Sweeney Todd Movie Review Thread- Page 11

[Perfectly Marvelous]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 2:19pm

I agree with b12b, the choral parts are HIGHLY important in "God, That's Good" and also in "Pirelli's Miracle Elixir". It didn't quite make sense to have Sweeney and Lovett singing whilst everyone else stands around. It definitely would have given that particular number a much fuller sound. Especially in "God, That's Good", a piece which thrives on the customer's chorus. By just having Lovett and Toby sing, it made the otherwise bawdy song barren and dull.

Posted: 12/23/07 at 2:49pm

...& doesnt that add to the perversion of it, the happy satisfied crowd singing along merrily about how good these pies are?

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 4:32pm

I haven't read any of this thread, so I apologize for anything I say that's been said, but here is my review of the film. And I am so sorry for the length...I'm just really passionate about it.


As some of you know SWEENEY TODD has long been my all-time favorite musical. Many people I know do not like it (some who haven’t even seen it) because they don't understand how someone could like a story "like that." To be honest, I think that view of the musical shows, in many ways, the person’s inability to understand what the musical says. Yes, it is a horror musical, and that is part of its goal. But it is also a scorching examination of the darkest side of human nature. And it is an examination that is utterly fascinating.

While any good production of SWEENEY certainly has an indescribable power, there have been three "definitive" productions of SWEENEY that approach the material in different ways. Of the three (Hal Prince's original, John Doyle's revival, Tim Burton's film), I have to say, after thinking about it thoroughly, that I think Burton's achieves the most power out of the three. And thus, it is my favorite.

I know, I know, it is unfair to compare stage to screen. Prince's original production, big and melodramatic, employed a Brechtian approach to the material, something that cannot be achieved through the medium of film. Prince used the show to critically examine the effects of the Industrialization of Western society. On the other hand, Doyle took an extremely psycho-analytical view of the material, and it was endlessly fascinating.

But Burton achieves something completely different. He sees SWEENEY TODD as what it is at its most basic core: the horrifying story of a man gone mad. Sweeney is a sympathetic character at first, yes, but he quickly becomes a monster. He becomes the embodiment of the very worst parts of human nature. And Mrs. Lovett, driven to the brink of madness herself not in a thirst for revenge but an unrequited obsession, adds a horrifying companion to Sweeney's personification of all that is evil within us.

What Burton does that stage productions didn't (perhaps even couldn't) do, is bring the audience into the emotions and lives of these two horrifying yet infinitely interesting characters in an intensely personal way. So personal, so close, that the horror is inescapable.


Burton has always been a visual filmmaker. Stunning visuals, beautiful production design, breathtaking scenery, I think everyone knew, once his name was cemented, that all of these would be present in his film of SWEENEY. And he does not disappoint. Everything about SWEENEY’s visuals and production is perfect, breathtaking and appropriately dark. But storytelling has never been Burton’s strongest suit. This film is where he comes into his own as not just a visual wizard, but as a real filmmaker. Finally, he has learned to fuse his gifts with strong storytelling to produce the finest, most assured film of his career.


On top of the expert filmmaking, Burton secured a cast that I feel, after intense hesitance before seeing the film, I feel can hardly be bettered. Depp delivers the most haunting Sweeney ever. This is not the melodramatic and loud Sweeney of the Prince production or the beautiful-voiced, brooding Sweeney of the Doyle production. Both of those Sweeney’s worked beautifully in their respective productions, but in the world of Burton’s film would have been completely out-of-place. Depp’s Sweeney is real, vengeful, horrifying and unpredictable. But the most important word in there is real.


Helena Bonham Carter’s Mrs. Lovett I’m sure has people divided. It is such a departure from what people familiar with Sweeney are used to. She is quieter, perhaps more unsure about what she is doing. The only thing she is sure about is her desire to have Sweeney all for herself. It is this obsession that is her downfall, in every way. She is evil, but hers, like Sweeney’s, is an evil that is so very hard to understand because it comes from a virtuous emotion deep within that has manifested itself, through her actions, as some of the cruelest acts imaginable.


I’m sure many people are having qualms with the voices of both the leads. And let me first say, no, neither Depp nor Carter could have careers as singers. But they are actors. And they bite into Sondheim’s lyrics with such emotion. Their voices fit the characters perfectly. This is a dark, horrifying musical and, on screen, we are right up with the characters. If Sweeney had a voice like Michael Cerveris, the audience would be taken completely out of the moment. This is not the case on stage, but because of the way Burton approaches the material, the voices had to SOUND like the characters. And they do. Perfectly. Depp in particular brings a voice that tears into Sweeney’s songs. Is it ALWAYS pretty? Maybe not. Is it always appropriate to the character? Yes.


The rest of the cast also are pitch-perfect, particularly Alan Rickman and Timothy Spall. I was quite a fan of the look of Johanna and Anthony. And their exaggerated youth, along with the way John Logan structured his flawless screenplay, helped counterbalance their youth and innocence against Sweeney and Lovett’s corrupt existences. It begs the question, will life turn Johanna and Anthony into the sad, evil adults that populate the world of Sweeney?


John Logan and Tim Burton did a fantastic job in their adapting, particularly in the choosing of songs. I felt, overall, their choice of songs to keep and cut worked beautifully. And that 80-piece orchestra (directed by the wonderful Paul Gemignani and orchestrated by the legendary Jonathan Tunick) sounds GORGEOUS.


I know this is long, and I’m sorry. But I have to quickly list my two favorite moments of the movie. Spoilers for those that haven’t seen it. First, the Johanna counterpoint with Anthony and Sweeney, which is my favorite part of the show, was put together beautiful. It is the most gorgeous music in the show, and counterbalanced with Sweeney’s first killings…it is chilling. And the last 15 minutes are the most chilling of any movie I’ve ever seen. When Sweeney and Lovett waltz before he *SPOILER* pushes her into the furnace *SPOILER* was haunting in a way I have never seen.


All in all, this film is everything a stage-to-screen adaption SHOULD be. It was faithful to the material, but in the move to screen, it brought out things that would not be possible on stage. I feel, that in this production, SWEENEY finally became what it can be. A chilling, haunting, oddly moving examination, through real characters, at the darkest side of us all. I can’t wait to see it again and again. Call me crazy, call me biased…but SWEENEY, to me, is a masterpiece and the finest stage-to-screen adaptation in film history.

[Pippin]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 4:39pm

Wonderful review, priest. I agree with just about everything, and I'm sure a lot of others do as well.

[Pippin]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 5:01pm

this is Ted Behar's laughable review of the movie. God, all the movies he labels as "excessive" or "Abhorrent" are always the ones that I love the best. I guess I'm going to hell.
movieguide.org review.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:13pm

Everything is pagan to him!

[Perfectly Marvelous]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:15pm

I'm glad someone's mentioned Brecht in relation to Sweeney. I have found myself agreeing with the majority of what you have written, Priest.


...& doesnt that add to the perversion of it, the happy satisfied crowd singing along merrily about how good these pies are?

Yes! That is the selling point of "God, That's Good". Cheery customers eating their own townspeople, happily unaware they are partaking in cannabilism. Without that, the humor is sucked out of the song much like the feeling of compassion has been sucked out of Sweeney Todd. You're left with nothing but a hollow shell of what had been.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:22pm

Tim Burton did not want any choral singing in the movie. Is it really THAT hard to get over the missing chorus parts in GOD THAT'S GOOD, and PIRELLI'S MIRACLE ELIXER?

[BustopherPhantom]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:26pm

(WRONG)Someone might have already mentioned this, but did anyone else think it a very awesome addition to give Mrs. Lovett a husband ("me dear Albert") before Sweeney?(/WRONG)

Now that I think back on the film, I think the only real problem is the final sequence. Tim Burton has never been known as an emotional filmmaker, and I think, here, he unintentionally tried to let the visuals give the emotion rather than Mr. Depp, who looked constipated throughout the entire film and deserved to cut loose a bit (not that he wasn't still pretty good).

I say unintentionally because I think, to fully get the emotion the way it's done, you have to like Ms. Carter's interpretation, because she's the one in the room with the most variety. No matter what Mr. Burton says, the story really is partly Mrs. Lovett's.

Oh, and that final image don't hurt either. Damn, that was sad.

P.S. Oh, and I loved Toby's final expression before he leaves the room: Burton has changed him from something evoking Shakespeare's fools to an Avenging Angel, a "you-got-what-you-deserved" guy.

Updated On: 12/23/07 at 06:26 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:29pm

Albert is mentioned in the stage show as well. She talks about him after BY THE SEA.

[BustopherPhantom]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:32pm

Albert is mentioned in the stage show as well. She talks about him after BY THE SEA.

Really?

Damn. I thought I was on to something. Boy, is my face red.

[Perfectly Marvelous]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:36pm

Tim Burton did not want any choral singing in the movie. Is it really THAT hard to get over the missing chorus parts in GOD THAT'S GOOD, and PIRELLI'S MIRACLE ELIXER?


I am not lamenting about his decision. What I was implying is how better the songs would have sounded had the parts stayed in. It's not bothering me half as much as the rushed feeling I got from Sweeney's encounter with the Beggar Woman or the lack of "Kiss Me".

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:38pm

"Tim Burton did not want any choral singing in the movie. Is it really THAT hard to get over the missing chorus parts in GOD THAT'S GOOD, and PIRELLI'S MIRACLE ELIXER?"

Yes. Yes, it is.

A director's vision isn't necessarily the best choice, just because it's his vision.

*****SPOILERS******

It's very much a mistake in my opinion to remove all the choral singing from Sweeney. In addition to isolating the main characters from the "extras" by a strange dividing wall, it causes the group scenes to lose their added energy, AND it draws unnecessary attention to the Beggar Woman. If she's singing she must be important, because nobody else who wanders into any scenes sings, except for the main characters. Even if the audience doesn't "get" that division right away, they sense it. Most everyone who isn't familiar with the plot figures out the Beggar Woman is Lucy from the "God, That's Good" scene. In addition to catching glimpses of her disguised face, she's the only other one singing.

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:39pm

I guess some of you would rather them have cut GOD THAT'S GOOD and MIRACLE ELIXER all together?

Oh wait, everyone would still be bitching. You people will never be happy. Period.

[Perfectly Marvelous]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:47pm

No, that's not it. I actually would have rather seen "Green Finch" get the boot and "Kiss Me" take its place, but you know, that's just MY personal opinion.

Both "God, That's Good" and "Pirelli's Miracle Elixir" work, it's just that they sound very much striped down. That's all. Like I said earlier, the missing choral parts don't bother me half as much as Sweeney's encounter with the Beggar Woman - which ultimately made me feel less sympathetic towards his character at the end.

But, you know, that's just my personal opinion, so take from it what you will...

Updated On: 12/23/07 at 06:47 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:49pm

I disagree about Lucy, Best12 - I saw the film with three people who didn't know the musical and they were all surprised; they figured it out right when Burton wanted them to...

I personally would have liked her to make an appearance at the beginning of the film as she does with Anthony and Todd in the musical, but its a small thing.

As I understand it, the main reason the ballads were cut was because Burton and Logan argued that they are problematic in that they are commenting on the *end result* of the story before the action has happened. For film, you generally want a more linear approach - in which the audience - even if they've seen the previews is "surprised" as the events unfold.

That makes sense to me. I didn't miss them. It would have been fun to have the choral singing in "God That's Good" because it makes the number all the more horrifying that these people vocally love these meat pies. But again, its a small grievance.

I certainly don't think cutting the choral music was the huge mistake Best12 thinks. For one thing, on stage its almost impossible to make out the lyrics to the choral numbers like "The Miracle Elixer" -- I think all the cuts were made to clarify story and to make lyrics more inteligable for film audiences.

I think all are justified.

[TomMonster]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:52pm

I agree, MB. I thought all of the cuts were very judicial.

And the wonderful pieta at the end would lose it's power if there was the infamous "door slam". I felt that the silence before the end credit music was just as loud as any slam could be.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 6:55pm

A film audience also wouldn't have had the patience to sit through all those ballads - they would have felt incredibly repetative in a movie. And absolutely Tom, the power of the final moments of the film is absolutely perfect as is.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 7:04pm

After reading the brilliant ideas Logan had for the first and final Ballads, I sorta wish they kept those in as bookends, though I love the opening credits as they are now. It's probably for the best, but I wish they had been filmed to be seen on DVD later.

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 7:20pm

Well, according to the threads posted here on BWW, people who didn't know are figuring out who the Beggar Woman is from the God That's Good scene. Several people have pointed to that moment exactly.

Read the many posts first. That's where I'm getting my information.

And ljay---No need to fly off the handle and get so defensive. I liked the movie quite a bit. It's a good film. It does have a few things that could have been improved to make it better, and we're discussing that.

If you can't stand the heat...

Updated On: 12/23/07 at 07:20 PM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 7:40pm

On stage, some people figure out who the Beggar Woman is before the ending as well - so there is nothing you could do to insure a total surprise. Regardless, I don't think it makes the ending any less powerful in either situation...

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 7:49pm

I think most people figure it out before Sweeney does too, wherever that may be. And I don't think that's awful, as long as it's not too soon in the plot.

Hitchcock used to love that technique anyway... letting the audience in on the "bomb" before the characters realize there is one planted. He put it this way, which I always loved:

If you have a bomb planted under a table, and it goes off, the audience reacts and is shocked by the impact of the explosion.

If you show the audience the bomb under the table a minute before it goes off... they have the added tension of knowing about the bomb.

It allows the audience to squirm even more before the "explosion."

It's a great technique. So I agree that the audience should figure it out before we see Lucy's demise. It adds to that moment greatly.

But an hour before the end? Probably a tad too soon for the slow build. Still, in a film with closeups, etc., it's hard to hold that secret for very long. Keep her in the shadows forever, and they'll figure it out too.

Posted: 12/23/07 at 8:15pm

I'm glad the Ballads weren't in it, it would've really slowed the film down. I'm glad the chorus parts weren't in the movie, I believe it would've come off as cheesy on film, especially in God That's Good. On stage? Great. On film? Stupid.

[best12bars]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 8:17pm

...one more note...

As far as cutting all the choral numbers (not talking about the Ballad), you're not supposed to understand everything they're singing! Cutting it for clarity was a moot point.

Sondheim wrote it that way!

It's a din of enthusiasm, energy and commotion, which is what we're missing.

The chorus lyrics on "God, That's Good" literally are:

God, that's good, that is de--have you---'licous ever tasted---smelled such---Oh, my God---What's more---That's---pie's good!

Does that sound like he intended for the audience to comprehend a coherent thought?

No. It's a din of bliss, while they enjoy chomping down of the flesh of their neighbors.

Updated On: 12/23/07 at 08:17 PM

[ljay889]

Posted: 12/23/07 at 8:19pm

Here's something to laugh out. An IMDB review claiming every character is emo this is hilarious and idiotic at the same time. Sometimes I read the IMDB boards for a good laugh.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0408236/board/thread/92965029?d=92965029&p=1#92965029