The Future of Movie Musicals & Film Adaptations of Musicals

I was talking about this with a fellow musical theatre lover and a very good friend of mine; with the exception of "La La Land" (2016) and "Beauty and the Beast" (2017), there appears to be NO MAJOR film adaptions of Broadway musicals happening in Hollywood. With the new wave of LIVE! Musicals of on TV, I fear for the future of the movie musical genre in Hollywood (especially seeing that the general public seems to despise them! Must we go back and look at the Hate Tweets when Into the Woods was in theaters?!)

Anyway, my 3 part question is this: 1) Are there any planned film adaptions of musicals coming soon that I'm just unaware of? 2) If not, what musical do you think SHOULD be next? And 3) What is your DREAM musical to be made into a movie?

Here is a list of stage-to-screen transfers that I know are currently in the works:

Beautiful: The Carole King Musical-Paul Blake (the lead producer of the Broadway show) is producing with Tom Hanks and Gary Goetzman at Sony with Douglas McGrath adapting his book into a screenplay.

In the Heights-According to Lin-Manuel Miranda, they're currently planning on having it made as an independent film.

Joseph & the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat-Elton John (who has worked with lyricist Tim Rice on The Lion King and Aida) is producing an animated film adaptation.

Matilda-Matthew Warchus is planning to direct with Dennis Kelly adapting his book into a screenplay.

Pippin-Craig Zadan and Neil Meron are producing the film with Harvey Weinstein.

Wicked-This will be made, it will only be a matter of when. Producer Marc Platt has stated that the thing they're waiting for is a screenplay they all feel 100% completely satisfied with.

I'm still waiting for the In the Heights and American Idiot movies, although they couldn't possibly be as good as I want them to be, because Broadway adaptations never are (at least not modern ones). The problem is that they just never attract the top directing talent, for whatever reason.

My dream adaptation would be Chess, directed by Martin Scorsese, with a screenplay that includes spoken dialogue but is not based on the Broadway version (and which excises all the crappy songs from the West End version).

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 11:43 AM

hork said: "My dream adaptation would be Chess, directed by Martin Scorsese, with a screenplay that includes spoken dialogue but is not based on the Broadway version (and which excises all the crappy songs from the West End version)."

Okay, I'll bite. Three things:

* Martin Scorsese? Seriously? I think New York, New York proved musicals are not his strong suit.

* Smart move on cutting the dead weight from the West End version, but...

* ...you really hate the Broadway version? 'Cause at least it's more streamlined than the West End version, which has its pluses, but is uniformly sloppy in its construction with a lot more glaringly weak scenes (almost all but ~25 minutes of Act I is actively bad). Neither show is perfect, and the Broadway version has some obvious weaknesses, but I've always felt it's easier to use the Broadway script as a base and import the preferable changes from London than it is to try and bend the London script into a workable shape.

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 11:55 AM

g.d.e.l.g.i. said: "hork said: "My dream adaptation would be Chess, directed by Martin Scorsese, with a screenplay that includes spoken dialogue but is not based on the Broadway version (and which excises all the crappy songs from the West End version)."

Okay, I'll bite. Three things:

* Martin Scorsese? Seriously? I think New York, New York proved musicals are not his strong suit.

I don't think it proved that at all. It's not one of his best but it's a good film. And anyway, it doesn't have much similarity to Chess beyond being a musical. And I think movies like Goodfellas and The Age of Innocence are better indications of his facility with images tied with music.

* Smart move on cutting the dead weight from the West End version, but...

* ...you really hate the Broadway version? 'Cause at least it's more streamlined than the West End version, which has its pluses, but is uniformly sloppy in its construction with a lot more glaringly weak scenes (almost all but ~25 minutes of Act I is actively bad).

I agree, but I think the Broadway version is even worse. The West End version needed a lot of work, but completely rewriting the plot of Act II and making Freddie the "hero" (if such a word can even apply to this show) was not the answer.

Neither show is perfect, and the Broadway version has some obvious weaknesses, but I've always felt it's easier to use the Broadway script as a base and import the preferable changes from London than it is to try and bend the London script into a workable shape.

Or just write a new script from scratch, based on the concept album and importing the good songs that are missing (like "Someone Else's Story" ) .

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 12:10 PM

Jeffrey Karasarides said: "The problem is that they just never attract the top directing talent, for whatever reason.

There have been several stage-to-screen transfers that were helmed by top directing talent.

A Chorus Line-Richard Attenborough (just coming off of his Oscar wins for Gandhi).
Finian's Rainbow-Francis Ford Coppola (before he made The Godfather).
Jersey Boys-Clint Eastwood (a number of you weren't happy with the film, but I really liked it).
Les Miserables-Tom Hooper (just coming off of his Oscar win for The King's Speech).
Rent-Chris Columbus (just coming off of directing the first two Harry Potter films).
Sweeney Todd-Tim Burton (a number of you weren't happy with this film ether, but I loved it).

I would never, ever consider Richard Attenborough, Tom Hooper, or Chris Columbus "top directing talent." They're much closer to the bottom. Eastwood and Burton's best work is behind them (and as you pointed out, most people weren't happy with their musical efforts). And Finian's Rainbow was almost 50 years ago and is mostly forgotten (I've never even seen it).

I would never, ever consider Richard Attenborough, Tom Hooper, or Chris Columbus "top directing talent." They're much closer to the bottom. Eastwood and Burton's best work is behind them (and as you pointed out, most people weren't happy with their musical efforts).

I could probably understand Columbus because he hasn't really made any films as director that were well received since leaving the Harry Potter franchise. Though he still made other classics such as Home Alone and Mrs. Doubtfire. But how would you not consider Richard Attenborough nor Tom Hooper as 'top directing talent' since they were both just coming off of their Oscar wins prior to making their musicals?

I wouldn't go far to say that the best works of both Eastwood and Burton are behind them. Eastwood's most recent film American Sniper was his best reviewed movie since Invictus back in 2009. Burton does tend to be more divisive when it comes to his filmography. His last two films (Frankenweenie and Big Eyes) are both certified fresh on Rotten Tomatoes.

And I wouldn't say most people weren't happy with any of their musical efforts. The Jersey Boys movie does seem to have a cult following, and Sweeney Todd currently has an 86% on Rotten Tomatoes and also won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture-Comedy/Musical.

There is a huge difference between directing talent in musical film and mainstream film.

Tom Hooper did not understand anything about the material, the timing in many scenes is horrendous. He also does not understand that this material benefits from a less literal approach on film and many of the details are too amateurish for words. He also didn't understand that sung notes can work as actors themselves so not everything has to be spoken with a 5 second vibrato syllable in the middle.

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 12:51 PM

There are scripts for a remake of GUYS AND DOLLS floating around out there too.

(One is written by Danny Strong of EMPIRE fame.) Not sure if any will see the light of day, but we can dream...

The 4 best musicalfilms ever made, directing wise, to me, are:

1. The Sound of Music

2. Evita

3. Moulin Rouge

4. Grease

In terms of great editing, cinematography, the way the scenes work and the way the music is incorporated.

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 12:56 PM

Opinions can differ but I just love Evita.

Especially because of the true filmic quality and extraordinary editing. Time-lapses, sung thoughts, compilation clips, just an emotional triumph of the fantasy. A not-literal approach. Such as in "Another suitcase", "Good night and thank you", "High flying adored", "The lady's got potential" but also the parts in between, it just works.

For example this scene, Santa Evita, gets me every time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K0wjYbkaUs

Same goes for Moulin Rouge. These films are so great that even without the music they will stand.

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 01:07 PM

Answer 1:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8WSysB5vKM

Answer 2:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0K0wjYbkaUs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAZ76v6xg8A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYYyLBYAd8w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sa9oMej5B8

Updated On: 2/5/16 at 01:32 PM

Dave19 said: "Miss Saigon. But not in the Les Mis literal "theatre performance on a pavement in 1 take"-way. This should be a triumph of the fantasy, elaborate cinematography, pre-recorded songs used as voice-over. More like a really good film edited as a bold music video, that will gratify the audiences."

We Get It Please Shut Your Pie-Hole About This Now