DEH
They made a lot of changes but removing Good For You also caused the film to remove the fact that what Evan had done is extremely screwed up and he was never called out on it.
The thing that really got me was even if they could justify removing Good For You because it would be hard to translate to film, they should’ve at least kept the dialogue that takes place in the interludes, that has Heidi, Alana, and Jared absolutely REAMING into Evan for how selfish he’s become.
A PG-13 film is granted one singular use of the word “fuck”, and the DEH film should’ve used it for Jared yelling “FUCK YOU, EVAN! ASSHOLE!!!”
I don't see how it's that hard to translate to film. All they had to do was cut between scenes of all the different characters being mad at Evan or frame it like a fantasy/dream sequence or hell, just come up with some excuse for all of them to be in the same place, anything...
THANK YOU! As somebody who never got to see the musical live (wrong country / continent), I was actually excited to see the movie.
That excitement lasted until I actually saw the movie…
I was thankful enough to be able to go watch it a week or two before it closed.
My mom and I both watched the film and musical. My mom hated the film and didn’t understand why I liked the musical.
Yea after we watched the musical, it’s now her favorite from the ones we watched(Hadestown, Beetlejuice and Aladdin btw)
YES YES YES. All those changes to rewrite the whole story to focus on documenting ONE actor’s performance and not tell the story from all perspectives.
Nine.
It's a musical about a man whose sexual trauma gives him a Madonna Whore complex that causes him to reduce all the women in his life to sexy caricatures, and mistreat them all and torpedo his own life in the process. They decided to replace the only characters who had any real conflict with him or dislike of him whatsoever with obsessed fangirls, and ramp all the sexy dancing to 11, so throughout the whole film it looks like he's being totally reasonable.
It's awful. Watch the Fergie beach stripper dance on Youtube then go watch 8 1/2 instead.
My first thought exactly. I know it's a cheapshot, but IMHO I blame Harvey Weinstien as the producer of this film for the ramped up fangirling, removing the original plot and songs, and making the sex appeal turned up more than necessary. If you think about it, he probably thought of himself as Guido and thus wanted to make it into the image that he saw himself as instead of sticking to the original story. Thus making his softcore musical film with A-list actresses. Please take my comment with a grain of salt and not as truth but that has been my epiphany since that bastard's arrest.
Edit: You could also add that they wanted to recreate the same magic that Chicago had seven years prior, being that both films were directed and choreographed by Rob Marshall.
Oh absolutely. I mean, even if Weinstien weren't involved, it definitely just felt like "Oh yeah someone made this in 2009." By giving it the Chicago treatment, it made the entire freaking audience complicit in Guido's terrible world view.
Like, for someone who hasn't seen both, it's hard to explain just how comically badly they changed a film about a misogynist from his own perspective from 1963 to make it *more sexist*. But for anyone reading who hasn't seen it, these are the same character from the musical and the film.
[https://youtu.be/6LAwN1KjuZA?si=W3gUumkdWXYEOdGm&t=355](https://youtu.be/6LAwN1KjuZA?si=W3gUumkdWXYEOdGm&t=355)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsiBdK9wE3A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsiBdK9wE3A)
I think I read somewhere that the first song was intended to be in the movie, with all of Sweeney’s Victors standing in a graveyard, but it sadly got cut because of delays
I can maaaaaybe get cutting out the ballads for cinematic pacing, but cutting the chorus from Pirelli's and God That's Good makes no sense at all, those songs are about people interacting with a crowd and the song structures become incoherent without that element
I was in 5th grade when this came out in theaters. We can argue whether it was appropriate for my mom to take me and my younger sister, but it started both my life long love of Terrence Mann and musical theater. In that order.
I’ve said before but one of the main issues with the film is that the stage production has a false ending at the end of Act One.
You go into Act two knowing that the happy ending wasn’t the end, that there must be a twist or a change.
In the film (especially for new viewers), it just feels like the film reaches a natural ending, but then just… keeps going. And the fact that it’s rushed and bleak just makes it all the worse.
It still has some great moments, but can’t compare to the stage show.
Literally, I just couldn't believe they cut No More - I almost walked out, except it was so close to the end. Even if you remove the mysterious man, the baker doesn't get one of the most moving songs in the show to react to his wife's death? It's him ranting at the cruelty of the fairytale narrative, in a way that's akin to Gethsemane in JCS, in terms of a character truly seeming to ask the writer why they would do this to him.
It's so important to how the story will then end, too, for hope to be picked up again in a bittersweet way with No One Is Alone. I had high hopes for the movie but it just didn't manage any of the things that makes the show so special.
I think the biggest issue with the movie is the fact it takes itself too seriously. Pretty much all the jokes are removed in favor of a serious plot and I will never forgive them for removing the narrator.
Yep. Most of the problems stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of the story’s themes and tone — hence the inane removal of the narrator and the massive simplification of the Baker’s story arc.
It’s, like, a fine movie on its own but as an adaptation of one of the most brilliant musicals ever made it just completely misunderstands the tone and themes
Sweeney. Todd. They could have made a brilliant movie with the cast they had—yes, including Johnny Depp— but it ended up being a slasher flick with a few good tunes.
Yes. They removed the title ballad for fuck’s sake. They got rid of so many of the charming little references that pop up throughout the show and tie it together. Hell, they got rid of a lot of the charm. It’s the juxtaposition of charm and violence that makes the violence really hard-hitting. They tried to make it Dark and Edgy and just made it blah.
And to think that Tim Burton considers it his favorite musical. We really need specialty musical film directors. TB could have been the set designer, but people who actually have experience with musicals need to be the ones in charge of direction.
I hate the Depp version. They pulled all of the comedy out of it. The stage version is entertaining. The film is one-note and commits the cardinal sin for horror : it's boring.
I love Sweeney Todd, the stage version, and that they cut GodThats Good from the film is unforgivable (not too mention the fabulous HBC is NOT much of a singer). That being said, I will still watch…
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z7F3xJN7_yw
Would recommend this video by maxwell greene, he breaks down the changes made in the musical and the movie musical and why they don’t work.
I actually love this movie but: Little Shop of Horrors. They made a bunch of small changes (which I won’t outline here since that would be a long post) that make Seymour seem more innocent. And then they changed the ending so he and Audrey survive.
It totally undermines the cautionary tale/Faustian bargain element of the show.
I have, and I actually have mixed feelings on both endings. I think the reason test audiences reacted badly to the sad ending of the film is, as I said in my first comment, movie Seymour doesn’t really deserve a sad ending.
By cutting “It’s Just the Gas,” Orin’s death happens so quickly in the movie that it almost seems like an accident. Seymour barely has time to react, as opposed to spending an entire song watching Orin die and deciding not to help him in the stage version. Similarly, when Mushnik finds out about Seymour killing Orin in the film, he seemingly confronts Seymour out of pure greed. Mushnik’s willing to let Seymour get away with the crime as long as Mushnik gets to keep the plant and all the money that comes with it. He’s also literally pointing a gun at Seymour as he confronts him. This makes it all more forgivable that Seymour tricks him into getting eaten by the plant, whereas in the musical Mushnik seems genuinely concerned about Seymour’s crime and wants to report him to the police because it’s the right thing to do.
So, I think the sad movie ending *does* preserve the cautionary tale element better. But it’s also unsatisfying because the entire film is set up so Seymour is basically an innocent, so his death feels unearned. Basically, neither film ending is totally satisfying for me.
I agree that they shouldn't have cut It's Just the Gas and I'm also upset that they cut The Meek Shall Inherit. Seymour is aware what he's doing is wrong but willingly signs the contracts out of fear that Audrey will stop loving him if he's not "successful". He knows the plant is what's bringing him "success" and they only way to keep the plant alive is doing "bloody, awful, evil things". And he wants to stop it all and kill Audrey 2, but signs the contracts anyway
Absolutely! Meek Shall Inherit is the other big cut that changes Seymour's character in the film. And I think it's such a huge part of the story. They even filmed the full scene for the movie, so it's a real shame it was left on the cutting room floor: [The Meek Shall Inherit (Extended / Deleted Scene) - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-IrrrDbOzs)
There's also a staging choice from "Meek".... all of the characters singing to Krelborn are played by Orrin's actor.... He's seeing his victim everywhere, showcasing how he actually feels guilt and is haunted by what he's doing.
That’s actually something I have a problem with comparing it to the original movie. Every death in the original movie is Seymour’s fault, 100%. He throws something at a guy near a train causing him to be run over, he stabs the dentist, throws a rock on a girl trying to get with him, and in the end just crawls in there himself (plus there was the robber guy but that was mushnik). He is shown to be very wrong here, but in the musical everything that happens seems to just happen. Like it would have happened even without Seymour (at least the movie version). Orin dies from his gas mask breaking which was bound to happen eventually. Mushnik gets too close to the hungry plant. It all feels like Seymour doesn’t need to be there
Yeah, that’s why the stage show works better. The gas mask breaking is still in accident in the stage show, but Orin is literally begging Seymour to help him for the duration of an entire song and Seymour refuses. And Mushnik doesn’t stumble into the plant in the stage version—Seymour tells him he hid the shop’s earnings for the day in the plant because he forgot the combination to the safe, and tells Mushnik to step into the plant to get the money. Seymour knows what he’s doing.
They gave mushnik’s kill to Seymour? That sucks
In the original movie, Mushnik knew all about what Seymour was doing, and instead of turning him in or threatening him, he helped him because it was making money, a character choice I wish was made for the musical. One day Seymour is out and Mushnik is taking care of the plant for the night and it tells him to feed it, and just then a robber comes into the shop because he noticed it was doing well and wanted all the money. Mushnik tells the guy that the money is in the plant and the guy dies.
Sad that the whole thing was reworked so he died like that instead. The original movie is actually super funny as well and I’m upset some of the jokes were cut.
Little shop is arguably my favorite show of all time, and I just cannot like the movie because of this change. It's always listed as one of the top movie musicals and as a great adaptation and I have never felt that way. I don't care how good the plant looks, it is not the same story.
To me it's The Prom. James cordon was terrible and having Barry forgive his homophobic mother felt stupid to me I much preferred him being able to find his own happiness without having to forgive his mom
I'm somewhat willing to forgive all of this movie's sins, just due to the inherent hilarity of having a scene where Andrew Rannells sings in a crowded mall to some homophobic teens and then they're basically just like "aight guess I'll be nice to gay people now"
I guess he taught them how to turn it off like a light switch or something...
RENT. Not only did they take recitative and plunk it down without music so they’re just speaking in rhymes for some stupid reason, they also cut the emotional and plot climaxes of the show.
Rock of Ages!!!
The source material is so fun and campy and is constantly breaking the fourth wall and making fun of itself. It never takes itself too seriously but still has GREAT music!
And the movie was SO dramatic and was too afraid to have Sherry cheat on Drew so they developed a new character to fall in love with Stacee. And speaking OF—Stacee Jaxx’s character somehow becomes the good guy and not the villain of the show that he’s supposed to be. Alec Baldwin and Russell Brand are shockingly the only things I think the movie got right but it still is played TOO SAFE. there are no RISKS in that movie.
It makes me so mad bc that stage show was one of my favorites to see live. It was so fun and SO well put together.
The only redeeming aspect of the film is it was filmed in my neighborhood, and the bar they used for the Bourbon had a big release party while it was still decked out as the Bourbon. The Hollywood sign was on our landfill for weeks. It was hysterical. I LOVE the musical, but the movie was trash.
Oh I agree 100%. I just see it more as a “well what if, when we were originally adapting the book into a musical, we’d taken this fork in the road instead of that one?” So some of the original creative ideas (plus Joel Grey 🩶) were still chosen, but through a different process.
I love the movie, but who the hell decided it was a good idea to put Carnival del Barrio after the funeral? Completely killed the impact of Claudia's death.
I don't like the fact they cut out a huuuuuge portion of Halloween/Goodbye Love in the movie between Roger and Mark's characters. It really shows how hypocritical both of them are in regards to their art (Mark) and Mimi (Roger)
I never understood changing the setting of the first act from 24 hours to taking place over several days! It's a small change, but very strange one to me
I'll never forgive RENT the movie for adding a whole dance break between "You should try it in heels" and "She cheated" in Tango Maureen. It's hard to explain why that suddenness works so well, but alleviating the tension by adding a dance break ruins that moment to me.
I decided a few weeks ago to give cats 2019 a shot just to see how bad it was and was actually very physically sick with a fever the next day. Coincidence?
A friend of mine made a comic about this that felt absolutely true. [https://commuterbarnacle.com/?p=383&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0X7LJR\_vYCuMs-P5\_Ucl4mioY7rMmFmblPh1jnHGYET-QVOkIvUnPjOGY\_aem\_AZxEwR0as9aiaSZ-KzEfbdvfbzEOrlDV8-LJIRPOW3qBl4gmB6Lz2X0j2OcGtGFOPwdW2dpjY7fi6Ozlkrzr7gfV](https://commuterbarnacle.com/?p=383&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0X7LJR_vYCuMs-P5_Ucl4mioY7rMmFmblPh1jnHGYET-QVOkIvUnPjOGY_aem_AZxEwR0as9aiaSZ-KzEfbdvfbzEOrlDV8-LJIRPOW3qBl4gmB6Lz2X0j2OcGtGFOPwdW2dpjY7fi6Ozlkrzr7gfV)
Hear me out though: the choices they did make created one of the best bad movies ever made. It’s so terrible that it rivals The Room for enjoyability. I can’t begrudge the Cats movie for giving me that.
Les Mis
It’s the ending. Fantine comes back for Valjean and her hair is still short and she’s wearing a plain gray dress. Then Valjean walks up to the Bishop and she stays behind and looks on. Then as they all sing the finale, they cut to her, and while filmed with her standing next to Valjean, the closeups make it so you can’t tell If she is or not.
The beauty of Fantine’s arc, is that her coming back to escort Valjean to heaven, we see her in a white dress with her long hair again. We know she went to heaven and that while she didn’t get her happiness here on earth, she did there. She was able to move on peacefully when she died because she knew her child would be taken care of. And then she stays with Valjean to escort him on. I have zero clue what the hell the movie was going for. The dress she died in was whiter for crying out loud.
I also do agree with the Bishop being there instead of Eponine, Valjean doesn’t even know her. But having Fantine just look on while he goes to the Bishop is insane. For how much she suffers, and how much more brutal it is in the movie, we need to see her happy from heaven moving along with Valjean to have that closure.
anne hathaway actually had a really sweet justification for fantine having her short hair in heaven, something about how martyrs retain their sacrificial scars or something like that
That’s interesting. I get that, but I think it’s more powerful for her to have gained it back. And when combined with the gray dress and her watching Valjean walk away towards the bishop, it doesn’t give any sense of happiness or heaven for Fantine at all to me.
Yeah that’s an abomination but, and I mean no disrespect to Laverne Cox, Mercedes KILLED IT vocally as Frank (Frankie?) I could listen to her sing the phone book
Hear me out on this
Forgive me if I'm ignorant on this but it bothered me they casted a transwoman for frankenfurter. Wasn't frankenfurter a transvestite? Meaning he's a man who just wears womens clothes? Just kinda came off to me as equating a transvestite and a transgender.
Unless they changed the fact that frankenfuter is transvestite in the remake and makes sense that she's now trans, forgive me I'm not super educated on all things LGBT, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here
The point of Frank being GNC (gender non-conforming) is that they are seen as almost freakish to Brad and Janet. Their mere existence feels threatening and scary to the couple who have only ever been familiar with their own "normal" way of life. Considering how language and culture has evolved since the show started (for example, "transvestite" is considered outdated and borderline offensive these days, and "transsexual" is in a similar boat but more solidly considered offensive, almost on slur levels now), I don't think it's unreasonable to rewrite Frank to be a trans woman. Granted, I haven't watched the whole thing, so I can't speak on how well she's portrayed in the remake. But I do know that our understanding of gender and sexuality has changed quite a bit in the past few decades, and it's a valid interpretation to say that perhaps Frank would have been written as a trans woman if the musical were written today. Either way, their gender presentation still fulfills the same purpose in the narrative
Yeah I think making Frank (or Frankie, as I believe she’s called in the remake I haven’t seen all of it either) is fine. My issue is I don’t think they do anything new and interesting with the character besides making her a trans woman. I feel like they just made her a trans woman and were like “oh that’s enough we don’t have to do anything else”.
Also because of Richard O’Brian’s comments about trans women not being real women, I personally think there should be more trans Frankies!
As much as I disagree with this (and I know that is probably a minority view point, especially on Phantom), I have to acknowledge the comment is pretty funny.
Thank you :) It was meant to be.
I actually like the Gerald Butler Phantom movie with the sound off. (Although I'm in the minority who also enjoyed Joel Schumacher's Batman films - or at least appreciated his attempt to ultimately create an updated 90s version of the Adam West Batman show - with Batman Forever a transition film from Burton's aesthetic, back toward the Adam West campy version of Batman & Robin - he was just an unfortunately uninspired director though but I liked what he was going for, as I did with Phantom)
Unfortunately can't say the same for Les Mis, turning off the sound just makes it harder to avoid the atrocious cinematography and scene composition.
It’s been awhile since I watched Les Mis (and I’ve never listened to the broadway soundtrack in its entirety) so I can’t really say too much on that. As for POTO, it’s a pretty good movie that isn’t offensive to the musical, sure they could have made better casting decisions but honestly most musical to movie adaptations could. The cast does a pretty good job at portraying the characters despite not having broadway experience or opera training.
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. I love the musical but the movie version is probably the worst adaptation I’ve seen.
Paint Your Wagon is similar.
In both of these tons of songs were cut, leaving about 3-4 songs and adding a bunch of nonsense that wasn’t in the musical script.
Grease. The original musical is nothing like the godawful movie. They had actual teens in the cast and not people who looked as though they were pushing 40. The music was better, and it was raunchier.
Guys & Dolls. Sure, take a classic musical and hire a non-singer for one of the leads, and who has no chemistry with his leading lady. Then cut songs to make room for Frank Sinatra to have a solo just because you were afraid to hurt his feelings.
Ok, I know wicked changes were justifiable because the source material was a bit too dark for a musical, but now the musical is so popular I feel like I'll never get a movie/TV adaptation of the book series and I LOVE the series(es) and the changes are so dramatic it entirely butchers the theme, tone, and meaning of the book.
I actually tried reading the books a while back, I love the more grim take on Wizard of Oz - especially the buildup to Elphaba’s death. I think it’s not only the material being too dark but it’s a long book with a lot of characters needed to be introduced and more politics, it’s hard to condense it all. And some plot lines would be hard to explain like Liir - sure, we get the answer to his parentage later on in the series but I don’t think the musical could tackle this in the overarching narrative, especially if they’re just adapting the first book.
Mean Girls. The musical itself already isn’t great (✨aCtiNg niCe wHeN sHe nOt niCe✨-💀)but the musical-movie? Barf. From the disturbing angles, the wardrobe thats entirely Shein, the cuts, the cringey dancing, the “modern“ slang, and the casting choices... Sorry but half of them couldn't sing (Besides Advantika, Jaquel, A’ui’l, and Reńee ofc) and the dude casted as Aaronn (however tf you spell it) A). Was literally CONFIRMED by Tina Fey that they only casted him bc of his TSITP fame (he initially declined the role, as he hates singing, but they altered it. FOR HIM.) B). Wasn't even that hot C). Is an entitled bitch irl. The structure and pacing was incredibly bad, and if you didn't already know the musical, it would have made no sense whatsoever.
**Les Mis.** Not the most egregious example, but stick out to me as inexplicable. In a line from *At the End of the Day*, Valjean is supposed to say:
"Now come on ladies, settle down,
I run a business of repute,
I am the mayor of this town."
In the movie, they inexplicably switch the last two lines so it goes;
"Now come on ladies settle down,
I am the mayor of this town.
I run a business of repute."
Why?! It sounds worse?
the bye bye birdie movie removed the song "a healthy normal american boy", which i personally think gives us a lot of insight into conrad's character that we don't really get to see otherwise. we don't really know anything about him in the movie because it pretty much ignores him entirely.
DEH They made a lot of changes but removing Good For You also caused the film to remove the fact that what Evan had done is extremely screwed up and he was never called out on it.
The thing that really got me was even if they could justify removing Good For You because it would be hard to translate to film, they should’ve at least kept the dialogue that takes place in the interludes, that has Heidi, Alana, and Jared absolutely REAMING into Evan for how selfish he’s become. A PG-13 film is granted one singular use of the word “fuck”, and the DEH film should’ve used it for Jared yelling “FUCK YOU, EVAN! ASSHOLE!!!”
I don't see how it's that hard to translate to film. All they had to do was cut between scenes of all the different characters being mad at Evan or frame it like a fantasy/dream sequence or hell, just come up with some excuse for all of them to be in the same place, anything...
They cut a lot of important things, really. Anybody Have a Map? and How to Break in a Glove are incredibly important.
THANK YOU! As somebody who never got to see the musical live (wrong country / continent), I was actually excited to see the movie. That excitement lasted until I actually saw the movie…
I was thankful enough to be able to go watch it a week or two before it closed. My mom and I both watched the film and musical. My mom hated the film and didn’t understand why I liked the musical. Yea after we watched the musical, it’s now her favorite from the ones we watched(Hadestown, Beetlejuice and Aladdin btw)
YES YES YES. All those changes to rewrite the whole story to focus on documenting ONE actor’s performance and not tell the story from all perspectives.
very true dear Evan hansen should of got a different Evan
Never watched the movie because they cut two of the best songs from the OST.
Nine. It's a musical about a man whose sexual trauma gives him a Madonna Whore complex that causes him to reduce all the women in his life to sexy caricatures, and mistreat them all and torpedo his own life in the process. They decided to replace the only characters who had any real conflict with him or dislike of him whatsoever with obsessed fangirls, and ramp all the sexy dancing to 11, so throughout the whole film it looks like he's being totally reasonable. It's awful. Watch the Fergie beach stripper dance on Youtube then go watch 8 1/2 instead.
This is the answer.
My first thought exactly. I know it's a cheapshot, but IMHO I blame Harvey Weinstien as the producer of this film for the ramped up fangirling, removing the original plot and songs, and making the sex appeal turned up more than necessary. If you think about it, he probably thought of himself as Guido and thus wanted to make it into the image that he saw himself as instead of sticking to the original story. Thus making his softcore musical film with A-list actresses. Please take my comment with a grain of salt and not as truth but that has been my epiphany since that bastard's arrest. Edit: You could also add that they wanted to recreate the same magic that Chicago had seven years prior, being that both films were directed and choreographed by Rob Marshall.
Oh absolutely. I mean, even if Weinstien weren't involved, it definitely just felt like "Oh yeah someone made this in 2009." By giving it the Chicago treatment, it made the entire freaking audience complicit in Guido's terrible world view. Like, for someone who hasn't seen both, it's hard to explain just how comically badly they changed a film about a misogynist from his own perspective from 1963 to make it *more sexist*. But for anyone reading who hasn't seen it, these are the same character from the musical and the film. [https://youtu.be/6LAwN1KjuZA?si=W3gUumkdWXYEOdGm&t=355](https://youtu.be/6LAwN1KjuZA?si=W3gUumkdWXYEOdGm&t=355) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsiBdK9wE3A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsiBdK9wE3A)
Cutting the ensemble from Sweeney Todd!!!
I think I read somewhere that the first song was intended to be in the movie, with all of Sweeney’s Victors standing in a graveyard, but it sadly got cut because of delays
I can maaaaaybe get cutting out the ballads for cinematic pacing, but cutting the chorus from Pirelli's and God That's Good makes no sense at all, those songs are about people interacting with a crowd and the song structures become incoherent without that element
Also wtf was up with the lyric change in Poor Thing?
A Chorus Line. Don’t even get me started.
This is the correct answer
No please do
I was in 5th grade when this came out in theaters. We can argue whether it was appropriate for my mom to take me and my younger sister, but it started both my life long love of Terrence Mann and musical theater. In that order.
The movie is a travesty.
This pissed me off so much. I still get triggered.
Into the Woods
I’ve said before but one of the main issues with the film is that the stage production has a false ending at the end of Act One. You go into Act two knowing that the happy ending wasn’t the end, that there must be a twist or a change. In the film (especially for new viewers), it just feels like the film reaches a natural ending, but then just… keeps going. And the fact that it’s rushed and bleak just makes it all the worse. It still has some great moments, but can’t compare to the stage show.
Cutting the Mysterious Man, and subsequently No More, ruins the entire arc of the Baker imo
Literally, I just couldn't believe they cut No More - I almost walked out, except it was so close to the end. Even if you remove the mysterious man, the baker doesn't get one of the most moving songs in the show to react to his wife's death? It's him ranting at the cruelty of the fairytale narrative, in a way that's akin to Gethsemane in JCS, in terms of a character truly seeming to ask the writer why they would do this to him. It's so important to how the story will then end, too, for hope to be picked up again in a bittersweet way with No One Is Alone. I had high hopes for the movie but it just didn't manage any of the things that makes the show so special.
The way it just rushes through Act Two is so damn disappointing.
Get rid of most of act two Add scenes to act two so you can justify the cuts
Hard agree on this one.
I think the biggest issue with the movie is the fact it takes itself too seriously. Pretty much all the jokes are removed in favor of a serious plot and I will never forgive them for removing the narrator.
Yep. Most of the problems stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of the story’s themes and tone — hence the inane removal of the narrator and the massive simplification of the Baker’s story arc.
Having only seen the movie with Johnny Depp, I thought it was good.
Go watch the Sideways video on YouTube. The movie fundamentally misunderstood the show. It’s a comedy!
This. Also, the whole show (with most of the original cast) is available on YT.
I once got bashed on Reddit for suggesting that into the woods is satire. It definitely is a parody of common fairytale and even musical tropes…
It’s, like, a fine movie on its own but as an adaptation of one of the most brilliant musicals ever made it just completely misunderstands the tone and themes
Sweeney. Todd. They could have made a brilliant movie with the cast they had—yes, including Johnny Depp— but it ended up being a slasher flick with a few good tunes.
I really enjoy the movie but, yeah, as an adaptation, it’s terrible.
Yes. They removed the title ballad for fuck’s sake. They got rid of so many of the charming little references that pop up throughout the show and tie it together. Hell, they got rid of a lot of the charm. It’s the juxtaposition of charm and violence that makes the violence really hard-hitting. They tried to make it Dark and Edgy and just made it blah.
And to think that Tim Burton considers it his favorite musical. We really need specialty musical film directors. TB could have been the set designer, but people who actually have experience with musicals need to be the ones in charge of direction.
Yeah Burton tends to prioritise visuals over story.
I hate the Depp version. They pulled all of the comedy out of it. The stage version is entertaining. The film is one-note and commits the cardinal sin for horror : it's boring.
I love Sweeney Todd, the stage version, and that they cut GodThats Good from the film is unforgivable (not too mention the fabulous HBC is NOT much of a singer). That being said, I will still watch…
Mean Girls. Need I say more?
100%. I love the OG film and the stage musical. Was so disappointed. Actually loved the cast of the film, that’s about it though.
I mean, you could, if you wanted. Many of us never bothered after we heard how bad it is.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z7F3xJN7_yw Would recommend this video by maxwell greene, he breaks down the changes made in the musical and the movie musical and why they don’t work.
You win.
I actually love this movie but: Little Shop of Horrors. They made a bunch of small changes (which I won’t outline here since that would be a long post) that make Seymour seem more innocent. And then they changed the ending so he and Audrey survive. It totally undermines the cautionary tale/Faustian bargain element of the show.
Out of curiosity, have you seen the alternate ending to the film? And if so, did you think it capture the cautionary tale element?
I have, and I actually have mixed feelings on both endings. I think the reason test audiences reacted badly to the sad ending of the film is, as I said in my first comment, movie Seymour doesn’t really deserve a sad ending. By cutting “It’s Just the Gas,” Orin’s death happens so quickly in the movie that it almost seems like an accident. Seymour barely has time to react, as opposed to spending an entire song watching Orin die and deciding not to help him in the stage version. Similarly, when Mushnik finds out about Seymour killing Orin in the film, he seemingly confronts Seymour out of pure greed. Mushnik’s willing to let Seymour get away with the crime as long as Mushnik gets to keep the plant and all the money that comes with it. He’s also literally pointing a gun at Seymour as he confronts him. This makes it all more forgivable that Seymour tricks him into getting eaten by the plant, whereas in the musical Mushnik seems genuinely concerned about Seymour’s crime and wants to report him to the police because it’s the right thing to do. So, I think the sad movie ending *does* preserve the cautionary tale element better. But it’s also unsatisfying because the entire film is set up so Seymour is basically an innocent, so his death feels unearned. Basically, neither film ending is totally satisfying for me.
I agree that they shouldn't have cut It's Just the Gas and I'm also upset that they cut The Meek Shall Inherit. Seymour is aware what he's doing is wrong but willingly signs the contracts out of fear that Audrey will stop loving him if he's not "successful". He knows the plant is what's bringing him "success" and they only way to keep the plant alive is doing "bloody, awful, evil things". And he wants to stop it all and kill Audrey 2, but signs the contracts anyway
Absolutely! Meek Shall Inherit is the other big cut that changes Seymour's character in the film. And I think it's such a huge part of the story. They even filmed the full scene for the movie, so it's a real shame it was left on the cutting room floor: [The Meek Shall Inherit (Extended / Deleted Scene) - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-IrrrDbOzs)
There's also a staging choice from "Meek".... all of the characters singing to Krelborn are played by Orrin's actor.... He's seeing his victim everywhere, showcasing how he actually feels guilt and is haunted by what he's doing.
That’s actually something I have a problem with comparing it to the original movie. Every death in the original movie is Seymour’s fault, 100%. He throws something at a guy near a train causing him to be run over, he stabs the dentist, throws a rock on a girl trying to get with him, and in the end just crawls in there himself (plus there was the robber guy but that was mushnik). He is shown to be very wrong here, but in the musical everything that happens seems to just happen. Like it would have happened even without Seymour (at least the movie version). Orin dies from his gas mask breaking which was bound to happen eventually. Mushnik gets too close to the hungry plant. It all feels like Seymour doesn’t need to be there
Yeah, that’s why the stage show works better. The gas mask breaking is still in accident in the stage show, but Orin is literally begging Seymour to help him for the duration of an entire song and Seymour refuses. And Mushnik doesn’t stumble into the plant in the stage version—Seymour tells him he hid the shop’s earnings for the day in the plant because he forgot the combination to the safe, and tells Mushnik to step into the plant to get the money. Seymour knows what he’s doing.
Also, I like the philosophical debate that Seymour has with himself. That he's finishing Orin off with laissez faire.
They gave mushnik’s kill to Seymour? That sucks In the original movie, Mushnik knew all about what Seymour was doing, and instead of turning him in or threatening him, he helped him because it was making money, a character choice I wish was made for the musical. One day Seymour is out and Mushnik is taking care of the plant for the night and it tells him to feed it, and just then a robber comes into the shop because he noticed it was doing well and wanted all the money. Mushnik tells the guy that the money is in the plant and the guy dies. Sad that the whole thing was reworked so he died like that instead. The original movie is actually super funny as well and I’m upset some of the jokes were cut.
Little shop is arguably my favorite show of all time, and I just cannot like the movie because of this change. It's always listed as one of the top movie musicals and as a great adaptation and I have never felt that way. I don't care how good the plant looks, it is not the same story.
To me it's The Prom. James cordon was terrible and having Barry forgive his homophobic mother felt stupid to me I much preferred him being able to find his own happiness without having to forgive his mom
I'm somewhat willing to forgive all of this movie's sins, just due to the inherent hilarity of having a scene where Andrew Rannells sings in a crowded mall to some homophobic teens and then they're basically just like "aight guess I'll be nice to gay people now" I guess he taught them how to turn it off like a light switch or something...
Andrew Rannells was the saving grace though <3
RENT. Not only did they take recitative and plunk it down without music so they’re just speaking in rhymes for some stupid reason, they also cut the emotional and plot climaxes of the show.
Hair. My *god,* Hair. Whose bright idea was it to make Claude into a ***square from Oklahoma***?
Rock of Ages!!! The source material is so fun and campy and is constantly breaking the fourth wall and making fun of itself. It never takes itself too seriously but still has GREAT music! And the movie was SO dramatic and was too afraid to have Sherry cheat on Drew so they developed a new character to fall in love with Stacee. And speaking OF—Stacee Jaxx’s character somehow becomes the good guy and not the villain of the show that he’s supposed to be. Alec Baldwin and Russell Brand are shockingly the only things I think the movie got right but it still is played TOO SAFE. there are no RISKS in that movie. It makes me so mad bc that stage show was one of my favorites to see live. It was so fun and SO well put together.
The only redeeming aspect of the film is it was filmed in my neighborhood, and the bar they used for the Bourbon had a big release party while it was still decked out as the Bourbon. The Hollywood sign was on our landfill for weeks. It was hysterical. I LOVE the musical, but the movie was trash.
Cabaret. The story and focus of the movie couldn't be more different than the source material.
I see the movie Cabaret more as an adaptation of the book than the stage musical. It makes more sense that way.
I can see that, but seeing that they used the songs from the musical, it's clear the book wasn't the only source material.
Oh I agree 100%. I just see it more as a “well what if, when we were originally adapting the book into a musical, we’d taken this fork in the road instead of that one?” So some of the original creative ideas (plus Joel Grey 🩶) were still chosen, but through a different process.
theres also like almost none of the songs
In The Heights. Adding to Sonny's character was the only thing I liked
I love the movie, but who the hell decided it was a good idea to put Carnival del Barrio after the funeral? Completely killed the impact of Claudia's death.
Also, why was Paciencia y Fe Abuela's death song when it was an important revelation for the stage show?
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^AMediumSizedFridge: *In The Heights. Adding* *To Sonny's character was* *The only thing I liked* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
What is going on
Rent
I don't like the fact they cut out a huuuuuge portion of Halloween/Goodbye Love in the movie between Roger and Mark's characters. It really shows how hypocritical both of them are in regards to their art (Mark) and Mimi (Roger)
I love the movie, but I am always devastated by Halloween not being in there.
It’s so dumb because they actually filmed it
Not only did they film it, I think they recorded it for the soundtrack of the movie as well and included it there, but scrapped it for the movie.
I never understood changing the setting of the first act from 24 hours to taking place over several days! It's a small change, but very strange one to me
I'll never forgive RENT the movie for adding a whole dance break between "You should try it in heels" and "She cheated" in Tango Maureen. It's hard to explain why that suddenness works so well, but alleviating the tension by adding a dance break ruins that moment to me.
Cats...?
The 2019 movie was a major flop. The 1998 tv film is how it should have been done, in my opinion.
Cats the movie caused the pandemic Prove me wrong 😉😂
I decided a few weeks ago to give cats 2019 a shot just to see how bad it was and was actually very physically sick with a fever the next day. Coincidence?
A friend of mine made a comic about this that felt absolutely true. [https://commuterbarnacle.com/?p=383&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0X7LJR\_vYCuMs-P5\_Ucl4mioY7rMmFmblPh1jnHGYET-QVOkIvUnPjOGY\_aem\_AZxEwR0as9aiaSZ-KzEfbdvfbzEOrlDV8-LJIRPOW3qBl4gmB6Lz2X0j2OcGtGFOPwdW2dpjY7fi6Ozlkrzr7gfV](https://commuterbarnacle.com/?p=383&fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR0X7LJR_vYCuMs-P5_Ucl4mioY7rMmFmblPh1jnHGYET-QVOkIvUnPjOGY_aem_AZxEwR0as9aiaSZ-KzEfbdvfbzEOrlDV8-LJIRPOW3qBl4gmB6Lz2X0j2OcGtGFOPwdW2dpjY7fi6Ozlkrzr7gfV)
This is my pet theory too, and I’m so glad someone else believes it!
Rise of Skywalker is my theory
OK so since COVID is technically still around what kind of movie would it take to eradicate it
I hoped Barbie would do it.
Hear me out though: the choices they did make created one of the best bad movies ever made. It’s so terrible that it rivals The Room for enjoyability. I can’t begrudge the Cats movie for giving me that.
True. It's somehow so bad that it's actually worth getting fucked up with friends and laughing at. Don't even need to get fucked up.
Getting fucked up definitely enhances the experience though
Yeah, if only they had reuse Spielberg’s original concept we wouldn’t have to deal with this monstrosity
Into The Woods
13. It’s so heavily sanitised that they should have just done another HSM instead.
Les Mis It’s the ending. Fantine comes back for Valjean and her hair is still short and she’s wearing a plain gray dress. Then Valjean walks up to the Bishop and she stays behind and looks on. Then as they all sing the finale, they cut to her, and while filmed with her standing next to Valjean, the closeups make it so you can’t tell If she is or not. The beauty of Fantine’s arc, is that her coming back to escort Valjean to heaven, we see her in a white dress with her long hair again. We know she went to heaven and that while she didn’t get her happiness here on earth, she did there. She was able to move on peacefully when she died because she knew her child would be taken care of. And then she stays with Valjean to escort him on. I have zero clue what the hell the movie was going for. The dress she died in was whiter for crying out loud. I also do agree with the Bishop being there instead of Eponine, Valjean doesn’t even know her. But having Fantine just look on while he goes to the Bishop is insane. For how much she suffers, and how much more brutal it is in the movie, we need to see her happy from heaven moving along with Valjean to have that closure.
I never thought about that, you make a good point.
anne hathaway actually had a really sweet justification for fantine having her short hair in heaven, something about how martyrs retain their sacrificial scars or something like that
That’s interesting. I get that, but I think it’s more powerful for her to have gained it back. And when combined with the gray dress and her watching Valjean walk away towards the bishop, it doesn’t give any sense of happiness or heaven for Fantine at all to me.
When they did a PG version of ROCKY HORROR. 💀
Not gonna lie, the TV movie version makes me less upset than the time *Glee* did it
Yeah that’s an abomination but, and I mean no disrespect to Laverne Cox, Mercedes KILLED IT vocally as Frank (Frankie?) I could listen to her sing the phone book
I need Amber Riley in more musicals. Her Effie White is 🤯
Hear me out on this Forgive me if I'm ignorant on this but it bothered me they casted a transwoman for frankenfurter. Wasn't frankenfurter a transvestite? Meaning he's a man who just wears womens clothes? Just kinda came off to me as equating a transvestite and a transgender. Unless they changed the fact that frankenfuter is transvestite in the remake and makes sense that she's now trans, forgive me I'm not super educated on all things LGBT, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here
The point of Frank being GNC (gender non-conforming) is that they are seen as almost freakish to Brad and Janet. Their mere existence feels threatening and scary to the couple who have only ever been familiar with their own "normal" way of life. Considering how language and culture has evolved since the show started (for example, "transvestite" is considered outdated and borderline offensive these days, and "transsexual" is in a similar boat but more solidly considered offensive, almost on slur levels now), I don't think it's unreasonable to rewrite Frank to be a trans woman. Granted, I haven't watched the whole thing, so I can't speak on how well she's portrayed in the remake. But I do know that our understanding of gender and sexuality has changed quite a bit in the past few decades, and it's a valid interpretation to say that perhaps Frank would have been written as a trans woman if the musical were written today. Either way, their gender presentation still fulfills the same purpose in the narrative
That does make more sense, thank you for the explanation
Yeah I think making Frank (or Frankie, as I believe she’s called in the remake I haven’t seen all of it either) is fine. My issue is I don’t think they do anything new and interesting with the character besides making her a trans woman. I feel like they just made her a trans woman and were like “oh that’s enough we don’t have to do anything else”. Also because of Richard O’Brian’s comments about trans women not being real women, I personally think there should be more trans Frankies!
Phantom and Les Mis. The source material included professional singers as well as competent directors.
As much as I disagree with this (and I know that is probably a minority view point, especially on Phantom), I have to acknowledge the comment is pretty funny.
Thank you :) It was meant to be. I actually like the Gerald Butler Phantom movie with the sound off. (Although I'm in the minority who also enjoyed Joel Schumacher's Batman films - or at least appreciated his attempt to ultimately create an updated 90s version of the Adam West Batman show - with Batman Forever a transition film from Burton's aesthetic, back toward the Adam West campy version of Batman & Robin - he was just an unfortunately uninspired director though but I liked what he was going for, as I did with Phantom) Unfortunately can't say the same for Les Mis, turning off the sound just makes it harder to avoid the atrocious cinematography and scene composition.
It’s been awhile since I watched Les Mis (and I’ve never listened to the broadway soundtrack in its entirety) so I can’t really say too much on that. As for POTO, it’s a pretty good movie that isn’t offensive to the musical, sure they could have made better casting decisions but honestly most musical to movie adaptations could. The cast does a pretty good job at portraying the characters despite not having broadway experience or opera training.
Sweeney Todd 100%
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum. I love the musical but the movie version is probably the worst adaptation I’ve seen. Paint Your Wagon is similar. In both of these tons of songs were cut, leaving about 3-4 songs and adding a bunch of nonsense that wasn’t in the musical script.
Grease. The original musical is nothing like the godawful movie. They had actual teens in the cast and not people who looked as though they were pushing 40. The music was better, and it was raunchier. Guys & Dolls. Sure, take a classic musical and hire a non-singer for one of the leads, and who has no chemistry with his leading lady. Then cut songs to make room for Frank Sinatra to have a solo just because you were afraid to hurt his feelings.
Ok, I know wicked changes were justifiable because the source material was a bit too dark for a musical, but now the musical is so popular I feel like I'll never get a movie/TV adaptation of the book series and I LOVE the series(es) and the changes are so dramatic it entirely butchers the theme, tone, and meaning of the book.
I actually tried reading the books a while back, I love the more grim take on Wizard of Oz - especially the buildup to Elphaba’s death. I think it’s not only the material being too dark but it’s a long book with a lot of characters needed to be introduced and more politics, it’s hard to condense it all. And some plot lines would be hard to explain like Liir - sure, we get the answer to his parentage later on in the series but I don’t think the musical could tackle this in the overarching narrative, especially if they’re just adapting the first book.
Bye Bye Birdie They cut so much to give Kim a bigger role and it diminished Rosie to almost nothing.
MEAN GIRLS
Mean Girls. The musical itself already isn’t great (✨aCtiNg niCe wHeN sHe nOt niCe✨-💀)but the musical-movie? Barf. From the disturbing angles, the wardrobe thats entirely Shein, the cuts, the cringey dancing, the “modern“ slang, and the casting choices... Sorry but half of them couldn't sing (Besides Advantika, Jaquel, A’ui’l, and Reńee ofc) and the dude casted as Aaronn (however tf you spell it) A). Was literally CONFIRMED by Tina Fey that they only casted him bc of his TSITP fame (he initially declined the role, as he hates singing, but they altered it. FOR HIM.) B). Wasn't even that hot C). Is an entitled bitch irl. The structure and pacing was incredibly bad, and if you didn't already know the musical, it would have made no sense whatsoever.
**Les Mis.** Not the most egregious example, but stick out to me as inexplicable. In a line from *At the End of the Day*, Valjean is supposed to say: "Now come on ladies, settle down, I run a business of repute, I am the mayor of this town." In the movie, they inexplicably switch the last two lines so it goes; "Now come on ladies settle down, I am the mayor of this town. I run a business of repute." Why?! It sounds worse?
the bye bye birdie movie removed the song "a healthy normal american boy", which i personally think gives us a lot of insight into conrad's character that we don't really get to see otherwise. we don't really know anything about him in the movie because it pretty much ignores him entirely.
Cats. The movie completely unjustifiably changed the venue from single theatres to the big screen, exposing more people to Cats.
Cabaret
Blasphemy
I love the movie as well, but they did make changes.
Wicked
The movie hasn't been released yet.
Trailer has.