I rushed out and got the DVD of the Fantasticks, despite the horror stories I’d heard about it (Five years on the shelf, five minutes in the theater!), as it’s one of my favorite musicals. The horror stories turned out to be mostly unfounded. Mostly.
For those of you unfamiliar with the story, a brief synopsis (no spoilers) Two fathers who want their kids to fall in love with each other decide to “have a feud” since if you tell a kid “No!” they’ll run right out and do whatever you’ve forbidden. It works, as the kids begin their “forbidden” romance, but the fathers need help to end the feud so the kids can get married. They get a carnival guy (El Gallo) to help them. El Gallo suggests a mock-abduction. He’ll grab Luisa, Matt’ll rush in to save her, he’s a hero, the feud is forgotten and everyone lives happily ever after. The plan works. That’s the first half. The second half deals with the messy stuff that happens after the “Happily Ever After” and deal with some of the consequences of the first half. A trailer can be found here.
Some of the cinematography is breathtaking, the scenery is wonderful and some of the casting is amazing.
El Gallo (Johnathon Morris) has a beautiful, quiet, evocative voice that is absolutely nothing like Jerry Orbach’s. This, I think, is a good thing.
Luisa’s (Jean Louisa Kelly) voice can’t decide if it’s an ingenue’s sweet young voice or a full blasting operatic “mature” voice. It kind of switches in a way that makes me wonder if someone dubbed her high notes. I rather prefer the ingenue voice, for what it’s worth
Luisa’s dad Bellomy is played by Joel “Cabaret” Grey. The man is incapable of singing badly and his acting is, as always, excellent.
Matt (Joseph McIntyre)…well…he’s got this weird affectation in his singing pronounciation. It’s not bad…but it’s weird.
Teller (Of Penn and Teller fame) in an inspired bit of casting, plays Mortimer, who’s job it is to die dramatically. He has immense fun with the role.
but there were some weird decisions made by someone. For example:
I don’t know why they gave Matt a dad (Huckabee, played by Brad Sullivan) who’s singing voice makes Jack Klugman’s sound good, and is a worse dancer than I am, but…well…he doesn’t have much singing to do, really and Joel Gray as Luisa’s dad can mostly cover for him. Except occasionally when he’s glaringly bad.
A major mistake, possibly the single biggest mistake is the deletion of the opening scene. The famous number from this musical, as important as Oklahoma! opening with Curly singing “Oh, What A Beautiful Mornin’” or the “Shall We Dance” scene from The King And I, is the wistful solo “Try To Remember” that opens the musical. The quiet haunting melody perfectly sets the tone of the musical, reminding the audience to remember the pain and beauty of their first love. This also which prepares the audience for the surreality of the story. Without it, it’s too dark. I suspect that the director (Mark Ritchie) wanted it as the big finale, but it just doesn’t work. I think this may have been the most serious mistake to the tone of the piece.
The story has had a bit of Ray Bradbury’s “Something Wicked This Way Comes” grafted onto it…as bizarre as it sounds, somehow it works.
The movie butchered the song “Metaphor”. In the original version, Matt makes outragous comparisons about his love for Luisa:
If I were in a desert deep in sand
and the sun was buring like a hot pom’grante
walking through a nightmare
in the heat of a summer’s day
until my mind was parch’ed
Then you are water
Cool clear water
A refreshing glass of Waaaater!
and then, in the refrain sings (ironically)
Love, you are love,
better far than any metaphor can ever, ever be
Love, you are love
My mystery of love
A wonderful song. But in the movie version, they cut out all the metaphors. The “If I were in a desert…” part of the song is now him saying how he’d fight for their love. But the refrain still deals with the metaphor stuff. Wha? It’s now gibberish. Feh.
There’s supposed to be a narrator, who explains some of the motivations, that role’s been cut, apparently to make the musical “more traditional” (WHY?! It’s been playing for 40!!! years!)
Since the second half of this post may end this up in GD or the Pit, let me finish the review part of the post here: I recommend it, but with reservations. If you’re unfamilar with the musical, listen to the original recording to hear what a few of the songs should sound like, and be sure to get the DVD for huge amount of cut scenes, three chopped songs, the trailer, etc. And the widescreen allows you to see some of the stunning vistas the director chose. A well done, but somewhat flawed package.
Now that that’s out of the way, I have to admit that I’m a bit pissed at a cave-in to political correctness.
A bit of background: This is the single longest running musical in history. I believe it’s been playing non-stop since 1960 or so. And since the start, the following segment has been included:
When the fathers go to El Gallo, El Gallo tells them that they’ll have to set up the rape properly. The fathers get upset. El Gallo says that he’s using rape in an accurate useage meaning “kidnapping”. The “Rape of the Sabine Women” for example. El Gallo tells the fathers “I know you prefer the word abduction, but the proper word is Rape. It’s short and business-like”
As a matter of fact, there’s a whole menu of “styles” of abductions/ rapes that the fathers can choose from and in a bouncy sort of flamenco (sp) number El Gallo sings:
You can get the rape emphatic
You can get the rape polite,
You can get the rape with Indians;
a truly charming sight!
You can get the rape on horseback,
they all say it’s new and gay!
But you see the sort of rape depends on what you pay
It depends on what you pay
It’s a strange, intentionally uncomfortable moment. Two fathers are singing and dancing about the wide range of “rape” choices available and dickering over the price. (“It’s so Spanish, that’s why I like it” “I like it too! Aye-Ay-Ay!”). Even though you know nothing’s going to happen to Luisa, you feel uncomfortable as you realize how…narrow the fathers’ outlook is. They want their kids married. Whatever it takes. There’s also a dark insinuation as the fathers begin to use the word “rape” that the parents are no longer in charge of their scheme: it now belongs to El Gallo. With the proper set-up and actors the scene can work well.
The creators caved a few years back and changed about half the occurances of the phrase “You can get the rape” to “An abduction that’s” (it doesn’t scan well, IMHO). Well, in the film version, they’ve cut the song all together and in it’s place put a clunky, ham-handed number where someone stuck awful lyrics onto an otherwise good piece of incidental music. No discomfort, no hard choices, no good song. Phooey.
What’s even more frustrating is that they filmed the original number, and it’s wonderful. It’s amazing. It even features a couple of dwarfs (or midgets) doing a grotesque little dance as El Gallo’s assistants, as both fathers prance about and El Gallo lists rape after rape (“The Gothic rape, I play Valkyrie (?) on a bass bassoon/The Drunken rape, it’s done completely in a cheap saloon” “Nothing cheap!” replies Luisa’s father) which only underscores and adds to the complete surreality of it all. It makes you uncomfortable and what’s even better or worse, the tune is so catchy, you find yourself tapping your feet to it. The contradictions in the scene are wonderful. It’s a very powerful moment.
And it is preserved on the disk. However, short of re-recording it onto videotape, which I’m going to do, it’s impossible to see the movie in the correct order.
I wish the studio (from what I hear) had the courage to go with the creator’s and the director’s vision. A good movie would have been made far better. We could have had a classic. Instead we just have a movie.
Fenris