SWEENEY TODD review

[thehefner]

So we're winding down to the end of the number "My Friends" and I'm starting to shift anxiously in my seat. Mom is eyeing me suspiciously as I tell myself, "don't do it, don't do it, don't do it," and the music swells. It's rising, higher, more triumphant, and I'm squirming even more, barely able to contain it bubbling up inside me. "Don't do it, don't do it, don't--!" And Johnny Depp rises like a reborn fiery angel of vengeance, proclaiming just as the music hits...: "At last... my arm is complete again!"

Me (swinging my arms in my theater seat, singing full blast): LIFT YOUR RAZOR HIIIIIGH, SWEE-NEY, HERE IT SINGING YESSSSS! SINK IT IN THE ROSY SKIN OF RIGHTEOUSNESSSSSS!!!!!!

... Erm... I was lucky the movie theatre's sound was blasted up high, or I might have been really embarassed.

Sorry, I just... well I missed the chorus, damn it! Seriously, between that and none of the patrons of Mrs. Lovett's pie shop singing "God that's good!" during the song "God that's good!", it's like Burton and company were like, "One person singing = good, two people singing = tolerable, more than that is FORBIDDEN!"

Other than that, I kinda fucking loved SWEENEY TODD.

And it's tricky, because you have to understand, I was a seriously recent and hardcore convert to the Angela Lansbury/George Hearn version (there entirety of which you can watch HERE), and wasn't sure if the movie would be able to live up to it, what with a cast of actors who--it seemed--couldn't really sing.

Well, can they? The answer is yes... in the context of the film.

With the exception of Toby, the singing alone is not all that great. Only the Hot Topic generation totally unfamiliar with the original show will likely snap up the soundtrack and lovingly listen to it on its own, not realizing that--relatively speaking--it's not that strong.

But when you combine the acting behind those vocal performances... and you combine Tim Burton's sumptuous visuals... and you throw in the extra sounds you wouldn't get in a stage version, the metal ring of blades, the scrape of silver against soft wet flesh... taken as a whole, it about evenly matches the seductive and awesome power of a great stage SWEENEY TODD.

While being two very different beasts. Apples and oranges, really.

And that's exactly how this should be viewed. Sondheim was right, it's not the stage version, but it's every bit as deserving of the title of SWEENEY TODD.

Burton hasn't made it his own, mind you. Perhaps if he'd has a bit more fun in some places (why so dour all the time, folks?!) it might well have been, but no, Angela Lansbury's legacy is well intact, thank you very much. It's not going to be the definitive version of SWEENEY TODD anymore than BEOWULF earlier this year will be the definitive version of that story either.

But let's talk actual Sweeneys. After watching the George Hearn version, listening to the original Len Cariou production, and seeing Johnny Depp, I'm going to have to say that Hearn is my favorite. It's hard to compare Cariou on voice alone, so I'm willing to grant that on stage he had a lot more going on, but Hearn had far more passion and anguish.

That's the thing that bugged me about Depp's performance. Look, he was excellent, he was intense, he was powerful... but look back at Hearn's performance. What struck me most about Hearn was that this was a man who was constantly and forever hurting, whereas Depp's Sweeney seems to have lost his humanity long ago. He spends the entire film glowering, rarely showing any of that humanity, and even at the end, when he should be feeling utter anguish... he almost just seems to deadpannedly accept it all and inevitable.

Depp is all burning revenge without the pain that spurred it forth, and while it's mostly exciting to watch (and it worked beautifully in the "By the Sea" number), it's not exactly sympathetic. Sure, you could have a Sweeney who's lost his humanity, but would you really want to if given the choice?

Also, Timothy Spall, known to many here as "Peter Pettigrew" (the things I do to try to connect with my audience, oy), who played Beadle Bamford. The man is a grotesque work of art. Seriously, was anybody else, like, totally transfixed every second he was on screen? That limp hair, that toothy evil grin, the complete and utter absence of a neck, that sliding cane, that entire awesome outfit... and every move he made, it was like he was dancing. His arms were always free, his knees always bent to the side like an elegant and well-fed spider, or perhaps a tick. His very presence was just dazzling in a sleazy gross vile sort of way.

I want their coats. All of their coats. Hats, too. Cravats, while you're at it. I want. Now. Give me dem.

No, you know what I want? Between this and GANGS OF NEW YORK, I want my entire world to be designed by Dante Ferretti. Make this happen. Doom commands it.

Oh, and one more note about the actual singing abilities of the cast: they were good, in the context of the film. On stage, they'd be totally "meh," by and large, but their acting absolutely made up for it. Take the young actor who played Toby, on the other hand: he had an EXCELLENT and powerful singing voice, one that threatened to drown out Carter's weak little thing during "Not While I'm Around," and yet he couldn't act worth shit. So there you go. I still prefer Neil Patrick Harris. But I did like what they did with Toby at the end.

So in summation, I know some people are like, "ew, another dark Tim Burton movie where Johnny Depp is gaunt and weird and Helena Bonham Carter uses up precious oxygen, wah wah wah," yes, those people are out there. But seriously, flaws aside (and mainly, those are just criticisms from a lover of the stage version--one might read as "the REAL version" if you so desired--this truly is the most sumptuous film Burton's made since SLEEPY HOLLOW, and his best since ED WOOD.



Once again, if you wanna see the celebrating classic Lansbury/Hearn version it's all up here for free. Just, y'know, you'd like to see a version with people who can actually really sing.

Comments

[civilbloodshed.livejournal.com]

You sir, are a total boob. It's incredibly endearing. ;D

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

... what did I do to earn boobiness??

Man, this totally is just furthering my ex's theoretical equation as to how I actually negate badassery.

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

It's true, about the badassery.

I'm the only one who is immune, and can still maintain badassery in his midst, but even that is only so long as he and I don't start dissecting our passions, as we are prone to. Then my badassery goes right out the window.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I was about to say, the main reason we're pals is because we can geek out like nobody's business, but that right there negates your own badassery right there.

I should share with you Bloo's theory. It's sorta her Anti-Life Equation. (See? I'm doing it again!)

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

Yes, but I can at least maintain until we get sucked into discussion.

But, to be fair, I'm the most badass person you know.

Feel free to share Bloo's theory.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

I'm actually thinking about adapting it into a comic strip sometime. If I don't do so by the next time we hang out, I'll just tell you.

As for being the most badass person I know, I dunno if you can measure up to Gordon.

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

Well, duh.. Gordon doesn't count.

At that rate, you may as well allow Batman into the running.

hehehe.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Versus Gary Busey as cancer.

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

Hehehe.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

*rereads my entire post*

... oh. Yes, well, that would qualify boobiness I imagine, yes.

[skalja.livejournal.com]

Timothy Spall, known to many here as "Peter Pettigrew" (the things I do to try to connect with my audience, oy)

vs.

Make this happen. Doom commands it.

Sir, you boggle my mind with your classic example of the the geek hierarchy. May I preserve this post in amber, that future generations have access to such a beautiful specimen for study?


I keed, I keed. But you have to admit they're pretty funny next to each other! :D

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Hey hey hey, now, I'm not saying I think HP fans are more geeky than me, now...

And hey, for all you know, perhaps "Doom" is my middle name. It could be, y'know. Or I changed it when I came over to this country, faking a distant relation to a famous person so that I may have an excuse to start a one-man show? Didn't consider these possibilities, did you?

[lonebear.livejournal.com]

just trivia: silver never scrapes against skin. It is the sensual sound of steel against skin. The "chased silver" is the cover.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Ah, okay, gotcha.

[cisic.livejournal.com]

Agree with your assessment of JD's Sweeney character. And yes, Hearn rules all. Depp was good as expected, but I wasn't blown away. I found him strangely not that bold in terms of acting choices. He's an actor known for being bold, but I found his Sweeney rather safe.

My roommate says that she prefers Toby as a retarded older boy as opposed to a really young kid. She thinks it's more touching.

The only thing I disagree with is that on stage you would find their singing "meh." I go to a lot of cattle call auditions, and if anyone ever walked in and sang like these people, they wouldn't get a single callback. They might even be laughed at. Someone who sang like that would never get cast in the professional musical theatre.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it was a generally safe role and performance. Strong and fun and well-done, but nothing daring nor especially dazzling either way. Well, not to anyone familiar with the show; I'm already starting to notice several of my friends who've never seen the show utterly blown away by the movie.

And y'know, I think I agree on the Toby point as well. Actually having him as a Dickensian kid gives it a different angle that I appreciated, though; it really upped the "mother" angle of Mrs. Lovett that I didn't really get so much in the Lansbury/LuPone versions.

(I did also miss the white hair at the end; it could have meant something more than usual in this case, reflecting Johnny's own white streak, but whatever).

Ha! Oh, so you disagree in the sense that you thought their singing wasn't even adequate for stage? That's funny.

The scene that really nailed it for me was "Not While I'm Around." Comparing Toby's voice to Carter's... geez.

[little-dinosaur.livejournal.com]

Hahaha. You're your own chorus! If I may offer another opinion, though, I just saw it last night and I wasn't so much not impressed as not sure what the point was. It wasn't a bad job, but I knew everything it was going to be from the pitch. I felt like Johnny Depp did what he always does (and he's done it a lot better elsewhere, such as in "Sleepy Hollow" and "Ed Wood", as you mention), Tim Burton did an unnecessarily bleaked-out version of what he always does (though his version of Toby at the end was by far my favourite, and you're right, Timothy Spall is a genius) and Helena Bonham Carter just Bellatrix Lestranged it completely. "Look at me, I'm so batty in my striped socks and heavy eyeliner and high-pitched giggle!" I mean, it's not interesting if Bellatrix Lestrange bakes people into pies. Of course she does. It's interesting if Jessica Fletcher bakes people into pies! I've never really thought of "Sweeney Todd" as a bleak show, either. It's bloody and violent, but it's really not unhappy about it.
And most importantly, where where my singing townspeople?!

(The above is coloured slightly by the fact that all of yesterday, including the movie excursion, had an evil tone about it. But I felt like nobody was holding it up! They were all three just putting in their usual background noise and not an iota more. I couldn't even see Tim Burton's alleged passion for the thing, let alone the actors'. The only passion I saw was in the set design and the outfits that were not Mrs. Lovett's. Mmm, waistcoats.)

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

And if I were my usual high-standards snotty self, I'd probably agree with you. But I purposely prepared myself to scale back my expectations ever since I saw the Hearn/Lansbury version, because I genuinely did want to enjoy this on its own merits.

Viewed on all those merits of Burton and Depp and Carter, yeah, it's all more of the same. But here's the key difference as to the point of all this: Sondheim.

The thought of having Sondheim in a big-budget production seen by a whoooole lotta people who'd never consider touching anything "Broadway, ewwww!" is the big difference. If this had a Danny Elfman soundtrack, then yeah, it's just be more of the same. But SWEENEY's score is comprable to Danny in many respects, but also very much it's own thing, and that's the point from where I stand.

I think this version's actual vision was to purposely be more serious and less fun. I kinda had the same issues with the movie of CHICAGO, the stage version of which is way more fun than the film.

So on one hand, I very much agree with you. In fact, should SWEENEY not bomb and become a total mainstream success like CHICAGO did, perhaps threatening to eclipse the stage show in the minds of the general public as "the definitive version, OMG Johnny is SUCH a better Sweeney than George Hearn, ew, Angela Lansbury is OLD, etc," then my own problems with the show will be magnified and I'll side with you 100%.

But right now, I'm struggling between my snobbiness and love of the original... and my attempts to be objective and appreciate the film for what it is.

(Seriously, though, WHERE ARE THE SINGING TOWNSPEOPLE?! How can you have the song "God, that's Good!" if no one is actually singing, "God, that's Good!"?!)

So you prefer this ending's version of Toby to the stage version?

And yeah, besides the singing townspeople, the big question I keep coming back to is where's the FUN?

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

After reading all this, and pretty much agreeing with you, I'm curious whether you agreed with my own review.

Also, if we go see it again together, you are not singing along. It'll be distracting to me while I try to sing along.

Just kidding. It'll be distracting to me while I'm trying to bury myself in the mood of the film.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

I've just reread your review, and I do agree, aye.

Now, regarding that "sense of dislocation from the grim and gory nature of the story" you mention, I think the play accomplished that with the TITUS ANDRONICUS Grand Guignol sense of fun... something the Burton movie was oddly lacking. Even during the "A Little Priest" number, they're dancing, sure... but that's supposed to be a fun number! They were barely smiling! I found that to be a very odd creative choice on Burton's part.

Not really making a point, it's just an observation.

We totally need to see it together. But only as long as we can both sing all the chorus parts, including the customers, "GOD, THAT'S GOOD!"

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

The singing almost seemed like the medium to tell the story, like interpretive dance or something. Know what I mean?

Ok, that could be an obvious statement, I know, because of course it is the medium to tell the story. But I mean in the less obvious sense.

No no no.. no singing. I'd be a hypocrite after all the times I've told people in theater's to shut up, ya know? :)

But yeah.. the lack of singing from anyone but the principals was a bit heartbreaking for me.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I think I got it out of my system the first time. No singing the second time around. Hopefully. Maybe.

Seriously, I'll be very interested to see how it feels upon second viewing, after comparing it to expectations and the reviews of others.

[spacechild.livejournal.com]

word up.