The Last Five Years (The Movie, The Thread)

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:15am

Just finished watching this, god this was awful, the performances are great but the direction and cinematography are atrocious and its clearly directed and written by someone thats NEVER seen the actual show, this is officially Jason Robert Brown selling out, what a disappointment, not surprised that they had such a major problem getting distribution for this.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:27am

I have to strongly disagree. I found this to be a fantastic film with fantastic direction. It was clearly his passion piece, and he had a deep understanding of the piece. The staging of the numbers made them feel fresh, and even though I know pretty much every word and every note, it felt like discovering the piece anew. Yet pretty much every choice was in accordance with the text. It was wonderfully done, and I'll be watching it again soon.

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:36am

it was TOTALLY cliche up to and including



SPOILER alert(?)


Future Jamie singing to past Cathy, what the **** was that, also Nobody Needs To Know, why are they showing him with half a dozen woman, Jamie can be considered a jerk but he isn't a philanderer and at no point until the end is it clear that the person he is sleeping with is Elise

[gypsy101]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:39am

But...the song is him singing to a woman in his bed that isn't his wife. So if he's not a philanderer, he's still an adulterer.

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:43am

but its not A woman its multiple women which totally contradicts whats actually happening in the show which is Jamie sleeps with Elise because unlike Cathy she is supporting his career, he finds justification in that action its not just to sleep around and screw random woman at that point.

[gypsy101]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:47am

I agree that muddles his "justification" for the cheating, which was a misdirection (as you originally stated). I don't think it changes the major point of the song.

[LightsOut90]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:57am

but in the context of a film you can't do that, yes it doesn't change what the song is but its a visual medium portraying that in that way totally distorts THE POINT OF the song.

[SomeOtherMe]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 9:54am

I just finished watching the movie. I thought it was good, for the most part. Though, it would have GREATLY benefitted by adding more dialogue, as the little bit that they did add in really helped me get more into the story and added much more of a cinematic feel. The way it almost always just goes straight into the next song was the wrong choice (in my opinion). Both Anna and Jeremy did great work.

I enjoyed the way most of the songs were staged. A few I thought were the great choices (A Part of That, Moving Too Fast, A Summer in Ohio, NNTK), others I thought were safe and pretty boring (ICDBTT, Schmuel, TNTM), but overall, I very much enjoyed it. I can't complain too much, as a movie being made was so unlikely anyways, I'm just glad it ended up actually happening.

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 12:50pm

I can't even make it through the clips. Jeremy Jordan is just one of those performers I don't like. He comes across as arrogant and obsessively self-aware in everything I've seen from him.

Pass.

Updated On: 2/13/15 at 12:50 PM

[notalwaysontime]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 12:53pm

" not surprised that they had such a major problem getting distribution for this."

What are you talking about? It's being distributed how they want to. They don't want to over distribute it, because it's a very niche film and no matter what they did it wasn't goin to be a huge seller because they made it strictly for fans of the musical and if anyone else happened to come along and fall in love with it, awesome! This was one of, if not the first movie at TIFF (i'm pretty sure it was the first) to get a distribution deal, even before it had its first screening, and for a movie that's so little, being released after only a year and a half since it wrapped filming is pretty amazing. You're just talking out of your ass.

Re: nobody needs to know, first off, in see i'm smiling, cathy says "little girlfriendS" plural, so it's a justified choice imo. But also, from Richard at the Q&A after the screening I was at, he explained why he chose multiple women for that scene. I took audio of the q&a so i'll just transcribe, because he said jason asked him why too. "I looked at the lyrics. And the truth, it felt to me. In a miracle would happen, he's suddenly famous, now a guy who has that ego, who's suddenly being recognized for his talent, and all he sees are the women, so logically, to me, the process would be, first he starts having meaningless sex, meaningless affairs, and then of course they become empty and then he starts to go, he finds one where he says 'I need to be in love with someone /maybe/ I could be in love with you' so to me, it felt like a more honest approach to it, than just one woman he immediately falls in love with right after her. where he goes through that process of just having sex, and say it doesn't mean anything, and then obviously he gets further and further away from her, it just felt like a more honest way of doing it"

Updated On: 2/13/15 at 12:53 PM

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 1:12pm

Well, I just watched it and loved it. My only issue was the way it was framed. I watched it On Demand and I know that they change aspect ratios sometimes for that, but was it always a 1.85 or was it filmed 2.35 and cropped? Because there was more than a couple scenes where the two actors were on screen together and severely cropped on the sides, making it look incredibly strange.

Other than that, I think it's one of the best filmed adaptations of a musical in years.

[everythingtaboo]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 1:58pm

I'm happy it's finally out, and people can (legally, please) watch it. It's great to see a little musical make it to the big and small screen. Hopefully it'll convince a lot of these smaller shows invest in leaping to the screen via independent cinema routes. Much like theatre itself, it doesn't have to be a big, splashy thing, to be effective.

[Mrtrobz]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:20pm

I watched it, it was nice but I don't think it necessarily needed to be made it hasn't translated into something that lends itself to film as well as it could have. I think I am also a bit fatigued of Anna Kendrick, I am glad of those who like it and I am glad that it's one more movie musical regardless every little helps. :)

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 2:57pm

"What are you talking about? It's being distributed how they want to."

It's common knowledge this had many, many issues finding a distributor, which is why it wasn't released until 20 months after filming wrapped. All kinds of problems.

[oncemorewithfeeling2]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 4:27pm

I haven't been feeling well today, but I don't think it shaped my opinion any. I found to absolutely, 100% okay. It wasn't that great, but it wasn't horrible. I'm happy it got out there, even if it doesn't draw a huge audience. It does good things for the field.

Anna Kendrick's strongest song is A Summer in Ohio. She sells it. However, she's just not great in it most of the movie. You expect and want Cathy to be great. Her voice just feels too thin for much of it. Part of it may simply be that since the movie was announced, I haven't been able to envision her as Cathy. Something about her just doesn't seem like she would be cast as Cathy in any production.

Jeremy Jordan was okay. I don't see this making him more famous, but it was a nice way to show what he does.

As someone else stated, the movie more dialogue. I think it would have helped with the flow of the movie and the actual storytelling.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 4:29pm

Yes, the film did indeed have a rough time finding a domestic distributor. That would be hard to argue, considering it really wasn't a big secret.

[notalwaysontime]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 5:04pm

For a movie this size to get distributed less than two years after wrapping is an accomplishment, they went to tiff and got a distributor right away. yes it took a year, but again for a movie this size that is normal. there was nothing more difficult about it than any other small budget film. when they were filming this I was sure it would be at least 2 if not 3 years TIL it was released because i've had to wait that long for a lot of movies. studio films generally take a year so yes, anything longer than that is usually trouble, but this was bottom of the barrel indie and very specialized. I don't understand downplaying a year and a half as if it's an epically long time when it absolutely isn't.

[SmokeyLady]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 5:14pm

It is ok. A curiosity that will eventually make its way to the WTF section of Netflix. I agree with @best12bars regarding Jeremy Jordan. I don't understand why anyone felt the need to make this into a film.

[AwesomeDanny]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 5:49pm

Jordan, I purchased it on iTunes, and it was in 2.35 aspect ratio.

I think what I really loved about this film is that every song was given dramatic action. The biggest trap for doing this piece in the theatre is that it can morph into more of a cabaret show than a musical theatre piece and become a collection of songs rather than a story. The challenge is to give each song a dramatic context. Putting it in the medium of film forces this to be realized to an entirely new level, which worked marvelously.

My only issue is a very minor one, and it's that The Next Ten Minutes wasn't on a boat. The pulsing rhythm of the accompaniment always felt like rippling water in the moonlight to me, so I missed that. But I still thought that sequence was lovely, and the framing shots worked quite nicely, especially how it paralleled the framing shots of the entire film (which I won't give away for those who haven't seen it).

[ZiggyCringe]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 5:51pm

Just finished watching it three times in a row on pay per view, and have many thoughts.

If you are one of those spoiler people, stop reading this post right now.


A general note. That movie is damned confusing if you don't know the show. I think the should have put up subtitles before each song, at the top "Before," during Shiska Godesss "After," and then "Before," and then "After," and during the middle section "Now." I think it would have made the whole movie less confusing.

I thought the opening "I'm Still Hurting" was devastating. While Anna Kendrick doesn't have the smooth, luscious pipes of Sherie Renee Scott, I thought her acting was impeccable, and her singing was totally fine. I liked that LaGravanese used bleach bypass stock to film that opening, it showed that that was the past, then
Shiska Goddess was in full color, which gave you a clue that the two stories were happening in reverse chronology.

I also liked the fact that the two were almost always on screen together. In the musical, they never talk to each other until the duet in the middle. In the movie, there were always together, even though they didn't sing together.

It did get very confusing. That "Story of Schmuel" number should have never, ever happened. It stops both the show and the film dead.

Then I was confused during the film about her audition scene. First you see her having a great audition (in front of Sherie Renee Scott, Kurt Deutch and Bernie Telsey, which is a cute inside joke). But her story is supposed to be happening backwards, and then you see her to a bad audition for the same show, and finally doing the worst audition (with a cute cameo from Jason Robert Brown as the accompanist), but wouldn't it happen the other way around? If she had that crappy audition she never would have been called back. And by the way, was she auditioning in front of the set of "Avenue Q"? It looked like it.

I did like the fact that Jeremy Jordan's character was the bad guy. In the stage show, they both come off as guilty, the movie realty paints him as the villain. And I thought that worked.

One other thing. Where in Central Park is that Gazebo that they filmed "Next Ten Minutes" in? I've lived next to Central Park for 30 years, that Gazebo doesn't exist. It just seemed strange because that whole Central Park number which references many things (the San Remo, the Dakota, John Lennon) did not seem to be filmed in Central Park at all.

Still, on the whole, I think its a pretty terrific film version of that musical.

[HBP]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 5:51pm

I had a dream the other night that I was Anna Kendrick's assistant. She was filming "The Last Five Years" live on a soundstage for HBO. Then I woke up and thought how much more amazing Anna and Jeremy Jordan would be in a live version on HBO.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 6:41pm

"Jordan, I purchased it on iTunes, and it was in 2.35 aspect ratio."

Thank you! I knew it had to be formatted wrong for pay-per-view on stupid Time Warner.

[Sutton Ross]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 6:48pm

The cinematography needed some work. Anna Kendrick and her thin, nasal voice should never have been cast, especially in a tiny film like this.

Other than that, it was good!

[ZiggyCringe]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 7:32pm

Thanks for the info, because it looked like the wrong ratio on my TV as well.

[Huey's Pop]

Posted: 2/13/15 at 10:02pm

I watched it and loved every minute. I had seen this on stage several times (once at UCLA with JRB playing piano and singing the Jamie parts.). This version affected me deeply, bringing out my own memories of past failed relationships and an unwanted divorce. I will watch it again soon. I give it an A+.