Dreamgirls Golden Globes — Page 3

True adaptation is the art of being truthful to the essence from which it is based on. Certainly a film or play cannot include every little gem from the source material.

Still I found it odd that Condo left out one of the funniest and most entertaining scenes from the novel, FATHER OF FRANKENSTEIN where James Whale directs a scene in the film, THE BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN where it appears the blind old hermit is giving Frankenstein a blow job as an in joke. A colleague of Whale tells him he can't put that in the film. Whale explains how no one will notice because he tags the BJ by panning up to a crucifix on the wall. If you watch the movie THE BRIDE this scene is in it exactly as the novelist Christopher Bram describes it. I don't know if this really happened - or if it is an invention of the novelist after seeing this scene in the film or not. Too bad Condon didn't include it.

That aside I thought it was a terrible misstep by screenwriter and director Condon (whether you read the novel or not) to end GODS AND MONSTERS with a sappy coda in which Brendan Fraser's character, Clay shows his son the drawing Whale did for him of Frankenstein and tells his son the director of Frankenstein was his friend of his.

Condon's last image in the film is Clay walking down the alley pretending to be Frankenstein. WE GET IT! The character of Clay symbolizes the Frankenstein monster. The ending is not only sappy, it hits you over the head. Other than the ending I think GODS AND MONSTER is a wonderful film. I love it.

I think DREAMGIRLS is a wonderful film. I love it. As for the ending...


S

P

O

I

L

E

R

*

S

P

A

C

E

*

*

*

I thought it was a terrible terrible mistake to have Foxx's character Curtis - while observing Effie sing with the Dreams in their last performance together - notice Effie's daughter in the audience and figure out that little girl is his daughter. OK. That pretty bad, but Condon makes it even worse by having Curtis leave his box seat in the audience and come down and stand in the aisle and stare at his daughter in astonishment.

This totally pulls the focus away from the Dreams swan song and Effie's big comeback and makes it about some soap opera plot twist. This is totally inappropriate way to end the film. Who is the main character of the film? Curtis? Is that what the whole story is about? Curtis discovering who his daughter is? No. So why does Condon go way out of his way to steer the focus over to this? Bad choice. Doesn't ruin the film for me, but it does end it on a sour false note.

IMO That's why I think Condon has a problem with how he ends his films.

Updated On: 12/14/06 at 01:33 PM

I thought it was interesting that Jamie Foxx purposely did only one take of everything he sang. He wanted it to be raw, and since Curtis was not a singer he didn't want him to come across as a singer. This approach sounded dumb to me, because everyone in a musical needs to be a singer even if their character is mute, ya know what I mean? They need to sing inner monologues or whatever the score has them do. It sounds like Jamie's approach made him come across as lazy...

...can't WAIT to see this movie tomorrow night at the ArcLight!

Mischief, I agree 100% about your assessment on the ending. I thought it was distracting as well

Anika Noni Rose deserved a nomination more than Beyonce.

Beyonce was hardly BRILLIANT in Dreamgirls. They dumbed down Deena and wrote her as if it was Beyonce playing the part. She looked pretty and sang fine. But she didn't have that much dialogue and they cut down part of that awful reunion scene with Effie.

Just wait til she finally does a role where she's required not to sing. Which she won't do cause it will further expose her weak acting skills.

Do people even remember the COMPLETELY naive, innocent Deena of the stage show?

She is ONLY a pawn in the original version. She may sing "No, I've got dreams of my own" in her stage duet with Curtis, but THAT'S IT. We don't see the wheels turning in her AT ALL.

Condon and Knowles managed to stay faithful to the original, and yet "spice her up" with a bit of ulterior motives showing.

Thank GOD. And it was a vast improvement over the original innocent, sweet, reluctant-to-be-famous, and far less dimensional stage Deena.

---

"And totally ruins the whole concept of Deena not being a great singer."

Where on earth did you get that from?

The lines in the show are about Deena not being able to singing like Effie.

"Good" is something you added in yourself.

Deena CAN sing... just not like Effie. Curtis wants a different sound for the group.

The rest is... your speculation that they are talking about quality and not simply style.

---

Well for what its worth, Beyonce just got a great review in the L.A. Times.

Well, I haven't seen the movie yet, but I assume she can act as well as Diana Ross did in her movies, so I don't see the problem, except people love to trash pop stars who attempt to make movies.

until she redeems herself...

Which doesn't doesn't do onstage.

---

Why is Jennifer Hudson under the supporting actress catagory? isn't Effie a larger role than Deena?

I know nothing haven't seen the musical or the movie, this is just what I thought....

---

Random Question:

Emily Blunt got a nomination for PRADA over Anika Noni Rose. That's so messed up.

---

Thanks, Ray! I did not know that...

---

Or me, Marquise. I have to admit she was bad in the other movies I have seen her in, but just watching the trailers and some clips, she looks and sounds great.

CAN'T WAIT!!

---