The movie adaptation of "Nine" (2009) - why?
The movie adaptation of "Nine" (2009) - why?
#1The movie adaptation of "Nine" (2009) - why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 12:08am
I don't understand what made Nine an attractive property for a film transfer - it's hardly garnered much attention outside of the Broadway community, unlike Chicago, Les Mis, Phantom (which was a hit in Europe and Japan) - or this decade's Sondheim adaptations, which benefit from intellectual cred and a proliferation of amateur productions. (Even a Catherine Zeta-Jones Gypsy, or a less extravagant Kiss of the Spider-Woman - which Marshall allegedly considered after Memoirs of a Geisha - would have been more enticing.) Let's be frank, had anyone ever hoped they'd make a Nine movie before this project was announced?
Indeed, it's barely an adaptation - using only eight of Maury Yeston's original songs, with Fellini's 8 1/2 providing a weak clothes-line plot. (As though Marshall, Anthony Minghella, Michael Tolkin and the Weinsteins made a film from a cast recording, rather than one of the finest musicals ever written.) Admittedly, one can see what went wrong. But if Kopit's book was unfilmable, I don't see the benefit of culling an adaptation around the ladies they had cast - with one song apiece, and two for Guido and Luisa. Perhaps after making his Chicago, Marshall wanted to make his Cabaret, which is quite unlike the stage show - but still relatable to the conceits and stylisation that was originally employed. The "show within the mind" concept just doesn't work. (It's laughable how the veddy English Judi Dench - literally - leads into "Folies-Bergere", when Daniel Day-Lewis's Guido rubbishes her costume creations.)
Surely, they could have done something else with that cast?
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 12:08 AM
#2Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 12:38am
Your subject title made me laugh, and I agree with you that the movie version of Nine is not very good (I hated it when I first saw it, but saw it again in 2011 and thought it was merely mediocre and a missed opportunity). I think if they had stuck closer to the stage musical's terrific book and score it could have been much better. I fell in love with the score a few years before the film so I was very excited for it, just to have my hopes dashed. I think part of what was wrong was too many huge stars. Out of the main cast, everyone was an Academy Award-winner with the exception of Golden Globe-winner Kate Hudson and Grammy-winner Fergie (who I thought was the best part of the film). With that many stars no one can truly shine the brightest.
Which other Sondheim adaptation has occurred this decade? I can only think of Into the Woods.
"Contentment, it seems, simply happens. It appears accompanied by no bravos and no tears."
evic
Broadway Star Joined: 3/5/04
#4The movie adaptation of
Posted: 8/23/15 at 12:45am
The movie was a hot mess. The casting was ridiculous. Kidman, an Aussie playing an Italian, Cruz, a Spaniard, playing an Italian, Dench , a Brit , playing a French woman, Daniel Day,really stunk, a Brit, playing an Italian, Fergie, an American playing Italian, Cotillard, a French woman playing an Italian, Hudson, an Amercan playing (why the hell was that part created )....Sophia was the only true blood in it- and they took the most beautiful song in the show from her. Granted, they couldn't cast an all Italian cast, but they could have done much better. Marshall's big mistake was trying to recreate the same dream sequences he was successful in in Chicago. I was furious at the creative team for ruining one of my favorite shows. Their idea of casting big "stars" back fired on them. One of the true great failures of theater to film musical adaptations of all time..
#5Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 12:48am
Nine is a truly awful film. It should have transferred extremely well, but I guess Marshall had to "fix" it.
#6Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 12:54am
JoseLee_ said: "^Sweeney Todd?"
Ohh, I was thinking "this decade" referred to 2010-2019, but I guess there were two Sondheim films from the decade of 2005-2015.
"Contentment, it seems, simply happens. It appears accompanied by no bravos and no tears."
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#7Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 1:32am
I went to see this in between rounds of a course of chemotherapy and the time I spent watching it was the only time during my entire ordeal that I wished I was dead.
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 01:32 AM
#8Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 1:42am
LOL. Yeah, this film is why Rob Marshall should never be allowed to direct a musical ever again. I was watching INTO THE WOODS again the other day after having not seen it since Christmas in the theater and I realized that I don't like that, either. I did in the theater but I think it was just because it could have been so much worse, but looking at it again it suffers from the same problem that NINE did. That awful director just didn't trust the material and needed to "fix" it. And now he wants to direct FOLLIES...
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#9Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 1:44am
I have the exact same feelings about the Into the Woods. It's not a total piece of shít that Nine was, but it really lets the material down.
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 01:44 AM#10Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 1:54am
Plus there's absolutely no justifiable reason why Mary Stuart Masterson wasn't cast in this. Her performance on Broadway was one of the greats. I mean just watch this -
#11Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:05am
Jordan, I had the same experience with Into the Woods. I COULD have been a lot worse, but that doesn't mean it was good. And I'm sorry, but only Emily Blunt came close to being good - and Meryl needs to stop with these musicals. She's the same age as Bernadette - why didn't she reprise her role? Or Donna Murphy? Or Mary Testa? I digress...
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
#12Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:09am
Meryl can carry a tune. She can't carry a musical. I've said it a thousand times before, I really wish they'd bring back dubbing in movie musicals. There's so few actors who are good enough singers for them that we just recycle the same few for everything. It's like a community theater. At least if we got good dubbing done (it sure as hell didn't hurt things like MY FAIR LADY or THE KING & I), it would open up the pool of people who would do these movies and we'd probably get a lot more made.
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#13Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:18am
There are people on this board to this day still go all Marion Cotillard should be in this musical or that musical! Only if you like your singing flat and breathy!
I agree about Meryl. I think her voice is probably sounded the best that ever has in Into the Woods, but enough with musicals, Meryl!
Or just flipping do Sunset Blvd. I'd rather Barbra do it, but Meryl can if she promises not to take a role in Follies.
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 02:18 AM
#14Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:19am
Isn't Webber having Glenn Close reprise her Norma in hopes of getting her to do the movie finally?
#15Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:31am
Why is Toni Colette not in any movie musicals? She proved in The Wild Party she can sing. She had a television show (United States of Tara) that was literally just her showing how great of an actress she is. She is more of a name than most musical theatre stars. Not as big as Meryl or Hugh, but she's so good.
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
#16Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:31am
NINE could have been an amazing movie musical. But they tried (failingly) to bring it back to 8 1/2 which was a terrible idea. AND THEY CHANGED TOO DAMN MUCH OF THE STORY & SCRIPT LOSING MOST OF THE SONGS.
The whole "songs in Guido's mind" conceit was actually very appropriate, since that's essentially the way the show is written, but trying to isolate ALL the musical numbers in his mind and furthermore in some bizarre limbo is stupid. Like "My Husband Makes Movies" wouldn't be in Guido's mind. "Be Italian" is a memory in his mind but it requires the presence of Little Guido and the young boys. And so on.
The new songs were OK but in most cases were no match for what they replaced. "Guarda La Luna" is decent but "Nine" is better. So is "Take It All" but "Be On Your Own" is a powerhouse. The re-writing of the Stephanie character was just unnecessary.
I fell in love with the show and score in preparation for the film and was devastated by the schlock they put out.
Keeping BroadwayWorld Illustrated
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#17Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:38am
Jordan, that's probably so. I just can't stand the sound of Glenn Close's voice.
#18Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:38am
Glenn Close needs to stay far away from movie musicals. I love her as an actress but her voice isn't good enough, especially for Norma Desmond. I want a possible film version of Sunset Boulevard to have an actress who can sing the score as written (including maintaining Patti LuPone's original key toward the end of With One Look). I know that's probably not gonna happen but I want to dream.
Also evil made good points about the casting, however they changed the nationality of Nicole Kidman's character to some kind of Scandinavian (Swedish I think?) which still was strange. Also she sang nowhere near as well as she did in Moulin Rouge!
The problem I have with dubbing in movie-musicals is it takes me out of the experience because you can almost always tell that it's not the actor's voice, even if they're perfect for the character in every way but vocally (like Natalie Wood as Maria and Audrey Hepburn as Eliza Doolittle). Find actors who can sing; they shouldn't be too hard to find.
PS: YES to Sally re: Toni Collette. A fabulous actress who can actually sing. I'd love her to be in Follies.
"Contentment, it seems, simply happens. It appears accompanied by no bravos and no tears."
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 02:38 AM
#19Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:39am
Actors who can sing aren't hard to find. BANKABLE stars who can sing are hard to find and that's the difference and the probelm.
#20Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:47am
Toni is ideal for either lead in Follies. As of now it's probably more obvious to cats her as Phyllis, but I would love to see her take on Sally - after Queenie and T, Phyllis almost seems like typecasting her. Not that she wouldn't be brilliant, but she has the chops to play a less aggressive character. But her in anyway involved in the film would make me happy (hopefully without Marshall).
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#21Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:48am
Or they take actors who can sing (well mostly) but then make them sing live take after take after take after take after take, like they did in Les Mis. And then once they start singing live they never shut the hell up about it. They should shut up about it. They didn't sound that great.
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 02:48 AM
Phyllis Rogers Stone
Broadway Legend Joined: 9/16/07
#22Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:52am
I know this kind of makes me an outlier, but I actually really like the Sweeney Todd movie. I would never argue with someone who doesn't like it because I can understand why fervent fans of the show hate it. I'm sure to be that way if and when Follies makes it to the screen.
#23Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 2:59am
As a film outside of the Sondheim musical - it's pretty good. I personally don't like it because they cut too much of the score and two dark brooding protagonists gets grating and boring (I enjoyed Depp, surprisingly, besides some of the questionable singing, Bonham Carter but had no energy).
"Sticks and stones, sister. Here, have a Valium." - Patti LuPone, a Memoir
#24Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 3:00am
I agree with both Sally and Phyllis. Sally (the BWW poster), Toni would be perfect as either one but I think she should play Sally (the Follies character). She has a vulnerability that is so moving. Phyllis (the BWW poster), I agree that they did what was necessary for the film to succeed and I think it's better than most movie musicals in recent memory (and any other Sondheim film). Helena was a little grim for a character usually giddy and insane, but on the whole it's a good movie. And about the singing live, most of the cast of Les Mis would have faired much better in the studio. I watched it for the first time since 2012 about a month ago and while I didn't hate it I thought most of the singing was grating, especially Hugh Jackman. Why he refused to perform Bring Him Home in any sort of falsetto I'll never understand. Did he think he wouldn't seem manly if he sang it as originally sang?
"Contentment, it seems, simply happens. It appears accompanied by no bravos and no tears."
Updated On: 8/23/15 at 03:00 AM
#25Nine -- Why?
Posted: 8/23/15 at 3:02am
Toni is perfect if they ever make that NEXT TO NORMAL movie they talked about.
