Musicals - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Zeraph · 02-25-2005, 07:11 PM

I'm curious about musicals and it's beginning. They really seemed to have an impact in 1940-1960s. Now we still have some pictures that come out occationally like hedwig, chicago, and moulin rouge but they have no wear near the popularity they once had.

What do you think a musical is/meant besides singing and dancing? I think maybe the singing and dancing were kind the old days "special effects" as they couldn't do the same stuff they do today.

What does it do for audiences?/What does it accomplish?
Theyre very unrealistic (people singing at the drop of a hat) and yet people still loved them, I'm guessing its more of escapism here.

Usually things evolve, but musicals even the popular ones today havn't seemed to change much over the years. Still similar format, but I havn't seen very many old musicals. Anyone know?

edit: Oh, and finally do you think they will die out, or become more popular, or stay the same? I think they will eventually die out, just very slowly.

SecretMethod70 · 02-25-2005, 08:23 PM

Well, really, musicals on film are not a strange phenomenon at all. Opera has been around for *quite* awhile and musical theatre is sort of a natural progression from that. Film is basically taking what is done in theatre and conveying it through a different medium, so it's only natural then that musicals would then be placed on film as well. I don't think the decision to do so is any more involved than that.

Now, as for the style of some of these older movies (and musicals in theatre) - the happy-go-lucky kind of feel they tended to have - a lot of that comes from who was doing most of the work in film and broadway at the time. There's not a stereotype of Jewish Hollywood for nothing. This is where a lot of Jewish immigrants were able to find success and, so, what they tended to create was their image of the American dream - in some ways how they saw America (through the eyes of their success) but in most ways, how they had hoped America would be.

I once saw a very good documentary about this actually (Jewish immigrants and Hollywood) - I wish I could remember the title to recommend it.

As for musicals dying out, the only logical answer is that they won't. Musicals will always be placed on film so long as musicals are being performed in theatre. And musicals will be performed in theatre so long as there is music to be performed.

Val_1 · 02-25-2005, 09:40 PM

Musicals just aren't in vogue anymore. Same as westerns. They will never totally go away, but they just won't have the mainstream popularity that they once had back in their hey day. When one does come up (like Moulin Rouge) it'll create a bit of nostalga, but that's not to be confused with coming back into style (for instance, the retro music phase didn't mean disco was back in style as a viable art form). And films like Hedwig or Rocky Horror don't really count really, because they are definitely not mainstream in nature. Which is a shame, cause Hedwig kicked ass! Another great musical is Tommy by the Who (the film version). Great cheesy fun.

Willravel · 02-25-2005, 10:02 PM

Val, I hope you've seen Tommy live. It blows the movie away.

I was into musicals breifly towards the end of highschool (I was dating a drama student). Phantom and the other Webber abominations (Joseph, Cats, etc.) were quite popular within those circles, but they had no real concept of what a musical meant. A musical is an opera with dialogue breaks. The main focus should be in quality of music, as well as the quality of story. Phantom was an intriguing story, but the lyrics and music lacked seriosuly (in my opinion).

I think we could see the popularity of musicals return if we were to see some real quality. Until it can match it's competetors, who have the benifit of huge audiences, great exposure, popularity, and finances, musicals will remain on the back burner.

If a musical with the quality of Falstaff or the Barber of Seville were to come along, we might see a different response.

shakran · 02-25-2005, 10:32 PM

I was frankly surprised to see Phantom come out as a movie after Evita bombed so badly. And it's not that I think either one was bad- -- they were frankly excellent (noone was more surprised than I was to see that Madonna really CAN sing if she wants to

)

But unless you're in to musical theater, those movies just won't appeal to you, so the fact that Evita bombed is a good indicator that the majority of the population isn't all that in to musicals.

Which is kind of a shame because there are some excellent more modern ones out there. Les Mis for one.

SecretMethod70 · 02-25-2005, 11:41 PM

eh, musically, Evita and Phantom sucked ass as movies (and, to be honest, they're not that spectacular as musicals either, but at least they're relatively entertaining). I've actually been surprised they did as WELL as they did considering how crappy they are.

Either way, something like musicals that fill a niche are going to ebb and flow in terms of popularity. Just like opera has never really been all that popular (contrary to popular notions of history), musicals will never truly be mainstream.

Catmandu · 03-04-2005, 02:33 PM

I hated Moulin Rouge, but loved Chicago. I might have enjoyed MR if had been slowed down a little bit. Too much "in your face". I've always wondered why the stage version of 42nd St has not been movified. It would be even more throw-back than Chicago, but it's got all the music and dancing anyone could ask for. It's drawback is that it really doesn't have an element of sexiness to it, which is what I think MR and Chicago had that kept the audience involved.

I adore musicals. I probably have 20 in my DVD collection. The best: Singing In The Rain, West Side Story, the Broadway Melody series. My 14-yr-old daughter has been listening to the soundtracks to Singinig In The Rain and Wicked almost exclusively lately.

aberkok · 03-04-2005, 05:02 PM

For the record, I think the Phantom of the Opera film was motivated by the success of Chicago and Moulin Rouge and NOT ignorance of the bombing of Evita.

It would be good if the success of Chicago ushered in an era of musical films (a la Moulin Rouge) and talent who can be true "triple threats" (and I'm not talking about graduates of the Randolph Academy here in Toronto who do scare me with their talents, and not in a good way).

02-25-2005, 07:11 PM	#1 (permalink)
Zeraph Banned Location: The Cosmos	Musicals I'm curious about musicals and it's beginning. They really seemed to have an impact in 1940-1960s. Now we still have some pictures that come out occationally like hedwig, chicago, and moulin rouge but they have no wear near the popularity they once had. What do you think a musical is/meant besides singing and dancing? I think maybe the singing and dancing were kind the old days "special effects" as they couldn't do the same stuff they do today. What does it do for audiences?/What does it accomplish? Theyre very unrealistic (people singing at the drop of a hat) and yet people still loved them, I'm guessing its more of escapism here. Usually things evolve, but musicals even the popular ones today havn't seemed to change much over the years. Still similar format, but I havn't seen very many old musicals. Anyone know? edit: Oh, and finally do you think they will die out, or become more popular, or stay the same? I think they will eventually die out, just very slowly.

02-25-2005, 08:23 PM	#2 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Well, really, musicals on film are not a strange phenomenon at all. Opera has been around for quite awhile and musical theatre is sort of a natural progression from that. Film is basically taking what is done in theatre and conveying it through a different medium, so it's only natural then that musicals would then be placed on film as well. I don't think the decision to do so is any more involved than that. Now, as for the style of some of these older movies (and musicals in theatre) - the happy-go-lucky kind of feel they tended to have - a lot of that comes from who was doing most of the work in film and broadway at the time. There's not a stereotype of Jewish Hollywood for nothing. This is where a lot of Jewish immigrants were able to find success and, so, what they tended to create was their image of the American dream - in some ways how they saw America (through the eyes of their success) but in most ways, how they had hoped America would be. I once saw a very good documentary about this actually (Jewish immigrants and Hollywood) - I wish I could remember the title to recommend it. As for musicals dying out, the only logical answer is that they won't. Musicals will always be placed on film so long as musicals are being performed in theatre. And musicals will be performed in theatre so long as there is music to be performed. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

02-25-2005, 09:40 PM	#3 (permalink)
Val_1 Addict Location: In a State of Denial	Musicals just aren't in vogue anymore. Same as westerns. They will never totally go away, but they just won't have the mainstream popularity that they once had back in their hey day. When one does come up (like Moulin Rouge) it'll create a bit of nostalga, but that's not to be confused with coming back into style (for instance, the retro music phase didn't mean disco was back in style as a viable art form). And films like Hedwig or Rocky Horror don't really count really, because they are definitely not mainstream in nature. Which is a shame, cause Hedwig kicked ass! Another great musical is Tommy by the Who (the film version). Great cheesy fun. __________________ I feel sorry for people who don't drink. When they wake up in the morning, that's as good as they're going to feel all day. -Frank Sinatra

02-25-2005, 11:41 PM	#6 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	eh, musically, Evita and Phantom sucked ass as movies (and, to be honest, they're not that spectacular as musicals either, but at least they're relatively entertaining). I've actually been surprised they did as WELL as they did considering how crappy they are. Either way, something like musicals that fill a niche are going to ebb and flow in terms of popularity. Just like opera has never really been all that popular (contrary to popular notions of history), musicals will never truly be mainstream. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

03-04-2005, 05:02 PM	#8 (permalink)
aberkok “Wrong is right.” Location: toronto	For the record, I think the Phantom of the Opera film was motivated by the success of Chicago and Moulin Rouge and NOT ignorance of the bombing of Evita. It would be good if the success of Chicago ushered in an era of musical films (a la Moulin Rouge) and talent who can be true "triple threats" (and I'm not talking about graduates of the Randolph Academy here in Toronto who do scare me with their talents, and not in a good way). __________________ !check out my new blog! http://arkanamusic.wordpress.com Warden Gentiles: "It? Perfectly innocent. But I can see how, if our roles were reversed, I might have you beaten with a pillowcase full of batteries."

02-25-2005, 10:02 PM	#4 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Val, I hope you've seen Tommy live. It blows the movie away. I was into musicals breifly towards the end of highschool (I was dating a drama student). Phantom and the other Webber abominations (Joseph, Cats, etc.) were quite popular within those circles, but they had no real concept of what a musical meant. A musical is an opera with dialogue breaks. The main focus should be in quality of music, as well as the quality of story. Phantom was an intriguing story, but the lyrics and music lacked seriosuly (in my opinion). I think we could see the popularity of musicals return if we were to see some real quality. Until it can match it's competetors, who have the benifit of huge audiences, great exposure, popularity, and finances, musicals will remain on the back burner. If a musical with the quality of Falstaff or the Barber of Seville were to come along, we might see a different response.

02-25-2005, 10:32 PM	#5 (permalink)
shakran Tone.	I was frankly surprised to see Phantom come out as a movie after Evita bombed so badly. And it's not that I think either one was bad- -- they were frankly excellent (noone was more surprised than I was to see that Madonna really CAN sing if she wants to ) But unless you're in to musical theater, those movies just won't appeal to you, so the fact that Evita bombed is a good indicator that the majority of the population isn't all that in to musicals. Which is kind of a shame because there are some excellent more modern ones out there. Les Mis for one.

03-04-2005, 02:33 PM	#7 (permalink)
Catmandu Insane Location: Seattle	I hated Moulin Rouge, but loved Chicago. I might have enjoyed MR if had been slowed down a little bit. Too much "in your face". I've always wondered why the stage version of 42nd St has not been movified. It would be even more throw-back than Chicago, but it's got all the music and dancing anyone could ask for. It's drawback is that it really doesn't have an element of sexiness to it, which is what I think MR and Chicago had that kept the audience involved. I adore musicals. I probably have 20 in my DVD collection. The best: Singing In The Rain, West Side Story, the Broadway Melody series. My 14-yr-old daughter has been listening to the soundtracks to Singinig In The Rain and Wicked almost exclusively lately.