2,015 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Oct 7, 2021 19:03:14 GMT
In a way glad, because I wouldn't want to see it done with La Close. At this stage of the game it comes across an a vanity project on her part (given she out-aged the role long ago)
|
|
2,015 posts
|
Post by distantcousin on Oct 7, 2021 19:04:58 GMT
Just to make the point that this is another “ALW says” situation (assuming the report is true) and we all know what a prize bullsh*tter he is. Difficult to see why he would say this if not true but …
It's not so much of a "report" - it's a direct quote from an extensive interview he gave to Variety two days ago.
|
|
623 posts
|
Post by chernjam on Oct 7, 2021 20:35:18 GMT
I've been intrigued with what these scripts looked like, how they wanted to translate a movie turned musical back into a movie musical - but have been frustrated for years that they didn't simply rebuild the original napier sets, get a huge venue (Radio City Music Hall) with a few thousand rabid fans and a symphonic orchestra - do five performances (one without an audience) and create something ala Love Never Dies to end this already
|
|
|
|
Post by max on Oct 7, 2021 21:21:12 GMT
I've been intrigued with what these scripts looked like, how they wanted to translate a movie turned musical back into a movie musical - but have been frustrated for years that they didn't simply rebuild the original napier sets, get a huge venue (Radio City Music Hall) with a few thousand rabid fans and a symphonic orchestra - do five performances (one without an audience) and create something ala Love Never Dies to end this already This is the way to go - if Paramount will allow this. I don't see why they wouldn't. |
|
211 posts
|
Post by justsaying113 on Oct 8, 2021 21:09:13 GMT
GC is too old and, in cinematic box office terms, means very little these days - especially in a musical (which I love) but was not a rip-roaring commercial success here or on Broadway. This, if ever it was going to be made, should have been done so years ago with Streisand: a global star with unfailing commercial appeal. She, sadly, is also now too old.
Good on Paramount. If it feels it shouldn't be made then it should stick to its guns and - one suspects - the wishes and/or instructions of the Billy Wilder estate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2021 10:19:46 GMT
Streisand should have made Sunset and Gypsy movies twenty years ago.
|
|
7,175 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Jon on Oct 9, 2021 10:50:25 GMT
I wouldn't be surprised if Paramount got cold feet over Sunset due to the failure of Cats.
|
|
594 posts
|
Post by og on Oct 9, 2021 12:10:30 GMT
I wouldn't be surprised if Paramount got cold feet over Sunset due to the failure of Cats. 100% a key factor. They'll probably hold off til ALW's obit is posted, once they're completely confident he's unable to intervene artistically or otherwise. Realistically not that long in the bigger picture and can push it on the 'in memoriam' aspect. |
|
|
|
Post by dan28 on Oct 10, 2021 9:00:02 GMT
They'll probably hold off til ALW's obit is posted, once they're completely confident he's unable to intervene artistically or otherwise. Realistically not that long in the bigger picture and can push it on the 'in memoriam' aspect. I think that the lack of intervention of people who understand this artform is what really harms these artforms on film. The previous Cats movie (a real movie with pre recorded tracks and using sets just like the new one) actually works really well and sounds terrific, thanks to Andrew, who demanded some tracks to be re-recorded because they were not up to par yet. It's all about lack of understanding this language and artform on film. Current movie makers tone down the language of sung thoughts, which is the essence of the artform and why it works, ad they tone up the realistic aspect, which clashes ernormously with the material per definition. It should be the other way around, embracing the sung thoughts and take it to the next level and tone down the realistic aspect. Even Andrew is emotionally damaged over the second Cats movie: www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/andrew-lloyd-webber-cats-dog-b1933850.html?utm_content=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0BMJ2_3A-UBTDIBhP945f7WOpQRjmyw_B7Esiy7429_aHl38SbMbcMNIE#Echobox=1633595576 |
|
|
|
Post by hairspray57 on Oct 10, 2021 9:13:37 GMT
The first Cats movie is really a filmed performances without an audience.
|
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Oct 10, 2021 9:50:56 GMT
It's all about lack of understanding this language and artform on film. Current movie makers tone down the language of sung thoughts, which is the essence of the artform and why it works, ad they tone up the realistic aspect, which clashes ernormously with the material per definition. It should be the other way around, embracing the sung thoughts and take it to the next level and tone down the realistic aspect. Exactly why I think the In The Heights movie is so perfect. When you’ve got people dancing on a vertical wall, and wig stands in hair salon bopping along to a song, you know the director knows how to film a musical. |
|
|
|
Post by dan28 on Oct 10, 2021 11:11:13 GMT
The first Cats movie is really a filmed performances without an audience. That's not really true, it is actually treated as real film on a set. Pre-recorded tracks, shot everything with separate camera's in separate takes. If anything, the 2nd Cats movie or something like Les Miserables is much more like a filmed live performance (with live singing on set), which clashes with the realistic aspect. To avoid the literal aspect on film on location, you really have to embrace the art of sung thoughts. Pre-recorded tracks are very helpful with this, and it's not even necessary to see the actors mouthing each word. They do a great job at this in for example the original Beauty and the Beast movie, in "Something there" you just hear their sung thoughts while they are speaking and doing other things. Unfortunately in the live action version they fell into this pitfall and there you have both actors mouthing the whole song and seeing nothing else. |
|
594 posts
|
Post by og on Oct 10, 2021 13:17:28 GMT
The first Cats movie is really a filmed performances without an audience. That's not really true, it is actually treated as real film on a set. Pre-recorded tracks, shot everything with separate camera's in separate takes. If anything, the 2nd Cats movie or something like Les Miserables is much more like a filmed live performance (with live singing on set), which clashes with the realistic aspect. To avoid the literal aspect on film on location, you really have to embrace the art of sung thoughts. Pre-recorded tracks are very helpful with this, and it's not even necessary to see the actors mouthing each word. They do a great job at this in for example the original Beauty and the Beast movie, in "Something there" you just hear their sung thoughts while they are speaking and doing other things. Unfortunately in the live action version they fell into this pitfall and there you have both actors mouthing the whole song and seeing nothing else. Sorry, this is false. Correct they recorded the vocals first, but the majority of it was a multi-cam shoot across 2 full run-throughs at the Adelphi. They then spent the rest of the shoot picking up any close-ups required with on stage steady-cam. Also, Les Mis & Cats(2) were live sung on set (after having tracked in pre-production) but then also overdubbed in post, so they're not live performances verbatim. |
|
422 posts
|
Post by carmella1 on Oct 11, 2021 1:09:24 GMT
It's all about lack of understanding this language and artform on film. Current movie makers tone down the language of sung thoughts, which is the essence of the artform and why it works, ad they tone up the realistic aspect, which clashes ernormously with the material per definition. It should be the other way around, embracing the sung thoughts and take it to the next level and tone down the realistic aspect. Exactly why I think the In The Heights movie is so perfect. When you’ve got people dancing on a vertical wall, and wig stands in hair salon bopping along to a song, you know the director knows how to film a musical. And a massive flop. |
|
1,483 posts
|
Post by steve10086 on Oct 11, 2021 7:29:42 GMT
Exactly why I think the In The Heights movie is so perfect. When you’ve got people dancing on a vertical wall, and wig stands in hair salon bopping along to a song, you know the director knows how to film a musical. And a massive flop. If it was then it was, doesn’t stop it being a great movie. Shame they didn’t sing it all live, speak half the words, cast actors who can’t sing, then win an Oscar. Is that what you’re saying? |
|
|
|
Post by danb on Oct 11, 2021 8:29:55 GMT
Was it a massive flop? It was released in the tail end of Covid just as cinemas reopened. It might not have made blockbuster numbers but I bet it has legs when streaming and rentals are taken into account. The strictly performance last night was a good advert for it (ropey vocals aside). It certainly captured the energy of the piece.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan28 on Oct 11, 2021 8:44:00 GMT
They then spent the rest of the shoot picking up any close-ups required with on stage steady-cam. Also, Les Mis & Cats(2) were live sung on set (after having tracked in pre-production) but then also overdubbed in post, so they're not live performances verbatim. That is correct, they did the same with the Miss Saigon film. And they ended up using these separately filmed close-up shots for more than 60% of the final product. Whole songs (such as "I'd give my life for you") are filmed very detailed separately and these are completely different takes than the actual "filmed performance". So it only shows how much this is real filmmaking. |
|
422 posts
|
Post by carmella1 on Oct 12, 2021 1:22:49 GMT
If it was then it was, doesn’t stop it being a great movie. Shame they didn’t sing it all live, speak half the words, cast actors who can’t sing, then win an Oscar. Is that what you’re saying? Its your Opinion that its perfect. Does not make me or anyone else wrong. You are pretty defensive. That is what I am saying. |
|
|
|
Post by scarpia on Oct 12, 2021 19:42:32 GMT
I think it's fair to say that In the Heights is one of the more successful (artistically) stage-to-screen transfers of recent years. It actually works as a film. Which is more than can be said for Hooper's Cats or Schumacher's Phantom (which were financial, as well as critical, failures).
|
|
4,204 posts
|
Post by anthony40 on Oct 12, 2021 19:44:47 GMT
I think it's fair to say that In the Heights is one of the more successful (artistically) stage-to-screen transfers of recent years. It actually works as a film. Which is more than can be said for Hooper's Cats or Schumacher's Phantom (which were financial, as well as critical, failures). I thought The Last 5 Years transferred to film quite well |
|
|
|
Post by sph on Oct 12, 2021 22:27:08 GMT
Was it a massive flop? It was released in the tail end of Covid just as cinemas reopened. It might not have made blockbuster numbers but I bet it has legs when streaming and rentals are taken into account. The strictly performance last night was a good advert for it (ropey vocals aside). It certainly captured the energy of the piece. It is generally considered to be a box office bomb, yes, despite positive reviews, unfortunately. |
|
2,859 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by couldileaveyou on May 3, 2022 23:03:50 GMT
bless her little heart
|
|
5,891 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by mrbarnaby on May 3, 2022 23:16:14 GMT
She needs that Oscar and this could be her only chance. Make the damn film already!
|
|
1,932 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by LaLuPone on May 3, 2022 23:24:12 GMT
“Believe it or not”, I’m going with not, sorry Glenn! She’s been saying this since 2017 poor love.
|
|
|
|
Post by inthenose on May 4, 2022 0:47:37 GMT
I wish. I really wish.
|
|
