Sweeney Todd: The Poll

Post Reply

Sweeney Todd: The Poll

****
2
10%
*** 1/2
1
5%
***
4
20%
** 1/2
3
15%
**
5
25%
* 1/2
4
20%
*
0
No votes
1/2 *
1
5%
0
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 20

Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Post by Damien »

Sweeney Todd already got booted from New York City's premiere showcase theatre, the Ziegfeld, to make way for "Hannah Montana and Miley Cyrus: Best Of Both Worlds Concert." :D
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
Zahveed
Associate
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:47 pm
Location: In Your Head
Contact:

Post by Zahveed »

I wish I didn't enjoy movies as much as I do. I'm looking like a fool handing out stars to every damn thing.
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

vote and discuss.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
User avatar
Sonic Youth
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8003
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:35 pm
Location: USA

Post by Sonic Youth »

dws1982 wrote:David Cronenberg might have offered an interesting, and original, take on the material.

dws, that's exactly the first name that popped into my head when the question was asked three weeks ago "Who better to direct?" He thrives on outlandish subject matter - it's not so far removed from "Dead Ringers" - but he maintains a firmly disciplined, classical visual style. Don't know how he'd fare with the musical aspects, though.

And to dispute the notion that a realistic approach to the material would be inappropriate, my second choice for Sweeney Todd director - although Damien will cringe - would be Mike Leigh. He's already displayed his mettle for filming musical numbers with "Topsy Turvey", he has a real feel for the Victorian era, and his way with character interaction would have beared fruit in the dialogue songs.

And if we want our "Sweeney" to be a tribute the "silent horror genre and German Expressionism", that brings me to my third candidate. Guy Madden would have made a beautiful "Sweeney Todd"... assuming he could make a successful transition to talkies.




Edited By Sonic Youth on 1200899393
"What the hell?"
Win Butler
Zahveed
Associate
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:47 pm
Location: In Your Head
Contact:

Post by Zahveed »

Steph2 wrote:Quit it, Zahveed. Just because people are disagreeing doesn't mean it's time to end a thread. It's much more engaging anyway than reading the 80th prediction list for whatever award.
Oh Pshaw, I'm just having a little fun. Plus the same thing is being said by both fronts and the blood is getting bad.
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19319
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

Zahveed wrote:Image
I agree. A more interesting topic might be why the most contentious arguments on this board have often been over musicals - Evita, Moulin Rouge!, Chicago, Dreamgirls, now Sweeney Todd.

It's often said that music has charms that soothe the savage beast, but here they just seem to bring out the beast in everyone. A curious conundrum.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Post by The Original BJ »

anonymous wrote:I'm fine with you guys not liking it. I'm just disappointed hardly ANYONE else liked it in this board.
I liked it, with no apologies. (I don't like it as much as you did -- the singing really let me down -- but I thought it was a mostly impressive transfer of a great musical.)

However, I feel no desire to get into any heated debate on this thread. There's no way to respond to comments suggesting you don't "understand" the original musical if you like this film, or comments suggesting that my opinion is wrong because . . . IT IS . . . because IT IS . . . because YOU'RE WRONG . . . and here's WHY you're wrong . . . and WHY can't you see that YOU are wrong . . . instead of just putting forth differing opinions and letting them be.
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6377
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Post by anonymous1980 »

OscarGuy wrote:You miss the entire point. It's NOT that he's a tenor. That's not the problem. Though, the tenor thing is wrong for the part, IMO. The problem is that his singing does not reflect 16 years of pent-up rage. It does not convey 16 years of age and wisdom. The same can be said for Mrs. Lovett. Alan Rickman got his singing voice right. It was gravelly and imperfect because he was aged and weary. The ONLY characters that should have had an innocent voice were Johanna, Anthony (who shouldn't have a purely innocent voice as he is in the military, but it would be ok) and Toby up until parts of Nothing's Going to Harm You.
The title of that song is "Not While I'm Around". But whatever.

As for Johnny Depp not having enough "16 years of wisdom", I thought he was fine with whatever he brought to the role.

You keep saying if they had done it the way it was done on stage. We're not saying that the translation should have been a mirror of what's on stage. We're saying that the stage version took characterization, vocal performance and story and blended them together a way the film did not. Of course on the big screen, it's going to be less chessy, but I contend that Depp went out of his way to make himself seem more outlandish, so he's just as hammy as you claim George Hearn was.


Apart from the makeup and hair, I didn't think Johnny Depp's style was too outlandish. I thought it was quite subtle and quieter and more controlled than Hearn was on the stage. Different but not bad.

Listen to Len Carious sing it. Really, there is no higher standard. From his VOICE ALONE, you get all the frustration, happiness, rage, vengefulness without having to see a single image of him. Whereas if I were to shut my eyes and listen to Depp, I'd get hollow, shallow and limp vocalization. He may be "ok" as a singer and tenor isn't so bad, but he brought nothing to the voice.


Of course, he can't compare to the original. I never said he was in any way shape or form equal or even superior. Just different. I didn't think it was hollow, shallow and limp. Just DIFFERENT.

The same goes for Helena Bonham Carter and your contention that she showed more compassion towards Toby. That may be true, but in this situation, by your rationale, she would have been more protective, not trying to help Todd find him to kill him.


Helena's Mrs. Lovett truly cared for Toby and was far more conflicted in having to kill him for the sake of the man she loved (Sweeney). Yes, she cared for Toby but her love for Sweeney is greater. Unlike Angela Lansbury, who didn't feel any conflict towards having to kill Toby since she only cared for him like a pet that she likes.

Mrs. Lovett shouldn't be a sympathetic character. Matter of fact, we should have more sympathy for Sweeney Todd than for Mrs. Lovett, but again, Burton didn't understand that and so he allowed his actors to reverse the balance.


I felt Depp's Sweeney Todd was sympathetic. In fact, I felt sympathy for both Sweeney Todd AND Mrs. Lovett. Sweeney Todd's basically a decent man who lost everything he had including his basic humanity due to his blind thirst for vengeance. Mrs. Lovett is a lonely woman who just wanted someone to love, crazy, yes but she just wants someone to love.

But I don't know why we're arguing. You haven't been able to see past our fanatic love of Burton to see how much truth there is in everyone's thoughts.


A lot of what has been said are opinions. I read them and say I just disagree or I just don't see it that way or I don't see those particulars as flaws or that didn't take away from what I loved about the movie.

Others, I'd agree with at least partially but frankly it didn't take away much from the overall feel of the film. Yes, the film could've used more humor, yes, the film may have had more three-dimensional characterizations. But overall, I thought it was a great film.

I resent the accusation that I like this film solely due to blind admiration for Burton and/or lack of respect/understanding/reverence for the original material. Could it be possible, Oscar Guy, that I liked this film because ::gasp:: I really liked it? Couldn't you grasp that concept?

I'm fine with you guys not liking it. I'm just disappointed hardly ANYONE else liked it in this board. Well, Zahveed did but he seems almost apologetic for it. Why the hell should I be apologetic for liking this movie?
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3791
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Post by dws1982 »

Steph2 wrote:Quit it, Zahveed. Just because people are disagreeing doesn't mean it's time to end a thread. It's much more engaging anyway than reading the 80th prediction list for whatever award.
If their argument consisted of anything other than rehashing the same points over and over, it might be an interesting read. But it's basically a yes-no-yes-no back-and-forth match, with no one saying anything they didn't say five posts before. At this point, I think it's become beyond tedious.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

You miss the entire point. It's NOT that he's a tenor. That's not the problem. Though, the tenor thing is wrong for the part, IMO. The problem is that his singing does not reflect 16 years of pent-up rage. It does not convey 16 years of age and wisdom. The same can be said for Mrs. Lovett. Alan Rickman got his singing voice right. It was gravelly and imperfect because he was aged and weary. The ONLY characters that should have had an innocent voice were Johanna, Anthony (who shouldn't have a purely innocent voice as he is in the military, but it would be ok) and Toby up until parts of Nothing's Going to Harm You.

You keep saying if they had done it the way it was done on stage. We're not saying that the translation should have been a mirror of what's on stage. We're saying that the stage version took characterization, vocal performance and story and blended them together a way the film did not. Of course on the big screen, it's going to be less chessy, but I contend that Depp went out of his way to make himself seem more outlandish, so he's just as hammy as you claim George Hearn was.

Listen to Len Carious sing it. Really, there is no higher standard. From his VOICE ALONE, you get all the frustration, happiness, rage, vengefulness without having to see a single image of him. Whereas if I were to shut my eyes and listen to Depp, I'd get hollow, shallow and limp vocalization. He may be "ok" as a singer and tenor isn't so bad, but he brought nothing to the voice. The same goes for Helena Bonham Carter and your contention that she showed more compassion towards Toby. That may be true, but in this situation, by your rationale, she would have been more protective, not trying to help Todd find him to kill him. Lansbury did it perfectly, making it seem like she cared, but not nearly as much as a real mother would have, but since Toby had no mother, he bought into her act. Mrs. Lovett shouldn't be a sympathetic character. Matter of fact, we should have more sympathy for Sweeney Todd than for Mrs. Lovett, but again, Burton didn't understand that and so he allowed his actors to reverse the balance.

But I don't know why we're arguing. You haven't been able to see past our fanatic love of Burton to see how much truth there is in everyone's thoughts. You say you see the point, but you contend the other is true. Sure, multiple interpretations of a subject can be valid, but when that interpretation leaves out some of the story's core thematic elements and focuses on a bloodbath, then it's not an effective interpretation.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
anonymous1980
Laureate
Posts: 6377
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 10:03 pm
Location: Manila
Contact:

Post by anonymous1980 »

OscarGuy wrote:So, basically, you're saying that no one but Johnny Depp could have done well as Sweeney Todd singing baritone. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

I did not say that.

Personally, I would've casted Hugh Jackman as Todd since he's a marquee name who's proven to be a more than capable singer.

What I'm saying is that the role should be open to various styles and interpretations. There's more than one way to skin a cat so to speak. Johnny Depp sang the role way differently from the other Sweeneys, less Broadwayish, more rock and that to me isn't such a bad thing. It isn't necessarily inferior, just different. You may like both or prefer one over the other but I don't think it's at all bad.

I was pleased with Johnny Depp's performance.




Edited By anonymous on 1200819571
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Post by Damien »

LMAO Zahveed :D
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
Steph2
Assistant
Posts: 545
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:11 am

Post by Steph2 »

Quit it, Zahveed. Just because people are disagreeing doesn't mean it's time to end a thread. It's much more engaging anyway than reading the 80th prediction list for whatever award.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

So, basically, you're saying that no one but Johnny Depp could have done well as Sweeney Todd singing baritone. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Zahveed
Associate
Posts: 1838
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 1:47 pm
Location: In Your Head
Contact:

Post by Zahveed »

Image
"It's the least most of us can do, but less of us will do more."
Post Reply

Return to “2000 - 2007”