Posted: 12/18/21 at 10:21pm
What musical films have you seen that don't really trainslate well in their transfer from stage to screen? I really didn't appreciate that Hans and his father were removed from "Rock of Ages" and didn't care for the ending of "Hairspray", a movie about a character who loves to dance, loses the dance competition to a minor character in the film.
Posted: 12/18/21 at 10:25pm
Cats and Dear Evan Hansen. Highlights are few and far.
Posted: 12/18/21 at 10:46pm
95% of movie musicals.
Posted: 12/19/21 at 1:52pm
Rock of Ages was the first one I thought of. The studio meddling to add more star power led to a near complete overhaul of the plot and characters. It might as well have been called something else.
Posted: 12/19/21 at 1:54pm
TotallyEffed said: "95% of movie musicals."
Exactly. I think it might be an easier/much smaller list to try and think of movie musicals that retain the magic. For me that list is very small: Chicago, maybe the original West Side Story (haven’t seen the remake yet). That’s about it. Others have their moments but there is always something wrong.
Updated On: 12/19/21 at 01:54 PM
Posted: 12/19/21 at 2:41pm
Jersey Boys is a perfect example
Posted: 12/19/21 at 3:08pm
Takes too long to list.
but I will say The Sound of Music on stage will never be better than the movie which I find fascinating.
What elevates Sound of Music is the actual locations and Julie Andrews.
Posted: 12/19/21 at 3:12pm
Come From Away. Which sucks because I'm very supportive of filming shows. The energy of smaller shows just don't translate I think. I have seen CFA 10+ times in person and loved it every time, but the pro shot doesn't do it for me. If I'd only seen that version, I probably would have never physically attended the show.
Posted: 12/19/21 at 3:15pm
For some reason Sweeney Todd always comes to mind, even though I think most stage-to-film musical translations are either beset by embarassment ("sorry, everyone! it's a musical, apologies, sorry"
or stodginess (which is probably just that musical adaptations are so expensive that taking risks in film styling is out of the question). In the theatre, it's an unhinged delight, but in the film, everything moves at such a hurried, subdued pace that the grand guignol aspects don't have the space or time to blossom, which is a shame because some of the gore and imagery is fabulous. Somehow it's too ironical and winking, which lessens both the overall tragedy and the delicious sense of guilty joy over the nightmare unfolding before you.
Maybe just because it comes so close to being so good that it stands out to me, whereas others are more clear failures (A Chorus Line, lol).
Posted: 12/19/21 at 3:34pm
Another vote for Rock of Ages. Hated the casting - Tom Cruise was so wrong as Stacee Jaxx, I couldn't understand how Jack Black wasn't a shoe-in to play Lonny (unless he was and declined). And if they wanted to go for a household name cast, ..why stop with Drew? I also didn't like the plot/character changes, and how they omitted the fact that Sherrie did have sex with Stacee, not the reporter. Not sure if that was because Julianne Hough has (had?) a wholesome reputation they wanted to maintain?
The Rent movie was also disappointing. Even the lip synching looked off and awkward.
On the opposite end however, and I know many disagree, but I LOVED and thought the Phantom movie was beautiful.
Posted: 12/19/21 at 4:13pm
I know I’m in the minority, but I thought the “Fiddler” movie was a downer and didn’t come close to matching the feel/tone of the stage version.
Posted: 12/19/21 at 5:21pm
^ I saw the Fiddler movie on Netflix last summer. Never seen it on stage. Knew there was something I did not like about the film. There was not enough levity!
Posted: 12/19/21 at 7:30pm
Charley Kringas Inc said: "For some reason Sweeney Todd always comes to mind, even though I think most stage-to-film musical translations are either beset by embarassment ("sorry, everyone! it's a musical, apologies, sorry" or stodginess (which is probably just that musical adaptations are so expensive that taking risks in film styling is out of the question). In the theatre, it's an unhinged delight, but in the film, everything moves at such a hurried, subdued pace that the grand guignol aspects don't have the space or time to blossom, which is a shame because some of the gore and imagery is fabulous. Somehow it'stooironical and winking, which lessens both the overall tragedy and the delicious sense of guilty joy over the nightmare unfolding before you.
If you pretend you have no reference to the original show- Sweeney Todd is a phenomenal movie that only gets better with each viewing. I have come to just see it as it’s own thing and enjoy the sort of odd Nosferatu or Cabinet of Dr Caligari esque tone of the world.
And in some ways I wish more movie versions of musicals were bold like Sweeney was to go “let’s make this its own wonderful thing and not fall flat being deeply faithful and keeping no spark.”
Sweeney is better than Les Mis for this reason. Les Mis was bloated and never asked the question “but what would make this a great MOVIE?”
Posted: 12/19/21 at 8:50pm
Everyone's Talking About Jamie
The movie is just OK. Jamie has become annoying and petulant.
The filmed stage production is fantastic.
Updated On: 12/19/21 at 08:50 PM
Posted: 12/19/21 at 10:44pm
BwayLB said: "^ I saw the Fiddler movie on Netflix last summer. Never seen it on stage. Knew there was something I did not like about the film. There was not enough levity!"
Exactly! I saw the film before the show, so was VERY pleasantly surprised by all of the humor and warmth (and this was the 2004 which was criticized for lacking those qualities)!
