I got a lot of comments regarding my post on Monday, “Why is NYC the next logical step?”.  Today I’d like to address some other thoughts on the issue.
Alison said,

I agree with Hans’ initial point so, so much. See, New York WAS the next logical step for me - but NOT the ending point, or even the capstone to my theatre career. We’re all striving for something different. And while no one would argue with a starring role, most of us willingly accept it’s a dream and not a reality.  (italics mine)

I disagree.  I DON’T think “most of us” accept that it’s a dream and not a reality.  I think most people our age think they can move to NYC and honest to God get on Broadway within six months.  You’ve learned the harsh reality of an actor’s life in NYC (although I’m pretty sure you already knew that going into it).  The point isn’t taking the NEXT step.  That I can totally understand.  My real question is… why NYC?  Why not Chicago or Asheville, NC or Atlanta?  Why does it HAVE to be NYC?  because Broadway’s there?  I don’t feel that’s a good enough reason.  But then again, like you said, everyone’s got different goals.

Hans said,

As for Scott’s comment: I’ve lived in the Prof’s own town for a couple of years now and am once again considering the very step he questions. The reason is that I’ve now been hired to direct at the professional regional theatre level, but I’m still working at a bar, often full-time. I’m on a new level now, professionally-speaking, and to really take advantage of that perhaps I need to locate myself in one of the major theatre centers of America. Because won’t most professional theatres across the country be more likely to hire someone out of New York than out of a small city in the mountains of Western North Carolina? It’s unfair and more that a little stupid, but the fact remains.

One of Scott’s consistent points is that there’s no need to go to Nylachi to “make it big”.  While that’s true in a sense, and while you make a good point (it’s unfair and more than a little stupid), it follows a certain logic.  Scott is fond of hearkening back to the medieval times, to the Elizabethan period, to commedia dell’arte.  He claims Shakespeare had a tribe, the commedia dell’arte groups were tribes, etc.  That’s true.  Very true.  But where did Shakespeare work?  In the equivalent of Broadway.  Where did the commedia dell’arte groups work?  They toured, often in major population centers.

To even take the analogy further than that, the way Shakespeare’s business model worked was more of a apprentice/master relationship than anything else.  The principal actors got the lead roles, and they apprenticed the youngest members.  Contract members were often brought in to fill in the supporting roles.  Incidentally, the apprentices (who weren’t paid, but were given room and board) often got bigger roles than the contrators, simply because the women were played by the young boys.

In other professions, an apprentice is sent to a master to learn.  These apprentices often come from poorer families in small towns and hamlets, while the master craftsmen are in larger towns and sometimes cities.  A young boy from Asheville, NC might be sent to Atlanta, GA to apprentice to a master carpenter.

In much the same way, moving to a larger area is like starting an apprenticeship or becoming a journeyman.  You can’t stay in your small town forever and still get better at your craft.  I think Hans is making the right choice — but I DO think that he’s doing it for the right reasons.  He’s considering moving to NYC because he’s established himself elsewhere and has been offered a professional gig.  This is majorly different than moving right out of college to NYC.

RebeccaZ said,

And, yes … I might decide to take our company elsewhere based on a lot of different factors (I’m past the age of 25 but still have a bit of wanderlust in me), but I’m glad to say that I gave Chicago a go of it, instead of always wondering what it would be like.

And this is the biggest reason why I plan to move to Chicago at some point in the future.  Not because I expect to make it big (like Alison, I realize that “making it big” is more of a dream than a reality), but because I expect to have a great time in a thriving theatre city and, worst case scenario, I can say “I went to Chicago, gave it a shot, and here I am.”

My biggest thing about NYC is that so many people romanticize it, as Hans said, and are willing to pack up and move to NYC and wait tables and such because society says that if you’re a theatre person you HAVE to go to NYC.  I disagree.  There are tons of other places you can go and get a similar experience:  Chicago, Atlanta, D.C., St. Louis.  I resent the idea that NYC is the only place that actors should go.

When I first started pursuing drama, my father was strongly against it.  Not because he hates theatre, but because he felt like I would never survive in NYC.  I finally sat him down and said, “Dad, I have no desire to move to NYC and ‘try and make it’, so you can rest assured that I’m not going to starve and live out of my car trying to break into Broadway.  If I ever move there, it’ll be because I am reasonably confident that I’ll have steady work and make enough to pay the bills.”  After that (and a few rather good productions I was in), he relented and now he supports my decision.

My father, like millions of other people out there, hear the word “theater” and automatically think NYC.

In my mind, that has to change.

C’mon folks.  Gimme a break.  Ever After on Broadway?  Are you kidding?  Can we please, as a theatre community, stop adapting movies to the stage willy nilly?  There are a bazillion stories out there just dying to be told — certainly too many to be rehashing the same pop titles over and over.

Of course, NYC is all about commercial business and entertaining the lowest common denominator, not about, you know… producing original art.

Don’t me wrong.  I loved The Lion King on Broadway, but it had nothing on the movie.

I mean, dude… seriously.  What’s next?  Die Hard: the Musical?  Grey’s Anatomy on Broadway?

Congrats to Patti Lupone!  Took her 28 years, but she won again! Best Actress in a Musical Revival.  Great job!

I had heard lots of good things about all of the plays and musicals that were up for the Tony’s this year, but I’m ashamed to admit that I hadn’t had the opportunity to see any of them.  Yet I’m stoked.  I think the presentations were amazing and the performances by the actors and actresses in these dozens of plays and musicals were just absolutely phenomenal.

I was especially impressed with “In The Heights”, “Xanadu” (don’t laugh), and, oddly enough, “Grease”.  I was more impressed with the choreography for “Grease” than anything else.

I love the directing choices behind “The 39 Steps” with the switching of hats and such.  Absolutely brilliant.

I think I may try and take a trip to NYC later this Fall and see as many of these as I can.

As I watched the Tony Awards the other night, I saw several clips from “The 39 Steps” which I had honestly never heard of.  I was fascinated by the way the actors would switch characters.  Sometimes they simply switched hats, other times they had intricate choreography that put one character out of sight just long enough to switch hats or masks or whatnot to change characters.

I imagine this method doesn’t take very long to get used to, much like the puppeteers in “Avenue Q”.  After a few minutes, you don’t even notice the puppeteers — until they want to be noticed.  The same thing probably applies for “The 39 Steps”.

So back to my original point.  The scenes that I saw really got my mind racing about those kinds of possibilities.  I’d often seen similar shows (like Patrick Stewart’s one-man version of “A Christmas Carol”), but I had never really considered it from a directing standpoint.  It’s raised some questions in my mind.

1)  Does the show need to be specifically written with those kinds of mechanics in mind, or could you theoretically adapt regular plays to fit that kind of model?  Could we, say, take Romeo and Juliet and do the same thing, or would massive changes be required?

2)  How much does the audience enjoy that kind of switcheroo?  I imagine there has to be some sort of seamlessness in character changing so the audience doesn’t even think about it.  Another Avenue Q example:  Several times an actor will hand off the puppet to someone else while he leaves the stage to grab another puppet.  Nearly every time, I didn’t notice the hand-off until the actor came back on stage with a new puppet.  If I were to adapt Romeo and Juliet to the “39 Steps” model of switching characters with three or four actors, how do you make it seamless enough that the audience isn’t distracted by the changes?

3)  How can I take these kinds of concepts and apply them to an existing (or new) play in an original or different way?  I don’t want to flat out copy The 39 Steps.  Their switcheroos were flawlessly executed and seamless, but I don’t really want to steal that idea or clone the show.  I don’t want my Romeo and Juliet to be “The 39 Steps” in sheep’s clothing, so to speak.

I’ve been working on a play for the past year or two, and I had a transition planned for the characters, but seeing these clips from the Tony’s has given me some new ideas.  I should pull out that script and see what I can do.

If you haven’t heard already, RENT is closing on Broadway after a 12 year run. For those of you who haven’t heard of or seen RENT, it is one of the most controversial and successful musicals of the 90s. With over 5,000 performances, it is the 8th longest running musical on Broadway. Jonathan Larson’s sardonic comment, “I am the future of Broadway musicals” is more true than he could even imagine.

RENT is a modern adaptation of Puccini’s La Boheme. It takes place in New York City, following a rag-tag band of down-on-their-luck Bohemians, struggling to pay rent and deal with the deeper issues of life: love, happiness, and community. As if that weren’t enough, the underlying issue plaguing the group of friends is the haunting fear and threat of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Half the group has HIV or AIDS, and the other half is forced to learn how to deal with it.

During the course of the play, one of the members dies, providing the theme song for the play “Seasons of Love.”

I consider RENT to be one of the best musicals ever written. Despite ludicrous lyrics (a dog committing suicide), characters that stretch the imagination (does EVERYONE have AIDS!?), and heart-wrenching lyrics (Goodbye, Love?), RENT resonates deeply within me. I’ll quote Gordon, from Life Support and Mimi from Another Day:

“If I find some of what you teach suspect,
It’s because I’m used to relying on intellect,
But I try to open up to what I don’t know
Because reason says I should’ve died three years ago…”

“The heart can freeze, or it can burn,
The pain will ease, if I can learn,
There is no future, there is no past,
I live each moment as my last,
There’s only us, there’s only this,
Forget regret, or life is yours to miss
No other road, no other way,
No day but today.”

You see, that section in particular resonates with me for a very good reason: I’m living on borrowed time. You see, true to Gordon’s song, I should’ve died three years ago. A little over three years ago, I had a liver transplant. It is unlikely that I would have lived to see January, had I not had the transplant. As it is, my donor’s gift saved my life. Today, I live a normal, healthy life. I live each day as my last. I live for myself, for my friends. No day but today.

May RENT live on in the memory of RENT-heads for years to come.

To you, Jonathan Larson.

Last night, I saw what was possibly the best show I’ve ever seen in my life. The Virginia Samford Theatre hosted a production of Les Miserables presented by the Shades Valley Theatre Academy. For those who don’t know, Shades Valley is a local high school. However, this school edition of the hit musical wasn’t solely Shades Valley High students but consisted of students from all over the state. I mean, these kids were top-notch. I couldn’t believe they were only high schoolers. So, here comes my review!

Plot. There’s not much to say here — it’s your traditional Les Miserables plot. Still a great show, though. My father, my step-mother and I got into a discussion at dinner before the show. Now, I’d never actually seen Les Miserables before last night, so I was looking forward to it. I’d only heard the music up until this point. My father said “I don’t really care about the plot and the story, I care about the music.” My step-mother was aghast, “but, honey! The story’s the best part!” I decided to reserve judgment. Incidentally, my stepmother cried half the time during the show, she was so moved, and my father just tapped his foot to the beat.

Music. After having that conversation and watching the entire show, I decided that both of them were correct. It all comes down to whether you consider Les Miserables to be a musical or an opera. In my mind, an opera is all about the music — it’s basically a musical score that just happens to have a plot. A musical, on the other hand, is a play that happens to have music. It all depends on whether you like the music or the plot better, I think. I loved both aspects. The kids’ voices were incredible. The kid who played Enjolras had the best voice, by far, but the others were incredibly strong as well. The guy who played Jean Valjean did a lot of sing-speaking, but I’m not sure if that was written into the score or if that was a function of his voice capabilities. I’m inclined to believe the former, since he got standing O’s for a couple of his solo songs.

Choreography. The choreography was phenomenal. There wasn’t anything terribly difficult, but I was kept entertained throughout. The only lulls were when the soloists came forward to sing songs. The scrims would drop and it would be the actor downstage in a special singing alone, with very little movement. I thought that was rather boring. As I listened, I pictured them doing other things besides standing still and belting out the music. Other than that, there wasn’t a dull moment. The Threnadier’s were amazing, with some pretty complicated movements, and the students and revolutionaries had some pretty amazing stuff, too.

I was most impressed with the kids in the play. I mentioned that they were high schoolers, but that wasn’t entirely accurate. The show consisted primarily of upperclassmen, but there were a handful of middle-school and elementary-school children in the show as well. Little Eponine sang an adorably cute solo, and Little Cosette was cute as a button.

Another thing that impressed me was how each of the Ensemble members had a prominent position in the show. They each had solo parts, they each took centerstage at some point, and yet when their time was done, they seamlessly blended into the background chorus. Just great choreography and direction in this show.

Set. I’m going to admit that I spent a good part of the show trying to figure out how much the set cost. The set was incredibly done, with detail far beyond what I’ve seen in the few theatres that I’ve been in. They flew in a bridge and whole set pieces from the fly space. Honestly, I was shocked when kids walked across this bridge suspended in air, but apparently the techs knew what they were doing — nobody fell. The set was designed in separate modules that, when pulled together in different configurations, completely changed the way the set looked. I’ve never been backstage of the VST, but I was constantly shocked at how much set there was. Each scene was a completely new experience. I took my camera along, hoping to get pictures after the show, but they dropped the main drape and denied my request to take pictures. Oh well.

The only problem I had was that I could see into the wings the entire time. I kept wondering when the legs would fly in to conceal the wings, but it never happened. I could see actors backstage waiting for their entrances, whispering to each other, etc. I tried to ignore them, but when they’re wearing these fancy costumes, it’s hard to ignore.

Costumes. I was very, very impressed by the costumes as far as quality is concerned. However, looking at production photos from other performances in other theatres, I’ve realized that they didn’t do anything new with the costumes. They essentially took the Broadway version and copied their costumes. I was very impressed with them, though. Nothing looked fake or cheap.

Acting. These kids were phenomenal. They never broke character that I could tell, and they were very very convincing, especially in the parts where I’ve always found it hardest to stay in character. You know those parts, the ones where you’re in the background and supposed to be having a conversation with someone else while the leads are downstage singing solos. I’ve always found it difficult to make it realistic, and every show I’ve ever seen where that kind of stuff happens has been a disappointment. Not this time. This Les Miz cast completely blew me away. Everything was perfectly cast, and everyone fit into their roles like a glove. I honestly can’t believe these were all high schoolers.

Overall. I’ve always said that I can’t get into a soundtrack until I’ve seen a performance of a show. I’d listened to the Les Miserables soundtrack a handful of times, and I never could get into it. I put it on my iPod on the way home, and I’ve been listening to it non-stop. The story just came alive in front of my eyes, and now when I hear the songs, I can see vividly what happens.

I’ve seen four productions on Broadway, and I have to say that this production was right up there with them. I suspect part of the reason I’m so impressed is that I went in there expecting a high school production, and I got a Broadway production. Next time Shades Valley Theatre Academy puts on a production, I’m there. Great job, guys.

You know, two summers ago I wrote a play. It was inspired by a conversation I had on a front porch on the 4th of July. There were about 10 people there at the party, but only three of them were dominating the conversation, and as I’m not very good at group conversations, I just listened. One of the three was a professor, another a student. The third was a girl who was visiting from across the country. In a small town like ours, that’s a huge deal.

She was telling us about her life in another place, and we were all rapt with attention. The student expressed his desire to leave, to find himself, and the professor (in rather crude terms) seconded the notion.

Regardless, I found the conversation to be inspiring. They spoke in a very real, down-to-earth way, but instead of half-hearted smalltalk, this was passionate, fiery conversation. It felt like I was watching a play.

As soon as I realized this, I switched my brain into Line Memorizing Mode, where I remember things accurately and quickly. I dunno, it’s a trick I have, I guess. Anyway, as soon as I got home, I wrote the rough draft of a play. It wasn’t long at 25 pages, but it was a good start.

Over the next year, I polished it and refined it. The character personalities were heavily based on my friends on that porch, with several monologues coming verbatim (at least, as best as I could remember) from that porch conversation. I wasn’t ripping off their ideas — I’d already had those ideas. But they had articulated them in ways I’d never been able to do before.

So the character personalities were based on my friends, but the characters deep down inside were based mostly on my own experiences (which, I suspect, everyone else has gone through as well). The conversations were composed entirely of thoughts that I had had before or experiences that I had actually been through. I wrote the way my friends might say it, but the underlying message came from within, rather than from them.

After a year of polishing it up, I turned in a proposal at my school to direct it. It took six weeks to get a response.

The producer came to me, asked me to come to his office, sat me down, and said “This is crap. Lazy writing.”

His reasoning was the professor’s character cursed constantly. I just nodded. I couldn’t very well tell him that the character was based on one of his employees, that this was very, very realistic writing. If it had been truly lazy writing, then the other two characters would have been cursing as well. As it is, neither of them ever say a curse word.

So, my script sits on a shelf, waiting for a day when I can produce it on my own, when I have the resources and opportunity to put it on stage.

I suspect that many people will connect with it. I don’t think it will make Broadway, by any means. It’s not that good. But it’s good enough for a one-act.

Like the characters in my play, someday I know my dreams will come true.

I’m relatively new to blogging, and I’ve yet to make it into extensive professional theatre credits, but I’ve been trying to keep up-to-date on the latest and greatest in the theatre scene. I have to say, despite only blogging for two months, I’ve read some pretty inspiring posts and chatted with some pretty incredible people. These are the guys who are changing my perspective on theatre, getting out of my young, naive viewpoint and into the nitty gritty reality of theatre. Here’s a brief list of just a few of the blogs that I read on a regular basis. I’ve got over 30 that I subscribe to, but for now I’ll stick to about five. Here we go:

- Theatre Ideas is run by Scott Walters. I’ve linked to him before. He’s one of the masterminds behind a movement to change the face of theatre. While his posts are hit-and-miss with me (sorry, I’m not good with statistics, Scott), I always walk away, so to speak, with more questions than answers. In case you’re wondering, that’s good. It generates comments (like the To MFA or Not MFA conversation) and keeps me on my toes.

- Parabasis is another blog that I read when they update. Like Theatre Ideas, Parabasis has some good stuff. Every once in awhile, there’s an off-topic post, but that kinda keeps things from getting too repetitive. A good blog that was posted very recently deals with the issue of Enhancement, or when commercial producers fund a show by a non-profit, in hopes of moving it to a commercial venue in the future. Good stuff.

- An Angry White Guy In Chicago isn’t really angry. He’s white, and he’s in Chicago, but he’s not angry. Well, sometimes he’s angry, sometimes he’s not. He got the name from — well, that’s not really relevant to this post. Semantics aside, this guy attacks some pretty serious issues facing theatre in Chicago, as well as some political stuff. Since theatre and politics are two of my favorite subjects to read about (until the election anyway, and then I’ll tune out), this ain’t so bad. Don’s got particularly funny ideas regarding stunt casting for Broadway musicals.

- A Storefront Rebellion was started by Kris Vire who, alongside Scott Walters, advocates the proliferation of.. well.. storefront theatres. Once again, great posts that are both inspiring and fun to read. He regularly posts on another blog called Time Out Chicago, which I have yet to read. Good stuff, though.

- BroadwayMouth wants to be a librettoist. Is that a word? I’m not sure. A teacher who wants to become a full-time libretto-maker (that’s definitely a word) writes a blog. He’s got some good down-to-earth posts, reviews, stories, etc. You name it, he’s got it, and he’s a good writer to boot! One of his recent posts discusses his first production experience. Great stuff!

By the way, you should all sign up for Google Reader and follow the instructions to add it to your favorite browser (I use Firefox). Once you’ve added Google Reader capability, you can go to any of the above blogs and look for one of the following:

• - Subscribe to this blog
• - Posts (Atom)
• - Subscribe to this RSS Feed
• - or look for an orange button that looks like antenna rays or something.

Once you click on those, choose to either add them to your GMail account or to Google Reader. One will send a notification to your email everytime someone updates, the latter will give you a button to press when you want to read a newly updated blog.

If you have any questions regarding RSS stuff, just ask. It’s fun, it’s easy, and it’s a great way to follow blogs (or any website for that matter)!!

Toodles for now!

I don’t know how many of you actually follow the professional theatre blogs out there, but I’ve been trying to keep abreast of the latest and greatest in the theatre world. One of these is a blog by Scott Walters.

Scott has an intriguing viewpoint in theatre. He believes theatre has failed America, that there is a new regime change, so to speak, in sight. He believes that the status quo is about to change, and a new order will arise.

I’m not going to rehash everything Scott believes. Instead, I’ll refer you to his blog.

In other news, my friend William is having difficulties in his first year as an MFA student. He’s one of the more capable people I know, so the fact that he is having trouble scares me a bit.

As a result of Scott’s blog on MFA programs, the subsequent discussions, and William’s troubles, I’m having second thoughts about joining an MFA program. There are dozens of programs out there, and I’m unsure which is the best to join. I’m not even sure an MFA program is the best direction to go. I’m writing this to sort of lay out my plan, my ideas, and see what I can come up with.

Pros:

- I want to teach college eventually, and I need an MFA to do that
- I want to direct, and my undergraduate training was sorely lacking in that area. An MFA will provide that training.
- I need to make connections with the theatre world, and my undergraduate school was so far removed as to provide no connections at all.
- I need to see more diverse views on theatre than what I saw in my undergrad program.
- Looking at Broadway billings, it’s painfully obvious that the most successful artists are those who have MFA’s and extensive training.

Cons:

- It costs a lot of money
- It’s extremely tough, and given William’s experiences, I’m afraid of getting into a program I don’t fit well with
- I could theoretically get directing training by working independently or professionally
- Working professionally could gain me some networking connections without the hassle of an MFA program (which, according to Scott, is outdated anyway)
- Broadway, while a nice idea, isn’t exactly a priority goal for me, so an MFA wouldn’t help me in that regard.

Oh geez. It’s tougher than I thought. I’m going to say that the training will probably be equal either way, so that’s out. The connections are probably equal either way, so that’s out too. The Broadway option cancels the MFA authority out. So that basically leaves me with one criteria: I wish to teach college at some point in the future.

I need an MFA…

..or do I?

If you’re new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

First, let me say that I’ve been looking forward to this film for quite some time. Sweeney Todd is one of my favorite Broadway musicals, and the fact that Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, and Stephen Sondheim were bringing it to the big screen just made it even better. Now, on to the review:

(WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD! If you haven’t seen the movie, you might not want to read any further!)

Music. The music in the movie was awesome. Not just my favorite numbers like “My Friends”, “Poor Thing” and “The Contest” and such, but even the ballads as sung by Mrs. Lovett (which weren’t ever really my favorites) were done exceptionally well. I even found myself tapping my foot along with the music the entire time, which definitely means it was catchy. If it weren’t, I would’ve been asleep. I’m sort of surprised at Johnny Depp’s singing ability, and I’m surprised that I’m surprised, considering he was in Cry Baby (although I recently found out his voice was dubbed for those rockabilly songs!). His voice was surprisingly strong and solid. I give the music a 10/10.

Acting. The acting, too, was completely solid. There wasn’t a weak moment in any scene that I could detect. The characters are unspeakably memorable, from Depp’s extraordinary character development to Helena Bonham Carter’s portrayal of Mrs. Lovett as despising of London as Sweeney Todd is to Alan Rickman’s flawless portrayal of Judge Turpin, whose turpitude created Sweeney Todd’s demon spirit from the ashes of the nice barber Benjamin Barker. Even the kid, Toby, had a flawless performance. I truly bought that Sweeney Todd wanted revenge, that Mrs. Lovett was in love with Todd, that the old hag was crazy, that Anthony loved Johanna (in a slightly creepy, stalkerish way), that Judge Turpin (the old perv) wanted to bang the daylights out of Johanna, that Toby was scared of Todd, that… well, you get the point.

Cinematography. Awesome. Simply awesome. Burton’s vision of Sweeney Todd is reminiscent of his Sleepy Hollow, but instead of faux-comic horror, this time it’s real. The streets of London aren’t dark to scare you, they’re dark because the denizens of London are evil bastards with true criminal hearts. There’s not a single good person in London, except perhaps Johanna. Everyone is self-serving, deprecating, and twisted in their own ways. The cinematography reflects that, with harsh lights, shadows, dark scenery, rotted sets, and horrid people.

I found several instances where lighting changed where it shouldn’t have. For example, when Mrs. Lovett is telling Sweeney Todd about how his wife took poison, they show the scene from two different angles — looking at Mrs. Lovett and looking at Sweeney Todd. When you look at Mrs. Lovett, you can see Todd off to the side. The right side of his face is dark. When they cut back to Todd, the lighting has changed — the right side of his face is now bright, while his left side is dark. There were at least a dozen other instances similar to this.

Doing a movie with such dramatic lighting will inevitably cause this kind of thing, so I’m not terribly upset about it. It’s just that usually I don’t notice those kinds of things, so for me to notice, that’s not a good sign. Other than that, no other issues with cinematography or lighting or anything like that. Amazing work, really.

Directing. Okay, up until now it’s been mostly roses and happiness. Now I’ve got a serious nitpick with Burton. He has this annoying habit of stopping the action when the actors sing. For instance, when Anthony sees Johanna singing in the window, he should have been trying to get her attention, running down the street to get flowers, and trying to show that he’d been struck by Cupid’s arrow. Instead, he stands there and stares at her.

When Mrs. Lovett and Sweeney Todd sing “Like A Priest”, they stare out the window. There is no interplay between them, there is nothing interesting — they simply stare out the window and sing. They should be having fun — they’re devising the means of their revenge against the blasted denizens of London! Mrs. Lovett should be flirting with Todd, he should be ecstatic that he now has a way to get back at the bastard Judge Turpin. Instead, they stare out a window. How drab.

When the kid, Toby, sings to Mrs. Lovett about how he’s not going to let anything happen to her, he’s just sitting there singing to her, and she’s singing back. Let’s have some action, folks! I’ve heard the soundtracks before. I know the songs. I don’t need to sit there and watch a person sing. I can imagine that well enough on my own. Bring on some action, bring me something new to happen!

This was a huge fuckup on Burton’s part, as far as I’m concerned. If they can fill these songs with action on Broadway, then they can certainly do even better on screen. The budget, at $50 million, is many times that of the Broadway version (less than $10 million), so they could definitely have improved upon it.

Overall. At any rate, I’d have to say that Sweeney Todd is one of my new favorite films. As I mentioned before, I love the story, I love the actors, I love the songs, and I love movies. Put them together and what have you got? Bibbity-bobbity-Sweeney-fucking-Todd.

I love it.

Final Rating: 9/10

Here is another review of Sweeney Todd that I read. Excellent points, all.

What did you think of the movie?
Do you agree with my review?
Did you agree with it at all
Or should I agree with you?

Why or why not? Let me know!
Click on the Comment link below!

(What do you know… I’m a poet and I didn’t realize it!)