu 2-minute class on performing emotion through song, which was amusing and very kind. Now you make me curious about what his idea of "emotion through song" was. It's a subject I am very interested in, and I notice that many performers have different views on this. Was he more of the "I act out every word on top of the singing, so everything is doubly over-emoted and extra tiresome but I have the feeling I act extra well"? Or was he more of the "I understand the artform of sung thoughts and that the notes naturally work as actors already too so there's no need to act out every word on top of it by over-emoting, speaking, crying or yelling"? Just curious
|
|