Sondheim wonders if Johnny Depp has the vocal chops for Sweeney Todd film

[xharryb]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

I guess my sadness is that I so deeply love the entire score-- from "attend the tale" to "fleet street"... and I, as yet, have no evidence that the prologue/epilogue will be included.

This is me as well. I love the show, and I'm so far loving the look of the film, but what matters most to me is the music. I'm reserving judgement until I hear more of it. I am a bit concerned about the lack of the prologue/epilogue though. I know there were several actors cast as "ghosts" early on and the rumor was that they would sing those bits, but then those characters got cut somewhere along the line. I have no solid evidence other than the castings and the cuttings, but it does seem scarily plausible.

[mousepod]

I admit I'm a huge fan of Sondheim's Sweeney Todd. I saw the original production on Broadway with Len Cariou, and have since enjoyed a number of different revivals and "re-imaginings".

While my love for Tim Burton has vanished since the atrocious Planet of the Apes remake, I like the look of this movie (or at least the trailer). And if it even has a bit of the original musical in it, I'll bet I'll enjoy it.

And if the music doesn't hold up, there's still the George Hearn/Angela Lansbury DVD from "Great Performances," so at least this won't be the only video recording of the show.

(and I still love Alan Parker's Evita)

[Chernabog]

Originally Posted by mousepod

(and I still love Alan Parker's Evita)

Wow, and I thought that Evita was unwatchable (even tho I do like the music, especially the orchestrations, to the movie version). Montage, anyone? Oh wait, let's have another montage. Oh oops we almost had a scene, but just kidding we're going to make it a montage. It's a textbook case of "what works on stage may not work cinematically".

Plus Morrigoon and I emphatically agree that whoever did Jonathan Pryce's makeup in that movie made him look like an anthromorphic turtle.

Back to sweeny: Tim Burton stuff is so hit-and-miss (The good: Batman, Edward Scissorhands, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. The bad: Corpse Bride, Planet of the Apes)... it's hard to tell from the trailer.

But I agree with others, it is all about the music. I think that "Not While I'm Around" is just as important as the Prologue ("Attend the tale of Sweeny Todd...") and "A Little Priest" (the end of the trailer seems to show the lead in to that song), so I seriously hope they don't cut it.

Movie musicals are always a weird thing with me anyway -- it takes a bit for me to get away from the "oh, that's different than the play and I like the way they did it in the play better" type mentality. I don't expect them to film the play either (again what works on stage may not work cinematically) but there's a point at which you gut the underlying work so much that what made the underlying work good is lost in translation entirely.

[Morrigoon]

But, for example, would you like Hello, Dolly! better onstage, do you think?

[Strangler Lewis]

I agree about Evita. I enjoyed it well enough because of the music, but it struck me as having too many unnecessary cuts to prove it was a realistic movie, not a stage play.

I liked Chicago. I thought it did justice to the stagey, Brechtian, blah, blah, blah of the story.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by Chernabog

Woah.... I *almost* agree with Alex on something :P Chicago was not *the* worst..

To be fair, if I think about it in a vacuum it is merely a thoroughly mediocre movie musical. But it receives 5 billion additional demerits for accumulating so much thoroughly unwarranted praise including one of the great Best Picture boners of all time (though not the greatest).

[xharryb]

Wow. So much hatred for Chicago. It's almost enough to make me sad if I cared about other people's opinions. Perhaps this is a discussion better had elsewhere so as not to derail this thread, but why is it that so many of you don't care for the film version. Is it because the stage version you know and love is the current incarnation? Because frankly, I don't care for the concert style staging they've been doing for the last 10 years or so. I much preffer it done in period, as it was originally and again in the movie. But I could just be completely biased based on my own experience with the show.

[Alex]

I've never seen the stage version.

I like movie musicals, I just found Chicago to be boring, poorly performed, horribly choreographed, a really stupid story (this likely being a flaw in the stage version as well), and I didn't like a single person in the movie. In other words, my only coherent response I can make to the question "why don't you like it is" is "I don't see how anybody would."


And before the "but that's just you're opinion" I'll just say of course it is just my opinion.

As far as Sweeney Todd, if it has gone the way of a halfway musical that probably isn't a good thing (go balls to the wall or go home is my general opinion such things) but I'll wait and see. I also have never seen the stage version of this. All I know about Sweeney Todd are the bits in Jersey Girl.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I loved Chicago. In fact, I'd say the exact opposite of Alex - wonderfully performed, tight story, great choreography, timely issues. Just sayin'.

[Snowflake]

Originally Posted by JWBear

The clip seems to de-emphasize that this is a musical. Hmmm.

Yes, almost no musical in the trailer. This will be interesting to say the least, oh yes, I will see it, no question about it. It looks lush, that's for sure. Spall as Beadle will be great, as well. Rickman, I will enjoy, tremendously.

Now to break out the Sweeney Todd soundtrack (original) which will color my opinion of the film, no matter how good/creative or well done it may be.