Johnny Depp talks a little about Sweeney Todd movie — Page 3

You people judge too quickly!

And I don't think they'll throw out Sondheim. if that happens, I doubt anyone will see it.

In the case of MY FAIR LADY, it wasn't accepted, at all! The other films, noboby knew about, until way after the fact. Today, though, everybody would know, and it would just alienate everyone. Besides, what would be the point?

Yes, but practically nobody saw that. Which will be the fate of Todd, as well.

I say yes, with Depp in it, if he is dubbed!

I think you're giving the general population too much credit. Today's pop stars are so studio manipulated, and many of their performances are lip synching with pre-recorded vocals and people don't bat a lash. They'll just see Depp's name and that will be enough.

---

I've been excited about Tim Burton since I heard about him doing it, but much less so about Johnny Depp. Yes, he'd act wonderfully, but I'd rather have the entire rest of the cast dubbed than have Sweeney dubbed or, worse, sung poorly. And yes, even if he can sing well, he's 1) likely not the power baritone that Sweeney at least should be and 2) he's not trained and even a crash course in proper singing technique won't be enough for Sweeney friggin' Todd! Was I the only one who liked Russel Crowe?


And I hate to beat a dead horse, but next to Sweeney Todd, Oklahoma! isn't as hard as "Row, Row, Row Your Boat!" At least that one's in around!

---

Updated On: 7/6/06 at 04:00 PM

You do sound like a broken record. Particularly, since I never used the word hard to describe the music in OKLAHOMA!, I said great. The words are not synonomous.

Besides, they don't film the actors singing. They record the tracks afterwards and dub it in. Depp could sing the music as it is filmed and then go back and sing it better in a dubbed vocal track or they could just get someone to sing it for him.

Do you really believe you're telling us something that we don't already know? Also, there have been times when the actors have sung live, and not to a pre-recorded vocal on film, (Rex Harrison in MY FAIR LADY; the cast of the film CAMELOT, to name 2).

Personally I would rather they got someone who could sing to do the role because Johnny Depp honestly isn't the only ****ing actor in the world, but whatever.

He may not be the only ****ing actor in the world, but he's the ****ing actor whose name is in the title of this thread.

Updated On: 7/6/06 at 04:13 PM

I agree with the fact that Depp doesn't have the powerful presence, but that's not my biggest problem - though maybe it should be.

Alright, I'll rephrase myself: Next to Sweeney Todd, Oklahoma! isn't as good as "Row, Row, Row Your Boat." Though even I admit that is at least more so a matter of opinion, even if it is a VERY widely held opinion.

---

Do you really believe you're telling us something that we don't already know? Also, there have been times when the actors have sung live, and not to a pre-recorded vocal on film, (Rex Harrison in MY FAIR LADY; the cast of the film CAMELOT, to name 2).

Well, you sure seemed not to know! Both the examples you gave are from movies made years ago. They wouldn't do that in a million years nowadays. Also, Rex Harrison "talk sings" much of his music, it makes sense that he wouldn't be pre-recorded. I don't know about Camelot, I have a hard time believing that the whole thing was recorded on set, especially considering a lot of the songs are montages. Also another show with "talk singing" in it...

He may not be the only ****ing actor in the world, but he's the ****ing actor whose name is in the title of this thread.

So? I can't express my distaste with the predictable choice of Johnny Depp?

I've stated before in this thread (I think), that one of the things I've never liked about the show (other than the music), is the bombast of the Sweeneys. I think I may prefer a Depp Sweeney, especially without the heavy vocals.

Why? What is a musical if it doesn't have big characters? That's the thematic point. Sweeney Todd is a little man with big ideals. Frankly, I think you would complain about it one way or another. You will not prefer it at all, with or without Depp. You needn't bother yourself with the concern. There's already a film of Oklahoma which I'm sure you own. In fact, there's another with Hugh Jackman that isn't very good but you will still prefer it to Sweeney since it has such glorious, earth shaking music (as I recall the original Curly was performed by Alfred Drake, who definitely had "heavy vocals", whatever that is supposed to mean) , and I'm sure there are countless bootleg copies and high school versions floating around. There you are, now leave us with our wrongheaded enjoyment of Sweeney Todd. We will, at least, go see it if it happens.

---

exactly...I LOATHE Oklahoma but I can appreciate for the landmark musical that it is and love how it progressed the artform I just think it's a pain to sit through. Yeah Sondheim is a whole 'nother level in my opinion.

---

Well, you sure seemed not to know! Both the examples you gave are from movies made years ago. They wouldn't do that in a million years nowadays.

They wouldn't do what, nowadays? I have no idea what you are saying. I think you may have mis-read my original post on it. Besides, they don't make musical films any differently than they did in the 60s.

And, I wasn't comparing OKLAHOMA! to SWEENEY. I never compare one musical to another. And, I wasn't even speaking about the show, but its music. I was saying that musically, it doesn't matter how well Sweeny is sung; and, for me, that was something I didn't like about it. It's oversung, and it isn't necessary. It does matter in something like OKLAHOMA! The fact that Laurey couldn't sing all that well, in the recent revival was an issue. Obviouslly, that's my opinion. For those who like SWEENEY TODD, just as is, you'd never agree. No need to keep disagreeing with me. I'm only stating my opinion. Not disagreeing with you.

Updated On: 7/6/06 at 04:44 PM