Trailer included:
I’m very interested in seeing this.
Now then: could someone give me a quick summary of the story? I know this was performed in the past; I thought I saw Angela Lansbury on TV at some point as one of the characters…?
Is that really Johnny Depp doing his own singing?
Is this going to be a dark comedy, or a really dark and rather gruesome story with little bits of comic relief now and then?
Ah, Christmas movie fare…It just warms the heart of your cockles, doesn’t it?
Yes, Angela Lansbury played Mrs. Lovett with both Len Cariou and George Hearn as Sweeney.
The story is that a barber (Benjamin Barker) was falsely accused of a crime and transported (sent to Australia) because his wife wouldn’t submit to the judge’s attentions. Thinking that getting rid of Barker would leave the field open for him, the judge had him convicted and transported. Fifteen years later, Barker returns to London under the name Sweeney Todd, resumes his old rooms above Mrs. Lovett’s pie shop, and sets out to get his revenge with the help of the dotty pie-lady.
Once Todd starts on his path to vengeance, that dotty pie-lady shows she’s a bit more than endearingly deranged by suggesting that, with the high price of meat, perhaps Todd’s new hobby could profit them both as well as fulfill his desire for revenge.
As the opening goes,
And to answer your last question, definitely dark and gruesome with very DARK bits of humor. Sweeney Todd is no Sound of Music, for sure. Entertainment Weekly notes that there’s a LOT of blood effects involved, so goriness is more or less guaranteed, which really twists me around a bit, because I REALLY want to see it but I don’t like movie gore.
Sondheim tends not to go for the simple morality play with happy ending. Even his light stuff is complex (A Little Night Music, while delightful (I’ve listened to A Weekend In The Country eight or nine repetitions through several times), tends to pull you in about four different directions).
Yes, the original show starred Angela Lansbury & Len Cariou as Sweeney. (The Original Cast Recording is one of my faves, I definitely recommend it.)
According to everything I’ve read, Depp is doing his own singing in the film, and advance screenings have been positive about this, however they point out that he does not have a classical sounding voice. A fact which could still work with the story, as Sondheim has said in the past how he wants his actors to first and foremost “act on pitch” rather than just sounding good.
The story has it’s funny moments (“A Little Priest”), but is very dark and macabre. Certainly not a comedy, and from what I’ve read Burton will even be turning up the gore from what it was on stage.
Here is a great summary of the entire show.: http://www.theatre-musical.com/sweeneytodd/synopsis.html
Quick summary: Murder, rape & cannibalism. Dark themes of revenge. Not a happy show at all, but one with a fantastic score.
There was a televised version of the stage show that had Angela Lansbury & George Hearn that has been released on DVD.
Depp has been in rock bands, but he admitted to only doing the occasional backing vocals. He is not a trained singer, and did not take singing lessons for this role. But Tim Burton encouraged him to be natural, and considered Depp’s performance here a “punk rock Sweeney Todd.” I’m not familiar with the show or the songs, but a few fans said that has raised all kinds of red flags for them.
Oh, there are all kinds of red flags, but I’m really hoping they’re all actually herrings. It sounds, in some of the trailers, like they’ve taken sung lyrics and made them spoken, which I’m not terribly happy with. But Sondheim has been working with Burton on this, so it’s not going to be some sort of complete travesty (or at least no more of one than Sondheim occasionally manages to trip over (Sunday In The Park With George, anyone?)).
Someone made an audio comparison of four Sweeney’s; Cariou, Hearn, Cerveris & Depp, singing the same line from the trailer from “Epiphany” and IMO Depp sounded like he was basing his performance on Cariou. (Which would make sense, as he’s the one on the original album.) But a lot of his phrasing & pronunciations sounded like Cariou’s, so that gives me hope that Depp’s voice will prove a good fit for the material. (Unlike the Phantom musical from 2004, where the film was hurt by not having a trained singer in the role. But I’d argue that particular role calls for more of a trained classical voice than Sweeney, so hopefully that won’t be a problem here.)
Re Red Flags- Depp as Willy Wonka raised red flags to the studio bosses, Depp as Cap’n Jack Sparrow raised red flags to the studio bosses, Depp is gonna do just fine here. My God, if Sondheim approves, who are we to doubt?
Ironically enough, LAST CHRISTMAS a friend gave me the DVD of the Lansbury-Hearn production. Ah, Sweeney- the Gift that keeps on giving!
This is one I’m definitely looking forward to. Sadly, no one I know wants to see it so I’ll be going to my first “by myself” movie viewing.
I consider Sweeney Todd to be the very best musical ever written, bar none. I have heard and seen the show in multiple incarnations and it never, ever gets old. I get chills just thinking about listening to the score. I would consider myself a major fan.
And yeah, this new adaptation worries me enormously.
Some aspects seem promising. Burton has said that he took his design cue from silent horror films of the teens and twenties; think London After Midnight, for example. Given the show’s Grand Guignol roots, that seems like an appropriate choice. However, it’s rather on-the-nose, and feels more like Burton reeling the material into his comfort zone than Burton stretching himself to meet the demands of the material.
Also, in the preview, it’s clear that Depp isn’t just inadequate to this particular score, he’s so raw he doesn’t know how to handle vocal interpretation at a basic level regardless of the show. Listen to the moment at 1:22 in the trailer, when he sings the line “I will have vengeance,” in which the first syllable of “vengeance” is a long, sustained note. Any halfway experienced singer knows that with something like this, the emotions are conveyed on the vowel; it should be “I will have ve-e-e-e-en-geance.” But Depp holds the note on the consonant, singing, “I will have vennnnnnnn-geance.” This isn’t just a technical criticism, pointing the finger at somebody who hasn’t had formal vocal training. This is a major shortcoming of Depp’s performance at an emotional and interpretive level. See, the whole point of this particular song (it’s called “Epiphany” and is the emotional climax of the first act) is that Sweeney has lost what he believes to be his best chance at revenge and is freaking out as a result. The orchestra goes fucking nuts during this song as Sweeney tears the lid off his up-to-now restrained rage and despair, and wails a vicious tantrum of grief and fury. The song is written balls-out, because Sweeney has been catapulted into a frenzy by his missed opportunity. But Depp, in this moment, swallows the note, crushing the energy when he should be lighting fireworks. I know, it’s totally unfair to be generating detailed criticism based on approximately two seconds of screen time in a preview. But I just can’t believe how remarkably off that moment is: it’s central to the character, and if they didn’t get that right, what else did they miss?
Oh, and Helena Bonham Carter is just spectacularly wrong for the role of Mrs. Lovett. This is miscasting on the level of “Kevin Costner as Robin Hood” wrong.
Plus, they cut 45 minutes of the score. Including the intro.
Now, I’m sure this movie will be fine. It’ll have Burton’s fingerprints all over it, and he’s an interesting filmmaker even when his movies suck: his bad movies are not bad for the same old reasons Hollywood movies are typically bad; he comes up with new and fascinating ways to be bad. That, I suppose, is worth something. And it may not be bad, either. It may be perfectly acceptable.
But here’s the thing: Sweeney Todd is way goddamn better than that. Anything less than a masterpiece will be a disappointment.
So yeah. You could say I’m a little concerned.
Of course, to people like myself, who feel that Sondheim couldn’t write a tune to save his life, taking ‘sung’ lyrics and speaking them either makes no difference or might actually improve the experience. Personally, I would much rather have the lyrics spoken than ‘sung’, given Sondheim’s comprehensive ineptitude when it comes to melody. Just my opinion. I’m sure the Sondheim fans will find the movie interesting, at least.
All the articles I’ve read say Sondheim approves of the casting and the way the music is handled. That, along with the look of the trailer, (and Johnny Depp, of course) sold me.
I AM SO PSYCHED FOR THIS MOVIE!!
I’m more concerned about Helena Bonham-Carter as Mrs Lovett than anything else - I jokingly predicted she’d get the part when I first heard about the proposed movie, but I really, honestly thought I was joking. Depp might be able to pull it off, or he might do something that is technically competent, but just wrong (IMO, his portrayal of the character of Willy Wonka was just not right, for example, even though he executed the portrayal well), but HBC as Mrs Lovett? How can that even hope to work?
So, let me get this straight. Tim Burton is making a new film…and it has Johnny Depp in it? Whoa, dude, shocking. Next you’re going to tell me it has Helena Bonham Carter in it too, right? Right? Hahahahahaha!
What? 
Seriously, though, are there any existing recordings of Depp singing in any of his rock bands?
I want to post a longer response to this thread later, but in the meantime:
Why wouldn’t it work? I can’t think of a single thing wrong with the casting, but so many people have described it as awful that maybe I’m missing something. Is there a reason Mrs. Lovett has to look like Angela Lansbury? Or even act like her?
Just like Angela Lansbury? Nope, not at all. As I said, I’ve seen various productions, and Mrs. Lovett has come in all shapes and sizes.
But whatever the take on the character, she should be someone who seems, at first glance, to be normal, saucy but friendly, maybe a bit eccentric, but otherwise an odd match for the dark, tortured Sweeney, and who only gradually, over the course of the show, reveals the depth of her corruption and madness. She should not be someone who right out of the gate looks like a woman who would happily knife your neck and suck out your precious juices.
This goes along with some of my concerns above, regarding the “silent horror movie” setting especially: It feels like Burton is giving away the whole thing straight at the top, letting the look and feel point a big neon arrow at the story’s ultimate destination, instead of letting it unfold slowly, which is a critical element of the musical’s structure. If you don’t know the plot, you will have no idea from the opening twenty minutes what to expect from the last ten. Everything about the show — the score, the book, the typically spare design — supports this careful, measured development, which is what makes the climax such a kick in the stomach. But then, attention to narrative structure has never been Burton’s strength, has it?
Still- the “silent horror movie” setting gives away the whole thing?
How about “The Demon Barber” part of the title?
Granted, I would think the basic concept of Sweeney Todd would be more generally known than it apparently is, but I think anyone going to it would know that it’s a horror movie.
Now, even those who know the old story may well be shocked by the cataclysm of twists at the end.
But I think Burton has, by one particular casting choice, spoiled one of those twists. Which is unfortunate, because the first time I saw this show unspoiled that twist was the first and only time I have ever been completely, totally, floored by a plot development.
P.S. - If you don’t know what I’m talking about out there, don’t find out. It’s worth it to be surprised.
I’ve never actually seen the version with Angela Lansbury, so it certainly isn’t prejudice in that direction. To my mind, the Character of Mrs lovett needs to be a dried up, screechy old witch - I just don’t think HBC has the force of personality to pull it off - I’m quite prepared to be proven wrong, of course, but my point is that I think she was cast here out of habit, rather than because of any particular merit.
Hm. OK. I actually disagree with this, though. I can’t see any reason that she needs to be dried up or screechy. Ultimately all we know about Mrs. Lovett is that she knew Benjamin Barker from before Barker was transported, and that she was attracted to him at the time. Barker was transported as a newlywed with an infant child, which means he himself would have been, probably, in his early twenties. He’s gone for twenty years. If Mrs. Lovett is his contemporary - or even a bit younger (I sort of imagine her as a teenage girl eyeing the handsome young barber) - there’s no reason that she needs to be anything more than around 40.
And thematically, of course, Mrs. Lovett represents Capitalism, greed unchecked. I submit that she is more interesting if she is vaguely attractive - in an sexual but disreputable way. The Victorian attitude about money was not at all dissimilar to the Victorian attitude about sex: everyone wanted it, but no one wanted to admit they wanted it, because to pursue it was avaricious and impure. Having Mrs. Lovett played by a woman like Helena Bonham Carter, who is exactly the sort of dirty-sexy required to characterize this dichotomy, I think is absolutely brilliant.
(Lansbury, of course, was also brilliant, but duplicating her performance is impossible, so why bother trying?)
My reservations? They cut the “Ballad of Sweeney Todd,” which is sad, and they also apparently cut “Kiss Me / Ladies in Their Sensitivities” and the choral part of “God, That’s Good” (which takes away some of the black humor of that scene).
But otherwise, everything I’ve seen has made me more excited. I’m not really interested in seeing the stage version translated to the screen - I can see the stage version anytime I want. I want to see the story reimagined through fresh eyes. I want to see the movie embrace the fact that it is a movie, and embrace the medium’s strengths instead of trying to be a stage play on film.
Yeah, Depp’s performance seems a little less unhinged that Cariou’s or Hearn’s were; it has to be. A stage quality psychopathic break, on film, would look like comical overacting. I like what I’ve seen of his interpretation so far, and ditto Rickman and even Cohen.
Bring on this movie.