West Side Story Reviews

The trailer is visually stunning. I'm really curious to see it.

Is it on-demand, yet?

So ironic. West Side Story makes its entrance the same week Sondheim take his curtain.

Last year Ansel was removed from all of the promo’s because of misconduct allegations. This year he’s at the premiere being photographed with Spielberg. What a difference a year makes.

40% of the dialogue is in Spanish, with no subtitles, according to one tweet.

The guy who plays Riff was the original Connor in DEH on Broadway. Very good, nominated for a Tony.

I don't see a lot of transwomen of color in OP's pic. This is problematic. Do better Hollywood !

Did they test the DNA of the whole cast to ensure they were all of Hispanic origin?

Embargo is down

Direct Variety link

BBC Review

The Guardian

Is it un-"woke" to have subtitles?

^ Interesting point because we have Spanish translations or options everywhere in the U.S.

Rotten Tomatoes

Not the biggest fan of Grace Randolph but this is a pretty thorough review

They’re pretty much raves across the board except for Ansel Elgort who is a borderline embarrassment. Unlike Les Mis, this has a real chance at multiple Oscars.

If it's as good as the reviews it probably will be an Oscar winner. Something positive and bright and uplifting will be well received in this climate.

I would have like to play Maria, but of course I'm too busy prepping for my own triumphant turn as Norma.

Entertainment Weekly positive.

USA Today positive

Time is positive

The Daily Beast positive

R11 I was about to post the G&M review. Typically that paper hates all films, so a rave is a rare event indeed.

[quote] Something positive and bright and uplifting will be well received in this climate.

Well, as positive, bright, and uplifting as a story about a triple homicide can be.

Now I'm excited to see it.

It sounds like this is Spielberg's return to form, and he may win his third Oscar as Best Director.

It's not winning any of the major Oscars for a remake. Not happening. Spielberg will have to settle for just being nominated.

Nah, I can see WSS winning Best Picture, if only because this time they have a Polish-Columbian playing the Puerto Rican heroine rather than a Russian.

I think King Richard wins

Truly hilarious how many of the reviews shit on Ansel.

None of the ones I've read answer the question of why it needed to be remade though. So the answer really does just seem to be because Spielberg wanted to.

Who honestly is the person that keeps posting about woke? God you are awful. Grow up. Do you have a mental disorder? And then another on trans and people of colour. How is that funny? You are all obsessed. It's totally bizarre. We are the anti woke brigade. We want things how they used to be!

I genuinely think it's about getting older. It must be. We just hate those younger people!

[quote]None of the ones I've read answer the question of why it needed to be remade though.

Because the script of the original movie was dated in 1961 when it came out for one thing. Several reviewers mention this, but don't dwell on it because of all the love for the original. There are other problems too. Beymer and Wood have little chemistry. Then there's the inexplicable cutting of A Boy Like That/I Have A Love. And there's Marni Nixon's warbling. Most of it is wonderful but it could use a revamp after 60 years

[quote] Then there's the inexplicable cutting of A Boy Like That/I Have A Love.

Those songs are in the 1961 movie...were there lyrics cut from the stage production?

I'm sorry R40. Yes, lyrics were cut.

Is "I Have a Love" in the new version? Oh, I know I'm going to sob at the end of this movie. I swear it was in the 1961 version.

r15

Hmm... If that review is accurate, I wonder if Spielberg would film "Follies"...

[quote] I think King Richard wins

KR was a flop. No way are they giving it to a glorified HBO movie.

I'm SO looking forward to this!

[quote]None of the ones I've read answer the question of why it needed to be remade though. So the answer really does just seem to be because Spielberg wanted to.

And what's wrong with that? Movies are just stories and Spielberg is a storyteller and he wanted to tell it his way. People are so weird as if it something changes anything by having a new version. We don't NEED a revival of any show but we get them and the world still turns.

Was this version also filmed a the San Juan Hill neighborhood of Manhattan as the original one was?

[quote]We don't NEED a revival of any show but we get them and the world still turns.

And sometimes it seems a bit brighter as it turns.

Just listened to the Quintet and One hand, one heart on Youtube.

Truly lovely.

This was already given a "vibrant, stunning upgrade" in 2000:

Electrifying in Y2K:

Dazzling in 2000:

The original was vibrant though. And perfect. Honestly.

R52....GAP has the best, most creative ads!

Here's my money. I've already got tix for the Super Screen Size showing on the "Deamlounger" chairs.

For one week only, in my rural neck of the woods, WSS will be on the largest screen because "Spider-Man" opens the next Thursday and takes over.

Super excited, can't wait.

The outdoor scenes for the 1961 film was being filmed while the neighborhood was literally being razed to the ground to make way for the Lincoln Center complex.

Well, it's a good thing no one was hurt!

"I did manage to stub one of my toes."

Wow, what a collection of reviews. As for "remake", Leonard Bernstein, Sondheim, Laurents, Spielberg, Shakespeare... year, it's an iconic American/Universal story... and, in my opinion, it's a good thing for our culture and Culture that this will be so good.

And... the "anti-woke" troll brigade? Tiresome, dated... give it a rest. You are the only ones who even use the word "woke" anymore.

Oh, fuck off, ya smug bagpipe.

[quote] ya smug bagpipe

Pics please.

R60 Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

So are we taking bets yet on what its going to be canceled for by the wokies? And when?

I don't think it'll take more than a week before it's canceled because not enough afro cubans

R63 And the world is flat! No, it is, I read it!

R47. Yes, it was filmed in Lincoln Center. They dance around the Metropolitan Opera house, Geffen Hall and Juilliard.

Read today’s NYT, a young Dominican wokie wants this to fail. Woke describes her opinion perfectly.

Isn't the film about Puerto Ricans? What does her opinion matter?

As a child she was mistaken for Puerto Rican and traumatized. Not kidding. Read the NYT today for all her penetrating insights..

Sorry traumatized Dominican doesn’t want it to feel. Aggrieved Puerto Rican Jew does. i got my Victims confused.

…fail

Is there not bigger issues than what's woke today? Such a bizarre thing to get het up about. Unless...

For the poster who asked why this needed to be remade, it's because the movie was not exactly like the stage show, which is so much better. It is certainly sexier than the movie, which is bland and sanitized. So I think it's great that Spielberg has made it to be more like the stage production. He is not remaking the original movie.

But America features both sexes, right?

And Officer Krupke comes before the rumble, right?

R74 that’s from the original stage show.

Never mind, I got it wrong. Krupke comes after the rumble in the stage show.

“Cool” comes before the rumble in the stage show, and it does here too.

But “Cool” worked beautifully after the rumble

The change in placement for Cool and Krupke, and adding the men to America, were vast improvements over the stage musical.

America clip

Grace Randolph loved it. And I sometimes agree with her. Her enthusiasm makes me wanna watch, and I like that she notices things like use of color, because I do too. She said in this one the colors Maria uses in her clothing change as the film progresses and things grow more dark and aggressive.

She also said back in 1961 the censors only allowed but so much to be said or shown, so this one is better because it feels more real, and it is a lot more angry, aggressive and dark as the film continues.

She actually said this musical is up there with the greats.

And Maria does her own singing!

Anybodys was NOT trans. She was a tomboy. Why are we acting as if tomboys never existed?

They made the character openly trans in the new one, which still takes place in the past 🙄

The supporting cast are getting more love and praise for their performances than the two leads, same exact situation as the 1961 film, where the supporting cast were seen as much better than both leads.

[Quote] She said in this one the colors Maria uses in her clothing change as the film progresses and things grow more dark and aggressive.

Um, the same thing happens in the 1961 film - Maria's dresses darken as the film progresses, starting as pure white and ending as dark red.

R84 yea, but using colors as part of the story was common back then. It’s something they don’t do anymore in films, so she is excited Spielberg did that.

Another review praising it, and that says a lot because this guy can be tough.

I remember Hitchcock used colors in Psycho. At the beginning of the movie, Janet Leigh was in a white bra. After she stole the money, she was in a black bra.

[quote]Grace Randolph loved it. A

What the fuck is wrong with that chick?

[quote] Anybodys was NOT trans. She was a tomboy. Why are we acting as if tomboys never existed?

Why are you acting as if Lesbians and Trans never existed? They were called Tomboys in those days.

R87, tomboys are NOT trans!

R4 'what a difference a year makes'

you can say that again!

"Tomboys" are prepubescent. If you're a17 yo girl and dressing like a man, take your pick of adjectives, but tomboy isn't one.

R87 because tomboys are not trans. Tomboys are their own thing.

She could be just a fucking butch lesbian...are those still allowed to exist ?

Yeah, I've always assumed she was a butch lesbian.

[quote]but using colors as part of the story was common back then. It’s something they don’t do anymore in films

No, absolutely no contemporary directors use colour as part of their storytelling. None at all.

Is Spielberg a contemporary filmmaker? He isn’t.

A lesbian and a tranny aren’t the same either.

Give it a rest, T obsessive.

R95 You said "they" so you were suggesting, stupidly, no current directors use colour as a tool.

R94 The changing colours were also a sexual reference in the original film. She enters the film in white as a virgin. She puts on the red dress after she sleeps with Tony. A spilling of both virgin and other blood.

Everyone seems to forget that WSS was based on Romeo and juliet..The current film is based on, well, the first WSS.

Bernardo is actually Tybalt, turned from the girl's cousin into her brother for WSS. Riff is Mercutio, in my view the only tole in the play with any meat on its bones.

The scene between the two new lovers after the dance is the iconic balcony scene.

The big street dance and brawl is right out of the initial clash between the two families in the city's streets, complete with partisan harlots, before the Prince stops it.

The Bard's play and WSS suffer from the same problem: without the extraordinary quality of the language, the play wouldn't be worth a half your's time. Without its extraordinary music and choreography, neither would the film.

^*a half hour of your time (not a half your's)

When you take away the music from a musical or the dialogue from a play, what exactly is left, great Oracle?

GYPSY!

[quote]They’re pretty much raves across the board except for Ansel Elgort who is a borderline embarrassment.

Saw that coming from space. He's up there with Alden Ehrenreich in the Untalented Young Actors Being Pushed On Us For No Reason category.

Follies!

Ehrenreich was absolutely wonderful in Hail Caesar. At least he has that.

I have zero interest watching this movie.

Good news, r106! The law forcing you to see the movie has been repealed! You're free!

You almost have to say 'woke' sometimes to describe a certain sort of reactions. The Guardian review, for example, was going on about the 'Protestant' unease of the white gang resenting the intrusion of breeding Catholic Puerto Ricans into their territory, when they were clearly Catholic Irish & Polish in origin themselves and the Catholic church hall was everyone's neutral ground. 'Seeing' issues where they don't exist.

R108...right? I always assumed they were supposed to be "bad" white. Irish or Italian. If so, it's as catholic as they come, Fucking idiots.

Reviewers often see things through their own lens.

If they could give 89-year-old Rita Moreno from the 1961 cast a major part, why couldn't they give 91-year-old John Astin from the 1961 cast at least a cameo?

When did Astin last work? Moreno has never stopped.

Moreno is also iconic to WSS. Everyone adores her portrayal of Anita. Astin? No.

I have yet to see how this adds anything to the original.

Why bother doing a remake. It just screams "I have no imagination" when you simply re-do something someone else did well enough to make it a classic.

A remake when it adds something new is fine. When it gives something more than the original, fine. But, the recent spate of remakes simply advertises that even Spielberg is bereft of original ideas at this point.

His Girl Friday was a remake. The Maltese Falcon too.

[quote]His Girl Friday was a remake. The Maltese Falcon too.

And both added something to the originals that made the remakes classics that outshone the originals.

A remake needs to go beyond what the original gave the audience. It needs to add something, rather than simply ride the coattails of the original's popularity.

Admit it, if the original Westside Story hadn't been what is is, would this movie even have been made, let alone would it attract any audiences?

It does little, if anything, better than the original.

R114, it does the original better in that it actually uses Latino talent for the Latino roles, rather than just throwing brown make up on white actors.

And that alone makes it worth redoing. And if you don’t think so then that’s YOUR issue and not the issue of the makers of this new film adaptation.

[Quote] Admit it, if the original Westside Story hadn't been what is is, would this movie even have been made, let alone would it attract any audiences?

How many times has Blithe Spirit been remade? None are considered classic.

r117, that's not a good enough reason.

[quote][R114], it does the original better in that it actually uses Latino talent for the Latino roles, rather than just throwing brown make up on white actors.

LOL - that's not remotely close to a good reason and questionably "better" in terms of objective quality, artistry, or technical movie making.

[quote]How many times has Blithe Spirit been remade? None are considered classic.

No one ever said that a remake would make it a classic. What I said was that the remakes of those two particular movies we so much better than the original that the remakes actually became classics while the originals are largely forgotten.

Clearly, the remakes of Blithe Spirit adding nothing to the original nor improved anything on each other to make any of them memorable.

In YOUR opinion r119.

You’re white, aren’t you?

r121, does it bother you when American/English actors like Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, and Jodie Comer play French historical characters? If not, why not?

Who the heck is Jodie Comer?

R121 yup. He is. And a racist, always posting nonsense all over the site. He now made a new thread claiming he’s never seen the original, using a different account. He’s not well.

A lot has been changed in this. Many reviews have said this. For someone all over these threads you would think he would take the time to read one of them.

This movie adds back characters and songs that the original took away, rearranges some songs, and omits a couple as well. He changes the setting where many of the songs take place, and made sure to cast actual Latinos of all colors.

[quote]I have yet to see how this adds anything to the original.

Have you seen the movie? How can you judge if you haven't seen it?

[quote]Why bother doing a remake. It just screams "I have no imagination" when you simply re-do something someone else did well enough to make it a classic.

You're the one screaming and have a lack of imagination. Is it a classic? Yes, to an older generation. I'm 65 and part of that generation. But much of the dialog is cringeworthy. The leads don't sing their parts. It was sanitized. If that's not enough for you then don't see it and stfu.

[quote]A remake when it adds something new is fine. When it gives something more than the original, fine. But, the recent spate of remakes simply advertises that even Spielberg is bereft of original ideas at this point.

No. Only in your fever dream. Stop trolling.

How was the original film sanitized except for a few lyric changes which are pretty minor. It has a roughness and grittiness usually reserved for black and white films of the period.

R126 I thought you never watched it.

And the changing the order of songs as a very big improvement over the original including the adding of the men to America.

Who are you talking to?

[quote] yup. He is. And a racist, always posting nonsense all over the site. He now made a new thread claiming he’s never seen the original, using a different account. He’s not well.

That's not me. I am r27 in that thread, however.

Lmao you’re more than r27 there. Using another account doesn’t keep me from seeing it’s you bud.

Oh, for fuck's sake, I'm 52 years old, I have no idea how to use another account here.

I bet you think every other poster is Boris, too, don't you?

R131 you’re just getting so sad. Trolling at your age? Never being honest? It’s scary and SAD.

r124, r130, r132:

[quote]I have zero interest watching this movie.

Are we supposed to care?

[quote]The supporting cast are getting more love and praise for their performances than the two leads

Wrong. Rachel Zegler is getting lots of praise, and has moved securely into the top five lists of potential Best Actress nominees. Elgort's a flop, but not Zegler.

I heard Ben Horne sing Maria on Youtube the other night and he had a gorgeous voice.

Not as keen on the Norwegians singing back up.

DL has gotten SO boring. This stupid movie is all you keep talking about.

[quote]I have yet to see how this adds anything to the original.

That's because you're judging it on a few clips that have been released. You need to see the film, dear, to make that judgment.

[quote]DL has gotten SO boring. This stupid movie is all you keep talking about.

Oh, you poor thing! There are plenty of threads WITHOUT "West Side Story" in the thread title to identify them - why don't you go hang out on one of them?

I think Mike Faist will get an Oscar nomination. He's also rumored to be in the running to play Fiyero in Wicked.

Grace Randolph absolutely praised him r140. Supposedly he’s remarkable and a revelation. A stage actor (who originated parts in Newsies and Dear Evan Hansen) who actually translates well to film, and who had a unique look that most people in film wouldn’t like but this movie may give him more opportunity in film.

But the actors that are getting the most Oscar buzz are new Maria, new Anita and Rita Moreno (again). If any of them win it will be the first actress to ever win an Oscar for a Spielberg film, and Moreno will be the first to win an Oscar for the original and the remake.

Yes, R77. I totally agree with you. “”Cool” should come after the rumble, so as to, “cool down” after the fight.

Where is MY cameo?

Mike Faist as Fiyero? Hmm. Is he a good enough singer? You can't really tell from his "Riff" character singing. He's sexy but not good looking. Would Galinda really be attracted to him?

Poor Chakiris, I remember years ago him being on a list of actors who were pretty much cursed after winning the Oscar.

Chakiris is actually one of the few actors who is credited as an Oscar win hurting his career.

Chakiris ruined his face in his late 60s. It's time for him to come out loudly, too.

Wasn’t Chakiris openly gay? I’m pretty sure I remember hearing he was treated like trash on that set.

R148 Chakiris was never openly gay to the public. But in the entertainment industry there are no secrets. He seems to be quite grounded and to have carved out a happy life for himself even if his film career fizzled.

He was fantastic as Bernardo. The performance is a reproach the morons insisting that only Latinos play Latino roles.

Odd, I haven't heard the same pompous shit about Denzel Washington playing a medieval Scottish nobleman.

Or that fat black actress playing a historically white English Queen noted by observers of the time for her slender delicacy.

Either you're for it or agin it.

No Chakirises for Bernardo.

No nonwhite actors playing Anne Boleyn.

Wait. How are the guy in r140 and this guy the same person.

Hollywood magic baby! Hollywood magic!

Spielberg talks casting Rachel, and the high bar she set during the casting process.

The vid includes portions of some scenes that are not in any of the trailers.

Has anybody here worked at a movie theatre?

Last week, the first day tix went on sale, I bought 5 tix for the 12/10, 11:30am showing. Just out of curiosity to see what sales were like and how many people would be in the theatre, I've been checking every day for sold seats and up to yesterday, at the most, it was maybe 20 seats sold.

All of a sudden today, when I clicked on the showing I have tix for, it said :

"There are currently no tickets remaining for this showtime. Please select another performance."

Ok, there may be an obvious answer here, but, to have it suddenly sell out? Other time were sold out, too. Does this mean the remaining seats were mostly likely sold in a block?

R149. I totally agree. It's ridiculous to have a Scotsman named Macbeth played by a black man.

Wow. Some of you have no brain. It’s scary.

Who is Ben Horne?

That's the name of Richard Beymer's character on Twin Peaks, where his subplot involved business dealings with Norwegians.

R157, was his acting any better than it was in WSS?

R157 Benjamin Horne.

R158 I never watched the revival. Was he in that one too?

There has been major press for West Side Story since last week, plus the review embargo ended and the raves have been pouring in. Plus that hour long ABC special Sunday night.

R153 appears to be looking for a conspiracy to explain the ticketing upsurge. There isn’t one.

I wonder if Elgort's bad press affected the cut. I guess you can't really cut Tony down hugely, though you can give away some of his close ups, of course.

Piece of shit movie.

R154 - It's not any Scotsman, either: Macbeth was a real historical figure, one the last Gaelic Kings - he was turned monstrous by Shakespeare just the way Richard III was )admittedly, political pressure was responsible for Richard's portrayal - with the Tudors on the throne it was as much as the Bard's life would have been worth to paint Richard any other way.) Glamis Castle is a real place - it was the Scottish seat of the Queen Mother's father, the Earl of Strathmore. She grew up there, the family splitting its time between Glamis, their English country home, and their London townhome.

I just love colour-blind casting - especially how it only works in one direction.

The underlying message is always the same: well, what can you expect? "They" haven't got anything as good, so they have to use ours.

I actually, at bottom, don't mind Denzel Washington taking a crack at Macbeth.

I mind the entertainment business having a nervous breakdown about non-Latinos playing Latino roles when they have no problem with Denzel Washington playing a historically white Gaelic King of Scotland.

If the road ran both ways, it would be fine.

But it doesn't. And, as a result, you get Steven fucking Spielberg fanning the flames of separatism, nationalism, and proving that the aim isn't to understand each other better, but to seal ourselves off and claim territory.

Which is exactly what that empty stupid gesture re the titles in English is saying.

[quote]I actually, at bottom

Nobody, NOBODY wants to see that.

[quote] You get Steven fucking Spielberg fanning the flames of separatism, nationalism, and proving that the aim isn't to understand each other better, but to seal ourselves off and claim territory.

That is ironic, given what West Side Story is supposed to be about.

Columbian and Polish=Columbian

Like Meghan and Harry's children are 1/4 black which makes them black.

R166 stop

Fuck off, r163. You have racism on your brain.

[quote]Columbian and Polish=Columbian

They're letting Poles into Ivy League schools these days? Tsk, tsk!

Colombian, not Colum-bian

I don't mind "colorblind" casting in sci-fi/fantasy (where EVERYTHING is a complete fabrication) as long as it fits within the rules of the world it's creating. And if it's a contemporary film set in the US or UK, it makes total sense.

But I question it in historical films; I like to consider such films as a form of time-travel, I want to see what the world looked like in 532, 1066, 1353, or 1879, and I'd like it to be as accurate as possible. It isn't just that racism kept ethnicities separate, but also that mass immigration from the land of one ethnicity to the land of another ethnicity didn't occur until the 20th century. Mary Queen of Scots (2018) is littered with "colorblind" casting that is patently absurd: Gemma Chan (Chinese ancestry) plays English Bess of Hardwick; Adrian Lester (Jamaican parents of African extraction) plays English Lord Thomas Randolph; Ismael Cruz Cordova (Puerto-Rican) plays Italian David Rizzio. (The movie also has Mary totally accepting of Rizzio's homosexuality -- "it's just your nature" -- which is beyond anachronistic.)

And it's not like there aren't great historical roles out there for minorities: I would love to see a film about Thomas-Alexandre Dumas, the former Haitian slave who became a general during the French Revolution and under Napoleon, or Robert Smalls, an American slave who commandeered a ship out of Charleston harbor during the Civil War and eventually served in the US House of Representatives in the 1870s and 1880s.

Playwright August Wilson:

"Colorblind casting is an aberrant idea that has never had any validity other than as a tool of Cultural Imperialists who view American culture , rooted in the icons of European culture, as beyond reproach in its perfection . . . . To mount an all-black production of a Death of a Salesman or any other play conceived for white actors as an investigation of the human condition through the specifics of white culture is to deny us our own humanity, our own history, and the need to make our own investigation from the cultural ground on which we stand as black Americans. It is an assault on our present, our difficult but honorable history in America; is an insult to our intelligence, our playwrights, and our many and varied contributions to the society and the world at large. We do not need colorblind casting, we need some theatres to develop our playwrights."

95% at Rotten Tomatoes based on 110 reviews.

5

[quote] All of a sudden today, when I clicked on the showing I have tix for, it said : "There are currently no tickets remaining for this showtime. Please select another performance."

The virtual box office is open 24 hours. Maybe the site updated. The closer to showtime and as reviews are published more people will buy tickets. It's not like the old days with a 1000 seat house and tickets are only available that day with people lining up all day to get in.

I just checked our local cinema for Saturday afternoon. It's playing in their largest theater; not a single seat is sold.

That gives you great pleasure, don’t it, r174. You desperately want this film to fail.

Of course, we know you are lying. You always do.

[quote]I just checked our local cinema for Saturday afternoon. It's playing in their largest theater; not a single seat is sold.

What is the theater, R174, let us check.

This would have been a greater and more authentic success if Lin-Manuel Miranda had re-written it. And appeared in the Rita Moreno part. And casted, choreographed, re-orchestrated, executive produced, and directed it.

R177, oh dear.

Cast, not casted.

r178 - THAT'S the only thing you find objectionable about fuckwad r177's post. That's it?

[quote] Do you have a mental disorder?

You're shaming the neuro-atypical.

Has Lin Manuel Miranda ever sucked dick?

WSS is looking to be a box-office disaster for Fox. They are going to lose around $100 million on it.

R140, Fiyero was BLACK in the novel. The woke people will protest if they discover a black character has been whitewashed.

r179, I'm fairly certain r177's post is a joke post. Nothing to get upset about.

I generally prefer joke posts to be funny.

[quote]WSS is looking to be a box-office disaster for Fox.

Nope. No more "Fox." Disney ditched the name to avoid confusion with the part of Fox they didn't buy. It's "20th Century Studios" now.

From the Spectator:

Why? Spielberg’s remake of West Side Story reviewed

What wonders has the director brought to a film that was great and beautiful in the first instance? Not many

What a shock, the right-wing Spectator doesn't like anything new.

The Spectator in 1961 - "West Side Story - Why? Romeo and Juliet was already fine."

I can't imagine the ending being a patch on the original which tears your heart out with Wood's great performance followed by the stupendous credits of Saul Bass. One of the very best sequences of credits in film history.

Everything about the original was brilliant. The entire final scene is heartbreaking, with beautiful directing, cinematography, and a gorgeous score. I love when the cops walk over to Tony’s lifeless body and she runs to cover him with her body, screaming “DON’T YOU TOUCH HIM!”, and then when some his fellow Jets pick up his body, and almost lose their grip, leading to a few of the Sharks to rush over and help carry him, looking at each other for a moment, as they now help each other instead of fight each other. The Jets and Sharks now walk out of the park, in unison, with Maria slowly walking out, as she wraps the scarf around her head, symbolizing she now feels grief too, like Anita.

It’s all very moving.

[Quote] Wood's great performance

You lost us.

R192 = Rita Moreno

Is Rita Moreno a good swimmer?

You'd have to be a total idiot not to think Wood is great in that final scene. It's one of the reasons the film became such a success. It caps all that great music and dancing culminated in her protecting his body like a wild animal. Then it calms down to almost silence with just the music of Somewhere quietly playing in the background.

Wood was never great. She was rarely even competent.

No she was great in that final scene. She is also great in her final showdown with Russell in Gypsy.

Though I don't know what the hell is on her head in the very last scene. Orry Kelly took that secret with him to the grave.

R191 - That all happens in the play. I'm not taking away from the 1961 but it's also very moving on the stage.

When Wood did the TV version of Cat on a Hot Tin Roof with Wagner as Brick and Olivier as Big Daddy, one of the reviews in LA said "Cat On A Hot Tin Roof should lay to rest forever those rumors that Natalie Wood can actually act."

[quote]You're shaming the neuro-atypical.

Somer neuro-atypicals deserve to be shamed, Matt.

My favorite str8 boy agreed to go with me to see it tonight as a Christmas present. My fantasy is that he'll love it and realize he's been missing out all these years bu discounting musicals.

Opening night. Str8 boy. Dinner. West Side Story. Nothing better, friends.

R199, if the actress can do it right.

I saw a 50th anniversary production of West Side Story at the 5th Avenue back in 2007. I took my sister to see it. The actor playing Riff was too queeny and the actress playing Anita was too…shy. I took my sister to see it, and after Act I, my sister says, “I know she’s not that great, but there’s still that scene with the Jets at the end where she really has the opportunity to prove her acting chops!” And then after the scene came, my sister whispered to me, “She blew it!”

And the actress playing Maria at the end was also pretty lacking.

Saw it tonight. No way Zegler is getting an Oscar nomination, unless they up the number of nominees from 5 or 6 to more. The Lead Actress race is tight this year, and she was good but they aren’t nominating her for that. She will get to present.

Saw it today.

It was amazing. I was looking to be transported "somewhere" and that happened. I'm going back to see it.

TCM now is showing WSS. Tony is singing "Could Be" as I type this.

R205 lmao so what was your favorite moment, in detail?

[quote] The Lead Actress race is tight this year,

R204= idiot

R207 ummmm no

My mom really wants to see this, but she's having some health issues, so she'll wait till it comes out on-demand. I didn't like the original much, so I'm content to wait and stream it.

Anita and Bernardo will win Best Supporting again.

I hope that cunt Rita Moreno doesn't insist on being nominated.

I'll post my details after I've seen it a 2nd time, r206.

I do have a couple of nit picks. I think in some scenes the dialog dragged a bit, especially during the rumble negotiations. I agree with some of the reviews that Maria and Tony almost are incidental to the bigger themes.

Also, I love "One Hand, One Heart. It was performed beautifully here, but, again I think the dialog between Tony and Maria could have been trimmed slightly.

You're such a piece of shit, r210. There's no cunt like an old cunt, Lansbury, et al.

She’s getting tons of buzz r210. I don’t think Bernardo is winning this time, maybe not even nominated. I think Riff has a better chance of being nominated this time.

[quote] I think Riff has a better chance of being nominated this time.

Agreed.

The guy they cast as Riff is a theater actor. Most of them don’t translate well to film but he was remarkable. A revelation.

Ariana, who plays Anita, is another one but I found her emotional scenes to be very “stagey”.

Spoiler Alert! West Side Story is Romeo and Juliet for the idiots who can't read Shakespeare.

Well then, R216! Shouldn't it be sung in Italian? Italian is the language for singing!!

I found Mike Faist, who plays Riff, a bit fey at first but he gets better. He played Connor in the original Broadway cast of EVAN HANSEN.

Elgort has a nice singing voice but there's no way he's convincing as an ex-con (one of Kushner's additions to the script for Tony, and it makes sense). Still he's an improvement over Richard Beymer - a low bar, admittedly.

What I liked was how Spielberg shoots the dance numbers so that you can see the actual dancers from head to toe vs. constant frantic cutting. Peck's choreography is generally fine but not quite Robbins-level. That said, "Gee, Officer Krupke" is way too busy, though: over-staged and over-edited.

R218 that was my least fav number/scene in the movie, followed by I Feel Pretty.

When Valentina confronts the boys after the attempted rape of Anita does she give a speech about what a terrible actress Natalie Wood was and the fact that she couldn't sing and had to be dubbed and her latino accent was a joke?

Spielberg has recorded one minute videos on why he cast each of the principal actors in WSS. (The only video not released yet is for Ansel Elgort.)

Here's the Mike Faist featurette.

Here's the featurette for Rachel Zegler.

Why would this movie “lose” $100M as R182 predicts?

It cost $100 million to make and as much to promote.

Variety says there are still issues with the audience showing up for musicals, especially since an older audience that might really like this movie is probably going to stay away (Covid). And yet it's one one of the best reviewed movies of the year, and the audience rating (96%) on Rottentomatoes is even higher than the critics rating.

Variety.com-

[quote] Steven Spielberg’s long-delayed “West Side Story” remake collected $800,000 in previews on Thursday night. Even with a slower start, the musical is expected to pirouette to the top of box office charts this weekend.

[quote] The Disney and 20th Century Studios film is expected to generate $10 million to $15 million in theaters. Ticket sales on the higher end of that range wouldn’t be terrible by COVID-19 standards because movie musicals, as well as films targeting adult audiences, have been struggling at the box office. Anywhere in the lower end, however, would be less than dazzling since the movie cost $100 million to produce and millions more to promote.

$100M is an awful lot of money to spend making a picture.

And it was even shot on digital video, for fuck’s sake.

I wonder if anyone saw it...today was the first day of showing at theaters. How was it?

WSS is about to learn the same lesson that In the Heights learned--you need STARS to sell tickets to a musical. Audiences are not going to show up to see no-names singing and dancing. If your biggest star is Jimmy Smits(ITH) or Rita Moreno, then you've got a problem.

WSS has the music and dancing that is familiar to everyone, especially the fans of the musical. It's beloved by many people. I think, that alone, will bring in the audiences. In The Heights was brand new, although I thought that was good, too. WSS has 60+ years of notoriety.

R215, I do not get all the acclaim for the new West Side Story at all, but I agree that Mike Faist was terrific. He was the only one that I thought found a new, interesting take on a character. His Riff is nothing like Russ Tamblyn's, yet both work really well.

For all the acclaim for Ariana DeBose, her best moments are when she's copying from what Rita Moreno already did. Faist is doing something different.

Oops...disregard my question. All I had to do was read upthread.. 🙄

I saw it and I loved it.

Okay I finally saw it tonight. Here are my thoughts.

1) The script is better and I like how it fleshes out the characters a little more, gives them a bit more backstory.

2) Ansel definitely has more of an edge than male ingenue Richard Beymer.

3) Rachel definitely fits the role of Maria better than Natalie Wood. However, I’m sorry, but I have to say, Natalie is much better at having emotional breakdowns, and what Natalie lacks in singing talent, she makes up for in her emotional gravitas. Still, I could see Rachel getting an Oscar nod for this. Her eyes are so amazing and expressive.

4) Ariana Bose does an amazing job, but… Rita Moreno MADE Anita. Rita’s Anita is someone you’d love to hang out with at a party. Ariana is still amazing, and I think she deserves the Oscar. I don’t know, it’s just a different Anita. But in her first scene where she twirls and says, “I want to dance,” you can see there’s an Anita just waiting to break out.

5) Mike Faist is solid, but I miss Russ Tamblyn’s gymnastics.

6) The new version has the superior version of “One Hand, One Heart,” keeping the full song.

7) My favorite song “Somewhere” was less significant in this version. It was much more significant in the original play and in the movie. I guess it worked for the montage of Tony, Maria and Anita in this version. But I’m just waiting for that melody in the finale and I feel deprived when I don’t get it.

7) The new version has a much superior as well as full version of “A Boy Like That/I Have a Love,” and Ariana and Rachel give a much better performance than Rita and Natalie.

8) Unfortunately, the finale felt too rushed. Spielberg did not capture the emotional beats that the 1961 version had, and part of the problem was that Rachel just couldn’t do what Natalie could do. Natalie was so effective, there was no need for any background music when she was pointing the gun at everyone. As a matter of fact, the lack of background music was so much more appropriate. And then finally, when the “Somewhere” melody starts playing when she breaks down… it was just executed so perfectly. But that’s not what Spielberg did here, and perhaps he needed the “I Have a Love” melody to add the emotion that Rachel could not deliver by herself.

What do you think of David Alvarez's performance? He has that macho swagger.

R235, he’s sufficient as Bernardo. He doesn’t have the elegance that George Chakiris had. But he worked for making Bernardo’s character a boxer.

Also, the Jets were unfortunately less distinctive in this new version than they were in the 1961 age.

Action, A-rab, Baby John, Ice… those Jets were quite distinct characters in 1961. But in this new one, I could not identify any of the Jets by name, except Baby John.

[quote] Action, A-rab, Baby John, Ice… those Jets were quite distinct characters in 1961. But in this new one, I could not identify any of the Jets by name, except Baby John.

Agreed, and that applies to the Sharks, too.

[quote] Ariana Bose does an amazing job, but… Rita Moreno MADE Anita. Rita’s Anita is someone you’d love to hang out with at a party. Ariana is still amazing, and I think she deserves the Oscar. I don’t know, it’s just a different Anita. But in her first scene where she twirls and says, “I want to dance,” you can see there’s an Anita just waiting to break out.

Ariana DE Bose.

I thought she was good in "The Prom" and "Schmigadoon." This is really her year.

Well in the 1961 movie other Jets were given more lines etc. Ice took over the leader role when Riff dies, and then sings “Cool”. In this one they took all that away and had “Cool” sung by Tony and Riff before the fight.

The placing of “Cool” after the fight worked better, IMHO.

The Eternals made $386,159,564 worldwide so far. I know it appeals to a different demographic (though I'm attracted to both) but $200M worldwide is possible.

R241 it isn’t with a $10-$15 million opening bud.

I can’t forgive Spielberg for fucking up the ending in this. It was rushed and emotionless.

Did r241 just out himself as a pedo? ;-)

In the Heights did BETTER than WSS at the box-office and it got just as good of reviews. So why is WSS getting all this Oscar buzz and not ITH? They better give tick, tick...boom some Oscar nominations to make up for the outrageous slight.

It's funny to me how everyone made fun of ITH opening weekend and it did better than the massively hyped West Side Story. And ITH premiered in theaters and HBO Max at the same time and STILL did as well as WSS. It also cost half as much to make.

R245 maybe because the box office has nothing to do with the Oscars nominating what they see as worthy… it’s not hard to get.

Who really thought this would not flop?

[quote]In the Heights did BETTER than WSS at the box-office and it got just as good of reviews.

West Side Story just opened last night, moron.

[quote]it isn’t with a $10-$15 million opening bud.

It made $4 million last night per BoxOfficeMojo.com. That makes it on track.

[quote]Did [R241] just out himself as a pedo? ;-)

GFY pedo troll. I'm 65 yo and collected Marvel comics as a kid. I stopped by the time I was 14 so I'm not familiar with The Eternals, but I'm a fan of the MCU. I also like musicals.

[qoute]it isn’t with a $10-$15 million opening bud.

I was going by your numbers. Actually, The Eternals first night box office was $30.8 million so I'll agree, WSS is not on track.

No way is WSS winning Best Picture now that it's losing the studio $100 million. Either Belfast or Power of the Dog is winning.

Belfast isn’t even a front runner.

Many Best Picture winners aren’t big Box Office movies. Lmaoo

Eternals made $72 million it’s opening weekend. WSS is making $15 million. It’s not making $200 million 😬

And I said this was gonna flop. Most people see it as unnecessary and aren’t embracing it at all.

WSS in '61 was the Marvel movie of its day as were other big epics and musicals and even non gross out comedies. It shows you how infantilized we've become as a culture.

The '61 ending can't be beat. I still think it is amazing. It is so beautifully acted, directed and scored.

[quote]Most people see it as unnecessary and aren’t embracing it at all.

The word-of-mouth is phenomenal as are the reviews. You don't speak for most people, just Natalie Wood stans like yourself. But we now have another COVID wave coming I don't know how to judge a box-office flop.

Clearly i am right when it’s not doing well r254. It’s not a limited release film, it’s a big release in over 4000 theaters and flopping

"Spider-Man No Way Home" is taking up theatre super big screens until next Thursday, but I think WSS will settle in on smaller screens at theatres for steady business until it heads to streaming.

[quote]WSS in '61 was the Marvel movie of its day...It shows you how infantilized we've become as a culture.

Swiss Family Robinson was the top-grossing movie of 1960. 101 Dalmatians was the top-grossing movie of 1961. In Search of Castaways was the 3rd top-grossing movie of 1962.

Get off your fucking high horse. The MCU movies may not appeal to you, but they do appeal to many people of all ages.

Ooops, meant to write - "Spider-Man No Way Home" next Thursday is taking up theatre super big screens bumping WSS to the smaller screen,

[quote] No way is WSS winning Best Picture now that it's losing the studio $100 million. Either Belfast or Power of the Dog is winning.

Let's look at Power of the Dog financials. It was apparently released in theaters only to qualify for the Oscars. It had an estimated box office gross of $160,000. Not $160 million. $160 thousand.

Production cost for Power of the Dog is between 30 million and 40 million dollars.

Its main audience is found in streaming services, which may also turn out to be true for WSS.

Wow. Some of you bitches are SO ready for this movie to flop, you’d think it was personal.

Is it?

I was excited for it r260. I loved the original since I first saw it in 6th Grade. I loved it so much my mother bought it for me as a gift. I then showed it to my sister and she loved it. We would sing and dance along to “America”. It was amazing.

I went into this with an open mind, and while I liked a lot of it, it let me down in some very important scenes, mostly the ending. The ending was rushed, and lacked real emotion. Zegler honestly dropped the ball during that final scene. Shrinking the Jets and Sharks to just 4 people each during the final scene was lame vs all of them being present during the 1961 film. Having Valentina walk by Tony’s dead body to grab Chino and make him stand there with her until the cops came was ridiculous to me.

Anybodys comes off like a full on retard in this.

By no means do I want to see it flop, r260.

I saw WSS yesterday, loved it, and am going back again tonight or tomorrow to see it on the super-big screen before "Spider-Man" comes in like a tsunami on Thursday.

I know from reading all of the WSS threads that there is a contingent that are hoping it's a box-office failure, for whatever reasons they have.

20th Century Fox doesn't need me to shill for them. It and Spielberg have billions already. I just think people are missing out on a real, old-school but fresh cinema experience by passing up WSS while it's still on the big screen.

Personally not ready to sit in a movie theater, where will this stream? And when?

Might I add that I was hoping it would do well but after going to see it last night, and it showing in the theaters largest auditorium on a Friday Night, and my screening had maybe 15-20 people in it, I know it’s not doing the numbers they were expecting.

When I was leaving there was one person buying a ticket for the next showing, no one else there. It was empty. I found it sad.

My sister loves the original. She is refusing to see this new one. I can imagine there are others out there like that.

I'm very happy it's flopping. Just what Spielberg deserves for hiring that arrogant, no-talent creep Ansel Elgort. I hope this ends Elgort's career.

R257 West Side Story was the top grossing film of 1961. Spartacus made twice the money Swiss Family Robinson did. And in '62 the top grossing films were The Longest Day and Lawrence of Arabia.

'but they do appeal to many people of all ages.' Which is why I said it was the infantilizing of culture. And the work of Ellenshaw in Castaways is so beautiful without computers it is a marvel in and of itself.

You need to overcome your arrogant dimness.

1964- Mary Poppins, My Fair Lady

1965 The Sound of Music, Doctor Zhivago

1966 The Bible, Hawaii

1967 The Graduate, The Jungle book

1968 Funny Girl, 2001 A Space Odyssey.

Yes the mentality was very different.

R261, you obviously aren’t one of the posters I was posting about. You have valid criticisms of it; you aren’t bashing it just because it dares to exist.

Oh and BTW, I agree with you about the ending, not nearly as powerful as the original 1961 one. Maybe Spielberg decided to purposely play it down so as not to “step on” Natalie Wood’s iconic original performance?

Or maybe Rachel Zegler just didn’t have the skills to pull it off.

I don’t know.

Sitting in a theater right now waiting for WSS to start in 8 minutes. Seats just under 400 people. My friend and I are the only ones here.

I watched the original West Side Story last night on TCM. I'd forgotten how damn corny it was.

Yeah, doesn’t feel like a hit. It’s a shame because this will inevitably make Hollywood deduce that there aren’t audiences for musicals anymore and we will see even less of them.

I agree somewhat with what some of the articles said; that the main audience for West Side Story are likely older women and a lot of them, still afraid of Covid, will not venture out to the theatre to see it.

It will be interesting to see how it does on streaming.0

r257, just for accuracy's sake, the 1961 West Side Story was the top-grossing film of that year. One Hundred and One Dalmations has since made a lot more, because Disney rereleased it in theaters multiple times over the years, but in 1961 WSS was #1.

It was a mistake to have no marquee names as leads. They should have paired Bradley and Gaga again.

Don’t know how many the theatre held at my showing, but there were about 40 people there yesterday at the three o’clock showing. For the record, it was at AMC and was one of their larger theatres.

I’d say most of the audience were older women, and most of them were coming in pairs; like 2 old friends or 2 sisters or something. There were some men, and most of them appeared to be their with their wives. A few young women and teenagers were scattered around as well.

Anyway, just my observations.

I resemble your remarks, OP.

Who wants to wear a mask for two and a half hours?

R277, the trick is to buy food and eat it all during the film. You can’t wear a mask while you’re eating, can you?

[quote]Wow. Some of you bitches are SO ready for this movie to flop, you’d think it was personal.

Actually, it was the WSS fanboys who were gleeful when In the Heights flopped because they didn't want it to steal WSS's thunder. Fast-forward 6 months and now WSS is flopping even worse than ITH. Karma's a bitch, I guess.

The last 40 minutes don't make a lot of sense plot-wise (that's a critique of the source material more than this version). Elgort and the actor playing Riff were the best by a lot, and Moreno is quite good in her scenes, but everyone else is just fine. None of this is reinventing the wheel, and it's too long.

So, damning with faint praise, it's going to win a gaggle of Oscars (but probably not even nominate Elgort, whose actual acting makes some sense of Tony in a way that Zegler can not with Maria).

[quote]In the Heights did BETTER than WSS at the box-office

And remember In the Heights was released to streaming on the same day as its theatrical release.

Seems the theory is Disney are hoping this does a Greatest Showman type slow-burn over the holiday period.

I'm dying to go but still not up for sitting in a movie theatre. Maybe dying is a wrong choice of words.

Decided to see it a second time, and it was more enjoyable the second time, MINUS THE ENDING AND THE ANITA/Pharmacy scene!!!

They’re about to lose a lot of money.

r270 here. So, by the time the movie started, 7 other people had shown up. Yeah, they're gonna lose a lot of money.

And I don't think word of mouth is gonna save it. The movie sucked. There was no energy or vitality to the narrative; indeed, Tony Kushner's additions to the script meant to provide deeper characterization and commentary on prejudice only serve to bog the film down, and that's when it's not insulting the audience by underlining and highlighting all the issues.

I'm shocked to discover that Spielberg is apparently inept when it comes to helming musical numbers: the Prologue is pretty much jettisoned, America lacks pizzazz, and Gee Officer Krupke and Cool are completely irrelevant -- both songs could be removed from the film without disrupting the story. But he even fucks up the dramatic scenes: as mentioned above, the climax is utterly lacking in impact, and, I'm sorry, but the decision to have the Sharks and the girls speak Spanish without subtitles robs the tale of momentum, as it leaves the viewer just sitting there perplexed.

Ansel Elgort is terrible; he makes Richard Beymer seem stellar by comparison. Rachel Zegler is good -- gorgeous voice -- but she lacks charisma. Mike Faist sounds like a duck. Ariana de Bose and David Alvarez are excellent, the best parts of the film. Rita Moreno hams it up, but it's not pleasant to watch -- and, again, giving her "Somewhere" steals the focus away from the story with an unnecessary detour.

I'm honestly befuddled by the raves this movie is receiving.

I didn’t like this version of “America” either. It lacked the energy the original version had. It actually had almost no energy at pets. Interesting how he managed to accomplish that…

“Cool” worked better in the 1961 version, after the battle. Idk why Spielberg wanted to put it back where the original stage show had it, before the battle.

"Les Mis"??? LOL So the Anglosphere are going so far as to rename a masterpiece such as Victor Hugo's Les Misérables?

What a time of completely ignorant nuts.

How could any version of Cool match the original film? The genius Robbins and his dancers are in white heat.

R176 Just check any theater. Opening day receipts for WSS were less than In the Heights which was available on HBO Max as well.

Well, the good news that this is flopping for people that don’t want to go to theaters is that it will be streaming probably by Christmas or New Years.

On Disney + because it’s 20th Century Fox, I guess.

Natalie Wood is so pretty in the original with the sweetest smile she draws you in. Rachel seems pretty but in a bland contemporary way.

I think it will build like The Greatest Showman did.

I had mixed feelings seeing the new West Side Story because the 1961 film is one of my favorites. Buy I saw it today (in IMAX) and I must say not only did I think it was an amazing adaptation, it is probably better than the original film. Only the ending is less than stellar.

r292, it will likely be on HBO Max, with dual release on Disney+ a possibility. 20th Century Fox signed extended their agreement giving HBO first streaming rights to its movies back in 2012 for 10 years, long before Disney bought it. They amended the agreement last month allowing Disney+ to share the rights, but I don't think it's been mentioned whether WSS will be one of the movies they're sharing.

"Whatever post-theatrical life is in store for “Free Guy,” it won’t be alone: Disney’s 20th Century Studios films for 2021 — the animated film “Ron’s Gone Wrong,” Ridley Scott’s period drama “The Last Duel,” and Steven Spielberg’s musical “West Side Story” — also will be covered along with any theatrical releases that come through the early 2022 expiration of the contract term."

Loved it. With some caveats. But yes, cried.

I think "Cool" was before the rumble in the original play...as was "Officer Krupke" was after the rumble. The 1961 movie change the sequence. In the play, "America" was just the women. The movie had the men and women version.

*changed^^

R298 no I believe Officer Krupke was before the rumble in the original play also. This movie put those back in the right order.

I think you're right R300. It sounds like it.

Cool works better after the fight.

Oops...before the rumble...got it..lol.

Yes R302. Cool works better after the rumble. They are so worked up and scared after the deaths...it makes better sense. Agreed.

In the original Broadway production, "Gee, Officer Krupke" was in Act Two after the rumble.

Will wait for streaming to see the film.

Currently loving the soundtrack. If dances at my high school gym had an orchestra like that I might actually have gone to them.

There's no orchestra at all in the '61 film. What the hell are they dancing to? Yeah I know you don't see an orchestra in the rest of the film because it is all in their heads but this is a real dance where you have to have music. Maybe John Astin was the DJ with a phonograph..

Or maybe they were lesbian couples R275.

My wife and I saw it last week on a weekday at an 11 AM showing. We specifically chose that day and time because we wanted to minimize the number of other people who would be there. We went to a recently re-done Regal theater with an excellent sound system. I highly recommend making sure you see it in a theater with a state of the art sound system. In the intro for instance individual instruments come from individual speakers. It isn’t just left side horns, it’s left side back speaker horns, right side front speaker strings, now the horns are back, but on the back right side speaker. It’s like the musical instruments are physically moving around you, and it adds to a sense of immersion in the story. There is no way we could replicate that sense of immersion streaming at home and you’d lose a lot of the experience.

The movie was beautifully done; acting, singing, story, costumes were all engrossing.

Oddly, my wife and I both found Riff miscast. He was too short and scrawny and my wife found his speaking voice annoying. I was disappointed that Rita Moreno sang Somewhere, but otherwise enjoyed her presence and it was fitting that she got to stop new Anita’s rape.

I don’t understand the criticism of re-doing true classics. As others have pointed out the “original” is just Romeo and Juliet redone.

I just heard ( correct me if wrong) that they changed a line in America to make Anita seem...less hostile? to Puerto Rico....which is such smelly horseshit it makes me wretch. As a hispanic immigrant myself (not PR) there are so many immigrants that shit on their own country....it is extremely common to see that bitterness among expats, and I am sure this is the same for every country. Anita's line in 1961 was true to life and a gritty hard truth about how certain people react after immigration. Now they take it out on the fear of offending.....tragic.

Between the moronic reasoning behind the lack of subtitles, Moreno's unnecessarily bitchy remarks about Wood, Hollywood's self congratulatory pats on their own backs for making this "woke", Hollywood's continued lack of creativity or ideas of anything new, and this horseshit here, I swear no movie was more deserving of being a pathetic, inconsequential flop this year than this one.

What lyric was that R309? I didn’t notice any changes in the lyrics of America and Anita says all sorts of disparaging things about Puerto Rico, both in that song and in the additional back story dialogue added by Kushner. There is one glaringly obvious removed word in I Feel Pretty though.

I don’t speak Spanish past Sesame Street words, but I understood enough that it didn’t matter. A lot is repeated in English and other things are obvious either through context or similarity to English words. I think anyone who understands 10 words of Spanish should have no trouble following.

And I wouldn’t say it’s “woke” at all, just contextually richer, for instance with the already mentioned prison history of Tony. And there’s one line in the scene in the bar with Riff that just broke my heart. I won’t give it away, but I am sure those of you who have seen it know.

Oh and that stupid article about Protestant vs. Catholic, really? In the movie I saw the Jets light a candle to the Virgin Mary after Riff dies; not exactly something a Protestant gang would do.

R309..they cut the "Puerto Rico, my heart's devotion, let it sink into the ocean" line.

I never heard any catholic vs protestant controversy other than some dimwitted reported calling the Sharks protestants.

And I always said, it is the reasoning that Spielberg gave about the subtitles that was absolute idiocy. Seemed like he was trying to go hip and woke for the youngins and failed soooo hard.

I think a big misstep was changing the women (I Feel Pretty) from working in a dress shop to being cleaning women getting ready to start work with their buckets, mops and rubber gloves taking them from having talent and skill to being maids.

I do think you are right and that line from the song is gone, but Anita gets a speech about how she’ll never move back to Puerto Rico and have to put her children to bed hungry every night. To me that’s a more substantively damning statement than the cut song line.

The Spanish is so simple and obvious and half the time immediately repeated in English, I think subtitles would have been distracting.

R313 its not the same....it isn't about discussing how you have better conditions in the US vs PR. It's about the type of resentment that builds in some expats that makes the line extremely relatable to those who have been in the same position.

'Get off your fucking high horse. The MCU movies may not appeal to you, but they do appeal to many people of all ages.'

Alright asshole the size of Brazil who wrote this. How many 100s of gazillions of dollars has idiot spiderman made when WSS has barely made a sou? Get off my high horse?

You are a fucking moron as are all the many people of all ages who love this Marvel car crash shit or whatever shit it is they do in these shitty movies.

I just saw it here in Berlin dubbed In German. The songs are subtitled. I was very impressed with how they juggled the dialogue with Spanish. What they did was if the line was entirely in Spanish (like Anita’s call to the bandleader Harry to play mambo) then they used the original soundtrack but if it was a mixture the German actors did it. I missed Mike Faist’s amusing line readings but the guy dubbing Ansel Elgort was definitely better at line readings than Elgort. The “synchronisiert” team gets included after the credits.

R205 - Really, Della, you're easily pleased.

R310 - Oh, spare us with the enriched context. It's fucking Romeo and Juliet! It doesn't need enriched context. It either works on its own or it doesn't. No matter how you play with it, tweak it, "enrich" it - if you take away the score and the choreography, you have nothing.

I thought the same thing with Scorcese's disastrous remake of "Cape Fear". He admitted himself he tried to do too much with a very simply and well-known suspect film meme: nice family menaced by sociopath - will they make it or not? The original, shot in black and white, uncoiled crisply and reflected the excellent literary work in its genre as the original story, "The Executioners" by John D. MacDonald.

By the time Scorcese was done adding contextual "enrichment" and marital complications and a Max Cady who would have been arrested just for appearing on a sidewalk - I saw in on first release, and people were laughing during the last five minutes with the boat going down. I guarantee you, NO ONE, anywhere, would be laughing at the last ten minutes of the original film.

A work of art succeeds most when it achieves that rarest of all states, being greater than the sum of its parts. And when you overthink your basic material, you end up asking yourself why? Just as Scorcese did after maiming a really tight little thriller by trying to turn it into some sort of grand psychological picture of humanity. And by the way: Spielberg was involved with that, too. Scorcese agreed to it in exchange for Universal's support for The Last Temptation of Christ. Spielberg had developed the remake as a project, but traded it for Scindler's List. Amblin Entertainment, Spielberg's studio, was still involved but Spielberg chose not to be credited as a producer on the finished film. . . probably one of his few good artistic decisions given what a mess the result was.

Romeo and Juliet doesn't need much embroidery, and the only reason the play is so popular is because of the exquisite language and starry-eyed viewers and TRU LURVE! (You'd have to pay me to get me ever to sit through it again, unless it's entirely in the nude and the Romeo is Aidan Turner.)

A bit of richer context isn't why people go see this. West Side Story is watchable because of one of the most fantastic scores and brilliant choreography, cinematography, and costumes ever to hit the screen.

The trick to any of this is knowing what weight your material can support and still retain its original gestalt. That's why remakes fail so often.

^*simplE and well-known SUSPENSE (not suspect) film

I really liked this one when I saw it 3 weeks ago, but it doesn't float around in my head. There isn't anything in it as memorable as the original. It does seem to be a movie Steven Spielberg wanted to make for himself.

[quote] Really, Della, you're easily pleased.

True, r317.

I am easily pleased, thrilled, by experiencing again, in WSS 2021, something I thought was relegated to childhood memories of me sitting in a big theatre watching a big, cinematic, well-crafted film with beautiful music and dancing.

I bow to your rarefied taste.

I like the 91 Cape Fear remake...it stands on it's own. But I still prefer the og one because Mitchum is just....appalingly good. Deniro is entertaining but less realistic, so less menacing. Mitchum has ssleazy exual criminal coming out of his pores

R321 As I said, the audience was laughing at the end in the theatre on first release.

What it took De Niro a huge cigar, tattoos on his hands, and a ridiculous overdone bwahaha affect to do, Mitchum did with the swing of his shoulders. You could see menace in his walk from the back.

And he didn't even want to do it. Peck and the director had to beg him to do it, and then he walked off with the film. I think it took a case of bourbon.

The original was a classic illustration of when, in art, less is more.

^*an illustration whose lesson that Spielberg has clearly never absorbed.

WSS didn't need more. Neither did Cape Fear.

Someone above mentioned the political dimension of the setting for I Feel Pretty, but it’s also visually crowded and busy, and we’re distracted trying to work out who all these women are and where they are working.

In all of the discussion about the wisdom of this or any WSS remake, I don’t see how this is any different from what opera has been doing since its beginnings, taking stories from history or literature, turning them into a score, and seeing that score, if it’s lucky, being reinterpreted over and over again. That’s what’s happened here.

Riff kept reminding me of Just Jack!

R324 $100 million is more like the annual budget of a first rate opera house. Maybe more. Although who knows these days.

And while they may "reinterpret" operas, they don't rewrite them or change the only thing about them that makes them what they are: the music.

You think cutting out Un Bel Di from Puccini's Butterfly would, er, fly? When what she really should have done was use that knife on that fuck Pinkerton when he comes for the kid.

How about cutting out Desdemona's attempt to deny her husband just strangled her with her last breath? You know, making her seem like a woman colliding in her husband's abuse?

The foundation of the opera in the last analysis is the music.

Take that away and no one will give a fuck whether Mimi lives or dies.

It comes down to the same thing. And as you brought it up, "reinterpreting" operas is almost always an exercise in who on the part of directors and rarely if ever improves on the original.

Which is where we came in.

For his next trick, Spielberg will be reinterpreting Wagner's Ring Cycle, but leaving out the incest and of course we can't have that anti-dwarf stuff, now, can we?

^*colluding (not colliding)

Fucking autocorrect

^^*exercise in ego

What music was changed (besides the excision of the first verse of “America,” which does make Anita sound confused)? I wish they had done the original ending of “Tonight,” with the gorgeous harmony.

R322 Cape Fear is the worst Scorsese film I've seen. You feel nothing for the family whose lives are in peril. And the end with De Niro continuing to fight as his face is melting is absurd as his clinging to the underbody of the family's jeep for so long. Everything in the remake is overdone. The nonchalance with which Mitchum menaced the family in the 1962 film was far more terrifying than De Niro's cartoonish character.

I couldn't give a fuck if Mimi lives or dies.

When does Desdemona collide with Othello? I don't recall that happening.

R329 - Sing it, brother.

The scene where Mitchum gets onto the houseboat where Peck thinks he's safely gotten the wife out of the way, his chest streaming with water, and breaks the eggs on her chest before raping her is one of the most nightmarish scenes I've ever seen, talking to her in thatsmooth sardonic voice. "After all," he says, "what is there to be scared of?" before he assaults her.

In Polly Bergen's memory of the scene, she relates that the egg stuff was an on the spot improv by Mitchum, which was why she reacted with such genuine horror. She said Mitchum got so buried in the part that as he began to assault her, the director had to yell CUT several times and a couple of techs had to pull Mitchum off her. Mitchum was so ashamed, Bergen said, that he slunk around the set for days, unable to look her in the eye until she told him she was cool, to get over it.

I always thought Mitchum should have gotten at least a nomination for the role.

Anyway, as you point out, the remake had none of the expertise, tautness, and leanness of the original.

Note to Spielberg: If it ain't broke, don't fix it.