| Author |
Message |
|
| billyweeds |
 Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:08 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
lissa wrote: I like what you said earlier, Joe, about how you were watching a classic movie in its first run. I got to see it on PPV when it first got released, and watched it over and over again till I finally bought the DVD. It remains a favorite. I'd been deeply familiar with the soundtrack, having bought it after the musical won a Tony and the award show featured Bebe Neuwirth in the role of Velma as she played it on Broadway. I knew then that I had to get to know the songs, and I did - even before the movie was filmed. But I want to see Nine in its big-screen glory so I can feel the same way you did about Chicago. And yes, that does mean I am optimistic about it!
Lissa--I hate to be a wet blanket, and I don't think I necessarily am being one when I say that the songs for Nine are nowhere near as memorable as the ones from Chicago. Nine was a very interesting musical (I saw it on Broadway in the Banderas revival) and occasionally excellent, but not exciting at all. I guess the movie takes and runs with it and it sounds good, but I'm not expecting anything like another Chicago. It looks more like Dreamgirls to me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:35 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12944
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
Joe Vitus wrote: Thanks, Lissa.
Marj,
Mirimax was really scared about Chicago (remember that the ads never called it a musical) and they wanted to build a solid box office in urban areas before opening it wide. The hope was that positive word-of-mouth would override the percieved box office poison movie musicals were considered to be.
If I remember, Nancy and I went up to Quail Springs in north Oklahoma City to see Chicago, and it was something like a month before it reached Norman. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:54 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
billyweeds wrote: lissa wrote: I like what you said earlier, Joe, about how you were watching a classic movie in its first run. I got to see it on PPV when it first got released, and watched it over and over again till I finally bought the DVD. It remains a favorite. I'd been deeply familiar with the soundtrack, having bought it after the musical won a Tony and the award show featured Bebe Neuwirth in the role of Velma as she played it on Broadway. I knew then that I had to get to know the songs, and I did - even before the movie was filmed. But I want to see Nine in its big-screen glory so I can feel the same way you did about Chicago. And yes, that does mean I am optimistic about it!
Lissa--I hate to be a wet blanket, and I don't think I necessarily am being one when I say that the songs for Nine are nowhere near as memorable as the ones from Chicago. Nine was a very interesting musical (I saw it on Broadway in the Banderas revival) and occasionally excellent, but not exciting at all. I guess the movie takes and runs with it and it sounds good, but I'm not expecting anything like another Chicago. It looks more like Dreamgirls to me.
Let me add I totally disagree. I think the score to Nine is superb. Better than Chicago? It's a pointless argument. Every song in Chicago is built on a famous twenties number, so rather like the "period" songs in Follies they sound more instantly familiar and therefore appealing.
But I listen to Nine over and over. Much more often than I listen to Chicago. A lot of appealing, big numbers ("Folies Bergers"), comic numbers ("A Call From the Vatican"), but also heart-wrenchingly intimate ones ("My Husband Makes Movies" "Be On Your Own" to name two). And a painful self examination in music "I Can't Make This Movie" followed by the lovely, quiet epiphany "Being Tall." All very melodic and memorable. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:57 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| Joe--Glad you love the score. i guess a lot of people do. I don't find the soul-searching of a famous Italian moviemaker to be particularly emotionally gripping. The story of Chicago had thriller/romance/comedy and other genres working for it. Different strokes. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| lshap |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 5:10 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 12 May 2004
Posts: 4248
Location: Montreal
|
Films that have actually been seen
It Might Get Loud - Syd nails it. A great time hangin' out with Edge, Page and White. Cool for anyone who appreciates or plays guitar. Colour me both.
Capitalism: A Love Story - Moore is less. Entertaining as always, but no matter how fast Moore stirs the pot, the soup is pretty thin.
The Informant - Great film! Tons of weird little ah-hah moments and recurring motifs (Abe Lincoln, anyone?) that add up to a great performance and character study.
Law Abiding Citizen - Brutal, intense and very satisfying action-flic, with just enough moral ambiguity to make it worthwhile for grownups. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:10 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
billyweeds wrote: Joe--Glad you love the score. i guess a lot of people do. I don't find the soul-searching of a famous Italian moviemaker to be particularly emotionally gripping. The story of Chicago had thriller/romance/comedy and other genres working for it. Different strokes.
I think what I find gripping is both his ambivalence and his inablity to ever make definative choices: I will do this, I won't do that, I will persue her, not her, I will make this kind of movie, not that kind of movie. He's completely tied in knots, and I can relate. I don't think it has much to do with the plight an egotistical Italian film director, specifically. Not the way 8 1/2 does (which, for the record, I don't much care for). And I think we see much more clearly how destructive his choices are to everyone around him, whereas the movie was only about "What will make Guido happy?"
Out of curiosity, in what possible way does the ice-hearted Chicago demonstrate romance? |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:48 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Joe Vitus wrote:
Out of curiosity, in what possible way does the ice-hearted Chicago demonstrate romance?
Good question. And I have no answer other than that my fingers just typed "R-O-M-A-N-C-E." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| lissa |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 7:26 pm |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 2148
Location: my computer
|
I never saw Chicago on Broadway, so please enlighten me, those who have...didn't the story change somewhat to become a vehicle for the big screen? Is it possible that might occur for Nine as well?
I'll reserve all judgment till I see the film - which, I think, I am compelled to see...just 'cause. But I also think that comparing musicals is a little like comparing people; there is a complexity and a character that engenders surrounds them which renders them unique unto themselves...I mean, can anyone really compare My Fair Lady with Fiddler on the Roof other than the fact that they're both musicals? |
_________________
Statistically, 6 out of 7 dwarfs aren't happy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 8:44 pm |
|
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12944
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
| Sure, but comparing them with Repo! The Genetic Opera and Madam Satan is a bit more difficult. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:07 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| Lissa--The only big change from Chicago stage to screen was that the gossip columnist on stage was played by a man in drag, and on screen by Christine Baranski. Yeah, I know, I know, some people would say that's almost the same thing. Very funny. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:27 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Lissa wrote:
Quote: I never saw Chicago on Broadway, so please enlighten me, those who have...didn't the story change somewhat to become a vehicle for the big screen? Is it possible that might occur for Nine as well?
One of Rob Marshall's terrific qualities as a director is his ability to see cinema versus stage. I had seen Chicago in it's first stage incarnation and loved it. What he brought to the screen was such a new experience that I couldn't even begin to compare the two. I expect he'll do the same with Nine. And FYI, I've never seen it on stage, nor have I heard the score.
And I wouldn't refer to either show as a vehicle. In someone else's hands perhaps, but not Marshall's. He doesn't put the play on screen as much as create a cinematic experience based on a story or set of ideas. Sorry if that sounds like I'm nit picking but I do think there is a real difference.
. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 9:35 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
Joe Vitus wrote: Thanks, Lissa.
Marj,
Mirimax was really scared about Chicago (remember that the ads never called it a musical) and they wanted to build a solid box office in urban areas before opening it wide. The hope was that positive word-of-mouth would override the percieved box office poison movie musicals were considered to be.
True, Joe. I had forgotten. Now the Weinstein Bros. are already lobbying heavily for AMPAS votes. But I doubt if this weren't a Rob Marshall film, times wouldn't have changed that much. With the exception of some recent musical biopics, musicals are still doing poorly.
Is Dreamgirls the only exception? Hmmm. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marc |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:08 pm |
|
|
Joined: 19 May 2004
Posts: 8424
|
| deleted. Marc rant. |
Last edited by Marc on Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:48 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:28 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
| Point taken, Marc. I do think this may be the end of the musical discussion for now. And if you and others prefer, we could move any future discussion to the musical forum. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:44 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Marc wrote: Current film has turned into discussions of films released years ago or films that haven't even been released. Or people (hey Lissa) discussing at length current films they haven't seen.
Paranormal Activity, A Serious Man, Julie & Julia, Zombieland...let's see, there are others...
Are these current enough for you? I've seen and at least commented on all of them. Yeah, so we had a little talk about Nine and Chicago. Excuuuuuse me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
