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