DEAR EVAN HANSEN Movie Musical - News & Discussion Thread — Page 32

Jordan Catalano said: "Has there ever been a case of a film version actually hurting the currently running show?"

I don’t have an example to provide, but it’s worth mentioning that the TikTok crowd (probably the most crucial ticket sales, as they’ve now gotten to be older teenagers/twenty somethings) has been very vocal about their disapproval of the show’s plot. If the Broadway production doesn’t keep bringing in big names like Jordan Fisher, it’s likely that the (allegedly) very visible story flaws will not only tank the movie, but hurt the chances of these kids wanting to experience that live. The newer generations are becoming very in-the-know about mental health and learning to talk about it. If this movie is as careless as the reviews suggest, they’ll know. And if they don’t notice immediately, their favorite musical theater TikToker will point it out on their own platforms. It’s already been happening to this show’s story for about a year, to the point where it’s now a common point of discussion.

I suspect the reviews coming out of tonight's 92nd Street Y screening/conversation will be more positive, since it should be more of a fan event, unlike TIFF.

Bettyboy72 said: "He would be in such a better place if he just had a cameo as a teacher or guidance counselor walking down the hall and gave a wink or smiled and the film were populated with actual teens. That would have been super cute.

He could then focus on promoting his album and tour. Instead he’s dealing with this steaming turd that has tainted what was a zeitgeist moment of a truly spectacular Broadway performance. His voice was astounding in the show and he sold out the entire run. The original run was a phenomenon. Now it’s attached to this turkey. He needed to leave well enough alone. "

Yes. Yes. Yes.

---

bear88 said: "ijest22 said: "I feel like we’re rushing to judgment here. Most posters haven’t seen the movie yet, and a sizable portion of the reviewers hate the source material. Let’s wait to see it. Honestly, if it makes money, these initial bad reviews will be dismissed. Even if not, for those who love the Broadway show, it may turn out to be ok. "

I saw the preview again tonight. And maybe it will be a disaster, but so many of these harsh reviews just hate the plot. That’s been a source of controversy since the musical debuted, and we’re all familiar with the arguments.

The other big critique is Platt’s performance in the film and I can’t judge that. I haven’t seen the movie.It feels like critics are really gunning for him. Maybe he really is awful, but there’s something odd about the level of vitriol directed at a performance that got so much praise on Broadway."

I don't think that's necessarily odd. Platt's stage performance was very good and rightfully praised- but it was absolutely a very stagey performance. It was big. His gestures and ticks were pitched for the back row of the balcony. His emotions filled the space.

In a theater, that sort of thing can be very impressive. You can get carried away just being in the presence of it. It can paper over and obscure a lot of faults.

But film is a different beast. Platt can't overwhelm the same way, and the material can't hide behind him anymore.

---

Touching on Streisand in the film version of FUNNY GIRL: by the time the film went into production in 1967, she had done extensive television work post Broadway (she left December 1965; did a few week in London early 1966), so she already knew how to modify and adjust her performance style to suit different mediums. If you listen to bootleg audio of her on stage in FUNNY GIRL, you’ll hear her perform the book scenes broader as she was playing to the balcony at the Winter Garden Theatre. For the 1968 film, she knew how to play these same scenes for film cameras (toning things down, etc). Another benefit for her having performed FUNNY GIRL on stage for about 2 years is she knew how to play her scenes and where the laughs would be as during filming no one on set can laugh or react while the cameras are rolling.

Glad people are seeing DEH the way I’ve been seeing it. Bland and a terrible message. The Canadians got it right. Every time a song started I thought “didn’t we already hear this?” (besides “good for you” which I love and was cut.)

Owen22 said: "Well...apparently Stephen Chbosky is an as*hole..

https://twitter.com/epsteindara/status/1436533842203009026?s=19"

Except for you, Benny Boy. You ain't gotta change a god damn thing because Daddy's paying for this.

Jordan Catalano said: "I find the discussion now shifting to “the story sucks because the main character is awful” to be one of the more ridiculous and reaching arguments I’ve ever heard. Are we going to have to start listing great films with leading characters who weren’t pure as the driven snow? This is just getting silly."

But in most cases with leading characters who were notably flawed in big ways, the point is not to spend the movie sympathizing with them and for there to not actually being any repercussions. DEH frames itself as an inspirational movie, but that doesn't gel with a lead character who is a notable asshole.

ijest22 said: "I guess I’m waiting to hear a reaction from someone who liked the musical, the music and Ben’s performance (I believe there are a few of us in that category), who has actually seen the movie,as to whether it’s a good film adaptation and how it holds up to the stage version. I have to dismiss any review that doesn’t like the music. I like the music, and from what I’ve heard of the soundtrack, they haven’t messed with it too much. Maybe I’ll agree that Ben doesn’t convince on screen as a teenager, but so what? If I can give a pass to Julie Harris, I’m open to this."

So as a superfan of the musical - the material, the songs, everything DEH - I saw the TIFF digital stream. However, I was having major buffering issues so had to settle to watch in SD. So I'm waiting to give my thoughts until I see it in the theater on the 23rd.

That being said, I'll will say my initial impressions are not as I would have hoped they would be. It definitely strays in significant ways from the source material, sometimes in a positive way (e.g. the two new songs which I think are both fantastic, and the new ending), and sometimes not so much (e.g. all the cut songs, which I loved, and the minimization of both Heidi's and Connor's roles). As Chbosky said in an interview, he wanted it to be Evan-centric, and that it is.

Given the mixed-to-negative reviews so far, I am really hoping that the movie does not end up having a negative impact on the stage show, which would be a tragedy because I think it is a profound show that has had a positive impact on so many that struggle with anxiety, social isolation, and other mental health issues (including me).

---

Updated On: 9/12/21 at 12:53 PM

This is also why the deaths of Seymour and Audrey don't work in the film of Little Shop but they do onstage. On film it's too real it's too sad, and they're not coming out at the end in funny flower costumes to sing don't feed the plants.

Film and theatre are two different mediums and stuff is simply not always going to transfer cause they have different sensibilities.

The musicals that do really work on film I think it speaks to the strength of their original story onstage. And that film can add something to that story to bring that story out more. Give it roots to thrive.

Which to me is why The Prom DID work as a movie even better.

Updated On: 9/12/21 at 12:59 PM

Side note, I rewatched the film of Jersey Boys recently.

There's no reason that movie was as bad as it was. That story was perfectly suited for film. Clint Eastwood just was out of his element clearly along with other bad decisions.

rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Side note, I rewatched the film of Jersey Boys recently.

There's no reason that movie was as bad as it was. That story was perfectly suited for film. Clint Eastwood just was out of his element clearly along with other bad decisions.

I enjoyed Jersey Boys both on stage and screen