Yet again - Is the Movie Musical Dead?- Page 2

[Plum]

Posted: 12/29/04 at 12:16am

Don't be melodramatic. The Producers is (probably) still going to film, at the very least. And as has already been pointed out Phantom is only on limited release, and had solid per-screen numbers in its first weekend. The sky isn't falling yet. And it better damn well not until Hugh Jackman gets to be in a movie musical.

[jo]

Posted: 12/29/04 at 7:39am

Sometimes it's beyond me why people can support movies with animated characters to record box-office levels and not provide some measure of support to movie musicals with real people who possess triple threat talents

Has public taste changed so much?

[Theatreboy33]

Posted: 12/29/04 at 11:00am

De-Lovely and Beyond the Sea are biopics, now musicals. Yes, they contain music, but I can almost guarantee you if you asked their respective directors if they had made a "movie musical" they would surely say no. To analyze something in a different context than what was intended is wrong. Now, as for real movie musicals, they're not dead. As far as I see it, we are 1 for 2. Chicago succeeded. Phantom has failed. And if you want to include the unoriginal Moulin Rouge, thed Id say 2 for 3, which aint bad. We'll have to wait till producers now, which i expect to be fantastic. But in the mean time, with the critical success of "Closer" why dont more filmmakers concentrate on turning great plays into films, rather than turning one more terrible 70s sitcom into a bloated, unfunny 2 hour piece of garbage. THink about the possibilities with all the plays out there...

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 12/29/04 at 12:31pm

Jo, you bring up an excellent point.

I think the public is used to to animated figures singing - they walk into the theater buying into the fantasy of seeing someone that is not a flesh-and-blood person burst into song. They can't suspend belief when a human being sings and dances in the course of action as naturally as breathing (as opposed to being a music video in the mind of a character).

Updated On: 12/29/04 at 12:31 PM

[CaTheatreGirl]

Posted: 12/29/04 at 1:06pm

For the record, POTO played in 1/5 of the number of theaters as Meet the Fockers. Had that been equal, POTO would have been a very healthy #2. I saw it in a small city (very surprised it was playing here during its limited run) and the theater was sold out.

[Rentaholic2]

Posted: 12/29/04 at 2:22pm

So if Phantom is #10 right now, isn't that actually pretty good for how few theatres it is playing in? And I agree--Phantom will NOT have the success of Chicago or probably the success that I predict the Producers and maybe even Rent will have. But that's the same reason I went to go see Finding Neverland two nights ago (just opened I think in this city) and there were maybe five other people in the theatre. It was the absolute best movie I've seen this year, and maybe in a long long time. But it unfortunately does not have Ben Stiller flushing a dog down a toilet, Barbara Streisand giving Dustin Hoffman an orgasmic massage, or anything like that. Sure these movies are fun and funny, but there are just way too many people in the world who feed off of this stuff and would never see something with meat like Finding Neverland or Phantom of the Opera....if they did, they would be bored and say "I don't get it"...