GAG ME WITH A RAZOR: Why I Hate Tim Burton's SWEENEY TODD- Page 3

[SNAFU]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 3:28pm

"like my Grandpa used to say.......opinions are like a**holes, everybody has one."

Yep and everyone's but your own seems to stink! Wise words indeed!

[worrell4077]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 4:39pm

Wow, just wow, you must have alot of time on your hands or no life if you can find that many things that you hate about a film. Jeez, If I hated a film, I would probably only say one or two things, not in the double digits.

The songs were cut or trimmed because Sondheim approved them because he's a big movie guy and he didn't want A Little Priest to be completely intact in the movie because he wanted the movie to be able to move smoothly and not hang on one part for so long. You can have A Little Priest at it's normal length on stage, but it's a different medium with film.

All of the re-edited songs lyrics were by Sondheim and they werek lyrics that had bugged him for along time.

I loved this movie. I thought the sets were beautiful and I thought the singing worked for the movie because you don't need a BIG Broadway voice for a movie. You don't need to be shouting lines or songs in a movie.

You probably went in thinking that it was going to be the stage show and not something different, that's would explain why you had such a bad time with the movie. You really shouldn't be analyzing the movie or looking into a movie too much, and you should really be enjoying it. That's what movies are for, to entertain.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 5:27pm

I don't even think that I hated Troy as much as you seem to hate Sweeney Todd. Wow.

Anyway, I liked it. I had a few issues with it, but what movie doesn't have some problems?

[Not Barker, Todd.]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 5:56pm

I do beleive that Burton actually put more music back IN to the movie once he was at the helm.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 6:00pm

Yes, he re-inserted LOTS of the score. It's amazing how much made it.

[SamIAm]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 6:23pm

That is probably the longest post I have ever read on this board. Having said that, the things with which I agree, among others are:

1) The casting of non-singers in the roles. It seems that nearly every movie musical made in the last 7-8 years has used stars who they know will get some box office attention at the expense of the music. The possible exception to that was The Producers, though even those secondary roles went to Ferrell and Thurman who did a creditable (if not theatrical) job. Still Brooks made the mistake of trying to remake the stage version with little change to staging or perspective. The unfortunate fact of life is that outside of NY no one knows who the Broadway stars are, so that is why Burton and others use the Hollywood stars. I hate it too, but it is reality

2) Sondheim made some sacrifices and approved the casting primarily because, I believe, he felt that it would at least mean that the piece would be seen by a larger audience. It may not meet the standards of NY theater audiences but that again is reality. What I WISH we would do is to film AND release the archives that Lincoln Center keeps. That way, those of us who really want to see the theatrical version can enjoy the performances.

[Pippin]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 6:27pm

umm, then how do you explain Beyonce, Jennifer Hudson, Anika, Nikki Blonsky, Travolta, Queen Latifah, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Michelle Pfeiffer, and James Marsden?

[luvcaroline]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 8:09pm

Oliver, you said "It didn't need a director like Tim Burton, whose overpoweringly weird, grotesque personal vision has dominated most of the films he's made, and I consider it very unfortunate that he was given the assignment."

This property sat on the shelf waiting to be filmed for 26 years. Apparently no one wanted it. I applaud Burton for finally getting this masterpiece to the masses, no matter what faults there were with his final result (although I think that the faults were few).

Here's the best outcome that I can think of for this film, using my experience as an example. I am a huge broadway fan, but have always avoided Sondheim, thinking he's a bit too stuffy for his own good. When I saw Sweeney in the theater, it was my first exposure to any Sondheim piece in full. I absolutely loved it and immediately bought tickets for Sweeney Todd on tour (which I also adored). I then immediately bought the OBC for Sweeney Todd (1981 version) and I now think it may be the greatest CD that I own. The DVD of that production is now on order. Yep, I am now a bonafide Sondheim fanatic and I can't wait to see something else by him (like maybe SITPWG in NYC). I'm sure there are many new Sondheim fans as a result of this film.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 1/22/08 at 11:11pm

[roquat]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 12:50am

Thanks, Oliver. I have little to add, except the fact that Helena also revealed in interviews that she originally wanted to play Lovett in a bigger, showier, sexier style. Perhaps that was the Lovett she showed Sondheim at the audition--the one that he approved--before she and Burton ground the part of Lovett into a humorless, living-dead nightmare.

Like you, I didn't go into SWEENEY the movie expecting to see the Broadway show intact on film. But any criticism of this film is met by certain people on this board as, "well, it's NOT THE BROADWAY SHOW, IT'S A FILM!" No, it's not the Broadway show--not by a long shot. And it doesn't make the show work on film, either.

[Oliver Brownlow]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 8:17am

songanddanceman2 has replied:

"OK so what you wanted was basically a filmed version of the stage show ????"

Actually, Tim Burton's SWEENEY TODD is very little more than a filmed version of the stage show. For the most part, the material has not been re-thought or re-interpreted, it's just that a lot of it's been cut, and additional chunks have been cut out of most of what remains. There's one new scene (Anthony's interview with the Judge in his study), and a dozen or so lines of new, idiotic dialogue have been interpolated into existing scenes. Mrs. Lovett's relationship with Tobias has been reconfigured slightly, with a few lines and some business added to increase audience sympathy for him and a few lines eliminated, apparently, to remove any suggestion that he is childish or mentally impaired. Other than that, the opening scene with Todd and Anthony sailing into the harbor, the shots of Sweeney in the street during "Epiphany," the half-baked attempt at illustrating every type of person mentioned as a possible pie filling in "A Little Priest," and the amusing "By the Sea" sequence, the vast majority of what actually appears on screen comes directly from the stage show. Despite all the bells and whistles, cgi, special effects, buckets o' blood, pretentious art direction, weird costuming, dubious acting, and inadequate vocals, there's been no reorganization of the work into a new conceptual framework that excludes the material that's been cut, in the way that, for example, the new conceptual framework invented for the film version of Kander & Ebb's CHICAGO made it impossible to include the song "Class" because that song couldn't be happening inside Roxie's head. So there's no real reason why all or most of the cut material couldn't have been included. The film's creators seem to have convinced each other that just cutting stuff out was in itself a concept, but it isn't one.

"Every Musical to movie transition has to be changed it someway, what works on a stage does not always work on Film .... "

In general I agree with that statement, but what's fundamentally different about the material that was cut (as opposed to the material that was included) that would have made it "not work" on film? I've heard it said that the "Ballad" was too stagy and wouldn't have worked on film, yet LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS, which is in a number of ways structurally similar to SWEENEY TODD, preserved most of the numbers sung onstage by its "greek chorus" of "urchins," and I thought they worked very well on film. And I see nothing about numbers such as "Ah, Miss" or "Kiss Me" or the "Kiss Me"/"Ladies in Their Sensitivities" Quartet that would have made them unworkable on film. On the contrary, leaving them out creates gaping holes in the narrative.

The always-cringe-inducing Judge's version of "Johanna" might have been more problematic, but in a film that already had an R rating, I see no reason for it not to have been included. And what would have been unworkable about including, say, the section of "Pirelli's Miracle Elixer" that explains why Tobias was allegedly balding although he is only 14 years old ("Scarcely a month ago, gentlemen, I was struck with a 'orrible dermatologic disease ...")? What would have been unworkable about including the middle of "A Little Priest"? Are we to believe that the middle of the song is more unworkable for some reason than the beginning and the end? What would have been unworkable about including the chorus singing the words "God, That's Good!" in a song called "God, That's Good!"? What would have been so unworkable about taking the few seconds it would have taken to include the brief section where Sweeney entices the Judge with thoughts of Johanna right before the final reprise of "Pretty Women" to avoid the absurdity of Sweeney's non-sequiter offer of a shave, which, in the movie, the Judge has no real reason to accept? In the original, it's the Judge himself who suggests "a splash of bay rum" after Sweeney gets him all worked up.

[fabala4077]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 9:19am

Who was Christopher Lee going to play? The judge? He would have been cool, but Alan Rickman did an all right job.

But honestly, they're both amazing.

[StageManager2]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 9:28am

I think Lee was to sing "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" and its several reprises as a voice-over.

[James885]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 9:43am

Cutting the "Kiss Me" quartet was unavoidable because it's such a theatrical song and there's no way it would've worked on film. It's sung by 4 people who are in two different locations. On stage it works because you can accept that Johanna and Anthony are singing in the parlor, while at the same time the Judge and the Beadle are singing while on their way to Todd's place. The only possible way I could see to do this on film would be to do it in split-screen format, which would've looked very awkward and totally ridiculous.

So if the quartet is cut, then the first part has to go as well, because it doesn't advance the plot and is just boring. Sondheim said in an interview something to the effect of if the quartet is gone, then you're just stuck with the lovers in the parlor singing to each other and going on and on.

[Dancin Thru Life]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 9:44am

KUDOS to the OP for His conviction to his cause!

I didn't care for the film either, and I've liked a lot of "bad" movies in the past.

Sweeney just happens to be a bad film that I didn't like.
I wanted to...but didn't.

[Rymes_With_Witch]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 10:02am

I pretty much agreed with all you said, Oliver. I went to this movie not expecting it to be a exactly like the stage musical(just like when you see something adapted from a book...you'll always be disappointed if you expect it to be the same), but hoping to appreciate it as a separate adaptation. I didn't HATE the whole movie, there were certain parts of it I liked (Sacha Baron Cohen was surprisingly enjoyable, for example...as was Jamie Bower as Anthony); the costumes and overall visual style of the film were good. But ultimately I felt that Tim Burton just decided to cast a bunch of his friends in a pet project and didn't really care if they could sing. Helena Bonham Carter especially. Her singing was completely terrible as was the interpretation of the character. I would never believe this person was capable of conspiring murder and making people into pies (which is surprising because I generally enjoy her, and her performance in Harry Potter was a lot closer to what I expected of her as Mrs. Lovett) Also, Johanna/Anthony's storyline was severely underdeveloped (we don't even see them speak to each other until AFTER he breaks her out of Bedlam) and the girl just couldn't sing "Green Finch". The acting was good overall. The blood and gore were completely ridiculous. But there was little to no humor in the movie. The two things about "Sweeney Todd" that made me love the show was the dark humor and the beautiful score. If neither of those things are present, I can't really enjoy it. If I wasn't at all familiar with Sweeney Todd, I might have liked it a tiny bit more, but definitely not loved. I loved the movies of Hairspray, Chicago and Dreamgirls. And they all had changes. But the changes in this movie didn't work for me.

And on a side note...
"Helena Bonham Carter giving one of the most haunting performances in a movie musical since Nicole Kidman's Satine."

Ahahahaha! Stop it. Stop it right now.

Updated On: 1/23/08 at 10:02 AM

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 11:22am

and the girl just couldn't sing "Green Finch".

Maybe that was the point? In the lyrics, she implores the bird to teach her how to sing.

[Rymes_With_Witch]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 11:34am

LMAO...Good point, Phyllis...

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 11:37am

Jayne was okay, but her voice was kind of thin and I didn't find her a very good actress.

It's not all her fault, though: Johanna didn't have much of a chance to show her personality in the movie because "Kiss Me" was cut. Theatrical song or not, the story suffered from that scene not being included. Couldn't they at least have had a spoken version in which they agree to get married?

[WordedGrace]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 12:19pm

Everyone's a critic thesedays and entitled to their opinions and views..

Ok, I didn't even buy that one.

[bk]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 12:28pm

All this "it's not the stage show, it's a film" business - they all read it in the Sondheim interview or heard it from someone who read the Sondheim interview - the verbiage is always the same.

[worrell4077]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 3:40pm

Christopher Lee was supposed to play a character called The Gentleman's Ghost, although if they didn't get Rickman, I would think that Lee would have been perfect as Turpin.

[Rymes_With_Witch]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 3:54pm

I don't know about the others, but I haven't read any such article. Its just smart not to go in with such narrow expectations; that applies to any movie adaptation. That was the big debate when the "Hairspray" movie came out...it was different from the musical in a lot of ways, but I felt it could be enjoyed as a separate entity. Of course, thats subjective, but its easier for me personally to enjoy a film when I am not constantly comparing it to the source material. A perfect example is Harry Potter...after the first movie I stopped rereading the books, simply because I didn't want to be comparing them the whole time I was watching the movie. I have since been able to greatly enjoy the movies. Unfortunately I just didn't enjoy Sweeney Todd that much as a movie.

[Oliver Brownlow]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 6:28pm

James885 has replied:

"Cutting the "Kiss Me" quartet was unavoidable because it's such a theatrical song and there's no way it would've worked on film. It's sung by 4 people who are in two different locations."

I presume you think the "Tonight" Quintet, which involves a couple dozen people singing in five different locations, ought to have been cut from the movie of WEST SIDE STORY on the same basis. And I guess "A Weekend in the Country" should have been cut from the film of A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC, and "Savages" should have been cut from POCAHONTAS. And I presume that you recommend that if LES MISERABLES is ever filmed, "One Day More" should be cut because like all these other numbers, which involve multiple singers singing in counterpoint at multiple locations, it is obviously completely unfilmable.

"On stage [the "Kiss Me" Quartet] works because you can accept that Johanna and Anthony are singing in the parlor, while at the same time the Judge and the Beadle are singing while on their way to Todd's place. The only possible way I could see to do this on film would be to do it in split-screen format, which would've looked very awkward and totally ridiculous."

Nonsense. The split-screen technique is only one of dozens that might have been used to film the "Kiss Me"/"Ladies in Their Sensitivities" Quartet. Even old-fashioned quick intercutting might have done the job nicely. Modern cgi and image manipulation could have been used to create a new kind of "split-screen" effect in which one moving image was laid over another instead of the traditional hard-line separation. Perhaps even a James Cameron-style "flying camera" could have whizzed from the young lovers to the Judge and Beadle, momentarily to Todd and Lovett and back again, encircling the characters, showcasing a panorama of London streets, changing perspective constantly and pushing the sense of danger, speed, and urgency in the song to the breaking point. Or all these techniques could be combined, and others could be invented that I can't begin to imagine. The possibilities are limited only by the imagination of the filmmaker. But obviously, you'll never think of a good solution if don't try to think of any solution. Whether on stage or screen, any jackass can solve the problem of material he or she doesn't know how to direct (or perform) by cutting it. It doesn't take any talent or work or imagination or money or time or intelligence to cut stuff. What requires all of those things is finding ways to illuminate and enhance seemingly difficult or unworkable material so that it engages an audience and serves the whole production.

"So if the quartet is cut, then the first part has to go as well, because it doesn't advance the plot and is just boring."

I wonder how many times I'm going to have to say this: advancing the plot is not the only purpose of songs in musicals. In my view, "Kiss Me" and the "Kiss Me"/"Ladies" Quartet are not intended to "advance the plot." The "Kiss Me" section is intended to enhance the audience's understanding of the characters of the young lovers and their relationship by showing the interaction between them, and the Quartet is intended to build and sustain suspense, first about the possibility that the Judge and Beadle may come home and discover Johanna and Anthony together, and then about what's going to happen when the Judge arrives at Sweeney Todd's tonsorial parlor and asks for a shave. It is also a showpiece of ravishingly beautiful vocal music.

One of the biggest problems with the way the script and score are cut in the film is the way that the way everything is "compressed" prevents anything from breathing or establishing. Events seem to happen almost on top of one another, and suspense is never allowed to develop or build as the cast races toward the conclusion like a company of Keystone Cops. The suspense, as well as the beauty added to SWEENEY TODD by the "Kiss Me"/"Ladies" Quartet on stage is simply absent from the film, and I think it's a major loss.

[BenKaye]

Posted: 1/23/08 at 8:53pm

I'm afraid that this has to stop here Oliver.

Fine, you didn't like the movie. Many people hold that opinion. I'm pretty sure there's a "Sweeney Movie Review Thread" somewhere on this board.

Just because you didn't enjoy this film, doesn't mean you should go and write an essay about it, not to mention, including extremely stupid reasoning as to your "hatred" of the film.

It's called an opinion. It's great to hear you have one.