Chicago

[JonathanLB]

I loved this movie. It was an excellent musical that is absolutely deserving of its attention and hype. Granted, it might not make it onto my top 10 films of the year because I have given 15 four star ratings now and I have to find 5 movies not to make my list, and it sure won't be Star Wars, TTT, Equilibrium, Minority Report, Simone, Changing Lanes, or Catch Me If You Can, so it has to be some other great films :\

Anyway though, it earns my four star rating. Also, I'm giving Chicago Best Actress for Renee Zellwegger and Catherine Zeta-Jones also has the best singular Best Supporting Actress performance. I still am giving my overall supporting actress award to Emily Watson for Equilibrium and Red Dragon, though. Nonetheless the best performance by an actress in a supporting role (which is slightly different than "best supporting actress") is definitely Zeta-Jones! She is amazing in the movie.

Chicago is well edited, well shot, has great music that blends really interestingly and well into the film, and it even has some great bits of dialogue in scenes between the singing.

The most critically acclaimed films of this year are -- gasp -- finally actually good movies too! Yay.

[CMJ]

Saw it today, and I echo much of what Jonathan says. I thought it started off a tad slowly, but by the 2nd reel I was really into it. Most of the musical numbers were inspired, and the preformances were uniformally excellent.

I also rate this baby 4 stars. Now I just have to figure out where to rank it among the year's best films. All I know, 2002 ended with a bang.

[Dae Jinn]

Ooo, a movie I actually saw! :lol

Yes, it was good, better than good, great. I don't watch enough movies to have a huge list, but I'm always happy when I go to the theatre (a rare occurance) and see an excellent film. :)

[CMJ]

It's kinda like cinema candy though. It's really flashy and in your face, but there wasn't a helluva lot of depth. Nonetheless, I loved it.

[Dae Jinn]

Yeah, but sometimes it's nice to just go and see a movie for pure entertainment. I wasn't sure if I would like, my friend dragged me to it, she loves it. But she's a dancer :lol

[JonathanLB]

Yeah I suppose there isn't a huge load of depth, but it was great for what it was.

[Dutchy]

I saw a trailer of it and thought it looked jawdroppingly annoying. Well, maybe the movie itself isn't half as bad, but I'm afraid to find out. :)

[JonathanLB]

Dude, it's going to be a Best Picture nominee and has gotten great reviews. I'd say that's at least reason to give it a chance ;)

[Dae Jinn]

Dutchy, I felt the same way, I wasn't sure if I would even like it. But it's really good. :)

[CMJ]

I concur with Jonathan. For the reasons he mentioned it's at least worth a look.

[Nathanial K'cansce]

I thought I posted my reply to this?

Ah well. The musical was great, and not a lot of depth story wise either. If I have time, I'll check it out at the theaters.

[Jedieb]

I saw it the other day and talked with CMJ about it a bit. It was good, but not the best musical I've ever seen. I was left with the feeling that I really would have preferred to have seen the show on Broadway instead of on film. I saw it on a Malaysian DVD so I was denied the experience of seeing it with an audience so that might have effected my viewing experience a bit. Zeta Jones and Rene Z. were great. Richard Gere held his own. He was at his best when he WASN'T singing. That guy was born to play a dirtbag.

[CMJ]

I disagree with Jedieb(he knows this). I'm not sure it would've been as effective on stage, especially with some of the editing techniques that were used so effectively.

[JonathanLB]

It's not the best musical I have ever seen, but given I haven't seen a ton of musicals it probably is one of the better ones I have seen.

Singin' in the Rain is perhaps my favorite musical, but I like all the ones I have seen on the AFI Top 100. An American in Paris was great, I thought, even if the end 15-minute musical sequence really is a bit long. It's very impressionistic and abstract, quite an odd bit of film, but overall I still thought it was fine in the film.

[sirdizzy]

ok i really liked chicago i gave it 4 stars out of 5 in my review


but lately i have been pretty pissed with their whole political campaign to get an oscar

recently i have been emailing back and forth with the VP of my local theatres concerning many different things one of them being movie selection in my town and here is part of a response he sent to me regarding miramax's strategy concerning chicago



But it it the studio that tells us what films are avaiable and when they will be released. For example, we asked for Chicago months ago, but the head of distribution for Miramax, in all his wisdom, decided there would be a staggered release schedule. How do you think we felt with a screen available, a print in the projection room, and we were allowed to play only one sneak per night on Friday and Saturday for the last two weeks.


hows that for messed up they had the movie they had the screen yet were not allowed to play it because mirimax is begging for an oscar for chicago

[Oriadin]

I thought this film was quite good.

I had one major problem with it though. Moulin Rouge. I could help but compare the two films together. I know I shouldnt but I just couldnt help it. I love musical films because as Ewan McGregor says, music reaches us on an emotional level that words simply cant.

When I saw Moulin Rouge it completly blew me outa the water. It was fantastic. Very in your face and easy for some people to hate but also very easy to love. Ive never heard anyone say Moulin Rouge was ok. It was either fantastic, or crap.

I really need to see Chicago again. Now I know what to expect I can enjoy it for what it is, rather than compare it with Moulin Rouge. I did try as hard as I could not to, but twas tough.

[CMJ]

Sirdizzy, studio's often stagger their release schedules, not just for Oscar, but in genral. Miramax is famous for platforming films in this manner.

[Jedieb]

When I saw Moulin Rouge it completly blew me outa the water. It was fantastic. Very in your face and easy for some people to hate but also very easy to love. Ive never heard anyone say Moulin Rouge was ok. It was either fantastic, or crap.

That happened to me as well. MR is one of my more recent favorite films. As for CMJ's staging problems, the play had a great run on stage and received a lot of critical praise. It's been run on broadway in 76, 85, 92, and 97 and each of its runs has produced Tony nominations and wins. It's definitely worked on stage for quite some time now. I just wish I'd had the chance to see it there.

[CMJ]

I didn't say 'Chicago' couldn't work on the stage, but the way it was produced to film would make it impossible for it to be translated THAT way on stage.

That was my POV. :p

[sirdizzy]

i agree with cmj, the way the film was produced it was hard to imagine it on stage

[Sene Unty]

I was blown away by how fantastic this movie really was. I actually saw it a while ago, and I really want to go see it again.

[Jedieb]

I'd be surprised if that many changes were made in the film version. I'd imagine that most, if not all, of the musical numbers were kept the same. Just about every set in the film could have been done on stage.. Not to the same extent of course, but you'd be surprised what a great set designer could do. Whenever I've seen a film/play on both the screen and stage I've always been impressed by both versions. (Grease, Death of a Salesman, A Christmas Carol, West Side Story) I've never really been dissapointed with either. Films will always give you flashier sets, but they can't produced the immediacy of a live theater performance. There's something about seeing the performance in flesh and blood that's exhillirating. Each of the shows I've listed above delivered in both mediums. I would bet that Chicago would TOO CMJ. ;)

[Oriadin]

I was actually suprised at how the film looked like it was taken almost right off the stage. Guess im on my own on that one...

[CMJ]

I didn't say it wouldn't be good on stage. :p

Where did I say that exactly? ;) But a couple of the music numbers cut between "real life" and singing...I can't imaging how that could be done on stage.

[Sene Unty]

It can be done, just not as effectively. That is the beauty of doing musicals in a movie format, you can have action jump from the stage to "real life" in a more fluid way.

I am hoping that they will consider doing other musicals now that this one has been a success. I would love to see what they would do with Cabaret if they could transfer it to the big screen. :D

[CMJ]

You mean the "Cabaret" that came out in '72 and lost Best Picture to "The Godfather"? ;)

[Sene Unty]

I have never seen that version, but then again I have never seen the original Moulin Rouge either.

I love the stage version of Cabaret though..... :D

[Jedieb]

Joel Gray and Liza Minellie were in both the film and stage version I think. Both were excelent.

[Sene Unty]

I know that Allan Cummings was in a recent version of the stage play, and I heard he was absolutly amazing....

[Mu Satach]

I *think* one of the main differences they did adapting the stage version to the screen is that in the film most of the song & dance numbers happen seem to happen inside Roxie's head.

I don't believe that the stage version has that same approach.

There is a song number from the stage production called "Class" that Velma & Mama sing that was not in the film because it didn't fit with the take the film was going. It is however rumored that it will be included on the DVD.

If you take out that one little story telling angle I think you could see how everything could work beautifully on stage.

PS - absofrigginlutely loved this flick