Steven Spielberg's WEST SIDE STORY - News & Discussion Thread- Page 76

[herewegoabc]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 9:17am

I honestly have no idea what the people claiming "go woke, go broke" are even talking about. It's "woke" to not use brown face in the 21st century? I thought that was just common sense. 

The only other thing would be Anybodys, which none of them would even know about outside the articles regarding the banning of the film in some countries. So in that sense, they're agreeing with those countries? 

It's just people making noise. Same with the people who are claiming it's a sin to "remake a classic." The majority of those people have probably never even seen the 1961 version or at least don't actually care about it.  They're likely not even musical fans. They just want to get online and make nonsensical comments about stuff they know nothing about. 

This movie is amazing. The casting is perfect, all the way down to the background Jets and Sharks. The reimagining and the delving into the whys of these characters has transformed this story for me. I was never much a fan of WSS, but I've seen this movie 6 times and plan to see it as many times as possible before it leaves theaters.

[The Other One]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 10:16am

"It's just people making noise. Same with the people who are claiming it's a sin to "remake a classic." The majority of those people have probably never even seen the 1961 version or at least don't actually care about it. They're likely not even musical fans. They just want to get online and make nonsensical comments about stuff they know nothing about."

Remakes of beloved films are rarely greeted warmly by the public.  There have been many excellent remakes of classic films that were critically dismissed and ignored by moviegoers in all sorts of genres.  The Wages of Fear was remade beautifully by William Friedkin, then at the height of his success, as Sorcerer.  It's almost as though it never happened.  Fritz Lang's M was very thoughtfully adapted by Joseph Losey into a film that absolutely stands on its own.  It is barely acknowledged.  And those are films that were adapted from the German and French languages into English.  

Look at the world of film noir.  The Postman Always Rings Twice was remade by a popular director with two superstars.  It bombed and is never shown or discussed anywhere anymore.  And, right on the heels of West Side Story, a remake of Nightmare Alley has been released, filmed by an Oscar-winning director and starring a bunch of Oscar-nominated (in one case a two-time winning) actors.  I think it is bombing at the box office as well.  

These are the sort of projects that people in the industry appreciate more than people out of it, and many of them get invited to screenings.  Add Covid on to this, plus the fact that the original films both air frequently on TCM. 

Potential salvation lies in the fact that the post-box office after lives of many movies now has as much to do with a film's reputation as its initial response.  Time will tell. WSS is at least likely to be nominated for several Academy Awards. That should impact on its long-term reputation as well.

[JasonC3]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 12:35pm

from New York magazine:

How West Side Story Reset Itself

By Jackson McHenry and Helen Shaw

 

"Vulture’s theater desk considers Tony Kushner’s song reordering as a deep reenvision that changes the musical’s core qualities."

[Musicnut82]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 12:38pm

The Other One said: ""It's just people making noise. Same with the people who are claiming it's a sin to "remake a classic." The majority of those people have probably never even seen the 1961 version or at least don't actually care about it. They're likely not even musical fans. They just want to get online and make nonsensical comments about stuff they know nothing about."

Remakes of beloved films are rarely greeted warmly by the public. There have been many excellent remakes of classic films that were critically dismissed and ignored by moviegoers in all sorts of genres. The Wages of Fear was remade beautifully by William Friedkin, then at the height of his success, as Sorcerer. It's almost as though it never happened. Fritz Lang's M was very thoughtfully adapted by Joseph Losey into a film that absolutely stands on its own. It is barely acknowledged. And those are films that were adapted from the German and French languages into English.

Look at the world of film noir. The Postman Always Rings Twice was remade by a popular director with two superstars. It bombed and is never shown or discussed anywhere anymore. And, right on the heels of West Side Story, a remake of Nightmare Alley has been released, filmed by an Oscar-winning director and starring a bunch of Oscar-nominated (in one case a two-time winning) actors. I think it is bombing at the box office as well.

These are the sort of projects that people in the industry appreciate more than people out of it, and many of them get invited to screenings. Add Covid on to this, plus the fact that the original films both air frequently on TCM.

Potential salvation lies in the fact that the post-box office after lives of many movies now has as much to do with a film's reputation as its initial response. Time will tell. WSS is at least likely to be nominated for several Academy Awards. That should impact on its long-term reputation as well."

It breaks my heart because failure of films like Duel, WSS, Last Night In Soho means that the studios will stop funding movies of this type and focus on the ones that bring home the $$, cure mainly MARVEL, Star Wars, James Bond etc.

I am totally not against superhero movies and I don’t feel happy when/if they bomb cause I enjoy watching them for what they are, popcorn flicks. But art should be diverse and not one dimensional, I hope we don’t lose that. Damien Chazelle put it best  in a recent interview with Spielberg on Spotify - he loved WSS he felt it offers the classic big screen film experience but not in a machine made way but a very hand made tactile personal way, something that becomes more rare. 

It deeply saddens me that those type of films don’t get much traction. 

As far as critical recognition goes, unfortunately nominations are not enough, it needs to win several awards at this point to stand a chance of becoming a deserving film for the ages, especially since the Box Office aspect failed. 

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 12:48pm

SophiaPetrillo said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Start the 1961 movie from Tonight Quintet to the end- it's pretty flawless and understandably won Best Picture."

I can’t disagree with that. I probably overstated when I said the 1961 version paled in comparison. Each movie is brilliant in its own way. I prefer the 2021 version largely because the characters were given backstories, which made their inevitable fates all the more tragic. I felt an emotional connection that I didn’t feel as much with the first one."

A movie made in 2021, with all the technological tools they have available now, better look different than something made in 1961.  And with SS at the helm, you knew it wasn't going to be half ass.  He's a smart guy, and a great director.  He knew taking a classic like this was going to require every shiny dime and nickel the studio had.  I can't see SS tanking his rep on making a half-baked remake of a classic.  There was too much riding on this one.

As for the emotional connections, we live in a world where there is very little room for creating subtlety, allowing the audience to take the characters where they see them personally, or even suspending  disbelief in some cases.  Everything is in your face, all the time.  And everything is explained out down to the last detail because that's what movie audiences expect nowadays.  The less work you have to do, the better.

I thought the 1961 version was quite spectacular for its time actually.  From taking to the streets of Hell's Kitchen, to the performances, which were great.  And I had no problem reading into their characters and motivations; I didn't have to be spoon fed anything to see who they were.   The 1961 version, even today, brings out strong emotions from the characters.

 

 

Updated On: 12/30/21 at 12:48 PM

[bear88]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 1:00pm

It is possible that, in a non-pandemic world, that the West Side Story remake would have done poorly, due to a lack of interest in remakes of classic films or various other reasons. But we’ll never know.

Any explanation that doesn’t pretty much start and end with Covid ignores reality. Adults, and especially adults in ‘blue areas’ where concern about the coronavirus runs high, aren’t going to movie theaters. 

House of Gucci is the only non-Marvel, non-horror, non-franchise original film for adults that will probably scratch out a profit the old-fashioned way. Nobody is going to see critics’ choices in theaters, whether they have big stars or no stars, whether they are musicals or not. They’re waiting for those films to be streamed. Often, people don’t have to wait long, maybe a week, so there can be a token release in a few theaters.

I don’t know when, or even if, adults in blue areas will return to movie theaters. But until then, I think attempts to explain the box office failure of films aimed at adults are kind of a waste of time. With a single exception, they all have failed by traditional standards.

 

[SophiaPetrillo]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 2:22pm

theatreguy12 said: "SophiaPetrillo said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Start the 1961 movie from Tonight Quintet to the end- it's pretty flawless and understandably won Best Picture."

I can’t disagree with that. I probably overstated when I said the 1961 version paled in comparison. Each movie is brilliant in its own way. I prefer the 2021 version largely because the characters were given backstories, which made their inevitable fates all the more tragic. I felt an emotional connection that I didn’t feel as much with the first one."

A movie made in 2021, with all the technological tools they have available now, better look different than something made in 1961. And with SS at the helm, you knew it wasn't going to be half ass. He's a smart guy, and a great director. He knew taking a classic like this was going to require every shiny dime and nickel the studio had. I can't see SS tanking his rep on making a half-baked remake of a classic. There was too much riding on this one.

As for the emotional connections, we live in a world where there is very little room for creating subtlety, allowing the audience to take the characters where they see them personally, or even suspending disbelief is some cases. Everything is in your face, all the time. And everything is explained out down to the last detail because that's what movie audiences expect nowadays. The less work you have to do, the better.

I thought the 1961 version was quite spectacular for its time actually. From taking to the streets of Hell's Kitchen, to the performances, which were great. And I had no problem reading into their characters and motivations; I didn't have to be spoon fed anything to see who they were. The 1961 version, even today, brings out strong emotions from the characters.

You misunderstood what I meant, but ok.

 

[SophiaPetrillo]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 2:22pm

double post
 

Updated On: 12/28/21 at 02:22 PM

[rattleNwoolypenguin]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 2:41pm

Honestly, the future of movie musicals should be straight to streaming! And happily so!

Hollywood has always demanded stars in the movie musicals and we've seen over and over how middling that choice will end up being.

When there isn't box office gross and international distribution appeal on the line, you can just adapt a really great musical on lower stakes, the way we saw with Tick Tick Boom

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 3:00pm

SophiaPetrillo said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Start the 1961 movie from Tonight Quintet to the end- it's pretty flawless and understandably won Best Picture."

I can’t disagree with that. I probably overstated when I said the 1961 version paled in comparison. Each movie is brilliant in its own way. I prefer the 2021 version largely because the characters were given backstories, which made their inevitable fates all the more tragic. I felt an emotional connection that I didn’t feel as much with the first one."

I would add that the choreography in the current version is so much better filmed.  As previously mentioned, it sometimes feels like you are in the middle of it, whereas the original for me looked like it was filmed in a way that every dancer was always on camera, i.e., too stage-bound, whereas this was totally cinematic.

[White_Lotus]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 4:22pm

masterpiece.

necessary? probably not, but so glad that spielberg made it anyway.

a+ performances from faist + debose

alvarez' triple axel during the mambo was breathtaking...just wow

zegler made a luminous maria

moreno was the heart of this

despite the low turn-out i believe time will be kind to this one.

hopefully oscar is kind to it as well.

[Musicnut82]

Posted: 12/28/21 at 4:39pm

I would add that the choreography in the current version is so much better filmed. As previously mentioned, it sometimes feels like you are in the middle of it, whereas the original for me looked like it was filmed in a way that every dancer was always on camera, i.e., too stage-bound, whereas this was totally cinematic."

Apparently that’s what Spielberg and Kaminski (cinematographer) wanted to achieve hence the continuous moving camera, dollies, push ins through the dancers, crane shots etc. They wanted to place the audience on the dance floor, become part of the act and feel the energy and tension. The drawback with that technique is that it misses the choreography as a whole, it’s hard for the camera when it’s inside the dance to capture the whole group. But that didn’t matter than much given that Justin Peck’s choreography was less synchronised ballet like and more carefree/freestyle (for lack of a better word). Spielberg wanted to make WSS choreography more bound to the real world as possible and less to the stage but without losing the elegance and artistry of a stage act that much. It felt that a less gymnastic/ballet style and more freestyle dance act is what suited street gang members more.

Wise went for the full stage-like approach with wide 70mm static outside looking in from a far shots with minimal movement and zoom ins. He wanted to place the audience on the theater seats and let them admire the choreography/artistry in its entirety and full force, like a perfectly conducted symphony orchestra performing in front of you. Robbins’s choreography was clinical, every single movement and every single dancer synchronised to perfection with ballet, liquid and flawless movement. That type of choreography DEMANDED wide group shots, it would have killed the vibe and purpose of Wise’s vision for the film had it followed Spielberg’s approach. 

I feel both  filmmakers, and their teams, achieved what they had envisioned. It’s up to us, the audience to interpret it that way and not make comparisons between the two films, and choose which adaptation suits us best. 

I personally marvel and admire Wise/Robbins’ incredible and unmatched work and see it for what it is, a perfect transfer (technically) of a stage play to the big screen that no one will ever surpass. Nevertheless, I will have to go with Spielberg’s more cinematic, more gritty and grounded to reality approach. It still has its flaws (especially the third act) but to me I feel more immersed and attached to the story than with Wise’s version.

 

Updated On: 12/28/21 at 04:39 PM

[degrassifan]

Posted: 12/29/21 at 1:46am

I really wish people would stop calling this movie a remake because it is not. It’s a second film adaptation of the 1957 stage play.

I don’t think it’s fair to send movie musicals straight to streaming. I like seeing my musicals on the big screen. Why should other genres get that luxury but not musicals? 
 

I’m so heartbroken that history will forever label this movie a bomb. It was made at the wrong time. I truly believe it would’ve done well had it not been for the pandemic. I believe time will be kind to it, and once it’s released on streaming, more people will sing its praises. I hope the Oscars will be kind to it as well. I feel confident it will get a Best Picture nomination for sure. 

[Musicnut82]

Posted: 12/29/21 at 3:24am

I’m so heartbroken that history will forever label this movie a bomb. It was made at the wrong time. I truly believe it would’ve done well had it not been for the pandemic. I believe time will be kind to it, and once it’s released on streaming, more people will sing its praises. I hope the Oscars will be kind to it as well. I feel confident it will get a Best Picture nomination for sure."

I fully share your dismay, it is unfair for such a great film and effort to receive such a poor public attention and pushed aside when other mediocre projects thrive like there’s no tomorrow (cough* cough* Spider-Man).

I wish it could win loads of Oscars to at least solidify its reputation in another way but high unlikely, the competition is stiff. I can see it getting for supporting actress (Ariana DeBose), Costumes and maybe maybe Cinematography for Kaminski (although it will either go to Dune or Power of The Dog). As far as best director that will go to Jane Campion for The Power of The Dog. Power of the Dog will also win best picture this year, very very likely. Unfortunately it doesn’t look that promising for WSS  

 

Updated On: 12/29/21 at 03:24 AM

[The Other One]

Posted: 12/29/21 at 7:11am

degrassifan said: "I really wish people would stop calling this movie a remake because it is not. It’s a second film adaptation of the 1957 stage play."

I understand what you are saying here.  I'm sure most people see the 1951 Show Boat as a remake, ditto the three additional versions of The Front Page, though each is its own different adaptation of an earlier play, too.

Do any of you think the Kushner screenplay will ever be adapted for the stage?  Considering how many revisions of Candide there have been, it might be possible. Wouldn't it be interesting to see how it worked?

 

 

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 12/30/21 at 3:52pm

As theater lovers, we want movies like this to succeed.  We want to believe that younger generations will embrace this kind of movie like we do.  And some will.   Many won't.

We also want to believe that older generations will continue to embrace them.  Which we do.

I'm just not sure how much a movie like this resonates with younger and middle-aged generations, besides just being something to see after you've seen everything else. 

I'm not sure the story is really contemporary enough to touch them. Especially in 2021.  Especially with the music we're seeing in WSS.  I'm a teacher and my students are into a different kind of music.  A different kind of story.  The story behind WSS, as emotional as it is, is vanilla to them.  And the music (outside of the high school's theater department) would draw snickers.  Not oohs and aaahs.  

I expose my students to all kinds of things....classics....contemporary....etc.  But when given the choice on their own, how many would choose to see WSS over Spiderman.  In fact, how many young adults would do the same?  The young men I know would see it as a 'chick flick'.  Sure, they might take their girlfriend to it if the she wants to see it, just to be a good guy, but it won't be at the top of the list for many.

Now again, I'm not saying there aren't younger people who would like it.  It's a very well done movie.   But it certainly speaks as a specific type of genre.  And it doesn't have the edgy groove that something like Hamilton does.  If you're going to try to lure today's generations over to musicals.

Now will this movie gradually inch its way up toward the 100 million mark?  Maybe.  If it wins the Academy Award, that might facilitate the process.

But what about the rest of it?   Again, it's just not a familiar story to them.  Not that it has to be.  But it also doesn't possess the kind of music they're accustomed to.

Are kids nowadays familiar with Steven Spielberg?  Some are, yes. If you tell them what movies he directed.   And they do like them.  But do they care about his ties to WSS?  No.  

It's not an action/adventure movie. It's a musical, which already will not resonate with most young people when they have other more adventurous movies to choose from.  Especially a musical with this genre of music.

As some have noted, the big appeal for this movie I would think will be the older generation.  Many of whom aren't going to the movies right now.   And by the time they're able to will they care anymore about seeing it. Maybe not. My friend in Europe was saying many places over there are going into lockdown again.   Some places here as well.  How long will audiences be willing to give this movie in the theaters?  Who knows?

Too many things to question on this movie and how different audiences would respond to it, in general.

With all of SS's and the studio's money though, maybe he just chalks this up to a passion project.  Something he wanted to do, and did well....with the 100 million dollars he was given to spend on it.   (Jeez, think of all the homeless people you could help out with that!! ). And just not worry about box office. 

 

Updated On: 12/30/21 at 03:52 PM

[theatreguy12]

Posted: 12/30/21 at 4:54pm

SophiaPetrillo said: "theatreguy12 said: "SophiaPetrillo said: "rattleNwoolypenguin said: "Start the 1961 movie from Tonight Quintet to the end- it's pretty flawless and understandably won Best Picture."

I can’t disagree with that. I probably overstated when I said the 1961 version paled in comparison. Each movie is brilliant in its own way. I prefer the 2021 version largely because the characters were given backstories, which made their inevitable fates all the more tragic. I felt an emotional connection that I didn’t feel as much with the first one."

A movie made in 2021, with all the technological tools they have available now, better look different than something made in 1961. And with SS at the helm, you knew it wasn't going to be half ass. He's a smart guy, and a great director. He knew taking a classic like this was going to require every shiny dime and nickel the studio had. I can't see SS tanking his rep on making a half-baked remake of a classic. There was too much riding on this one.

As for the emotional connections, we live in a world where there is very little room for creating subtlety, allowing the audience to take the characters where they see them personally, or even suspending disbelief is some cases. Everything is in your face, all the time. And everything is explained out down to the last detail because that's what movie audiences expect nowadays. The less work you have to do, the better.

I thought the 1961 version was quite spectacular for its time actually. From taking to the streets of Hell's Kitchen, to the performances, which were great. And I had no problem reading into their characters and motivations; I didn't have to be spoon fed anything to see who they were. The 1961 version, even today, brings out strong emotions from the characters.

You misunderstood what I meant, but ok.

"

Apologies.  I added more to my response than was necessary to address your points.  A little convoluted there. 

Focusing back on what you said specifically about characters and their backstories this time (rather than droning on about the other things about the '61 version that I liked), I guess my point was simply that I didn't really need much more backstory than was given in the original because I really felt a connection  to them anyway.  Even not knowing their backstories, I could really draw a connection to their struggles and sorrow.  Always a wrenching musical.  Especially the end.  

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 12/31/21 at 12:43am

Theatreguy12, you're so right about how young adults and kids probably feel about this movie and why they aren't seeing it.

[BJR]

Posted: 12/31/21 at 9:17am

theatreguy12 said: "(Jeez, think of all the homeless people you could help out with that!! "

i know you didn't mean it that way, but of all movies to say that about, when so many are absolute drivel. It's a critical hit and likely to be an Oscar contender. There are many films that cost just as much if not more and are neither.

[Jarethan]

Posted: 12/31/21 at 2:34pm

Musicnut82 said: "
I would add that the choreography in the current version is so much better filmed. As previously mentioned, it sometimes feels like you are in the middle of it, whereas the original for me looked like it was filmed in a way that every dancer was always on camera, i.e., too stage-bound, whereas this was totally cinematic."

Apparently that’s what Spielberg and Kaminski (cinematographer) wanted to achieve hence the continuous moving camera, dollies, push ins through the dancers, crane shots etc. They wanted to place the audience on the dance floor, become part of the act and feel the energy and tension. The drawback with that technique is that it misses the choreography as a whole, it’s hard for the camera when it’s inside the dance to capture the whole group. But that didn’t matter than much given that Justin Peck’s choreography was less synchronised ballet like and more carefree/freestyle (for lack of a better word). Spielberg wanted to make WSS choreography more bound to the real world as possible and less to the stage but without losing the elegance and artistry of a stage act that much. It felt that a less gymnastic/ballet style and more freestyle dance act is what suited street gang members more.

Wise went for the full stage-like approach withwide 70mm static outside looking in from a farshots with minimal movement and zoom ins. He wanted to place the audience on the theater seats and let them admire the choreography/artistry in its entirety and full force, like a perfectly conducted symphony orchestra performing in front of you. Robbins’s choreography was clinical, every single movement and every single dancer synchronised to perfection with ballet, liquid and flawless movement. That type of choreography DEMANDED wide group shots, it would have killed the vibe and purpose of Wise’s vision for the film had it followed Spielberg’s approach.

I feel both filmmakers, and their teams, achieved what they had envisioned. It’s up to us, the audience to interpret it that way and not make comparisons between the two films, and choose which adaptation suits us best.

I personally marvel and admire Wise/Robbins’ incredible and unmatched work and see it for what it is, a perfect transfer (technically) of a stage play to the big screen that no one will ever surpass. Nevertheless, I will have to go withSpielberg’s more cinematic, more gritty and grounded to reality approach. It still has its flaws (especially the third act) but to me I feel more immersed and attached to the story than with Wise’s version.

Brilliantly written.  You should be a film critic. 

 

[Musicnut82]

Posted: 1/1/22 at 11:37am

Jarethan said: "Musicnut82 said: "
I would add that the choreography in the current version is so much better filmed. As previously mentioned, it sometimes feels like you are in the middle of it, whereas the original for me looked like it was filmed in a way that every dancer was always on camera, i.e., too stage-bound, whereas this was totally cinematic."

Apparently that’s what Spielberg and Kaminski (cinematographer) wanted to achieve hence the continuous moving camera, dollies, push ins through the dancers, crane shots etc. They wanted to place the audience on the dance floor, become part of the act and feel the energy and tension. The drawback with that technique is that it misses the choreography as a whole, it’s hard for the camera when it’s inside the dance to capture the whole group. But that didn’t matter than much given that Justin Peck’s choreography was less synchronised ballet like and more carefree/freestyle (for lack of a better word). Spielberg wanted to make WSS choreography more bound to the real world as possible and less to the stage but without losing the elegance and artistry of a stage act that much. It felt that a less gymnastic/ballet style and more freestyle dance act is what suited street gang members more.

Wise went for the full stage-like approach withwide 70mm static outside looking in from a farshots with minimal movement and zoom ins. He wanted to place the audience on the theater seats and let them admire the choreography/artistry in its entirety and full force, like a perfectly conducted symphony orchestra performing in front of you. Robbins’s choreography was clinical, every single movement and every single dancer synchronised to perfection with ballet, liquid and flawless movement. That type of choreography DEMANDED wide group shots, it would have killed the vibe and purpose of Wise’s vision for the film had it followed Spielberg’s approach.

I feel both filmmakers, and their teams, achieved what they had envisioned. It’s up to us, the audience to interpret it that way and not make comparisons between the two films, and choose which adaptation suits us best.

I personally marvel and admire Wise/Robbins’ incredible and unmatched work and see it for what it is, a perfect transfer (technically) of a stage play to the big screen that no one will ever surpass. Nevertheless, I will have to go withSpielberg’s more cinematic, more gritty and grounded to reality approach. It still has its flaws (especially the third act) but to me I feel more immersed and attached to the story than with Wise’s version.

Brilliantly written. You should be a film critic.

Hahaha, thanks man. Appreciate that you liked my review. :) happy new year 

 

[Globefan]

Posted: 1/1/22 at 9:34pm

The movie going public has gotten incredibly shallow, in the last few years especially. 

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 1/2/22 at 2:56pm

I don’t know. I have some controversial opinions. 
 

1. I think the book needs work. Obviously you can’t do that right now, but it felt a little slow. Maybe it’s just not my thing. 
 

2. Justin Pecks choreography is breathtakingly beautiful.

 

3. While Rachel Zegler was phenomenal, I do not see an Oscar in her future. Rita Moreno totally had my heart though. 
 

4. Honestly…maybe I’m a bad judge for saying this-but I don’t think Ansel was that bad. I don’t. 
 

5. the music. Oh god. The music. I love it so much. Such a gift to the musical theater cannon. 

[Theatre Fan3]

Posted: 1/2/22 at 11:06pm

I saw the film twice in IMAX during it's first week of release and loved it.  It didn't make me love the original any less ... I'm happy that I've been given the chance to enjoy and appreciate both of them.  I'm sad that there are probably many people who, under normal circumstances, would have enjoyed seeing this in the theater but, due to covid, will forgo that experience and will opt to watch it at home once it becomes available for streaming or on demand ... such a shame because no matter how great your home theatre setup is, it simply can't compare to seeing it on the big screen.  I decided I wanted to see it once more in a theatre before it quietly disappears from screens and upon checking I noticed that it will be down to 1 showtime a day starting this Tuesday so I plan on going again tomorrow (Monday).  I saw no reason to pre-book the tickets and pay the extra online service charge since there are currently no tickets sold for any of the performances on Monday ... I will just purchase them at the box office when I arrive.  I will also be adding it to my blu ray collection when it becomes available.

Updated On: 1/2/22 at 11:06 PM

[The Other One]

Posted: 1/3/22 at 7:12am

The musical films of 2021 get a shout-out in The Washington Post's Best-Of list, but it isn't West Side Story that takes the chief honor:

'Cyrano' 

Between “In the Heights,” “Annette,” “Tick, Tick … BOOM!” and Steven Spielberg’s glorious revival of “West Side Story,” it’s been a good year for musicals. Joe Wright’s adaptation of Erica Schmidt’s 2018 stage production might be the most transporting of them all. Reprising the role he originated, Peter Dinklage brings deep reserves of pathos — and more than a little edge — to the title character, whose unrequited love for Roxanne chafes against his own hair-trigger temper and bristling self-regard. Wright’s alternately lavish and spare production works in well-tempered harmony with songs written by the National’s Aaron and Bryce Dessner. Admittedly, those numbers begin to sound repetitive and lyrically blunt, but a climactic sequence, set amid soldiers writing letters home from the front, captures the heartbreak and waste of war with aching simplicity.

There is, of course, one glaring omission. but having these five mentioned (I have not seen Cyrano or Annette myself) is surely noteworthy.