Did we act too soon about movie musicals? — Page 2

I don't know if we "acted too soon", but I do think that the majority of people don't like musicals and don't want to see them. Whether this is because of ignorance of them or what I don't know but when I talk to people at work they're not really interested in them.

I think musicals will probably remain a specialized audience sort of thing. Really, the big recent hits "Cabaret" and "Moulin Rouge" were not blockbusters, they were indie hits. I don't think we can expect the majority of movie goers to want to see them. But I also think maybe the whole idea of "blockbusters" is passing. Attendance at movies keeps dropping and maybe that's the way movies will be heading anyway.

---

Thanks for letting us know that Phantom, I didn't know it had done that well. Again with the specialization of movies a lot of the gross is coming from overseas and my guess would be that musicals would do well in Asian and Indian countries.

---

Attendance may be dropping - but some of the slack are being made up by sales in DVDs. Maybe this is because people do not have time to go out to a moviehouse ( and all the time and effort it requires) and so would prefer to see movies at their own leisure.

Seeing a movie musical on the big screen is such a great experience -- but maybe with the proliferation of excellent home theatres, watching a movie musical at home could be an equally satisfying experience.

What's the DVD sales for PHANTOM OF THE OPERA? I saw the movie twice on the big screen and had pre-ordered the DVD as well.

I think the reason why movie musicals aren't doing that well is because these studios are torn between who to cater to move to: the Broadway fans or the movie fans. Because RENT was a good movie, but the only bankable movie actor in it was Rosario Dawson and she's not even that big.

Same with THE PRODUCERS. Nathan Lane is mired in B-Listness and Matthew Broderick has made a film in a while (well, a film anybody cared to see anyway).

The only reason CHICAGO did so well is because they cast a bunch of bankable movie actors to play the leads -- Catherine Zeta-Jones, Renee Zellwegger, Richard Gere, Queen Latifah, and John C. Riley. Who did RENT have? Rosario Dawson, Taye Diggs, and Jesse L. Martin? The chick from Josie and the Pussycats, the guy from Kevin Hill, and the guy from Law & Order? Not much money in them. But it was a good movie.

I think if studios are gonna continue to make these types of movies and do the stage production any kind of justice, they are gonna have to start doing promotion EARLIER and/or casting movie stars in the leads. Even though, eh, most of them cannot sing or dance to save their lives.

Thanks, Fan2 :)

Phantom of the Opera did $ 64.8 million in DVD/video sales ( I assume this stats is only for the domestic USA market) - even better than cinema box office figures of $ 51 million.

So, there is a market out there - not reckoned in the box office figures.

I did a research paper on the film musical whilst at uni. It doesn't make me an expert, but I did learn a lot about them and their history, particularly at the box office in the United States, and around the world. The movie musical has always been a niche market. Very few musical films, in the history of the cinema were gigantic hits. In fact, by the late 50's, the film musical was considered a dead genre, and a complete waste of money. Almost no musical did well outside of the United States, then WEST SIDE STORY opened, and was an international hit. In countries where an American musical never even played, WSS was a hit. Most of the early 60's musicals were green-lighted because of the success of WSS. Of course, THE SOUND OF MUSIC not only matched the success of WSS, but surpassed it, and became not only the most successful musical in Hollywood history, but for a few years was the most successful motion picutre in Hollywood history. It still ranks as the Number 3 motion picture of all-time, when adjusted for inflation. The biggest problem today, is that the Broadway musical, no matter how successful, is not part of the popular culture like those of the golden age of musicals. As big as THE PRODUCERS was and is on Broadway, it still isn't as big as MY FAIR LADY or THE SOUND OF MUSIC were on Broadway. Not only were they record-breaking shows, but their casts were featured on television variety shows of the day, they're songs became part of the popular hit-parade on radio, and their cast albums went to number 1 on the record charts. That just doesn't happen today. Whatever the successes of today's film musicals (CHICAGO, for example), they don't begin to compare to the phenomenal successes like WEST SIDE STORY, MARY POPPINS or THE SOUND OF MUSIC. I personally know more people who didn't see CHICAGO than did see it. The same cannot be said for WSS or TSOM. The film musical will stay, as long as it make a return on its investment at the theaters. Thus allowing for video releases to be pure profit. When the trend becomes that they are not successful, then Hollywood will stop making them.

---