Musicals to My Ears

An expansion of a previous post.

           

Musicals are in the air. Again. The recent news that Hugh Jackman is in talks to star in a purported musical adaptation of Les Miserables has us lowly bloggers ruminating on the musical renaissance that wasn’t this past decade. Circa 2001/2002 everyone was anticipating the rebirth of the musical genre but that’s where my issues with the perception towards musicals arise because I’m reticent to call the musical a film genre.                       

             

Okay, fine the word genre points to artistic compositions with similarity in style, form or subject matter and the concept of telling stories through music and lyrics make all musicals similar. But the concept of the musical being genre in that context is different from the concept of the word “drama” as a genre. Annie Hall, Bringing Up Baby and Sideways are all comedies. In terms of story, you expect them all to tell their story with humour as a significant tool. Now, ostensibly you’d say in the same way comedies use humour musicals use music but therein lies the crux of my problem. Humour makes you laugh, whether laugh uproariously or laugh and think – it’s rooted in laughter. Music is different; all music doesn’t elicit a single response which is why I think of musicals not as a genre but as a form. Let me explain.

                     

Musicals are like black-and-white films, or better yet silent movies. They all are made in the same way in that they look the same (for black-and-white) or “sound” the same (silent films) but you could tell gamut of stories through that single form. Musicals could vary from comedy (Singin’ in the Rain) to drama (New York, New York) to fantasy (Xanadu) or even pseudo-horror (The Rocky Horror Picture Show). I think the concept of musicals of the roaring twenties has sort of lulled us into this false belief of musicals being some sort of fantastical form of escapism, but for me I look to the Great White Way as veritable proof of the musical. The Tony’s divide their laurels in terms of musical and plays. And just like plays vary in genre, so do musicals. Maybe I am being unnecessarily fixated about this, but it always annoys me when the musical “genre” comes in for more criticism than necessary when people seem unwilling to realise that other than a story told through song a “musical” owes them nothing.

            

What do you think?

"Uh-uh! Not guilty!"

Flashback: Dreamgirls

Dreamgirls and Cold Mountain have a somewhat similar history. Both were fêted as shoo-ins for Oscar Picture glory when they were in post-production, both of them racked up a slew of nominations (7 for Minghella’s piece, 8 for Condon’s) without managing to attain that elusive best picture nod. More importantly, they both won that Supporting Actress statue – performances which have gone on to be reviled in many circles. I happen to be more than a moderate fan of Cold Mountain (which I’ve reviewed before) but I’m often indecisive about where my feelings on Dreamgirls lie.* I gave it a somewhat knee-jerk B+/A- when I was doing my 2006 in review post over a year ago. I do like Dreamgirls for all its issues – of which there are many. Watching it recently, a number of things that struck me about all the times I’d seen it before resurfaced, but some even more interesting things came to mind.

I still think of Dreamgirls in context of its supporting actress, although it’s not Jennifer Hudson I turn to but Anika Noni Rose. Perspective is such a great thing, and taking Noni’s recently strong work in For Colored Girls I put even more credence in her work as Lorrell Robinson. It’s more than her age defying ability to encapsulate the youth of Lorrell (who’s half her age) – character consistency is a beautiful thing, especially in a musical like Dreamgirls which, unlike something like Moulin Rouge, takes great pains to be a slice-of-life. When Noni Rose plays opposite Murphy on that tour bus (“You’re so crazy, Jimmy”) or breaks down, almost facetiously, in a dressing room (“Nobody’s breaking me and Jimmy up”) she manages to retain that strident character consistency that’s so necessary in the drama, and that seems more than occasionally lacking in her costars.

Still, I find that this time around I have a little more commendation for the cast itself. Although I am no champion of Hudson’s performance I find it easier to praise her collective delivery – even I applaud her enthusiasm more than her execution. No amount of jaunty editing could conceal her terrible dancing, which is no judgment on her acting ability but suggests an insufficiency in the casting area. It makes Effie’s resultant firing logical, because truthfully she is something of lead-weight if she’s not in the lead-spot, musically. She gets highest praises for “And I Am Telling You” which is odd, since her passion on “I Am Changing” is so much more piercing. There are, too, rare moments where her sincerity is palpable out-of-song. An ineffectual moment like removing an ingratiating M.C’s hand from Deena’s derriere is so well played which only underscores her promise – which has yet to be realised.

On that note of unrealised promise, I turn to Beyoncé who so easily emerges as the performer most likely to be condemned. Depending on my mood I’d say Beyoncé is either just as competent in her role as Hudson, or at times even better. Watching it recently, I feel more inclined to the latter. That glassy-eyed vacant stare which marks Knowles Deena works not only in accordance with her range, but takes on greater meaning when taking the narrative into perspective. It’s that sort of vague suggestion of being vacuous that makes her Deena such a good performer – as Curtis says, she’s nothing but what he puts into her. It works better in the film’s first half, and where Knowles triumphs decisively is in her performances. It’s a surprising thing, but she manages to eschew her natural stage charisma to retain those same characteristics of her characters which makes a number like the eponymous one work because you actually believe you are watching Deena Jones – even if her spoken lines all too often retain a clunky delivery.

It’s that sort of juxtaposition of the good and the bad which marks Dreamgirls. Condon is so adamant in trying to avoid the book-numbers of the musicals, he’s so determined to ensure that the musical numbers occur in a realistic format, the times when he decides to retain pieces like “Family” or “It’s All Over” become problematic. “Family” is especially awkward because it is a number so rich with an almost cringe-worthy amount of sentimentalism. Its placement immediately before the Dreamettes debut (that is not the least bit familial) is subverted by Condon’s occasional tunnel-vision. Which makes me consider Marshall and Nine. Despite the tongue-lashing it received, Nine consistency in its musical numbers makes it a more laudable piece – cinematically, especially.

Then, of course, there’s the male ensemble. Keith Robinson C.C seems less superfluous now, if only because he’s working doubly hard to ensure that the character’s blandness don’t show much. I’m neither fond of nor hateful towards Murphy’s Jimmy. It endures as a fine comedic turn from him, no worse than the few good comedic performances he’s delivered in pieces like Coming to America or Trading Places. It’s Jamie Foxx’s exasperating Curtis Jackson who’s the film’s true albatross. He’s consistently awkward in the role contributing an unremitting impediment to any organic establishment of plot-points.

It’s a bit unfortunate, but a succinct criticism of Dreamgirls could be made from just watching the first fifteen minutes. Condon infuses the narrative with an almost – almost– nauseating amount of colour pyrotechnics culminating in production design that’s strangely officious, even for a musical. What makes it officious is that, there are some moments where Condon’s visual additions add nothing to the story. “One Night Only” ends up coming off for good and for bad, since even when you get the point of the recreation of a real music video being done Condon gets these delusions of grandeur where it’s just a bit too much.

Today, I’d probably give Dreamgirls a solid B because it does remain as a generally enjoyable experience – and its editing is especially good, taking into account its story issues; issues which are part of the actual Broadway production as much as its cinematic counterpart. Krieger’s score never emerges as iconic as it’s endured in some circles (although the new song additions are well infused with the old ones). Dreamgirls might not be one for the ages, but I suppose it is good enough at the end of the day.

*I’m not certain why, but I feel a need to beg pardon for this lengthy discourse. This was meant to be a short look back at the film; it turned into an overly lengthy dissertation. Umm, apologies?

         

Now that almost half a decade has passed, where do your thoughts rest on Dreamgirls?

Music Break [...with Andrew Lloyd Webber]

Andrew Lloyd Webber may have my name, but I still sort of loathe him. Still, I'll admit he's sort of awesome sometimes. Case in point: Jesus Christ Superstar. I sort of can't resist his ludicrous at times re-imagining of the New Testament and what not. True all his musicals (Evita, Phantom) sound like they're all the score to one loooooooong show, but Jesus Christ Superstar has some kick-ass numbers.

I'm not sure if Carl Anderson or Ted Neely would win in a sing-off (though Neely does remind me of Adam Pascal, a lot.)

       

Okay, so much for "religion". As you were.

Cinematic Knowledge: Moulin Rouge!"

"This is what I want, naughty words."

"Oh, it's so bad."

"Don't, don't, don't stop!"

"Give me more, YES!"

Lesson Learned: a)Poetry just may be the most powerful aphrodisiac. 
(b) Satine is easily turned on (Christian finds it disturbing) 
(c) Elton's John's lyrics are actually useful.

Flashback: Hello, Dolly!

If you’ve been paying especially keen attention you’d know that I’m not the biggest fan of Gene Kelly. I think I’ve called him overly precise, and I won’t deny that some of my lack of interest centres on the fact that I generally loathe An American in Paris, but I’m digressing. If I had to pick a favourite Gene Kelly movie, it’d be one that he’s not even in – Hello, Dolly! I have a vaguely embarrassing love for Hello, Dolly! even though Nick despises it (oddly enough, I agree with an oddly large portion of his review, and I love it – go figure). Hello, Dolly! is based on a Broadway Musical which is in turn based on a Pulitzer Prize winning play – “The Matchmaker”. Its plot is simple, painstakingly so. Dolly Levi has been a widow for some time, and occupies her time by arranging things. She has her sights set on Horace Vandergelder who in turn has his eyes on Irene Molloy – a milliner. Horace is the guardian of his niece Ermengarde (what a a name), who’s in love with a starving artist of sorts Ambrose. Dolly pretends to set Horace up with Irene, sending him off to town.; though she's really trying to to put forth her own agenda. She in turn convinces Ermendgarde and Ambrose to go to town, along with Barnaby and Cornelius - two of Vandergelder's workers. All in all it's a musical clusterf*** of a situation.

The thing is, Barbra Streisand is (in theory) all wrong for the role. She’s about three decades too young for the role, because there’s no way that Barbra (two years after Funny Girl) is an aging widow of how many years. But, really, I don’t even care about the age thing, or the obvious lack of chemistry with Walter Matthau (we all know that Jack Lemmon was the superior member of The Odd Couple). Barbra can act and she can sing, but above all else – she can play funny, and that’s what so brilliant about her in Hello, Dolly!. It’s just one constant torrent of funny bits and she sells them excellently. With the exception of Matthau, the cast is quite good but Barbra steals the show.

Really, Hello, Dolly! doesn’t make much sense. The story is one of those ridiculous comedies that thoroughly amusing in its inane way, and I like that about it. It doesn’t have the strongest score (and the title song is oddly weak), but it’s well directed (yay, Gene Kelly) and well acted (yay Barbra). In fact “Put On Your Sunday Clothes” just may be one of the strongest ensemble musical numbers of all time. It has the sort of quotable quotes that make you roll your eyes and laugh and still think about their lucidity (case in point: “”). At its worst Hello, Dolly! is a kind of riduclous bauble; at its best Hello, Dolly! is easy watching – and I like to think of it at its best.

           

Ever seen the 1969 classic?

Music Break [...with the Cast of Rent]

There’s something off about the film version of Rent. I don’t know what it is, and I haven’t seen the Broadway play so it’s unlikely I’ll ever be able to glean it...but it just feels clunky. That being said, measuring the Original Broadway Cast Recording against the Original Film Soundtrack the latter is the superior. I don’t know if the it’s the years of growth that improve the cast, but I do know I prefer Rosario Dawson’s singing voice to Daphne  Ruben-Vega’s – the original Mimi.

              

Still, as weird as some of the numbers look (they all song great) “La Vie Boheme” is untouchable.

Movie Meme, Day 29: A Movie Scene More than Ten Times

This was ridiculously easy. Even though I remember seeing The Wizard of Oz very young, I remember seeing The Sound of Music more than twice a year for a very long time. My older sister still refuses to watch it, my mother still loves it and I still know way too much of the dialogue but there it is. “The hills are alive….” How could I resist?

Movie Meme, Day 12: Best Soundtrack

I vaguely remember answering this question for another meme before, and I feel no need to change it. I’ve become a bit obsessed with Broadway Cast Recordings in the last few years. It’s my own way of experiencing actual Broadway vicariously before I finally see a real show. I’ve never really been crazy about movie soundtracks, so it makes sense that the soundtrack I consider special is based on a Broadway play. That’s not really what’s important, what’s important is that the lyrics of the soundtrack were written by Stephen Sondheim. I have a large amount of brain-envy for the man, probably my favourite musician at the moment. West Side Story was early in his career, before he started doing music and lyrics – it’s not my favourite of his works, but it’s good enough. Leonard Bernstein who provided the music is no slouch in the music department either.

     

I’m not going to review West Side Story (go HERE) and if you haven’t seen it, I’ll admit I’ll find that extremely disturbing. Yes, Natalie Wood and Richard Beymer aren’t the ones singing here…but that doesn’t matter. Here are three of my favourite numbers from the score, actually that's erroneous these aren't my favourite numbers. But there's one from the lovers, one from the Jets and one from the Sharks (really my favourite songs: "One Hand, One Heart", "Tonight", "Officer Krupke", "Something's Coming" - "Cool" is the best scene though.)

Music Break [...With Gene Kelly, Donald O'Conner & Debbie Reynolds]

The song essentially says it all. Enjoy.

Music Break [...with Dolly Levi]

As far as sixties musicals go Hello, Dolly is too often forgotten. Just a few year after Streisand's debut in Funny Girl she is decades too young for the role of the personable widow with a penchant for minding everyone's business, but with all its clunky plot points I still think it's a whole lot of fun. Streisand is no small reason for that. "So Long Dearie" doesn't resonate as much as softer numbers like "Before the Parade Passes By", but it's one of the most hilarious cinematic musical numbers I've seen. Enjoy.

            

Music Break [...with Sweeney Todd and Mrs. Lovett]

Cut songs and all (where was the rest of "God That's Good") I do love Tim Burton's adaptation of Sondheim's Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street. A bit too short, but entertaining and well made. True to my weird nature my favourite moment in the film is one that is often forgotten. True, I've never actually seen a live incarnation of the piece but even though Depp and Bonham Carter were not the belters associated with the roles their soft voices paid off - especially in this scene. "My Friends" along with "Johanna" is the only love song in the musical, and it's writren so wonderfully - but it's not Sondheim's lyrics that carry it through. Depp is, of course, entranced by his tools but it is Helena with that look of longing, even obsession, on her face that commands the screen (er, where exactly was her Oscar nomination)...and I do love it when actors sing in counterpoint.

The Animated Question…Or What Is a Musical?

I told you before, editorials are not really my thing but I have to do one every now and then. It’s been nagging at me since May. This is less editorial and more of a short conjecture.

                            

When Univarn rightfully weighed on the issue with some musicals I questioned whether musicals can rightfully be called a genre. Romance is a genre, every romance films have the same tenets – no matter how quirky, offbeat, maudlin, unrealistic, gross, stupid or smart – there will be a couple, they will fall in love (or pretend they have) one may die, they both may die, they may part ways but romance will occur, hence the name. It isn’t the same with a musical, silent movies aren’t regarded as a genre (at least not correctly) neither are “talkies”. So why are musicals and animated films treated as such…? What is it that we expect from them? No one thinks of breaking down films in terms of black-and-white. I do have my favourite black-and-white film (forthcoming on the list).

                    "Sweeney, dear, there's been a bit of an error...this is a bit too bloody to  be a musical..."  

              

It’s not that I don’t often go around citing my favourite musical or animated flicks (I do and I did) but when persons have such mental blocks it becomes a tad – trite? “I don’t watch children’s movies” – did they see Waltz with Bashir? “Musicals are for girls” – I think I’ve done enough trying to prove that one wrong but Sweeney Todd (or on stage “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels”)? Really? …or maybe I’m missing the big picture. Is there something that makes all musicals inherently the same (musical drama, musical comedy, musical romance, musical tragedy, musical horror) or all animated films likewise (animated documentary, animated comedy, animated fantasy)? Other than the fact that one will have singing and one will be animated what else makes then worthy of being regarded as a genre? Aren’t they just film forms? Or am I just being overly neurotic?
                    
…anyone?

Follow the Yellow, Brick Road – A Few Short Notes, No Digressions

I didn’t cover The Wizard of Oz on Sunday – because it’s not my absolutely favourite musical – it’s the ever dreaded #2. Jose and Ruben both looked deeper into the classic spotting things that had never occurred. Of course, that’s one of the main indicators that a film is excellent – when you can keep returning to it and finding new things. The thing is, I often forget that the The Wizard of Oz is a musical. It’s not that the songs are poor, headlined by the class “Over the Rainbow” and backed up with sweet tunes like “If I Were the King of the Forest” and “If I Only Had A Brain” it is just as fulfilling in its moments of adventure as it is in its moments of music. What I remember The Wizard of Oz for most is the one thing that has been borrowed by countless story tellers (on film and otherwise) – our hero’s departure to a strange, new world that turns out to be a dream. Incidentally this running gag is the weakest part of The Wizard of Oz’s strong story, but all things considered it’s only weak by comparison and it’s only lost its brilliance today because of our overexposure to it.

The Wizard of Oz is one of the films I remember earliest from my childhood. I can’t recall the exact age, but I know I saw it when it had all switched to Technicolor. Upon my “discovery” of the earlier sepia toned portion I found myself more charmed by Dorothy’s adventures (or lack thereof) in Kansas. She’s obviously out of place, and it made me realise how important this portion is to her “development”, and I couldn't help but smile every time Judy said "Oh, Aunty Em" in that earnest way of hers. The Wizard of Oz is doing so much even though it seems like a standard home, away and back home story. I always marvel at Judy’s ability to be meek while still having a sort of bravura that’s most attractive. She has a thing for line readings, even at that age, and sure she spends a significant portion of the film admonishing the things she meets it’s never too much. Of course Dorothy’s growing dissatisfaction with Oz is key to the message the story has to tell us. It’s part of the weirdness of the entire film though. Sure, the Wicked Witch of the East is evil and all, but the celebration is almost perverse as we watch those crazy Munchkins rejoicing.

It’s nice that The Wizard of Oz has endured for so long. As much as I love Shirley Temple I balk at the idea of her as Dorothy. It’s a little gem, that works as much for the adult as for the child – and that’s a bit of a rarity. It’s #19 on my list of favourite films.

Life is a Cabaret

Later today I’m hosting a blog-a-thon celebrating the wondrous musicals of the cinema. Check back later in the day for all the entries, here’s mine.

        

"Divine Decadence Darling"

I always say that I love Cabaret against my better judgement. Not one of Ebb & Kander’s stage shows is as saturated with classics like the original play and I always bemoan the fact that the film couldn’t make use of excellent standards like “Don’t Tell Mama” or “I Don’t Care Much”. Then, there’s the fact that they took a perfectly competent book and eviscerated it for reasons that are beyond my understanding. Yes, when I think about Cabaret it gets me as exasperated as much as it gets me cheerful. But, when I actually sit down to watch it, and the notes begin playing to usher in the beginning of “Wilkkomen” I’m already so far gone into a reverie that I immediately forget what it was that got me annoyed in the first place.

                

"Wilkkomen, Bienvenue, Welcome"

Cabaret takes place in Berlin during the onset of World War II and the actual Cabaret where we meet Sally Bowles and the Master of Ceremonies is as cathartic as can be. Sure, everything offered there is as synthetic as the dancing girls, but for a few moments it allows the Berliners to step outside of their horrid reality. In the wake of this calamity Cliff, a would-be writer, arrives at the Cabaret falling in love with Sally Bowles – our sociable heroine. But in this way, I suppose Cabaret is not so much a story about what happens as it is a story about how it happens. Fosse has always has his reputation for being an especially stylistic man, and Cabaret represents the zenith of his talents. For, in many ways, Cabaret is a bit like an allegory. We’re transported by the bawdy music and scintillating dances so that by the time tragedy is at hand we’re surprised, even though it’s been sneaking up on us for the entire film. It’s in this way that I (almost) forgive the excision of so many great numbers, and I suppose it’s important that York doesn’t do any singing. Sure, it’s been argued, he’s not really a lead in the film – and he isn’t in the typical sense. But it’s important that what we see of the Cabaret begins with his entrance and ends with his departure. He doesn’t sing, because we don’t either. He’s the only lifeline we have with this corrupted Berlin. More importantly, he can’t cope in a world so egregiously corrupted – neither can we.

               

"Tomorrow Belongs To Me"

But then, how can one call a sensation like Minelli’s Sally Bowles corrupted? It’s a perfect combination of star and character and Liza’s Sally is a force to be reckoned with, even if she does sing too well for the novice that Sally should be. Few musical moments are as heart wrenching as when she takes to the stage to sing “Maybe This Time” – a number that for some reason isn’t as oft remembered as it should be. Joel Grey’s androgynous Master of Ceremonies is more obviously perverse. The man has a talent for showmanship, and I’m still surprised that Oscar decided to reward him in the face of the more typical lineup. It’s a job well done on their part. I suppose in some ways, Fosse really is the star of the show. His direction is flawless, and even though I’ll forever hold that grudge for the shafting of this flick in the Best Picture category, at least they rightfully recognised Fosse for his directing. As we prepare for Liza’s final number I’m never sure if we should be praising her or Fosse. We notice his eerie theatrics as the screen is clouded and we notice how Liza manages to reach to the flawed core in the eponymous number. For us to understand Cabaret we have to understand the title number first. It’s not a song of irrepressible joy, but a resignation to a life of unfulfilling debauchery in the face of real pain. She realises the desperation and frenzy in the piece and as she sings those final few lines you can’t help but pity this ridiculous creature. They're all looking forward to tomorrow while simulatenously afraid to face it...and who can blame them?

          

No matter how much I wish Cabaret had done differently, I realise always that I can’t argue that what it does – because that is done flawlessly. I can’t think of any musical piece that manages to impress both dramatically and musically as this. It’s a perfect combination of skill on all counts and it cruises dangerously close to perfection at #14 on my list of favourites.

…oh yes, it also happens to my favourite musical film…hence, the review…

The Musical Blog-a-thon

Hello there, folks. Next Sunday - the 30th - I'm hosting a blog-a-thon here celebrating musicals. Why? Because May begins with an M and so do musicals (yes, that's my logic). I sent out emails inviting you all to participate, if you didn't get an email it means I don't have your address. So, I'm inviting you now, and reinviting those that know of it. What do I ask of you? Not much - you know I'm not demanding...

Ideally your entry would be on your favourite musical, the one you consider the best or the most fun. Of course, you have the option of not writing about your favourite, but ideally, that’s the idea.
           
No strict rules, as I said before – a review, a few notes, a general lecture anything you choose. Just one thing I’m looking for, what makes it your favourite musical – what makes it special? Why is it worth our time?
       
A few bloggers asked if they can write on more than one. Sure, as I said ideally it's one - your favourite, but if you can't decide on one and have a tie, do so by all means!

Anytime Sunday before 12:00 would be a good time to post your entry, although you can do so before if you wish. Just send me the link to your post by 1:00 PM - (standard time), so I can get it posted by the end of the day!

These ladies look so pensive because they want to know if you picked them!
       
SPREAD THE WORD...

Something's Coming [Music Break...with Tony]

...I'll be back soon, it's weird not being on line I feel a junkie experiencing withdrawal. I've been thinking of West Side Story ever since this post, and I am fan of Mr. Beymer even if he doesn't do his own singing. But, I digress, something's coming...that's all you need to know.

PS. Don't forget to send me your ideas for the new episode of LAMB Casting...
PPS. Don't forget to check the sidebar...I'm not writing, but all those bloggers are...

Scene On A Sunday: Funny Girl

I remarked a few months ago that I’m a fan of the 1968 musical Funny Girl. Sure the plot gets a little plodding at times, but Barbra Streisand is a delight in it. The thing is, Omar Sharif’s performance is often forgotten – understandably, I suppose, but still. A scene I often think of in Funny Girl is not one that people turn to immediately when they remember it, but in its way it’s a beautiful piece. Fanny is now getting close to Nick and she’s invited to his home. Fanny is still an impressionable young girl, and Nick is a man of the world. She doesn’t even realise that he plans on seducing her until he actually starts singing.

He begins -

You are woman! I am man. (the name of the song)

Streisand is a comedian at heart, even though her dramatic turns are good it’s the comedy she always plays with such alacrity. I just love the expression on her face her, it’s exaggerated (as much is throughout this scene) and it works because that’s who Fanny is.

We don’t usually see Sharif like this, but the role is tailor made for him, he just has to look good and make us believe that Streisand’s Fanny would be enticed by him. It’s no tough job for him, but that doesn’t make it any shoddier.

You are softer to the touch,

It’s a feeling I like feeling very much.

You can almost see Fanny breathing, as she gets tense under his touch. Fanny is such a inexperienced girl and Streisand’s plays it impeccably. For example, I love how she’s so on edge she downs the glass of champagne in one go.

It’s only adding to the comedy, and what’s more Sharif is still cool as cucumber, his Nick isn’t fazed a bit.

 ...Still our friendship...leaves something to be desired...

It does make us wonder how dangerous he could be, but Fanny’s obviously caught in his web.

As we watch her face (Streisand is so emotive) we can see her defences wearing down more and more. It leads to the first attempt at the kiss.

You are woman I am man.

Let’s kiss.

In her own way, Fanny’s trying to fend him off for the sake of chastity, we can presume. Lucky for her, the seduction is interrupted by the butler.

This leads to Fanny’s own monologue (which is played over while she thinks). It’s a nice moment, but not only for Streisand’s singing (truthfully, the song is lovely but it doesn’t show her range), but it’s still nice seeing her face as she has that emotional tug-of-war. And William Wyler, never one to shirk on cinematic idiosyncrasies gives us moments like this –

Should I do the things he tells me to?

In this pickle...what would Sadie do?

And this…

Just suppose he wants his dinner back...

It’s more than the just the slight humour in Fanny mimicking the statues though, the art direction and costume design are just lush her and what better way to show them off?

      

Of course the butler can only stay for so long, and eventually the lights are dimmed – we know what’s coming next…

It’s a moment that’s both romantic and funny, and it works both ways. Sharif is still being exceptionally seductive, but Fanny spends the time giggling as if he’s tickling her funny bone.

But she’s liking it…

And then of course, the kiss – lovely.

But of course, it doesn’t end there…

...If I stop him now, can he sue me?!

But she won’t stop him…the lights go down and the camera pans out…

…as they kiss.

         

Funny Girl is a delight...and so is this scene.

Forgotten Characters 2:9 (Special Edition)

There are some persons I’m not sure if it’s their characters that are forgotten, or just them completely. Ask anyone to name a good musical of the sixties, and though My Fair Lady and The Sound of Music might take a number of votes Robert Wise and Jerome Robbins’ 1961 piece will turn up invariably. The thing is, everyone remember The Sharks – Rita Moreno (very good), Natalie Wood (similarly good) and George Chakiris (not so much). Everyone forgets The Jets? Why is that? I don’t though, hence the following commemoration…

        

Richard Beymer / Russ Tamblyn in West Side Story (my review)

As Tony and Riff

Along with Tucker Smith as Ice, Gina Trikonis as Graziella, Susan Oakes as Anybodys, Tony Mordente as Action, Carole D'Andrea as Velma & Elliot Field as Baby John

             

I’m a fan of Russ Tamblyn, remembering particularly his work in Peyton Place…I’m always nonplussed to the love for George Chakiris’s uninspired take on Tybalt/Bernardo when Russ’ superior take on Mercutio/Riff is forgotten. Similarly, I often wonder why Beymer isn’t remembered as Tony. Sure, he’s lip synching, but that doesn’t make his performance any worse. Take that early moment where Tamblyn and Beymer discuss the imminent batte. The chemistry between the two is strong as Riff cajoles Tony to attend that fateful dance. Sure, I’d give Tamblyn the edge – he is the stronger of the two, but Beymer’s reticent charm shouldn’t be left unnoticed. I will say, in a decade of excellent lip synchers (Kerr, Hepburn, Wood) Beymer takes the cake. I don’t know if it’s sheer luck on his part that they found a singer who’s voice is so close to his speaking voice, but it all just comes together well. The tentative romance with wood is a beauty to watch, even though I don’t see them as obvious complements to the other. Few romantic moments are as honest as the meeting on the fire escape in “Tonight”.

                      

The Sharks have their moments with “America”, of course it’s more female centred because a large part of the story revolves around Anita. The female Jets aren’t as lucky. Sure, they do their dancing at the dance but they rarely get a moment to shine. Still Trikonis and D'Andrea come off well with the light comedy. I like their cutting remarks at Anybodys.Trikonis’s line-reading is a favourite of mine, “An American tragedy!” she says referring to the adrogynous girl. This soon segues into “Officer Krupke”, an oft forgotten number. It’s not as eclectic as “America” but I love it just as much. The number is sold by Tamblyn who just has a knack for the physical comedy. He completely understands the irreverent leadership of Riff (as opposed to Bernardo’s iron fist), but he’s just as loyal. Riff’s (perhaps, misguided) devotion to Tony is a significant part of his character. As they said at the beginning, “birth to earth, womb to tomb”. It’s for this reason that Riff’s death makes me sad. Bernardo’s death is only one that saddens me incidentally, I know Anita will be hurt and so will Maria. But I feel no connection to Chakiris, which is perhaps, as it should be.

You know West Side Story to inevitable tragedy but Beymer’s (and Wood) innocence still have you hoping something will happen. As honest as “Tonight”, “One Hand, One Heart” takes it just a little further. It’s a striking romantic duet, and measured against the inevitable fallout only makes it more poignant. And of course it only gets sadder, “Somewhere” has to be the most moving bits of lipsynching, and it makes you realise how much work Beymer (and Wood) are putting into it. We may not be hearing their voices, but all the emotions we’re seeing are real and effective. It’s as if all the Jets are saving up their best work for after Riff’s death. Like the way that Smith effectively steps into place as the interim leader. The rendition of “Cool” is the easily the strongest group number of the entire score and placed right there after the heat of the two murder’s makes it more than just an extraneous number. It's Smith's moment to shine, along with all the other Jets - and they do. It’s the same way that the annoying Anybodys becomes more grounded after Riff’s death too. It’s like everything comes into motion. It doesn’t make their coffee shop with Anita any more forgivable, but it’s depressing when we put into perspective. I suppose that moment skewers the narrative in the direction of the Sharks when it comes to sympathy. It’s all leading up to the inevitable tragedy. Beymer’s strongest moment as Doc tells him of Maria’s “death”. It’s unlike the Tony we’ve seen before and it’s the moment of bliss on his face as he spies her in red suspended there as his life expires that most profound.

                  

Sure West Side Story went on to win ten Oscars (the most for any musical) but there seems some injustice that Beymer, Tamblyn and all those other Jets haven’t endured over time…or do you remember them too?