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

[Fiction Writer]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:20pm

You people judge too quickly!

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

[bjivie2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:23pm

I can't see how Sweeney could be seen as "dreck." It's Sondheim's best, and one of the best of all time.

Yes, no one would want to see a musical Sweeney with all the voices dubbed. There would be no point nowadays. It wouldn't be accepted as easily as when Marni Nixon's beautiful voice got screwed out of stardom, expecially in a (basically) thru-sung piece like Sweeney.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:32pm

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?

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:44pm

Minnie Driver was dubbed for the POTO film and I heard/saw no outrage from the general public. Many people didn't know, and those who did really didn't care.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:49pm

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

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:50pm

not with Depp in it

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:54pm

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

[wonderfulwizard11]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:56pm

Honestly, I wouldn't care if Depp was dubbed. I think Depp will act the part really well, so if he is dubbed, I won't really care. I would rather see someone with a good voice sing for him instead of Depp singing badly himself.

[colleen_lee]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:56pm

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.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 3:59pm

The difference with pop stars, is that they are lip-synching to their OWN voice. I think if Depp is dubbed, it will get lots of press that he is dubbed, and people will stay away; because, the interest in seeing Depp in a musical would be to hear him sing! Besides, how well can you act SWEENEY TODD, if you're not using your voice?
Updated On: 7/6/06 at 03:59 PM

[jam_man]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:00pm

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

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:01pm

The difference with pop stars, is that they are lip-synching to their OWN voice. I think if Depp is dubbed, it will get lots of press that he is dubbed, and people will stay away. Besides, how well can you act SWEENEY TODD, if you're not using your voice?

Why do you care? You're ridiculous anyway. You hate Sweeney Todd so much, get out of our Sweeney Todd thread :P

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. 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.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:03pm

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.

[SpamalotDiva]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:06pm

wait he sad he didnt singyet... what about cry baby?

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:09pm

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.

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:10pm

oh sorry Johnboy2 I thought you meant that like phantom no one will come see sweeney todd. I meant with Depp as a star...people will come.

I'm just gonna put this out there...does anyone think that Depp doesn't have a powerful enough presence for Sweeney? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying he couldn't do it...but all the other sweeneys at least to me have seemed like bigger built guys with really deep big powerful presences...arghh I have a hard time wording that but even Michael Cerveris project really powerfully where as Johnny always seems very creepy and sly but not that commanding powerful force to be reckoned with. I'm sure he could but just looking at him in a physical sense...I don't know he just wasn't what I pictured as Sweeney singing or non.

[immortalbroadwayLA]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:13pm

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

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:14pm

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've seen. I think I may prefer a Depp Sweeney, especially without the heavy vocals.
Updated On: 7/6/06 at 04:14 PM

[jam_man]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:22pm

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.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:27pm

Okay. Good thing Rodgers and Hammerstein weren't dependent on you to make their show and score an enduring smash.

[Roninjoey]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:29pm

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.

[jam_man]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:32pm

I never said I didn't like Oklahoma! (don't love it, like it) I just said that Sweeney was far better. It is hard to judge really, with the different eras. Without everything Oklahoma! accomplished, Sweeney never would have come close to being, and we'd still be doing musicals with no plot and great, meaningless songs. And I do love a lot of R&H's stuff, such as Carousel and South Pacific, but most Sondheim, put next to it, is far better, IMHO. But that's like comparing La Boheme with Gregorian chant - so much was accomplished and advanced that you can't compare the two directly.

[gustof777]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:36pm

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.

[donna_darko_23]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:39pm

While I enjoy Burton's original work (i.e. The Nightmare Before Christmas, Scissorhands, ect.). I am less than thrilled with his regurgitated versions of movie remakes (Charlie & the Chocolate Factory). I'm just afraid what kinds of liberities his twisted mind might want to make with the movie of of Sweeney.

[JohnBoy2]

Posted: 7/6/06 at 4:44pm

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