#1
Posted: 12/10/09 at 5:35pm
3 new NINE featurettes -"Unusual Way", "Folies Bergere", "Guido's Song"
#2
Posted: 12/10/09 at 6:53pm
I read reviews and feel bad that they are gunning for two things in this movie:
Daniel Day-Lewis as Guido and lack of 'hit songs'.
I listened to DDL and he is adequate. No different than the past male actors who dabbled into singing this past decade for a role. The show is about **his women**. Seeing the acting clips makes me feel confident whatever he lacks in singing will most definitely be made up in acting.
Good on Dame Dench's agent for giving him the script. Who knows where this film would have been once Bardem dropped out.
Daniel Day-Lewis as Guido and lack of 'hit songs'.
I listened to DDL and he is adequate. No different than the past male actors who dabbled into singing this past decade for a role. The show is about **his women**. Seeing the acting clips makes me feel confident whatever he lacks in singing will most definitely be made up in acting.
Good on Dame Dench's agent for giving him the script. Who knows where this film would have been once Bardem dropped out.
#3
Posted: 12/10/09 at 7:09pm
For lack of a better term, it seems like the fan-boy reviewers (EW's pathetic Owen G. included) are all ready to ejaculate all over AVATAR even if it is the lamentable mess that it most certainly seems to be and feel that by downplaying the prestige pic front-runner, which NINE undoubtedly is (particularly since LOVELY BONES and INVICTUS are DOA), they will play up their fan-boy/street-cred by fawning all over AVATAR and once again there will be a "popular" best picture winner as opposed to one that truly deserves it, whether or not NINE (or PRECIOUS) does. I predict that AVATAR will ultimately be a huge disappointment to anyone looking for more than mere wowza special effects, and at least dramatically inert and (maybe) critically DOA and some of those critics will be forced to re-assess their opinions on NINE once the Globes award it, as I am almost sure they will judging from their track record with musicals.
All that being said, I fear NINE may be too highbrow (as SWEENEY was, even with the NC17 level violence and Depp) and will be treated as an also-ran even if it was the greatest musical of all time just because the critics want to reward frivolity, jokes and/or special effects because "the people deserve it" because times are so hard for so many, or some such bollocks, and forget that the greatest musicals came during times of financial hardship and war in the past and people do not need mindlessness and escape entertainment to be mutually inclusive terms.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I can't wait to see NINE, whatever the case!
P
All that being said, I fear NINE may be too highbrow (as SWEENEY was, even with the NC17 level violence and Depp) and will be treated as an also-ran even if it was the greatest musical of all time just because the critics want to reward frivolity, jokes and/or special effects because "the people deserve it" because times are so hard for so many, or some such bollocks, and forget that the greatest musicals came during times of financial hardship and war in the past and people do not need mindlessness and escape entertainment to be mutually inclusive terms.
I guess we'll just have to wait and see. I can't wait to see NINE, whatever the case!
P
Updated On: 12/10/09 at 07:09 PM
#4
Posted: 12/10/09 at 7:25pm
To be honest as much as I have hopes for Avatar the fact it cost so much makes me think no matter how many good things there are in that film it will be CGI's answer to Heaven's Gate. It may do well it's first week but I doubt it comes close to recouping.
Gleiberman is one of my least favorite critics. He goes off on tangents in his reviews and is the type of critic who asks like an advisor, with his own ideas of the film's direction. What does Nine and Dreamgirls have in common? They are not as good as Couple's Retreat according to Gleiberman. Lisa Schwarzbaum thankfully got to review Sweeney to save me from skipping that section of EW when it came out.
Gleiberman is one of my least favorite critics. He goes off on tangents in his reviews and is the type of critic who asks like an advisor, with his own ideas of the film's direction. What does Nine and Dreamgirls have in common? They are not as good as Couple's Retreat according to Gleiberman. Lisa Schwarzbaum thankfully got to review Sweeney to save me from skipping that section of EW when it came out.
#5
Posted: 12/10/09 at 7:37pm
Yeah Lisa is definitely day to Owen's night so it should be interesting to see what she thinks of NINE.
After reading Owen's reviews from DRAMGIRLS to NINE, at least those I didn't stop reading in disgust, I am seriously considering ending my subscription, particularly since he fawns all over romantic comedies these days and wouldn't know a good song if it hit him (didn't he call CHICAGO's score repetitious and boring, too? Whatever). Word on the street for the last 6 months or so has been that EW is going online-only any day now so it is in the midst of a last ditch effort to be more mainstream so his reviews certainly follow that transparent agenda (The complete "pretty colors"/less content/1 page of DVD/CD reviews make-over complete with The Bullseye is the latest example of this desperate ploy for populist acceptance on EW's behalf, aping the US/IN TOUCH template, which ultimately alienates their subscription base in the process. So misguided.)
P
After reading Owen's reviews from DRAMGIRLS to NINE, at least those I didn't stop reading in disgust, I am seriously considering ending my subscription, particularly since he fawns all over romantic comedies these days and wouldn't know a good song if it hit him (didn't he call CHICAGO's score repetitious and boring, too? Whatever). Word on the street for the last 6 months or so has been that EW is going online-only any day now so it is in the midst of a last ditch effort to be more mainstream so his reviews certainly follow that transparent agenda (The complete "pretty colors"/less content/1 page of DVD/CD reviews make-over complete with The Bullseye is the latest example of this desperate ploy for populist acceptance on EW's behalf, aping the US/IN TOUCH template, which ultimately alienates their subscription base in the process. So misguided.)
P
#6
Posted: 12/10/09 at 7:47pm
He actually gave Chicago a nice review. But Chicago since its revival surpassed the original productions of Dreamgirls and Nine in popularity.
Funny reading the reviews on RT, Gleiberman says it lacks Chicago while another says the film will not convert those who were critical of Chicago. So it has to either be exactly like Chicago or it has to get people who did not like Chicago so much based on the fact both films are by Rob Marshall? Which is it?
Funny reading the reviews on RT, Gleiberman says it lacks Chicago while another says the film will not convert those who were critical of Chicago. So it has to either be exactly like Chicago or it has to get people who did not like Chicago so much based on the fact both films are by Rob Marshall? Which is it?
#7
Posted: 12/10/09 at 8:34pm
I really, really, really like what I have seen of "Folies Bergere", "Unusual Way" and "Guido's Song" (the 3 trickiest songs) from these featurettes and I must say these interviews have gotten me excited all over again about this project. 
P
P
#8
Posted: 12/11/09 at 12:29am
Dear God, Gleiberman also didn't like Hairspray with the same C grade. These two sentences sent me into a tizzy:
I wish that Queen Latifah, as the soulful den mother Motormouth Maybelle, were playing less of a saint, and that Michelle Pfeiffer, as the villainous Velma Von Tussle, had a more memorable song to express her dragon-lady WASP disdain.
I think we all agree "Miss Baltimore Crabs" ain't exactly the best song but who wants to Velma von Tussle do a 'I hate Negroes!' song? Motormouth Maybelle has always been a saint, almost the conscience of the civil rights sub-plot in the show. "I know Where I've Been", hello!
This proverb is never more useful than describing Gleiberman: Make your own film!
I wish that Queen Latifah, as the soulful den mother Motormouth Maybelle, were playing less of a saint, and that Michelle Pfeiffer, as the villainous Velma Von Tussle, had a more memorable song to express her dragon-lady WASP disdain.
I think we all agree "Miss Baltimore Crabs" ain't exactly the best song but who wants to Velma von Tussle do a 'I hate Negroes!' song? Motormouth Maybelle has always been a saint, almost the conscience of the civil rights sub-plot in the show. "I know Where I've Been", hello!
This proverb is never more useful than describing Gleiberman: Make your own film!
#9
Posted: 12/11/09 at 12:54am
Sweeney was rated R, not NC17.
Unless you were saying that you believed the violence warrented a NC17 rating, in which case I understand your point.
Unless you were saying that you believed the violence warrented a NC17 rating, in which case I understand your point.
"Oh look at the time, three more intelligent plays just closed and THE ADDAMS FAMILY made another million dollars" -Jackie Hoffman, Broadway.com Audience Awards
#10
Posted: 12/11/09 at 1:21am
I am pretty sure there were rumors of re-cuts to Burton's Sweeney Todd when producers feared harsh ratings from the MPAA. I heard it was to possibly take it down to PG-13 to make it more marketable. Obviously Burton won. Perhaps because the violence was 'stylized' like Tarantino's films it caught a break rather than grisly violence. But I also did hear that Dreamworks toned it down for the US release to not get NC-17. I barely remember the death scenes so I cannot compare and contrast the amount of violence/blood/gore with anybody who saw an international release.
#11
Posted: 12/11/09 at 1:23am
I really don't understand that, as the violence in Inglorious Basterds was far more realistic and far worse than anything Burton could've put into his vision of Sweeney.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#12
Posted: 12/11/09 at 2:06am
That's because Harvey Weinstein fights tooth and nail for Tarantino with the ratings board and he has seemingly mastered the arbitrary tyranny of the MPAA because each film's violence seems to top the next imo, which is fine by me because I am a Tarantino fan. I think one of Sweeney's producers was quoted on making it stylized 'like Kill Bill' which it was in a way.
IG was definitely the most violent of any of QT's films, it made Kill Bill look pretty tame even though they were both stories on vengeance.
IG was definitely the most violent of any of QT's films, it made Kill Bill look pretty tame even though they were both stories on vengeance.
#13
Posted: 12/11/09 at 7:56am
Having seen the film already this past Tuesday at one of the many nationwide advance screening all I'll say about it is I cried 3 times during the film. It stands alone as its own interpretation of NINE as it pays heavy homage to all 3 previous incarnations -- Federico Fellini's original 1963 source, Tommy Tune's 1982 Broadway original and David Leveaux's 2003 Broadway revival. Rob Marshall even pays homage (just as he did to Bob Fosse and his original CHICAGO) to the 2 Broadway production's choreography in spots. Those familiar with them will know them.
I also agree with someone else's assessment on another post, the film is actually a straight film WITH musical numbers -- I wouldn't call it a movie musical at all. As a huge fan of the musical I am pleased that they trimmed the score and used what they did. It works for film. It would have been an overwhelming mess if ALL of the score was retained. I also love Marshall's technique of cutting into musical numbers (as he did with CHICAGO) -- from number to present reality, therefore you don't get bored watching a full 3-4 minute song without any visual stimuli. Heck, this technique is even used on stage BUT no one ever mentions that.
Anyway... I'm not going to go into a full detailed review as others have. It was a beautiful film. The film is purely a European film in every sense of the word (camouflaged as an American film). Its chic. Sophisticated. Funny. Sad. Introspective and fabulous. As I mentioned above, I cried 3 times. First time was during the opening Overture sequence. No credits needed to be seen -- Rob Marshall says it all with that sequence and it is simply breathtaking. The first little 60's 'cinema Italiano' moment (with that 60's music and Guido's little car and la Via Veneto), I was almost out of my seat from the bliss -- it was just all too perfect and delicious.
As my friend said -- the film might not appeal to US audiences: its just too sophisticated.
Time will tell and yes... I could have watched the film from the beginning right after it was over. Its an easy watch.
I also agree with someone else's assessment on another post, the film is actually a straight film WITH musical numbers -- I wouldn't call it a movie musical at all. As a huge fan of the musical I am pleased that they trimmed the score and used what they did. It works for film. It would have been an overwhelming mess if ALL of the score was retained. I also love Marshall's technique of cutting into musical numbers (as he did with CHICAGO) -- from number to present reality, therefore you don't get bored watching a full 3-4 minute song without any visual stimuli. Heck, this technique is even used on stage BUT no one ever mentions that.
Anyway... I'm not going to go into a full detailed review as others have. It was a beautiful film. The film is purely a European film in every sense of the word (camouflaged as an American film). Its chic. Sophisticated. Funny. Sad. Introspective and fabulous. As I mentioned above, I cried 3 times. First time was during the opening Overture sequence. No credits needed to be seen -- Rob Marshall says it all with that sequence and it is simply breathtaking. The first little 60's 'cinema Italiano' moment (with that 60's music and Guido's little car and la Via Veneto), I was almost out of my seat from the bliss -- it was just all too perfect and delicious.
As my friend said -- the film might not appeal to US audiences: its just too sophisticated.
Time will tell and yes... I could have watched the film from the beginning right after it was over. Its an easy watch.
#14
Posted: 12/11/09 at 3:05pm
Thanks for the great review, Brody!
Here's the full (8 page) transcript of the interview with the complete cast from NIGHTLINE last night, 1/3 of which did not make it to broadcast (Hudson's comment about the different needs that the women fulfill for Guido on the 1st page is particularly enlightened, I thought). There's also the interview itself.
LOVELY!
NINE on Nightline
Here's the full (8 page) transcript of the interview with the complete cast from NIGHTLINE last night, 1/3 of which did not make it to broadcast (Hudson's comment about the different needs that the women fulfill for Guido on the 1st page is particularly enlightened, I thought). There's also the interview itself.
LOVELY!
NINE on Nightline
#15
Posted: 12/11/09 at 7:04pm
My mother was basically charmed to death by Kate Hudson on the Today Show this morning promoting Nine. She doesn't even know NINE existed prior but now she wants to see it.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/34377566#34377566
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/34377566#34377566
.jpg?format=auto&width=300)
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $65
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71