Hell, he normally looks and sounds great. He was a dream in “Australia.”
But he made a very interesting point--that the musical was back.
I've thought about that for a while, and even though it's been some time since the Oscars, I decided to make a post now about several of the popular movie musicals that hit the big screen, perhaps prompting him to make such an observation. I won’t comment on all of them, because I don’t want this post to be ridiculously long. Every now and then I feel a pang of modesty. You know, once in a while. Feel free to share comments on these or other movie musicals.
Phantom of the Opera
Okay, this was an older one. But it still stuck its neck out there on the big screen with a substantial list of unknowns, falling back largely on its legacy. I have been a Phan (as we call ourselves) since I was in the 8th grade. I have seen the stage show three times. I was anticipating this film with a mixture of excitement and dread. It scared me that Joel Schumacher was directing. I had nightmares of this becoming some crazed action film polluting the Paris Opera House with motorcycles and neon glo-paint graffiti.
Fortunately, it wasn't that bad.
Visually, it was spectacular. That was an absolutely necessary element. PotO had a history of being one of the first special-effects-intensive musicals, so they were very true to that.
My only real complaint is that each of the big three characters had one fatal flaw.
For Christine, it was her acting. She had a sweet, lovely voice, but at the start of the title song, she had a deer-in-headlights look that she retained for the rest of the film. Sometimes it was sad. Sometimes it was slightly happy. But still--lights on, nobody home.
For Raoul, it was his acting, as well. It was a little...weird. From what I read, he had some prior stage experience, and perhaps he was still acting like he was on stage. Also, the actor was in his 30s and Christine's actress was a teenager--the difference was noticeable. A bit creepy.
Now the Phantom's acting was fantastic. Gerard Butler was a passionate actor that just flew with the role, and I loved him. It was a shame that when he sang, we all winced in pain. The man was a rockstar, not a broadway singer. The notes he couldn't hold, he yelled. It was rather excrutiating.
Overall, though, they didn't do too bad with this musical. I think it opened the door for later, edgier musicals to emerge.
High School Musical
Interestingly, I can't really comment on this one. I haven't seen it or any of the sequels. Or the ice show. Or whatever. Good Lord. The franchising is crazy, isn't it? Disney at its finest. Earlier last week I recall opening a packet of string cheese that had a HSM3 trivia question on it.
Even our dairy products are no longer safe.
But you know what? It's nice that kids are pulled into the musical wave. Let's get 'em singing!
Oh, if only high schools were really like that...
Sweeney Todd
And on the opposite end of the scale...
What a gruesome film. It was rather slow. But gruesome.
I mean, that kid and the lovebirds made off in the end, but, whew.
Dastardly.
Also, like I said, rather slow.
But this was a more classical musical. The classical musicals didn't typically aim to impress by simple means. Instead, the lyrics were often very clever, and gave more insight into character.
The reason this movie came off as a slow, perhaps, was because of Tim Burton's stark angle. He seems to love to shock the audience with an inexplicably predictable gothic formula. "Oooo! Blood! Gore! Darkness! Muahaha!"
So here we have this movie...
Disaster! Rivers of blood, gushing forth! Dark, dreary London! Crazy-haired, eyeshadowed Depp!
Then cue a sharp little ditty about being a barber or something.
See, the dramatic stylistic contrast, I think, makes the movie seem duller than it ought to be. But it speeds up chaotically at the end, where both the classical element and the Burton element are climaxing. Then the audience is so excited they just don't know what to think of the damn movie.
It's like the whole time they'd been taking a step forward, then a step back, then a step forward, then another back, until finally, everyone gets so thrilled that they spin out of control and take a flying leap off a cliff.
Kind of like a demented cha-cha of death. But it's okay, because everyone's singing.
Hairspray
Wasn't this one cute?
Really.. It was just darling.
It had catchy tunes. They make you want to dance.
It had a memorable cast. This movie is just another reason to adore James Marsden. Queen Latifah sparkles. I...um...really didn't know what to think of Walken and Travolta, but you know, "memorable" summarizes it quite nicely.
It even had a crazy storyline. Crazy! Seriously. High school girl goes from lovesick teenage wanna-be to nationally-recognized equal rights activist. More or less, anyway. Holy crap.
But really, it was a lovable musical, and I'm surprised that it didn't get more acclaim. Maybe more people were afraid to see it. It got marketed as such a silly, fluffy thing when it really had a message to send.
Although the message was dressed up as a silly, fluffy thing. With poofy hair.
All in all, though, a great watch. I've never seen the original, but I certainly enjoyed this.
Mamma Mia!
I think the purpose of this musical was to get ABBA songs stuck in your head. At least, that's what it accomplished for me. I went and downloaded a bunch of music and now I have a playlist that I dance to regularly.
But really, the only way you can enjoy this movie is if you don't take it seriously. Otherwise you would (a) hate the daughter. She's incredibly insensitive to her mother's private life and stupid about genetic inheritance. And if there's one thing I hate, it's a stupid female character.
Also, you would (b) hate the daughter's fiancé. What does he do all day? Run around the island with his sculpted abs and tanned body only to come back, say he loves her, and then promptly berate her for the most trivial reasons?
Additionally, you would (c) be ocassionally bothered by parts that are bizarre. I'll give you an example. The stupid daughter and her unappreciative Abercrombie & Fitch-model-of-a-fiancee are singing a song together when, out of the ocean, like some sort of surreal Baywatch, come the groomsmen in multi-colored snorkels and flippers, and they do a dance and--literally--carry the young groom off to the bachelor party while the bride smiles all lovey-dovey. If you're just singing along to the ABBA song, happy as a clam, it's no big deal. If you're trying to follow this with some semblance of reason, you're a bit creeped out. Just sayin'.
I must say two other things about this movie that I truly enjoyed.
1) Meryl Streep. She's so talented. She obviously had fun with the role and she's absolutely fantastic.
2) Watching Pierce Brosnan try to sing. He's a terrible vocalist. And knowing that James Bond was crashing and burning with ABBA was just so giggle-worthy that it really made my night.
So let's think about this--is the movie musical really back? I think it's getting more popular, certainly. I don't think, however, that we're to the point where an audience is perfectly willing to except Astaire-and-Crosby-esque regulars. And I doubt we will reach that point anytime soon—“realistic” cinema is all the rage, and musicals will always be the antithesis of realism.
I think your last point nailed it. Realism hit screens hard in the 1970s and the musical has never really managed to gain another foothold-- I remember similar "the musical is back" claims after Moulin Rouge, but that never quite materialized, unless we attribute most of your list to it, in which case that's a rather slow output for "back". ;)
ReplyDeleteI think for a long while Disney kept the musical alive with their animated films, but Menken just got burned out and what had once been creative became formulaic and robbed of all heart (can't think of one song from Hercules that was worth recalling... and the only one from Hunchback is when Frollo is singing about hellfire, and that's due to Tony Jay, not Menken). Mulan was a final attempt to salvage the format (and don't get me wrong, was one of their better ones post-Lion King), but they then transitioned to narrative-songs (ala Tarzan) or no songs whatsoever (ala Atlantis) and have never revisited.
The reason I don't think musicals will ever be more than the occasional niche genre that it is now is that we really don't have the talent pool in Hollywood that we once did. There are no Gene Kellys, Fred Astaires, Bing Crosbys, Frank Sinatras, Doris Days, Debbie Reynolds, Dean Martins, Howard Keels, etc. who can both sing and act. What we've got is a music industry that is trained to cash in on pop tastes, which relies heavily on computer alteration of voices to provide effects and make stars without great singing voices (hello Britney Spears) appealing to the masses. (That or you have country stars who always sing with a twang, which would be fine in a western musical, but not so much the traditional kinds.) As a result you don't have a lot of classically trained singers able to staff productions, you have actors that can try to pull double duty (like Pierce Brosnan you mentioned), singers that think they can act (like Mariah Carey), or actors that think they can sing (Lindsay Lohan, Hayden Panettiere, any girl who realizes they can gyrate too). The ones competent with both are few and far between.
I'll always gravitate towards the oldies but goodies, like Singin' in the Rain. And I have been known to belt out "Bless Your Beautiful Hide" from Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (I dare you to TRY to get that movie made today) for comedic effect. I think a lot of the art of the musical has been lost and a good deal of the more modern stuff adheres to what the filmmakers viewed that art to be, rather than what it actually was. If that makes sense. That and there's a general confusion that Broadway=Musical, rather than Broadway Musical being a type of Musical.
You make a good point about the somewhat degenerative nature of the Disney musical. They have seemed to reinforce that musicals are going out of style. They tried to make their songs edgier and poppier (is that a word? it is now) until they removed them altogether. It's almost as if they were embarrassed by their own music. I still listen to the scores of "The Little Mermaid" and "Beauty and the Beast," nostalgic about the magical, heartfelt nature of the songs.
ReplyDeleteAnd I like what you bring up about the talent pool in Hollywood. Not everyone can both sing and act simply because, unlike the days of yore, they are not EXPECTED to.
I remember watching "Holiday Inn," thinking about how musical numbers were typical of every movie. It was simply the norm. If that were still the case, the stars we idolize today would be entirely different.