why do movies into musicals keep getting made?

[massofmen]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 11:29am

that other post shows how many of them fail and its amazing.

Funny how so few movie musicals did well and yet people still keep trying their darndest to produce them.
whats the definition of insanity again?

"Bring it on the Musical"? Didn't we just try that when it was called Legally Blonde? And didn't that show lose about 12 million dollars?
Or "clueless the musical"? or "Heathers the musical"? Come on people, its like writers and producers are just throwing things at a dart board hoping that one sticks. Why not take some time and create something. Piazza took Guettal 9 years.
Even ROA was 5 years in the making. Everyone just slow down and put some time into these things.
Memphis took 6 years and it still isn't very good. Remember when they put up good vibrations in a year and a half with John carraffa helming it? That worked out wonderfully well.

TAKE YOUR TIME! a multi-million dollar investment doesn't need to be rushed kiddies. I think there would be better things on broadway if people weren't in a rush to try and make gobs of money off their artistic achievement.

and producers, Please stop with the movie musicals soon. go to NAMT or NYMF or the Fringe and see some original stuff.

Yes I like ROA but i also LOVE urinetown which is original for all those people who were about to jump down my back about how ROA isn't original. I am not myopic in my tastes.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 11:35am

Piazza was based on a movie that was based on a book.

[Craig]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 11:42am

Who cares where the source material comes from as long as it's done well. Movies, Books, or whatever.

And despite your theory that some of these musicals happen overnight - they don't. Some have been in development for several years. They've only recently gotten press.



my .02

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 11:46am

In regards to musicals made into movies, not all were failures. Hairspray and Mamma Mia did well. It is all about execution and marketing.

Also, why should producers stop producing movies into musicals on Broadway? Not all are failures (Lion King, Mary Poppins, Billy Elliot). I hate how people think that everything on Broadway must be completely original or it is crap. Often these musicals based on movies are gateway shows for people to explore other shows.

Who cares where the source material comes from? Producers shouldn't stop producing movies-to-musicals simply because you feel as if it isn't original enough for your liking. If you don't like it, then don't go!

Movies are often great source material for musicals. Sometimes an idea sounds good on paper, and unfortunately doesn't do as well as hoped. If everyone was so hesitant to produce a show, then nothing would ever get produced.

Updated On: 10/22/09 at 11:46 AM

[BrianS]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 11:51am

Not only had the stage musical always borrowed liberally from other mediums (it's the mediums that have changed over time), but I think you'll find that musicals based on movies don't necessarily fail at a higher rate than musicals based on anything else.

I completely agree that it's insulting and stupid to have producers just flipping through pages of film rights to pick a project, but for those who have a genuine love for a particular story, movies can be great source material. As Craig said, it's all about how well it's done.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 11:59am

It's partly a trend, just like that which occurs in every art form, especially in commercial entertainment. But before we had the ease of accessibility of Hollywood films from virtually anywhere we wish to view them at any given time, the trend was to musicalize popular plays and novels.

Come on people, its like writers and producers are just throwing things at a dart board hoping that one sticks.

That's exactly what happens when a show becomes popular. Producers try and capitalize on the success of other shows and attempt to make lightning strike twice. Sometimes, it is the same producer, such as Mel Brooks. He tried to create The Producers 2 in Young Frankenstein and it backfired. Meanwhile, Billy Elliott has become an international smash hit.

[Craig]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 12:08pm

Mister Matt. True

But that's also true in other mediums

TV Shows (spinoffs), Movies and even book authors try to immediately capitalize on success with sequels, etc.

[orangeskittles]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 12:15pm

Who cares where the source material comes from as long as it's done well.

The problem is many of them aren't.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 12:18pm

Right. That's sort of what I meant by "commercial entertainment". It exists in virtually every form of media.

[Yero my Hero]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 1:29pm

Yeah! Movies made into musicals always suck! Especially that new one coming, A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC! Like, be original, Mr. Sondheim!

[Weez]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 1:36pm

OMG you guys, please stop saying "mediums". It's causing me physical pain.

And while we're at it, can we put out a plea for people to stop turning plays into musicals? There's absolutely NO reason to set the most lamentable tragedy of two young Italians in '50s New York. Even that English playwright who wrote about 'em buggered up the timeline, making everything happen implausibly fast. He's such a hack, most of his plays were ripped off from other things. Just leave everything exactly as it is! That's the point of art, right?!

[James885]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 1:51pm

And while we're at it, can we put out a plea for people to stop turning plays into musicals? Just leave everything exactly as it is! That's the point of art, right?!

I know Weez! Can you believe Sondheim, Bernstein, Laurents, and Robbins created a musical off of Romeo and Juliet? How absurd is that? Where's the originality?!

And then that no-talent hack Stephen Sondheim had the audacity to later collaborate with Hugh Wheeler on an adaptation of Christoper Bond's play called Sweeney Todd! And Kander and Ebb creating a musical based on a play called Chicago? Come on! I mean, can't these guys come up with ideas of their own without stealing other people's material?!

This scourge of adapting musicals from previous source material must stop. I think all musicals should be original and not be based off of anything, be it books, movies, plays. All creative teams should be required to come up with original stories.

Updated On: 10/22/09 at 01:51 PM

[mikem]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 2:17pm

They keep getting made for the same reason that police procedurals keep getting made as TV series -- although a number of them don't do well, there are some very visible successes.

From 2001 to 2005, four of the five Tony winners for Best Musical were movie adaptations (The Producers, Thoroughly Modern Millie, Hairspray, and Spamalot), as was last year's winner, Billy Elliot, and the cash cow called The Lion King. Although you could argue about whether those shows deserved to win, those shows (along with Mamma Mia) are among the most financially successful shows of the decade. That type of success helps new potential movies-turned-into-musicals get made. I'm not sure it's any more complicated than that.

[Jennifer Lynn]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 2:35pm

I'm with the rest of you who think that movies-into-musicals isn't necessarily bad. It's just that it has to be conscientiously done, with an eye to good source material, and composers and writers who'll do it justice.

After all, didn't The King And I owe at least as much to the Rex Harrison movie Anna And The King as to the original Margaret Landon novel?

I, for one, am really looking forward to Ever After (which I hope won't be delayed forever) and Somewhere In Time. They're both lovely, romantic stories that can really be done justice with music.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 3:47pm

There's absolutely NO reason to set the most lamentable tragedy of two young Italians in '50s New York.

Not to mention how the ending was butchered. Or NOT butchered, shall we say. It's not even a faithful adaptation. I honestly don't understand how anyone could ever enjoy such a disrespectful hack job.

Don't even get me started on I Am a Camera: The Musical! Unoriginal garbage!

[bluebonnets]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 4:08pm

There was a "Heathers" musical? How did I miss that?

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 4:23pm

Passion is based on a movie.

[ggersten]

Posted: 10/22/09 at 7:08pm

Forget that Shakespeare abomination - did you see what some hacks dick with Shaw's Pygmalion!

[fgreene1938]

Posted: 10/23/09 at 8:28am

There's a difference between an author who's compelled to musicalize a film because of an original take on it...and some hack who's looking for a tried-and-true property to repackage as a musical to get rich.

And just because someone "can" make a musical, it doesn't mean they know how to. Hacks are everywhere.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/26/09 at 5:26pm

Passion is based on a movie.

Oh, Passion is more unoriginal than that! It was based on a film that was based on a novel.

There's a difference between an author who's compelled to musicalize a film because of an original take on it...and some hack who's looking for a tried-and-true property to repackage as a musical to get rich.

Well, it depends how long they take to write it. Apparently, if they spend more than 5 years writing a musical based on a tried-and-true property to get rich, then their respectability is automatically restored, which is why I am currently working on a musical of Paranormal Activity for the 2014-2015 Broadway season. The Tonys are practically in my hands as we speak.

[jonmbway4652]

Posted: 10/26/09 at 7:36pm

Movies made into musicals already have the title which helps them to do better than new shows that no one has heard of in some case. Even if a new show is better, a movie musical is more popular for tourists.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 10/27/09 at 4:01pm

The film titles of Legally Blonde, The Wedding Singer, High Fidelity, Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Tarzan and The Little Mermaid didn't seem to help them much. In fact, just like original musicals, revues and jukebox musicals, movie adaptations have more flops than hits. Producers hope name recognition and branding will turn their show into a hit, but so far, there's been no magic formula.

[darquegk]

Posted: 10/27/09 at 10:29pm

They're not all bad. It's just like regular movies- you see more bad ones than good get released. Broadway is similar, but on a much smaller scale.

I myself have been working on a draft of a musical version of Tim Burton's "Beetlejuice" movie for some years now, constantly refining it, rewriting it, and learning from the mistakes of other shows. Yes, it's a movie into a musical. Yes, the name will help to sell it if it gets produced. But I'm trying my hardest not to make it a dashed-off sort of thing, since I saw real theatrical potential in the story and characters for years.

Of course, I'm not a famous and successful Broadway composer or librettist thrown into a think-tank of successful and recognizable Broadway movers and shakers, like Shrek's creative team. I'm just some guy who wants to write it, and thinks he can do it. Maybe that makes things different, I don't know. I just hope that by the time I have a finished workshop score and demo disc, Universal, Touchstone and their associates won't say "You're not famous, go home."

[Dantes]

Posted: 10/28/09 at 12:02am

""Bring it on the Musical"? Didn't we just try that when it was called Legally Blonde? And didn't that show lose about 12 million dollars? "

lolol, no i don't think it lost even a fraction of that, the musical did very well but did not recoup on Broadway, however now the show is touring and doing brilliant business on the road it will have easily made its money back.

And Movies to Musicals have been happening forever