It All Depends on 'Dreamgirls' - The Fate of the Movie Musical

[CapnHook]

Posted: 1/29/06 at 11:21pm

http://moviemusicals.net/news.html#012906b

Thoughts?

[respeck]

Posted: 1/29/06 at 11:42pm

Well there was this little movie called Chicago. I heard it did okay. I think as long as there is a director who KNOWS what he or she is doing things are great. It's when people delve in to the unknown (either with the mediums film or musical theatre) that we have problems.

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 12:49am

I don't think movie musicals are going anywhere, I mean somebody will always be making them, however, i think Chicago did help, but prior to Chicago there weren't any, so even if the movie musical craze stops it will most likely pick up a few years down the line.

[BroadwayBoundBoi]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 12:52am

I don't necessarily agree with this ...
Here's the thing...Chicago was not an awsome movie because it was a movie musical that came out during a time when people would be more acceping of movie musicals ...its an awsome movie because its a well done MOVIE - period. If producers and filmmakers would get over the fact that they think people will not accept these movies cause they're musicals then they're focus is not in the right place. With Phantom, ALW was so worried about getting a contemporary audience that he cast a phantom that was neither right singing-wise, but more importantly looks-wise (he was hotter than Raoul and younger than what the phantom should be) and it hurt the movie. Christopher Columbus was so worried about keeping Jonathan Larson's vision that he lost his own vision and ideas. The Producers was just made to capture the memory of the original cast, not to be anything more.

So, for the sake of movie musicals to continue, i think we should stop worrying about how to make audiences accept it and work on making it a GOOD movie ... the audience will fall into place if the work is there! Besides, look at the otherm ovie musicals that are so good other than chicago - Hedwig is a beautiful movie and, yes it was never a huge hit with the box-office, but its a great movie that has its own following.

Make good movies, filmmakers! That will save movie musicals!

[jaso_n]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 2:44am

The problem is, for movie musicals to sell, more and more pop stars are gonna be trying to get involved. Rent and The Producers were both well done films but did not make a huge splash in the theaters. The people that care about musicals will go, but I doubt they are going to make a fan base with a few musicals here and there. Dreamgirls won't make or break the scene, though.

[BroadwayChica]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 2:50am

I completely agree with BroadwayBoundBoi. It's about the QUALITY of the movie, not its genre. The recent movie musicals that weren't successful simply weren't as good as they could have been. Period. There will always be a place for movie musicals, as long as they do them justice.

[ellenoshalom]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 3:13am

Preach on BroadwayBoundBoi! ...Just make Dreamgirls the movie a quality film and later for the targeting a large audience. Make the movie from the heart!

[BwayBaby18]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 4:03am

I liked the producers movie and i thought it was well done...it made me reminsce of old mel Brooks movies with a broadway flare!

[Sant]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 10:02am

Why do they always put this "the fate of movie musicals depends on this movie!!" -label on every film musical that's being made?! It happened with MOULIN ROUGE and CHICAGO and THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA... And it's just BS.

There's been movie musicals that have flopped before these latest not-such-a-big-blockbusters movie musicals and I don't think the success film version of DREAMGIRLS makes any difference.

There have always been movie musicals and whether DREAMGIRLS flops or succeeds doesn't make any difference, there still will be movie musicals even after DREAMGIRLS.

It's just the reporters wanting to be over-dramatic.

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 10:12am

I guess it's human nature to pin genres and trends on everything from television to fashion. If three new sitcoms tank in a given season, the media says "the sitcom is dead." Or if three new reality shows fail, same thing. (Although, personally I WISH the reality show as a genre was dead.)

Movies are the same way. After Dances With Wolves won Best Picture, there was a wave of (mostly "okay" westerns), and then three years later "Unforgiven," (another western) won again. The western was back! Until four or five flops later, and the media proclaimed it dead again.

I completely agree with BroadwayBoundBoi---Make GOOD movies and (as they said so eloquently in "Field of Dreams"), the people will come.

[broadwaysmiles]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 10:34am

The thing about movies, is that 75% of all "current projects" loose money. Most studios make money on movies from DVD sales, merchandise and other royalties. That is why DVDs come out now 4 months after movies are in the theaters.

There is a wonderful book, call "Big Picture" by Edward Epstein, that talks about hollywood financing and how movies make money in international sales and other revenues. I learned so much about Hollywood and movie processing from that book.

Since several of these musicals are not on DVD yet, and the merch sales are not collected yet we do not know how well they have faired. Yes they have not done as well as Chicago, but that does not mean the genre is dead yet.

Posted: 1/30/06 at 10:49am

How can you say there weren't any movie musicals in the past? West Side Story, Carousel, Cabaret, etc.....

[thez914]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 12:09pm

Yeah...if the last movie musical really did star Beyonce, Usher, and Eddie Murphy...

p.s. how cool was the ode to Anika? That's what I'm talkin' 'bout!

[CapnHook]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 1:54pm

You're all losing the point.

Yes, the movie musical will always be here and won't go anywhere. Yes, the point of making a movie of ANY genre is to make a GOOD one. The director should have a clear vision, the script should be solid, the characters should be cast based on who fits the role best, etc.

The POINT is that production companies today are scared. Movie musicals are generally expensive. And then nobody shows up to see it?

The fate DOES rest with 'Dreamgirls' and 'Hairspray' because if both of them tank, I don't think a studio will greenlight a musical for years. The genre will be at a stand-still for a while whereas it could potentially be picked up and go full steam ahead.

Look at all the projects in the works. All DEAD if 'Dreamgirls' & 'Hairspray' don't make money.

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 2:04pm

Actually, movie musicals don't cost any more to make than any other main stream Hollywood movie these days. (not counting low budget indies)

Basically ALL big budget movies are considered a risk out here... not just the musicals.

Updated On: 1/30/06 at 02:04 PM

[CapnHook]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 2:26pm

Yes, true, but due to special effects.

According to Box Office Mojo, 'Phantom' cost $70million, 'Rent' cost $40million, 'Producers' was $45million, 'Chicago' was $45million, and 'Moulin Rouge' was $50million.

Now non-musical movies: 'Brokeback Mountain' cost $14million, 'Capote' was $7million, 'Crash' was $6.5million, and movies with music 'Walk The Line' was $28million and 'Ray' was $40million. Special effects films 'King Kong' was $207million and 'War of the Worlds' was $132million.

So compared to non-musical, non-special effects flicks (and I gave you Oscar contenders), they are significantly less to produce than a musical.

[wickedfan]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 2:57pm

Ahem, but the recent "Fun With Dick and Jane" movie cost $100 million, 'Big Momma's House 2" cost $40 million, "Last Holiday" cost $45 million, and these are all recent big budget movies.
CapnHook, the non-special effects movies you were listing (other than "Walk the Line" and "Ray")-the smaller budget ones-were independant films that have now gone mainstream. Like Focus Features and all that.

[CapnHook]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 3:29pm

This is true. Although most movie musicals in the works are independent going mainstream. Bat Boy, Sweeney Todd, etc.

Regardless, we're getting off-subject. Yes, it costs to make movies. But if you were a production company who was going to give $50 to a new project, and it was down to a movie musical and a straight dramatic film, both with decent scripts, what would you go with? The movie musical whose genre hasn't made money after Producers and Rent (and if after Dreamgirls and Hairspray and let's say they both tank)? Or the straight drama where chances are always up in the air.

Yes, it does depend on Dreamgirls.

[JasonM12480]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 7:59pm

The entire movie industry, as a whole, is in trouble - not just musicals. People either go see a movie, or they don't. We can all sit and analyze why, what statistics, what factors, etc. go into why a movie succeeds or bombs. Everyone had high expectations that King Kong would be this HUGE blockbuster movie, and sure enough, they brought in Debbie Downer (wha-wha) who said "Well, it just didn't make enough money at the box office." I go to see a movie because it has a subject matter I wish to see and observe. I don't go to see a musical because I love musicals and want to support the genre. If I liked the show, I go see the movie version of it. Many comedies have bombed - has Hollywood stopped making comedies? What about all the action/adventure movies that didn't do so well? The list goes on and on. I'm already blue in the face thinking about it.

So if you want to see Dreamgirls, go see Dreamgirls. If you don't, stay home with your dog. The fate of the world does not rest on one movie, I don't think. And if we, the public, would just back off and let things happen as they will, maybe we could stop over-analyzing everything, and just sit back with our gallon of over-expensive popcorn, and enjoy the show :)

[jo]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 8:02pm

Maybe it could also be a matter of changing cultural tastes or preferences.

In the past, when movie musicals were derived from stage shows or were originally scripted/composed, songs from musicals sometimes made it to Billboard charts. They were somewhat considered part of mainstream music.

I think that is no longer true - it would be quite a shock if one sees a showtune being part of top singles lists.

Which is why, no matter what one thinks of "American Idols", I appreciate that there is some effort there to re-establish the appeal of showtunes.

[Katurian2]

Posted: 1/30/06 at 8:04pm

I agree: the movie industry is in trouble. But the movie musical is as well. I read in EW that in 20 or so years, seeing a movie will become like seeing a show. There will be ushers and beautiful lobbies, and the price will rise amazingly high. But, Dreamgirls might determine whether Sweeney Todd goes through and how much money does into Hairspray. I have no doubt that Dreamgirls will be a hit, so I am not worried.