Posted: 5/28/15 at 4:58pm
Has Emma Watson ever sang in any role?
Posted: 5/28/15 at 5:39pm
The only time i have seen her singing, is in the following clip in the film, NOAH...
LINK: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMZJTlObAyM
Posted: 6/3/15 at 10:08pm
Menken announced tonight at Lincoln Center that the film will NOT include any of the songs written for the Broadway production. He has written 3 new songs for the film, in addition to the original animated film's songs. Two of which he described:
Forever More - Beast's song that he sings as he now knows what love is (somewhat replaces If I Can't Love Her (from the Broadway version)
Days In The Sun - a lullaby sung by the objects as they are going to sleep remembering their lives before the spell
Updated On: 6/3/15 at 10:08 PM
Posted: 6/3/15 at 10:18pm
^So it is safe to assume that "A Change in Me" will NOT be in the movie?
Posted: 6/3/15 at 10:43pm
"Menken announced tonight at Lincoln Center that the film will NOT include any of the songs written for the Broadway production. He has written 3 new songs for the film, in addition to original animated film's songs. Two of which he described:
Forever More - Beast's song that he sings as he now knows what love is (somewhat replaces I'f I Can't Love Her (from the Broadway version)
Days In The Sun - a lullaby sung by the objects as they are going to sleep remembering their lives before the spell"
...My hopes have been crushed.
Posted: 6/3/15 at 10:50pm
Why are they making this movie then? I agree with Elfuhbuh, this crushes all hopes I had for this film. I wanted Home, If I Can't Love Her, Me, No Matter What, A Change in Me... All those songs written for the Broadway musical were great. Why are they making the film?
Posted: 6/3/15 at 10:57pm
I'm sad to hear "If I Can't Love Her" won't be part of the film.
Posted: 6/3/15 at 10:59pm
And of all things why would they replace Human Again, a fun, showy number, with a lullaby? (Assuming it is meant to replace that song, since it sounds like both numbers do the same work storytelling-wise.) It's too bad; they have a bunch of perfectly good songs from the stage musical, lying and waiting to be used. Of course, Alan Menken will likely write some great new songs for the movie, but it's just a little disappointing.
Updated On: 6/3/15 at 10:59 PM
Posted: 6/3/15 at 11:09pm
I assume he is writing new songs so that he can be eligible for an Oscar. And maybe they fit the screenplay better? Most people who know B&tB, know the film version and not the Broadway version.
Posted: 6/3/15 at 11:16pm
Maybe the folks at Disney thought that including songs from the Broadway show would have made the film too long for the young kids at the movie theaters. The original film is only 84 minutes long, which is a perfect amount of time for a family-friendly cartoon. Disney's recent non-musical live-action remakes, Maleficent and Cinderella, were 98 and 105 minutes respectively. Maybe that's the running time they are aiming for.
I shared this with former user, beautywickedlover and he was very saddened to hear this. Though he knows now not to return to this website and express how he feels. He has moved on as everyone knows by now.
Updated On: 6/3/15 at 11:16 PM
Posted: 6/3/15 at 11:21pm
"Maybe the folks at Disney thought that including songs from the Broadway show would have made the film too long for the young kids at the movie theater. The original film is only 84 minutes long, which is a perfect amount of time for a family-friendly cartoon. Disney's recent non-musical live-action remakes, Maleficent and Cinderella, were 98 and 105 minutes respectively. Maybe that's the running time they are aiming for."
Maybe, but even just including two or three songs from the stage show would have been fine and not made the movie too long. There are some real gems in the musical's score (If I Can't Love Her, Home, and A Change in Me come to mind), and it's a shame that they won't be heard on the big screen.
But oh well, life moves on, I guess. I have to admit I'm interested in what these new songs will sound like.
Posted: 6/4/15 at 1:12am
He say it's it won't include any songs 'written' for the show, but wasn't human again actually written for the movie but not used (initially ) so maybe it will still be in there
Posted: 6/4/15 at 1:36am
True, but it originated in the stage musical. And it seems like Days In The Sun has the same message.
Posted: 6/4/15 at 1:57am
Was going to say the same thing. ^
Posted: 6/4/15 at 2:14am
But he did say 'written' not originated so it's possible. I guess it depends on how days in the sun is placed and what it's about. It could be a song early on for the objects, one of reflection on the past and then human again being a more positive and hopeful song for the future after belle arrives
Posted: 6/4/15 at 5:49am
Ugh. How dumb. The 2 songs are obviously rip offs of If i cant love her and Human again. Why not just do those songs? They are wonderful.
He say it's it won't include any songs 'written' for the show, but wasn't human again actually written for the movie but not used (initially ) so maybe it will still be in there
The description for DAYS IN THE SUN is pretty much the description of Human Again. Having 2 songs about the same thing would be terrible.
I'm very sad to hear we won't hear Home, Me, No matter what, If I can't love her, A change in me, Maison des lunes and Human again. Those songs really did make the show better. These new songs better deliver.
Updated On: 6/4/15 at 05:49 AM
Posted: 6/4/15 at 5:53am
I assume he is writing new songs so that he can be eligible for an Oscar..
Ugh. I'm getting so sick and tired of songwriters making new songs and taking out the old ones just to win an Oscar. Like what the hell was that Suddenly crap in Les mis? The songs added to the Broadway show are so great and it really seems like a missed opportunity to not use them.
Posted: 6/4/15 at 6:17am
You never know... we may hear the music added to the score, or used during the credits. Although, Enchanted wasn't able to be nominated for Best Score because they used Little Mermaid.
Anyway, I don't see the point in complaining until you've seen the film.
Missed opportunity or not, can we please wait to see the film before you start bashing the creative choices?
Writing original songs gives the actors a chance to add something new, which I'm all for.
(I bet you complained when they added new songs to the Broadway show. "UGH. But the cartoon is SO GOOD. Why did they have to change it? Come on. I bet you did.)
Posted: 6/4/15 at 6:19am
Film adaptations are not meant to be filmed versions of the stage show. Why not wait to see how the live-action movie musical turns out to find out whether the director's cinematic vision gives us an even more entertaining version of this story set to music?
Re SUDDENLY, if you have read the unabridged novel by Victor Hugo, there were two epiphanies of Valjean which he wrote about - the road to virtue envisioned by the Bishop and the road to love which Valjean realized when he found Cosette. In the stage musical of Les Miserables, the latter was not covered ( after getting Cosette from the Thenardiers, Valjean and Cosette never established what initial bond drew them together) and the film adaptation decided to reinforce it. Tom Hooper wanted to tell a more complete story of the life of Valjean. As for the quality of the song, it was nominated for an Oscar.
Updated On: 6/4/15 at 06:19 AM
Posted: 6/4/15 at 6:26am
Being disappointing they are taking out some of the best songs from the show is hardly bashing. I'll still see the film but i really hope the new songs can deliver in a way the others could not. Doubtful but we'll see. Bill Condon did wonderful with dreamgirls so I still have faith, even if there have been many red flags with this film already..
Posted: 6/4/15 at 6:27am
Re SUDDENLY, if you have read the unabridged novel by Victor Hugo, there were two epiphanies of Valjean which he wrote about - the road to virtue envisioned by the Bishop and the road to love which Valjean realized when he found Cosette. In the stage musical of Les Miserables, the latter was not covered ( after getting Cosette from the Thenardiers, Valjean and Cosette never established what initial bond drew them together) and the film adaptation decided to reinforce it. Tom Hooper wanted to tell a more complete story of the life of Valjean. As for the quality of the song, it was nominated for an Oscar.
Well yeah, I understand why the song was put in. It just happened to suck.
Updated On: 6/4/15 at 06:27 AM
Posted: 6/4/15 at 6:55am
As I said, it depends on the lyrics and real meaning of the new song. If its a lullaby it will be a very different style and feel to Human Again, they may lament the past (and could just be a short song too, we know hardly anything after all) in a melancholy way.
Human Again is more upbeat and positive looking to the future, one could be near the start of the movie and the other towards the end. It depends how much they want to develop the objects. The two songs could have similar themes but different meanings/outlooks.
In reality we know very little and people jump to conclusions, like when some characters were listed on Imdb and people were talking backstories etc, and in the end its just characters in the 'Belle' segment.
Posted: 6/4/15 at 7:41am
"And of all things why would they replace Human Again, a fun, showy number, with a lullaby?"
This was in a re-release of the movie, so there's a chance that it could still be in there.
But, yeah, this pisses me off. What's the point of making this damn movie then?
At least, Day in the Sun sounds gorgeous
EDIT: I wonder if they removed the Broadway songs because Emma and Dan couldn't sing them. I'll be so furious if that's the reason why
Updated On: 6/4/15 at 07:41 AM
Posted: 6/4/15 at 9:25am
Posted: 6/4/15 at 10:07am
I'd have to to disagree, Kad. I feel that Beauty was the one time adding new songs to a Disney show really worked and brought more heart to the story. No Matter what and If I can't love her were beautiful additions that brought more depth to the story and moved the plot along seamlessly. It certainly didn't work for Little Mermaid and Lion King is debatable.
