DEAR EVAN HANSEN Movie Musical - News & Discussion Thread- Page 17

[SouthernCakes]

Posted: 7/20/21 at 9:24pm

Sutton Ross said: "SouthernCakes said: "Eh. I just can’t get behind any of this. This man is here because his father paid for it. They curated a show that best suits his talents. Not saying he isn’t talent. I didn’t see him in the role but he’s clearly a great singer and actor but the fact that his only Broadway credits before this were shows his father has produced just sits weird with me. And how we are all okay with it. How it’s like oh you just need a Tony award winning producer father to get ahead in this business. I don’t know. I think the show - at least on stage - is boring and repetitive. And the trailer is not my thing."

That's a lie and it's important to point that out. Marc Platt had nothing to do with The Book of Mormon. Facts matter.

Source


Daddy does have friends so…

 

[degrassifan]

Posted: 7/20/21 at 9:32pm

131 minutes is long?? This is not a slight to anyone at all (I promise :) ), but I don't get how people think any movie, especially musicals, past 2 hours is long, but can watch Marvel and DC films that are past 135 minutes without any problems. Some people thought In the Heights was long, but it didn't feel long to me. Some even thought the live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast was a little long at 129 minutes. The Sound of Music, Mary Poppins, West Side Story, Olivier!, and My Fair Lady all had long runtimes, but people still watched/watch them, so what makes those different than the modern movie musicals? Genuine question. 

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 7/20/21 at 11:17pm

Sutton Ross said: "SouthernCakes said: "Eh. I just can’t get behind any of this. This man is here because his father paid for it. They curated a show that best suits his talents. Not saying he isn’t talent. I didn’t see him in the role but he’s clearly a great singer and actor but the fact that his only Broadway credits before this were shows his father has produced just sits weird with me. And how we are all okay with it. How it’s like oh you just need a Tony award winning producer father to get ahead in this business. I don’t know. I think the show - at least on stage - is boring and repetitive. And the trailer is not my thing."

That's a lie and it's important to point that out. Marc Platt had nothing to do with The Book of Mormon. Facts matter.

Source


"Daddy does have friends so"

This is the most embarrassed Ive ever felt for anyone on this board. The fact that you simply won't admit that you told a LIE that was debunked in 30 seconds is shocking, hilarious, sad, stupid and deeply disturbing allll at once. 

You lied. Admitting fault is what actual adults do. The fact you refuse to give it up is astonishing. 

Updated On: 7/21/21 at 11:17 PM

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 12:24am

DramaTeach said: "I honestly think that as sad as it is, a modern audience does want to/can’t sit for more than an hour and 45 minutes unless it’s some sort of masterpiece with hype that convinces them they must. People don’t have the attention span anymore."

I think you’re being dramatic. Modern audiences are perfectly able to sit for longer films. There have always been longer films. I can sit for a longer film. I’m an avid film goer. The product needs to warrant a longer run time and attention span. I think it’s sad that modern directors and editors are less judicious and unable to critically look at their work and make appropriate cuts. IMHO In The Heights could have easily shaved 20-25 minutes off. I found myself looking at my watch after the first 90 minutes. 
 

I think what I find bothersome is the norm in films nowadays is to run longer than two hours. I think film makers have a harder time making edits. When you realize an effective film or play can tell a remarkable story often in 80-90 minutes there had better be good reason for all the extra padding. 
 

I’m not a fan of sci-fi, action or any of the marvel universe stuff but I know those films are insufferably long. I don’t know how people do it. Especially with how overstimulating and loud they are. But I’m not a fan of the genre so it’s not possible for me to understand. The receipts speak for themselves. People can and do sit sit for it. 
 

I have no issue with long theatre because there is an intermission. I don’t like missing parts of a film. Long films and film musicals used to have intermissions. When I saw A Chorus Line at the movies as a kid there was an intermission. When I saw Reds and Dr Zhivago at the movies as preteen there was an intermission. Back when movie going felt like a special experience. Now it often feels very guttural. I just hope with baited breath that I’m not placed in a recliner next to someone eating chicken fingers or loaded potato skins or someone who brings a blanket, falls asleep and farts through the movie. 
 

 

Updated On: 7/21/21 at 12:24 AM

[A Director]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 2:19am

Bettyboy72 said: "DramaTeach said: "I honestly think that as sad as it is, a modern audience does want to/can’t sit for more than an hour and 45 minutes unless it’s some sort of masterpiece with hype that convinces them they must. People don’t have the attention span anymore."

I think you’re being dramatic. Modern audiences are perfectly able to sit for longer films. There have always been longer films. I can sit for a longer film. I’m an avid film goer. The product needs to warrant a longer run time and attention span. I think it’s sad that modern directors and editors are less judicious and unable to critically look at their work and make appropriate cuts. IMHO In The Heights could have easily shaved 20-25 minutes off. I found myself looking at my watch after the first 90 minutes.


I think what I find bothersome is the norm infilms nowadays is to run longer than two hours. I think film makers have a harder time making edits. When you realize an effective film or play can tell a remarkable story often in 80-90 minutes there had better be good reason for all the extra padding.


I’m not a fan of sci-fi, action or any of the marvel universe stuff but I know those films are insufferably long. I don’t know how people do it. Especially with how overstimulating and loud they are. But I’m not a fan of the genre so it’s not possible for me to understand. The receipts speak for themselves. People can and do sit sit for it.


I have no issue with long theatre because there is an intermission. I don’t like missing parts of a film. Long films and film musicals used to have intermissions. When I saw A Chorus Line at the movies as a kid there was an intermission. When I saw Reds and Dr Zhivago at the movies as preteen there was an intermission. Back when movie going felt likea special experience. Now it often feels very guttural. I just hope with baited breath that I’m not placed in a recliner next to someone eating chicken fingers or loaded potato skins or someone who brings a blanket, falls asleep and farts through the movie.

IT'S A PROVEN FACT THAT AS PEOPLE GET  OLDER THEIR ATTENTION SPAN GETS SHORTER. FOR SOME, THIS STARTS WHEN THEY HIT 50, LIKE YOU.


"

 

[gypsy101]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 2:52am

oh my god. 2 hours is not too long for movie, get over it.

i am glad the baseball song is gone tbh

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 3:02am

A Director said: "Bettyboy72 said: "DramaTeach said: "I honestly think that as sad as it is, a modern audience does want to/can’t sit for more than an hour and 45 minutes unless it’s some sort of masterpiece with hype that convinces them they must. People don’t have the attention span anymore."

I think you’re being dramatic. Modern audiences are perfectly able to sit for longer films. There have always been longer films. I can sit for a longer film. I’m an avid film goer. The product needs to warrant a longer run time and attention span. I think it’s sad that modern directors and editors are less judicious and unable to critically look at their work and make appropriate cuts. IMHO In The Heights could have easily shaved 20-25 minutes off. I found myself looking at my watch after the first 90 minutes.


I think what I find bothersome is the norm infilms nowadays is to run longer than two hours. I think film makers have a harder time making edits. When you realize an effective film or play can tell a remarkable story often in 80-90 minutes there had better be good reason for all the extra padding.


I’m not a fan of sci-fi, action or any of the marvel universe stuff but I know those films are insufferably long. I don’t know how people do it. Especially with how overstimulating and loud they are. But I’m not a fan of the genre so it’s not possible for me to understand. The receipts speak for themselves. People can and do sit sit for it.


I have no issue with long theatre because there is an intermission. I don’t like missing parts of a film. Long films and film musicals used to have intermissions. When I saw A Chorus Line at the movies as a kid there was an intermission. When I saw Reds and Dr Zhivago at the movies as preteen there was an intermission. Back when movie going felt likea special experience. Now it often feels very guttural. I just hope with baited breath that I’m not placed in a recliner next to someone eating chicken fingers or loaded potato skins or someone who brings a blanket, falls asleep and farts through the movie.

IT'S A PROVEN FACT THAT AS PEOPLE GET OLDER THEIR ATTENTION SPAN GETS SHORTER. FOR SOME, THIS STARTS WHEN THEY HIT 50, LIKE YOU.

But I have no problem paying attention to longer works as I stated. Must you scream? 

 

[dramamama611]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 6:51am

A Chorus Line 1985
Dr Zhivago 1965
Reds 1981

You saw ACL as a kid, but Reds and Zhivago as a preteen? And ACL had an intermission in the movies? It didn't even have an intermission on bway if my memory serves me correctly.

And to A Director: are you really trying to imply that 50 is the end of the world?

[jpbran]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 12:18pm

Not sure if the IMDB song list is very accurate. I thought Anybody Have a Map was confirmed to be gone.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 7/21/21 at 3:33pm

dramamama611 said: "A Chorus Line 1985
Dr Zhivago 1965
Reds 1981

You saw ACL as a kid, but Reds and Zhivago as a preteen? And ACL had an intermission in the movies? It didn't even have an intermission on bway if my memory serves me correctly.

And to A Director: are you really trying to imply that 50 is the end of the world?"

Yes, dramamama. ACL had a break when I saw it the theatre. And we had an old movie palace that showed repertory films, many classics that were longer and they had intermissions. Sometimes they had an organist too. I'm not 50 yet, I guess it was just an attempt to insult me as being decrepit and unable to pay attention. 

I think much of the modern editing, especially in musicals, is for those who can't pay attention, the ADD generation. The quick cuts that don't let you see the choreography I feel is a real cheat to the viewer and the performer.

I will see DEH. I'm curious how they will tackle it. 

 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 7/27/21 at 12:19pm

A film version of Dear Evan Hansen that's over 2 hours? This should be interesting.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/2/21 at 12:10pm

BUMP

This movie only has one month left to be released in theaters.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 8/2/21 at 12:32pm

September 24th

[KnewItWhenIWasInFron]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 11:34am

Bettyboy72 said: "dramamama611 said: "A Chorus Line 1985
Dr Zhivago 1965
Reds 1981

You saw ACL as a kid, but Reds and Zhivago as a preteen? And ACL had an intermission in the movies? It didn't even have an intermission on bway if my memory serves me correctly.

And to A Director: are you really trying to imply that 50 is the end of the world?"

Yes, dramamama. ACL had a break when I saw it the theatre. And we had an old movie palace that showed repertory films, many classics that were longer and they had intermissions. Sometimes they had an organist too. I'm not 50 yet, I guess it was just an attempt to insult me as being decrepit and unable to pay attention.

I think much of the modern editing, especially in musicals,is for those who can't pay attention, the ADD generation. The quick cuts that don't let you see the choreography I feel is a real cheat to the viewer and the performer.

I will see DEH. I'm curious how they will tackle it.

"

Still confused. If you're saying you saw the "A Chorus Line" movie in a theater and there was an intermission, I think you are misremembering. It was released well after the road shows that did sometimes have intermissions, in a time when virtually no movie ever had an intermssion ("Reds" is an exception). And it's not even two hours long!

I love "Chorus Line" so I saw the movie in theaters and, even though it's awful, I saw it more than once in theaters. I am absolutely certain there was no intermission and I can't even imagine where they'd put one if they were inclined to -- which, again, in that time frame, they were not.

Updated On: 8/3/21 at 11:34 AM

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 12:14pm

Is this garnering any sort of award buzz? For a movie thats being heavily promoted Im hearing nada. 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 1:44pm

I think most of the awards buzz might just be focused on Ben Platt and his performance, not so much the film as a whole. But it ultimately depends on the first reviews the movie gets when it opens at TIFF.

[gregnyc2]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 4:15pm

I follow a Lot of film twitter, and there’s maybe 4% who even have DEH in the conversation. Unless Ben is beyond extraordinary, he won’t be nominated - with the backlog of films and just the interest in and quality of the competition this year, Best Actor is way overcrowded. If the film would have been made and released for last year, it’d be a whole different story. Adams and Moore are big question marks as to Supporting - it will all hinge on So Big for Moore, and what exactly Adams gets to do at all (there are very unconfirmed rumors that Anyone/Map has been replaced with a new song - I hope that’s not true. The new song, likely over closing credits, may have a shot for Best Song.

I still don’t know how TIFF is doing the allegedly worldwide streaming on Sept 9 - whether truly worldwide, how many slots open, etc. Agree it all depends on the TIFF reviews, Day and date Sept 9.  DEH would have been catnip to Hollywood Foreign Press, but so long Globes

Updated On: 8/3/21 at 04:15 PM

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 4:30pm

A CHORUS LINE: The Movie runs under 2 hours and like the original Broadway production, did not have an intermission. I saw this 1985 film adaptation twice during its original theatrical run and it did not have an intermission.

[Theatre Fan3]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 6:44pm

Don't be so quick to judge the person who said ACL had an intermission when they saw it.  I have heard of instances where theatres have inserted their own intermission in various films in an attempt to get a few extra $$$'s in concession sales.  This practice is highly frowned upon by the studios and is actually in violation of their license agreements for the showing of their films but, unless someone complains or notifies them, how are they going to know?

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 7:00pm

Theatre Fan3 said: "Don't be so quick to judge the person who said ACL had an intermission when they saw it. I have heard of instances where theatres have inserted their own intermission in various films in an attempt to get a few extra $$$'s in concession sales. This practice is highly frowned upon by the studios and is actually in violation of their license agreements for the showing of their films but, unless someone complains or notifies them, how are they going to know?"

That practice is for movies that run close to 3 hours.  A CHORUS LINE: The Movie runs an hour and 53 minutes.  Even 1997’s TITANIC, which ran a little over 3 hours didn’t have an intermission.  

 

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 7:18pm

gregnyc2 said: "I follow a Lot of film twitter, and there’s maybe 4% who even have DEH in the conversation. Unless Ben is beyond extraordinary, he won’t be nominated - with the backlog of films and just the interest inand quality of thecompetition this year, Best Actor is way overcrowded. If the film would have been made and released for last year, it’d be a whole different story. Adams and Moore are big question marks as to Supporting - it will all hinge on So Big for Moore, and what exactly Adams gets to do at all (there are very unconfirmed rumors that Anyone/Map has been replaced with a new song - I hope that’s not true. The new song, likely over closing credits, may have a shot for Best Song.

I still don’t know how TIFF is doing the allegedly worldwide streaming on Sept 9 - whether truly worldwide, how many slots open, etc. Agree it all dependson the TIFF reviews, Day and date Sept 9. DEH would have been catnip to Hollywood Foreign Press, but so long Globes"

I agree, honestly I think Steven Spielberg and his version of West Side Story has far better chances for awards love (except the Globes for obvious reasons) than Dear Evan Hansen.

[ucjrdude902]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 7:22pm

As of now, there are no Globes in 2022 correct?

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 8/3/21 at 7:27pm

ucjrdude902 said: "As of now, there are no Globes in 2022 correct?"

The 2022 Golden Globe Awards is still happening.  NBC announced months ago it is cancelling plans on airing the ceremony.  The Golden Globe Awards are still happening, nominations will be announced and the ceremony will take place. Until further notice, the ceremony currently has no television broadcast.  

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 8/6/21 at 4:39pm

Back in June, Ben did an interview with The Zach Sang Show and he addressed the criticism of his age in the movie. 

“I think you know people like to have something to say that is negative regardless of what it is and so if my thing is something that I can’t control at all, which is my age, then bring it on. I’m glad it’s not about the performance or my voice or anything that actually matters,” Ben began.

He continued, “I think the reactions is largely from people that don’t know the context of the piece; the fact that I created the role and workshopped it for three years and did all of the out-of-town productions and originated on Broadway and received the accolades that I did.”

Ben then said that people are “not really understanding the fact that, like, were I not to do the movie, it probably wouldn’t get made. And so I think, you know, my defensive response is to want to like, go onto twitter and be like, you know ‘F you guys, like you don’t even know that like this wouldn’t exist without me.’”

Ben did add that his sentiment is “not true entirely” and it’s not his place to say whether the movie would have actually gotten made without him.

I mean, he ain't wrong.

Source

[binau]

Posted: 8/6/21 at 6:25pm

Wouldn’t exist because of nepotism or because of talent/star power?