573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Jun 14, 2016 10:57:55 GMT
It's a film that seems to be apologizing for being a musical, not celebrating one of the greatest musical ever written. A disaster. True, that is the problem with most adaptations. It is like they are apologizing for being a musical. Which makes it very uncomfortable. I guess it goes wrong from the start by hiring a screenwriter that does not understand the essence of musical on film. How important the singing is and how important it is to adjust the cinematography to that. It should be a triumph of the fantasy. Not a normal film. Sung dialogue can be used in so many more ways than just the uncomfortable "speaking 4 words and use vibrato on the 5th, but at least it feels less uncomfortable for the actor that way with the current standard screenplay" attitude. Because then you create a product that is uncomfortable for the audience. Because it has a style-clash. I don't want to see actors or screenwriters apologizing for singing. I want them to embrace it and to embrace extensive cinematography too. They did not embrace either of these things in Les Mis and Sweeney Todd. |
|
4,171 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Jun 14, 2016 17:48:58 GMT
I for one am the first to jump in line to embrace and support the process of committing a musical to celluloid because I subscribe to the theory that if you make one musical film, the studio bosses will fork out the money to make another.
I also believe that anything that is going to promote musicals and put them in the forefront of the general public and expose them to the wider public who may not have attended one in the past can't be a bad thing.
That said, for varying reasons I have been impressed with the current batch of film musicals; Chicago, so dynamic! Sunshine on Leith, exposed me to a whole batch of Proclaimers songs that I was unaware of, Mamma Mia!- everyone has an opinion but lots of fun, The Last 5 Years- Thank God! someone committed this to film; Hairspray- at first I thought that Michelle Phieffer and Queen Latiffa were terrible miscast however they have not grown on me and there's no doubt that James Marsden was one of the best things in it, Sweeney Todd, Into the Woods, Les Miserables, DreamGirls, Rent, the Phantom of the Opera, The Producers, Evita, London Road... I could go on.
But the one that stands out for me as being (arguably) the worst and the one that I feel most aggrieved by is Nine.
What a train wreck that was. The storyline was so modified the songs tat ere included were incoherent. The whole second half of the stage show what cut.
Every musical has a song. That one song that instantly makes people recognise "Oh, that's from that show". If the show is really successful, the may possibly be a second, third or even a fourth.
Given that, how can 'the song' from the show Be On Your Own be cut?
Actually, such is my anger, frustration and sheer disappointment over this that I'm no longer going to keep typing......
Urgghhh!
|
|
|
|
Post by crabtree on Jun 14, 2016 19:04:46 GMT
I guess it is all about trying to find the visual language that allows the songs to burst forth - so many films go for the literal approach, assuming that film has to be literal. Cabaret was a huge success for finding a context for the songs. One of my favourite films is The Boyfriend.
|
|
573 posts
|
Post by Dave25 on Jun 15, 2016 23:17:20 GMT
I guess it is all about trying to find the visual language that allows the songs to burst forth - so many films go for the literal approach, assuming that film has to be literal. This. It is unbelievable that directors, producers and filmmakers do not understand this. This artform on screen is not literal but about sung thoughts, a triumph of the fantasy. What they often seem to do now is tone the music and singing down to match the standard literal visuals and approach. Preferably with a lot of switching between speaking and singing in 1 sentence. Which makes a sudden sung note after 4 spoken words extremely awkward and uncomfortable. What they should do is match the visual language to the singing. Let the music lead the story and then paint it in with cinematography. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2016 9:51:21 GMT
I liked the Evita movie because it was a good example of a successful movie that didn't jar too much with the musical aspect.
Then I saw the show again and now I can't watch the film without being made painfully aware of how completely unequipped Madonna is to sing the score.
I quite liked the Sweeney Todd movie too; it managed to strike a middle ground where it was recognisably a Stephen Sondheim musical but also recognisably a Tim Burton movie. Shame the singing couldn't match up to the glorious orchestra - it doesn't bother me as much as it clearly bothers others, but I do acknowledge it as a proper shame.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicholas on Jun 18, 2016 1:22:26 GMT
It’s not an adaptation, but I’ve always thought New York, New York is a truly amazing film. I think what Scorsese evokes is the style of musical that would have evolved had musicals never gone out of fashion: not a 1950s musical in a 1970s world per se, but a 1950s musical after 20 years of political and social change, stylistically true to its roots and thematically true to its era. It’s not pastiche and it’s not post-modern, but it’s not a tribute and it’s not a recreation, and I think that confused people and its lack of success did it in; it must be ripe time for a reappraisal. In a post-Watergate, post-Vietnam, post-Summer-of-Love world of darker, less confident, more morally ambiguous movies, it’s the movie musical of its decade, daring to go to the unsatisfactory, unpleasant and morally grey areas of Coppola and De Palma and, well, Scorsese, but still preserve the sing-song stylings of Gene Kelly or Vincente Minelli, and I think making a great movie. It’s not perfect (it’s no King of Comedy, Scorsese’s absolute peak), but I much prefer it to, say, Mean Streets, and I think it’s a fascinating, wonderful and successful anomaly in the history of the medium. And Liza! But the world goes round...
And another shout to Sunshine on Leith, not just a lovely movie, not just Peter Mullan singing (!), but a really strong and genuinely heartfelt book around the Proclaimers numbers. |
|
