And now Hollywood is scrambling to figure why so few people have gone to see it so far. Especially since the reviews and the audience reaction has been fantastic. By all accounts, Spielberg achieved everything creatively he set out to do. And this is a guy who knows how to make a movie.
One reason could be that a large percentage of the audience that would want to see this still isn’t comfortable going into a movie theater. I fall into that category. At some point it’ll be on a streamer or On Demand and I’ll see it then. (Or I get sent a screener, hint hint.) I very much want to see it, but I can wait. It’s not like everyone is talking about it and I don’t want to be left out. Other than concerned industry folk, no one is talking about it.
WEST SIDE STORY is a classic to those of us who grew up with it. But I wonder if it has the same cache to those who haven’t. Other than theatre-geeks, do younger generations give a shit about a musical about young people that was written over sixty years ago? No one gave a crap about IN THE HEIGHTS, and that was more contemporary and about similar subject matter. Of course this question is clouded by IN THE HEIGHTS being a bad movie. WEST SIDE STORY is supposed to be good.
Did TICK TICK…BOOM! steal its thunder? TICK TICK…BOOM! was terrific and available for streaming. Had audiences gotten their musical adaptation fix?
Hollywood is VERY worried. Why? They have other big budget musicals currently in production… including a two-part WICKED. WEST SIDE STORY cost $100 million. This genre becomes a big gamble, especially since no one flies or wears a cape. Which brings me to another issue, will the only movies that do well in theaters be CGI comic book explodaramas? (Ironically, the big tentpole blockbuster began with JAWS… directed by Steven Spielberg.)
What are your thoughts? Have you seen it? Do you want to see it? Would you see it in a theater if Natalie Wood was still in it?
114 comments :
I haven't seen it, almost certainly won't go to see it in a theater (nothing to do with the film), and may or may not see it at home when it's available. I'm 65 and used to be a musician. It was such an iconic work for me that I have no desire to see what's been done with it. That has nothing to do with it being a musical. I had no interest in the remake of THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, nor would I if remakes were made of THE MALTESE FALCON, or SUNSET BOULEVARD.
I haven't seen it yet, but I don't wish to end up in the hospital because of curiosity.
I would like to see it, partially because the original, as great as it was, had an eNORmous amount of euphemisms. "Ever-lovin'" and "buggin'" just doesn't cut it. Mister Roberts had a similar issue, but the movie was so good, I didn't care about the cleaning up of the language.
As for the penchant for musicals, there are still ivy-covered executives that hold out a wizened hand and say, "What the kids want is a good old-fashioned musical!" Well...for the most part, no they don't, "La La Land" was a fluke and the same creative team couldn't duplicate their success with "The Greatest Showman" which was not as profitable (source: Box Office Mojo). It is a long shot, as much in show business is, but it is a real long shot to remake a 60 year-old movie musical. The landscape of movies is not "Another musical this year", but "Wow! A musical that isn't animated!"
I hope it does well, but this pandemic has really Krupped up the movie business.
I saw it and loved it. And it needs to be experienced on the big screen. In a way, the currently low audience figures work in your favor, Ken. You could see an afternoon screening without worrying about being surrounded by lots of people, especially noisy teenagers. Win win.
My theory on why it's underperforming is pretty much what you say about the domination of superhero films. I thought David Lynch was exaggerating when he said a few years ago that cinema is dead. As much as I like Spielberg, he shares some of the responsibility for the dumbing down, executive producing endless Transformers sequels. Marvel is the biggest culprit of course with its market saturation.
Another reason could be that audiences associate the Christmas season with adventure and comedy movies, and a musical might seem out of place. It also doesn't have big star names in the cast. It's a rare case of the director being the star.
In any case, Spielberg is just about the only director who can have a movie underperform and it not affect his career. It's safe to say he'll get to make more films.
I think Spielberg made a mistake by not including subtitles for the Spanish words, and then acting like this was some kind of anti-racist statement. That kind of condescension is a big turn off. I'm fine without there being subtitles, but I don't need a lecture. Nevertheless, because I love the original, and admire Spielberg, I will watch it over the holidays.
As for the younger generations, I doubt they care that much. West Side Story was outdated in the 80s when I first saw it as a teenager. Gangs in NYC, dancing at each other? Hopefully this new version will make those scenes more relevant and fresh. But I can understand why younger people would shrug their shoulders.
I want to see it, Ken. My wife did and loved it. But even before Covid19 I had soured on going to the movies due to the usual wretched behavior of my fellow theater-goers. I will wait for pretty much any movie to be available in my home. I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes one of those sleepers that over the holidays gets a lot of attention from the 40-plus crowd who don't have to be first to see something. Of course Covid is the wild card here.
I generally enjoy musicals, but I have no interest in West Side Story (although I'll stream it when that's available because I try to see all of the films that get major Oscar nominations, and I'm sure this will receive at least a few). There are several reasons.
One is that I have not seen a film in the theaters since the Before Times. I'm not a hermit in my house, but there doesn't seem to be a need to risk Covid exposure in a theater when I can wait for a month or two and watch it at home (with cocktails and a pause button readily available).
Speaking of the pause button, West Side Story is two and a half hours long. Honestly, that's a long time, and for the most part it's too long for my attention span (my only recent exception was Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, and that's because I love Tarantino's warped sense of humor. But that was in the Before Times, and I digress....).
There's also the fact that I've seen the original West Side Story film, and there have been a zillion high school productions of the play, so my kneejerk reaction is simply Not Again!
I'll watch it when I can see it at home. I might even enjoy it. But it just doesn't seem worth the hassle of going out to the theater and seeing it during the pandemic (Licorice Pizza, on the other hand, may finally get me out to a movie theater for the first time in close to two years....).
I'm like you in that going into a movie theatre has me skittish. I'd love to see it West Side Story based on clips and reviews but not sure the risk is worth the reward despite being fully vaccinated. One other point. The movie had so much pre-release publicity from every angle possible that I was already experiencing West Side Story fatigue prior to opening day.
My personal theory is it's lack of interest in Musicals as a genre. As in, all that singing and dancing is very very VERY much passé. It's like someone asking why no one is making silent movies anymore, after all they used to be all the rage. I'm not interested at all in Musicals and honestly don't know anyone who likes them. Sure people still go and see the usual Andrew Lloyd Webber fare and whatever else there is on stage, but that seems to be because they really have to travel and make it a weekend or a small vacation so those people care and are devoted. The fact that just about anything is being turned into a Musical probably doesn't help Musicals being special or anticipated when they are on the big screen. Maybe there also ought to be questions about target demographics - movies are very much tailored for and to a young and casually movie-going audience nowadays, and these aren't people who as a whole care all that much about either Musicals or Spielberg as an iconic movie maker (they're too young to have experienced the impact he once had). If you do in fact notice it's only industry people who are wondering and worrying, that should tell you a lot.
I haven’t seen the remake yet. Initially, I was excited that BEING THE RICARDOS and WEST SIDE STORY were opening the same weekend. But the death of Stephen Sondheim has made me reluctant to see the remake just now.
When the remake of ARTHUR came out, you wrote that you believed Hollywood shouldn’t remake great movies. You wrote that they should remake films that had good ideas but were flawed.
While 1961’s WEST SIDE STORY isn’t perfect, it isn’t flawed. No one is trying to remake SINGIN IN THE RAIN. Instead of WEST SIDE STORY maybe Stephen Spielberg should have considered remaking A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM.( Larry Gelbart, that Book’s co-author hated Richard Lester’s film version.) Maybe remake A LITTLE NIGHT MUSIC so that we can have a film version of ‘Send in the Clowns’ by someone other than Elizabeth Taylor.
65 years ago, I'm sure there were starched and sanitized citizens who actually thought West Side Story depicted the mean streets of the (giddy shiver of horror) Big City. In 2021, after decades of carnage and profanity in countless storylines of street gang life, gangbangers settling their conflict with song and interpretative dance makes a "guy flying in a cape" seem hard-edged realism.
It also strikes me as a "Hollywood has run out of ideas" remake. Some remakes of classics can be justified because of improvements in film making or the original's culture has become too dated. By all accounts, this new version is a period piece set in the same time as the original movie. So...why bother? Do 21st century actors tap dance faster or sing louder?
$100 million for a song & dance flick?? What, did they actually buy a few square blocks of New York?
I think it's a niche movie for the niche fanatic lover of musicals. For less ardent fans, waiting to see it stream someday is more than satisfactory. And then there is a LOT of folks who don't give a squeaky fart about musicals.
The original was made the year I was born, and I have never seen it. Never had a desire to see it. Most people I know, especially people my children's generation, late 20's early 30's, could not care less about a musical. I couldn't make it past the opening number of LA LA Land without turning it off. I have only been to a movie theater 3 times in 11 years. I get uncomfortable in the seats, need to go to the bathroom, and can't pause it. With modern TV's and streaming I see no real lure to see movies in a theater. Especially since this one is charging over $35/ticket from what I read.
I want to see it and will this weekend, I assume. I have been too busy with my work to take time on opening weekend.
I hate Musicals, Theatre, Musical Theatre and Comic Books so I'm part of completely ignored group, the non-woman, non-gay, and not a child group
Saw it yesterday at the Newhall Laemmle. It was excellent and, although Natalie Wood isn't in this version, Rita Moreno is. Truth is I'm more of a Rita guy than a Natalie guy anyway.
The new Maria is great and far more suitable to the role than Ms Wood (age, ethnicity, voice- no need to have Marni Nixon do her singing).
Finally, they fixed the most awkward moment from the original where Natalie burst into a showstopper over her true love's corpse.
All in all, a good movie experience.
"(Ironically, the big tentpole blockbuster began with JAWS… directed by Steven Spielberg.)"
True enough, but "Jaws" and "Raiders of the Lost Ark" are "Hamlet" and "Macbeth" compared to the tsunami of comic book crap that is driving adults out of the movie theater--perhaps for good
For me, and long before covid, the movie-going experience was ruined by the movie-theater experience. Rude patrons, loud patrons, phone lights, phone conversations(!). Then too, there are the outrageous prices. While attending a viewing of Lincoln with an elementary school field trip group and an otherwise small audience, one male patron (not in our group) would not stop talking, loudly, on his phone. Eventually, someone asked him, politely, to go outside the theater with his phone. The response was a loud "F-off". This led to confrontation. Theater personal were requested to help, but the lone, young employee was (understandably) unable to do anything. That's just one example of what I've experienced which has led to just staying home.
As for this new West Side Story? No interest. I saw the original in school when I was 13 years old. I recall being bored by it and the song and dance scenes were tedious. Again, I was 13. Perhaps that memory taints this new version, even with the name Spielberg attached. So I know I will never watch this movie, even on my home screen on a cable network I'm actually paying for. That's just me, anyway.
I have no interest in seeing it any time soon but I've yet to see the original all the way through. I'm dumbfounded at how long Steven Spielberg has been struggling for a hit. He seemed to peak after SCHINDLER'S LIST. I remember when Jeff Goldblum hosted SNL and announced that JURSSAC PARK had surpassed ET as the all-time highest grossing movie. The then said, "I guess the guy who made ET must be bummed out right now."
Could not care less about any iteration of West Side Story. Although it was intriguing to watch the video of Leonard Bernstein continually correcting tenor Jose Carreras during the recording of the score with opera singers.
Can't work up any enthusiasm.
I'm a big musical fan and too old to care about comic book movies, so I should be the natural audience for this, but I still haven't seen it. I might yet, but with limited leisure time, I'm still on the fence. I've had COVID, so that doesn't keep me out of theaters.
My issues are, first, that this has never been one of my favorite musicals. Great score and some terrific dances, but the story and characters never appealed to me that much. Plus it's awfully long, and the last half hour is a real downer (Shakespeare didn't know how to send them out of the theater humming.) I also think they didn't help it appeal to older audiences by making such a big point in advance publicity about all the trendy PC tweaks, like refusing to subtitle the Spanish scenes so as not to imply that English is superior (news flash: it is superior if your target audience speaks English.) If I saw an American movie in Mexico, I'd expect it to be subtitled in Spanish. That's not oppression, it's just common sense.
Mostly, though, what has kept me from feeling too excited about this is that I don't see the need for it. Siskel & Ebert used to urge filmmakers, if they wanted to do remakes, to remake bad movies and fix them, not remake great movies and ruin them. Spielberg might have pulled off a minor miracle in not botching the remake, but the original won 10 Oscars and had Natalie Wood. How much is he likely to improve on that?
In The Heights is not a bad movie. Really, not even close. I demand a rewrite.
Not sure about WSS, but I'll never go see another superhero movie. If we all stop, perhaps Hollywood will do something different.
My wife and I, 50ish and theater-nerd-adjacent, went and saw it on opening morning last Friday. There were five of us in the theater. We were the youngest by two decades. It was fantastic. The performances and cinematography were spot on.
I'm glad we went, but I was uncomfortable the whole time and remained masked except while eating, even with only five of us in the theater. With the uptick in COVID-19 cases, I'm glad we went when I did. I don't think we'd go now.
I took my 10 year old on Saturday to celebrate her 2 weeks since second dose (yay!). We both liked it a lot. I admit it's been a few years since I have seen the 1961 version, but I found the acting better in the new one in general--though Rita Moreno is equally great in both. I also think the cinematography was excellent, except maybe one or two places where it felt like they couldn't decide whether to be "real" or "stage play," if that makes sense.
If you think the reason this flopped is because of people not wanting to go to the theatre, wait until you see the numbers for Spider-Man this weekend. That's not the reason. The reason is that young people don't go to see musicals.
Other than theater nerds, I don't think big crowds go see musicals. Even if they are directed by Spielberg.
I'm a millenial. Pretty much missed the golden age of cinema. And I've spent these last two pandemic years trying very hard to finally watch many of these classics (Kurosawa, Capra, Ford, Lumet, and so on). Of course, I'm a film buff, and I'm certainly not everyone else. I like to spend time watching films, especially on the big screen.
As far as the pandemic goes, I've gone back to theatres, but I do try and find ones that are more empty.
I finally saw the original WEST SIDE STORY on TV for the first time last week (and I do intend to watch the remake on the big screen - in the next week or so).
I've spent enough time around here to know how much Ken worships Natalie Wood. Somehow, I'd never seen any of her films before.
And I have to say, I was not remotely prepared for what I saw. The scene where Tony dies should be mandatory in acting schools. Never before had I witnessed such a pure, unfiltered moment of motherly rage. The way she yells 'DON'T YOU TOUCH HIM!' as she tearfully moves to shield Tony's body from the cop had me shivering and shaking. That's how powerful her delivery was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGtD5QAaAGY
I only have myself to blame for not watching this sooner.
I am also a theatre geek, as is my whole household. Every time I see an ad for the new West Side Story I think: do they not want anyone who doesn't already know what West Side Story is to see this? If I didn't already know the show, I'd have no idea what this movie was. You get told it's the greatest love story - ok that's like...37 things - you get mini snippets of the most famous songs as if you're supposed to recognize them and be excited - you can tell it's a musical because it shows 2 seconds of some of the dance numbers. Maybe there's a longer trailer airing in movie theaters? But then again there's the problem of people not comfortable being in theaters won't see that. The TV ads are vague as hell.
I was in high school when Zeffirelli's "Romeo and Juliet" played in movie theatres. It was Shakespeare and we sat through it because we were sold on the love story, not the rivalry. I think the marketing folks need to retool their trailers and focus on the love story and not the wokeness of the remake.
"Tick Tick... Boom!" had great acting and singing, and was a real treat for musical-theater fans. But the plot was weird and confusing for anyone who isn't very familiar with the true-life story (which I had to look up). It was about Jonathan Larson, the composer who was by far most famous for writing the musical "Rent," from his point of view. And the movie's structure revolved around him trying to get a musical made... except the musical he was trying to get made wasn't "Rent," but an earlier, unsuccessful one. And that earlier, unsuccessful musical was basically about him trying to get an even earlier, MORE unsuccessful musical made. Yikes! Basically, Lin-Manuel Miranda combined elements of Larson's real life with his autobiographical musical about writing musicals, and the results were... messy, to say the least. (Still, I recommend it highly.)
I love musicals, but West Side Story is one of those shows with a great score and (to me) a boring book. Given the choice between seeing the film (new or old) and listening to my copy of the Symphonic Dances, I'd stay home save myself about $10 and 100 minutes of my life. (At the risk of sounding like a suck-up to our blog host, call me if they ever film "City of Angels.")
Vaccinated here and unafraid of going out. Why are so many vaxxed people on this thread (including Ken) afraid of getting a breakthrough case and feeling nothing or possibly a mild flu? Why aren't we trusting the vaccine and the stats that say hospitalization would be a fluke?
I don't think musicals are the problem, it's just the right film at the right time. They had to know going in that a remake of an eleven-Oscar winner was a tough sell so the Spielberg name alone was the "star" that might have been the draw.
Hollywood is not out of ideas, it doesn't want to hear them. Spreadsheets sell movies, TV shows and most every creative concept because of the high risks. Movie companies are all conglomerates and answer to shares. The fact is that 1961's West Side Story, like most movies that are remade, was a perennial hit in theatrical reissues as well as numerous home video releases. The soundtrack album was number one for many weeks. That was part of the challenge of selling a new one, but the irresistible urge to make a new one.
Then comes marketing. How do you convince people to see a new version of an acclaimed movie? Just like toothpaste and laundry detergent. New and improved.
Do you really think all the social media pointing out the flaws of a movie came only from concerned citizens? One of the most common jobs on the market today is social media marketing specialist. The flaws of the 1961 film were researched and became selling points, then they were peppered into threads and discussions. That is how it's done now without the mass media of yesterday.
The flaws of the earlier film are valid, for sure, but at the time the film was cutting edge and explosive in its treatment of the hot buttons of juvenile delinquency, racial and sexual issues, especially in a mainstream Technicolor musical. This was the same year that Flower Drum Song and Babes in Toyland were released.
That's why the dancing, singing and now-dated aspects of the 1961 version can be understood because it was 1961. No matter how it was "fixed" for today, it does not have the impact it did then. But spreadsheets cannot understand that.
There's one other major fact that hurt the new film: Warner was aggressive in making their original version as accessible as possible. In marketing, it's called "piggybacking." You let the other people spend the advertising money and your ancillary product sells too as a result. The 1961 West Side Story has never been easier to see than in 2021. Guess why? Most people saw it for the first time or saw it again. They either decided it could not be topped, wanted to wait for streaming, or didn't care.
Studios and corporations, if they must do remakes, should now find ways to connect rather than disparage the originals to sell reboots and re-imaginings or they are going to lose money because it's proving to be an ineffective strategy. It immediately puts a large segment on the defensive, which is the worst thing in advertising and throws away the opportunities to leverage the good points of the original. This negative based thinking is not working.
As for Wicked, I wish it well, it was a great show. But they waited so long, there have been too many imitative movies since with sympathetic villains. (And they say Hanna-Barbera copied stuff!)
I'm so old I saw the original on Broadway....the memory was so vivid I was never interested in seeing the FIRST movie. And I LOVE good musicals MGM musicals were a big part of my childhood. So, even if I could totter to the theater I probably wouldn't make the effort.
I remember when the big debate was: The Philadelphia Story vs High Society. -:)
I think the audience for this film is unfortunately very tiny at this time. No sane person wants to be in cramped spaces like a movie theater for 2 hours right now. Maybe its artistic merits will be recognized at some point (I have not seen it), but this is just the shittiest timing.
I've read a few of the pieces by critics on why the new WSS movie is "underperforming." One suggested that women don't like the downer ending. But even with Sondheim's passing there just doesn't seem to be much excitement for a musical film about gangs. Maybe it should have been repurposed as a musical on stage and given audiences a chance to connect with stars and music. I don't know if age factors in to liking musicals, but Wicked was hugely popular and so was the remake of The Producers (both stage and film).
@Scottmc, I agree that reinventing is more enticing than remaking a classic. I think there's too much temerity about being faithful to "the original" because if it's over 60 years old the aficionados of the classic are going to be a tiny sliver of the potential audience. And I would cheer on a new version of A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. It's a lousy movie even with Zero Mostel, Buster Keaton, etc. I recently tried watching it and the opening montage is clunky and unfunny. Needless to say Richard Lester is one of my least favorite directors, he didn't know what the hell he was doing.
Following your line of thinking, Hitchcock said it's much better to make a movie from a bad book than to try to adapt a great literary work. I read Daphne de Maurier's novel Rebecca and it's a very bad book that was transformed into a very good movie.
Channel-surfing yesterday, I came across MY COUSIN VINNY and my first thought was I wonder how long until a prequel, sequel, or series version is announced. Or has one already and I have missed it? With current trend, seems inevitable.
William R:
I have also been fully vaccinated and have had the booster shot as well. My biggest fear at this point is to now get the virus, feel no symptoms at all, and then unknowingly pass the virus on to my 3 years old grandson. Who cannot yet get a vaccine.
That may be the reason why Ken and others, myself included, who are fully vaccinated are not yet ready to visit a movie theater and possibly sit inches away from the unmasked and unvaccinated.
I plan on taking my theater geek 10th grade daughter to it. She isn't all that passionate, surprisingly, but I expect her to love it when I haul her in there.
I want to see it in theater, although my big screen TV is just fine for blockbusters like superhero movies. I think the music and dancing will really transport me in a real theater.
But I am waiting until she is out of school for break, coming this weekend. I wonder if others have the same timing issue.
Why go out when I can watch PIG at home?
As one of those youngins, you are right. This doesn't mean anything to me culturally, and there's nothing out there to indicate that it should.
I saw the original just before joining the Army (no connection). I was a big Natalie Wood fan, and enjoyed the original West Side Story, though I always disliked musicals. "Hey, kids, let's put on a show!" [Mickey Rooney in a hundred musicals]
I wouldn't bother with the new version even if Natalie Wood had been re-animated.
I skipped La La Land, because who cares.
I watched 10 minutes of Tick Tock Bang on the basis of Ken's recommendation.
Frankly, I don't think there's anything at all that would get me back into a movie theater even without COVID. It was already a very expensive and unpleasant experience before COVID. Certainly not musicals or the comic book garbage they serve up now.
Very happy with streaming TV series (foreign and domestic) these days.
A thoughtful assessment of WSS from the standpoint of a Puerto Rican writer, Andrea Gonzalez-Ramirez, in the current New York magazine:
https://www.thecut.com/2021/12/west-side-story-is-not-for-puerto-ricans-like-me.html
I desperately want to see it, but cannot enter a theatre in New York City. The other half saw the preview at Lincoln Center (he's also in it), and raved.
I am a huge fan of the original, which I loved from the time I saw it as a little kid. Saw a Saturday matinee in a mostly empty theater. My one word review: "Unnecessary." There is some nice back story added to the three main characters, but other than that, nothing worth adding or changing was added or changed (and it was missing Natalie Wood, your favorite). Which is not to say it isn't hugely entertaining....it would be impossible for a filmmaker with Spielberg's talent to make a bad movie with such fantastic source material.
But I feel like I only saw half a movie and I paid full price. There is much Spanish dialog and lyrics in the film, and absolutely no English subtitles. I find that offensive. I don't know what Spielberg was thinking telling the main audience he wants to attract for the film to basically go pound sand if you don't speak fluent Spanish--in the United States of America!
Maybe people heard about this and that's why they are staying away in droves?
Also, why is Spielberg trying to improve on an almost perfect movie. I've thought he should direct a musical for years. But not one that was already done so well. Why not take a musical that hasn't been made into a movie and make that>
Or....how about remaking a musical that was butchered when transferred to film. There are many examples but I'm thinking specifically of Man of La Mancha, a great Broadway musical that was turned into a horrific film. Spielberg should make that one new. I suggest Hugh Jackman and Lady Gaga as the leads, with Nathan Lane or Jason Alexander as Sancho Panza.
For my namesake Michael:
A novelist named Lawrence Kelter has taken up My Cousin Vinny - as a series of novels.
You know - books.
Mr. Kelter started out with a novelization of the movie, which he followed up with an original sequel, Back To Brooklyn.
The third novel, Wing And A Prayer, came out last year, and a short "origin story" is available on Kindle; there may be more forthcoming ...
Just so you know - 20th-Fox may still hold the copyrights.
I saw it, I loved it. The 3:30 p.m. showing I attended was sold out. And there were people of all ages. But this area has always been weird when it comes to demographics.
The Maltese Falcon was made three times. The Bogart version--and the best IMHO--was the third and last. Casablanca was remade with David Soul.
" Pat Reeder said...
My issues are, first, that this has never been one of my favorite musicals. Great score and some terrific dances, but the story and characters never appealed to me that much. Plus it's awfully long, and the last half hour is a real downer (Shakespeare didn't know how to send them out of the theater humming.)"
You're blaming Shakespeare for West Side Story bombing? He didn't write it. His play was great enough that no one ever says, "It's too dated. No one cares about family feuds in renaissance Italy anymore."
And in his ending, BOTH of the lovers die. I remember seeing WSS for the first time and being annoyed by the cop-out happy ending where Maria lives.
(I also saw an extremely odd stage production of it once, in 1972, with an all-gay-male cast, so half in drag, directed by a dancer who had been in the original Broadway production, so you had Jerome Robbins's choreography being performed by drag queens.)
Shakespeare never intended audiences to leave the theater after R&J humming. However, he does leave audiences humming after Twelfth Night, the most-musical of his plays. You're ill-advised to speculate on what Shakespeare did and didn't know how to do. He didn't know how to surf the net, but he could play an audience like a lyre, and provoke any response he cared to.
Dear Kent:
So, the new Maria is much more age appropriate than Natalie Wood was? Natalie Wood was twenty-two. Rachel Zegler was twenty at the time of filming. Yeah, that's really more age appropriate, two whole years. Of course, Richard Beymer was also an old man of twenty-two as Tony. Mr. Elgort is twenty-seven. Oops.
I just got out of the habit of going to the movies. Pre-pandemic I’d average two in theater movies a week. I go to baseball, I go to basketball, I go to restaurants, I even went to a mall this week. So I can’t say I’m “afraid” or overly cautious of going where there are crowds. But the habit left me. The only movie I’ve been to this entire year was the Sopranos mess…terrible movie…so may have been partially responsible for my return being further delayed.
I just read the article that Buttermilk Sky linked to.
This is exactly the kind of infuriating social justice drivel that has become a cottage industry for writers who want to attack things to garner attention for themselves.
In one paragraph, she says: "Almost nothing in the film is sonically Puerto Rican — there’s no plena, bomba, salsa, aguinaldos. The opening beats of “America” are la clave, the main salsa beat, and the subtle sounds of a guiro before it reverts to being a Spanish paso doble. There’s a lack of imagination in what the score could be."
A few paragraphs later, she says "At the beginning, the Sharks sing “La Borinqueña,” but not the highly sanitized post-U.S. invasion version that is currently our national anthem. Instead, they sing the revolutionary version. What should have felt like a powerful moment — that song in a massive Hollywood production? — felt like pandering."
So the film is flawed because it lacks Puerto Rican music. And the film is flawed because it panders to Puerto Ricans.
If people could sell shit for money, this lady would be a millionaire.
I would see it in a crowded toilet stall with no one wearing a mask if Natalie Wood were in it!
Nobody I know wants to see a musical right now, the lead actor has sexual allegations against him and it's been done too many times.
To William R: If you live with someone who, even though fully vaccinated has other health issues, even a mild infection may be fatal. You may be a doctor, I am not, so I will defer to my doctor's judgment.
I also will not respond further to this. Let's just say we are both right and we have our reasons.
Lately I feel turned off by Hollywood in general. Too much of it has been infected with woke preachiness for my liking. I don't want to pay good money to watch something that's going to make me roll my eyes.
I was hoping it would play in a big theater in Westwood so that I could see it on a true "big screen," but unfortunately it's not. But we do still plan to see it in a theater.
BTW, my 20-year-old daughter and 16-year-old son have seen the original, like it, and want to see it. In fact, my son plans to see it with a high school friend who also likes the original.
Spielberg and Kushner were thoughtful in wishing to update this musical in fleshing out some back stories and being more authentic, while honoring the original. I think this justifies the remake. The original is always still there to be appreciated and viewed.
Ya lost me at "In the Heights being a bad movie".
Boomer, saw the 1st movie when I was 10 or 11, life-changing.
I'll see it eventually, preferably in a (Not too crowded) theater.
Screenwriter Albert Brooks in The Muse thinks he's got a meeting with Steven Spielberg to save his career but it's with "Stan Spielberg," Steven's distant cousin (played by Steven Wright), whose advice to Brooks is "Make it in color. People love color."
https://youtu.be/n9-2bRqEzEk
William R said:
“ Why are so many vaxxed people on this thread (including Ken) afraid of getting a breakthrough case and feeling nothing or possibly a mild flu? Why aren't we trusting the vaccine and the stats that say hospitalization would be a fluke?”
Not every case of Covid that doesn’t result in hospitalization is “a mild flu”. I was talking to our contractor who will be putting in a retaining wall in our back yard. He had covid last year. He wasn’t hospitalized but was sick for a couple of months. He lost his sense of taste for about 5 months, he said, and he had memory lapses for nearly half a year. He said he now is fully recovered.
I’m doing a lot more than I did prior to getting vaccinated. Lots more shopping stuff and I’ve even gone to restaurants (the ones that require proof of vaccination) but I’m still cautious. Not ready for movie theaters yet.
Wife and I saw it in a 90% empty theater. We went to that showing because it was so empty. It was pretty good. Better than the original IMHO.
But it was too long. Everything nowadays it too long. But I did enjoy Tick, Tick, Boom more.
Hi all,
The world of cinema is changing. SS must change with and innovate or give the elixir to the new generation of film-makers around the world. WSS was made for SS. SS made WSS for himself. Because he can. As directors get old they keep making movies and there will be lots of flops and pain. SS will one day hang up his dancing shoes (director grandeur) and retire. He cannot continue. No one does. All great directors fizzle out in flops. Some get lucky. But will bet 200 million budget ?
It happens to all in other professions too. Even those work for Cirque Du Solie or Vegas shows or great Doctors and Lawyers or Tarantino or James Cameron or Coppola. They all one day will call it quit. Too much money is at risk when we try to re-capture old magic of life in cinema.
Cheers,
Brian
I went to an afternoon showing last Friday - I checked online, to see how empty the theater was. Only seven people, so I went. After five minutes, I had to change seats due to two chattering people. It lasted the whole time. WTF?
The film is good, but as others have said, unnecessary. And many critics have lamented the casting of Elgort as Tony. Good actor, but just too weak in the role. I felt the same about 1961's Beymer. I wasn't remotely offended by the lack of subtitles - so what? It wasn't that much dialogue - you lost no important details. It ADDED to the feeling of conflict, in a way, making the audience uneasy - briefly.
I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that the older commenters in here, don't realize that "woke" has become a huge signal for the far right? Like a red baseball cap. And stupid catch phrases they pass around on Facebook, while screeching "prayers for the family." (WTF?)
I love musicals, although of the older variety.
I rarely went to the movie theater, even before the pandemic. Audiences are dumb as rocks, and rude. They treat the place like their living rooms, with their TV STUPIDLY hung above the fireplace. (Hint - heat and smoke aren't good for the TV...it's a tacky HGTV trend...you should NEVER spend hours with your head pointed up - the TV should be at eye level, or lower - ask your doctor.)
From what I've heard, In the Heights is good, West Side Story is not.
As predicted the critics are praising West Side Story- because Spielberg is in the club.
I was 16 years old when WSS was re-released in 1968 and a movie theater usher. I saw WSS so many times I can literally play the score in my head. I was skeptical about a re-make but the trailer looks interesting, and I will probably see it eventually, but at home. I have no desire to attend a movie theater. The moviegoing public's enjoyment of musicals (with a few exceptions like "Fiddler on the Roof") seemed to have peaked in the mid-1960s with "The Sound of Music." The theater I worked played TSOM for 67 weeks at reserved seat prices, and after that tried time and again to recapture that magic, and time after time failed. During my tenure they tried it with "Star," a Julie Andrews epic that was one of the biggest failures in Hollywood history. And that was directed by Robert Wise, who directed TSOM and WSS. It was a time of cultural upheaval, and musicals began to look old-hat, and very quickly. At least a person my age grew up with the genre, but folks younger than me were rarely exposed to it and simply do not understand the concept. And unfortunately, that's who's buying tickets. I hope the film does well over time when people like me get to see it, but it was folly to expect an audience steeped on superhero movies to flock to see something so remote from their culture.
Maybe the once forbidden idea of love between a white guy and a puerto rican girl no longer resonates. That's a good thing
Maybe the idea of dancing and singing gangs is deemed silly. People hear about real gang violence often, and this seems to trivialize it
Maybe the idea of yet another movie with some group-specific themes (i.e. puerto ricans) seen thru the lens of another wealthy white director seems tiring. Kinda similar to the pushback against Hillbilly Elegy, and, here in my native Mexico, Roma (which I deemed as a posh mexican apology to the maid he looked down upon his whole life)
The only musical I've ever really liked is the Blues Brothers movie.
Put me in the Want-to-See-It-But-Still-Haven't-Gone-back-to-the-Theater camp. (the last movie I saw in theaters was Elizabeth Moss in The Invisible Man). So my uneducated wild guess is that it's *mostly* a case of the movie's demographic being more reluctant due to COVID.
As for the running time, I found it cool to see that the new version is only 3 minutes longer than the original. And a lot of those extra 3 minutes could just be the credits, for all I know.
I love the Leonard Bernstein score, and they've done a good job with it in this new version (I listened to the cast recording on Spotify). It's just too risky to spend a couple of hours sitting in a movie theater at the moment though, so I'll have to wait until it shows up on Disney+.
In another time, parents and grandparents might have dragged their kids out to see this movie. But right now there's a place for us, and that place is on the sofa watching a streaming service.
To Doug McEwan: Methinks you're taking my little joke a bit too seriously. BTW, I have an English minor with a concentration in Shakespeare, so I was aware that "Romeo & Juliet" is a tragedy and that both of those crazy, mixed-up kids bite the big enchilada in the end. But if you're going to give that away to everyone else, at least add, "SPOILER ALERT."
And I wasn't "blaming Shakespeare for 'WSS' bombing." I was just pointing out the source material is longer, deeper and more tragic than the typical fluffy, popular musical like "Grease" or "Mama Mia," which can make it a tough sell to movie audiences these days. I have no problem with musical tragedies (I just watched Sondheim's "Passion" on YouTube last night), but it's rare for those shows to become popular movies even if they are hits on Broadway. Even the most popular "downer" musical of all time, "Phantom of the Opera," only made $51 million in the US as a movie. Now, there's a movie musical somebody should remake.
Every bloke I know has only ever seen a musical with his girlfriend/wife.
2 "bloke"s do not choose a musical to watch together.
Much as I like WEST SIDE STORY and (old) musicals, it still takes me a little time to settle into the conventions of the genre when I see it. Gangbangers bursting into pirouettes near the start never works for me; it always takes me out of the film. And I think that's the problem. Young audiences are not used to how musicals work, the suspension of disbelief needed to enjoy them.
Misc thoughts on some of the other comments: it's not a documentary, it doesn't need to be precise; tribalism still exists and marrying someone from the enemy camp would be a big problem; I know how HAMLET ends but I've gone to a half dozen productions anyway and still enjoyed; 2 1/2 hours is too long but what exec has the cajones to say trim it to Spielberg.
I know Spielberg is a big John Ford fan, but I hope he doesn't remake THE SEARCHERS.
I'm a geezer but I will go to a theater to see it when my daughter comes from Christmas. Two and a half hours may be a challenge for my prostate.
And, as always when discussing this film, fuck Pauline Karl.
If you've been boostered (as have I), you're pretty safe to go to a theater that isn't packed. And apparently, they are not packing the theaters for this one. I don't come into any close contact with children, etc. I have a sister who refuses to get vaccinated - that's her problem. I avoid her. She got COVID a year ago. Thinks she's immune, no matter what scientists say, and she's not a right winger. I am NOT sorry to say, "If you are an adult, and refuse to take the vaccine (assuming no health reasons), then I don't care what happens to you. ENOUGH of this shit."
Trump just uncovered, and encouraged, the crazy that has always been there - hiding.
I'll say it again, I am a nearly 60 year-old gay man. I lost 90% of my college friends to AIDS. We still don't have a vaccine. We've hoped for forty years. COVID gets one in 18 months, and half the f-ing people in the US won't get it for weird reasons. Ignorant reasons. Again, I got my first Pfizer on my birthday last March. I shed some tears, and thanked the nurse in the middle of a sports arena parking lot, for giving me the best birthday present, EVER.
By the way, for almost two years, I've carried a spritzer with Everclear liquor in it. I constantly spray my hands, and surfaces.
Also, I've flown for work twice since Sept. Production work. We have to take constant COVID lab tests. Everything has always come back negative. Just be smart. Too many people keep touching their face, CONSTANTLY.
Yes, there are breakthrough cases with the booster, but they are mild, and mostly are affected by pre consisting conditions.
This will stop, only if people start taking the GD shots. Now, that means three shots. And yes, we will be taking shots yearly, for the rest of our lives. Or maybe pills, as Pfizer is working on that.
I am a preacher's kid who believes in science.
@ MikeN
I call BS on that Spielberg-critics love fest. I'm not sure what "club" you're referring to. Listen, I have a BA in film production, and (nearly) a master's in film history/theory/criticism. I can tell you, that the two groups are not "pals." Actually, critics will be especially hard on Spielberg.
Are the critics overpraising this film? Likely. Why? Because, perhaps, everybody is sick of the Oscars going to obscure, weird films. Look at what the Best Picture USED to mean. That being said, it's likely because of the film critics, that these f-ing weird films keep winning all of the awards. So, I dunno.
A too-long response to others and Mr Levine
“What are your thoughts? Have you seen it? Do you want to see it? Would you see it in a theater if Natalie Wood was still in it?”
• Won’t see it, in part because of its disreputable/unlikeable male lead, and because Spielberg’s talents too often exclude subtlety.
• High Prices?
Our local first-run single-screen palace — founded in 1924 (the 3 Stooges performed there) — charges $9 for adults; $7 for kids and coots, all showings. The nearby AMC 16 matinee ducats go for : Adults $8.50 Kids $6.50 Codgers $7.50. Street/Lot Parking for either venue is free
• Pre-Covid Experience?
In 2017-2019, I was seeing from 3-6 films monthly in theatres
I never experienced any in-show phones/talking
I enjoyed pre-show trailers — if spoiler-free — but not other ads
I found self-serve soft drink touch screens terribly unsanitary — do employees ever wipe them?
I won’t return in Covid era, but I often stop at the local house and buy 2 large popcorns ($20) as a show of support for them and my mouth
• Film — as opposed to Stage — Musicals?
With relatively few exceptions (e.g. Whale’s Show Boat, Red Shoes), give me musical films that are animated, comedic, and/or fantasies, not dramas. That is, a Fred Astaire comedy movie over an artsy Gene Kelly film. If I can’t see a musical drama on stage, I much prefer it via sound recordings over film renditions.
• Comic book films?
Like the western, war, and crime films before them, they’re globally popular, partly cuz action packed films have little dialogue to be subtitled or dubbed, and could almost play as silent films: comic book features have soared in China, which is reason enough for studios to produce them indefinitely. That, and our theatre chains might vanish without them.
As for the Martin Scorsese camp that derides the genre as an annoying trend created by — or for — artless whelps, comic book/strip/magazine offshoots have been around since the last century’s first decade, featuring work by the likes of Orson Welles Marion Davies Buster Keaton Buster Crabbe Marlon Brando Eva Marie Saint Ben Kingsley Robert Altman Cliff Robertson Paul Newman Robert Redford Steven Spielberg Mickey Rooney Joe Yule Jerry Lewis Tom Hanks Anjelica Huston John Huston Albert Finney Tommy Lee Jones Johnny Mercer Charles Strouse Marie Dressler Walter Matthau Jack Nicholson Warren Beatty Al Pacino Dustin Hoffman Gene Hackman Bill Murray Burgess Meredith Jimmy Durante Leon Errol Carol Burnett Bernadette Peters Robin Williams Robert Blake Sean Connery Jackie Cooper Alastair Sim Benicio del Toro John Hurt Mickey Rourke Natalie Portman Bruce Willis....
Perhaps the greatest film — The Life and Death of Colonel Blimp — by Scorsese hero Michael Powell, was based on a comic strip
I'd chalk it up to two things: Covid and it's an old musical. Everyone knows the plot. Everyone knows how it goes. I've already seen it IRL, why would I be chomping at the bit to see it again? I was pretty entertained when I saw it, but it's a downer ending and we got a lot of that IRL already. Why the hell go to a theater for that, especially these days? I would have figured In The Heights to be more of a grabber since it's a fresher show, but on the other hand, it also doesn't have a lot of plot. That said, had Hamilton been able to premiere in movie theaters, it would have been huge money.
People may snark on the Marvel universe, but by god, I need to actually watch those movies (or at least most of them, I skipped the last two, may just watch Shang-Chi on D+, Eternals looked boring and irrelevant) because I don't always know how it's going to quite end and they keep an entire worldbuilding thing going from property to property. I don't even LIKE having to sit still in a dark theater, but most of the time I'll drag my butt out for Marvel. But West Side Story? Death happens, it's depressing, that's not enough to get me out.
I note the only movies I've seen all year were Black Widow, Coda and Encanto. I don't even know if I'll get to the new Spider-Man because I'm busy this season, but I'm more likely to get up for that than another WSS.
A post-scriptum on my point (way) above about the genre just being pretty much a thing of the past, an exploration of precisely that notion:
https://boingboing.net/2021/12/15/why-did-the-big-hollywood-musical-die.html
Ok here's my two cents... when I first heard about WSS I thought, why remake it? Not interested. Then I heard it's great, it's wonderful and it's in focus. Not interested. I did see the trailer. Great dancing, great orchestra, but the singer's were not right for the material. This style of music and lyrics require a full robust sound rather than the popular sound of today. Casting the voice for a musical is as important as the acting. I don't know what criteria they were working under when casting but I feel they missed the mark. Or.... I was looking for a reason not to see it because... why make it In the first place.
I will stream it for a girls' night viewing. I'm all in for musical theater!
I'm not sure if I'll ever go back to a movie theater - that was a bad experience even before Covid.
Recent news is that Tom Holland will play Fred Astaire in an upcoming biopic, produced by Amy Pascal. He's agreed to the project script-unseen. No word yet on who will play Ginger or his other partners. Fred said his favorite dancing partner was Rita Hayworth. And could any actress now come close to evoking the brilliance of Eleanor Powell?
Ken Berry was amazing as Fred Astaire in a sketch on the Carol Burnett Show spoofing the Astaire/Rogers musicals. It has a lot of little inside jokes that are fun to catch if you know the movies. His dancing and singing are so perfect, he must have made a close study of Astaire. I think this sketch was in the final episode of the CB show.
https://youtu.be/a3LlZ4SYDaA
Since she’s been dead for 40 years, believe everyone would see it if Natalie Wood was still in it.
A son was working at an Edwards theatre in So Cal when several people asked that an unruly jerk be removed. Police calls were never an option there, and I still don’t know why. It took some doing but son is a big guy and got the job done. He remembers some clapping from audience members.
Later after his shift, son was found outside the theater with his face bashed in and left for dead. He was ambushed and never saw his assailant, but duh. Police treated even THIS event as a “private matter” on “private property”. What! He was outside when attacked (“You don’t know that. Were you there?”). Still steams us.
Our family never chanced a return to a theater like that, but even the luxury theaters feature talkers, texters and vape clouders. Wife is indeed anxious to see this film, but note the above. She’ll wait until it’s available on our large OLED TV at home, where the talking vape texters hardly ever bash in our faces.
because Spielberg is in the club.
Spielberg is pregnant ??
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/in-the-club
It’s one of my favorite musicals. I saw it a couple of days ago and loved it! Wasn’t too long at all. My only criticism is Tony isn’t a great singer. Felt like he was really holding back. Other than that, an excellent film. I might go see it again.
Maybe the best model for musicals should be "Mary Poppins Returns" from a few years ago. Well-known property, but with an updated premise (Mary coming back to help the now-adult children), new songs, and surprise cameos. The film was also profitable domestically and made twice its budget worldwide, according to iMDB.
My wife and I will go at some point if only to try to eradicate the memory of the early 2020 Broadway revival - the worst thing we've ever seen on the stage.
Perhaps the only positive thing out of COVID is that it forced this travesty of a show to close.
Friday Question given the Jeff Garlin mess. You are a producer, if the lead of your show gets kicked off, how do you write him out? Kill him off, transport in time 5 years??
I'm just not interested in the film and I go to see movies in theaters every week and have since May. I've been vaccinated, and had my booster and the regular flu shot. What I notice is that there just are not a lot of people in theaters, especially in the IMAX theater I usually go to. I think the only recent film I saw which had more than a small turnout was the James Bond movie. I saw Being The Ricardos a week ago, which clearly appeals to an older audience, and the theater had about 8 people in it.
I've given up on an industry that's given up. Not much chance of seeing something new in theaters. Remakes and chain explosions that might as well be remakes. What chance is there that this will add something. West Side Story is a remake that's a loose adaptation of Romeo and Juliet that's an adaptation of a poem. Hundreds of years of rehashing in the making.
How devoid of spark do you have to be?
Streaming is where all the chances are being taken. It's the only place left to see something new.
This movie is a formula driven by accountant. And who wants to spend a couple hours with accountants?
How long is long enough to remake a movie? SIXTY YEARS isn't long enough? After almost all members of the 1961 movie cast have gone to their eternal rewards?
The over-the-top grumpy-gussing about WSS, not only on this comment page but practically everywhere else on the web, is just hilarious to me. "It's a remake! How unoriginal!" "It's different from the first one, which was perfect, perfect, perfect!" "Spielberg, that world-famous hack who has never ever made a good movie EVAH, is erasing my beautiful childhood memories completely just by touching it!" "It has spoken Spanish in it, I read, so I refuse, refuse, refuse to attend!" "Musicals are so, you know, fakey, and I hate them, so instead I'm gonna go watch some spider-guy in spandex flip around the city on magical webs, and not think about the fact that male spiders don't spin any of that sticky stuff, and are usually devoured by their Charlottes post-coitus!" Oh, and, "In the middle of a new wrinkle in the pandemic, it's flopping in theaters!! So, proof positive that I'm completely justified in hating on it sight unseen! Ha! Take THAT, Tony Kushner!"
I really don't get what all these haters are hopped up about. Near as I can tell, it's generalized anger, stuff still floating around after the Orange Mess-up and COVID and Time's Up and what-have-you-got, directed at anything that moves - sort of like road rage. At least I hope it is similarly rootless, because the idea that is posited by the story - that we all should learn to live together - shouldn't be a anger-causer.
The movie is terrific. I loved it. See it in the theaters, watch it at home, or don't see it at all - but until you have, I for one don't remotely care what your opinion is about it. (And if you're Richard Brody of The New Yorker, I will never care.)
Keep up the good work, Ken. See it when you can. I think you'll like it, and you may find yourself with a thoughtful tear in your eye.
Early Friday question: I just started to watch the MASH episode THE BEST OF ENEMIES. The theme music at the start was top-heavy with trumpet. Was the theme music changed, instrumentally, over the years ?
Leighton said: "I have a sister who refuses to get vaccinated - that's her problem. I avoid her. She got COVID a year ago. Thinks she's immune, no matter what scientists say, and she's not a right winger. I am NOT sorry to say, "If you are an adult, and refuse to take the vaccine (assuming no health reasons), then I don't care what happens to you. ENOUGH of this shit."
Uh, NEWSFLASH: Your sister probably IS immune, at least more immune than yourself.
A study was just published proving this fact:
Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 infection is highly protective against reinfection with the Delta variant. Immunity from prior infection lasts for at least 13 months. Countries facing vaccine shortages should consider delaying vaccinations for previously infected patients to increase access.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34864907/
The film was superb, equal to the original in many aspects. Rita Moreno was a knock-out. But as you say, I grew up with classic films and theater so I was waiting for this (I am also not a huge fan of more modern musicals). I agree with your points about the "necessity" (or lack thereof) to see it in theaters and that it will be available for streaming are the two most salient reasons. Sadly, I do also think that people of certain ages or different cultural upbringings won't be attracted to this regardless.
But! Westerns were once the rave, fell off, then THE must-see films, and that genre continues to teeter. I believe the same is with musicals (or any other type of film for that matter). I do however think WICKED will be a success as it caters to theater-lovers and an age range that spans 30+ years (I am 35 and in 2003, WICKED replaced RENT as THE musical). It also has the added star power.
Would audiences in 1961 have been as attracted to the original film without Natalie Wood attached?
Danny J, what area of medicine do you practice? If not, please stop. Reading on the web does not make you well informed in this area. I was a D.A. but I'll be damned if I tell someone what to do with their civil case.
As for WSS, I am always puzzled when an older film acknowledged as good, great, well made, etc., is remade. Why? Make you, not somebody else into you. That has to account for at least why some aren't going. They already saw this movie done right the first time.
I saw the movie today. It isn’t a disaster. Hearing the Leonard Bernstein score in a theatre with state of the art sound was impressive. Otherwise, you should hold out for a screener or wait to watch it On Demand. The movie doesn’t have to be seen on the big screen.
I represented half of the audience in the theatre.
It was painful sitting through the eight coming attractions. Twenty minutes of clips of The Matrix, The Kingsman, Downton Abby, Cyrano, two PIxar movies and two other movies. I almost forgot what movie I was about to see.
Stephen Sondheim was able to restore an original lyric to ‘Gee, Officer Krupke’ and ‘Tonight’ that censorship rules at the time forced him to change.
It felt like there was two, or three, times more dialogue in this version. The Book of the 1957 musical is very sparse. The additional dialogue was a drawback.
I liked that they cast Harvey Evans in a small role as a security guard. In 1961, Evans (under the name ‘Harvey Hohnecker’) was one of the Jets.
Of the five leads, I thought David Alvarez, as Bernardo, was an improvement over the original.
I can see, over time, this version being the one most referenced. It happened with BEN-HUR, the 1959 remake over the 1925 original. Also, the 1956 version of THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH, over the 1934 original and AN AFFAIR TO REMEMBER(1957), not LOVE AFFAIR(1939).
I just wish that those leading the charge for this version hadn’t felt the need to take shots at the 1961 movie.
In interviews, I heard the film referred to as a ‘reimagining’’, not a ‘remake’. It’s a remake.
1959’s BEN-HUR was a remake. HIS GIRL FRIDAY(1940) was a reimagining of ‘The Front Page’. West Side Story is itself a reimagining of Romeo and Juliet.
In giving praise to the actress playing ‘Maria’ it is mentioned that she does her own singing and is Puerto Rican.This is a not so subtle dig at Natalie Wood, who didn’t do her own singing in the movie and who wasn’t Puerto Rican. Instead of focusing on what Natalie Wood wasn’t, we should acknowledge what she was. She was a movie star! She was probably the only name that movie audiences in 1961 recognized. Richard Beymer? He was like the 6th or 7th billed name in THE DIARY OF ANNE FRANK. Russ Tamblyn? Elizabeth Taylor’s little brother in FATHER OF THE BRIDE and one of the brothers in SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS. George Chakiris was one of the dancers behind Marilyn Monroe in the ‘Diamonds Are a Girl’s Best Friend’ number from GENTLEMEN PREFER BLONDES. The second most recognizable person in the cast was probably Simon Oakland(Lieutenant Schrank) because he was in PSYCHO a year earlier. Wood receives much of the same criticism that Audrey Hepburn received for MY FAIR LADY. Both have been unfairly maligned.
The original movie was co-directed by Robert Wise, like Stephen Spielberg, a two time Best Director Oscar winner and the film editor of CITIZEN KANE.
One can enjoy and recommend this version without taking shots at the 1961 version.
...the actress playing ‘Maria’... is Puerto Rican."
Colombian and Polish, actually, according to Wikipedia. All the talk about "authenticity", and they couldn't find a Puerto Rican actress that fit the bill? Okay.
Honestly, after seeing all the pre-realease publicity, I thought Spielberg and company were promoting the release of a new diversity training film from HR, rather than a contemporary re-imagining of a great love story.
Seems like a lot of execs wanna keep targeting a very specific demographic rather than a general audience. What the hell are they thinking?
@ DannyJ
WTF? YOU are the reason there is a problem. My sister is more immune, having gotten an earlier version of COVID, than I am, having been vaccinated, AND boostered? JESUS CHRIST. THIS is why this fucking disease keeps spreading in Merica. OMG. OMG. OMG. Ken, you allow posts like that????????????
"Anonymous Pat Reeder said...
To Doug McEwan: Methinks you're taking my little joke a bit too seriously."
Well, as it was not remotely funny, I missed that it was a "joke."
"I was aware that "Romeo & Juliet" is a tragedy and that both of those crazy, mixed-up kids bite the big enchilada in the end. But if you're going to give that away to everyone else, at least add, 'SPOILER ALERT.'"
Let's see, West Side Story was written in 1956, and Romeo and Juliet was written in 1595. Sorry for my spoilers. It never occurred to me that it was "Too Soon" to discuss how a 426-year-old play ends, let alone how a 65-year-old musical, and a 60-year-old Best Picture Oscar winner, end.
[SPOILER ALERT!!!] "Rosebud" is Charles Foster Kane's childhood sled, in Murder on the Orient Express, they ALL did it! Oh, and Hamlet and his entire family, and his girl friend and her entire family, all die.
"And I wasn't "blaming Shakespeare for 'WSS' bombing." Yes, you were. "I was just pointing out the source material is longer, deeper and more tragic than the typical fluffy, popular musical like "Grease" or "Mama Mia."
What on God's Green Earth does pap like Grease or Mama Mia have to do with West Side Story? Wagner's 20-hour Der Ring Des Nibelungen is a tougher sell than Beethoven's Little Minuet in G is also. (And most productions of Romeo & Juliet are not really any longer than most productions of West Side Story. As for "deeper," R&J ain't King Lear, it ain't Hamlet or MacBeth, it ain't even Titus Andronicus. It's not really very deep. It's a soap opera for teenagers, always was.
"I just watched Sondheim's "Passion" on YouTube last night."
My condolences. I saw Passion on Broadway two weeks after it opened. Not a good show. It's about a crazed stalker who destroys everyone around her out of her "Incel Rage" told from the stalker's point-of-view. Terrible show with screwed-up moral values, but magnificently acted by Donna Murphy. At least on stage we didn't have "discreet photography" in the opening scene, just two gorgeous naked people lolling in bed together singing a number that never quite develops a melody. (Nothing in Passion ever quite develops a melody.)
"Even the most popular 'downer' musical of all time, 'Phantom of the Opera,' only made $51 million in the US as a movie. Now, there's a movie musical somebody should remake."
BITE YOUR TONGUE!!! NO ONE EVER SHOULD REMAKE THAT ANDREW LLOYD WEBBER CRAPFEST! Also, how is Phantom a "downer"? The hero (a bore) and the heroine (Who is basically a different character in every scene) are united at the end. The Phantom is gone but not dead. (He dies on the novel.) Everyone is saved, the operas go on, and the villain leaves. How is it a downer? The only downer is realizing you paid good money to listen to that third-rate score all evening.
Dana King said...
I had no interest in the remake of THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN, nor would I if remakes were made of THE MALTESE FALCON, or SUNSET BOULEVARD."
You do, I hope, realize that The Maltese Falcon with Bogart was not merely a remake, but a SECOND remake. So I must assume you're referring to the version of The Maltese Falcon made in 1931 and starring Ricardo Cortez and Bebe Daniels, because if you're referring to the version made a decade later with Bogart and Mary Astor, then you DO have an interest in a remake of The Maltese Falcon, because that is what that movie is, and your example disproves your entire assertion.
"Scottmc said...
Of the five leads, I thought David Alvarez, as Bernardo, was an improvement over the original."
That will be a tough sell with me. I've met Chikaris a few times and a nicer, more gentlemanly, finer human being would be hard to locate. Wonderful man. In the clips I've seen the new Bernardo is certainly gorgeous. (Which I can NOT say about the new Tony. Maria falls in love with and causes tragedy over THAT?) I hope he earns your accolade.
Russ Tamblyn? Elizabeth Taylor’s little brother in FATHER OF THE BRIDE and one of the brothers in SEVEN BRIDES FOR SEVEN BROTHERS."
Excuse me, and the title role in George Pal's tom Thumb (Spelled correctly with all small letters). I was 11 years old when the original movie of came out, and tom thumb was one of my favorite movies back then (The first movie I ever saw Peter Sellers and Terry Thomas in), so Russ Tamnblyn was indeed a STAR to me then - and now. (Now I've also met Tamblyn a few times, and offscreen, well, he's no George Chikaris.)
"The second most recognizable person in the cast was probably Simon Oakland (Lieutenant Schrank) because he was in PSYCHO a year earlier.
No. The second-most recognizable person in the cast was John Astin as the Emcee at the dance. When I saw it in a theater and Astin came on, the entire audience laughed and applauded in recognition and love. No one reacted to Simon Oakland, though yes, we certainly recognized him.
However, your points about "remake" vs "reimagining" are well-taken and on the nose, and I agree that the remake can be sold without trashing Natalie Wood.
Actually the Bogart Maltese Falcon was a third remake. Satan Met a Lady, also adapted from Hammett's novel, was filmed in 1936 with more of a spoof style a la The Thin Man. Warren William is jokey and snide but still entertaining (I'm a big fan of William, especially the precodes, though he was great later in his career when he did B movies like the Lone Wolf series). The best touch is comedienne Alison Skipworth as the Fat Man character, she was great in the 30s with WC Fields, Mae West, etc. There's no falcon but instead they're all after a brass horn filled with jewels (they didn't have the chutzpah to title the movie "The Horn of Roland"). The first version filmed in 1931 is true to the novel and well made. I like Ricardo Cortez, he's always good as a bad boy and somehow has a contemporary vibe.
As much as I like the third version, Mary Astor seems miscast and stilted, and Bogart taking the priceless statue to a bus station to check it and get a ticket seems weird but maybe that was a 40s thing.
Spike
[Deep breath]
The Maltese Falcon with Bogart was the third movie VERSION of The Maltese Falcon; it was the SECOND REMAKE.
I was completely correct the first time. (You should have seen my first draft of this comment. Ken refused to post it.)
Here's a fun bit of West Side Story trivia few ever pick up on. Early in Hitchcock's North By Northwest a couple of goons kidnap Roger Thornhill (Cary Grant), and take him to confront a Russian spymaster with a classy English accent, like all Russian agents, Phillip Van Damn (James Mason). Before Thornhill quite grasps how serious the situation is, Roger bitches to Van Damn that "I have tickets to the Winter Garden Theater for tonight, to a show I particularly wanted to see, and I get rather unreasonable about things like that."
Onscreen newspaper headlines, and a visible-on-screen calendar quite specifically set North By Northwest in the second week of November, 1958.
The show that was playing at the Winter Garden Theater in November of 1958 was the original production of West Side Story. No wonder Thornhill was so pissed. Maybe that's what happened to West Side Story's audience. They were all kidnapped by Russian spymasters, and their bodies are all now littered about Mount Rushmore.
Of course, West Side Story also links to Hitchcock by the previously mentioned appearance of Simon Oakland in WSS mere months after appearing in Psycho. For me personally, there is one other Hitch-West Side Story connection.
In 1972, I was invited to a reception for Alfred Hitchcock. The night I met The Great Man remains one of the biggest thrills of my life. As I walked through the door into lobby, I instantly saw Hitchcock walking straight towards me.
Hitch was literally arm-in-arm with Robert Wise, director of the first movie of WSS, so I met these two men together. (I'd actually met Wise before and would meet him again much later.)
I don't know how to quote from an earlier post, but in response to D. McEwan:
You've neglected to mention perhaps the most conspicuous North By Northwest/ West Side Story link. Both films share the same screenwriter: Ernest Lehman.
"Eve Kendall said...
You've neglected to mention perhaps the most conspicuous North By Northwest/ West Side Story link. Both films share the same screenwriter: Ernest Lehman."
Excellent catch. Of course, NBN is a wholly original screenplay, whereas I think of the script of WSS as being by Arthur Laurents, but yes, Lehman's adaptation of Laurents is what Wise shot.
Now the real question is who are you? I am well aware that "Eve Kendall" is the name of Eva Marie Saint's character in NBN. Why are you hiding behind a pseudonym? I at least post under my real name. I'm not posting as "Lester Townsend" or "Phil Van Damn."
I saw it, I didn't care for it.
Spielberg jumped on the lens flare bandwagon which adds nothing to the story.
Tony now has a back story which takes him from someone who was striving for something better and turns him into just another thug. This major change in Tony's character takes the Tony and Maria dynamic from two innocents (I use the word loosely in Tony's case as we know he is not as innocent as Maria in any version of the story) breaking through the hate to an uneven dynamic in which Maria has become forgiver and savior. The loss of the innocent is part of the tragedy, now that Tony's character has changed, his death loses impact.
I expected self-indulgence from Mr. Spielberg, I didn't expect it to extend to Rita Moreno. He gave her all of "Somewhere". Sure, just take away the fact that everyone in the movie is looking for somewhere. When the song started I thought she would begin and the the scene would change to other characters, ending with all of them singing "Somewhere". I'm still a little surprised that didn't happen.
Going off on a tangent here, I got a little tired of the "Anita is in the movie marketing". Chita Rivera is still alive, Moreno's character could have had a sister. Mr. Spielberg seemed to be looking down on Broadway while ignoring the fact that without Broadway he wouldn't have the subject matter for his vanity project.
On a postive note, it's obvious Mr. Kushner did his research. The script points out that the Jets and Sharks are fighting a turf war over territory that will soon not exist. Their whole war is pointless. This did add poignancy to the upcoming tragedy.
Too much CGI.
I'm going to agree with many others, there are plenty of musicals waiting to be made ("Ragtime" tops my list) and plenty of poorly made ones that could be redone. "A Little Night Music" with Donna Murphy as Desiree and Elizabeth Stanley as Petra would be great. (Check them out on Sondheim's 90th birthday celebration on Youtube.)
I'm at a loss as to why so many people liked it, but what do I know, I loathed "Titanic".
I saw and loved it. Church got out at 11:30 and there was a noon showing, all other movies started much later. Honestly, I would seen something else if not for the timing. Glad it worked out.
I am 41 and was only familiar with people making fun of the movie (Gangs dancing).
I am not surprised it underperformed -
Almost all films are doing poorly (sans kids and CGI)
Unrelatable \ outdated story
No Signature song or over the top dancing
No movie star
Musicals are often hit or miss box office wise
As a devout fan of the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story, I saw parts of Spielberg's reboot/remake of the film West Side Story, and listened to part of the soundtrack, and it really felt forced, overdone, unnatural, and all wrong to me, and not like West Side Story, at all.
Also, the stuff that came out about Ansel Elgort was rather disgusting
In addition to having seen parts of Spielberg's reboot/ramake of the film version of West Side Story, as well as the trailers and afew extra photographs of it, I also listened to the entire sound track of the new West Side Story film version, It was very metallic-sounding, and often flat, in many places, and Rachel Ziegler's singing was rather nasal in many places, and Ansel's acting and singing voice were both overrated.
Having posted my above comment, I prefer the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story, which is my all time favorite movie, hands down.
As a devout fan of the old, original 1961 film version, which is my all time favorite movie, hands down, I have always had a gut reaction against good, older classic films, generally, especially something such as West Side Story, which is part of the reason that i'm boycotting the reboot/remake of the film West Side Story, even on TV.
I've always had a gut reaction against reboots/remakes of good older classic films, especially something such as the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story, which is my all time favorite movie, hands down. i was fortunate enough to see the 60th Anniversary evening screenings of the original 1961 film version of West Side Story late last fall, both with friends, and solo, because fathom events.com played it (as with other older classic films), in selected movie theatres, here in the United States, nationwide, in a theatre here in Boston, MA.
The 60th Anniversary screening of the 1961 film version of West Side Story was absolutely fantastic, as it had been restored to its original glory and beauty. The print was absolutely pristine, with no scratches or other flaws anywhere on it, and the soundtrack of the 1961 film version was absolutely stellar, also. My friends and i had an absolutely fabulous time seeing this great golden oldie-but-keeper of a classic movie-musical.
I hope that the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story will play again in movie theatres, and on TV, as well. I'll keep my eyes and ears peeled for it.
Post a Comment