I have just finished watching the classic 1964 musical film Mary Poppins and definitely enjoyed the songs especially "chim chimney chim chim cheroo". And I just found out that it was one of the most awarded musicals and even had a sequel in 2004, still starring Julie Andrews as Mary Poppins.
One of the themes that striked me most was the unseen and unfelt love of parents to their children. Why do we need nannies if our parents are always with us, right? Why do we need to have outings with strangers when we have our parents with us? The film has represented this reality quite clearly, especially when Mr. Banks brought his children to his work. The generation gap was seen their, the conflicting interests, and contradicting dreams of parents and their children.
There was one theme also that was not that emphasized. It was about Mrs. Banks' involvement in women empowerment. I see this belittled but however quite materialized in the character of Mary Poppins.Her firmness and maternal care for her wards were seen.
Definitely, it was one of the best musicals I've watched.
Watching an 80s horror film makes me feel bored, laughing (instead of screaming), and most of the times, dissatisfied with the production. However, watching the Rocky Horror Picture Show, a 1975 film adaptation of the Broadway musical Rocky Horror Show, the experience is different. With the excellently written songs, bizarre characters and simple plot but has a unpredictable twists, the Show truly did not let me down.
"THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW" is an outrageous assemblage of the most
stereotyped science fiction movies, Marvel comics, Frankie Avalon /
Annette Funicello outings and rock 'n' roll of every vintage. Running
through the story is the sexual confusion of two middle American "Ike
Age" kids confronted by the complications of the decadent morality of
the 70's, represented in the person of the mad "doctor" Frank N Furter, a
transvestite from the planet Transexual in the galaxy of Transylvania.
Created by Richard O'Brien,
who wrote the book, music and lyrics and calls it "something any
ten-year old could enjoy," this homage to the horror film opened in
London at the Royal Court's experimental Theatre Upstairs as a six-week
workshop project in June, 1973. The show received such acclaim at this
60-seat theatre that it was quickly moved to larger quarters in a
converted cinema in Chelsea. Following the movie theatre's demolition,
the show found a permanent home at the 500-seat King's Road Theatre,
where it is still playing to packed houses nightly. The play was named
"Best Musical of 1973" in the London Evening Standard's annual poll of
drama critics.
In my reading of Perks of Being A Wallflower, and watching of the Rocky Horror Glee Show (a season 2 episode of Glee) and Fame (1980), I knew and became curious of this film. There, they watch this film in community theaters and the audience participate by shouting in a chorus manner their answers to the questions of the characters.
According to an article by Sal Piro in the official fan site of RHPS, this audience participation started when the film had a regular screening in Waverly Theater every midnight in 1976. They would play the soundtrack of the film before the show begins, making a party atmosphere in the theater. The audiences naturally began to respond, booing the villain and cheering the heroes.
"These pioneers
of audience participation from the balcony included two young ladies
named Amy and Theresa; Bill O'Brien, the first person to dress as Dr.
Frank-N-Furter; Lori Davis, who wrote the Ten Commandments of ROCKY
HORROR; and Louis Farese, a kindergarten teacher from Staten Island."
"On Labor Day weekend of 1976, Louis felt compelled to speak to the
screen. He is credited as the first person to yell lines at the movie.
His earliest lines were: "Buy an umbrella, you cheap bitch!" - to Janet
walking in the rain, and "How strange was it?" - to the criminologist's
initial speech. (Louis called this "counterpoint dialogue.") Then, in
late September, as they sought a preview of Halloween, a few people came
dressed as characters from the movie. Later, on Halloween, there was a
costume party with many people dressing as the characters."
I haven't watched anything like it. But I think for a group of fans to a particular film, it would be a great and regular experience (you'd be watching the same movie thousands of times just like them, managing to memorize the lines and respond to the characters).
Criticizing the film, well, I find them good. Actually their singing was great. However the acting was quite weird. Also, it is not actually horrifying film, making it enjoyable. But because of the elements of sex, lust, and homosexuality, the movie I think would only gain audiences that are liberal, homos, in the influence of drugs, and definitely not young and conservative.
I blogged way before about the 2009 film Fame. Now, I'll blog about its original version shown in 1980 starring Irene Cara. Now before I compare the two, I give to you first some details about the movie.
The film is still about students studying in PA or the New York High School of Performing Arts. And it is still split into sections such as auditions, freshman, sophomore, junior and senior years. And did you know that Paul McCartney's Liverpool Institute for Performing Arts was inspired by the school in the movie. Maybe there aren't many schools like that before.
Now here are my comments to the film:
First, it was an "almost-fail" blast. The movie was good. But it was not great. Yeah.. Some parts bored me... But some parts wowed me. Especially the last, culminating act. Jeez, Alan Parker (director) didn't even make it emotional. Thanks to the wonderful songs "Out Here On My Own" and "Fame", the movie was passable.
Second, the characters were the same in the remake. However, their personalities and fates were different, only their talents are the same. What I love in the 1980 film is that the characters had more depth and story in their lives. Also, they are more matured and developed. However, back stories were minimal unlike in the remake. Weird because the characters here were fuller and richer than the ones in the remake that were provided with back stories.
Third, the language and the themes of the film are not child-friendly. And that's a plus points for me. You're showing liberal artistic teenagers man! So the acting, the lines, were great for me. Also, the awesome Leroy (Gene Anthony Ray) was exceptional.
Fourth, I expected so much from Irene Cara because not because of her, the songs I've mentioned would not be hits. Hell the movie would be lame without her. But WTF? Naturi Naughton was better.
In conclusion, I loved both films., Both have their pros and cons. How I wish the two would be mixed together. The performances and the cinematography from the remake. And the actors and their characters from the original.
If you're looking for a musical that is about dreams, school and talents, that is not that cheesy like Glee and Highschool Musical, here's Fame that will surely touch your hearts.
When was in second year in college, I heard about the screening of Fame here in the Philippines but haven't got the chance to watch it. So just recently this year, when my thesis mates and I were having overnight cramming in Antipolo, I was able to watch a copy of Fame in my friend's computer.
Honestly, I was so amazed in the performances, especially the flash mob in the canteen. I was also teary-eyed with the characters' storylines. The movie was filled with characters who have conflicts in themselves, with others, and with the harsh realities of showbusiness. Personally, watching the film made me think back the times when I was performing in Mediartrix and in our church. Nowadays, I'm teaching theater at our church and truly rusting in my acting skills already. I miss the days when I was dreaming about myself having a career in theater. I even applied for a Theater Arts course in UP but unfortunately, didn't pass. My family also opposed my choice back then, which is pursuing such course. It's not that I feel regretful now. It's just that I miss it. I miss performing.
The movie also gave me insights how to teach acting properly. Also what other acting games could I give.
(actually, I'm very familiar with the game they played there).
However, the film was a type of film that you should watch by yourself, or else, you will focus on the short and few production numbers. The plot was good but should be taken in complete attention and with high enthusiasm or else, you would just be bored. Also, all characters have this kind of twists in their storylines by the end of the film that I think was supposedly to be the climax. However, I think that's not enough. It didn't reach a certain level that would take your breath away. It's really kind of boring on those parts.
Fame 1980
Additionally, I found out that the movie was a remake of a film in 1980 with the same title that eventually turned to a series. I found out that it had so many differences, making the 2009 film loosely based from the original. The 1980 film (though I haven't watched it) was a kind of querulous movie that complements the events of that time. Now, they made the 2009 film very child-friendly and really HSM-like. One thing that I liked in the movie compared to High School Musical is that the songs weren't the lines of the actors and just mere performances. It made the movie real. Also, the movie's ending was a blast with the tear-jerker production number. And they said that it was better than the original.
When I saw Rent's trailer included in my vcd of Memoirs of A Geisha, I felt anxious to buy a vcd of it. Obviously, I haven't watched the original Broadway show but watching the original Broadway actors in the film gave me somehow a Broadway feeling (whatever that is :))
The movie was good for me because of the transition of scenes. I found out that the sequence of the scenes and the number of songs were edited, but for me, Christopher Colombus did a great job. The songs were great. (thanks to Jonathan Larson who writes music better than Andrew Lloyd Webber). The production also of slums in New York was cool also for me and really convincing. The community was really captured both by the actors and the sets. It was really an awesome movie and I can't speak any negative comments to it.
The original Broadway musical was finished in 1993 by Jonathan Larson, including the music and the lyrics, but was produced all over the world since 1996, because of delays after Larson died. The movie was written by Stephen Chbosky (who wrote Perks of Being A Wallflower). And both was a modernization of the Giacomo Puccini's opera, La Boheme (too bad I failed to watch Teatro Tomasino's production of it).
What's good and unique in this musical is that the songs are rock. Not the Singin' in the Rain dancing but ROCK, man! So when I was watching it, I was really hooked up. It's good to watch it, no doubt, and defintely, a play that has sense in it.
Why? because of the inclusion of themes of poverty, drugs, prostitution and homosexuality. This musical took the courage in tackling such taboo subjects (okay, I'm writing in the Filipino conservative perspective) and was excellent in conveying messages of acceptance, friendship, fidelity, and love.
