Alternate Vogue Video

I like this video a little better, but they are both good. The thing I love about the song is the excellent production by Shep Pettibone. It was kind of thrown together in rather random facilities according to an article about the song’s creation. The thing for me is the relentless, driving, full bass synth sound that turns out to be the “Lately” patch on an older Yamaha synth (tx81z). Madonna’s vocals have also matured a bit from her early fizzy sound to something a bit more full, decadent and earthy timbre. I also appreciate the spareness of the arrangement-things (synth lines, bongo, etc) come in and out, but the stars are the vox and bass. This song really previewed the “Ray of Light” and I still believe Madonna is at her best in a vibrant electronic soundscape.

It's ok, but looks like rag tag out takes and clearly alt shots that don't look quite as well composed. Lots of things look slightly off in the styling, Madonna looks exhausted with circles under her eyes in a few shots and there's a sloppiness to it. Some may like it, but the original edit remains era-defining for me.

What happened to Fincher's "Mank"? I thought it was supposed to sweep every category at the Oscars. Did it win anything?

I like it. Even more closeups of Madonna, and she's really giving "good face". The closeups with the white sleeveless dress and updo are incredible. The makeup and all those ringlets ❤

It’s actually the same director but likely a different editor OP - and this new edit is poorly cut / constructed. Right at the start you get a dozen cuts back and forth between M’s back in the rhinestone gown and her face as she does some rather clumsy finger movements - it’s the same idea, beaten to death with no variety of image or information (this version does that quite often, constantly cutting between and returning back to the same shot / visual tropes, like the slate in the shot, with no real point and building to no real climax or release moment.

Compare this to the opening of the real video - there are cuts between M’s back in that dress and beautiful shots of the individual dancers, as well as some minimal hints at narrative, or at least milieu, with the maid - THEN we get out first shot of M’s face as she says “Strike a pose” in a beautiful closeup - there is a buildup and a BAM payoff. You don’t prematurely shoot your was with a mediocre, repetitive shot of your star.

This whole cut is simply way too visually repetitive and WAY too much Madonna - she and her looks are much better when used sporadically as punctuations to the eye candy of the other dancers. The real video doesn’t cut between multiple shots of M until the whole “Dietrich DiMaggio” segment - it builds to that visual climax, and only uses the gag once.

The cutting between M in those two versions of the song are instructive - the cuts in the new version don’t have the sharpness and motivations of the original - they are formally sloppier and feel more random. Overall the editing in the new version is mediocre and rather listless - in general you almost never cut in before an action has started and you cut away before it fully completes - that keeps the energy up and propels the whole feel of the video. Look at how different the dance shots with the one guy off to her right feel in each video. And the moments that cut to someone “breqking” are both over and poorly used — in the new cut. M doing the silly “sizzle” motion on her shoulder vs the shot of the gorgeous guy suddenly smiling. Overall this does look like a collection of outtakes cut by someone who is just learning to edit.

^^ shoot your wad. Autocorrect strikes again.

Awful lot more of Madge not looking so "fresh."

Pass.

Original is a much better edit. The pace of this one is not good.

“…,discuss.”

No.

I agree with all the crits here. It's "too much Madonna," and while after all these years it's kind of cool to see "the video" with extra shots that no one has seen in all the decades the video has been available, those shots were clearly cut for a reason. She simply doesn't look as good in them, and especially in the beginning moments, her angles are not as flattering but also her hand movements are really awkward, as if she didn't quite understand voguing.

The only thing I can say for this cut is that it appears someone had the idea to cut in extra imperfect footage to show a difference between the polished perfect finished Vogue imagery and the real-life components that go into making it. Throughout the video, there are images that don't measure up, followed by images that are striking—for example, when she is playing around in front of the reflective surface with the Veronica Lake hair and doesn't look amazing followed by the shots we know where she is posing in reflection and does look amazing. But doesn't the addition of imperfect footage kind of take away from what we love about the perfectly polished original video? They really chose all the right shots of her.

The original video is propulsive because of all the quick cuts, but the male dancers also give it so much style and movement that's lost in this cut. Not only their own body movements, but the movements of the fabrics blowing around and the stark black and white contrasts. The photography is so gorgeous in those shots.

Aside from seeing some new images from that time after all these years, the only moment of this that I like a lot is toward the end when Madonna and her dancers vogue while walking toward the camera. That caught me off guard because in that very brief moment all of them actually look like they are street voguing and not just posing for the music video. Walking toward the camera in that way makes a big difference in the feel of it and it's a shame that was cut out because it would have been a great reference to more authentic vogue dance style than the stand-in-place posing in the Vogue video.

The original one is just much better. As someone said the shots of Madonna are broken up with shots of the maid and male dancers. In this new version she’s making a lot of stupid faces. Really shows that editing is an art form.

In her day she was extraordinary.

It was impossible to tell if the camera loved her the most or if she loved the camera the most.

R5 put it perfectly.

[quote]The original video is propulsive because of all the quick cuts, but the male dancers also give it so much style and movement that's lost in this cut. Not only their own body movements, but the movements of the fabrics blowing around and the stark black and white contrasts. The photography is so gorgeous in those shots.

Agree with this entirely. The male dancers are huge part of what makes the video a classic. The shots of them are beautiful.

The clips of Donna and Niki vogueing behind Madonna at 2:28 are embarrassing. I like that Madonna included her backing singers in the video but they're not dancers.

I know this is completely off topic but God this takes me back. I hadn’t seen this in some time. I was in the club scene at the time. Just a 20 something gay guy pretty good looking dancing drinking and fucking my way thru life. Man I had fun. And it had its place and time. And I would never go back. I’m married sober and I love my life. But I wish at the time I would have appreciated it more. Thanks for posting this OP.

In NYC a hot club called Quick (the renamed Area on Hudson and Hubert) premiered this video at their weekly gay Thursday night party. It was widely hyped and the place was packed.

A big screen came down in the middle of the dance floor and they showed the "Vogue" video. Maybe it was live carried from MTV? I don't remember, but it was the first place anybody had a chance to view it. The place went wild, it really was peak Madonna and lots of people knew the NYC-based dancers in the video.

They replayed it a couple more times that night, nobody could get enough of it. It remains a superb video.

R16, I love stories like that. I was 11 in 1998 when I first became a Madonna fan. I listened to The Immaculate Collection nonstop and still listen to it on and off. It's aged very well in my opinion. And then came Ray of Light. I remember thinking it would have been so cool to have been around during Madonna's peak era.

Thanks for the great commentary, R5.

One thing that struck me about a year ago while watching the video was how there are no shots of Madonna during the second chorus. Only the male dancers are shown. As someone who isn't an editor it struck me as counterintuitive to not feature the singer in what is one of the song's most important parts. It works though.

Surely the OP means different EDITOR.

I think this was assembled from B roll footage.

Thank you R18. One thing to keep in mind is that with a really excellent video - like Vogue - the structure of the visuals, and whatever story they tell, is usually quite different than the structure of the song.

Pop songs have a fairly fixed structure that is circular / repetitive by design. Effective visual storytelling - or just great eye-candy - usually requires a more forward building momentum. We get bored pretty quickly, so variety and constantly upping the visual stakes is key.

While there are lots of visual repetitions in Vogue, there are many set pieces that are only used in one discrete section - the lace shirt; the big window; the Horst corset recreation, etc. And even the styling of the dancers moves through a visual arc - they get dressed; they pose; they dance and then they undress, and dance undressed — it’s not Shakespeare but it’s not random either.

The chorus is the most danceable part of the song; and as talented as she is, M can’t full out Vogue dance at the level of those guys. It makes perfect sense for there to be at least one truly amazing Vogue dance moment in the video - where the effects rely more on the talents of the dancers than on those of the cameraman, stylists and editor - and for practical reasons for that moment to not include Madonna.

Related to all this is the iconic performance of the song at the VMA’s. The video is very much a film fantasy - not only in the Hollywood look, but the role of editing to create that fantasy in snippets and glimpses. Wisely, for the live stage / TV performance they created just that - a stage performance that had nothing to do with the filmic choreography of the video; and most brilliantly no visual references to the look of the video - which would be impossible to approximate with the kind of lighting available - but an entirely different, yet equally over the top, period fantasy.