Miscast in Movie Musical Adaptations — Page 3

I have just come across a funny anecdote during filming, which unfortunately I have not been able to keep tab of the source. It seems that when they were filming BRING HIM HOME, the rebel students ( known as the "barricade boys", if you had followed the filming process) stood up and clapped when Hugh first sang BRING HIM HOME when they were supposed to be lying down sleeping! A very funny sight!

I do remember that when a great number of us on IMDB followed the filming we would often share the most interesting tweets and developments we have come across. I distinctly remember how a number of the barricade boys ( composed of experienced West End actors, some of whom have portrayed Enjolras or Marius or another key rebel student in the London production ) tweeted how they admired Hugh's take of Bring Him Home. One of them was not just an actor but also a vocal coach. And one of the tweets came from Samantha Barks who was not even supposed to be there but stayed around for the filming.

I guess in our discussions, the twain will never meet...

Chacun a son gout :)

Updated On: 1/21/16 at 01:29 PM

Back to the topic on hand: I dearly wish that Judy Garland was available to play Rose instead of Rosalind Russell in Gypsy and must we forget the tragic misfire of casting Lucille Ball in Mame? I wish I could forget it.

Agreed people want to manage how people see them. Also, I definitely agree that Hugh Jackman was challenged by the score. However, given the total package I can't list a single better choice, not a single one.

http://www.backstage.com/interview/hugh-jackman-les-miserables/

"When director Tom Hooper was looking to cast his Jean Valjean in “Les Misérables,” he quickly realized only one man could pull off the physicality, the dramatics, and the singing. “My shortlist rapidly became one, and that was Hugh Jackman,” Hooper says. “I couldn’t have made this film without him.”..."

My thought with "Les Miserables" was that they should have gone with film names like Jackman (as Javert) and Hathaway (and I bet they BOTH would have won Oscars in the supporting categories) and hired Ramin Karimloo to play Valjean. He would not have struggled with the score and the film would have been better for it. Hooper's insistence on live singing and the resultant close-ups would still have been a problem, so many of us who don't like the film for its static, unimaginative look would still not like it, but at least the score would have been done justice.

jo said: “My shortlist rapidly became one, and that was Hugh Jackman,” Hooper says. “I couldn’t have made this film without him.”...

That's my point. Casting a role as Valjean has nothing to do with "rapid", especially when your "shortlist" always consisted of only 3 names you happen to know.

jo said: "The main challenge in a film adaptation would be the dramatic acting on a big screen! Is Karimloo up to that?

Has he ever acted on film?

"

That's what screentests are for.

Ramin is just 1 name on a huge list of suitable candidates and he wasn't even seen for the role. Typical case of tunnel vision (which the director likes to call "shortlist from the beginning).

I agree, many roles in the film could have been film names, but not Valjean, that role needs more. This film could have been much better with ideas like these.

It looks to me like the director and casting directoir had a severe case of tunnel vision. Especially given the fact that many theatre actors or singers, when given the chance, have proven to set the screen on fire. A screentest would be enough. How can they be so sure that no one can do it? That is just extremely unprofessional.

Updated On: 1/22/16 at 09:55 AM

I think Alfie Boe (who is not an actor) was the only one invited by Tom Hooper to give his point more strength. Very unprofessional to not want to see all the options.

But thanks for your views too. It's always interesting to debate about this.

Edit: I also think that when you create a star, the world is even more eager to see it. Especially when the quality of the performance is outstanding.

Good point.

I think Les Miserables would have actually benefited from a less literal approach because the material is per definition not literal. Playing a bit more with the material, use certain parts as a voiceover, without necessarily mouthing to it, using different editing and cinematography, using pre-recorded parts, etc, to create a certain movie feel. That would make it less comical. Less theatrical. More film-ish. More real.

Updated On: 1/22/16 at 11:55 AM

Which ends up in the action hero fans being disappointed and the movie musical fans being disappointed.

I couldn't tell that it wasn't live and I didn't care, either, which only proves your point.

The Other One said: "jo said: "The main challenge in a film adaptation would be the dramatic acting on a big screen! Is Karimloo up to that?

Has he ever acted on film? "

I guess the answer to your first question is "I don't know", and the answer to your second is "no".

But Jackman's box-office clout owes entirely to his being part of the enormously successful "X-Men" franchise. He has a long track record of bombs otherwise, so casting him involved its own share of risks. There are never any guarantees when it comes to casting.

***********************************************************************************************

Film Casting is not simply box office draw ( although Jackman has racked up a total of $ 5.6 BILLION in box office receipts for his many films to-date), per Box OfficeMojo.

It is primarily to do with his acting talent and whether he is suitable for the role. Hugh has worked with a number of respected film directors and obviously this has been taken into consideration as well.

Have you seen the fine dramatic performances he turned in for films like THE PRESTIGE ( directed by Christopher Nolan), THE FOUNTAIN ( directed by Darren Aronofsky), AUSTRALIA ( directed by Baz Luhrmann), PRISONERS ( directed by rising name Denis Villeneuve) and there was an early Australian film called ERSKINEVILLE KINGS ( a drama involving Sydney's inner city) for which he was awarded Best Actor honors. Of course we know that Tom Hooper is an Oscar-winning director ( for his work in THE KING'S SPEECH). Hugh has also starred in more lighthearted films like KATE AND LEOPOLD for which he won a Golden Globe award ( directed by James Mangold who also helmed Hugh's much-praised THE WOLVERINE) and REAL STEEL which was a commercial hit ( directed by Shawn Levy and exec-produced by Steven Spielberg), and voiceover work in HAPPY FEET which was a huge hit ( directed by George Miller) and FLUSHED AWAY as well as recent work with directors Neil Blomkamp and Joe Wright. He does have a fine and diverse portfolio of films and LES MISERABLES has reinforced his reputation for versatility. In all those films, he has always been praised for his overall portrayals. Some of the films ( like THE FOUNTAIN and THE PRESTIGE) have become cult favorites and the object of revisits by film buffs now. Also, he has a reputation for being a complete professional and being very focused -- which, to a director, is truly a gift when one needs not just the talent but the total commitment of his main actors. Ask any of the directors who have worked with him and you will get very favorable responses. If you remember, he was never absent in any of his year-long stint on Broadway for THE BOY FROM OZ...and his three limited engagements ( A STEADY RAIN, BACK ON BROADWAY, THE RIVER).

A film director has a cinematic vision that he wants to pursue and he will cast the roles and direct the movie the way that will fulfill his artistic vision and hopefully will have broad appeal to the " movie-going " public. It is even more of a challenge when the material is a genre that is not always well-accepted by movie fans. However, that formula worked for LES MISERABLES because it did garner over $ 500 million in worldwide box office receipts plus USA DVD sales. It also garnered a Best Picture nod and several awards/nods for the acting and creative teams.

As I have also said to Dave19, we have different perspectives on film adaptations of stage musicals/original literary work, so I will not pursue the arguments further.

Btw, you may want to look up on YouTube the versions of Valjean's SOLILOQUY by Ramin Karimloo ( mainly audio with photo images), by Alfie Boe at the Royal Variety Show, and Jackman's interpretation in the film adaptation.

Thanks for the exchange of views.

"

Updated On: 1/23/16 at 10:09 AM

skies said: "Richard Gere in "Chicago".

Shirley McClaine in " Sweet Charity"

"

Whoa, what didn't you like about Shirley McClaine in Sweet Charity? Besides running a little long that is one of my favorite stage-to-screen adaptations and McClaine is half the reason I love it so much.