![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatApparently Daylight Savings Time is next weekend? If so? Yay! I'll take next Monday off to deal with it.
Dull headache most of the day, but dissipating now that it is clearing. It was overcast most of the day.
Watched Speilberg's Adaptation of West Side Story on Disney + today. (It's also available on HBO MAX along with the original version.)
The Skinny? I like the 1960s version better. Co-worker is correct - it does not compare to the original. [And it is nearly impossible not to compare the two in one's head. ]
Why?
Robert Wise, the director of the 1960s version was a minimalist. And with musicals, less is more. Do too much - and you overshadow the score and dance numbers - which are the whole point. Wise wisely chose to emphasize Bernstein's score, highlight Robbins choreography and dance numbers, and Sondheim's lyrics, and under play everything else. He let the music speak for itself, and aided it with the visuals.
Speilberg in stark contrast - goes the hyper-realist route. (And I don't think hyper-realism necessarily works well with musicals. Mainly because musicals are kind of fantastical to begin with. You have people bursting out in song and dancings in the middle of streets, sidewalks, stores, and daily life. It's jarring if you get too realistic about the setting.) Also Kurshner's book well thankfully slang free (no Daddy-o's to be seen), tells us far too much about the characters, and way too much about the setting.
This musical works better if you go the minimalist route.
In his politically correct attempt fix the previous film, by painting the Puerto Ricans in a positive light, he ironically makes them kind of difficult to symphasize with. Spielberg gives them jobs, careers, and their own shops and town. They basically live in little Puerto Rico. Bernado is making money on boxing gigs, and has a career as a professional boxer. Chino is a banker, which includes fixing accounting machines, and wears tailored suits. Anita has a job as a dressmaker. Maria works at Gimbles as a cleaner. They have families, and a community. There's no real evidence of them being pushed out or discriminated against outside of the cops.
I related all of this to Mother, who has seen the original film enough to know the story.
Mother: Than why are Bernado and his friends even in a gang?
Me: Exactly. Bernado is the realistic - but there's no way he'd be running a gang. He'd not have the time or patience for it. Nor would he hurt his boxing career.
By bringing in this information - you are inadvertently underlining all the flaws in the musical's plot structure, and that's not a good idea. It's not Les Miserables or Miss Saigon or Jesus Christ Superstar - it's not meant to be an hyper-realistic Opera. In the original, the Jets and Sharks are just two rival street gangs, we don't need more information than that. Bernado is tired of running into brick walls whereever he goes. And he's sponsoring Chino. They've not obviously encroached on the Jets lives, and they are just trying to survive like everyone else.
In regards to the Jets? In Spielberg's version, they are painted as working poor or homeless street kids, with no families, living and squatting amongst the rubble of an area that has been demolished. In the original - Riff is staying with Tony's family, and has an uncle. Here? Both Riff and Tony are orphans with no family to speak of. They are Polish and Irish, and have no where to go. Their area of town is being turned into Lincoln Center. And they are wandering through a Puerto Rican village, which has obviously encroached on their area of town, taking over their pubs and bars, and hangouts, replacing English with Spanish and as a result they have no family or place to belong. In the opening number - we see Riff and his gang pull a Spanish Pub Sign off a pub, revealing the Irish Pub Sign underneath, and showing the store front was indeed once Irish pub, but it's been taken over by Puerto Ricans.
As Tony points out to Maria in one scene - right before the rumble, "Riff has no family. You and Bernardo and Chino have families. We don't. Riff has nowhere to go. His home is the Jets and the streets. Bernado has a home and a family."
This is not in the original film - and the sympathy in the original film slants more towards Bernardo, who we are shown is righteously angry due to how he's being treated, and his inability to get ahead. Riff, meanwhile, in the original film is a cheerful, in the moment, street tough, who does as he pleases without a care in the world. A bit of a clown. He comes across as a bit of a bully in a way - and is less sympathetic in the original. Faist's Riff in Spielberg's version is riveting, and lethal, but also sympathetic - due to the fact that he is so trapped.
For much of Spielberg's film, I felt as if the writer and director were sermonizing or explaining far too much - when seriously the music and dance could say it far better and speak for itself. It's a difficulty I have with Spielberg, actually - this tendency to go overboard. He's remade two Robert Wise films, and in both cases he demonstrated why Wise's minimalist method worked better. The other film he remade was The Haunting of Hill House or simply called The Haunting. Where Wise merely suggested the ghosts, Speilberg felt the need to show them in broad technocolor display. He does the same thing here - we're told far too much about the characters.
Tony - is on a parole from beating a kid to death in a previous rumble. (So why is he allowed anywhere near the school social? Also Maria tells him not to go to the rumble after he tells her the story - while in the original she tells him to stop it. )
The casting of Tony remains problematic. Weirdly more so. I honestly didn't think they could do worse than Richard Beemer in the role, but they managed to do it. Kudos.
While Beemer came across as in love, and why he feel in love with Maria made sense - he's searching for something else, something outside of what he has, and in steps Maria, who fits that. He's also very attractive, the actor playing Tony in Spielberg's version did nothing for me. Ansel Engort is a decent dancer, and can sing - but he's not a great dancer - as demonstrated by the excellent dance number "Cool" - which would have been much better if they'd cast a better Tony. Mike Faist is a good dancer, and singer - and he basically blows Egort off the screen during this number. He steals this number, along with the rumble, and the dance scenes from Tony, much as Tamblyn did from Beemer in the original. Why these movie directors persist in casting weak Tony's, I've no clue.
Tony and Maria in Wise's film have chemistry - partly because the actors didn't get along and the camera loves friction. Tony and Maria do not have that much chemistry here - they have some, but not enough to buy that she'd run away with him. I'm not even sure why she falls for him in this version. The first one made sense, this one...his attraction to her makes more sense.
The rest of cast is good in their roles. Anita is brilliant and deserves her nomination, as is Riff. Bernado is good, but it's hard to beat Chakiris, who admittedly isn't Puerto Rican but Greek. They went out of their way to get it right this round with a Puerto Rican Bernado.
Another misstep, and evidence that Spielberg doesn't quite understand this musical...or how to do it, is Valentina singing Somewhere. That's a beautiful song - that works best with Tony and Maria singing it as a duet, not some old woman who has lived a long life with someone she loved. Why is she singing this song? It's kind of jarring when the camera does a close up of Valentina and her white husband, showing that they lived a happy life. And then all the misery around her as a kind of voice over music video.
In the original - I weep whenever the song is sung, it's sung (or dubbed) for Maria and Tony - who sing it. And it is beautiful. Here, it's sentimental and does not work. I'd have preferred he take it out.
The placement of "I feel Pretty" is equally odd and jarring - it's sung right after Bernado and Riff are killed, and directly before Chino comes to tell Maria that Tony killed Bernado. I can see why they did it - but it makes the song difficult to watch or enjoy. Again it slides towards melodrama cliches.
The final scenes - which no longer include "Somewhere" - are well paced. And tragic. But lacking as well. It worked better to have the beginning and end - set at the same spot - the playground in the original film. Mainly because it's a playground. But the kids fight. And ultimately kill each other on the "community" playground. Also, the cops needed to come in on the scene faster than they do in Spielberg's. It adds something to it. Having them show up after Maria and the gangs leave with Tony's body, doesn't quite work - since it appears they are removing the evidence of a crime - when in truth, I think they are past caring at that point. The problem with hyper-realism in cinema is it can show the cracks more in a story, or the expectation is higher for realism.
That said, what works in Spielberg's version are the bits that do not revolve around the love story.
1. Every scene with Tony and Riff - is packed with energy. Faist and Egort bring it to those scenes. And the musical number "Cool" where Riff and Tony fight over a gun is fun to watch and captivating, even though I spent a good portion of it - wondering why Tony didn't just throw the gun out to sea or let it drop there.
However - the existence of Riff's gun is kind of problematic. In the original, Riff doesn't buy a gun or even consider it. He mentions zip guns but is shot down by the group. Chino is the one with the gun in the original, and it's never clear how he got it.
Tony and Riff have more chemistry than just anybody else in the cast does, which is problematic. And Egort is at his best with Faist.
2. Officer Krupke musical number is for the first time not cringe-inducing. It also works very well - and doesn't have any of the leads participating. In the original they have Riff doing most of the singing, and dancing. Possibly because they had Russ Tamblyn - who is great at that sort of thing. Here - it's the supporting actors playing the Jets who do it - and the setting is the police station - where they've all been brought in for questioning about the rumble. This is closer to the stage musical version.
Krupke leaves them locked in the station - alone, and they tear it apart doing this number - to stave off their fear, anger and frustration.
It works.
3. The Rumble works very well. The fight scenes are brutal. However, in the original it was more of a dance number. And in the original - Tony was less willing to fight. Here - Tony ends up fighting, even though Riff tries to stop him. Then Tony almost goes to far - which wakes Riff up to what he almost did to his friend in his attempt to commit suicide by rumble. That's an interesting character interaction. In this version it's not Tony's fault Riff dies, but Bernardo and Riff's - due to Riff's decision to use Bernado to kill himself, and Bernado's pride and rage - which makes it impossible for him to see through it. Riff is almost happy when Bernardo kills him in this version and kind of tells Tony not to worry about it. (In the other, Riff is shocked, and dismayed.)
Chino in this version helps Tony get into the Rumble. (He's not there in the other. Anybody helps Tony get in - in the other version.) And Tony's depicted as a bit more brutal here.
It's well choreographed and feels like an actual fight. And the camera angles are effective - particularly the first over-view shot, with the gang members shadows converging. But, what's loss is the dance moves.
4. The dialogue for everyone is better. Arthur Larents sucked at dialogue.
Kurshner is an expert. The 1950s fake urban slang is thankfully gone - both from the dialogue and the songs. Cool no longer has "Daddy-O" in the lyrics for example.
But other than that - I prefer the minimalist original version.
Does the film stand on its own two feet- regardless of the original. Yes, I think it does for the most part. But, I would most likely have some of the same criticisms had I not seen the original version. Tony wouldn't have worked that well for me regardless. Bernado may have worked better. Somewhere still wouldn't have worked. And I Feel Pretty would have felt jarring, either way. I'd have removed it and "Somewhere" completely from Spielberg's film, and had Somewhere play at the end credits.
Overall grade?
1961 Version? A- (for the casting of Tony and Maria)
2021 Version? B (see above)
***
Haven't done much today, outside of talk to mother, watch television, and revise my book. Slept until 8, had breakfast late...so...there you go.
Here's a picture.
Dull headache most of the day, but dissipating now that it is clearing. It was overcast most of the day.
Watched Speilberg's Adaptation of West Side Story on Disney + today. (It's also available on HBO MAX along with the original version.)
The Skinny? I like the 1960s version better. Co-worker is correct - it does not compare to the original. [And it is nearly impossible not to compare the two in one's head. ]
Why?
Robert Wise, the director of the 1960s version was a minimalist. And with musicals, less is more. Do too much - and you overshadow the score and dance numbers - which are the whole point. Wise wisely chose to emphasize Bernstein's score, highlight Robbins choreography and dance numbers, and Sondheim's lyrics, and under play everything else. He let the music speak for itself, and aided it with the visuals.
Speilberg in stark contrast - goes the hyper-realist route. (And I don't think hyper-realism necessarily works well with musicals. Mainly because musicals are kind of fantastical to begin with. You have people bursting out in song and dancings in the middle of streets, sidewalks, stores, and daily life. It's jarring if you get too realistic about the setting.) Also Kurshner's book well thankfully slang free (no Daddy-o's to be seen), tells us far too much about the characters, and way too much about the setting.
This musical works better if you go the minimalist route.
In his politically correct attempt fix the previous film, by painting the Puerto Ricans in a positive light, he ironically makes them kind of difficult to symphasize with. Spielberg gives them jobs, careers, and their own shops and town. They basically live in little Puerto Rico. Bernado is making money on boxing gigs, and has a career as a professional boxer. Chino is a banker, which includes fixing accounting machines, and wears tailored suits. Anita has a job as a dressmaker. Maria works at Gimbles as a cleaner. They have families, and a community. There's no real evidence of them being pushed out or discriminated against outside of the cops.
I related all of this to Mother, who has seen the original film enough to know the story.
Mother: Than why are Bernado and his friends even in a gang?
Me: Exactly. Bernado is the realistic - but there's no way he'd be running a gang. He'd not have the time or patience for it. Nor would he hurt his boxing career.
By bringing in this information - you are inadvertently underlining all the flaws in the musical's plot structure, and that's not a good idea. It's not Les Miserables or Miss Saigon or Jesus Christ Superstar - it's not meant to be an hyper-realistic Opera. In the original, the Jets and Sharks are just two rival street gangs, we don't need more information than that. Bernado is tired of running into brick walls whereever he goes. And he's sponsoring Chino. They've not obviously encroached on the Jets lives, and they are just trying to survive like everyone else.
In regards to the Jets? In Spielberg's version, they are painted as working poor or homeless street kids, with no families, living and squatting amongst the rubble of an area that has been demolished. In the original - Riff is staying with Tony's family, and has an uncle. Here? Both Riff and Tony are orphans with no family to speak of. They are Polish and Irish, and have no where to go. Their area of town is being turned into Lincoln Center. And they are wandering through a Puerto Rican village, which has obviously encroached on their area of town, taking over their pubs and bars, and hangouts, replacing English with Spanish and as a result they have no family or place to belong. In the opening number - we see Riff and his gang pull a Spanish Pub Sign off a pub, revealing the Irish Pub Sign underneath, and showing the store front was indeed once Irish pub, but it's been taken over by Puerto Ricans.
As Tony points out to Maria in one scene - right before the rumble, "Riff has no family. You and Bernardo and Chino have families. We don't. Riff has nowhere to go. His home is the Jets and the streets. Bernado has a home and a family."
This is not in the original film - and the sympathy in the original film slants more towards Bernardo, who we are shown is righteously angry due to how he's being treated, and his inability to get ahead. Riff, meanwhile, in the original film is a cheerful, in the moment, street tough, who does as he pleases without a care in the world. A bit of a clown. He comes across as a bit of a bully in a way - and is less sympathetic in the original. Faist's Riff in Spielberg's version is riveting, and lethal, but also sympathetic - due to the fact that he is so trapped.
For much of Spielberg's film, I felt as if the writer and director were sermonizing or explaining far too much - when seriously the music and dance could say it far better and speak for itself. It's a difficulty I have with Spielberg, actually - this tendency to go overboard. He's remade two Robert Wise films, and in both cases he demonstrated why Wise's minimalist method worked better. The other film he remade was The Haunting of Hill House or simply called The Haunting. Where Wise merely suggested the ghosts, Speilberg felt the need to show them in broad technocolor display. He does the same thing here - we're told far too much about the characters.
Tony - is on a parole from beating a kid to death in a previous rumble. (So why is he allowed anywhere near the school social? Also Maria tells him not to go to the rumble after he tells her the story - while in the original she tells him to stop it. )
The casting of Tony remains problematic. Weirdly more so. I honestly didn't think they could do worse than Richard Beemer in the role, but they managed to do it. Kudos.
While Beemer came across as in love, and why he feel in love with Maria made sense - he's searching for something else, something outside of what he has, and in steps Maria, who fits that. He's also very attractive, the actor playing Tony in Spielberg's version did nothing for me. Ansel Engort is a decent dancer, and can sing - but he's not a great dancer - as demonstrated by the excellent dance number "Cool" - which would have been much better if they'd cast a better Tony. Mike Faist is a good dancer, and singer - and he basically blows Egort off the screen during this number. He steals this number, along with the rumble, and the dance scenes from Tony, much as Tamblyn did from Beemer in the original. Why these movie directors persist in casting weak Tony's, I've no clue.
Tony and Maria in Wise's film have chemistry - partly because the actors didn't get along and the camera loves friction. Tony and Maria do not have that much chemistry here - they have some, but not enough to buy that she'd run away with him. I'm not even sure why she falls for him in this version. The first one made sense, this one...his attraction to her makes more sense.
The rest of cast is good in their roles. Anita is brilliant and deserves her nomination, as is Riff. Bernado is good, but it's hard to beat Chakiris, who admittedly isn't Puerto Rican but Greek. They went out of their way to get it right this round with a Puerto Rican Bernado.
Another misstep, and evidence that Spielberg doesn't quite understand this musical...or how to do it, is Valentina singing Somewhere. That's a beautiful song - that works best with Tony and Maria singing it as a duet, not some old woman who has lived a long life with someone she loved. Why is she singing this song? It's kind of jarring when the camera does a close up of Valentina and her white husband, showing that they lived a happy life. And then all the misery around her as a kind of voice over music video.
In the original - I weep whenever the song is sung, it's sung (or dubbed) for Maria and Tony - who sing it. And it is beautiful. Here, it's sentimental and does not work. I'd have preferred he take it out.
The placement of "I feel Pretty" is equally odd and jarring - it's sung right after Bernado and Riff are killed, and directly before Chino comes to tell Maria that Tony killed Bernado. I can see why they did it - but it makes the song difficult to watch or enjoy. Again it slides towards melodrama cliches.
The final scenes - which no longer include "Somewhere" - are well paced. And tragic. But lacking as well. It worked better to have the beginning and end - set at the same spot - the playground in the original film. Mainly because it's a playground. But the kids fight. And ultimately kill each other on the "community" playground. Also, the cops needed to come in on the scene faster than they do in Spielberg's. It adds something to it. Having them show up after Maria and the gangs leave with Tony's body, doesn't quite work - since it appears they are removing the evidence of a crime - when in truth, I think they are past caring at that point. The problem with hyper-realism in cinema is it can show the cracks more in a story, or the expectation is higher for realism.
That said, what works in Spielberg's version are the bits that do not revolve around the love story.
1. Every scene with Tony and Riff - is packed with energy. Faist and Egort bring it to those scenes. And the musical number "Cool" where Riff and Tony fight over a gun is fun to watch and captivating, even though I spent a good portion of it - wondering why Tony didn't just throw the gun out to sea or let it drop there.
However - the existence of Riff's gun is kind of problematic. In the original, Riff doesn't buy a gun or even consider it. He mentions zip guns but is shot down by the group. Chino is the one with the gun in the original, and it's never clear how he got it.
Tony and Riff have more chemistry than just anybody else in the cast does, which is problematic. And Egort is at his best with Faist.
2. Officer Krupke musical number is for the first time not cringe-inducing. It also works very well - and doesn't have any of the leads participating. In the original they have Riff doing most of the singing, and dancing. Possibly because they had Russ Tamblyn - who is great at that sort of thing. Here - it's the supporting actors playing the Jets who do it - and the setting is the police station - where they've all been brought in for questioning about the rumble. This is closer to the stage musical version.
Krupke leaves them locked in the station - alone, and they tear it apart doing this number - to stave off their fear, anger and frustration.
It works.
3. The Rumble works very well. The fight scenes are brutal. However, in the original it was more of a dance number. And in the original - Tony was less willing to fight. Here - Tony ends up fighting, even though Riff tries to stop him. Then Tony almost goes to far - which wakes Riff up to what he almost did to his friend in his attempt to commit suicide by rumble. That's an interesting character interaction. In this version it's not Tony's fault Riff dies, but Bernardo and Riff's - due to Riff's decision to use Bernado to kill himself, and Bernado's pride and rage - which makes it impossible for him to see through it. Riff is almost happy when Bernardo kills him in this version and kind of tells Tony not to worry about it. (In the other, Riff is shocked, and dismayed.)
Chino in this version helps Tony get into the Rumble. (He's not there in the other. Anybody helps Tony get in - in the other version.) And Tony's depicted as a bit more brutal here.
It's well choreographed and feels like an actual fight. And the camera angles are effective - particularly the first over-view shot, with the gang members shadows converging. But, what's loss is the dance moves.
4. The dialogue for everyone is better. Arthur Larents sucked at dialogue.
Kurshner is an expert. The 1950s fake urban slang is thankfully gone - both from the dialogue and the songs. Cool no longer has "Daddy-O" in the lyrics for example.
But other than that - I prefer the minimalist original version.
Does the film stand on its own two feet- regardless of the original. Yes, I think it does for the most part. But, I would most likely have some of the same criticisms had I not seen the original version. Tony wouldn't have worked that well for me regardless. Bernado may have worked better. Somewhere still wouldn't have worked. And I Feel Pretty would have felt jarring, either way. I'd have removed it and "Somewhere" completely from Spielberg's film, and had Somewhere play at the end credits.
Overall grade?
1961 Version? A- (for the casting of Tony and Maria)
2021 Version? B (see above)
***
Haven't done much today, outside of talk to mother, watch television, and revise my book. Slept until 8, had breakfast late...so...there you go.
Here's a picture.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 01:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 02:20 am (UTC)They work more on building the romance in the Spielberg film, and skimp on the dance. But weirdly, the romance has more chemistry in the Wise film. I've mixed feelings - in some ways certain scenes like "Something Coming" and "Maria" work better in Spielberg's - Egort is allowed to dance and has more to do, also he sings it. In both he interacts with other people and not just with himself. And Maria - ends with him interacting and talking to Maria all night long on the fire escape. While the 1961 musical goes from Tony aimlessly walking with a various colors backlighting him singing Maria to Bernado and Anita's America Dance number and the rumble meeting at Docs, which Tony attends. In the Spielberg versions - Bernado has the rumble discussion in a boys bathroom at the dance, and the America dance song is the next morning.
While the Maria number works better in Speilberg's, the America number and rumble discussion work better in the 1961 version, as does the dance.
The differences are kind of odd.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 04:17 am (UTC)The 1950s fake urban slang is thankfully gone
I do appreciate that. We read the script to West Side Story aloud in English class (think mid 1960s) with kids in the class assigned parts. I can't even remember the name of the bit-part Jet I was assigned. His lines were all that pseudo 1950s garbage, and I just could not make it sound the least bit convincing. Well, at least the rest of the class had a good laugh at my lack of 1950's urban street savvy. ;o)
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 05:04 am (UTC)It's apparently controversial? I discovered this while reading about the revival of the Broadway stage version - and how the original stage version didn't have Maria and Tony sing it - I think the cast did at the end. In the revival they do away with it and just do the orchestration. It's deemed by some to be too sentimental or saccharine.
Except, in the 1961 film version - it works and provides a certain level of pathos to the story - they are singing about the hope of their love, in the face of reality. It drives home the theme. Without it, the Spielberg version feels kind of empty and bleak, without hope.
The analogy to JJ Abrhams reboots of Star Wars and Star Trek is actually a good one in that sense - in that while the story is enjoyable, we have the beautiful score, and the lyrics, and the dance still, but it's ultimately empty and bleak, and not as satisfying on an emotional level.
I honestly think that the best compromise would have been to have the song in orchestration at the end, or sung by someone else over the credits - if they really didn't want Tony and Maria to do it as duet. I'd have kept the duet.
Ideally, I'd like to blend the two together. I want the end from the 1961 version (the ending in the current one doesn't work - either from a musical standpoint or a cinematic staging one - in Spielberg's he is shot in an alley, she runs to him. And they carry him off before the cops show up.
That does not work - it was jarring, bleak and empty. But I want the book from the current version, the Cool number, the Officer Krupke, Something's Coming, and Maria from the current version. America, and the dance sequences from the 1961 version.
The musicals are odd - because I kind of want to take bits of one, and bits of the other and blend them together. LOL!
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 12:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 01:18 pm (UTC)Like you, in "Cool" I did not understand why Tony just didn't throw the gun away. Also, didn't understand how Tony almost kills someone, goes to jail, out and on parole, almost kills someone again and then kills them and we are supposed to find him a romantic lead...
I was glad that everyone did their own singing; I would think the dubbing would feel strange.
I liked Tick, Tick, Boom better (as far as Oscar movies go.)
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 01:33 pm (UTC)OK, first of all Spielberg didn't re-make the 1961 film, he re-made the 1957 Broadway production. So "I Feel Pretty" is where it is in the theatrical version and "Cool" is before the rumble as, again, it's where the theatrical version has it. "Somewhere" is sung off set often by an anonymous person, when I saw the 2010 National Tour they had Anybodys sing it. Kushner and Spielberg wanted a song for Rita and so they made the decision to give her that.
Regarding the ending song :
“In the original, Tony and Maria go to sleep with each other and there’s a dream ballet. In the dream ballet, a fantasy soprano, originally Reri Grist from the Met, comes out and sings ‘Somewhere,’” Kushner explains. “And then Maria does it as a reprise when Tony’s dying. And so I thought, we’re not going to do the dream ballet, and [while] I’m sure Rachel and Ansel would’ve done a fantastic job with it, it felt like I could maybe play around with that since it wasn’t originally them. And as soon as Steven had agreed to the Valentina rewrite of Doc, I thought, ‘Wouldn’t it be?’ I mean, he got Rita Moreno in this movie. Of course, she’ll be great in all the dramatic scenes, but she should sing something.”
Spielberg loved the idea – and the change became a fixture in the script. But deep into filming, Kushner says, Stephen Sondheim pointed out a problem. As the lyricist, who died late last year, noted, if Valentina sings “Somewhere,” then how could Maria possibly know its famous lyrics at the end of the film, when she’s supposed to repeat them back to Tony as he lay dying?
“I said, ‘Well, I don’t know, Stephen. It’s just in the air.’ And he said, ‘Oh, that’s a terrible answer,’” Kushner recalls with a smile. “I said, ‘Well, I’ll have to figure something out.’”
Of course, Kushner, a two-time Oscar nominee, did come up with a fix by simply focusing on the characters. “I thought that ‘Somewhere’ is what she sings to him when he’s dying. ‘There’s a place for us, somewhere, a place for us.’ He’s about to go. She’s a Catholic, but there’s not a lot of evidence that she’s deeply religious or that he is,” he explains. “I felt like promising that we’ll meet together in the afterlife in heaven feels a little sort of Victorian and not quite plausible. And I thought, is there something else that she has sung that she could?”
“And then I thought, ‘Oh, only you. You’re the only one for me forever.’ [From ‘Tonight,’ which the star-crossed lovers do sing together.] What she can say to him is, ‘I’m never going to forget you. I will never get over this. You’re going to be inside of me forever,’” Kushner adds. “I thought that was good. I went to Sondheim and I said, ‘What do you think?’ And he said, ‘I wish I had thought of that.’ Made me very, very happy.”
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 04:11 pm (UTC)You can go a hyper-realistic route on stage - with a musical like West Side Story, because you are on the stage. In cinema - it's not always a great idea.
I can see how the Somewhere song works better with someone else singing it on stage - but it doesn't work as well on screen. Due to the changes in the medium. On-screen - you kind of need some sort of dream ballet - or something to get across Maria and Tony's love for each other - they spend the day together here. So that helps. But as yourlibrarian pointed out in her review - part of the problem with this film - is I don't quite buy the Tony/Maria romance. And yet, I did in the 1960s film adaptation, which is odd. I'm not so sure why I did there, and not here - except that I think the 60s version emphasizes it more, and spends less time on the things that keep them apart. Spielberg's version spends more time on Anita's take - which is everything that keeps them apart and the impossibility of them being together.
Also keep in mind most of the people seeing this - never saw the stage production.
"Somewhere" is sung off set often by an anonymous person, when I saw the 2010 National Tour they had Anybodys sing it. Kushner and Spielberg wanted a song for Rita and so they made the decision to give her that.
I'll have to tell Mother she was right - they gave it to Valentina, just so they had a song for Rita to sing. It changes the meaning of the song - and kind of is jarring. Valentina didn't need a song nor did Rita. In fact it works better if they don't give her a song. She should stay silent. It goes against the story thread to give her a voice. Keep in mind the story is told through the point of view of the two gangs, the adults are for the most part silent, or noise. Made fun of. Not listened to. The kids in the gangs feel unseen and unheard, they have no voice over the changes in their world, no voice in anything - so they sing and they fight each other and those around them. They are the only ones who sing, dance, and fight in the musical - because they feel so trapped. I don't know if the creators intended that when they did the stage version, but it is what worked so well in the 1960s screen version, and why the current one kind of lacks that emotional oomph.
I'd have given the song to Anybody, that's an excellent choice for it, because Anybody is the ultimate outsider, with no place to belong - and feels they have no voice or not heard. Think about the meaning behind the song? Valentina lived a full life with the love of her life, she found a place for herself and her love. She has no real emotional connection to it. It's kind of ...empty as result. They gave it to her for the wrong reasons - to validate "ego" and not to serve the story.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 04:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 05:32 pm (UTC)Also, didn't understand how Tony almost kills someone, goes to jail, out and on parole, almost kills someone again and then kills them and we are supposed to find him a romantic lead...
I agree. I should have cared about Tony, and I didn't. His whole bit about Maria giving him the dream of a better life - bothered me. I actually agreed with Anita and thought Maria was better off without him - which kind of kills the emotional impact of the movie right there.
I was glad that everyone did their own singing; I would think the dubbing would feel strange.
You wouldn't know. Watch "My Fair Lady" sometime - Audrey Hepburn was dubbed. Same with the original West Side Story - both Maria and Tony were dubbed. In fact, Marni Nixon sang for a lot of the leading ladies in the older Hollywood musicals. The reason you wouldn't notice - is that they aren't singing it live - the vocals are added in the sound editing stage. They record it in the studio. Also, something I found out from a former co-worker who records vocals and has recorded music - the voice is changed in the recording stage or sound editing. If your pitch is off - that can be corrected. He basically told me that anyone can have their vocals adjusted in a sound studio or recording now. If you are off pitch - not a problem, its adjusted.
So, you pretty much are listening to dubbing most of the time anyhow. You just don't know it.
Also, I should mention that Natalie Wood didn't know that she was dubbed in the original film until long after it came out - they lied to her. They didn't tell Audrey Hepburn either.
So they didn't know either.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 06:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 06:56 pm (UTC)See, I don't buy the Wood/Beymer romance probably because Wood couldn't stand him as she wanted Warren Beatty to play Tony. I found Elgort/Zegler more believable as she was the person who was giving him hope that he could change his life for the better. And I thought the new backstory for Tony made much more sense. In the original versions there's no need for someone with a stable happy homelife to form a gang so Kushner researched the actual lives of the 1950's gangs to create the Jets. And you'll notice that the Sharks are much older than the Jets, they really aren't a gang as much as a protection squad for the neighboring businesses that don't get a response when they call the police.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 09:25 pm (UTC)That didn't bother me. Marsters and Gellar found each other annoying and did not like each other while filming Buffy. Debra Winger and Richard Gere hated each other in Officer and a Gentleman. Patrick Swayze found Jennifer Grey very annoying in Dirty Dancing. I can handwave that stuff. The camera loves it. And they are getting paid. And it's short lived. We all work with people we don't get along with. And I didn't know any of that about Wood and Beamer until last year. It still doesn't bug me - because I don't see it at all on screen.
Although admittedly the fact that I knew This" about Elgort - probably didn't help. It was definitely in the back of my head while he's checking Maria out at the gym. Whether he did it or not - it was there. And.. Elgort is about 27, the actress playing Maria is 18 - did not help. (While Wood and Beemer were about the same age and looked it.) And the fact that Elgort is kind of creepy..did not help.
He lacks any edge or real screen presence. I'm watching Beemer who does have ooodles of presence. He's attractive. And he has comic timing and charisma. In comparison to Elgort - he's very good, which I never expected to say.
And I thought the new backstory for Tony made much more sense. In the original versions there's no need for someone with a stable happy homelife to form a gang so Kushner researched the actual lives of the 1950's gangs to create the Jets. And you'll notice that the Sharks are much older than the Jets, they really aren't a gang as much as a protection squad for the neighboring businesses that don't get a response when they call the police.
It also makes Tony sort of creepy.
What you wrote above is why the current version didn't work for me. The age difference between the Sharks and Jets. Bernardo going to a rumble with a bunch of kids while he has a boxing career and a community, and these kids aren't really that big a problem - makes no sense.
The problem with hyper-realism which is what Kurshner went for - even to the extent of having the wedding song happen at the Cloisters instead of the Bridal Shop where Maria worked...and getting rid of the dream sequence is the audience starts questioning things they might otherwise handwave.
I have to say - re-watching the 1961 version right now, I prefer it to the current one. Although I agree with yourlibrarian that I'm glad the current version exists and that Spielberg did it. (Even though I wish he'd cast someone else as Tony, and did the ending closer to the original, and got rid of "I Feel Pretty"). Part of the reason I'm glad the current version exists - is Riff. He blew me away. For that performance alone, I'm glad it exists.
I Feel Pretty btw - works better in the 61 version than the current one. I just saw it in the 1961 again - and it is just before she meets with Tony at the Bridal shop. She sings it prior to seeing him. (I don't like the song - I never have, but it works for the romantic build up.) In the current version - it's yet another hammer on the head about the rich vs. poor dynamic going on regarding gentrification, which I think took away from the central themes of the piece.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 09:51 pm (UTC)That must have been in the original Broadway presentation?
I'm watching the 1961 film now - and that is NOT what they did. Instead what the 1961 adaptation did - and it works so well - is have them sing the duet before they make love, when Tony shows up to tell Maria what happened. That's where it should be - and the reprise is the reminder of them coming together in that scene against all odds. The wedding song doesn't quite work in the same way and as a result falls flat. Actually two things work better here - one, Tony tries to break up the fight and doesn't fight. Riff takes over - but he was never meant to fight Bernardo, Ice was. It goes awry, Tony's shirt is ripped and Beemer is very attractive. And very sympathetic.
Maria is on the roof dancing when Chino tells her. Then she chases him off denying it - until Tony shows up and they talk about how there's no place for them anywhere, and they sing Somewhere as a duet. It's such a moving and beautiful sequence and sells the audience on the romance. You kind of fall for them right there. There's no moment like that in the current film.
The stage production clearly didn't know what to do with Somewhere - and the 1961 version fixed the problem, while the current adaptation tried to fix it with Valentina singing it (a colossal mistake in my opinion.)
Cool also works in some respects better in the 1961 version in that it gives the Jets a coming together moment. But in the current version - it would never work - because the whole point is that the Jets have no where to go and are lost. But in some respects its a better dance sequence in the 1961 version since it uses all the dances including the three female dancers.
no subject
Date: 2022-03-06 11:28 pm (UTC)There's less dancing in this version. The opening Jets number - no. The America number...iffy, maybe.
The dance at the gym - yes. Cool? Kind of - I'm on the fence. It's a two person dance number with the two leads, while in the original it was the entire group of Jets dancers but the two leads.
There's acrobatics in the original because of Russ Tambolyn who was a gymnast. And there's a sleeker Robbins style - mainly because Robbins did it himself, and the one who took over was basically studying under Robbins. And it had the stage dancers who were in Robbins shows.