Wicked Movie Casting- Page 3

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 5:40pm

^Just ask Nikki Blonsky about that, but where the hell is she now?

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 5:46pm

Well, of course. Several musical films have cast really strong singers in this decade alone (yes, I'm aware there have been a fewmishaps) , so it has been taken "to that level". I highly doubt, however, that a Wicked film is going to create the next generation of musical film megastars.

 

Did you not see Into the woods, showface?!?! It created mega star singers! It was perfect in every way. It raised the bar for every musical film. There's never been a film better than Into the woods!

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 6:27pm

Though there were people who did have a problem with the third act of the film which I could understand why, I did feel the third act was pretty rushed.

Updated On: 5/24/15 at 06:27 PM

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 6:54pm

Showface, I have to disagree with that one, I haven't seen the level of singing that I'm looking for in any film of the last decade:

I'm talking about this kind of level of singing and acting combined:

Rachel Tucker No Good Deed

 

 

 

 

 

 

Updated On: 5/24/15 at 06:54 PM

[Showface]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 7:01pm

Well, I have, and I can provide examples that are actually in the film medium, too

 

1. Jennifer Hudson- Dreamgirls

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QsiSRSgqE4E

 

2. Queen Latifah- Chicago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoDS1lWdpjw

 

3. Queen Latifah- Hairspray

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-2He8cNHdw

 

4. Catherine Zeta Jones- 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrDlxQNS4rI

 

5. Meryl Streep- Into the Woods

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aasECsxrSzQ

 

 

Updated On: 5/24/15 at 07:01 PM

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 7:08pm

Though there were people who did have a problem with the third act of the film which I could understand why, I did feel the third act was pretty rushed.

 

I was being sarcastic. The 2nd half of the film is terrible. 

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 7:13pm

Thanks for the examples!

I think that Meryl Streep and Catherine Zeta Jones are good actresses but not very good singers.

I also think that Jennifer Hudson is a decent singer but not a very good actress.

 

I think that musicalfilms are very hard to cast (acting through a very high level of singing, and therefore making both the acting and the singing believable, not let the one harm the other) and therefore the casting search for Wicked should be very extensive. 

[broadwayfan24]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 7:20pm

Showface, Chicago was not in this decade...it was 13 years ago.

Unfortunately I don't think I'll be happy with whoever they cast in this Wicked film because I was just too obsessed with it when I was 15 and saw the original cast 5 times. Those memories are too special for me. And I haven't liked who they've cast in many films that I've had high hopes for so I'm just expecting to be disappointed again.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 7:23pm

Honestly dave, it just sounds like no musical film will ever be good enough for you no matter how good the acting or singing is. There have been stellar musical films with more than capable actors and actresses singing and acting the crap out of their Oscar winning performances. Jennifer Hudson and Catherine shined in their roles and were just as good as  any Broadway singers and actors in my humble opinion. 

 

Updated On: 5/24/15 at 07:23 PM

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 7:41pm

This material is all about acting through sung notes. Too often the acting does not feel truthful because I see an actor struggling with the singing (les mis film), the singing does not feel natural enough for the person. Either the singing or acting will not feel truthful. The singing should be enhancing the acting instead of getting in the way, in fact, certain notes could work as "actors/emotion evokers" themselves.

The point is that they seem to deliberately ignore the people in the business that are best for the roles. I can't believe people like Amanda Seyfried and Anna Kendrick are even considered for this kind of material.

There are 10 outstanding actresses/singers that I can think of right now, that I would definitely screentest for the role of Elphaba if I was a producer, which could be amazing stars and set the screen on fire, visually, acting wise and musically, but they are probably not even invited because they already have Amanda Seyfried in mind.

The influcence of outstanding singing voices is one of the most underrated things in musicalfilms of the 21st century. It makes or breaks the film and the truthfulness of the acting. No one in the audience should ever ask themselves why the characters are actually singing, like I heard around me in the cinema while watching les Mis. it should feel natural from the first moment, not toned down or have compromised quality.

 

Updated On: 5/25/15 at 07:41 PM

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 8:15pm

"The point is that they seem to deliberately ignore the people in the business that are best for the roles. I can't believe people like Amanda Seyfried and Anna Kendrick are even considered for this kind of material."

 

They held an open call for Effie in Dreamgirls. They auditioned several broadway actresses for the 3 dreamgirls. I believe Patina Miller auditioned. At the end of the day, Jen won because she was believed to be the best for it and they weren't wrong in that casting. You seem to be of the opinion that only Broadway actors should get roles in musical films. Who exactly would have have cast in Dreamgirls and Chicago? 

 

I also have to ask, what did you think of Anika Noni Rose in dreamgirls? Was she also not up to par with the singing and acting?

Genuinely curious. 

Updated On: 5/24/15 at 08:15 PM

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 5/24/15 at 8:29pm

The point is that they seem to deliberately ignore the people in the business that are best for the roles. I can't believe people like Amanda Seyfried and Anna Kendrick are even considered for this kind of material.

They're still in the development process right now, so they're not even casting yet! Who knows when it will actually be made? If it gets made within the next 5-10 years, they'll both probably end up being too old for the roles.

Updated On: 5/24/15 at 08:29 PM

[gypsy101]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 12:15am

_.

Updated On: 5/26/15 at 12:15 AM

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 6:08am

"At the end of the day, Jen won because she was believed to be the best for it and they weren't wrong in that casting. You seem to be of the opinion that only Broadway actors should get roles in musical films. Who exactly would have have cast in Dreamgirls and Chicago? 
 
I also have to ask, what did you think of Anika Noni Rose in dreamgirls? Was she also not up to par with the singing and acting?
Genuinely curious. "

I have to say that "Dreamgirls" was one of the slightly better musicalfilms, mainly because of Beyonce and Anika Noni Rose. After watching the film, I thought that those 2 were the only ones in the film who's acting was outstanding and very nuanced. A very big part of this is because they were able to act through sung notes. I feel that Jennifer is not a good actress at all, her spoken scenes are amateurish and her singing scenes feel disconnected from her intention. I just see a girl whaling, but she might as well could have whaled about any subject. This lack of "merging" is my biggest problem I suppose. In the les Mis film the acting intention is sometimes right, but the singing does not feel truthful and only distracts. What Jennifer does is the opposite, singing from the outside and it seems that the acting only distracts her. I am always looking for that combination, both singing and acting of a high level. And Meryl Streep etc, are nowhere near that level singing wise, so her singing performances always distract me and take me out of her acting.

Edit: There are also moments in Dreamgirls, like the "Lorell loves Jimmy" part, where Anika's singing is not good enough either and it takes me out of her acting too. It feels like she's distracted, performing from the outside and her singing kind of fails and misses the intention. So even with good/experienced/natural singers it is tricky and if there is the slightest struggle with singing it shows.(by that I mean incapability of merging both singing and acting, if one of those 2 isn't great it ruins the other) I always see it in an actor. It has nothing to do with the "supposed struggle of the character's story line". Although some actors love to use that as an excuse. So outstanding natural singers who master the craft of acting through sung notes should always be the basis for this material on film. Especially on film because we see everything.

Updated On: 5/25/15 at 06:08 AM

[Jamie Pierce]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 8:59am

I like Anna Kendrick as Elphaba and Kristen Bell as Glinda.

I agree with the Dreamgirls assessment. Jennifer Hudson is a great singer but a terrible actress. The song won the Oscar, not her performance. It's one of those roles that no matter who plays it, they win the award. I found Beyonce quite captivating in that movie even if she, too, is not the strongest actress. 

I think CZJ was pretty good in Chicago although I'm still bitter that it wasn't Toni Collette as Roxie (ditto for Sweeney Todd).

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 9:35am

I think Anna Kendrick has a very whiny, dry, thin and childish voice, not suitable for this material at all.

Anna Kendrick For Good

 

It really is a choice to go for very downgraded generic quality in casting musicalfilms or go all the way.

Updated On: 5/25/15 at 09:35 AM

[Showface]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 1:31pm

^What some people may call "generic" others may like very much, so it's not a choice, to shoot for something "generic".

I like Kendrick's voice, and she's impressed me a lot with what she can do with it. Maybe it's not right for Elphaba, perse, but I still like it, and I think sometimes people forget that Kendrick started in musical theatre, and is the second youngest Tony nominee ever.

 

I also wouldn't say that anyone who would have sang "And I'm Telling You" would have one the award. JHud put everything into that song, and she won for a reason. On top of a stellar vocal performance, she put in stellar acting. There's a reason why in several movie theaters, people applauded after that scene.

 

 

" No one in the audience should ever ask themselves why the characters are actually singing, like I heard around me in the cinema while watching les Mis."

 

But, that's something you'll get in EVERY musicalfilm nowadays, ESPECIALLY films like LesMis and Into the Woods, because songs are so prevalent in them, and because it is put in a realistic setting, where singing for speaking isn't realistic, moviegoers are sometimes thrown-off (and it probably didn't hurt that some movie-goers didn't do their research to know what kind of film was ahead of them). 
But, it has nothing to do with who they cast in the roles.

 

Now, the example you included, I wasn't so impressed by, I didn't feel that "level of singing and acting combined by acting through sung notes," and I feel that especially wouldn't work in the film setting.

 

Updated On: 5/25/15 at 01:31 PM

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 7:39pm

" But, that's something you'll get in EVERY musicalfilm nowadays, ESPECIALLY films like LesMis and Into the Woods, because songs are so prevalent in them, and because it is put in a realistic setting, where singing for speaking isn't realistic, moviegoers are sometimes thrown-off (and it probably didn't hurt that some movie-goers didn't do their research to know what kind of film was ahead of them). 
But, it has nothing to do with who they cast in the roles."

I think it has everything to do with who they cast in the roles. People can adapt to the language of singing without any problem, as long as the singing quality is very high and feels natural. That is where people at the Les Mis film were thrown-off. They created some kind of unnatural-speak-sing style with suddenly a long vibrating note on the stangest syllables. It is clear they used people that do not understand the language of singing which makes it very odd and unnatural, almost cringe worthy at times. That's what made it look and sound distracting and forced in many scenes. They made the big mistake of toning it down, but that's not an option when the chosen language is singing. It is very important to go all the way with this kind of material. Understand the importance of that rare singing talent. They need people who understand the language of singing, only then the audience will fully engage. Speaking certain cyllables (toning down) and vibrate for 2 minutes (doing too much) on the wrong ones is not the solution.

Here is an example of Valjeans that sound truthful versus unnatural:

Example

 

Updated On: 5/25/15 at 07:39 PM

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 7:49pm

^Now if you actually heard that entire ensemble of actors sing onstage, it would not only be very different, but proof to you that they are very capable singers.

Of course, Adam Lambert came out and shared his criticism on the subject saying that the vocals should've been studio recorded and sweetened. In response to it, Russell Crowe tweeted saying: "I don't disagree with Adam, sure it could have been sweetened, but Tom Hooper wanted it raw and real, so that's how it is."

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 7:59pm

"Russell Crowe tweeted saying: "I don't disagree with Adam, sure it could have been sweetened, but Tom Hooper wanted it raw and real, so that's how it is."

And that's the big mistake in thinking. The chosen language is singing. That is per definition not realistic. So you need to create a language of storytelling that is larger than life. Toning it down, speak-singing, vibrate on the strangest syllables in a conversation in a 1 take shot does by no means equal "raw and real" on film. In fact, it makes it feel less real. Only real singing feels real in this case.

How can a professional film director make this mistake? I think it is the result of a director not understanding this material and the language of singing well enough, combined with an insecure producer who blindly trusts a film director that has only experience with spoken dialogue.

Take a look at the Valjean clip I posted to see what I mean. The Les Mis film clips are as unnatural as it can get. Edit: In comparison, all 3 theatre Valjeans in the clip appear to be very natural and filmic, they keep certain notes shorter, which is more natural, and the notes that need to be sung actually sound good en believable.

Updated On: 5/25/15 at 07:59 PM

[gypsy101]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 9:15pm

Catherine Zeta-Jones and Meryl Streep are both very good singers in addition to being fantastic actresses.

You can question Jennifer Hudson's acting ability (I've both enjoyed her and been bored by her) but she isn't a "decent" singer. She is among the best living singers, bar none.

Dave19, you seem to be obsessed with the theory of "acting through notes," do you feel any currently living actor-singers are good enough?

[Elfuhbuh]

Posted: 5/25/15 at 9:48pm

Yes, the performances in the Les Mis film were SO dreadful. That's why Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway were both nominated for Oscars, with Hathaway taking one home.


I understand your viewpoint that the singing in the movie sucked, but clearly 70% of critics and several audience members (myself included) disagreed and/or were too moved by the acting and story to even care.

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/26/15 at 6:56am

"acting through notes," do you feel any currently living actor-singers are good enough?"

That's the point of this material.

And yes, many people master this, see the clip I posted.

 

 

 

Updated On: 5/26/15 at 06:56 AM

[Dave19]

Posted: 5/26/15 at 7:04am

" I understand your viewpoint that the singing in the movie sucked, but clearly 70% of critics and several audience members (myself included) disagreed and/or were too moved by the acting and story to even care."

I think that more than 50% of the audience members cringed at multiple times. Especially because of the unnatural approach of the director and the artists. Like I said, "natural" lies in other things when the language is singing.

The director should at least have told Hugh Jackman that there is no need to speak certain notes and then vibrate for 2 minutes on the middle note (always the wrong one) If anything, he should have kept that middle note short too. And vice versa, the other notes (mostly long ones) should actually sound like singing, or else, what's the point of doing a long note.

In musical films, "natural/real and raw" lies in another language. The language of full, nuanced and layered singing, a way of storytelling that is not per se realistic or downgraded.

Imagine that Hugh Jackman actually sang "Listen to me, there is something I must do", instead of "Listen to me, there is something I must doeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeoeooeoeoeoeoeoeooeoe". Basically, understand the language of truthful singing a bit more. That would at least have helped half of the problem. (the other half being not capable of singing good notes the way they should be sung).

 

 

 

Updated On: 5/26/15 at 07:04 AM

[Jamie Pierce]

Posted: 5/26/15 at 7:59am

 I also wouldn't say that anyone who would have sang "And I'm Telling You" would have one the award. JHud put everything into that song, and she won for a reason. On top of a stellar vocal performance, she put in stellar acting. There's a reason why in several movie theaters, people applauded after that scene.
 

Even still, you shouldn't give someone an Oscar for singing one song. The rest of her performance, particularly her scene work, the acting was rudimentary at best.