Best Actor/Actress Nominations? For what? Melodramatic oversinging? The halfway decent plot was buried so deep below the never-ending sappiness and routines that it was almost completely lost. It felt more like a bloated music video than a movie.

The music sounded like Disney on Ice. There were no peaks and valleys in the singing. It was all peaks. No room for air or subtlety, which is so often and sadly the case in today's popular music. Who wrote it, anyway? Andrew Lloyd Weber? It was so very, very wrong. Give me Holland-Dozier-Holland any day over that rubbish. it's just a direct slap in the face to Motown and it's incredible legacy.

The one notable is that the cast was loaded with talent and what a waste of perfectly good talent it was. Jennifer Hudson is extraordinary and it's a shame her golden pipes were used for such thin, corny compositions. It was fun, however, to see Beyonce take the Kelly Rowlands role for a spell.

Ah well, maybe I'm not being entirely fair because I basically hate musicals anyway.

>Ah well, maybe I'm not being entirely fair because I basically
>hate musicals anyway.

>Ah well, maybe I'm not being entirely fair because I basically
>hate musicals anyway.

I do think the songs build, even if they start very emotional and go to an even higher plane.

Yes, musicals are melodramatic-- almost all of them, by nature. It's funny you mentioned Chicago below, one of the dryest least-emotional musicals of all-time (but therein lies its appeal, in its sexy cool detachment).

But it's really a pretty good show. By no means is it one of my favorite "shows", but it was done surprisingly well as a film. It's not a show I imagine lends itself to conversion to film easily, as you can tell by a few clunky transitions in the movie (there's so much "performance" of songs within the show that when they sing away from performance, it's awkward at first). But I thought it was filmed beautifully, Condon really created a nice world for those characters, and the performances were all pretty damn good. It's hard to sing those melodramatic songs with an earnestness that sucks you in the way that Hudson and Murphy and the others do.

There are parts I don't dig, sure. But overall I really enjoyed it-- one of the better movie musicals I've seen since Chicago, probably the best since Chicago. And the nature of the beast is its melodramatic delivery... but that's what most musicals are.

After all, these characters have to feel SO emotional that words no longer cut it, they need to SING. There's something intrisically corny about that, but if you give yourself over to it, it can make for a pretty terrific experience.

>I do think the songs build, even if they start very emotional
>and go to an even higher plane.

Which ones? I didn't catch it.

>Yes, musicals are melodramatic-- almost all of them, by
>nature. It's funny you mentioned Chicago below, one of the
>dryest least-emotional musicals of all-time (but therein lies
>its appeal, in its sexy cool detachment).

Chicago was stunning visually, but gave me a headache. The plot was so convoluated and ridiculous, it was impossible to follow. And no, Richard Gere CAN"T act OR sing. But damn if Latifa was the shizzle! She MADE that movie, what there was to be made.

>But it's really a pretty good show. By no means is it one of
>my favorite "shows", but it was done surprisingly well as a
>film. It's not a show I imagine lends itself to conversion to
>film easily, as you can tell by a few clunky transitions in
>the movie (there's so much "performance" of songs within the
>show that when they sing away from performance, it's awkward
>at first). But I thought it was filmed beautifully, Condon
>really created a nice world for those characters, and the
>performances were all pretty damn good. It's hard to sing
>those melodramatic songs with an earnestness that sucks you in
>the way that Hudson and Murphy and the others do.

No. I've seen more moving performances on Knight Rider.

>There are parts I don't dig, sure. But overall I really
>enjoyed it-- one of the better movie musicals I've seen since
>Chicago, probably the best since Chicago. And the nature of
>the beast is its melodramatic delivery... but that's what most
>musicals are.

Well, I did dig my own hole by saying I hate musicals, but is it a lesser evil? Stacked up against classic musicals? No. I'll take Busby Berkeley any day over this.

>After all, these characters have to feel SO emotional that
>words no longer cut it, they need to SING. There's something
>intrisically corny about that, but if you give yourself over
>to it, it can make for a pretty terrific experience.

Sort of like "Trapped in the Closet"? That's not entirely fair though. It was better than that.

What was so complicated about it that made it difficult to follow?

It doesn't take much. I could've done without the singing arguments though...

And while I did enjoy the music, I didn't feel the movie was that good. I mean, it's okay.. but I was really let down by it.

it was bland as hell, imo

>Ah well, maybe I'm not being entirely fair because I basically
>hate musicals anyway.

How's that?

All That Jazz was interesting.

Chicago was well-done, but not my speed.

Negate this!

I've never seen "All That Jazz".

I love "Chicago".

I also loved "Dreamgirls", "Disney on Ice" music and all. It's a Broadway musical. What did you expect it to sound like, real Supremes songs? "Chicago" sounds next-to-nothing like authentic 1928 jazz music. At least "Dreamgirls" makes a halfway decent attempt at charting R&B music from doo-wop to disco (I don't think I'll ever again see a film with a song done in the style of Motown producer Jeffery Bowen ever again)

Incidentally, real Supremes songs had a tendency to sound even more like "Disney on Ice" than anything in "Dreamgirls". Anyone who is actually familiar with the Supremes' catalog outside of what gets played over the Muzak speakers in Red Lobster can tell you that.

Holland-Dozier-Holland = Disney On Ice? Those Smokey Robinson tunes = Disney On Ice? Don't go too far in defending that shitty movie. Even when the Supremes sang Rodgers & Hart, country & western or other standards, they didn't sound Disney on Ice. The original music from the stage version of Dreamgirls was fine when transferred to the big-screen. That new shit for the movie? Wackness. Especially that god-awful "Listen" crap.

Smokey only wrote and produced one (1) top 40 single for the Diana Ross-led Supremes: "The Composer", which is not considered among the Supremes' (or Smokey's) best works.

Second, yes, I'm specifically talking about the Supremes' (numerous) Broadway recordings, namely "Diana Ross & the Supremes Sing and Perform 'Funny Girl'", their Copacabana live recordings, and most of the showtunes they sung on network television in addition to their hits. Some of those are pretty out there as far as a Broadway sound goes (I don't mean that in a bad way at all; they're all actually very good recordings). And I never said the recordings _equaled_ "Disney on Ice". I said "sounds more like". Don't put words in my mouth.

And as far as the new songs, I understand your point with two of the four. "Listen" was...well, "Listen". "Patience" only works within the context of the film; I'm prone to skip it when listening to the soundtrack. And "Perfect World" is too inconsequential to critique.

On the other hand, "Love You I Do" is one my favorite songs in the "Dreamgirls" canon. You can't front on Siedah Garrett.

hey...

first, i wanna say it was never my intention to put words in your mouth, so if that's what came across then i apologize. i also think that sometimes we type things with a certain tenor in our heads but shit comes off more biting than intended when read...

but a correction i would make in your info is that smokey wrote one of my favorite early supremes songs "breathtaking guy" and produced one of my supremes guilty pleasures, "long gone lover," so his input on the trio goes beyond "the composer," which i loathe.

also, my big problem with just the music of "dreamgirls" ('cause i got lots beyond that) is that if they were gonna broaden the musical palette and go beyond the more traditional b'way feel of the original show tunes (which i'm actually a big fan of), then they could have at least tried to be more era-accurate with what they came up with. "listen" is just contemporary dreck, a horrible fit for the movie's time-frame, while "love you i do" is -- to me -- a weak approximation of the era they were going for. but then, i ain't a big fan of the cockroach of the music industry, siedah garrett. respect her hustle and homegirl is always on the grind, going on 40 or 50 years now. but i mean, drag nick ashford's ass from the chair of his weaveologist and have him and val write some shit. ain't at least 2/3 of holland-dozier-holland still alive? they ain't doing shit... hell, if amy winehouse can do it, i know those old pros still got it in them.

and beyonce cannot act. end of story. gorgeous and insanely fuckable, but otherwise useless.

What I said (that Smokey wrote and produced one hit single for the Diana Ross led Supremes) is correct. I, of all people, know the extent of Smokey Robinson's input on the Supremes: he got them their first audition, he stole their guitarist (Marv Taplin) away and made him the sixth Miracle, he produced a lot of their filler, etc. Smoke wrote a good bit of those early Supremes singles that didn't go anywhere. He did later write the "Floy Joy" album for the '70s Ross-less Supremes,

But Smokey Robinson's contributions to the Supremes may go a bit beyond the scope of a post about the music in "Dreamgirls" (*unless we're talking about the character of C.C. White, whose role and relation to the Dreams is not entirely analogous to Smokey's real-life role). I was trying to keep a focus on the Supremes sound in general, meaning: the hits (by Holland-Dozier-Holland and, during the later years, the revolving door of producers) and their pop standards/Broadway stuff. (and upon their most famous/popular and frequently performed recordings from those years).

>
>also, my big problem with just the music of "dreamgirls"
>('cause i got lots beyond that) is that if they were gonna
>broaden the musical palette and go beyond the more traditional
>b'way feel of the original show tunes (which i'm actually a
>big fan of), then they could have at least tried to be more
>era-accurate with what they came up with. "listen" is just
>contemporary dreck, a horrible fit for the movie's time-frame,
>while "love you i do" is -- to me -- a weak approximation of
>the era they were going for. but then, i ain't a big fan of
>the cockroach of the music industry, siedah garrett. respect
>her hustle and homegirl is always on the grind, going on 40 or
>50 years now. but i mean, drag nick ashford's ass from the
>chair of his weaveologist and have him and val write some
>shit. ain't at least 2/3 of holland-dozier-holland still
>alive? they ain't doing shit... hell, if amy winehouse can do
>it, i know those old pros still got it in them.
>
>and beyonce cannot act. end of story. gorgeous and insanely
>fuckable, but otherwise useless.
>
*shrugs* Your opinion.

and all of HDH is alive and well.

Your level of quality may be low.

...with ethnic casts.

"Carmen Jones", "Cabin in the Sky", and "West Side Story" are three of my favorite films of all time.

I also like a lot of drama films about black music and musicians. "Dreamgirls" is like the best of both worlds in a sense.

how can you make an informed judgement then?

but hey, whatever works.

I was explaining why I haven't seen "The Sound of Music" or "All That Jazz", and why neither is very high on my must-watch list.

I guarantee that I've seen - and that I own - far more musical films than you. With black casts, white casts, and whatever. I don't need you to tell me I need to up my 'musicals' watching".

NM

...

Really really bad.

I thought Jennifer Hudson's rendition of 'and I am telling you' was incredible tho.

Really?

.

The technical savvy alone should save it from "worst movie ever".

thats YOUR opinion. fair enough.

to *ME*, it was garbage and the technical savvy didn't redeem it at all. Horrible, horrible film. I wanted the 2 hours of my life back and I was glad I didn't pay money to see it.

In any event, I hope Pass the Popcorn doesn't become the lesson. Y'know, people are so strange...they take on the significance of texts (which really mean nothing and have nothing to do with them *personally*) as if its part of them and then if someone doesn't share their opinion, they make all kinds of presumptions about the poster who disagrees with them....when infact they don't know that person at all and have never even interacted with them lol. Suddenly they have the power of telepathy and shit, just because someone didn't like a musical *they* like.

Unless the makers of Dreamgirls are paying you, you got nothin to worry about.

You think its awesome....fine. I thought it sucked.

However, as I said, I was impressed with Hudson's performance of the song and I hope her career goes from strength to strength.

schedule

Y'all are slippin'
______________________________________________________________________
(I REPEAT)
... and all that could have been...

.