The IN THE HEIGHTS Film Adaptation Thread — Page 44

Nocredits said: "BrodyFosse123 said: "I guess it’s safe to assume that tired old mantra “you owe no one an explanation” evaded many. Yikes. The time and energy it takes to write these LONG rants needs to be addressed. So many other ways to be more productive. Go outside and touch grass and feel the sun on your skin. Try it."

Sure. But I would also say the 'productivity' of the people who take the time to read through,then complain instead of engageabout said "rants" should also be addressed.

"

Bro, I don’t read the rants. I just see these LONG ass rants simply by scrolling. The short ones have more informative content than these 5 paragraphs of rants.

''F9,'' the ninth installment of the ''Fast and Furious'' franchise, took the No. 1 spot with $70 million. Notable about its demographic breakdown: Latinos led the pack with 37% of its ticket buyers, followed by Caucasians at 35%, blacks at 16% and Asians/Native Americans/others at 12%. What a shame more Latinos didn't turn out in a sizable fraction of these kind of numbers to support ''In the Heights,'' which opened with only $11.5 million on its debut weekend.

Updated On: 6/28/21 at 11:29 PM

bear88 said: "...with a plot that probably seemed a total mystery to anyone who hasn't already seen the show."

To me that would be the most likely sticking point for drawing a new audience. Without that, or stars, I'm not sure if the knowledge of representation alone would be much of a draw, even for members of the underrepresented/disadvantaged group being represented. I may be extrapolating too freely from my own experience, but I'm part of a disadvantaged group for some intents and purposes, and I'm pretty sure I would not pay money to sit through a film that I didn't think would be my cup of tea even if it was pitched as "Contains a lot of [my group's members]" or "Has a creative team made up entirely of [my group's members]" or similar.

teddy1996 said: "anthony ramos opened up about the colorism controversy: https://twitter.com/apentertainment/status/1408512049324363783?s=21"

Teddy1996, at this point I think you need to seek some help. There must be more pertinent things going on in your life than this nonsense. Are you working? Do you leave the house? Is there a park you can walk to? You seriously need to direct your energy. This is becoming toxic.

BrodyFosse123 said: "teddy1996 said: "anthony ramos opened up about the colorism controversy: https://twitter.com/apentertainment/status/1408512049324363783?s=21"

Teddy1996, at this point I think you need to seek some help. There must be more pertinent things going on in your life than this nonsense. Are you working? Do you leave the house? Is there a park you can walk to? You seriously need to direct your energy. This is becoming toxic."

Im curious what your issue or obsession is with folks who are trying to engage in the relevant conversations on this thread? All this person did was post a link and you think they need to "seek help". Your response reeks of a kind of privilege that, as you would say "is becoming toxic". I would encourage you to try and engage with people instead of writing them off as being nonsensical.

Updated On: 6/28/21 at 06:52 PM

I finally got to see this in a movie theater after about half a dozen viewings on HBOmax. It is easily one of the best stage musical-to-film adaptations. It's truly a wonder to behold on a big screen! What an uplifting and joyous movie to bring us into a post-pandemic summer!

The box office success, or lack thereof, does nothing at all to change its quality!

Updated On: 6/28/21 at 08:41 PM

Nature88 said: "bear88 said:I haven't rewatched it on HBO Max yet so I might rethink some of this. I don't believe any of my gripes had any reason for the film's box office underperformance. But here were my screenplay problems, which include some spoilers:

-- The stage musical didn't have the strongest book but it at least had drama and conflict and told a coherent story. The movieis a pleasant place to hang out, with likeable characters, but the stakes seem pretty low. This is especially noticeable in the Benny/Nina/Kevin storyline. Benny really likes Nina, and he doesn't want to lose his job, but he actually could be dropped from the movieentirely and not much would be lost - aside from Corey Hawkins' pleasantperformance. Benny had ambition. He wanted to take over the car service, but Kevin isn't interested in that for a variety of reasons, sparking conflict in the musical. In the screenplay, the only conflict left is the question of Nina returning to Stanford, and that's resolved without much fuss.

-- The framing device wastes time and sucks what little drama that exists out of the Usnavi/Vanessa relationship. It's safe to assume the outcome of the romance once the identity of a new character is revealed. Plus, it raises pesky questions like: If multiple years have passed, what happened to all of the other characters?

-- Except when she's singing or dancing, Vanessa seems rather dull. She's given a career ambition, which was fine, It's one of the few changes I liked.

-- The loss of "Everything I Know" harmed the movie. The song is both one of Miranda's well-written tearjerkers but also explains more about Abuela Claudia and gives Nina a motivation in song to return to school. In its place, we get the Dreamers subplot, which is topical but doesn't really fit in a movie that keeps the real world at bay even more than the stage musical did. Besides, Hudes never really committed to that subplotso it felt lazy. "Hey, let's make Sonny a Dreamer!"

-- Nina's reason for leaving Stanford has always been an issue, but somehow the new reasons were worse. It didn't even track if you add up the number of months between the supposed triggering incident and her decision to drop out. Didn't she come home over winter break? I'm probably being a little picky on this one.

-- After a strong start, and a decent first half, the screenplay meanders all over the place. I found myself waiting for the next song. I wasn't expecting to be bored. The length of the film wasn't the problem. The screenplay/directorial choices made it feel long.

-- The character's age didn't change from the stage musical, but seeing Sonny played by an actual child in the movie made Usnavi's decision seem like it ought to be obvious. He can always wait a few years to run his father's old bar in the Dominican Republic. Why would he abandon a family member of whom he is obviously very fondand who faces a scary legal situation (and a useless father)? Spoiler alert: He doesn't.

-- The stage musical features a drunken fight, romantic misunderstandings and jealousy, some racial tension, a tear-jerker of a death, fireworks set to avoid looting, and a conclusion that features losses and tentative new beginnings. The movie has mild romantic misunderstandings, a peaceful death, fireworks, and a time-jumped happy ending for one couple.

-- What was up with Miranda using some of his old lyrics in the finale when they made no sense given the new plotline?

-- What was up with the cartoons and other gimmicks? Director Jon Chu really didn't trust the material, did he?

I didn't dislike the movie despite its flaws, and might enjoy it moreon rewatch.I likedmost of the performances and no one was terrible. (I wasn't a big fan of Leslie Grace's singing voice, which is ironic given her background as a singer - not an actor.) I certainly understand the stage musical needed updates to work as a film. But after all of these years, I guess I hoped they could come up with a screenplay that made In the Heightsbetter, not worse."

I completely agree with this analysis. I haven't seen the stage musical but this seems completely on point to me. I thought that even with 2.5 hours somehow nobody had enough to do. Everybody's story seemed really sketched and half-baked. And I agree about there being zero conflict. The songs did not seem motivated to me. It seemed like they wrote a concept album of some songs about a community. And then developed a very vague lose plot to connect the songs. But just overall, it feels like there really is no progression here, no narrative."

I also completely agree with all these thoughts. While I enjoyed the film, it was a meandering miss. I won’t watch it again. They tinkered and tweaked too much dissolving much of what I liked about the show, including much of its stakes and narratives. Then they added the dreamers stuff which seemed out of place.


Many of the dance numbers felt bloated and over produced adding to the length. At times it felt like an overlong Old Navy commercial. Many of the songs aren’t that catchy or character specific. Losing Everything I Know kicks the anchor right out from under the show. I’m surprised LMM allowed that.

I agree that Nina’s new reason for leaving felt like they were trying to shove every current issue into the film. Overkill. I think it’s just as powerful for a woman to say she was unhappy and changed her mind.

I agree that Vanessa is written poorly. She’s flat when she’s not singing. As acted, she’s sullen and melancholy and not very appealing other than her looks and sensuality. That’s disappointing.

The reviews were great and I am sure many, including many young people will grow up having great affection for the film. It wasn’t my cup of tea.

It doesn’t surprise me that the film flopped. It has no stars, no hit songs, no new song released as a single by a hot artist, it’s overly long (people do look at run times) and it’s boring at times. It had no momentum other than theatre nerds and they never pay the bills. Some of the acting was lacking too.


I hope Olga is remembered come awards season. She was incandescent although the staging of Paciencia Y Fe and her death was confounding. For me they ruined the songs power with the hyperkinetic editing and choreography. What a mess.

Updated On: 7/4/21 at 08:42 PM

ljay889 said: "“The stage musical features a drunken fight, romantic misunderstandings and jealousy, some racial tension, a tear-jerker of a death, fireworks set to avoid looting, and a conclusion that features losses and tentative new beginnings. The movie has mild romantic misunderstandings, a peaceful death, fireworks, and a time-jumped happy ending for one couple.”

I completely agree. I like the movie but it’s like they axed any ounce of grit from the stage musical. I understand the main point of the film was to celebrate the neighborhood, but it’s portrayed as such a perfect paradise, it doesn’t even make sense why some of the characters are trying to leave. Also, looting will happen in any widespread blackout in a major city, I don’t like that they cut the reality of that. Everything just feels so “perfect” and sanitized in the film. "


I remember loving the fireworks in the stage show. It was such a crescendo and thrilled me. In the movie, it was a splintered overly edited segment.

When will directors get back to lingering on faces and choreography. That’s what I long for. The jump edits make me think they don’t trust the material, the performers or the audience.

For those of us who loved the film, here’s a fascinating analysis by YouTuber Howard Ho.

Thanks Bear88 for your thoughtful analysis.

Another point about shifting the timing of abuela’s death is simply that it precedes by minutes, but is not acknowledged at, the Carnival del Barrio. When Venessa complains that everyone is happy despite the heat and lack of power, I want to yell at the screen about the beloved neighborhood matriarch who died about three minutes earlier.


ETA: Ok, I just fact-checked my comment and see that Daniella does open the scene by saying “Our matriarch bites the dust and this is how we move on? We are not powerless, we are powerful. If Claudia was here, she would say balance!” I like that. Ignore me.

Updated On: 7/8/21 at 06:33 AM

DottieD'Luscia said: "^Thanks. I saw the film twice (HBO), and missed that both times. . . . "

As did I apparently! I’ll save you a trip to the TV. Someone on YouTube did it for us: