Musicals


The Folk Prophet
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

But I find this to be more the modus operandi of the gay crowd. I can't tell you how many times I've seen them claim something as theirs because of the "gay undertones" and been like, "What?!?"

I'd say Moana and Luca both hit the nail on the head if they made something everyone can relate to.  Disney and Pixar are probably elated when the gay community wants to stick their flag... [okay, let me edit that]... when the gay community wants to claim a creative product as their own among others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

I remember the Defying Gravity song, it just didn't stand out to me as much as it did for you apart from the other songs.

I'm not sure it did. Why I see it as the hit is because I've seen so many people singing it in various situations. It just seems to be the song that resonates with most people.

6 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

Are you a professional-hobbyist orchestrator or that's what you actually do for a living?

The first. I could explain in detail, but the short end of it is this...I got tired of being a starving artist. So it's hobby now with the outside sort-of hope that some day I'll still catch my "big break". But getting a musical on Broadway (my real goal in that regard) is hard enough even if you live in New York go the right schools, hang with the right crowds, etc., etc. I do none of that. So my plan now is Youtube, and if eventually I can build a big enough following who knows. Maybe an opportunity will arrive. Probably not. But maybe.

I say orchestration is what I do because that's what I keep having to do. I keep orchestrating other people's shows out of the goodness of my heart. :D Mostly stake musicals and the like. But my true love is composing and writing musicals of my own (orchestrating them as well, of course).

I think there's money to be made as a composer or orchestrator. But consistent good money? That's super hard. And, more importantly, I found that when I did professional work I had to constantly compromise my vision of things, which I did not care for. I want to do what I want to do more than I want to be successful at it. If it catches and becomes successful, awesome. But I'd rather never have renown than write things I don't actually like because some executive decision is made by some know-nothing. In summary, I didn't enjoy work-for-hire music composition and I couldn't make good money easily enough doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

So my plan now is Youtube, and if eventually I can build a big enough following who knows. Maybe an opportunity will arrive.

Drop that YouTube channel on here when you get it going.  I imagine you'll at least get 10-20 of us following you. I'd be interested to see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

if you live in New York go the right schools, hang with the right crowds, etc., etc. I do none of that

I am not trying to tell you something you don’t already know, so don’t misread this. But you are absolutely right. 
 

I have no talent-artistically, athletically, you name it. But, I do have a cousin who went to NYU, majored in film, lived there for years and still managed to fail there. Sadly but understandably, he moved back home when he was 30ish and sort of admitted defeat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

Drop that YouTube channel on here when you get it going.  I imagine you'll at least get 10-20 of us following you. I'd be interested to see it.

Having checked it out a bit today, it’s really cool! Strongly advise @The Folk Prophet to make it public here, but obviously it’s his choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another comment on the "gay" thing for for clarities sake.

I do not hate gays. I've known and worked with and have in extended family many of them. I like many of them, dislike some of them, and love a few. Their sexual interest in people of their own sex is unrelated to my like or dislike of any of them. I maintain my moral position on homosexuality, but it's unrelated to liking or disliking someone who is gay.

But....

I despise the (note the quotes) "gay" play-acting persona. The guy who speaks, walks, and moves his hands normally, then comes out, and then next day speaks with a lisp, walks with a swivel in his hips, and waves his hands around limp-wristedly in an animated way as he speaks. It's extremely distasteful. I also had distaste for the time the one guy came to school  dressed like a "cowboy" and started speaking with a drawl and saying "y'all" to everyone. The affectation of stereo-typical behavior to assume an identity is annoying as all get out to me.

That doesn't even mean I dislike everyone who does such things. I had a guy who was our "house help" back when the did that thing in the Philippines on my mission who was just like that. Annoying. Yes. But I liked him. He was a pretty cool guy. (Yes, we found out later that he was opening our mail, reading it, and then burning it in the backyard...because apparently he was also a creeper weirdo...but....that's another story....). But the idea that deciding your a cowboy and putting on an extra tight pair of boot cut wranglers with an oversized belt-buckle is being true to yourself? It was bad enough in high-school, but at least moderately understandable for dumb kids to do. But really... very silly.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LDSGator said:

I had my blog listed under my profile for the longest time. I can’t imagine it not being allowed FP. It’s not like you are linking to a dirty or anti LDS site.

Seems like there was a rule against self promotion. Since a youtube channel is a potential money maker I'm just not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course I did post this before and it seemed to be okay:

So here's my youtube channel link. Mods...if this is inappropriate let me know and I'll remove it...or you can remove it, or whatever's best.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrAik2zq2hrmBY0M6jrGMrQ/videos

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, The Folk Prophet said:

The CATS movie, however, for some reason is a bit of a guilty pleasure. Something about it was actually enjoyable. Not enough that I'd own it or watch it regularly...but....

Hi from the only other person on the face of the earth who feels the same way.  I give you the internet version of "making brief knowing eye contact, before anxiously looking away before the mobs of Cats Haters start yelling "I've got two of 'em here - let's GET 'EM!"

Musicals I regularly consumed 30+ years ago, and can still sing along to at least one track:

Chess.
Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat.
Any high school play of The Nightmare Before Christmas
The aforementioned Fiddler, Hamilton, Music Man, Les Miz.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed Evita when it came out (I was a teenager at the time and I think this may have been my first modern musical). You might get a kick out of Siskel and Ebert's review (and Ebert trying to draw Siskel into a critique of ALW's style :devil:).

 

As for musicals done in the last 20 years.....

The Bad

Les Miserables has already been commented on and I agree (I have to emphasize that casting Hugh Jackman is every bit as disappointing to me as Russell Crowe).

The Producers fell flat for me because it felt like they were just filming a stage production. When I see a movie I want it to be a movie. If you want to see Springtime for Hitler, look up the Chicago version on youtube.

Mamma Mia probably could have worked for me if I was more of an ABBA fan (generally I'm not a fan of jukebox musicals because of the plot challenge) and Remington Steele was fixed.

Mary Poppins Returns (and most of the Disney live-action remakes) didn't work for me because it felt like it was banking too much on nostalgia.

Tangled fails for me on a major plot point that happens in the finale (I think there was a few other issues I had with it but I'd have to watch it to remember). I'd be willing to give it another go on @The Folk Prophet's recommendation.

Moana still has a residue of Frozen's "subvert expectations - but don't really" problem. You can't pretend like you're breaking new ground by having a character point out that you're still following the classic formula ("You're a princess, and that's a cute animal sidekick." Also, what happened to the cute animal sidekick she already had? Chekhov's pig?). I also don't like it because Lin Manuel Miranda should not sing. You cast yourself in you own plays when you're too poor to afford actors. You're past that stage. Hire actors. Hire singers.

Rock of Ages is another jukebox musical, so that's already a big strike against it. I don't know that there's a universe where I'd enjoy the story either. My biggest annoyance was the characters being too self-aware that they're playing goofy characters.

Into the Woods suffered from the axe. It should have focused on two or three themes and really stuck with those. Instead it tried to be a highlights reel and lost its teeth.

Middle of the Road

Dreamgirls and Hairspray are probably good adaptations of their plays, but the story for Dreamgirls doesn't really move me and Hairspray is too over-the-top for me.

I think La La Land may have gotten close. The overall plot is ho-hum, but it had visual and musical themes that worked for me. I think it should have engaged more in the philosophic theme that it introduced in the band conflict (I get bored with relationship conflicts).

The Good

The big exception to jukebox musicals is Across the Universe. The storylines are loosely connected (my friend said he went in with the expectation that the plot is "how many Beatles songs can we pack into one movie") but the visuals are great. Julie Taymor directed it (she created the visual look for The Lion King on Broadway) so it's really the visuals for me.

I seem to remember enjoying Enchanted, and would probably find it more memorable if I had kids when I first watched it.

The Phantom of the Opera. I know the objections to it about Butler's voice. He get yell-y at parts and I could live without that. As for TFP's objections about him being a pretty-boy -- I think he has to be to some extent. The story doesn't take the time to show Christine first falling in love with a voice and then confronted with a monster figure. So instead he's shown to have a public monster persona (which she excuses because he's so dreamy) which he blames on his hidden monster face (rather than a total public deformity). I also think it works visually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not like Starlight Express.  I'm ashamed to admit I'm a sucker for a bouncy song with energetic and clever and sarcastic lyrics, so I love every South Park song I've heard, and 'd probably hate myself for loving The Book of Mormon musical.

Now that I think about it, songs in TV shows and movies are a big reason why I like shows and movies.  I remember the musical episodes of Moonlighting with Bruce Willis, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I'm sure more if I think longer.  

Monty Python's Spamalot.  I need to see that.

Oh!  Frozen, and Frozen II.  You haven't watched Frozen until you've seen it in the original Moraccioli style.

 

 

 

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

I enjoyed Evita when it came out (I was a teenager at the time and I think this may have been my first modern musical). You might get a kick out of Siskel and Ebert's review (and Ebert trying to draw Siskel into a critique of ALW's style :devil:).

 

Haha. Ebert is spot on though for most AWL musicals. It's one of the things that really set Phantom apart. More than one hit number.

32 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Tangled fails for me on a major plot point that happens in the finale (I think there was a few other issues I had with it but I'd have to watch it to remember). I'd be willing to give it another go on @The Folk Prophet's recommendation.

I am interested in this. Is that plot point that they didn't kill off Eugene? Because boy howdy that would have been SO much more powerful.

I love Tangled. And it isn't destroyed by that Disney choice. But man the power it could have had if he'd actually given his life for her.

32 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

Moana still has a residue of Frozen's "subvert expectations - but don't really" problem. You can't pretend like you're breaking new ground by having a character point out that you're still following the classic formula ("You're a princess, and that's a cute animal sidekick." Also, what happened to the cute animal sidekick she already had? Chekhov's pig?). I also don't like it because Lin Manuel Miranda should not sing. You cast yourself in you own plays when you're too poor to afford actors. You're past that stage. Hire actors. Hire singers.

I think you're missing the reason Moana is so good. Perfect? No. I agree with your critiques. But they don't ruin what is, at it's core, to me a very powerful and solid show.

And the slow motion singing scene.... HOW DID THAT WORK?!?! It was SO cool!

32 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

The Phantom of the Opera. I know the objections to it about Butler's voice. He get yell-y at parts and I could live without that. As for TFP's objections about him being a pretty-boy -- I think he has to be to some extent. The story doesn't take the time to show Christine first falling in love with a voice and then confronted with a monster figure. So instead he's shown to have a public monster persona (which she excuses because he's so dreamy) which he blames on his hidden monster face (rather than a total public deformity). I also think it works visually.

I'll acquiesce to these points. But I agree with @LDSGator who said that Phantom lives or dies on the Phantom's voice. And why the stink didn't they just use Michael Crawford?!

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I did not like Starlight Express.  I'm ashamed to admit I'm a sucker for a bouncy song with energetic and clever and sarcastic lyrics, so I love every South Park song I've heard, and 'd probably hate myself for loving The Book of Mormon musical.

Now that I think about it, songs in TV shows and movies are a big reason why I like shows and movies.  I remember the musical episodes of Moonlighting with Bruce Willis, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer, I'm sure more if I think longer.  

Monty Python's Spamalot.  I need to see that.

Oh!  Frozen, and Frozen II.  You haven't watched Frozen until you've seen it in the original Moraccioli style.

 

 

 

But....what about the Simpson's version of Planet of the Apes...or Streetcar? You haven't truly experienced musicals if you haven't experienced those!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

You haven't watched Frozen until you've seen it in the original Moraccioli style.

I wish he'd gone full death metal on the chorus instead of the pseudo growling/singing. It would have been cooler too just go to straight growling. Haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for why these newer movie musicals don't seem to be as good as the ones of yesteryear, I think that's because there were just so many!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_musical_films_by_year

Musical film was standard in the 30's - 50's (and still a significant portion in the 60's). That meant that actors, editors, choreographers, and directors all had experience with musicality on film. It was probably easier to assemble a competent team.

Also related to the raw numbers, only the good ones get remembered ;). If only 1 in 100 are good, then a decade can produce 3 good ones if it churns out 30/year but only 1 or 2 good ones if it's only producing 15/year. Then you remember the good handful from the last decade without recognizing that the dozen old ones you enjoy span 4 decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, dprh said:

The Into the Woods movie was my first exposure to it.  I don't think I'd ever even heard the music before.  I enjoyed it.  

 

People write essays on Stephen Sondheim's musical and lyrical genius. I think they're (the essays) mostly garbage. But...I walk the line between liking Sondheim a lot and kind of hating him. I can't decide.

Into the Woods is one of his more accessible works. But overall Sondheim is a musical snob.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

But....what about the Simpson's version of Planet of the Apes...or Streetcar? You haven't truly experienced musicals if you haven't experienced those!

"Look at that, I was wrong, it was Earth all along!  Well you finally made a monkey out of meeeeee!"
And Wiggum singing the intro to New Orleans.  Yep, absolutely.

But, if you're gonna go there, you have to include the My Little Pony musical version of A Christmas Carol.  And half a dozen others I will go into great depth about, if someone so much as makes eye contact with me on the topic.

(Example: A perfect example of musical variation known as The Deceptive Cadence, was shown in A Canterlot Wedding Pt. 2, where the evil changeling Queen Chrysalis has kidnapped Princess Cadence and assumed her form, in order to seduce, marry, and enslave the captain of the guard, thus opening up the kingdom to a changeling invasion.  Queen Chrysalis, pretending to be Princess Cadence, sings the This Day Aria, which employs this form.  In short, a deceptive Cadence character, singing an aria with a Deceptive Cadence in it.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mordorbund said:

As for why these newer movie musicals don't seem to be as good as the ones of yesteryear, I think that's because there were just so many!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_musical_films_by_year

Musical film was standard in the 30's - 50's (and still a significant portion in the 60's). That meant that actors, editors, choreographers, and directors all had experience with musicality on film. It was probably easier to assemble a competent team.

Also related to the raw numbers, only the good ones get remembered ;). If only 1 in 100 are good, then a decade can produce 3 good ones if it churns out 30/year but only 1 or 2 good ones if it's only producing 15/year. Then you remember the good handful from the last decade without recognizing that the dozen old ones you enjoy span 4 decades.

I can buy this...sort of... By the "sort of" part I mean...yes...they made more and so they knew how to handle them better. And...yes...they made so many that we only remember the cream on top. But...alternatively...moving making in general has come SO far. And it's not hard, if one is going to make a movie musical, to study the greats and consider why they worked well. But really the problem is that they're hiring people to do musicals that don't love or understand musicals. Tom Hooper, clearly, did not LOVE Les Miz the stage play or he wouldn't have butchered all that was beloved about it.

Of course the same could be said of some Star Wars directors. So...it's a Hollywood epidemic. :D

Edit: Oh...and note -- the greats were also great stage plays beforehand. Original great movie musicals are few and far between across the board. Adapting a great play to be a great movie with good movie making skills should not be that hard.

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I am interested in this. Is that plot point that they didn't kill off Eugene? Because boy howdy that would have been SO much more powerful.

I love Tangled. And it's isn't destroyed by that Disney choice. But man the power it could have had if he'd actually given his life for her.

I've got a fuzzy memory about the sacrifice but I think you're right about that. When I watched it I thought of the Anastasia and the many Romanov pretenders that came out of the woodwork. Tangled ends with a known charlatan presenting yet another heiress-to-be as the bona fide daughter of the king and queen. And the one identifying trait that she has that would positively show she's the missing daughter (her hair) no longer matches. But the power of happy endings wins out and the queen immediately accepts her. Nope. Not buying it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share