Hairspray: The Poll

[OscarGuy]

vote and discuss

[Hustler]

Umm...! Agree with Damien on this one. What´s the purpose of this film? On the other hand,this cinematographic adaptation of the theatrical version was frustrated. Theater is breathed and it does not surround. The version is completely encapsulated. Finally, I didn´t find Pfeiffer´s performance so irresistible.

[Mister Tee]

[Pfeiffer] also only agreed to do Deep End of the Ocean (spoiler alert) when assured that the missing kid turned up again.

Um, did she read the book? The whole point of the movie is that the kid comes back and the rest of the family has to deal with it. In fact, that is the movie. I don't get this comment at all.

flipp, she hadn't read the book, but said she would only consider reading the script if someone told her up front the kid returned (which for me removes one of the strongest elements of the book: the not knowing, which gives the tension to the first 1/2 - 2/3).

I hadn't registered that Mama I'm a Big Girl Now was missing until it turned up in the closing credits; it was one of my favorite songs from the show.

[Big Magilla]

I missed "Mama, I'm a Big Girl Now," certainly a more interesting and significant number than "Baltimore Crabs."

It's sung over the closing credits by Ricki Lake (star of the original Waters film), Marissa Jaret Winoker (star of the Broadway musical) and Blonsky.

I haven't seen it yet, but I do have the soundtrack which I like better than the original cast album.

[The Original BJ]

I thought the film version of Hairspray was enjoyable enough. I didn't like it as much as the stage version. (I, too, have never seen the Waters original.) I'm of the feeling that Shankman, while clearly an impressive choreographer, isn't much of a director. Some of the musical numbers have impressive cinematic concepts ("I Can Hear the Bells" most notably), but yikes on those compositions! I also found the film's design a little drab -- the candy-colored fun of the stage musical has given way to more authentic '60s realism; for me this wasn't such an interesting choice. Kudos, though, for not chopping up the musical numbers with cuts and actually letting us SEE the dancing.

Mister Tee, you're absolutely right on Blonsky: what a delight! Best in show, though, is James Marsden, who absolutely nails the show's tongue-in-cheek tone. I'm mixed on Travolta. Sometimes I found him quite funny (his dancing in "You Can't Stop the Beat" I thought hilarious), but in other moments I didn't like his approach. For me one of the strengths of Fierstein (and Bruce Vilanch in LA) is that, after several minutes, you completely accepted the character of Edna as the mother -- not a drag act. Travolta in a fat suit felt to me like Travolta in a fat suit.

The plotting indeed is overcomplicated, and the conclusion goes on WAY too long. Also, I missed "Mama, I'm a Big Girl Now," certainly a more interesting and significant number than "Baltimore Crabs." So for me, Hairspray was fun, not entirely successful, but entertaining enough.

And John Waters's cameo is priceless. I think I nearly died with laughter.

[flipp525]

[Pfeiffer] also only agreed to do Deep End of the Ocean (spoiler alert) when assured that the missing kid turned up again.

Um, did she read the book? The whole point of the movie is that the kid comes back and the rest of the family has to deal with it. In fact, that is the movie. I don't get this comment at all.



Edited By flipp525 on 1187039973

[Mister Tee]

Are people not seeing this, or just not bothering to write about it?

For whatever shameful reason, I've never seen Waters' original movie. I did see the Broadway version, and enjoyed it in a Bye Bye Birdie sort of way; this film version retains most of its giddy fun -- bouncing along with appealing humor and well-staged musical numbers. The script falters a bit in the second act, which deviates from/overcomplicates the Broadway version (I blame the dread Leslie Dixon, who's always been a slave to high-concept plotting), and the finale seems to meander and go on way too long. But generally high spirits carry the day. I've never seen any of Shankman's earlier, apparently loathsome work, but he does a decent enough job here.

The big attraction, Travolta, is oddly something of an afterthought. He doesn't appear until 10-15 minutes in, and never really makes much of an impression. As many have said, he foresakes the out-there diva approach of Fierstein (and, I presume, Divine) for a "realistic" fat-suit performance, to which there doesn't seem a whole lot of point (might just as well have cast, I don't know, Bette Midler or Roseanne). Even You're Timeless to Me, a major kick on-stage, registers as just another number.

The real attraction is Blonsky, who's every bit as perfect as Winokur was on Broadway, and carries the film with her infectious enthusiasm. She also sings exceedingly well. I see her as a major Globes threat (though Carter in a successful Sweeney would be a strong rival).

Michelle Pfeiffer is actually quite good in the villainess role -- she rings variations on her dialogue that few would find. But I can't help feeling it's a waste of her talent to friitter it away on trifles like this (the same way many feel about half of Brando's career). However, given that it's she who's chosen to do this (and Stardust, and Sinbad) in recent years when certainly other roles must have been offered, I reluctantly conclude these are the parts she wants to play. I recall reading she turned down Clarice Starling because she didn't want to go to the dark places necessary for Silence; she also only agreed to do Deep End of the Ocean (spoiler alert) when assured that the missing kid turned up again. It may be that she simply doesn't want to further explore the fears/emptinesses/solitudes that informed her great performances in Baker Boys and and Frankie and Johnny (or Married to the Mob, or, hell, The Russia House). But it seems to me going to those places is what a great actress DOES. So, I consider Pfeiffer a bit cowardly and, as a result, I rate her career a disappointment. (Sorry for the tangent)

Anyway, with -- now -- three musicals getting around the $100 million mark, I think we can safely say the genre has been commercially revived (kindly skipping over The Producers and Rent). What's interesting is how the three big hits have gradually reaccustomed us to the style. Marshall openly stated he limited the songs in Chicago to onstage performance because he thought audiences wouldn't accept "bursting into song". Dreamgirls began that way, but over the course of the film Condon slowly acclimated us to the more stylized recitiative, which exploded in time for I'm Not Going. And now Hairspray just takes for granted from the opening moments that this is a musical and People Will Sing -- which is what audiences used to easily accept 50 years ago.

[MovieWes]

Do you foresee any acting nods, MovieWes?

I haven't seen the movie yet, but I've seen some Oscar bloggers naming Michelle Pfeiffer a possible contender for Best Supporting Actress.

[Sonic Youth]

This sets up what could be a very competitive race. The Golden Globe's Best Comedy/Musical, Hairspray vs. Sweeney Todd.

But from what little I've seen, Travolta looks like the weak link. Drag queens aren't supposed to play it straight.

[flipp525]

Do you foresee any acting nods, MovieWes?

[MovieWes]

And it stars John Travolta who hasn't made a hit movie in ages and in drag too.

Hasn't had a hit movie in ages? The horrendous Wild Hogs inexplicably made nearly $170 million at the box-office. It's also (I think) his highest grossing movie.

This is shaping up to be a big year for John Travolta. Hairspray did quite well at the box-office this weekend ($28 million). It has 94% on Rotten Tomatoes and looks like a sure-fire $100 million hit. Could a best picture nomination be in the cards as well (a Golden Globe nomination seems almost certain)? I think that it will, at the very least, score nominations for Art Direction, Costume Design, Makeup, Sound Mixing, and, if the soundtrack features a new song, Best Original Song. It might even win Sound Mixing since the Academy seems to go nuts over musicals in that category.

[Johnny Guitar]

I saw this movie a few hours ago (and not because I personally wanted to see it) and was shocked at how good it was.

Actually, it's not really that good. But relative to my expectations, which were rock-bottom if not subterrannean, this was a revelation.

The music leaves much to be desired, especially the vocals (Bynes & especially Travolta are not satisfactory); Travolta & the film shied away from the drag/gay elements big time; and the most fundamental problem with the film is that it was made at all (like Damien said, Waters' original need not have been remade in any form, it's still perfect as it is, and in a different league from this one). But there's still something to like here; it basically keeps its sure footing on the side of competence rather than ineptitude (never exactly reaching for the stars). Janney, Pfeiffer, Walken, Latifah, Bynes (when she's playing a cipher and not singing), the guy who plays Seaweed, and the girl who plays the lead are all quite good. The film keeps something resembling a unified feel-good resonance while thankfully never totally selling out the political implications of Waters' initial vision. And Waters himself makes a great early cameo. It's enjoyable for what it is. Which is way more than I would have expected it to be ...

[anonymous1980]

Don't you think the positive response on this movie is largely due to the extremely low expectations most critics have over it?

It's movie based on a Broadway musical that's based on a beloved cult classic which conjure memories of The Producers which bombed.

It's also directed by Adam Shankman, who, up until now, is someone the studios hire if they can't get Shawn Levy.

And it stars John Travolta who hasn't made a hit movie in ages and in drag too.

Shankman came up with something quite decent and much of the praise is due to the fact that it's not as horrible as they expected it to be.

[flipp525]

I love listening to "Good Morning, Baltimore" on my iPod in the morning. It really gets me going.

Frankly, I think this movie looks really fun. And I have a weak spot for James Marsden so I'll definitely be seeing it.



Edited By flipp525 on 1184762466

[anonymous1980]

It's surprisingly getting good reviews.