Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Which Movie Musicals would you Remake...and Why...and How?

Boy there have been some stinkers...I would nominate the abysmal POTO movie. They needed to have made it in the late 90s without Gerard Butler or Joel Schumacher. Even if he couldn't sing the part as well by the late 90s, and I think he probably still could, Michael Crawford was the only way to go. And it's not like having the character being an old man would have been a problem. That's basically the story.

I feel like my Mame is going to be the first one mentioned, but since I haven't seen it, I don't know exactly how terrible it is. Only that it is bad.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 368October 21, 2019 3:21 AM

The mother of all fuckups - A Chorus Line

by Anonymousreply 1October 1, 2019 12:48 AM

An all-nude, gender roles-reversed version of Grease.

by Anonymousreply 2October 1, 2019 12:57 AM

MAME and PHANTOM are both quite awful. Miscast but also just misconceived.

Some other good stage musicals that deserved much better movies: NINE, FINNIAN'S RAINBOW, A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC, ON A CLEAR DAY (sorry, Barbra), ANNIE.

by Anonymousreply 3October 1, 2019 1:07 AM

You didn't like Black Annie...?

by Anonymousreply 4October 1, 2019 1:20 AM

I'd remake Annie with "We'd Like to Thank You, Herbert Hoover" included!!!!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 5October 1, 2019 1:29 AM

Why did they never move ahead to film Dreamgirls with Jennifer Holliday? She was doing great in the 90s....lost some weight, looked younger and was in great voice. Were they deadset against using her...?

by Anonymousreply 6October 1, 2019 3:18 AM

[quote]Why did they never move ahead to film Dreamgirls with Jennifer Holliday?

Girlfriend couldn't act. And I mean COULD. NOT. ACT.

by Anonymousreply 7October 1, 2019 3:26 AM

A Star is Born. Done correctly this time.

by Anonymousreply 8October 1, 2019 3:30 AM

Gypsy

by Anonymousreply 9October 1, 2019 3:33 AM

Gypsy!

by Anonymousreply 10October 1, 2019 3:37 AM

Gypsy!

by Anonymousreply 11October 1, 2019 3:41 AM

I thought Phantom of the Opera was pretty good. Joel Schumacher did a good job, and casting Gerard Butler as the Phantom was not a bad idea. His voice was rough, but it sufficed. I never saw a stage version so I liked it. And Emmy Rossum was excellent.So was Patrick Wilson. I always enjoy Miranda Richardson, and Ciaran Hinds and Simon Cowell were fine in their roles. I think Minnie Driver was the weakest member of the cast, but I didn't really mind her.She was supposed to be a terrible singer. The sets were certainly lavish, and the music, the orchestration was fine. Truthfully I think the whole notion of the Phantom of the Opera is rather out of date. The story itself. It's been told and retold dozens of times not as a musical. If they remade it they'd have to use social media and set up crowd funding to get the Phantom cosmetic surgery , and persecute the bad people who exploited him as a child and bullied him for his disfigurement.

by Anonymousreply 12October 1, 2019 3:48 AM

[quote]You didn't like Black Annie...?

You mean AfricAnnie?

by Anonymousreply 13October 1, 2019 3:50 AM

Gypsy!

by Anonymousreply 14October 1, 2019 4:02 AM

R12, sorry to tell you....but the movie was shit. Overblown undercooked shit. And if you'd seen the show you'd know that.

The Phantom is the "Angel of Music". Not some drunk Irish/Scottish dude hoarsing out Music of The Night. I mean Jesus. I get that Gerard was on his way up and a hunk but holy shit... how Webber let him anywhere near his score is baffling.

...have you heard Crawford on the original London cast recording?

Wilson was fine and Rossum needed an acting coach or better director but was fine. But Gerard was a sin. And Carlotta *is* supposed to be able to sing opera. Her vocals are some of the hardest in the show. Minnie was a dumb choice. They dubbed her so she could....what? Be "funny"?

Joel was shitty in his treatment of the material...it came off like a cheap romance novel cover brought to life. It didn't feel sincere. You didn't care about the characters.

...hell, just watch the Point Of No Return sequence. It looks like a cheap high school stage show.

And Phantom's face us....not ugly. Like, at all. So stupid.

by Anonymousreply 15October 1, 2019 4:10 AM

I agree. A Chorus Line was a shit show but the material deserves another chance.

by Anonymousreply 16October 1, 2019 4:14 AM

R7 I thought she was good. She's good here....and was good on Ally McBeal too.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 17October 1, 2019 4:15 AM

[quote]I thought she was good.

She was good where she got Michael Bennett's line readings right. But there were some major goof ups.

One of the major line blow outs: "No one can see her on record." It sounds like she's totally trying to copy a line reading and failing miserably.

by Anonymousreply 18October 1, 2019 4:21 AM

Oops, I think the actual line is "No one can see me on record." But it's still a bad line reading.

by Anonymousreply 19October 1, 2019 4:23 AM

Well if there's one part she knows how to play, it's Effie...

by Anonymousreply 20October 1, 2019 5:16 AM

[quote] Even if he couldn't sing the part as well by the late 90s, and I think he probably still could, Michael Crawford was the only way to go.

That would have been horrible.

Michael Crawford has a nice voice, and he got away with playing the Phantom onstage because he wore a mask and a giant cloak. But with the flashbacks and in close-up he would not have seemed attractive at all. Gerard Butler is not a great singer, but at least he was sexy. Crawford would have been about as sexy as the Phantom onscreen as he was as Cornelius Hackle--except he would have been thirty years older.

They needed to find someone sexy who could also sing well. They also needed a less vulgar director.

by Anonymousreply 21October 1, 2019 5:39 AM

The movie version of Rent was worst than the Phantom movie. While it was a nice idea to have most of the original cast return, they were all too old for their parts!

by Anonymousreply 22October 1, 2019 5:41 AM

The person who keeps saying here and elsewhere that Jennifer Holliday should have played Effie in the movie is insane. It's like saying Babs could play Momma Rose in a film today.

The Dreams are all supposed to be close to the same age, and for much of the first act, we know Lorrell Robinson is a virgin (it's an important plot point). Jennifer Holliday was 45 when the movie was made in 2005, and could never, ever, ever have passed even remotely plausibly for age 18-22.

by Anonymousreply 23October 1, 2019 5:43 AM

[quote]I think Minnie Driver was the weakest member of the cast, but I didn't really mind her.She was supposed to be a terrible singer.

Carlotta sings in a florid nineteenth-century style that the Phantom thinks is outdated, and he also absolutely abhors her acting; but the Parisian audiences nonetheless absolutely love her ("Think of how they all adore you..."). So despite her showy runs and trills, she would have to be a talented singer (great opera singers have always been able to get away with being weak actors--think of Joan Sutherland and Zinka Milanov). She just doesn't have the pure simplicity of Christine.

by Anonymousreply 24October 1, 2019 5:50 AM

Gigi and Gold Diggers of 1933. Why? Just because. How? I'd want them to closely replicate the original pictures as in being nearly carbon copies.

by Anonymousreply 25October 1, 2019 5:52 AM

The person who mentioned Jennifer Holliday was talking about when "Dreamgirls" was *first* talked up as a possible movie back in the 80s.

by Anonymousreply 26October 1, 2019 6:09 AM

2005's "The Producers" should've had Mel Brooks direct it instead of Susan Stroman (Stroman directed the stage version, but had no previous film directing experience, which was glaringly, painfully obvious). Also, the character "Ulla" was supposed to be 1. sexy, and 2. a belter, neither of which applied to Uma Thurman. Personally, I think Jane Krakowski would've been a much better choice.

by Anonymousreply 27October 1, 2019 6:24 AM

R25 The 1957'Gigi' may have been very pretty to look at but the thin story is about a prostitute.

Perhaps if two magnetic stars were cast as the two mature lovers they might make up for the fact that the two younger lovers were one-dimensional and repetitive.

by Anonymousreply 28October 1, 2019 6:40 AM

I prefer fun musicals like Gigi and the standard issue Golden Age musicals that don't have Gene Kelly or Cyd Charisse interminably swanning about or the operatic screetchings of Kathryn Grayson, Jane Powell, Ann Blythe, or Mario Lanza. I'm not easily drawn to or gravitate to post 50s musicals but I like Flower Drum Song and Bye Bye Birdie from the early 60s because they're fun.

by Anonymousreply 29October 1, 2019 8:21 AM

R7, there’s a bootleg on YouTube which must’ve been early in the run where Holliday gives a brilliant disciplined performance - with none of that face pulling she does in the Tony clip. Doesn’t make her a great actress but she was at least one who could take direction.

She was only 21 years old. Most actors of any age NEVER receive that amount of acclaim but, boy, when they receive some they almost always DO MORE. It obviously effected her performance. I would guess the toll of doing that 8 performances a week and wanting to impress audiences - and being so inexperienced - is what informed her later performances in the role. And being on camera, of course.

by Anonymousreply 30October 1, 2019 8:30 AM

R29 'Flower Drum Song' in 1961 was a rare movie in that there were sufficient professional 'ethnic performers' who could pass as Chinese.

by Anonymousreply 31October 1, 2019 8:48 AM

A Chorus Line gets a bad rap, but it's not as bad as people make it out to be. The supporting cast is top notch, and the songs are well performed. The only problem is Cassie is a wet blanket when she should be a shimmering bonfire.

by Anonymousreply 32October 1, 2019 2:46 PM

Some of these (Gypsy, Rent, Grease) have been redone in TV versions. The ones that were not "Live!" were more like movie remakes -- and some were atrocious, like the Matthew Broderick "Music Man" and the Jason Alexander "Bye Bye, Birdie." Bette's "Gypsy" was no great shakes either.

I actually like the "Finian's Rainbow" movie (directed by Coppola, of all people), although I wouldn't mind seeing it redone. It's one of my favorite scores.

I'd enjoy seeing "Newsies" redone to include the plot changes and new songs from the Broadway version. I know there's a filmed version of the stage production, but a regular "opened up" movie (like the original with Christian Bale) would be welcome.

How about "1776?"

by Anonymousreply 33October 1, 2019 2:52 PM

[quote] The 1957'Gigi' may have been very pretty to look at, but the thin story is about a prostitute.

[italic]HORRORS,[/italic] Mary!

by Anonymousreply 34October 1, 2019 5:08 PM

Michael Crawford is a ham not well suited to film.

See, e.g., Hello Dolly.

by Anonymousreply 35October 1, 2019 5:18 PM

R28 The 1957 'Gigi' might have worked if the mature couple were played by Marlene Dietrich and Maurice Chevalier.

That would have created a different focus to the bland younger couple (and, of course, Dirk Bogarde, would have been preferable to wooden Louis Jourdan).

by Anonymousreply 36October 1, 2019 8:12 PM

Hugh Jackman pretty much ruined Les Miz for me. One Day More was absolute shit.

by Anonymousreply 37October 1, 2019 8:29 PM

I now can only remember Phantom of the Opera through the filter of Lindsay Ellis.

How about a version of Sweeney Todd that's not so, well, Burtonesque? Maybe with people who can sing?

by Anonymousreply 38October 1, 2019 8:30 PM

That's an extreme reaction, R37.

Did you run from your theatre seat to the toilet to express your feelings?

by Anonymousreply 39October 1, 2019 8:35 PM

My Fair Lady (1964) was excruciatingly long. Funny Girl (1968) was just Barbra and Omar--I would have liked a lot more showbiz history, and a lot less of their absence of chemistry. Goodbye, Mr. Chips (1969) with a more magnetic leading lady (sorry Pet). Lost Horizon (1973) with a new book, new songs, new cast.

by Anonymousreply 40October 1, 2019 9:33 PM

Funny Girl and Goodbye, Mr. Chips had simple, one-page plots.

My Fair Lady had lots of ideas in it as well as good tunes. A remake might work if it had a magnetic young man playing Higgins (Leslie Howard was almost good-looking when he did 'Pygmalion')

by Anonymousreply 41October 1, 2019 9:41 PM

Les Mis with leads who can sing... not a screeching, nasal Valjean and a Javert channelling Gordon Lightfoot.

by Anonymousreply 42October 1, 2019 9:46 PM

So bad I'm forgotten.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 43October 1, 2019 9:48 PM

Les Mis was a noisy "rock-opera" which battered the audience on stage with painful amplification.

But translating it into realism on screen exposed the cheesy-operetta aspects of it all and the confusing hopeless plot stretching over decades.

by Anonymousreply 44October 1, 2019 9:52 PM

[quote] A Star is Born. Done correctly this time. —JLo

Sorry JLo, "A Star is Born" is not a musical. It's a movie with music just like your "Selena".

[quote]The movie version of Rent was worst than the Phantom movie. While it was a nice idea to have most of the original cast return, they were all too old for their parts!

Plus they took half the music out and made it dialogue instead of being sung thru.

The obvious choice is "Cabaret", restored to a proper musical where all the characters sing.

by Anonymousreply 45October 1, 2019 9:58 PM

A Little Night Music. There’s a terrific movie to be made of this (unlike, say, Chorus Line and Rent, which I think will always seem stage-bound) but the Hal Prince film is beyond lamentable.

by Anonymousreply 46October 1, 2019 10:00 PM

^ All those 3 are stagey talk-tests occur in one room.

A movie should be magical. One of the 'Sound of Music's drawcards was the fabulous scenery.

by Anonymousreply 47October 1, 2019 10:18 PM

I thought Leslie looked dreamy in Pygmalion and his performance was amazing.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 48October 1, 2019 10:43 PM

I'm glad I'm such an ordinary soul and not some authority. I loved GiGi, I loved Evita, and I saw Richard Harris on stage in Camelot. Loved it. Never saw the movie. Didn't want to spoil things. But I really did enjoy Madonna's performance in Evita. And Funny Girl was sublime.

by Anonymousreply 49October 2, 2019 2:28 AM

Madonna did a really job in Evita but I want a remake. Please have Gaga, Beyoncé or Mariah star in the new one 😂

by Anonymousreply 50October 2, 2019 3:56 AM

I would watch a live TV version of "Cabaret" if they did the Roundabout Theater production. "A Chorus Line" would do well as a live TV production.

The book for "Mame" needs to be reworked to bring it closer to the play/movie.

by Anonymousreply 51October 2, 2019 6:48 AM

Quilters!

by Anonymousreply 52October 2, 2019 7:06 AM

For me, remaking Mame is required (sorry Lucy). I liked On A Clear Day with Barbra but Yves Montand was a poor choice as her hypnotist.

by Anonymousreply 53October 2, 2019 9:46 AM

NINE because the last one sucked

by Anonymousreply 54October 2, 2019 10:07 AM

[quote]The book for "Mame" needs to be reworked to bring it closer to the play/movie.

What the hell does this mean?

by Anonymousreply 55October 2, 2019 5:05 PM

[quote]If they remade it they'd have to use social media and set up crowd funding to get the Phantom cosmetic surgery , and persecute the bad people who exploited him as a child and bullied him for his disfigurement.

DISfigurement? That lookist! He’s differently figured.

by Anonymousreply 56October 2, 2019 5:09 PM

Is it too soon to redo the CATS movie before it even comes out? Might do everyone a favor.

by Anonymousreply 57October 2, 2019 7:16 PM

I'd definitely like a remake of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. It could be a really fun and exciting film but the original is too long and baggy. Bedknobs and Broomsticks was much the same, it needs to be much darker and a bit scary.

by Anonymousreply 58October 2, 2019 7:31 PM

“Man of La Mancha” was badly botched as a movie cast with wonderful actors who couldn’t sing: Peter O’Toole, Sophia Loren and James Coco. Again it’s a very stylized theatrical stage concept and wouldn’t translate well to film.

by Anonymousreply 59October 2, 2019 7:51 PM

As good as it is on stage, Gypsy has never worked on film. Then again, it's not like they chose the most dynamic directors or writers for either version. They'd need to find a way to make it cinematic, especially "Rose's Turn." The person who suggested Toni Collette is a genius. I'm not sure she or Gypsy would sell tickets these days unless it was done for Netflix, but she'd have the right voice and personality to make Rose both funny and terrifying.

Mame is another good contender, but it's in desperate need of a better director and screenwriter.

A Little Night Music should have been better than it was, too.

A more faithful Cabaret wouldn't be the worst thing in the world, either. Emma Stone was great as Sally on Broadway and would sell a lot of movie tickets if she returned. That'd be an easy Oscar nom/win for her.

by Anonymousreply 60October 2, 2019 8:08 PM

Chicago, without the frantic editing and with When Velma Takes the Stand reinstated. I'd love for the stage version of it to be released on Blu-ray.

by Anonymousreply 61October 2, 2019 9:00 PM

I often wondered why PBS doesn't find a way into the musicals for broadcast business.

by Anonymousreply 62October 2, 2019 9:41 PM

Gigi is sublime, don't remake it. And the story is quite profound.

by Anonymousreply 63October 2, 2019 9:50 PM

The idea of a faithful adaptation of Cabaret is a good one. The Fosse film is one of my all time favorite movies, but a faithful version of the stage show would be radically different enough to justify its being made.

by Anonymousreply 64October 2, 2019 9:56 PM

I wouldn't remake A Chorus Line. But Bob Fosse apparently said he would have done it, had it been offered to him. That's a movie I'd like to have seen.

by Anonymousreply 65October 2, 2019 10:04 PM

A faithful adaptation of Cabaret would simply be a filmed stage show. Most of the "book" songs are terrible, particularly Cliff's, and nobody cares about a song about a fucking pineapple. If you want to see a film of the play, the Mendes/Horrcks version was filmed for TV.

by Anonymousreply 66October 2, 2019 10:07 PM

"All That Jazz" is like Zach's side of the story.

by Anonymousreply 67October 2, 2019 10:09 PM

Also, a film version of Phantom is problematic. The stage version works because it is so stagey. It is a great big, unapologetic, David Belasco stage show. There have been so many film versions of Phantom, I don't see a film version of the musical being able to add anything to what has already been made.

by Anonymousreply 68October 2, 2019 10:12 PM

Most good musicals are "stagey." How would anybody turn Hamilton into a movie? It's too "stagey."

by Anonymousreply 69October 2, 2019 10:15 PM

I'd like to see what an inventive filmmaker could do with Carousel. Otherwise, I don't think we should remake movie musicals.

by Anonymousreply 70October 2, 2019 10:17 PM

R70 But Carousel is about a dead wife-beater, isn't it?

by Anonymousreply 71October 2, 2019 10:34 PM

R71 Some people just want to b hit

by Anonymousreply 72October 2, 2019 10:35 PM

A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC cries out for a remake more than most as the score is superb. The Prince film is clunky and ineptly directed - Diana Rigg is the only saving grace.

However, I would get rid of the Hugh Wheeler book completely and have a better writer do the script.

NINE would never make a good film IMO, though I do like the show itself. To be cinematic you'd have to rip off 8 1/2 too much, I think. Though God knows, Rob Marshall botched the film with the help of Harvey Weinstein and his casting the film with his "favorites" despite the fact that hardly any of them could really sing, other than Fergie. Daniel Day Lewis should be eternally embarrassed by this film.

by Anonymousreply 73October 2, 2019 10:42 PM

R63 I don't know how you found 'Gigi' profound. Did it have any kind of plot which went from A to B?

R73 'A Little Night Music' is as claustrophobic and depressing as Checkov.

by Anonymousreply 74October 2, 2019 10:50 PM

I wanted to give the movie of HAIR a permanent wave...

... goodbye!

by Anonymousreply 75October 3, 2019 12:09 AM

[quote]I often wondered why PBS doesn't find a way into the musicals for broadcast business.

$$$$

by Anonymousreply 76October 3, 2019 2:50 AM

How about ones that have never been made in the first place?

Avenue Q

25th Annual Putnam Co. Spelling Bee

The Full Monty

City of Angels

by Anonymousreply 77October 3, 2019 2:52 AM

Just as an FYI: The Public Theatre in NYC, Joe Papp's baby, gets royalties every time A Chorus Line is produced and performed. It was a gift.

by Anonymousreply 78October 3, 2019 2:55 AM

A Chorus Line could definitely use one. When Audrey Landers is the best part of your movie, you have issues.

I've often wanted to see Sweeney Todd on film as if it were directed by Ken Russell. Very over the top and stylish and broad. Not like that whisper-sung version Tim Burton gave us, although I admit to hating it a lot less than most people do.

by Anonymousreply 79October 3, 2019 3:13 AM

Definitely Les Miserables. I don't remember the Uma Thurman version well, but I liked it well enough and always thought if it had had the songs it would have been good (again, I haven't seen it in ages so my memory may be way off).

by Anonymousreply 80October 3, 2019 3:21 AM

R50 Evita, if remade, would need a crazy Lupone-like singer rocking the score. Otherwise what's the point? Madonna was fine.

by Anonymousreply 81October 3, 2019 3:37 AM

[quote]I'd definitely like a remake of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. It could be a really fun and exciting film but the original is too long and baggy. Bedknobs and Broomsticks was much the same, it needs to be much darker and a bit scary.

They'd both end up being CGI crapfests.

by Anonymousreply 82October 3, 2019 7:38 AM

All these proposed remakes would fail without stars.

There are very few interesting stars left now.

by Anonymousreply 83October 3, 2019 7:49 AM

Ricky Martin is a star.

Hugh Jackman is a middle-aged star.

by Anonymousreply 84October 3, 2019 8:45 AM

R49 I was surprised to learn that Burton originated Arthur on Broadway, having grown up with Harris in the movie and the filmed revival. Imagine my horror too when I discovered that certain voices were dubbed in the 1967 film, and that it was shot in Spain and not in England.

Still, the film is quite an alluring affair and makes an otherwise frilly tame Renn-Faire type-production seem richer & darker. The changing seasons are a particularly marvellous touch that grounds the mythic romance in a tangible place & time. I think this is one of the few musicals whose reputation would have suffered terribly without a movie like the one that was made. I could only wish it were even darker & moodier, and perhaps not cut so much for time. If anything, it's the book that needs remaking or altering when it comes to CAMELOT - I'd balance the Acts and the flow of comedy into drama, and give some characters more lines and others less...

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 85October 3, 2019 2:15 PM

Why, “Hello Dolly!” With better casting where the two leads being a bit closer in age. And, no, Babs cannot recreate her role as the irrepressible Dolly Levi.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 86October 3, 2019 2:30 PM

R86, I'm too busy on Gypsy anyway. And after that I may play Cossette in the Les Mis revival.

by Anonymousreply 87October 3, 2019 2:32 PM

Hello, Dolly! is actually good, a good movie, and a good representation of the show. Certainly doesn't need a remake.

by Anonymousreply 88October 3, 2019 3:13 PM

I didn't see A Chorus Line on Broadway, so I don't really have a field of reference. I actually liked the movie, except switching the whole point of view on the What I Did for Love portion. Some of the guys were pretty hot, including Cameron English. How did Audrey Landers get cast???

by Anonymousreply 89October 3, 2019 3:35 PM

R74, it's Chekhov. And comparing a musical about a sexual roundelay to Chekhov is the silliest thing I've heard in a long while.

by Anonymousreply 90October 3, 2019 7:57 PM

Hello, Dolly needed to not make every song a dance number and the added number for Streisand stops the show in the wrong way, but it fared better than a lot of stage to screen adaptations. I'd have liked an older Dolly, but the score will never be sung better than when it was sung by Streisand.

I'm genuinely shocked we haven't heard that Midler will be reprising her role in one of those NBC Live productions of the show. It seems like such an obvious idea and would be a ratings goldmine. It also has a chance of there being a half-decent live musical show for once.

by Anonymousreply 91October 3, 2019 8:37 PM

Even Jerry Herman has come around to the Dolly movie. Barbra was too young when she played it, but now that she's a classic (read: old) dame, her performance seems perfectly en pointe. No one cares how old she wasn't.

by Anonymousreply 92October 3, 2019 8:53 PM

I'm also surprised we didn't get Bette as Dolly Live! Somebody slipped up, somewhere.

by Anonymousreply 93October 3, 2019 8:55 PM

Funny Face.

Fred Astaire was too old for Audrey Hepburn in the original.

by Anonymousreply 94October 3, 2019 9:00 PM

"I'm also surprised we didn't get Bette as Dolly Live! Somebody slipped up, somewhere."

No Broadway star would degrade herself to play a role they are famous for onstage on network TV today for fuck's sake. With commercial breaks!

by Anonymousreply 95October 3, 2019 9:53 PM

I'm not sure that's degrading. It'd be a huge audience and would have the potential to become a classic for future generations and be watched the way so many people watched Mary Martin in Peter Pan or Lesley Ann Warren in Cinderella over the years.

by Anonymousreply 96October 3, 2019 9:54 PM

They'd have to pony up the $$$ for Bette to consider it. She's still in demand as Dolly. If she wanted to do the tour, they'd have her.

by Anonymousreply 97October 4, 2019 12:55 AM

The best part of ACL by far was the dancing of Gregg Burge even though the song had him having sex with a woman.

by Anonymousreply 98October 4, 2019 2:33 AM

I am available for any and all title roles of TV adaptations.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 99October 4, 2019 3:05 AM

As a youngster we had season tickets. I've seen Jerry Orbach in Chicago, Zero Mostel in Fiddler, Carol Channing in Hello Dolly, and Richard Harris in Camelot. So there.

How many of you realize what a big deal it was for the handsome and seductive Omar Sharif, an Egyptian, to star opposite Barbra Streisand, who is JEwish? And to top it off they had an affair in real life. Yes.

Some of the musicals you're talking about would be too dated. Carousel is definitely about a wife beater n'er-do-well who dies. And she just LOVES him. "Hit me again!" And GiGi is about the world of courtesans. I think GiGi was supposed to be 15 or 16, and if it were done today there is no 16 yr old who would be as stupid and backward as GiGi was. And that "Thank heaven for little girls" number would have to be scrapped.

by Anonymousreply 100October 4, 2019 3:24 AM

"I'm not sure that's degrading. It'd be a huge audience and would have the potential to become a classic for future generations and be watched the way so many people watched Mary Martin in Peter Pan or Lesley Ann Warren in Cinderella over the years."

That happened 1 million BC

by Anonymousreply 101October 4, 2019 4:43 PM

Thank you for that link, Mary OP.

It is beautiful beyond descriptia.

A spiritual experience.

by Anonymousreply 102October 4, 2019 4:52 PM

Seth Rudetsky (granted, not the most reliable source) suggested to day that a "Little Shop" remake was in the works.

by Anonymousreply 103October 5, 2019 1:08 AM

Didn't Jake Gyllenhaal play Seymour a few years ago? I'll bet he wants to do it again. Insanely attractive actors love to play dowdy characters and show off their "range".

by Anonymousreply 104October 5, 2019 4:30 AM

I would love to see a new version of Dreamgirls filmed but it'll never happen. The movie isn't that good, but everyone has convinced themselves that Jennifer Hudson was amazing and iconic. And the sheer fact that Beyonce is in there means this is now some holy artifact.

But I can dream can't I?

by Anonymousreply 105October 5, 2019 4:31 AM

LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS is actually a much beloved movie. A lot of theatre kids grew up with it on video/DVD.

No rush to remake it, IMHO.

by Anonymousreply 106October 5, 2019 4:34 AM

I want to see Hugh Jackman and Ricky Martin doing a singing/loving romantic musical together.

by Anonymousreply 107October 5, 2019 7:25 AM

SWEENEY TODD should be re-made with proper attention to the music. Bryn Terfel and Brenda Blethyn would be stunning in the leading roles. Record every note of the score. Change as little of it as possible.

by Anonymousreply 108October 5, 2019 9:32 AM

[quote]Didn't Jake Gyllenhaal play Seymour a few years ago? I'll bet he wants to do it again. Insanely attractive actors love to play dowdy characters and show off their "range".

Yes he did a concert version a few years ago in NY with Ellen Greene.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 109October 5, 2019 9:35 AM

Bryn Terfel's acting was weak in that concert version of Sweeney Todd. Might have been okay from the mezzanine but can't get away with that on film.

by Anonymousreply 110October 5, 2019 9:52 AM

I'd like a remake of Irma La Douce with all the songs that Billy Wilder dropped from his 1963 version.

by Anonymousreply 111October 5, 2019 10:15 AM

Black Gypsy

by Anonymousreply 112October 5, 2019 3:10 PM

[quote]I often wondered why PBS doesn't find a way into the musicals for broadcast business.

Because there is no profitability in it. In the 1990s, there was a cable channel that tried to do Pay Per View Broadway shows. That's how we got the live performance of Smokey Joe's Cafe. But the DL show queens were the only ones that wanted to pay to have live Broadway shows pumped into their living rooms, so the idea folded.

Every so often, you've seen a Broadway show on something like Live From Lincoln Center. Technically, we should be able to see every Broadway show on PBS or a compatible channel, but it's too expensive to produce. I think that's why the live musicals on NBC and Fox have been somewhat successful. We can see Laura Benanti make a face as she crosses stage right and suddenly realize someone is standing on her dress, but the advertisers pay for it, not us.

by Anonymousreply 113October 5, 2019 3:46 PM

Instead of wasting time with Gypsy, Barbra should have considered bringing Ballroom to the screen. With Bob Redford in the Charles Durning/Vincent Guardina role, it would have been a great last movie for her, an older gay men/fraus would have eaten an indirect Way We Were reunion up like cake. Such nostalgia would have made it a huge box office smash.

Lucy should have done the movie of Gypsy in the early 60's. She had the gorgeous legs and an impressive figure and her voice hadn't been as ravaged as it was when she did Mame. She would have been an excellent Rose.

by Anonymousreply 114October 5, 2019 3:46 PM

Why black?

by Anonymousreply 115October 5, 2019 3:46 PM

[quote]Instead of wasting time with Gypsy, Barbra should have considered bringing Ballroom to the screen.

It's not a showy enough role for her. She wants to do Gypsy because it is the King Lear of the musical theater. If she wanted to, she could do a movie version of Sunset Boulevard, a more well known show. She's just stuck on thinking she would make the ultimate Rose.

by Anonymousreply 116October 5, 2019 3:50 PM

Feh. That woman (Bea?) was a loser. And old.

I'd never play a sad old loser.

by Anonymousreply 117October 5, 2019 4:15 PM

Ballroom really would be the perfect, age appropriate musical for her and something we don't see enough of - an older woman who still has some life left in her and trying to get her life back together. It'd be a niche audience, but Gypsy probably is, too. At least she wouldn't get laughed off the screen in this role. I don't even think I could imagine her as Rose when she was the right age for it.

Gypsy could use a great film adaptation before Sondheim croaks. It's an excellent show, but casting Rose for the screen is tough.

The musical Lucille Ball should have tried to get was Hello, Dolly where her limited range wouldn't have been as much of a hinderance and she'd be age appropriate and be able to use her comic strengths.

by Anonymousreply 118October 6, 2019 1:49 AM

Ba;;room is one of my favorite shows and 50% got me thru a breakup with a married man years ago.

by Anonymousreply 119October 6, 2019 9:46 AM

Lucille Ball had a warmth deficit that only grew with age. She would have been a horrible Dolly. Dolly has to charm everyone she encounters. If not, nothing happens. That kind of charm was not in Lucy's considerable range.

Doris Day was the obvious choice. Rita Hayworth would have been great. If she had been living (admittedly a big "if,") Marilyn Monroe would have been terrific.

Of course, the ultimate Data Lounge choice for the movie version of "Hello, Dolly!" would be that star of the legitimate theatah, Miss Arlene Francis.

by Anonymousreply 120October 6, 2019 2:23 PM

New York, New York. Not a re-do, but a massive edit. De Niro was tiresome.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 121October 6, 2019 5:07 PM

Nine was pretty abysmal. Besides Marion Cotillard and Penelope Cruz, everyone else was horribly miscast and the film was a chore to get through. Daniel Day Lewis can't pull off musical comedy charm, so it made everyone wonder what it was all these women saw in him. We never see him really create anything phenomenal on set or on screen, so all he had to work with was his charm.

I take that back - Fergie was excellent and Kate Hudson was charming and did well with her number even though it had no place in the film.

by Anonymousreply 122October 6, 2019 7:22 PM

The overwhelming problems with NINE were the director and, probably, the script. The shooting script may have been just fine, but got butchered on the way to opening night. One never knows about a film script, unless one has the actual script in hand.

Daniel Day Lewis was impossibly miscast as a Mediterranean. He played Guido like a brooding Irishman.

by Anonymousreply 123October 6, 2019 7:29 PM

[quote]Of course, the ultimate Data Lounge choice for the movie version of "Hello, Dolly!" would be that star of the legitimate theatah, Miss Arlene Francis.

The Ultimate Datalounge "Hello, Dolly!" would star Helen Lawson.

by Anonymousreply 124October 6, 2019 7:35 PM

The issue with Nine seemed to be Rob Marshall and Miramax trying to recapture Chicago's magic, but cutting all the songs that wouldn't work as a numbers inside Guido's head, forgetting that many of the number they did keep don't make a lot of sense inside his head either. Is he really self-aware enough to dream up a number like "My Husband Makes Movies?"

by Anonymousreply 125October 6, 2019 7:35 PM

Gigi is not stupid and backward. How long has it been since you've seen the film? And it is not about a prostitute(used for desperate quick sex) it is about a courtesan(providing a paid alternate lifestyle of physical, sexual and emotional affection without the oppressive trappings of a family. Which was by the way also paid for.) And Caron and Jourdan are about as attractive and charismatic a pair of lovers who have existed on screen. And Thank Heaven for Little Girls is not about being a pedophile. I honestly cannot believe how stupid people are today.

Mame, A Chorus Line, Night Music and Guys and Dolls are my choices.

by Anonymousreply 126October 6, 2019 8:05 PM

The ultimate original Dolly would have been a healthy, mature Judy Garland. The big voice, the charm, the impishness--a healthy Judy would have had it all, but she was a sad, burned-out wreck by 1969.

by Anonymousreply 127October 6, 2019 8:26 PM

The ultimate original Dolly would have been a healthy, mature Judy Holliday.

by Anonymousreply 128October 6, 2019 9:16 PM

[quote]New York, New York. Not a re-do, but a massive edit. De Niro was tiresome.

"New York, New York" is not a musical

[quote] The overwhelming problems with NINE were the director and, probably, the script.

The overwhelming problems with NINE is the score sucks. Not one memorable song and don't even just because you've been listening to the cast album for thirty years and it's drummed in your head. People go to see "Annie" to hear the brat sing "Tomorrow", people go to "CATS" to hear the old broad sing "Memory". People came out of "Nine" humming Anita Morris' costume.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 129October 6, 2019 11:40 PM

You're an idiot, R129. Obviously too dull to appreciate Maury Yeston's work on NINE. None of the score is lacking. Much of it is outstanding. "Folies Bergere" and "Be Italian" are genuine showstoppers. "A Call From the Vatican," is too. "Unusual Way" is a gorgeous ballad. "My Husband Makes Movies" is not just beautiful, it is a showcase for a singing actress. The score is filled with outstanding music and Yeston's worst lyric is better than anything Tim Rice ever wrote.

by Anonymousreply 130October 7, 2019 12:45 AM

Nope.

by Anonymousreply 131October 7, 2019 12:46 AM

Nine is a lousy musical but Tune's staging was the last great musical staging on Broadway. It was terrific. That musical swiped the Tony from Dreamgirls because of Tune. And Bennett's staging of that lousy musical was a marvel. Now the stagings are as lousy as the musicals.

by Anonymousreply 132October 7, 2019 2:09 AM

Someone needs to redo film version of A Little Night Music; and whoever was responsible for the 1977 version ought to have been shot.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 133October 7, 2019 9:17 AM

Harold Prince should have been shot?

by Anonymousreply 134October 7, 2019 9:42 AM

Harold Prince, and that dreadful ALNM film? How? Well I know technically how and why but it does seem awfully dreadful.

by Anonymousreply 135October 7, 2019 9:47 AM

I love the score to NINE, the movie version was just too mis-cast. The only one I liked was the Kate Hudson number

by Anonymousreply 136October 7, 2019 1:25 PM

The score to NINE is outstanding and the movie went wrong in so many ways, all listed above, but the songs had nothing to do with it. Rob Marshall should stick to making music videos, not films, but I digress.

by Anonymousreply 137October 7, 2019 4:46 PM

A Little Night Music cries out for a decent adaptation. Such a great score and so many great roles. Desiree is a great role for a phenomenal, magnetic, and funny actress who can just barely carry a tune. Michelle Pfeiffer might be too old, but I always thought she'd be wonderful.

by Anonymousreply 138October 7, 2019 6:07 PM

Honestly, I would have thought the movie of ALNM would have put the nail in the coffin of the Sondheim-Prince collaboration, but we had to wait until Prince's grossly misconceived Broadway production of MERRILY WE ROLL ALONG.

Pfeiffer might be a good choice for Desiree, except that I don't see her as being very good at conveying wit, which the role really needs. But she has the looks for the role and can sing well enough. Kristen Scott Thomas isn't as beautiful, but I think she would capture Deisree better. And either Rosemary Harris or Charlotte Rampling as the old countess - actually, Rampling and Thomas would be a good mother-daughter combo.

by Anonymousreply 139October 7, 2019 7:56 PM

Pfeiffer always seemed like she'd be a perfect Phyllis in Follies. If they hurry up, it could still happen. Weren't they throwing Streep's name around for that role around the time Into the Woods came out? I can't see her in that role at all. She seems more Sally than anything.

by Anonymousreply 140October 7, 2019 9:14 PM

Meryl in FOLLIES? For real?

No fuckin' way I'm dubbing that bitch aga... oh, never mind.

Heh-heh. I was kidding! Call me the Joker!

by Anonymousreply 141October 7, 2019 9:24 PM

Meryl, at best, would be a Hattie or Stella. Put Bette Midler or Liza Minnelli as whichever one Meryl doesn't play.

I'm not sure what Toni Collette's singing range is, but I could see her acting the shit out of Sally.

by Anonymousreply 142October 7, 2019 9:39 PM

[quote]Nine is a lousy musical but Tune's staging was the last great musical staging on Broadway.

And the revival closed almost as soon as the movie star's limo drove away on his last night.

by Anonymousreply 143October 8, 2019 2:06 AM

My favorite Mme. Armfeldt!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 144October 8, 2019 4:29 AM

Story I've always heard is that Nine had a weak "book" and thus needed a great cast to make the thing work.

Raul Julia, the ravishing Anita Morris, Karen Akers, Liliane Montevecchi, Taina Elg, Shelly Burch, and Kathi Moss really made OBC of Nine work despite limitations.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 145October 8, 2019 4:37 AM

R142 The picture evoked by the last six words of your post is very unattractive indeed!

by Anonymousreply 146October 8, 2019 4:40 AM

Eldergays talk to me about Ballroom!

After seeing late Dorthoy Loudon on that PBS special "Ladies of Broadway" doing " Fifty Percent" was hooked, and began doing research. All was able to come up with is that the show closed after only about 100 performances leaving a bitter taste in many mouths. IIRC the dirt was Michael Bennett or someone else had other projects going so pretty much left Ballroom to twist in wind.

Was this true, or am I missing something? The NYT was very unkind in their review.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 147October 8, 2019 4:52 AM

Always gives me goose bumps!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 148October 8, 2019 4:53 AM

Loudon does a great job by "50 Percent." But I always found it such a strange, artless song.

Do people really love it? Or just Loudon's balls-out performance?

by Anonymousreply 149October 8, 2019 5:00 AM

The TV movie it's based on is pretty bad, but Bennett's choreography for the show won a Tony and there were some rave reviews.

by Anonymousreply 150October 8, 2019 5:07 AM

[quote]Raul Julia, the ravishing Anita Morris, Karen Akers, Liliane Montevecchi, Taina Elg, Shelly Burch, and Kathi Moss really made OBC of Nine work despite limitations.

And don't forget those adorable little boys from the "Be Italian" number

by Anonymousreply 151October 8, 2019 5:19 AM

Gigi was based on a novella written by Colette about a sixteen year old girl growing up with her demimonde aunts who are training her to be a courtesan. Though yes technically a prostitute, but of a much higher class.

There was a French film starring Danièle Delorme and Gaby Morlay, then the play adapted for stage by Anita Loos starring Audrey Hepburn .

The rest as they say is history; MGM bought the property for an American musical film, but had to carefully work around the courtesan angle. There is a great interview with Leslie Caron who puts it bluntly ( they are training her to be a whore...).

Recreating the magic that made Gigi pop back then would be difficult today IMHO. Don't see any studio willing to pony up for all those on location shots in France. Who would do the costumes? More importantly how would the thing be cast? Who could replace Maurice Chevalier, Hermione Gingold, and Louis Jourdan? You're going to need actors who can bring more than just passable French accents to the table.

by Anonymousreply 152October 8, 2019 5:35 AM

^ Singing prostitutes and pedophiles would not be acceptable to the po-faced wowsers who run Hollywood today.

They're more likely to cast the film with American-Americans.

by Anonymousreply 153October 8, 2019 6:29 AM

R127, I was just thinking today how awesome a Mama Rose Judy would have been in a film of Gypsy.

I'd gladly see her in both roles though.

by Anonymousreply 154October 8, 2019 6:38 AM

I'd love to see "Irma La Douce" and "Fanny" with their full scores sung again with actors who could really sing the roles (and dance "Irma").

Dorothy Loudon's character in "Ballroom" was actually very sweet and charming; it was a very different side of her after she had become a big Broadway star playing Miss Hannigan in "Annie". Her Bea in "Ballroom" didn't mug; she seemed normal and human and quite lovely.

Judy Holliday would have been a wonderful Dolly had she lived and had been in good health. Also, Shirley Booth could have done the musical version too, since she starred on Broadway in "A Tree Grows in Brooklyn" and "By The Beautiful Sea". It was a character voice, but damn, she was funny and could put over a song! Plus she's pretty terrific in the film version of "The Matchmaker".

I wouldn't mind seeing "Promises, Promises" being done at last -- it was supposed to be made in the 70s with Neil Diamond apparently.

by Anonymousreply 155October 8, 2019 6:57 AM

Whole back story to Dorothy Loudon and "Fifty Percent" was that she did have a long term relationship to a married man (Norman Paris). It was the same old story from back then; the wife (Mrs. Paris) wouldn't consent to a divorce, so Loudon and Paris couldn't move on with their lives.

Together for 17 years it would only last five more as a married couple (finally) before Mr. Paris died, they were only married from 1971-1977. One year later in 1978 Ballroom opens on Broadway.

Those who knew Ms. Loudon or intimate details about her life likely drew parallels between her character "Bea" and what went on in her life. That of course is all brought home in "Fifty Percent".

by Anonymousreply 156October 8, 2019 9:06 AM

R154 Judy might have sung the role of Mama Rose well.

But can you imagine Judy producing a daughter that the world wants to see stripping their clothes off?

by Anonymousreply 157October 8, 2019 9:58 AM

Judy couldn't help it that Liza is the spitting image of Vincent.

by Anonymousreply 158October 8, 2019 3:59 PM

Could you imagine Ethel Merman or Bette Midler producing a daughter like that either? Heck, even good genetics aren't a given. Have you seen some beautiful people's kids? They turned out to be really ugly. You just never know.

by Anonymousreply 159October 8, 2019 5:38 PM

Nine has some good tunes, but the lyrics are dumb and generic. "You don't know what you do to me, you don't have a clue." Really?

No question, Tommy Tune saved that show from oblivion.

by Anonymousreply 160October 8, 2019 5:47 PM

"I wouldn't mind seeing "Promises, Promises" being done at last -- it was supposed to be made in the 70s with Neil Diamond apparently."

Thank Christ it wasn't. Neil Diamond would have utterly destroyed the wonderful Bacharach songs.

by Anonymousreply 161October 8, 2019 7:38 PM

Neil Diamond was supposed to play the lead in Promises, Promises? What the hell? That sounds like a fucking disaster.

Weren't there rumors of Matthew Morrison and Jane Krakowski doing a TV version of it a decade or so ago? Once again, that's some strange casting.

by Anonymousreply 162October 8, 2019 8:26 PM

I'd like to see an all-albino version of "Cabin In the Sky."

by Anonymousreply 163October 8, 2019 8:36 PM

I'd like to see an all-albino version of "Porgy and Bess"

by Anonymousreply 164October 8, 2019 8:46 PM

Now what's this about Preston and little boys?

20th Century Fox bought Promises I assume due to their relationship with Merrick and Dolly.

Paramount has the rights to Coco. Or did. They bought them probably thinking Lerner was bringing them a huge hit with PYW.

by Anonymousreply 165October 8, 2019 9:55 PM

IMHO "Phantom" and "Evita" top the list of musicals that need remakes. Both existing versions were miscast and disappointing,

But I'm willing to wait until the current generation of Hollywood power brokers has gone, because they just don't know how to adapt serious musicals to the screen. You need actors WHO CAN SING, goddammit! Yes, something like "Evita" does require top-notch acting to translate well to the screen, and that's why Madonna single-handedly sunk the first version, but you can't dispense with the singing as is currently fashionable. There's just no point to making a musical, if the music is going to suck.

by Anonymousreply 166October 8, 2019 10:26 PM

Into the Woods. Destroy the crappy Disney version and give it to Tim Burton.

by Anonymousreply 167October 9, 2019 1:34 AM

Tim Burton? So he can shit all over it as he did with SWEENEY TODD?

No thanks, R167. Yours is a terrible idea.

by Anonymousreply 168October 9, 2019 3:57 AM

Never a movie (only taped for TV broadcast), but a visionary director could do something amazing with SUNDAY IN THE PARK WITH GEORGE. Imagine telescoping time, moving in and out of the GRAND JATTE painting: it could be stunning movie musical storytelling.

It will probably never happen.

by Anonymousreply 169October 9, 2019 4:04 AM

It would be a CGI fiasco, r169. They'll surely do it one day, but I'll stick to the filmed stage version.

r166, I recognize that Evita the movie has problems, but I love the album. Madonna did a good job and I kind of like that if I ever see it on the stage, I know I'll be hearing higher notes and more dramatic singing. But the movie album isn't bad.

by Anonymousreply 170October 9, 2019 4:11 AM

Any movie with Tammy Cruise. Why, because I’m done with him.

by Anonymousreply 171October 9, 2019 4:23 AM

I was genuinely surprised by how good Cruise's voice was in Rock of Ages. It wasn't a good movie and I don't usually like him, but he did genuinely surprise me with his vocals.

I wouldn't be surprised if they greenlight a Sunday in the Park With George movie after the London transfer of the latest revival with Gyllenhaal. They'll probably replace Ashford with someone like Emily Blunt or Emma Stone on screen, though.

by Anonymousreply 172October 9, 2019 5:23 PM

Oddly, what I would like to see is non-musical versions of the original source material. Particularly, Berlin Diaries with period music from the Weimar Rep. Also, the original Gigi book.

I would love to see a remake of The Boy Friend done as an early partial talky with the last act being a two-tone technicolor sequence in an otherwise B&W movie. That would be closer to the original intent of the musical.

I am surprised that nobody had mentioned Guys and Dolls. Perhaps I missed the post.

by Anonymousreply 173October 9, 2019 5:36 PM

I did a ways back. Along with Mame and Night Music. I was surprised there weren't others except for you. Maybe nobody cares anymore. So many revivals they're tired of it.

by Anonymousreply 174October 9, 2019 5:44 PM

I just don't think there would be a market for a full film of "Sunday in the park with George." It doesn't appeal to families or high school girls, the way "Into the Woods" did.

One thing I believe with all of these is that if you are going to remake a musical it has to appeal more than just to gay men. The film would need to be financially successful. This is why I could imagine a "Mame" remake, but not a remake of "A Little Night Music."

by Anonymousreply 175October 9, 2019 5:48 PM

I'm still surpised they've yet to make a film of "Wicked." It is almost to be guaranteed a success if it is at all good, given its appeal for its target audience (teenage girls). I have heard the creators do not want to make a movie until the Broadway stage show closes, which I think is a real mistaken idea.

by Anonymousreply 176October 9, 2019 5:50 PM

R175, this is why I think a new Gypsy could be successful if they cast really hot chicks as the strippers and actually had them take everything off to show how vulgar they are compared to Gypsy who masters the art of the tease. If they could sex it up, they might widen their demographic. Plus, I've always wanted to see a really seedy, sleazy Gypsy.

by Anonymousreply 177October 9, 2019 5:51 PM

[quote]Which Movie Musicals would you Remake...and Why...and How?

Follies.

Everyone knows that the minute they make it, there will be demands that it be remade PROPERLY.

by Anonymousreply 178October 9, 2019 5:53 PM

Wicked is still doing so well on Broadway and in its many tours that they can delay that film for another 5/10 years. It'll be like Phantom. It took forever for that to come to the screen and then I wished they hadn't bothered at all.

by Anonymousreply 179October 9, 2019 5:54 PM

Here you go, R173. Ask and you shall receive.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 180October 9, 2019 6:06 PM

The thing is a seedy sleazy Gypsy is not the musical. It is very much of its period. A popular entertainment for the late 50s. Also how much did Lee herself really take off? Was she topless without some sort of shear netting? Was she ever frontally nude?

by Anonymousreply 181October 9, 2019 6:06 PM

Dear god I hope not r181.

by Anonymousreply 182October 9, 2019 6:07 PM

R181, I said Berlin Diaries rather than I am a Camera for a reason. The film of I am a Camera is precisely what I would not want to see. More like Babylon Berlin with actual music from the German Cabaret scene rather than the modern stuff they used. Actually, the two leads in Babylon Berlin would be great leads for a German version.

by Anonymousreply 183October 9, 2019 6:23 PM

You wrote that you wanted to see versions of the source material. The source material for CABARET is I AM A CAMERA.

The source material for I AM A CAMERA is BERLIN STORIES.

by Anonymousreply 184October 9, 2019 6:26 PM

Gypsy Rose Lee was a stripper. It wasn't the glamorous thing the movie GYPSY suggests it was. How much a dancer could show was controlled by local ordinance.

In each town she played, she showed all the law would allow. If she showed more, the theater would have been out of business. If she showed less, she would have been out of business.

Linked below are photos of her stripping in a carnival in Tennessee.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 185October 9, 2019 6:28 PM

It seems like every actress who plays Rose in the past 10 years has slowly been shedding more and more of the humor and trying to make Rose a much darker and grittier character. At this point, the show no longer feels like that fun 50's musical it was originally intended to be.

by Anonymousreply 186October 9, 2019 6:28 PM

R184, uh no. The book to the musical is very different from the Van Druten play, including a whole new subplot with the elderly couple.

by Anonymousreply 187October 9, 2019 6:29 PM

And this is why a lot of those recent revivals haven't worked for me. Who wants to spend 2 1/2 hours with a shrill, nagging, dangerously psychotic person from the get go. To me, it's scarier when you first see signs of Rose's psycho side at the end of act 1. When she starts off the show like Sybil off her meds, it makes for a slog of a night.

by Anonymousreply 188October 9, 2019 6:30 PM

R186. I don't know where you get that. Every person who worked on the original and that includes Merman spoke of how dark it was and how the audiences struggled with the tone.

by Anonymousreply 189October 9, 2019 6:30 PM

The original Gypsy was certainly dark for the late 50's, but recent productions have been draining the entire show of humor for the past 10/15 years and it becomes exhausting. At least Merman was getting huge laughs during the show back then. I don't remember hearing many laughs during some of the more recent productions. Maybe it's just how we've grown as a society and we no longer find someone like Rose charming or funny at all. We can see she's basically a true monster.

by Anonymousreply 190October 9, 2019 6:41 PM

The color photos of the original Gypsy certainly make it seem like a somewhat glamorous musical with a somewhat seedy story. What we see from it seems like that photoshoot from Life including the tableau on stage of the group of women is close to the mark. Though I admit it was a photoshoot for life so it is going to be sanitized. Though it is still interesting that a stripper in a conservative period of America's history would become so renowned and not some sleazy joke.

by Anonymousreply 191October 9, 2019 7:25 PM

[quote]Though it is still interesting that a stripper in a conservative period of America's history would become so renowned and not some sleazy joke.

It's because she--like the other two most famous "burlesque artists" of her day, such as Sally Rand and Lili St. Cyr--became famous during the Depression, which was a much less sanitized time than the 50s.

by Anonymousreply 192October 9, 2019 7:29 PM

There are no light-hearted Moms who put their kids in show business.

by Anonymousreply 193October 9, 2019 8:12 PM

Gypsy Rose Lee's "gimmick" was her being a "lady". The sort of stripper if a "nice" middle class girl was reduced to those circumstances would be and keep her dignity. Ms. Lee's shows were not that much if at all any more vulgar than some floor shows at nightclubs where plenty of respectable men and women went for entertainment.

MM didn't take anything off during this number, but her wiggling around in a somewhat revealing dress isn't that far removed from stripping.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 194October 9, 2019 8:34 PM

Jane Russell did another "lady like" strip tease in musical film "The French Line". Again we're talking something along lines of a floor show that plenty of respectable 1950's audiences had no problems with attending.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 195October 9, 2019 8:59 PM

As for 1930's vaudeville type burlesque, Barbara Stanwyck's act seems rather tame

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 196October 9, 2019 9:01 PM

r196, Pauline Kael (who loved Stanwyck and appreciated her performance in the film nonetheless) described Lady of Burlesque thus: "The movie has scenes in which burlesque audiences are stimulated into raucous excitement by the sight of girls clothed practically to the stifling point."

by Anonymousreply 197October 9, 2019 9:05 PM

Please! No one can possibly be suggesting that Hollywood under the Hayes Office is a suitable guide to understanding actual strippers working a carnival in Tennessee or any where else.

by Anonymousreply 198October 9, 2019 9:25 PM

To be fair, R157, Lorna Luft had a nice bod when she was young.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 199October 9, 2019 9:58 PM

Fosse/Verdon's "Whatever Lola Wants" was really just a strip.

Shortly after the Lansbury "Gypsy", Cher's producers gave her the open where she would start a song fully dressed before removing the draping and singing the rest of the song in a revealing gown.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 200October 9, 2019 10:15 PM

Under the unpopular opinion thread I would have to post that I like the film of Gypsy a lot. I'm a real sucker for Natalie Wood.

by Anonymousreply 201October 9, 2019 10:21 PM

There is a lot to like in that movie. Lots of problems, too. But it's the best "Gimmick" anyone will ever see. And the look on Natalie Wood's face as she watches them dance around her makes up for any shortcoming in the film.

by Anonymousreply 202October 9, 2019 10:24 PM

To R161. I remember reading in Variety sometime in the late 70's that "Promises, Promises" was going to be made with John Travolta and Linda Ronstadt. It never happened but would have been interesting.

by Anonymousreply 203October 9, 2019 10:27 PM

I think their confrontation in the dressing room is pretty great too. Wood is so genuinely furious at her mother and I like the way Russell bitterly repeats 'I thought you did it for me.'

by Anonymousreply 204October 9, 2019 10:29 PM

How about big splashy remake of "Follies"? Oh that's right, no has bothered to make the first one yet.

by Anonymousreply 205October 9, 2019 10:32 PM

I also love the movie just for Ann Jillian as Dainty June. That girl could sing and dance! Her bursting onto the stage, seemingly in mid-air, in the middle of "Broadway, Broadway" is fantastic.

by Anonymousreply 206October 9, 2019 10:33 PM

With all the great stars of Broadway's and Hollywood's golden age still alive in the 70s that would have been the perfect time to make Follies before they got too decrepit. Of course I would have been 1 of the only 10 people who would have gone to see it. Doris Day would have been a great Sally with Ava Gardner a wonderful Phyllis.

by Anonymousreply 207October 9, 2019 10:59 PM

r203 Was Travolta supposed to play Miss Della Hoya or Miss Polansky?

by Anonymousreply 208October 9, 2019 11:26 PM

What about something relatively obscure like My Sister Eileen or one of Virginia Mayo's old movies? I find most of these ideas boring.

by Anonymousreply 209October 9, 2019 11:41 PM

There are no male dancers today on par with Bob Fosse or Tommy Rall, r209.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 210October 9, 2019 11:45 PM

I don't doubt it r210 but maybe something could be done about that.

by Anonymousreply 211October 9, 2019 11:54 PM

No one can nor has touched Natalie Wood as "Gypsy" Rose Lee.

Ms. Wood was at the height of her beauty and top her game. Her gypsy is a nice girl with just a little bit of sultry smoldering underneath.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 212October 9, 2019 11:55 PM

Again, Ms. Lee didn't show anything more than what you'd see in most floor shows of the period, it was just how things were presented. She was an "artiste" *LOL*

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 213October 9, 2019 11:58 PM

Whatever Lola Wants, a striptease? Never thought if it that way , but now that you've mentioned it suppose is true.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 214October 9, 2019 11:59 PM

It is amazing with all the training dancers have today nobody can touch dancers like Fosse, Rall, Verdon, Vera-Ellen or Cyd Charisse. The list goes on. I wonder why that is. Maybe it doesn't matter as much to them?

It goes back to the thread on Norman. Why are there no singers today as great as she was?

by Anonymousreply 215October 10, 2019 12:01 AM

Film versions of "Gypsy" have a lot of built-in problems, starting with casting. Rose had her children very young, and should have been in her early twenties in the first act and her mid-thirties at the end, but no young actress has the devouring charisma of the mature divas who traditionally play the role, and who could never pass as the mother of young children on film. Then there's the role of Gypsy Rose Lee herself, who needs to pass as a tomboyish young girl in the 2nd act and a stripper in the 3rd. So she's traditionally played by slight little girlish things, who aren't believable as the most successful stripper of her era. Really, they ought to hire an actress with a figure, and CGI her body into a childish shape for act 2. Like the way they made Chris Evans into a skinny little pipsqueak in "Captain America".

I wonder if Anne Hathaway might make a decent Mama Rose. She's an appropriate age, she's a passable singer and a very good actress, and I think she could play a real monster if she tried.

by Anonymousreply 216October 10, 2019 12:04 AM

Wouldn't Hathaway read as too young in the latter scenes when Rose has to be clearly middle aged? At least clearly in her 40s. She'd be good as the mother when the girls were young. Then maybe you could have Streisand take over when the girls are young women. Just in time for Everything's Coming Up Roses.

by Anonymousreply 217October 10, 2019 12:19 AM

Linda Lavin is the only Rose.

by Anonymousreply 218October 10, 2019 12:21 AM

Oh my god. I saw Lavin as Rose. Didn't Laurents like her?

by Anonymousreply 219October 10, 2019 12:25 AM

[quote]No one can nor has touched Natalie Wood as "Gypsy" Rose Lee.

She was not a really fine actress, but "Gypsy" was her best performance.

by Anonymousreply 220October 10, 2019 12:36 AM

"Why are there no singers today as great as she was?"

Because for past few decades most opera singers are trained, taught or whatever to "sing on the interest and not the capital". Everyone wants to be a superstar diva but not necessarily put in the time and effort into building up a repertoire. So they stick with a few operas/roles they know and build a career based upon that alone.

Loved Natalie Dessay, but soon grew weary of her "tweety bird" performances. Everything was endless scales and high notes; you get tired of that after awhile. Apparently it also ruined her voice and thus her short lived opera career.

by Anonymousreply 221October 10, 2019 12:40 AM

Had no idea Dessay ruined her voice. Thought she was still performing in Europe.

by Anonymousreply 222October 10, 2019 12:43 AM

Performing yes, but not opera. Mlle Dessay gave her last operatic performance in 2013, she is now an actress and chansonnière.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 223October 10, 2019 12:48 AM

What actress out there today really understands Mama Rose enough to do justice to the role?

Who is going to be able to to do "Rose's Turn" that properly conveys a woman basically having a nervous breakdown right on stage.

Up until that number Mama Rose comes across as a high riding bitch; by the end of it we have gotten (or should anyway) the backstory and gained an understanding into what drove Rose to do what she did to her children.

Maybe things came more naturally to older actresses who had been around during Great Depression and or otherwise known hard times. This and or grew up in less than ideal homes.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 224October 10, 2019 1:05 AM

Why don't you Gypsy fanatics stuff a cork in it or perhaps start a 27,544th Gypsy thread?

by Anonymousreply 225October 10, 2019 1:28 AM

[quote]Whatever Lola Wants, a striptease? Never thought if it that way , but now that you've mentioned it suppose is true.

And completely wasted on Tab Hunter.

by Anonymousreply 226October 10, 2019 2:56 AM

Oh I don't know; his reactions to Lola's attempt at seduction are comical. They range from clearly uncomfortable to embarrassed. When he picks up Lola's discarded pants and puts them behind as if to say "now we'll just put those away now" is priceless.

by Anonymousreply 227October 10, 2019 3:25 AM

If it's not Follies it's Gypsy. I mean how miserable our lives would have been if we had lived and died before 1959. I feel so sorry for those theater queens who lived such empty lives well before those musicals were created. They had nothing to discuss and argue over.

by Anonymousreply 228October 10, 2019 3:48 AM

Broadway season 1957-1958.

Wasn't around then, but picking seem pretty slim aside from Music Man and West Side story in terms of things I'd want to discuss.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 229October 10, 2019 3:59 AM

Rose is hard to cast for film. At least on stage, there's a good deal of distance between the actress and audience so the age can be a bit blurry, but on film, it's a tough sell. The Hathaway suggestion isn't bad. I think she'd be more than up for it. I'm not sure if she's a traditional belter, but she can certainly sing and I think she's a wonderful actress. She was the best part about Les Mis and seemed to be one of the few who knew how to act and sing at the same time.

by Anonymousreply 230October 10, 2019 4:35 AM

Viola Davis should play Rose. She would be great.

by Anonymousreply 231October 10, 2019 4:39 AM

If Viola Davis or Octavia Spencer could sing it, they'd be phenomenal Roses.

by Anonymousreply 232October 10, 2019 4:41 AM

Ooh, Jennifer Hudson as Rose! That will be a casting coup!

by Anonymousreply 233October 10, 2019 6:18 AM

As far as more contemporary male dancers on Broadway, John Selya was fabulous in "Movin' Out" but seems to have disappeared after that. Could he sing? Terrific dancer. Hinton Battle was marvelous years ago and got several Tonys. More recently, I thought that Corbin Bleu was really excellent with a lot of charisma in "Holiday Inn".

by Anonymousreply 234October 10, 2019 7:17 AM

Rose Hovick was not young when she had Gypsy. She was 21. She was married very young but did not have children until much later. Rose is nearly 30 at the beginning of the musical

Gypsy Rose Lee was a stripper and showed considerably more than one could see in a floor show during that period, unless it was one of those "living tableaux" where the girls did not move. Her gimmick was that she was a "lady". She did not do the bumps and grinds associated with strippers. She also talked directly to the audience, often making Will Rogers type commentary on current events. However, she did strip to as far as sensors would allow.

She was also famous for not having a stripper's body. She was always rather flat chested, certainly compared to other strippers.

by Anonymousreply 235October 10, 2019 11:42 AM

I'd like Follies, please. And Sunday in the Park with George. Both are surreal properties, which translate to film well. Sweeney Todd, on the other hand, is a straightforward narrative, more difficult to do (with songs).

by Anonymousreply 236October 10, 2019 4:13 PM

Gregg Burge, Hinton Battle and Don Correia were as talented as any of the previous generation of male dancers. Today, Robbie Fairchild is certainly great.

by Anonymousreply 237October 10, 2019 4:18 PM

Are you serious? You would hold Fairchild up with Astaire and Kelly? He wasn't even a great ballet dancer.

by Anonymousreply 238October 10, 2019 4:27 PM

R237 doesn't know much about dance and it shows.

by Anonymousreply 239October 10, 2019 4:37 PM

R238, R239, the posted comparison wasn't Astaire and Kelly, it was to Fosse and Rail.

by Anonymousreply 240October 10, 2019 5:20 PM

Some things about Gigi the people seem to forget or overlook:

The song "Thank Heaven for Little Girls" isn't a pedophile singing about his desire for prepubescent females, it's about the recognition that some girls grow up to become beautiful women.

The plot hinges on the courtesan angle in such a way that Gigi is extremely hesitant to pursue such a path, and then when she acquiesces she is rejected by Gaston, who realizes he would rather have Gigi as his wife than as his paid mistress.

by Anonymousreply 241October 10, 2019 5:21 PM

Helena Bonham Carter is Phyllis Rogers Stone!

by Anonymousreply 242October 10, 2019 5:21 PM

R241, yes. Gaston is transformed by Gigi's innate "morality," for want of a better word. It's actually very rich, and clearly misunderstood.

by Anonymousreply 243October 10, 2019 5:26 PM

But still Fosse and Rall? Come on.

by Anonymousreply 244October 10, 2019 5:31 PM

I think "Gigi" had to be made in a more innocent time. If a frank modern version of the film was ever made, we'd see an extremely disturbing story about a girl being pressured into prostitution, surrounded by inappropriately cheerful and lucious songs. No, it's a story that actually needs the sugar-coating it got in the 1950s, to seem at all enjoyable.

"Sweeny Todd", on the other hand, would translate very easily to film, in the hands of a competent director and music department. The stage show is very funny and fast-moving, the narrative is straightforward and the characters boldly defined, if played with a little verve it'd be a MUCH better film than the lifeless Tim Burton version. I do look forward to a remake.

by Anonymousreply 245October 10, 2019 10:06 PM

I would pay good money to never see or hear about Phantom of the Opera ever again. It's been done to death and it's not even that captivating of a story.

by Anonymousreply 246October 10, 2019 10:25 PM

Burge and Battle's tap duel from "Sophisticated Ladies" was a simply brilliant performance. I'd compare it to the Fosse/Rail moment from MSE any day.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 247October 10, 2019 11:10 PM

R243 Yes, the sexual politics in the 1958 "Gigi" is clearly misunderstood because it was made by style-queen Minnelli who was more in love with fabrics and colour than the subtlety of Alan Jay Lerner's lyrics and the nuances of human emotion.

Minnelli made the lumbering, unfunny comedy called 'Designing Woman' where Gregory Peck is required to play an ultra-masculine, oafish cloddish pig.

Minnelli cast Louis Jourdan who is passably handsome but out of his depth trying to sing in the English language and trying to instil some light and shade into this rather repetitive lyric--

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 248October 10, 2019 11:43 PM

[quote]Burge and Battle's tap duel from "Sophisticated Ladies" was a simply brilliant performance. I'd compare it to the Fosse/Rail moment from MSE any day.

Boy, Phyllis Hyman was something, wasn't she?

by Anonymousreply 249October 10, 2019 11:54 PM

Well at least Mamita came out of "Gigi" looking good. She has her own line of foods at Aldi.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 250October 10, 2019 11:55 PM

[quote]Burge and Battle's tap duel from "Sophisticated Ladies" was a simply brilliant performance. I'd compare it to the Fosse/Rail moment from MSE any day.

Those guys earned their paychecks for that show eight times a week.

by Anonymousreply 251October 10, 2019 11:59 PM

[quote] I find most of these ideas boring.

No one gives a shit how you find them.

by Anonymousreply 252October 10, 2019 11:59 PM

I think several musical could be updated with a new version: Annie Get Your Gun focusing on gun control, and Kiss Me Kate being about William, Harry, Kate and Meghan. It would be easy to change the gold-digging Lois into Meghan.

by Anonymousreply 253October 11, 2019 12:07 AM

Belle Époque France in particular Paris was all about the demi mondaine and the grand horizontals . We know these courtesans from fiction (Dame of the Camellias, Swan In Love, etc...), but often there were real women behind these stories, and Gigi symbolized how some of them made out in real life.

Only difference is that Gigi wasn't her husband's lover before becoming his wife; but Gaston simply married beneath himself in choosing a daughter of an opera singer from a family of questionable background.

There were no shortage of less well off mothers/guardians of young girls during this period in France who wouldn't jump at the chance to pimp out those girls to a wealthy man. Gaston knows all about Madame Alvarez and her sister ( great aunt Alicia), but didn't get clued into exactly at first what Gigi's "lessons" entailed and that he was the chosen pigeon. When Aunt Alicia tries to flatter Gaston by asking about his family and so forth he responds politely but curtly. He knows what she was and thus her ways.

When Gigi bursts out of her rooms with her hair piled up on her head and skirts lowered to ground (a sign then of a young woman's coming of age), he finally sees her not as a little girl, but for what she has become, a young woman. More to the point the plots and schemes of her aunts is brought home quite clearly.

At that point ball is in Gaston's court; he can go along with the scheme,, deflower and use Gigi until he tires and discards her, or there is another option. The second is aroused by Gaston clearly coming to terms that he is in love with Gigi, this respect become even more profound when Gigi agrees to becoming his mistress because she really does care for Gaston.

That night at Maxims as Gaston "brings out" his new young mistress and Gigi displays her education (how to prepare a cigar, etc...) Gaston realizes that he would be corrupting an innocent, and again what is more someone he has grown to care about deeply. Saccharine as it may be, and perhaps out of character the rest makes up the romantic love story that is film Gigi. Our tormented hero must either chose to go against society or his own morals. If he chooses the former he will lose Gigi, which is tragic because the guy is deeply in love with her.

As Eva Peron says in that musical "story is quite usual, local girl makes good, weds famous man...".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 254October 11, 2019 1:29 AM

For those who remember this news story, apparently those demimondaine courtesans often did very well for themselves.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 255October 11, 2019 1:32 AM

Burge's dancing in ACL was among the absolute best filmed dancing in decades. Beautiful extension and musicality but even though he's a complete queen, his movement is not even vaguely feminine. Compare this to when Zach tells Cassie she's too good for the chorus and it's not hard to see why people laughed at poor Alyson Reed.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 256October 11, 2019 1:49 AM

ANNIE GET YOUR GUN CONTROL

KISS ME KATE BUT ONLY WITH COMPLETE WILLFUL CONSENT

MY FAIR LADY OF ANY RANGE OF SKIN TONES

by Anonymousreply 257October 11, 2019 4:27 AM

Well since we're into realm of "wishing"; wouldn't mind a film remake of "The New Moon". Last one was in 1940, so guess we're about due for another. Though hang me if you could find an actress capable of doing Marianne, *and* with a legitimate creamy soprano voice.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 258October 11, 2019 5:44 AM

Sigmund Romberg and Oscar Hammerstein II should be ashamed of ripping off Sondheim like that .

by Anonymousreply 259October 11, 2019 10:41 AM

KISS ME KATE BUT ONLY WITH COMPLETE WILLFUL CONSENT AND WHO THE HELL KNOWS WHAT THAT IS ANYMORE

by Anonymousreply 260October 11, 2019 1:21 PM

R243 You mention Gigi's innate "morality" and I'm reminded how the Eliza Dolittle's father makes a brief mention of morality.

But both mentions are skirted over with pretty costumes and lovely decor.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 261October 11, 2019 10:16 PM

Grease, with age-appropriate actors.

by Anonymousreply 262October 11, 2019 10:38 PM

My Fair Lady is another story that is far edgier and modern than it appears. A young woman moves in with two men? No wonder Mrs. Pierce, et al. are appalled.

by Anonymousreply 263October 11, 2019 11:00 PM

r262 I'm available

by Anonymousreply 264October 11, 2019 11:21 PM

South Pacific - with the native girl whom the young American servicemen fell in lust with - replaced by a native boy.

by Anonymousreply 265October 11, 2019 11:36 PM

Hairspray, but this time Waters has complete control, right down to being director. The musical would have worked so much better with his wit and style.

by Anonymousreply 266October 11, 2019 11:40 PM

Bye Bye Birdie done right this time. Into The Woods with the intelligence of the original and capable actors instead of Emily Blunt and Anna Kendrick. James Corden needs to get into a fatal car crash already.

by Anonymousreply 267October 11, 2019 11:42 PM

[quote]Hairspray, but this time Waters has complete control, right down to being director. The musical would have worked so much better with his wit and style.

The musical worked just fine.

by Anonymousreply 268October 11, 2019 11:43 PM

How about this for a ridiculous idea and directed by the guy who made the lousy "Love Simon". He couldn't even do a tiny musical moment well.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 269October 11, 2019 11:47 PM

BBB was done right. Well mostly. All the Broadway filler was thrown out thank god. Some of that American satire was dreadful. Maybe Champion in the original production was able to keep it light and fun but those songs that were cut are pretty bad.

by Anonymousreply 270October 11, 2019 11:52 PM

[quote]My Fair Lady is another story that is far edgier and modern than it appears. A young woman moves in with two men? No wonder Mrs. Pierce, et al. are appalled.

Two gay men, r263

by Anonymousreply 271October 12, 2019 12:28 PM

There is nothing in My Fair Lady or in Pygmalion that suggests Higgins or Pickering are gay. What nonsense.

Pickering is too old to do anything about it anymore, so it is irrelevant to the story and thoroughly unexplored or developed by the authors. Higgins' only interest is in the study of phonetics and in himself.

by Anonymousreply 272October 12, 2019 12:43 PM

Two middle aged or old men are housemates so that makes them gay. So you can say Felix and Oscar are gay. Well Higgins and Pickering are in a musical so I guess there's that.

by Anonymousreply 273October 12, 2019 1:33 PM

The main problem with BBB is Janet Leigh being cast as Rosie, who's supposed to be a Latina in the original show. I like Leigh, but she wasn't much of a singer though she could dance passably if the steps weren't too hard. The movie did, however, turn into the Ann-Margret Show, which is why Dick Van Dyke never liked it.

by Anonymousreply 274October 12, 2019 9:40 PM

I enjoy the Bye Bye Birdie movie and I don't think it's Leigh's fault that all her best material got cut. She seemed like a capable singer in the few brief bars she gets to sing in the film.

by Anonymousreply 275October 12, 2019 9:47 PM

But Ann Margret is so sensational who cares if we don't get more Dick Van Dyke. I like him very much but Ann in this film is spectacular. You want a lot of her and you get just enough of everyone else when they get their turns.

by Anonymousreply 276October 12, 2019 11:08 PM

Paul Lynde fared the best next to Ann Margret. He almost walks away with the movie.

by Anonymousreply 277October 13, 2019 1:14 AM

Paul Lynde certainly does!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 278October 13, 2019 1:42 AM

I would agree that BBB is just wonderful and can't be remade because the image of AM is much too strong. The TV remake with Jason Alexander and Vanessa Williams was a disgrace. I also agree that the movie would have been better with, say, Rita Moreno as Rose but the studio felt audiences couldn't yet accept that kind of an interracial romance.

by Anonymousreply 279October 13, 2019 1:52 AM

If you ask me AM is the only fresh and new performance in that BBB film.

Paul Lynde is playing PL, and DvD is playing Dick Van Dyke, each basically working the same ole schtick. It works for them, but still.....

by Anonymousreply 280October 13, 2019 2:07 AM

What am I -- chopped liver?

by Anonymousreply 281October 13, 2019 2:12 AM

Rydell is fine, but rather underutilized in the film. He has/had a great voice and could really swing a song with great energy.

by Anonymousreply 282October 13, 2019 2:35 AM

r75: If that's what Rex Reed said, then I agree with him. The film of [italic]Hair[/italic] was a travesty, a mockery of the original stage piece.

by Anonymousreply 283October 13, 2019 2:36 AM

I think Onna White's choreography was just great in BBB.

by Anonymousreply 284October 13, 2019 2:37 AM

Onna White's choreography is also magnificent and so fun to watch in "The Music Man".

by Anonymousreply 285October 13, 2019 2:42 AM

Returning to the thread: I concur with r38, Burton missed the boat on [italic]Sweeney[/italic] all the way around... too Burton-y. One thing that struck me when I first listened to the score was, "Wow... this doesn't sound like it was written in the late Seventies." (Not that you can restrict Sondheim's work to any specific era, except maybe [italic]Company[/italic] or [italic]West Side Story[/italic.) It sounded very like an MGM musical in places. And it struck me that if I ever made it as a film, I'd have leaned into that, creating a feature that turned all the tropes of classic Golden Age film musicals on their head, sort of an anti-"MGM musical" where everybody dies.

I know I'm beating a dead horse in saying so, but what really went right up my ass, pardon the phraseology (because you must, this is DL), was cutting the ensemble. They can talk all they want about their justification, it's bullshit. It's a musical, so we expect ensemble singing, as unrealistic as they find it to be. The whole character of certain songs was lost, and sometimes even the title, like why the hell call it "God, That's Good!" anymore if you never hear that phrase even once?

Plus, after reading the screenplay and learning how "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" would have worked, with the ghosts of Sweeney's victims recurring throughout the film, both as their ghost selves (sort of omniscient narrators; it was kind of implied that the story is being relived) and as themselves before they got killed, I was particularly incensed to lose that. Seeing the sole remnant of it -- Anthony Stewart Head is still in the film (as his "alive" self, asking if Sweeney has a shop in the Pirelli sequence) because the ax didn't come down on those scenes until after they'd already filmed his bit -- sticks out to someone who knows what's missing.

What really bugs me is that the artistic justification for cutting the ensemble is, in my opinion, total bullshit. As I understand it, Burton was all set to film them until Johnny Depp's daughter got sick. Johnny rushed to the hospital to be with her, Tim rushed to the hospital to be with Johnny (because... moral support, I guess?), and it set the schedule back enough that ensemble stuff wound up on the cutting room floor. Tim later justified it with all his crap about singing ensembles being unrealistic, but it always struck me as a hastily thought up excuse after the fact. I mean, I wasn't there; I have no clue how serious the health situation actually was, and besides that, maybe executive meddling was involved, maybe he was all set to go back and do it and the studio was like "Look, it got pushed way behind schedule, something's gotta go." But if so, I don't want to hear how you justified it to yourself. Just be honest. Say the studio killed it or that you fucked up. Don't try to claim this was something you wanted to do going in, you don't hire Christopher fucking Lee (seriously) to leave him in the dustbin. It's disingenuous.

(Especially when production didn't need to halt for Tim to rush to Johnny's side. Shit like that is what second unit directors are for, go in and get all the stuff that doesn't have to involve the leads. Let Tim watch it when he comes back. If something doesn't look right, let him re-shoot. It's not a difficult concept.)

by Anonymousreply 286October 13, 2019 3:59 AM

And let's not forget her brilliant work in Mame.

by Anonymousreply 287October 13, 2019 3:59 AM

[quote] If you ask me AM is the only fresh and new performance in that BBB film. Paul Lynde is playing PL, and DvD is playing Dick Van Dyke, each basically working the same ole schtick. It works for them, but still.....

Yes but you are looking at the performance today after Lynde's entire career. With BBB nobody knew him on Broadway and then in the film. He was hilarious and fresh. Unfortunately he turned out to be one note, but for this he shined.

by Anonymousreply 288October 13, 2019 10:12 AM

R286 I’d love a remake of Sweeney Todd, but with three specific things changed.

One, Sweeney and Lovett be age appropriate. Anytime Johnny Depp and HBC open their mouths to sing in the Burton version it sounded like twenty year olds singing, which didn’t fit the character of an embittered and weathered man old enough to be the father of an eighteen/nineteen year old girl.

Two, include the ensemble. Ensemble songs are the best part of Sweeney Todd and cutting those out alone should have gotten this film nominated for Razzies.

Three, change directors. Burton's look in this film doesn’t honestly even look like Burton. It looks like the inside of a Hot Topic. Horrible filters and color correction and stuff. Hire someone who knows how to make London look gritty, decaying, and sick. Burton’s London just looks fake. Like a set or a theme park ride.

by Anonymousreply 289October 13, 2019 2:35 PM

Sondheim is on record as saying he does not like movie musicals but he like Sweeney!

by Anonymousreply 290October 13, 2019 2:51 PM

R291 Sondheim is also old and senile and dating a man who’s well under half his age. We love the guy, but maybe at this stage in his life we ought to take his judgment with a grain of salt.

by Anonymousreply 291October 13, 2019 2:55 PM

I disagree, R290: the ages of the cast in the movie SWEENEY are one of the few details they did get right. Antony and Johanna are plausible teenagers, Depp is plausibly her father, and HBC is approximately his age. Len Cariou was just 40 when SWEENEY opened on Broadway.

Depp was 44 at the time of the film version. Nothing about him sounded or appeared "twenty year old" to me.

I agree that the film deserves a remake, with an ensemble. And leads who can really sing.

by Anonymousreply 292October 13, 2019 6:07 PM

A CHORUS LINE could work really well, even today, if it was "opened up" - meaning if each of the songs were little flashback videos of their own. And Paul's monologue, of course. Flashback videos would enhance a lot of the songs like "Nothing", "I Can Do That" and "Everything was Beautiful at the Ballet".

I would also cut down the long boring dance to "The Music and the Mirror" and just give Cassie her own flashback video of her long audition history, some successful, others not.

When I saw the film years ago I was shocked that they did not take this approach. I think it would give the finale a bigger punch too: I would make certain that each face was featured individually as they joined the final chorus line.

by Anonymousreply 293October 13, 2019 6:32 PM

What made A Chorus Line was Bennett's original staging with the original cast which was about as exciting a production as I've ever seen. But clearly the book and score resonate with a lot of people. I found them embarrassing but Bennett performed a magic trick so that you didn't notice. I saw it 5 times I was so in awe of his stagecraft.

That being said the movie is maybe the most incompetent transfer of a stage musical I've ever seen. It really is one of those cases like Mame where they got together and said 'Let's make this a terrible movie.'

by Anonymousreply 294October 13, 2019 6:55 PM

A Chorus Line is unforgivable. Giving Cassie "What I Did For Love" was a huge mistake and "Surprise" is no substitute for "Hello, Twelve." And why add in "Let Me Dance For You" when it literally says some of the exact same things as "The Music and The Mirror?"

by Anonymousreply 295October 13, 2019 7:48 PM

It's easy for us to fault the casting of A CHORUS LINE, which is... inept at best.

But to choose Richard Attenborough as director? He'd directed just 5 movies, including the enormously overrated GANDHI. One musical, OH WHAT A LOVELY WAR. Stop me if you've seen that one...

The screenwriter, Arnold Schulman, had written (wait for it.....) FUNNY LADY. Yep.

And had they been seasoned movie musical veterans, it wouldn't have mattered, but at the time of A CHORUS LINE and MTV and music video's enormous impact on film and TV, they were 62 and 60 years old, respectively.

This project was doomed.

by Anonymousreply 296October 13, 2019 8:04 PM

Alright, I've got more to say in this thread, why not:

[italic]Phantom[/italic] (or, as I call it, "Joel Schumacher's Ode to Garish Opulence and -- Shockingly -- Naked Gold Women") is frequently addressed here. The solution to that film's problems is easy:

1. Throw out that needlessly busy and expensive production design, and come up with something simpler inspired by Jaques Demy's work and the 1925 Lon Chaney [italic]Phantom[/italic] film, not unlike some of Peter Jackson's early pictures. 2. For the screenplay, go back to the stage script and score, and then make all the cuts that brought the Vegas version down to roughly 90-95 minutes. A movie of this musical needs to be a fast-paced thrill ride, not a crashing bore. 3. In terms of the creative heads, you want people who actually understand the unique sensibilities of a film musical, not someone who'd already been allowed to ruin the film adaptation of [italic]The Wiz[/italic] by turning it into some est-fueled nightmare. Give Rob Marshall the choreographer's chair (which is where he belongs), and -- given the flash-and-trash sensibilities not unlike [italic]Moulin Rouge![/italic] -- put Baz Luhrmann in the director's seat, and you've got places to go. (Just picture his dizzying take on "Masquerade"...)

As for who I'd cast instead, I don't know current film talent well enough to start afresh, so below you'll find the cast I would have liked to have seen in 2004.

Phantom - Hugh Jackman Christine - Anne Hathaway Raoul - Ewan McGregor Carlotta - Kristin Chenoweth M. Firmin - Nathan Lane M. André - Matthew Broderick Mme. Giry - Glenn Close Meg Giry - Katie Holmes Ubaldo Piangi - Frederic Heringes M. Reyer - Jonathan Pryce Joseph Buquet - Jim Broadbent Don Attilio / Passarino - Shuler Hensley

Enough theater people to keep the queens happy (and some in-jokes for the Broadway crowd, like Bialystock and Bloom as the hapless opera house managers and a diva in the role of a diva), and enough bankable names to keep Hollywood happy.

by Anonymousreply 297October 14, 2019 3:42 AM

Wrong thread

by Anonymousreply 298October 14, 2019 4:19 AM

Brigadoon. The movie just looks so phony.

On the Town. The movie is good, but we need a version with the Bernstein score restored. (Fat chance...)

Actually, there are any number of musicals which could be redone with their original scores restored. But, as we all know, the likelihood of any of them actually being done is minimal. (And, even if they were, how many people would actually pay to go see them? Six?)

by Anonymousreply 299October 14, 2019 12:04 PM

BABES IN ARMS has Rodgers & Harts's greatest score, including: "Where or When?" "The Lady Is A Tramp" "I Wish I Were In Love Again" , "My Funny Valentine", "Way Out West" , "Johnny One-Note" , yet the 1939 Garland-Rooney film dumped most of it, saving only only the title song, "The Lady is a Tramp" in brief underscoring and "Where or When," mostly screeched by Betty Jaynes and Douglas McPhail, with Judy given only an achingly brief two lines. Judy went into this right after completing the WIZARD OF OZ, and its fun to see her scene with Margaret Hamilton , playing another Miss Gultch.

I would love to see a remake of this. And yes, I'd include "All Dark People Are Light On their Feet".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 300October 14, 2019 4:40 PM

R297.....fuck no.

That's just a mess.

I agree a director who can create build tension is needed, but that cast is awful.

I've never heard or seen Hugh Jackman in a musical theatre role that suited him. Not in Les Mis, Oklahoma, Greatest Showman or Boy From Oz. He has a very weird energy, like he's game and enthusiastic, but always out of place. I haven't seen clips of him from Sunset Boulevard. Maybe he was better there. I doubt it. And his singing voice? Not fun. He can technically carry a tune but it's not pleasant. I'd never buy a CD of his. His whole musical theatre persona makes me uncomfortable. He's no Dick Van Dyke, Fred Astaire, or Michael Crawford. Maybe he'll turn that around next year in The Music Man, but I suspect it's going to take a whole lot of Sutton Foster to make him palatable.

You need someone who can play an outsider as the Phantom. He needs to be a little weird and a little frightening or imposing. And he needs to be able to SING. Like, for real singing! Like a fucking angel. You have to want to hear him sing. You have to want to run out and buy the album and listen to it on repeat. Ditto for Christine, who is in pretty much every scene and singing with a Radiant Voice that wows everyone around her.

Hathaway is no fucking Christine. You sound like some kind of executive, slapping together a bunch of famous names to fit into the roles without any concept of how they would work off each other or benefit the piece. Making Halle Berry play Storm helped sell tickets to the X-Men movies, but nobody walked out of the theatre liking her in the part. You can't just put a bunch of famous people in a movie and pat yourself on the back for the job well done.

And the Vegas version of the show? Really? Was there something wrong with it being a two act musical?

I just watched the film version of Fiddler on the Roof. Granted, when I was younger I found it kind of boring and tedious and not that interesting. But now, years later I really respect the movie and enjoy it for what it was. I think they did a good job with casting and honouring the material. I suppose if that film was being made today they would cut it down to 90 minutes and blitz through the plot, and put Harry Styles in there somewhere.

For a movie musical to be respected, it has to respect what it's doing. Everybody knows Phantom and most people love the show or have loved the show at some point in their lives (longest running musical ever, remember?). If you're going to slice it down to shreds, prioritize marquee names over talent best suited for the demanding roles, and impose some director's style on the piece, there's no point even making the damn movie.

Moulin Rouge is great because it wasn't trying to be something else. It was unique. The same can be said of Once, Little Shop of Horrors and Fiddler on the Roof.

Phantom absolutely deserves to be remade, but only by people who will take it seriously. There is plenty of humour in the show, tension, and even a little depth below all the glittery surface stuff. Hal Prince was able to bring so much of that out with Maria Bjornsen doing most of the heavy lifting. It isn't just some shity amusement park stage show. It's a tricky piece of material.

May no one ever take your suggestions on how to remake it.

by Anonymousreply 301October 14, 2019 4:58 PM

I never knew about any of that stuff r286. Interesting.

Honestly though, I think there was too much Burton shrouding the film in black, white and red. It didn't have to be that limited a colour palette.

And Depp's singing was nothing big. Again, I know people didn't particularly mind because he was well suited to the part otherwise, but as someone who first discovered the material through this movie, I didn't enjoy listening to him dodge the obviously trickier parts of the songs.

Whenever an A-lister like Streep or Depp is hired to do a movie musical when their voices aren't up to it, it does take me out of the picture listening to them "try their best".

by Anonymousreply 302October 14, 2019 5:10 PM

Most of Minnelli's film versions of stage musicals are pretty bad which is strange. You'd think he of all people would want to take the theatrical magic of the stage and turn it into a movie. But you get the impression he would rather be anywhere else but filming this Broadway musical. Thank god he didn't get MFL.

by Anonymousreply 303October 14, 2019 6:57 PM

r301 -- I maintain it would have been better than what we got at the time. I would never put that cast or that team on a remake, now or in the future.

by Anonymousreply 304October 14, 2019 7:44 PM

Love how you're picking [italic]Phantom[/italic] as a hill to die on, too. Like, even ALW calls it "a bit of hokum, really." He didn't even respect it enough to give it a good sequel, for Christ's sake.

by Anonymousreply 305October 14, 2019 7:49 PM

Phantom is a big budget theme park musical. Enjoyable and spectacular but not much more.

by Anonymousreply 306October 14, 2019 7:58 PM

It's Always Fair Weather!

I'm available, and have the role down pat.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 307October 15, 2019 12:16 AM

People have often said to me I'm Clifton Webb and Marlon Brando combined.

by Anonymousreply 308October 15, 2019 1:44 AM

[quote]Phantom is a big budget theme park musical. Enjoyable and spectacular but not much more.

And it's god damn entertaining, which is all it really needs to be.

by Anonymousreply 309October 15, 2019 1:51 AM

Enjoyable and spectacular yes. God damn entertaining? Don't know about that. In fact I'd put Prince's staging of Twentieth Century in the god damn entertaining category over Phantom. To this day I marvel at what he did in such a light entertainment. And I have not seen anything on stage before or since quite like the train chase in the second act. I'd second act it as much as possible. And then to have somebody like Imogene Coca as its centerpiece? Well if you didn't see it you have as they say nothing to tell your grandchildren.

by Anonymousreply 310October 15, 2019 2:12 AM

[R308]

That's quite a combination dear, you must tell me about it; sometime.

by Anonymousreply 311October 15, 2019 5:22 AM

Over three hundred posts and don't believe I've seen that DL fave "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 312October 15, 2019 6:12 AM

[quote]Phantom is a big budget theme park musical. Enjoyable and spectacular but not much more.

Actually, it is a big ol' David Belasco spectacular, and that is part of the problem. When it opened in 1988, double turntables were considered spectacular stage effects. The effects in Phantom, in spite of the fact that some were 19th century stage craft, were amazing for the time. Now, with all of the computerized sets, it just seems quaint. I have not seen the new version, but apparently this was one of the main reasons for the revision. None of this translates to film. A film of Phantom is just another of the 16+ film versions. It really cannot add anything to what has already been done other than the music and that is really more of a liability in film than an asset.

by Anonymousreply 313October 15, 2019 12:15 PM

....the music in the Phantom of the Opera is a liability?

Sure Jan.

by Anonymousreply 314October 15, 2019 6:13 PM

I've seen some futile, ludicrous arguments on the Datalounge over the years but these queens fighting over Phantom really takes the cak.

by Anonymousreply 315October 15, 2019 6:25 PM

Well it's about time they started fighting over something that isn't who was or who will be the best Rose or finding the best cast for the film version of Follies.

by Anonymousreply 316October 15, 2019 6:46 PM

And even if they did manage to make a film version of Follies and it starred Robert Downey Jr., Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, and Sandra Bullock using cgi to make them young for the flashbacks there still would be nobody going to see it except for 10 dataloungers giving it endless repeat business..

by Anonymousreply 317October 15, 2019 6:54 PM

R317, well besides Downey Jr, none of them can sing, so yeah, that would probably be a big flop. Now, would Downey be more of a Ben or a Buddy?

by Anonymousreply 318October 15, 2019 7:02 PM

The music is what makes Phantom popular, not the staging! If they wanted to do a film version where the only opulence visible was on the stage of the opera house, if everything backstage or outdoors or underground looked grubby and poverty-stricken, it could still work... IF the music and acting were good.

Of course some old theater queens would mourn the loss of all the opulent costumes and frou-frou sets, but then old theater queens aren't a big enough demographic to matter to movie studios.

by Anonymousreply 319October 15, 2019 7:02 PM

Definitely Buddy. Can you see Brad as anyone but Ben? And you don't need to be able to sing in a movie musical even if your character does.

by Anonymousreply 320October 15, 2019 7:09 PM

There is not one old theater queen in the world who has ever given a shit about Phantom. That is for the younger ones.

by Anonymousreply 321October 15, 2019 7:13 PM

I'm actually really excited at the prospect of RDJ as Buddy. He's the right age, right type, can act and sing. Seems like a no brainer. A shame it seems like there are no plans to make a Follies film. Last I heard, that awful Rob Marshall was trying to make it with Meryl as Phyllis (ugh! can you imagine?) right around the time of Into the Woods.

Who's even age appropriate who could handle the four leads these days? I feel like the supporting players would be easy to cast since I can think of more people over 55/60 who can sing, dance, and act those roles, but the 4 leads are in their early 50's at the most.

Pitt probably can't sing, but it would be nice to have a Ben who's actually hot for a change, so you can understand why Sally would be so obsessed with him. It certainly isn't his brilliant personality.

by Anonymousreply 322October 15, 2019 8:58 PM

Why are you talking about "Follies"? This thread is about REMAKES.

by Anonymousreply 323October 15, 2019 9:30 PM

Movie remakes, to be specific, not stage revivals.

by Anonymousreply 324October 15, 2019 9:44 PM

Well it seems now the Follies film cast will not only have to be cgi'd to look 19 but they'll have to be cgi'd to look 49.

by Anonymousreply 325October 15, 2019 10:07 PM

I'm not anxious to see a movie and I liked the original cast recording just fine on it's own tbh, but out of curiosity why wasn't there ever a filmed version of BARE: A POP OPERA? It seems the type of show that would be perennially popular with schoolkids & students, and wouldn't really date unduly. So how come? Is it just too similar to SPRING AWAKENING?

by Anonymousreply 326October 15, 2019 11:14 PM

THE DOLLY SISTERS - The Betty Grable - June Haver film of 1945 was largely Technicolor fiction. Jenny & Rosies real biographies would make a juicy story.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 327October 16, 2019 1:22 AM

This one isn't exactly calling out for a remake, but I think I know how to make it work: [italic]Godspell[/italic].

The film we have is as good a record of (some of) what the original stage version was like as we'll ever get. It's got original cast members from several of the first-run companies, the basic quality, tone, and ideas are the same... like it or hate it, its movie is one of very few in the theater canon where you got a fairly faithful translation of a musical to the screen. Having said that, if you don't know the show going in, the film would leave you utterly clueless as a first-timer. They took out some of the score's big tent-poles, so to speak, and moved other songs around, which muddied the structure somewhat. Unfortunately, with [italic]Godspell[/italic], when you fiddle with structure, it does damage to the rest of the show. (Like [italic]Hair[/italic] [a la Sunday school, in this case], [italic]Godspell[/italic]'s plot is not immediately evident, partly because it's mostly subtextual, but it is there.)

So, remake... but how? Personally (and I'm probably the only one who gives a shit, so I feel safe in saying this), I'd lean on my mentor's stage production. One of his big claims to fame was having directed the original Harlem company of [italic]Godspell[/italic] in the late Nineties (on West 125th St., no less, at the Victoria, one door down from the Apollo), to date the only all-black production in the show's history, which also updated the arrangements to reflect gospel, rap, hip-hop, R&B, and other black music formats in addition to the traditional folk-rock influences. (It also benefited from direct input from Stephen Schwartz, who liked the production, helped incorporate new material [first time the new "Beautiful City" lyrics were ever heard on a live stage], and went on tape saying that, with money, it would be the best production he'd ever seen.) The production was set in a church basement in contemporary Harlem, where the cast were rehearsing for the annual church play, when the literal Second Coming showed up and the rest of the show, as filtered through the "inspirational theater" techniques one might see in Tyler Perry's stage pieces or shows that play the "black Broadway" circuit, ensued.

[italic]Godspell[/italic] on the face of it doesn't work like it used to anymore. In too many productions, its spiritual side is flatly ignored in favor of flashy song and dance, or "future SNL cast members" shamelessly mugging at the show's (and often the story's) expense. These productions still entertain, but they’re not moving. The Harlem production was quite powerful, emotional even, because it was darker than most of the sugar-coated, cookie-cutter revivals of the past, and it tapped into a genuine spark and sentiment in the African-American Christian community that one rarely finds elsewhere; in Harlem, Jesus is real. So my remake, for lack of a better short description, would be a Perry-esque [italic]Godspell[/italic], set in the context of a black Pentecostal service and drawing on black theater tradition going way back, with names on the level of, say, Jenifer Lewis, Rain Pryor, Shirley Caesar, and such like in the cast. Finally it wouldn't be just a revue or variety show about team-building, as important as those elements are to Schwartz.

by Anonymousreply 328October 16, 2019 2:55 PM

[quote]THE DOLLY SISTERS - The Betty Grable - June Haver film of 1945 was largely Technicolor fiction. Jenny & Rosies real biographies would make a juicy story.

They could kill two birds with one stone and do it as a mash-up with "Sideshow."

by Anonymousreply 329October 16, 2019 3:50 PM

The time for film versions of musical stage plays is over, over. But... I'd really like to see some video versions of live performances of the original shows. My Fair Lady, West Side Story, Carousel, Bye Bye Birdie — don't make new movies. Stage them at a theater, and record that. There are two "live" broadcasts that worked very well - Grease Live! and Jesus Christ Superstar. We need more like them.

by Anonymousreply 330October 17, 2019 9:15 PM

R330, I think Hairspray Live was as good as any of them.

by Anonymousreply 331October 17, 2019 9:52 PM

The ending of the film of Godspell is the most logistically jaw dropping of any film I've seen. I don't know how they did it and there are no tricks of any kind involved. It was a brilliant idea coming at the end of the film due to everything visually that came before it.

by Anonymousreply 332October 17, 2019 9:58 PM

r115 because then Jennifer Lewis could star as Mama Rose.

by Anonymousreply 333October 17, 2019 10:06 PM

Turns out that there is a Bare movie in the works. I am shamefaced.

I didn't even know there was a documentary feature about the original Broadway run, but it exists and it's good (at the link).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 334October 17, 2019 10:19 PM

There's going to be a movie version of "Wicked" eventually, plus "Hamilton" among others. Movie musicals are certainly being done more nowadays than they used to be for years.

by Anonymousreply 335October 18, 2019 4:19 AM

[quote]I'd really like to see some video versions of live performances of the original shows. My Fair Lady, West Side Story, Carousel, Bye Bye Birdie — don't make new movies. Stage them at a theater, and record that. There are two "live" broadcasts that worked very well - Grease Live! and Jesus Christ Superstar. We need more like them.

Here....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 336October 18, 2019 9:41 AM

r330: try investing in a New York Public Library card and asking to see the Theater on Film and Tape Archive. Aside from some restricted shows, literally all you have to say is "I'm about to do a production, and I'd like to do some research." You can't stop, pause, rewind, or fast-forward (so get your bathroom breaks in beforehand), but you can absolutely watch.

by Anonymousreply 337October 18, 2019 2:59 PM

You can also see John Slattery there in all his nude glory in "The Lisbon Traviatia".

by Anonymousreply 338October 18, 2019 9:42 PM

Traviata, that is.

by Anonymousreply 339October 18, 2019 9:42 PM

Of course, I can see the shows at the library. Not really the point, though.

by Anonymousreply 340October 18, 2019 10:46 PM

It's literally what you described wanting, but go off, I guess.

by Anonymousreply 341October 18, 2019 11:57 PM

I'd remake The Merry Widow because it hasn't been remade in quite a while. I mean there have been 4 movie versions and the last one was in the 50s so we're overdue for another.

by Anonymousreply 342October 19, 2019 2:30 AM

^ I never saw that Merry Widow with Lana Turner mouthing the words.

I assume it's risible.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 343October 19, 2019 4:53 AM

Where are you girls going to find actors/actresses with legitimate theater voices to pull off half this wish list?

Suppose then as now there would have to be some serious major dubbing.

by Anonymousreply 344October 19, 2019 5:10 AM

It's 2019, r344. There's a little thing called Autotune if you can't sing.

by Anonymousreply 345October 19, 2019 7:03 AM

Didn't they do the autotune thing with Emma Watson in Beauty and the Beast? That was borderline sinister sounding. It was like her singing voice was replaced by a robot from Stepford - no emotion or passion.

by Anonymousreply 346October 19, 2019 6:00 PM

Well Watson has trouble emoting in a convincing manner, so TPTB assumed we wouldn't know the difference.

by Anonymousreply 347October 19, 2019 8:52 PM

Since Company is back on Broadway.....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 348October 20, 2019 5:12 AM

Meanwhile Most Happy Fella hasn't had a Broadway revival since 1992, and never was made into a film.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 349October 20, 2019 5:15 AM

Hit "enter" too fast, wrong link.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 350October 20, 2019 5:15 AM

For those that only knew the late Ms. Nancy Walker from those Charmin television commercials, Macmillan and Wife, or as Rhoda's mother, the lady could sing, and how!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 351October 20, 2019 5:18 AM

No one so far has mentioned Sound Of Music, which is fine with me....

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 352October 20, 2019 5:23 AM

R345

Marni Nixon must be spinning in her grave

by Anonymousreply 353October 20, 2019 5:25 AM

r348

I've never got an answer to this but does anyone know where that clip is actually from? It seems to be from a PBS program but which one and why?

by Anonymousreply 354October 20, 2019 12:09 PM

R354

Clip taken from a 1971 PBS show called "The Great American Dream Machine".

Series only ran a year, but was pretty good from what I understand. Our PBS television watching at the time was limited to "Sesame Street", so it wouldn't have known personally.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 355October 20, 2019 9:09 PM

More:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 356October 20, 2019 9:12 PM

Entire series is available on 4 DVD set.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 357October 20, 2019 9:22 PM

As to the "why", now that you know the show where clip comes from, and its background should be able to sum things up.

Company opened in 1970 and was running on Broadway while PBS was also doing "The Great American Dream".

Who was the character "Joanne"? More to the point what is she singing about in "Ladies Who Lunch".

Scores of actors, actresses, drag queens and other performers (of any sex) have sang (or at least that is what they called it), LWL; but no one has been able to top Elaine Stritch's original Joanne . You need to have been a woman in 1970's New York (or anywhere else in USA for that matter), to understand where Joanne is coming from.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 358October 20, 2019 9:35 PM

Why didn't Elaine wear makeup for those recording sessions, which they had to been aware was going to be filmed? She usually looked fine when she was out in public performing.

by Anonymousreply 359October 20, 2019 11:10 PM

More clips from that recording session are on YT, and you can see some women wore make-up, others didn't.

Obviously TY and rest of modern entertainment technology wasn't around in 1970. Film of recording session may not have been conceived for wide distribution so many of the actresses/singers may have felt "eff it", I'm not getting made/dressed up just for a studio recording session.

Someone with better knowledge may chime in here; but circumstances may have also depended upon when studio recording session was done in relation to performance later that evening. A actress going on stage later that day may have just wanted to get in, do the recording then go home and rest, shopping , or whatever else their day entailed before going to "work" that night.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 360October 20, 2019 11:44 PM

r355 et al

thanks!

by Anonymousreply 361October 20, 2019 11:53 PM

For all of Stritch's lousy behavior and issues, no one performs "The Ladies Who Lunch" like her. I've seen brilliant actresses attempt it and they've all fallen flat compared to her. It's like Judy Garland and "The Man That Got Away." Why even bother?

Has anyone ever been able to successfully shed the ghost of Stritch and reinvent that song or character?

by Anonymousreply 362October 20, 2019 11:59 PM

How very dare you, R362.

Who do you think you are?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 363October 21, 2019 12:02 AM

R361

I did it all with my own two hands!

YW!

by Anonymousreply 364October 21, 2019 12:03 AM

Yet another reason I will always love Patti.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 365October 21, 2019 1:26 AM

[quote]Scores of actors, actresses, drag queens and other performers (of any sex) have sang

Oh, DEAR.

by Anonymousreply 366October 21, 2019 3:21 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!