Oscar History
Film Bitch History
Welcome

The Film Experience™ was created by Nathaniel R. All material herein is written by our team. (This site is not for profit but for an expression of love for cinema & adjacent artforms.)

Follow TFE on Substackd

Powered by Squarespace
Keep TFE Strong

We're looking for 500... no 390 SubscribersIf you read us daily, please be one.  

I ♥ The Film Experience

THANKS IN ADVANCE

What'cha Looking For?
Subscribe
« Monday Monologue: “There is no Barbara Novak” | Main | Burning Questions: The Dumbing Down of Star Trek »
Monday
May202013

Stage Door: Far From Heaven...THE MUSICAL!!!

Since we're in the heat of Tony season, you get TWO screen-to-stage posts this week. Here's the first one (though perversely both shows are not on Broadway and are thus ineligible for those awards)

abstew here. Although often cited as one of the reasons for the death of originality in American Theatre, the musicalization of popular films to stage is hardly new. After all, two Best Picture Oscar winners (All About Eve and The Apartment) were turned into musicals (1970's Applause and 1968's Promises, Promises, respectively) long before Bring It On was cheering it's way to a Best "New" Musical Tony Nomination. (I, myself, am still waiting for the musical version of Death Becomes Her. It already has a musical number! Someone, please, make this happen!) The latest film getting the song & dance treatment (well... song & walking around) is one that I'm sure TFE readers are familiar with, Todd Haynes' glorious Far From Heaven (2002). more...

The film, for those who need a refresher -- and if you do, pretend otherwise! --  is an homage to the 1950s melodramas of the great Douglas Sirk. Cathy Whitaker, the perfect 50s housewife, suddenly finds her life in shambles when her alcoholic husband turns out to be gay. She forms a friendship with her black gardener, but the social mores of the time frown upon the attachment. It was nominated for four Academy Awards including a Best Actress nomination for Julianne Moore. (Julie's performance also recently made our poll as one of the 10 Best Actress performances not to win the Oscar.) The film, while inspired by the acting and style of Sirk films, never seemed like a replica, but a new work that had something fresh to say. Unfortunately, the same can not be said of its scene-for-scene transfer to the musical stage.

Far From Heaven...The Musical! (It's very important when stating the name of a musical that used to be a film to briefly pause after the title and then announce with a flourish of jazz hands: The Musical !!! So as not to confuse the two), first began in a two week preview run last summer at The Williamstown Theatre Festival. (This year they're doing a musical version of Bridges of Madison County - they won't rest until every Best Actress nominated performance is a musical!). Far From Heaven is currently doing a limited run at NYC's Playwrights Horizons. The show is still in previews for a June 2nd Opening, so it could still change between the show I saw last Sunday night and the final one. While not a bad show per se and maybe even a good one if you had never seen the movie (but, then why would you be there?), I just kept wondering what the reasoning was for turning it into a musical. 

The book, written by Richard Greenberg (currently represented on Broadway with the Tony nominated The Assembled Parties), is a faithful to a faul adaption. All the dialogue is taken, word for word, directly from the film which is a disservice to the actors as I kept hearing Julianne Moore and Dennis Quaid in my head. And the songs, written by composer Scott Frankel and lyricist Michael Korie, while pleasant enough, do nothing to enhance the story. In the film, the repression of the era is exemplified by all that is left unsaid--the emotions hidden under the surface. But, this being a musical, the songs are used to voice the characters thoughts and feeling which is exactly the opposite of what should be happening. The major problem is with the lyrics, their obvious rhyme schemes are so childlike in their simplicity that it becomes cloying having everything spelled out for you. 

Four-time Tony nominee Kelli O'Hara as Cathy, has a beautiful singing voice, but comes across as a little bland. Whenever Julianne Moore said something in the film, it seemed like she was adapting to a certain style of acting from the 50s. When O'Hara spoke I just thought, 'oh, I'm watching a musical theatre performance'. Isaiah Johnson, who plays the gardener, Raymond Deagan, still seems to be trying to find his character and even went up on one of his lyrics prompting the conductor to whisper it to him when I saw it. Steven Pasquale (who, my friend reminded me, was the lead in that NBC show, Do No Harm, which was cancelled after 2 episodes and whose voice makes Nathaniel's swoon) plays Cathy's husband, Frank. His character is the showiest part, so he benefits from being able to shout and break-down, giving a little life to the show. But, he still kinda seems like he's going through the motions.

Ultimately, it just doesn't make much sense to take a film that is so cinematic in its construction and identity and try to make it fit the stage without major changes. It would be like taking a play, defined by its theatricality, and making a painting of it–something gets lost in the translation. The lush cinematography, another characteristic of the Sirk films and Haynes's beloved homage, is replaced by a stark black stage with projections on the back wall. And as I kept looking at those screens with their stock photos of fall leaves, I wondered: if they were already so enamored with the film, why not just use actual shots of the movie? Which led me to think: Man, I can't wait to go home and watch the film all over again. 

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (9)

Is it wrong to say that beautiful but bland is my general reaction to Kelli O'Hara in general? She's obviously talented and lovely and can sing wonderfully, but she doesn't excite me like Audra or Sutton.

May 20, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJohn T

Whenever Kelli O'Hara sings, I swoon a little. Her rendition of "There Once Was a Man" at the Tony awards was so effortlessly sexy.

On the other hand, I rather dislike Sutton Foster. As in I'd avoid anything she was in

What's the oldest musical to be based on a movie? High Society? Though The Philadelphia Story was a play first.

May 20, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterArkaan

John T -- I WAS JUST ABOUT TO SAY THAT. Kelli O'Hara's voice is wonderful but she is just never exciting to watch. I'm kind of shocked that she's become *such* a mainstay in leading roles. I mean she's always got a show on the boards.

May 20, 2013 | Registered CommenterNATHANIEL R

It may be a silly idiosyncrasy of mine but I'm resistant to any adapted work that has been rethought as a musical but hasn't been renamed. It seems to show a worrisome lack of originality to just stick The Musical after the title. Even when the redo remains close to the source material, The Philadelphia Story and High Society are a good example, the songs should give it a different feeling and a name change indicates that.

May 20, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterjoel6

I love this movie - it sounds as if they did not find an interesting way of turning into a musical- if all the dialogue is kept intact from the screenplay - what are they going to sing about?

May 20, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterJaragon

Ugh, I feel exactly the same way about Kelli O'Hara - lovely gal, beautiful voice, does absolutely nothing for me. I always like her but never get all the swooning and raves she gets (South Pacific was the closest I ever came to seeing that "magic" but I've seen better Nellie Forbushes in my time). She would absolutely NOT be on my shortlist for Cathy in Far From Heaven - there are too many other Broadway leading ladies in that age range who do better with stylization. My dream would be Victoria Clark or Donna Murphy but I guess they're "too old" for the part.

Anyway it's a pity that you didn't find this very good, but I suppose that's the trouble with this particular source material becoming a musical - it makes it all too obvious.

May 20, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterdenny

I think O'Hara's cachet is that other than Audra, there are very few Broadway leading ladies who have legit voices. They are often brassy babes who never saw a note they didn't love to belt. I've not seen her on stage, but she does have a gorgeous voice that you just don't get very often in musicals these days.

Sutton Foster, on the other hand, I don't understand. She does nothing for me.

May 21, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterAle-Alejandro

If you're going to do a musical of this film, why not go all out on the set design and mimic the glorious colors and visuals, rather than lazily show a projector. You could at least present live theater that is a visual treat. The set could be a human-scale diorama with vivid hues and textures. But they took the easy way out. Sounds like they need to rename this musical Far From Far From Heaven.

May 21, 2013 | Unregistered Commenterbrookesboy

brookesboy, musicals are hella expensive to mount so I'm sure they had to come up with some creative design solutions to save money. Playwrights Horizons is not Broadway.

May 21, 2013 | Unregistered CommenterAle-Alejandro
Member Account Required
You must have a member account to comment. It's free so register here.. IF YOU ARE ALREADY REGISTERED, JUST LOGIN.