Sweeney Fatigue
Posted on Dec 31, 2007
| 5 comments
Filed under: Musical Theater, Sondheim, Sweeney Todd
Why am I so uninterested in the new Sweeney Todd movie? It’s as much a surprise to me as it is to anyone who knows me. I remember being excited about it about 15 years ago when there began to be noise about a Tim Burton adaptation, but in recent years I’ve lost interest.
The original stage version of Sweeney Todd is a masterpiece, and I’ve written before about how my first exposure to it put me on the path toward being a composer. Over many years I’ve studied the score so thoroughly and seen so many productions, some good and some bad, that I don’t think I can ever get excited about it again. It’s not just this film adaptation I’m down on; I’m normally loathe to go and see new stage productions as well. It’s also not that I don’t think the original 1979 Harold Prince production can’t be improved upon, but that happens so rarely.
Also, I hate violence in movies (everywhere, really). I have no tolerance for it. I’m not sure why I find it more acceptable on stage, but I do. On stage, it’s a play and it’s about characters, whereas judging from the trailers and reviews, the violence is more front and center here, and can’t imagine that would add anything new or constructive. I’m a little concerned that the new audience for the piece brought about by the film will only see the blood and not the characters or the ingenious musical dramaturgy.
From the excerpts I’ve heard, the film version seems vocally miscast. This music demands strong voices. Even if, through the magic of mixing, we can have Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter compete with a full orchestra, it sounds weird to me, because the energy of an actor projecting on stage (even an amplified one) is missing. And, no, it’s not just the nature of a movie musical. Listen to Topol in the film version of Fiddler on the Roof (the best-ever film adaptation of a musical in my opinion).
I will see the film, probably on DVD in a few months. Despite whatever may bug me about it, it clearly offers a new look. Maybe I’ll be pleasantly surprised.
What About the Recent Stage Revival?
I was more excited about the recent revival that was on here in San Francisco a few months ago. What I really can’t stand is when “new” productions basically just ape the original Harold Prince staging. This one had a new angle, and I found it thoroughly entertaining (mainly as someone familiar with the piece), because there was a sort of new sub-plot going on: the instrumental parts are played by actors on stage. So, in addition to being able to hear a really nifty, new orchestration, there’s this circus-like feel of watching the actors navigate transitions from playing to acting and back, and in some cases switching from instrument to instrument.
Unfortunately, the price of that (originally cost-cutting) gimmick is that those in the audience who are unfamiliar with the piece get shortchanged in a couple of ways. For one thing, particularly in the minor roles, the casting tended to skew toward competent instrumental playing, which made for some slightly amateurish acting performances, although the leads were top-notch. But there was also a weird disconnect among the actors. Since they were playing instruments they often couldn’t make eye contact with each other or the audience, so there was a sort of detachment about their performances.
Still, I love that production for at least attempting something different.
Other Productions?
Two other productions of Sweeney Todd stand out in my memory as being new and interesting. One was an early-90′s offering by Signature Theater in Arlington, Va., which was staged in a “black box” environment. Not only was it “in the round”, but the audience seating was arranged such that the action took place among the audience, if you can picture that. It was intensely creepy. And new.
Then there was the San Francisco Symphony “concert” version bringing George Hearn back to the title role. The semi-staging by Lonny Price, where action was played on platforms above and among the orchestra, was as effective as any full staging, and the power of the full orchestra made the drama soar.
I’m a middle-aged composer, with conservatory training and a long checkered career.
I’ve enjoyed recordings of the play, but heard only two versions, and never studied the score as you have.
I don’t like singerly singers, and I love the effects of amplification–singers don’t have to be belters any more. This doesn’t mean that anyone can sing: Madonna always sounds bad, no matter what. Sade, also.
Depp sounds pretty good, Helen Bonham Carter a little weak, imo.
The focus remained on the music, the new orchestrations (? I’m curious to what extent these are new) sound good to me, except some weirdness at the very beginning–where was 1 of the bar?–and the violence is contrived to be still cartoonish. It’s still pretty dark humor–the song Johanna (sp?) to the cutting of throats.
The original Sondheim music is so damn good that it still succeeds. Tim Burton is an ok director for the project–his dark and twisted London present contrasted with the absurdly pretty memories of Todd work just fine.
I, too, would just as soon see a film of the stage play, with a tweaked recording, but I’m obviously no purist: The artifice makes nuances possible, Depp can do subtle things with his face, and his singing is good enough. Art shouldn’t be about muscles.
Michael—
I saw the movie the day it opened and I was rapt. Now, remember, I met many of the cast members of the road production (the one from Philly in 1980-81) and I’ve seen the original production, the tour, the NYC Opera version and, yes, even a community theater production. In every case, I am blown away by the performances that are achieved by everyone, almost as though Sondheim wrote a piece that even some mediocre actors can transcend. Put someone as powerful as Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, and Alan Rickman all together and you’ve got a moving piece of cinema, compounded with Tim Burton’s direction and Oscar-worthy (and winning) art direction, there’s something that just blows me away….
BTW, I’m in Albuquerque, now—- see the web page
I also hope that the film will generate curiosity among younger folks about Sondheim.
Since writing this post, I listened to some excerpts of the sountrack CD on Amazon. Actually, I was really pleased to hear a child actor in the role of Toby, because he’s supposed to be a child. At least the film makes that clearer. The orchestration was also interesting to me — not as “Hollywoodized” as I’d been led to think from the trailers.
I enjoyed the movie because of what it will most certainly do for a generation of young people who have little exposure to anything of any musical value in the mainstream cinema. My hope is that Sondheim will have a new following of young people. Some of them might even set foot in a real theater one day.
I could not stand the gore, computer-generated as it was. I hated having to close my eyes. Still, I felt that as a film it worked well. Having a boy soprano in there made the film a bit like “Oliver,” but he did have a lovely voice and good diction.
Nothing can ever compare to the original production I saw on Broadway in 1979.
I did go see the movie yesterday. The more I think about it, the more underwhelmed I am. I’m still glad I saw it, but it was not anywhere near as powerful as the stage production. The gore was cartoonish, but still horrifying enough to me that I couldn’t watch it the whole time.
The singers needed to learn how to really SING … not just try to be pretty voices. But oh well.
I’ll be so curious to hear what you have to say about it!