chernjam said: "I still think preserving a live stage performance (perhaps with the original Napier sets) and using the opportunity of filming to do things you couldn't do on stage would be the best way to go. Would hate if they de-musicalized any of the score."
I agree, or something in between. This artform, this language is per definition not literal. It is about sung thoughts. About sung notes that are either acting or telling a story that's purely going on in a character's mind (sung thoughts). This is non-literal because in normal life (what film dialogue usually represents) people would never do this. Therefore it is important that the world that is created is non-literal too. Movies that understood this very well are Moulin Rouge, Chicago and Evita. They understand the difference between dialogue and sung thoughts very well. Some scenes take place in undefined spaces (I call them 'spaces of thought', ) because the scene asks for it. It is important to take the audience on the journey of the sung thought. Not literal. The sung thoughts should not only be embraced, but taken to the next level, far, far away from literal reality. A movie that completely missed this point is Les Miserables. I wouldn't even call that a movie because it is a stage performance on a literal street, but then with the worst of both worlds. Bad singing, bad filmmaking and it results in bad acting and a bad performance overall, no understanding of the difference between both worlds in storytelling, wrong pace, wrong angles and zero illusion of sung thoughts, the essence of this artform.
jo said: "Billy Wilder's film noir classic SUNSET BOULEVARD is one of the most admired movies, despite its critique of the Hollywood system.
I think what attracted me to the stage musical is the drama that the composer tried to translate into a musical theatre gift.
I would be sorry to see if the casting of the musical version laid more emphasis on the singing than in the very essence of the dramatic aspects - it has to be an acting masterpiece where singing complements the acting choices! Glenn Close, in that respect, would be excellent in the role of Norma Desmond! "
I agree it has to be an acting masterpiece. But this is a different language, a different ballpark. There already is a film in spoken language, the original film. Truthful acting through song (and not in spite of song, as in the Les Mis film), is a very specific language. Singing only complements an acting choice if the choice does not apologize for the singing (every choice Hugh Jackman makes). It makes the singing performance insincere and therefore harms the acting performance. It becomes a parody, which is too literal/too much like real life, which will never work because the arftorm per definition is not.
This artform on film should use all the magic of filmic editing and creating a certain distance between literal life and sung thoughts. It's not even necessary to see the characters mouthing all the words of the sung thoughts.
Glenn Close has never been able to connect these things, she always separates the singing from the acting, which will never work on film. This film will only be an acting masterpiece when we hear a Norma who knows how to paint with her voice in an extremely subtle way. In "with one look" the first time the line "with one look you know, all you need to know", I need to hear a light head voice, and the line has to have 3 different colors in emotion, first trying to convince Joe with "with one look you know" (dialogue), then the "all" has to be so light that you can see Norma turning into that young girl again, in her mind (sung thought), and then the "need to know" convincing herself even more, getting ready for the next verse. Debra Byrne masters this acting very well. Glen Close just throws out the line in a hoarse, unnuanced, loud way without any acting through song. She acts in spite of song.
Updated On: 1/9/19 at 07:41 AM