Could SUNDAY in the Park with George work as a film? — Page 2

That wasn't the question, Mr. Roxy. The question was whether it would WORK as a movie. That's the discussion taking place, don't change the subject.

---

It'd be a lovely film. and really. with a cast of big names, it wouldn't struggle to find an audience at all.

---

In its existing form it would not work as a film. It is too imaginative while film is too literal.

They COULD start with George's Chromolume presentation and follow him to the island where after lesson number 8 he becomes Seurat, taking us back to the start of Act One and following through the finishing of the paining. Then it would fade away and rejoin the last half of Act II. That would put the first act as a concept of Young George imagining what Seurat may have gone through in developing the painting.

I don't get those who don't like the second act of SUNDAY. That is where the show's heart really is. "Children and Art", "Lesson #8", "Move On" and the finale are all incredibly moving and in retrospect make the first act that much stronger.

I have long suspected that those who don't like Act II were frustrated because they hoped the second half would pick up George and Dot's story and bring them together, and even though it does it is in a non-linear fashion.

Those who don't like Act II of SUNDAY, where do you think it should go?

---

"Still want him to direct it?"

I never said I wanted him to direct it - I just described what I'd observed on The Jonathan Ross Show.

I beg to differ Wicked

Whether or not a film will succeed finally does enter into the equation whether it would work as a film. Unlike Broadway where a Sondheim show not making money is the norm, the suits in film will think twice about backing something they know will have no Box office draw. Gross is just as important as artistic merit especially in film.

---

Liking SUNDAY comes with time, especially if you are younger.

I personally LOVE Act 2. I think it's perfect.

And that's fine. But come back to it in 2-3 years. I bet you'll feel differently.

It definitely takes a while for us younger adults. I hated the Broadway cast recording the first time I heard it, but that was mostly because I just didn't get it. I wasn't really ever able to sit down and watch the DVD from start to finish either. It wasn't until the revival came along that I gave it another shot and now it's one of my favorites. It took a few years and I'm not even exactly sure what changed.

I was fairly unimpressed with Depp's singing in Sweeney Todd, even with the benefits of technological enhancements he no doubt enjoyed. And seriously, I'd keep Burton the hell away from this project. He did pretty well with Sweeney Todd, but the world does not need Helena Bonham Carter and her breathy little excuse for a singing voice as Dot.

It's really too bad the originals have aged out of their roles. Mandy Patinkin annoys the crap out of me in non-Sunday musicals, but he has real warmth and presence as a screen actor. And Bernadette will always be Dot to me.

I hate Act 2. Drop it and expand Act 1 to full length. It could be filmed as a regular movie, then when the finale starts, they switch to Imax 3-D.

---

The proposed Follies concept of making it about old-school movie musicals rather than stage follies has so much potential.

It's still awesome to me. :)