Just got done seeing it. I really enjoyed it- I have never seen the show or anything. I liked the music quite a bit.
I still can't decide if Tim Burton's stylizing of everything is something I like or something I find really tiring (maybe both). Johnny Depp was fantastic of course- he seemed like he could sing quite well too.
It did feel a little Harry Potterish with the villain being Alan Rickman and the guy who plays Wormtail. They both however did a great job.
Anyways I really liked it. Has anyone else seen it yet?
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
Just saw it tonight and loved it.
Posted by Lime (Member # 1707) on :
I read a one-line summary of Sweeney Todd the other day:
"Johnny Depp kills the cast of Harry Potter -- seriously."
I really enjoyed it, myself. I'd never seen the show and only knew that there was a barber and cannibalism involved.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
That summary is hilarious! Now I really want to see it!
Posted by Carrie (Member # 394) on :
I also noted the Death Eater Reunion.
I enjoyed it.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
I've said before that Tim Burton's style is tiring and outplayed. But I'd still like to see the movie.
Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
That's what I always say. But then I watch one of his movies and am just like "Ah, dude. That's cool."
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Has anyone seen it who had previously seen (and loved) the play?
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I haven't seen the movie yet, rivka. But I saw the play back in the Dark Ages (read: high school) with Angela Lansbury and loved it. I'm not sure if I want to see it all Burtonized, much as I love Depp and Bonham Carter in certain roles. I can certainly understand why Burton was attracted to this very creepy show, but I'm afraid that his touch will make it too deeply weird for my taste.
I'm also interested to hear the take of anyone who loved the stage version and then saw the film.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Exactly my concerns, Uprooted.
Posted by Tara (Member # 10030) on :
It seems like a disproportional amount of Johnny Depp's movies involve him being dressed up in some weird way...
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
A friend that I saw the movie with had just watched the stage version the night before - specifically to compare. He preferred the movie, said Carter blew Lansbury away, and that Depp's more melodic approach to the music was much more entertaining and emotionally charged than Hearn.
I don't know if that'll mean much to you, but there you go.
Posted by rollainm (Member # 8318) on :
quote:Originally posted by Tara: It seems like a disproportional amount of Johnny Depp's movies involve him being dressed up in some weird way...
Hehe. I agree. And yet, I'm not complaining.
Well, ok. I wasn't incredibly pleased with Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Too weird of an interpetation? Given the basis for the story I find that intertaining. Posted by Shawshank (Member # 8453) on :
I've never seen the show, but knowing the story I don't see how it couldn't have been too much differently.
This is probably my favorite Tim Burton film.
Posted by Mr.Funny (Member # 4467) on :
I thought that it was good, but really rather disturbing.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
I read a review the other day after I posted, but I can't find it now, saying that Burton used a lot of gray tones to make the blood stand out more, that the Greek-style chorus and "Ballad of Sweeney Todd" were cut, and that he focused more on style than social commentary. To be fair, the reviewer said everyone should go see it, but all those things make me not want to. Although the premise is inherently gory, I don't recall actually seeing any gore in the play (although it was ages ago and I could be wrong) and I don't particularly want to. I'll probably pass on this one.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:but all those things make me not want to.
Agreed. That means that dreadful credit sequence was instead of "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd"?! bleh.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mr.Funny: I thought that it was good, but really rather disturbing.
I felt the same. It reminded me of Sin City, only with singing. For some reason I love that movie, even though it's sooooooooo violent.
Man, was it chilling! And not the best movie for Xmas. So I saw enchanted next and that balanced it out. But, dang was it good. I had to look away in some parts. Also Johnny Depp has a pretty damn good singing voice. It's better than he thinks it is. His outfit wins at life and the main lesson is Never Fall In Love With a Man who Sings to Razor Blades.
Posted by Shanna (Member # 7900) on :
quote:Originally posted by Uprooted: I read a review the other day after I posted, but I can't find it now, saying that Burton used a lot of gray tones to make the blood stand out more, that the Greek-style chorus and "Ballad of Sweeney Todd" were cut, and that he focused more on style than social commentary. To be fair, the reviewer said everyone should go see it, but all those things make me not want to. Although the premise is inherently gory, I don't recall actually seeing any gore in the play (although it was ages ago and I could be wrong) and I don't particularly want to. I'll probably pass on this one.
I haven't seen the show on stage, but if style was chosen over social commentary, then that explains why I just left the movie theatre feeling incredibly disappointed.
It didn't make sense to me. I love musicals, I love Tim Burton. I remember one reviewer remarking how it was nice to see Burton working with a "real songwriter" instead of Danny Elfman, but I think this is what went wrong with the film. I love Elfman and he compliments Burton's style, and vice versa. But Sondheim and Burton just clashed the whole time I was watching the movie and it drove me nuts. There's just something so genuinely classic, yet quirky, that I love about Sondheim. And it took me back to my years in high school choir and how we wore out several copies of the "Into the Woods" dvd. Everything Burton did just seemed hokey compared to the amazing music. Like Burton was struggling to keep up.
And then it seemed like he gave up and it became all about the pretty lighting and makeup and I stopped caring about all of the characters. There would be little glimpses of development, but if you blinked, you missed it.
It just felt hollow.
But I will say that too many critics were being too hard on Depp. His voice was actually quite good. It fit the character and it was strong and clear. Which can't be said for Helena Bonham Carter. Maybe its just me, but I couldn't make out half her lines. I just couldn't hear or understand her. She carried the character well but bad choice when there was so much singing involved.
And Depp really should stop making movies for awhile. He's overexposed. They could have called him "Captain Jack" for the whole movie and I wouldn't have been able to tell the difference.
Or atleast do a movie without so much makeup. Has he ever made a movie where he wasn't playing some over-the-top character?
Posted by Saephon (Member # 9623) on :
Finding Neverland Well, some may still call that over-the-top, but there's no Hot Topic wardrobe.
Posted by Uprooted (Member # 8353) on :
quote:Originally posted by Shanna: Or atleast do a movie without so much makeup. Has he ever made a movie where he wasn't playing some over-the-top character?
What's Eating Gilbert Grape? comes to mind. He was fantastic in that.
Posted by Rakeesh (Member # 2001) on :
Secret Window, though the lead character was over-the-top in one way, was in appearance at the very least extremely ordinary.
Posted by Ben (Member # 6117) on :
It was my understanding that Depp optioned not to stick around long enough to do the Ballad of Sweeney Todd because he felt he should return to be near his ailing child.
I don't think a man should be faulted for that, nor should Burton for coming up with an alternate.
Posted by Ophelia (Member # 653) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: Has anyone seen it who had previously seen (and loved) the play?
I loved the play when my residential college at Rice put it on in October of 2000. (Although in the middle of seeing the movie, I did realize that, being backstage during our production, I have not, technically, seen the whole play in its final form. Still, I've heard it many times and seen most of it.)
I liked the movie, but did not love it. I felt like a lot of the humor was completely sucked out of it--some through line/song cuts, some just through delivery, particularly when it came to Mrs. Lovett. I don't know if that was Carter's acting or Burton's directing, but whatever it was it saddened me. I also wished that the singing had been a lot stronger, but Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter were actually a lot better than I thought they would be. Not great, but they didn't completely screw up the vocals, and since it was a film the singing didn't actually need to carry like a stage-play. But given the choice I'd rather listen to the voice majors we had in our little college production, thanks.
I do love Burton's visual stylizing, though. I never get sick of it and I thought it was a good fit for the movie. Although I can't imagine people visiting a barber whose own hair was so weird-looking. Wouldn't they be worried he'd make them look pretty freaky, too?
While I do want to own this film on DVD, mostly it made me miss the Baker College theater production, and wish that I gotten to sit in the audience there for one night instead of running around helping people into their costumes and setting up props.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Thanks.
Definitely taking a pass.
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
The thing I like about Burton's always drab, dark, grayfest is that when he DOES choose to put color into it, it's always more striking. Sort of like how only certain things got color in Sin City and they popped out as extra special. It made the flashback with his wife and the flowers in the market seem 100 times more dreamlike than it would have otherwise.
I liked much of the singing, but I doubt I'll EVER watch this again. Dawn of the Dead: The Musical! would have been just as entertaining. I only knew the story vaguely, but I predicted the ending pretty early on, it just seemed too tragedy laden to end any other way.
Overall? Neat music, average visuals for Burton, and way, way, way, way, way too bloody. I don't know if that's how the stage production is, but I was far, far too put off by the blood, almost to the point where I wanted to walk out it was just so offputting. I liked it once through, but I'm sort of wishing I had gone to see Atonement instead.
Posted by Puffy Treat (Member # 7210) on :
Traditionally, the stage versions use implication and symbolism more than blood and gore.
Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
Finally saw it tonight (finally came to our area). And I think I liked it.
I'm not quite sure, because I could only make out about one word in three. And at that I had the advantage of the people with me cuz I'd been listening to the soundtrack in my car the week previous so I knew more or less what they were saying and I still couldn't make a lot of it out.
I suspect that once I get the DVD and can turn on the subtitles -- assuming they can keep up -- that I'll like it quite a lot.
Posted by SteveRogers (Member # 7130) on :
I bought it, watched it, and thorougly enjoyed it. I have little knowledge of the play having only heard a studio recording of a recent reproduction.
I loved the music, and I thought Burton's directing fit very well. *shrugs* Love it or hate it. You've got to respect him for trying something out of his comfort zone.
Posted by andi330 (Member # 8572) on :
I saw it in theatres and I thought that the critics needed to stop complaining about the musicality of the actors. Soundheim has always been famous and has stated himself on many occasions, that he prefers actors who can sing, to singers who act. I will say that it took a few days after I saw it at the theatre to decide if I liked it or not (I did) because for whatever reason, I was not prepared for it to be so bloody. I've never seen the theatre version but I assume that they can't do all the blood like they could in the movie. I should have expected it ahead of time, and once I got my head around that part, I liked it alot.
Posted by Launchywiggin (Member # 9116) on :
Just saw the movie. Some pretty stuff. Not a bad film, but it pales in comparison to how great the music was. Makes me want to see the live show for sure--and buy the soundtrack.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
Saw it in a theater in NZ and enjoyed it very much. Burton's (and Sondheim's) dark sense of humor is somewhat a kin to my own.
The one thing I did find significantly disturbing was not the blood- sprays of arterial corn syrup are nothing particularly new, after all- but the bodies falling down the chute (crunch.) Somehow they managed to make the corpses landing head-first on the flagstones seem... Disturbingly real.
Posted by Telperion the Silver (Member # 6074) on :
How odd... I just finished watching it on DVD (second time since the theater) just now with my friends! Crazy...
Posted by Achilles (Member # 7741) on :
In the DVD "making of" special feature, Steven Sondheim notes that this is Burton's tribute to classic horror films.
Where has Mr. Sondheim been? You can say that of a great number of works by Burton.
Which bring me to my in point: Vincent a short from 1982.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)