Nicole Scherzinger set to be Elphaba in Wicked movie?

[sng]

Posted: 4/21/17 at 10:03pm

“Nicole has held early discussions with film bosses who think she’s perfect for the role of Elphaba. She’s been eyeing a career in acting for some time now, so playing the lead role in a such a popular musical would be a major coup.There’s still some way to go before a final decision but she’s very much in the frame for the job.”

source

what yall think about this??

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 4/21/17 at 10:08pm

Does this seriously need a big star? It's WICKED crying outloud. If they can hire Nicole (a 38 year old) for a college student, they can hire Idina Menzel.

[LesWickedly]

Posted: 4/21/17 at 10:15pm

Don't really know The Sun, but isn't it pretty much a tabloid? Also, I would say she's far from a big star. 

[Jeffrey Karasarides]

Posted: 4/21/17 at 10:36pm

Yes, The Sun is a tabloid magazine. So don't ever believe any of their reports.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 4:39am

I like her, but NO. Also, isn't The Sun the one that's really racist? 

[Dave28282]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 5:14am

I would say that the quality of her singing is good, and that the role needs at least that level of singing quality.

This role needs to have long, powerful notes that go through your soul, soar and therefore feel truthful. That is the language needed with this material. No speak chirping bleating talking here.

Real singing translates to real feelings in musical film. Not constant switching.

I would prefer someone who has played the role before, as these roles need to be sharpened like a diamond over time. 

So although I can see that she could be spectacular in the role, If I had the choice I would still pick someone like Rachel Tucker.

Updated On: 4/22/17 at 05:14 AM

[rjm516]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 8:02am

If the problem with Idina playing it is that she's too old, then this isn't much of an improvement. I'd love a fresh face or at least a young person. 

[PopAria]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 3:21pm

rjm516 said: "If the problem with Idina playing it is that she's too old, then this isn't much of an improvement. I'd love a fresh face or at least a young person.

"

I agree with everyone saying this doesn't need a big star, it's WICKED!  It'd be nice if they gave actual young people a chance by having them audition. Like how Tracy Turnblad was picked for the Hairspray movie.

As for Nicole, I'd like to hear a Broadway Favs album by Nicole since I've heard her voice and love it, but as for playing Elphie on bway, just get a real 20something who can sing and act tf out of this role.  

 

Also, want to say (*for any producers or casting people reading this*) that I would hate for Wicked to become the autotune disaster that was Belle in Beauty and the Beast. Not that Nicole would need Autotune, but if your actor/actress who is a star cannot sing, please don't put them in a musical. 

[Call_me_jorge]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 3:23pm

I agree Poparia, I've been saying it for a while. They could still earn back all the money if they cast elphaba and even Glinda with unknowns and then all the supporting characters wit a-list actors. It would be amazing if they did that.

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 3:26pm

I don't see how a show like this will get legit singers, be 90% sure it will be a star with a passable voice.

This is Elphie from Wicked not Effie from Dreamgirls, no producer would think the way the songs are written is above a huge name who can be auto tuned. 

[PopAria]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 3:53pm

blaxx said: "I don't see how a show like this will get legit singers, be 90% sure it will be a star with a passable voice.

This is Elphie from Wicked not Effie from Dreamgirls, no producer would think the way the songs are written is above a huge name who can be auto-tuned. 

"

It's so sad that you're probably right.  But I disagree with you a little bit- Elphie's role is for people who are BELTERS and can use their chest voice like no other, just like Effie. Think of the belting in Defying Gravity and No Good Deed, Elphaba cannot sing in the same style as Glinda or Belle, and I hope the producers don't overlook that this needs to be a powerful voice. I saw Wicked a couple months ago and was impressed with the current Elphaba because she was powerful and hit every note just like you hear on the cast recordings.  Nicole is exactly the right strong voice type for this, but can she sing Defying Gravity as a 38-year-old?  Maybe that's why she's being considered? 

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 4:02pm

I see your point as a theater lover; the film industry couldn't care less.

Just think of the number of film celebrities who can hum a tune and who could generate millions for a movie studio. I find there is no way that Hollywood would let an relatively unknown who is a great belter take this over a marketable actress who could be auto tuned or helped with some editing. 

This is also a film for two female leads. It's made for a dream celebrity pairing. 

Updated On: 4/22/17 at 04:02 PM

[JennH]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 4:41pm

blaxx said: "I see your point as a theater lover; the film industry couldn't care less.

Just think of the number of film celebrities who can hum a tune and who could generate millions for a movie studio. I find there is no way that Hollywood would let an relatively unknown who is a great belter take this over a marketable actress who could be auto tuned or helped with some editing. 

This is also a film for two female leads. It's made for a dream celebrity pairing. 

 

"

Right, lest we forget POTO and Hairspray...both of those cast moderate unknowns and they did fine. Not blockbusters, but they did well. Not that the POTO cast could sing any of their stuff, let alone act it, it was a terrible cast, but I'm talking about the "unknownness" of those casts. Hairspray cast Nikki and she was fantastic. Everyone else in that cast, whether unknown or not, was great and perfectly cast. And those films right up until about Mammia Mia or so, was in an era that getting anyone to see a musical anything was a struggle.  I feel like all Hollywood cares about are BLOCKBUSTER hits now when they don't have to anymore again. Musicals are more popular than they've been in any recent memory, so why can't they swing certain pieces with some lesser knowns who actually can pull off these roles? Or ANYONE who can do them justice? The Frozen/Wicked parallels are rampant enough, but both scream to kick off some careers with at least the two leads. They're HUGE hits on their own, and I"ll just repeat what we've all been saying...TITLE ALONE WILL SELL THEM. 

And yes, sorry there's no getting about Elphaba, auto tune or not. You can tune someone, but you can't fix actually quality of voice. If they cast someone who can't sing the crap out of it, I will throw things. And frankly I'll 1000% take Nicole regardless of her age, if they must do a "stunt" casting. I doubt this source is reliable but I digress. She has a musical theatre background, we all know this and she's known enough to get people in. Plus I'd want the world to finally see what she can REALLY do and she looks damn good for her age. I'd rather her age be made younger by camera technology than someone else's voice be auto tuned to death to hide the fact they can't sing or use dubbing. I want skilled casts again, every single member. And someone mentioned Dan Radcliffe as Boq sometime back...I gotta say, I didn't think that would work at first but I think otherwise now...he'd be perfect. WOULD he take that small of a role? Who knows.

[brian1973]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 4:57pm

The Sun is a newspaper and makes an awful lot of crap up. Just saying.

[BroadwayConcierge]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 5:00pm

This film better be a Hairspray and not a Phantom, so help me, God.

Also, with a December 2019 release, when does that likely mean filming would commence? In other words, when could we feasibly expect a casting announcement?

[PopAria]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 5:27pm

BroadwayConcierge said: "This film better be a Hairspray and not a Phantom, so help me, God.

Also, with a December 2019 release, when does that likely mean filming would commence? In other words, when could we feasibly expect a casting announcement?

"

A real casting press release could happen at any point depending on how simple they decide to market this movie.

If the producers were smart they'd wait until filming begins to get group production stills and shop around for major magazine cover stories with the production photos to make casting announcements. If this happens, then cast announcements won't be until sometime in 2018... Or they could simply release a boring cast announcement text only press release... if that happens then it could be anytime the cast gets hired.  

as a fan, I'm hoping for a release sooner than 12/19 :) :) 

[blaxx]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 5:56pm

Right, lest we forget POTO and Hairspray...both of those cast moderate unknowns and they did fine. Not blockbusters, but they did well.

POTO cost 70 million to make and grossed 50 domestically. Even if you add the international gross it was far from "doing well".

While Hairspray cast ONE unknown as the lead, she was surrounded by almost a dozen celebrities. Wicked doesn't have the numbers to do so.

I'm sorry Wickedites, this is a paring film; think Lea Michele or Grande at best. If you think an unknown who can sing will share the main role with a film celebrity you're having delusions of grandeur. 

Updated On: 4/22/17 at 05:56 PM

[BrodyFosse123]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 7:43pm

Nicole Scherzinger appears in things: films, TV, etc. 

Nicole Scherzinger does not "star" in things. 

The mass majority have no knowledge of who she is.  Her connection to the The Pussycat Dolls might slightly register a blip so she has that to rely on.  

[UncleCharlie]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 8:41pm

This is exactly the kind of item Nicole's PR team plants in a paper like the Sun to raise her profile and maybe get her on the radar of producers for a film she's interested in. This is done by PR folks every day. Why some here are taking this seriously is not quite clear to me.

[Tag]

Posted: 4/22/17 at 11:58pm

Nicole Scherzinger does not "star" in things. 

The mass majority have no knowledge of who she is.  Her connection to the The Pussycat Dolls might slightly register a blip so she has that to rely on.  

She's well known in the UK.

[adamgreer]

Posted: 4/23/17 at 12:03am

Putting aside the paper's reputation for simply making stuff up, the article in no way says or implies she's "set" for the film. 

[bk]

Posted: 4/23/17 at 12:07am

It's amazing to me that people don't "get" this - this is her publicist planting a story - it has no basis in reality and apparently the only "paper" that bit was this two-bit rag.  And yet, we have this thread.  This is no different than the yearly publicist for Miss Streisand putting out the usual BS story that the Gypsy film is alive and they've signed yet someone else that they've never signed.  And every year we get a thread about it.  I'm sure this year will be no different.  This is what publicists are paid to do - keep their clients name out there.  But continue on, by all means :)

[Dave28282]

Posted: 4/23/17 at 4:16pm

What audiences really want to see is quality. Especially in this day and age, I see clips of new talent appearing all the time and going viral.
People love to be excited about new things, new stars, the next special thing. 

I mean, is there really 1 person on earth that decided to buy a ticket for the les Mis film because of Russel Crowe? And otherwise would have decided not to watch the film?
I don't think so. If anything, performances like that avoid people from watching it a second time and avoid buying the Blu ray, it did for me.
Performances like that will not stand the test of time.

Look at the Beauty and the beast film. Emma Watson was supposedly the big "ticket selling name". Yet it's Luke Evans, Audra Mc Donald and Dan Stevens that bring in the quality and sell the soundtrack and make the film lasting. And yet, Emma's performance was so bad that I can not listen to the soundtrack, and it really keeps me from watching the film again. Maybe I'll give it another go with the French dub.

What the world really warms for is that unknown wonderful talent that really shines through. Stars are so easily created these days.

There is a reason why Mary Poppins and the Sound of Music are still so wonderful today and the Phantom of The opera 2004 film and Les Miserables are not.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 4/23/17 at 6:56pm

Dave28282 said: "What audiences really want to see is quality. Especially in this day and age, I see clips of new talent appearing all the time and going viral.
People love to be excited about new things, new stars, the next special thing. 

I mean, is there really 1 person on earth that decided to buy a ticket for the les Mis film because of Russel Crowe? And otherwise would have decided not to watch the film?
I don't think so. If anything, performances like that avoid people from watching it a second time and avoid buying the Blu ray, it did for me.
Performances like that will not stand the test of time.

Look at the Beauty and the beast film. Emma Watson was supposedly the big "ticket selling name". Yet it's Luke Evans, Audra Mc Donald and Dan Stevens that bring in the quality and sell the soundtrack and make the film lasting. And yet, Emma's performance was so bad that I can not listen to the soundtrack, and it really keeps me from watching the film again. Maybe I'll give it another go with the French dub.

What the world really warms for is that unknown wonderful talent that really shines through. Stars are so easily created these days.

There is a reason why Mary Poppins and the Sound of Music are still so wonderful today and the Phantom of The opera 2004 film and Les Miserables are not.

 

"

No, what audiences really want is a likeable star in a pretty looking expensive movie. If you don't get this, you are delusional.

The movie going public is not made up of theatre lovers. While it is true that Luke Evans and Audra McDonald added quality to Beauty and the Beast, audiences didn't give a rat's ass who was cast in either of those roles. The only things they cared about was that it was an attractively made, well produced new version of a beloved movie and that it starred regognizeable Hermione Granger. Those are the two factors most people cared about, and most of the movie going public didn't realize her voice was auto-tuned to help. Most people are used to listening to pop music where auto-tuning is an industry standard, they listen to it without even thinking about it.

If you want Broadway talent, with trained voices that don't need help, go to New York and see a Broadway show. Stay away from the Hollywood adaptations. The current industry standard isn't for you.

Does it suck that this is how things are now? Sure, but I can still enjoy these movies for what they are, and then run back to my original cast recordings and enjoy those for what they are. The existence of Emma Watson's performance doesn't delete that of Susan Egan or Paige O'Hara. It is just a new representation of the piece based on the taste of what is popular today, as is every film adaptation of a musical. They are products if their time.

Movie's are made for a much wider audience with very different expectations. We, here at Broadway World, are only a small fraction of those going to see these movies. To answer your question, yes, a lot of people DID go see Les Miserables to see Russle Crowe sing. Many people DID go see Beauty and the Beast because of Emma Watson. Maybe some were disappointed, but the masses did not care, and the masses made these movies successes; whether you want to admit it or not.

 

[Dave28282]

Posted: 4/24/17 at 7:31am

jimmycurry01 said: "No, what audiences really want is a likeable star in a pretty looking expensive movie. If you don't get this, you are delusional.

While it is true that Luke Evans and Audra McDonald added quality to Beauty and the Beast, audiences didn't give a rat's ass who was cast in either of those roles. 


If you want Broadway talent, with trained voices that don't need help, go to New York and see a Broadway show. Stay away from the Hollywood adaptations. The current industry standard isn't for you.

 They are products if their time."

 
I think Julie Andrews in the time of Mary Poppins and My Fair Lady is a good example. She was replaced in the latter for not being a big enough star (having done only stage work) and then she was cast on talent for Mary Poppins and we all know how that went. In my opinion the My Fair Lady producers were delusional. The Mary Poppins producers were realistic and smart.

"Names" are a product of their time. Unless the talent is so great that it will stand the test of time.

Luke Evans and Audra Mc Donald are saving the BATB movie, and are the reason people will still watch it next year. Next 50 years. In the end, people DO give a rat's ass about talent.

I don't want Broadway talent, I want natural talent. Julie Andrews, Luke Evans and Audra Mc Donald. And I want this standard on both screen and stage. 

Hugh Jackman in the les Mis film is way too Broadway parody over the top. Not natural. Many stage Valjeans I have seen, including John Owen Jones gave a much more filmic and intimate performance.

The handful of people who came to Les Mis to think it was funny to hear Russel Crowe sing can not be compared to the number of people that were disappointed in this and many generations to come.

 

 

Updated On: 4/24/17 at 07:31 AM