As much as I love the music for the "chair fit for a king" section (it soars!), I didn't miss that in the film either. And I loved the sequence of watching Sweeney put the chair together.
And I agree that MOST of the trims, particularly the trims made for the principle characters were smart choices.
But I would have added the chorus over the credits (not singing the Ballad throughout), and had them sing all of "God, That's Good!" and had SOME vocals remain in the Pirelli Elixir scene (even if they were scaled down). I just don't believe all those people standing around "silent." And I wanted the inmates in the asylum to sing "City on Fire" but that wasn't necessary either.
I also would have written a better scene somewhere for Anthony and Johanna, particularly since "Kiss Me" was excised.
"On stage, Johanna never knows that SWEENEY and LUCY are her parents. How was she going to figure this out in film? I doubt she even knows how she came to be adopted by the judge. Even if she overheard Sweeney and Lovett's conversation, there is nothing to connect her directly to either character."
Right, MB... but WE know it. And we would see her discovering the murdered bodies.
But if she doesn't know the relationshp between all the dead people, how is it more resonating? She's already seen the Judge and the Beggar Woman be murdered, so I think it would only have been "more" powerful for an audience to see her wtiness the other bodies, if she were somehow able to make the connection - but not even Anthony knows that she is Sweeney's daugther...
I'm just going to agree to disagree.
I think the ending was powerful visually, but weak and muddled narratively and emotionally.
And you don't.
"I don't think there's ever been a Lovett (at least outside of the opera world) that sang with PERFECT diction."
Judy Kaye came pretty damn close.
And yes, I thought Johanna looked soo much like Christina Ricci!
Okay, for some reason I feel like I wanna add my thoughts to this thread than the main board one
I'll just very briefly say I thought overall it was a great movie, Johnny, especially, and also Helena make up for their singing with their acting. I agree that last image of Lovett in the fire was really disturbing, but I see its place in the film. And yeah, overall I really enjoyed it.
So everything else I'm mentioning is just nitpicking, doesn't change my overall opinion that I think it's a really good movie.
Okay, I'm gonna bring up another side to the whole Johanna-having-scenes-cut debate. I wonder if my thoughts on this are influenced by being so familiar with the revival, but for me, Johanna is the most interesting character in Sweeney Todd. The way little things come out about how she is her mother and father's child, and how her and Anthony might one day parallel Lucy and Sweeney...I loved that. So of course, the movie removed all the great instances of these thoughts coming up...Johanna killing Fogg (can't remember if that happened in the original, but even if it didn't, I think it should), her part in Johanna (act 2), making it very interesting that it's sung by Sweeney, Lucy, Anthony and Johanna, and her little Green Finch at the end, showing how she has been affected by being at Bedlam. This Johanna seemed completely unaffected, I love the parallels in both her and her mother being wrongly placed in the asylum, and how she begins to go a bit crazy, and such. And I agree Kiss Me needs to be in there, to make the Anthony and Johanna story work, but to also reveal some more of her character -- the actress can choose to play it more "crazy" like her mom, or more somber, manipulating like her dad. Don't forget the lines of Green Finch: "maddened by the stars." I also love the contrast in Green Finch that shows more that's going on under the surface, the part that comes before teach me to be more adaptive...but I really didn't notice a contrast. But I really missed some of her scenes with the judge. We only got the one scene where he took her away -- we didn't see how she was always trying to be obedient, or how she reacted to him coming onto her, etc. Less scenes for Johanna with Anthony and with the Judge also takes away the little eerie similarities in how both deal with Johanna.
On a similar note, I was very surprised that the Judge's Johanna wasn't in the film (I was trying to avoid reading everything about the movie until I saw it, such as which songs were included). I just figured with Burton going all out with the blood and Lovett in the fire, why wouldn't he wanna go all out with the Judge masturbating and whipping himself? I would have loved to see Rickman take that on. I like that it shows more into the Judge's character, since he's such a big part of Sweeney's vengeance.
I also missed some of the Beggar Woman scenes, wish she had the first encounter with Sweeney, and it made it much more difficult to match her raunchy music with the waltz music.
I do understand that Burton really wanted to keep the focus on Sweeney/Lovett, and maybe all these things didn't belong in the movie he made, they were just preferences in some of my favorite aspects of Sweeney.
And it wasn't until I read this thread that I realized Lovett's craving of wealth and materialism really doesn't come through. And that's fine if you want to remove that part, but there are so many parts in the lyrics that demonstrate this, that I feel they're kind of oddly there without her demonstrating that stuff. "Silver's good enough for me," for instance. Of course she loves Sweeney, but I think her covetting material things is as important an aspect of her character as her covetting Sweeney.
And on a completely random note, everyone talked about the surprise in seeing By the Sea in the movie, but I was very surprised to see Wait in the movie. In the book Sondheim on music, which I'm sure you are all well aware of, he talked about his distaste for the song, and said if a movie comes along, he would either do away with it or rewrite it, so yeah, I was surprised to see it in there intact.
And one more thing, on the whole chorus debate thing. I can definitely see both parts of the argument, but I think one of the most important lyrics in the show is lost: "Isn't that Sweeney there beside you? Sweeney is there, etc." There was a review in the main board thread that asked what's the point of the story? That's the point, and it seems to get lost without those lyrics. I'm not even sure having a chorus singing it would be the only way to go about it, I just wish it could have been incorporated somehow. But oh well, maybe as others have said, there just wasn't a place in *this* movie for it, as might be the case for some other things I missed.
And I knew when I saw the Beadle, he was Pettigrew. So it was funny, I was like wow this is Harry Potter-Sweeney Todd (don't forget Helena played Bellatrix. 3 potter actors!)
I like your thoughts quite a bit, wickedrentq. Thanks for sharing.
Yes, Johanna kills Fogg in the original as well. And much (okay, nearly ALL) was missing from her character in this film. And I agree about the material greed of Mrs. Lovett being a part of who she is, and what she craves. And it is written into the lyrics.
Nice observations.
"Isn't that Sweeney there beside you?" would have sounded great in Surround Sound too.
Broadway Legend Joined: 12/31/69
i want to hear someone sing Mrs Lovett's parts in a mock-Julia Child accent.
Hahaha Norn.
Only if Carol Channing is the Beggar Woman.
But hearing Julia Child sing "Little Priest."
Now, THAT would resonate.
Oh dear lord...when I was 16, I was in a community theatre production of SWEENEY TODD which was actually quite good. I wanted desperately to be Toby, but they cast a 30 year old who was a cuter Ken Jennings, so I was singing lead tenor through the show. It was one of the most rewarding experiences I've had as a singer. It's one of the reasons I miss GOD THAT'S GOOD.
Backstage, I would do the entirety of WORST PIES in my best (nearly flawless) Carol Channing. It was a big hit. And I didn't understand, at the time, why everyone had a quizzical look on their faces whenever I told them I liked girls.
Ahh okay, she used the gun in the original and the scissors in the revival, then, it must have been. I knew there was somethiing a little different in that scene from the revival, but I couldn't remember.
In that case, there's really no excuse for Johanna to not kill Fogg, IMO. Even in this undeveloped character, on the one hand audiences would be like huh? but then it would set in that she was Sweeney's daughter. Something to bridge that connection.
BTW, I love your idea on having Toby slam the door. What if...keeping in tone with the movie, Sweeney was bleeding onto Lucy, and a couple of very quiet, monotonous voices, just went, very slowly: "isn't that Sweeney there beside you?" and then pan to Toby, slamming the door. Ooh, that would be creepy!
LOL! Sometimes we're the last to know ourselves, Robbie.
...and there's no video tape of your Worst Pies ala Channing?
Alas, I don't think so! There IS however a videotape of the production. For community theatre, our Lovett, Toby, Johanna, Beadle, Pirelli were all pretty freaking fantastic. But it was our Todd, Art Murray (brother of Mary Gordon Murray) who was really, honestly spellbinding. He was truly terrifying and sang it beautifully.
I LOVE Mary Gordon Murray, and didn't know she had a bro named Art! A Sweeney bro, at that.
I've seen a scaled-down Sweeney before that worked brilliantly. It don't need no fancies. Just great acting, appropriate voices and clear, focused storytelling.
And you SO should have pulled a Peggy Sawyer and gone on for Toby one night! Damn it!
wickedrentq---Creepy, yes, but I don't think the unseen quiet voices would have worked. Especially since we would have never heard them in the film previously. Too much of a head-scratcher. You would want audiences to think about those words, not wonder where on earth they're coming from.
Wickedrentq, that would be quite creepy. It's just me i guess, but I am very disappointed that the song most associated with this musical was cut from the film. It was nice to hear it instrumentally, but I just don't buy that it didn't fit into the movie. That final image was pretty hard to shake. But the final sequence just seemed to fly by after Lovett's death. I also missed Toby's final lines from the show. For me, it would have been nice for him to speak those lines, maybe even have the whistle (Although it probably wouldn't have made sense since you didn't hear it in the film) and then The music to the Ballad starts. The vocals coming in as the screen goes black and the credits roll.
But who would have paid attention to the song as the credits roll? Most of the people leave the theatre after the credits start rolling, so why would it even matter if the song is there or not if it's not part of the actual narrative of the film?
I honestly don't think the film suffers from the cutting of the Ballad. If you don't know the stage show, there is nothing to miss. Burton's vision of this tale is so different from the one we've seen on Broadway that I don't see how the Ballad would have made sense in this world.
I do think Burton didn't know exactly what to do with the lovers. I've seen the movie three times by now and I still cringe at that awful exchange between Anthony and Johanna.
My friends (who have no particular liking for musical theater and were rather dismissive of DREAMGIRLS, save for Hudson) watched it with me last night and loved it. They "got" the jokes, they were laughing their asses off during "A Little Priest" (and were quoting Mrs.Lovett's "if you get it...good you got it" line afterwards), cringed during "The Worst Pies in London," and were pretty impacted by the whole final sequence. When people who have no bias regarding the stage show enjoy it, then I feel the film as a film was successful.
I think the Johanna/Anthony relationship is pretty underdeveloped but overall, it is IMO the best movie musical since MOULIN ROUGE.
Okay, I just watched the movie a second time while I'm not as taken aback as I was at first, I still think it's friggin awesome.
I can't say that I wouldn't like to see HBC take on Lovett without Burton direction, but the scenes where she did seem to be going on her own instincts were priceless.
I'm pretty ashamed to say that I've never seen a single Johnny Depp movie, I still think I want to rent some after seeing this. He impressed me quite a bit even singing wise, it's easy to tell that he's not a trained singer and that he's a tenor singing a baritones role, but he still rocked it. I can't say I'm longing for him to have more layer, I went in not expecting George Hearn and that's exactly what he gave me.
I have a quick question which may deserve a thread of it's own (Or may already have a thread) but, what exactly happened to the vocal double in movie musicals? I know that software makes them obsolete now, but aren't they still popular in India? (I wanted to grow up and be like Marni when I was little)
soapguy17---You have to remember that Marni was a "ghost singer," and the studios did their very best to hide the fact that she was singing for the stars. Her name never appeared on the original releases of the soundtracks, in fact the star's name usually was credited with singing the songs on the packaging. She never got screen credit for her work. She had to sign a lifetime "gag order" forbidding her to ever speak about it publicly, but once the cat was out of the bag, she says it's "okay to do it now." She's actually on the Warner Bros. DVD of "My Fair Lady" doing audio commentary describing the whole process.
Marni was great at it. Just as great as the stars who visually convinced us they were singing as well, but it also was easier to keep something like that under wraps... at least (hopefully) as long as the film was in its initial run in the theatres.
Today, that secret would leak out way before a film even opened. And most believe it would have a negative effect on the general public's perception and reaction to a star not doing his/her own singing.
Personally, as long as it's done very well, I don't have a problem with it at all, any more than if a star does his/her own stunts in a film. It's not going to make me enjoy the performance any less... unless it's done badly.
Loved the movie...
but...
Hated the fact that there was no ensemble singing...made "God that's Good" a bit awkward. And I missed the ballads. Other than that. Two thumbs up. Helena was fabulous.
Broadway Star Joined: 12/31/69
i am serious about wanting to hear Julia Child-versions of Mrs Lovett's parts...i mean, i know it would be funny, but the thing is, i can HEAR it so clearly in my imagination, but i cant do a Julia Child impression, so i'm frustrated!
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
I don't mind going out on a limb in saying that I believe Helena Bonham Carter's work in Sweeney is almost equal to her work as Ari in Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes.
In both cases, her husband made the choice to not only cast her in the female lead, but to impede her ability to enunciate clearly. It is a stylistic choice that gives a through line to the Burton/Depp ouervre.
Had things worked out differently, we might have seen what Lisa Marie could have done with Mrs. Lovett, but as the Sweeney movie shows us, there's little use in dreaming "what if?" since we're all just corpses to be ground up in the end.
I understood every word she spoke or sang.
But, then again, I understand Patti LuPone.
You speak LuPonese, PJ??
Is there a book or a Rosetta Stone CD?
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
Oh, PJ, you're such a musical queen and know those words by heart you would have been satisfied if they'd projected the braille bumps on the screen.
I think you're ignoring Burton's desire to impede his wife verbally so that she would have the desire to express Lovett's (and Ari's) experience physically, which he also restrained.
Life in the Sweeney world as well as on the Planet of the Apes is one of constriction, which would not have been so frustratingly and successfully conveyed had we been able to understand Bonham-Carter's characters.
Lisa Marie had a much better rack that Helena.
Videos