Hugh is almost a decade too old. The play centers around turning 35!
Bomer or Aaron Tveit would be good. Someone very all-American.
R1 like plastic men in 3d roles.
[quote] The play centers around turning 35!
They should rewrite it to someone turning 40
It would resonate more.
The play cannot resonate more because it will always be stuck in 1969. It's specific to that era because it was the beginning of the sexual revolution.
In today's world, a man who's still unmarried at 35 is not at all unusual, especially in NYC. Back then 35 was practically middle-aged, which is crazy when you think about it.
I'd suggest Patrick Wilson but I can't endorse a movie of Company.
Why not, R7?
I think it'd work if set in 1969, just like FOLLIES wouldn't work unless it were 1971.
Because he's not a Company man, R8.
[quote] just like FOLLIES wouldn't work unless it were 1971.
Why not? They are developing a movie version of Follies.
They changed the locale to the closing of a historic movie studio
R11, I think (I hope) it is that they "were" developing a movie version. To be honest, Follies is one of those shows that really does not work without stunt casting. Most of the old broads from both Film and theater have died off. Also, even if it was a movie studio, it would still have to be set at the time of the MGM auction. There aren't that many back lots around any more and those that do, double as amusement parks. Also, the whole plot line of the girls being showgirls doesn't really work in an update. OK, I just had an idea.... an updated version of Follies *might* work (just might) if it was moved to Las Vegas, and it was about tearing down one of the old casinos. But that is the only way I can see it working, and it would probably still involve a hell of a lot of rewrites.
Follies could probably not withstand much rewriting - the song pastiches are from particular periods and contexts. Plus a theatre being demolished has a bit more resonance than a studio lot being sold.
Company would probably not work because it's basically a revue. The structure is interesting, so maybe a great director with a different concept could do something with it. Oddly enough, it's the one show where Marshall's "it's all in the main character's head" concept might have made sense.
Dianne Wiest would have made a fabulous Joanne if it were being made 20 years ago. Not sure who would work now.
Follies could work as a period piece, but I don't see how that would be bankable as a mainstream theatrical release. And it would need to be mainstream because the budget would be enormous.
Follies would not work at all in a present-day setting because it was so specific to its time period.
JFC leave it to Datalounge to turn a thread about "Company" into a thread about "Follies" a mere 11 posts in.
Patrick Wilson would have been good a few years ago but is 40 now and looks a bit older.
I like Aaron Tveit the best, he has a boyish, all-American look which is how Bobby should look, and of course he has the pipes. Matt Bomer or Matthew Morrison would also be good and are age-appropriate... assuming it was made today.
I think both COMPANY and FOLLIES would work on HBO or something. Probably not in theaters.
Daniel Radcliffe as Bobby. Bobby...Bobby baby...Bobby bubbi...Robby...Robert darling.
R17 a much better choice than AT
Daniel Radcliffe? Give it ten years, at least.
James Marsden could be...interesting.
DR is 23 frickin' years old.
Up on the walls--
Does Matthew Bomer sing?
Yes, you can see him singing on Youtube.
Seth McFarland as Bobby!!
Too predictable. How about Chaz Bono as Bobby.
Based on his opening number, Seth would be better as Booby.
Is it true that Elaine Stritch was drunk on her ass during all of her 10,000 performances in the original "Company?" I read that somewhere.
It's called acting, r20. Not something you'd see on your CW shows, but it happens when you employ real actors.
It's kind of amazing that with the exception of Susan Browning the entire original cast of Company, which premiered nearly 45 years ago, is still alive. And at least half of them weren't exactly spring chickens back then either.
Why in the world would they make a movie of "Company"? Does forty one years tell you no one is interested?
Gayest thread ever.
Company and Follies
Best music, from musicals, EVER!
[quote]Not something you'd see on your CW shows, but it happens when you employ real actors.
Even great performers can fuck up good material when they are wrongly cast. Streisand destroyed HELLO, DOLLY! and not for want of talent. Daniel Radcliffe is at least 10 years too young to play Bobby anywhere but in a college theater department.
No, R29, Charles Braswell, the original Larry (husband of Joanne (Elaine Stritch)) died years ago - he was the only one who didn't make it to the 25th Anniversary Concert at Lincoln Center in 1995.
Braswell was also the original Beauregarde and got to introduce the title song of MAME.
It's on streaming Netflix, if you want to see it again.
Daniel Radcliffe plays older than he is. He's almost 24. By the time a COMPANY film would get together, he'd be 25, and could easily pass for thirtyish.
He could handle the score, except for "Being Akive" - that would need some sweetening to get it where it needs to be.
I think you meant Being a Chive, R36.
You'd have to amke it a period piece. I think most contemporary audiences would be thinking, "Man, these friends need to mind their business."
Follies should have made into a movie in the 1970s starring Doris Day.
They need someone as tall as Hugh Jackman to be a good Bobby, with an equally strong voice to belt out 'Being Alive'
Plus they need a 'name' to open this movie
None of the guys mentioned are as tall, or have the name like Jackman.
Why does Bobby have to be tall?
Because Raul Esparza was, I guess. Not a prerequisite, IMHO.