What Do I Like In A Movie Musical? (A RAMBLE)

So I just saw A Star is Born. For the sake of this blog post, let's assume it's a musical. It's my post so I can make assumptions as I see fit, even though the song numbers in ASIB are diegetic, which is to say, the characters are singing in the world in context, unlike, say, Les Miserables where it is clearly an artistic decision since unless you're like me, you don't walk around the streets in the rain ACTUALLY singing about how much you love him on your own.

Moving back to the topic, I don't know if I have terrible taste in movie musicals, but I'd lump "A Star is Born" along with "Chicago","The Greatest Showman", and "La La Land" in the Movies-With-Amazing-AF-Soundtracks-But-Mediocre-Execution category. Consider this Category A.

There's another class of musicals I'd like to talk about which include Les Mis and Phantom... oh and that ABOMINATION "Across the Universe", but let's call this Category B.

Also, just a disclaimer, I am strictly speaking about MOVIE musicals. I find my thoughts which I am about to share actually don't apply to stage musicals as much. I don't know why, but adapting something to film just probably adds complications that I will attempt to articulate here.

Now you may be thinking these are most of the movie musicals released in the past 20 years. What movie musicals DO I like? Well, generally the older ones, but if you ask me for a list off the top of my head, I like these:

• Singin in the Rain
• The Wizard of Oz
• Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
• The Muppets
• Sweeney Todd
• Literally any Disney movie musical...
• The Lego Movie 2... I am NOT shitting you with this one
• The Sound of Music

and of course, my true love: Moulin Rouge!

These movies tell a well-paced and satisfying story that is perfectly encapsulated in the runtime.

My main issue with the movies in Category A is that the story isn't nearly interesting enough to not make you think "this story is alright but when is the next song coming?!"

The sad thing is those movies have amazing directors attached to them that give their musical numbers absolute showstopping qualities. "Shallow", "This is Me", "Rewrite the Stars", "Cell Block Tango", "Another Day of Sun" were drop-dead gorgeous to watch, listen to, and to witness. But here's the math with movie musicals. Normally you have 8-12 full songs that are 3-5 minutes each. At best you have 60 minutes of song numbers, which means you have at least 60 minutes to fill with, ya know, regular storytelling. That's roughly HALF the movie. The challenge is filling these with interesting enough storytelling to make the audience engaged enough to not just be waiting for the next song.

How is this done? Well... look at the movies in my list. Hell, just look at the Disney movies. The last word I'd describe them with would be dull. Those movies are usually engaging from start to end and in Frozen's case, for example, there's actually only 23 minutes of song numbers. But the focus of the story is on the characters and their growth. The execution is excellent so that remaining hour doesn't feel like a waiting game. I'd never thought I'd defend Frozen, because honestly, I have numerous problems with that film but pacing and structure is not one of them.

Now observing the movies in Category A and the movies I do like, I noticed something else actually. If you look at the movies I like, there are larger than life elements in most of them. There's magical shit in every Disney movie. There's a serial killer in Sweeney Todd. There's witches and talking lions in Wizard of Oz. Basically, it's quite easy to keep my attention with these kinds of settings and stories.

Looking at Category A, we have...

A Star is Born: Falling star meets rising star. Realistic

The Greatest Showman: Guy creates a circus: Realistic

La La Land: Two young people find their paths in life. Realistic

Chicago: Woman on death row. Realistic.

I'm not saying realistic stories don't make good musicals. I actually have three examples in my list. Let's analyze what they do well.

Singin' in the Rain basically deals with the emergence of dialogue in film or "talkies". The story is injected with a lot of humor and it doesn't overcomplicate things. It focuses on three main characters and focuses on their growth and development. Gene Kelly's character here feels larger than life.

The Sound of Music deals with a young nun signing up as the governess of the Von Trapp children. Again, there are plenty of humorous and charming moments in the film. The characters of the film feel grounded in reality, but Maria herself feels almost larger than life, what with her blossoming optimism and charm. Captain Von Trapp is also a captivating character and the tension between him and Maria Von Trapp is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

Moulin Rouge! deals with a theater putting up a production that is an analogue set up by a writer to win the heart of the courtesan away from a rather unpleasant duke. Even though the story is quite realistic, the way the story is presented is in a very over-the-top romanticized manner with over-the-top characters. This mundane story is elevated by the method the story is presented.

There we go. Focus on characters. These aren't soundboxes. These are people. Their arcs must be captivating and theatrical, as to make them feel larger than life. The music should be used to express these emotions perfectly. I can name one example from each of the films I mentioned.

In Singin' in the Rain, we have the eponymous number where Don Lockwood wins the girl and expresses his pure joy in the rain. Sound of Music does this with "I Have Confidence", the song Maria sings when she approaches the Von Trapp residence. Moulin Rouge! does this with "Your Song" where Christian sings Elton John's masterpiece to woo Satine.

In fairness, Category A does this often. A Star is Born has plenty of examples. Look no further than "Shallow" which perfectly informs us what Ally's character believes in. The Greatest Showman has "A Million Dreams". La La Land has Mia's "Audition".

So why do their characters feel, well, underwhelming, at least to me? Well since this is my subjective opinion, I can actually give a reason for that. They don't keep the magnetic personality they have during the song numbers outside them. Ally is presented realistically when she isn't performing. Barnum is still the dreamer but he is presented with nuance in a more grounded fashion. Mia is charming and passionate, yes, but never to the level she reaches in her number.

Look at the movies I mentioned. Don Lockwood is always as energetic as he is in the "Singin in the Rain" number, even BEFORE he gets the girl. Maria is embodied by "I Have Confidence" no matter what happens in the story. You have no trouble believing she is in the same mindset when she was singing that song than she was when NOT singing it. Christian singing Elton John's "Your Song" is perfect because he is probably the most overromantic optimistic-to-a-fault loverboy I have ever seen in a movie until 2009 when "(500) Days of Summer" came out. These characters are BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT the same ones who sing the songs.

This is why the fantastical musicals in my list land there by default. Their characters are larger-than-life BY DEFAULT. I will never have trouble believing Sweeney in the dialogue is the same Sweeney who sings "There's a hole in the world like a great black pit and it's filled with people who are filled with shit and the people of this world inhabit it." I truly believe the Emmet who sings "Everything is awesome!" is the same Emmet who buys two coffees with a smile during the apocalypse. I have no problem believing the Willy who sings "Come with me and you'll be in a world of pure imagination" is the same Willy who invented the Everlasting Gobstopper.

The characters in these BOMBASTIC musical numbers are PRECISELY the characters outside them. That way when we switch from musical number to actual dialogue, it's not boring because IT'S THEM.

I think that's it. It's that simple.

But wait, you might say "well... can't we aim for realism in a musical?"

This is purely personal taste, but the moment you have your characters sing and dance out of nowhere, I am not expecting realism. In fact, aiming for realism creates a problem for your film: consistent tone. One second, you're in a lavish musical number, the next you're in a gritty realistic scene. That isn't clever filmmaking or what have you, that is JARRING. It confuses the viewer and makes viewing uncomfortable.

Now is the point where I actually begin to contradict myself, but only in one respect, and that is "A Star is Born". When I say I will consider it a musical for the purpose of this blog post, it brings me to a short point I'd like to make, which is about expectations. Perhaps "A Star is Born" is actually just that: a movie with song numbers, instead of an actual musical. Well, I expected it to be a musical, so that did affect my enjoyment of it. I guess that's my fault. Either way, I thought it was dull and obviously made to win Oscars because, man, is this movie detached from the audience. I suggest you listen to the soundtrack on Spotify and save yourself the 136 minutes.

Oh right, Category B. Well... I don't know how to put this but... the singing sucks. It just does. In Les Mis, that's not the cast's fault. It's the directors. He opted for a realistic style. I redirect you back to what I said about inconsistent tones. In Phantom, Emmy Rossum is decent I guess. Minnie Driver is great, but I hate Charlotta's parts because I think that's the intent in the first place. Butler and Wilson are pretty bad.

Oh and Across the Universe... oh my god, the only thing that works in that horrible excuse for a motion picture is the visuals, because the story is atrocious, the characters are flat, the singing is dull, and the pacing is just the worst pacing I have ever witnessed.

I hope you enjoyed my ramble. 'Til next time!