DVD Review HTF REVIEW: Chicago - Razzle Dazzle 2-disc SE, DAZZLINGLY RECOMMENDED (1 Viewer)

[DeeF]

Group hug!

 

[Will Krupp]

Alejandro.....I feel left out too. Can I get in on the big gay group hug?

 

[DaViD Boulet]

That may not necessarily be a bad thing as far as marketing is concerned in this particular case. I'm sure a large percentage of the fans of this film (and of musicals in general) are gay, or at least don't feel pejoratively about the issue.

 

[Alejandro]

Come on in.
Everybody join the big parade!

 

[DaViD Boulet]

That parade looks positively razzle-dazzling!

 

[Mike Frezon]

 

[Greg_M]

I Love this movie! This is probably one of the best filmed musicals and one of the best pictures ever, it did win the Oscar. And Renee was in a neck and neck race with Nicole Kidman for best actress (I still believe Nicole won by a nose - the fake one she wore throughout "the Hours" helped her chances)

"Chicago" is edited much better than "Moulin Rogue" and you really can't compare the two films, they're quite different.

As much as I love this film I'm wondering if a double dip is worth it, there really isn't much new on the Disc that seems real interesting. I may have to pass on this one or wait until I can get it at a reduced price.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Yeah. The bargain hunter in me is wondering if this is one of those titles that's going to show up in BB or CC's 2/$20 sales in a coupla months. I have no reason to think that it will, but since it's be a double dip for me...and there have been so many other titles this quarter...I might just hold off and see if it does (or if it shows up used somewhere).

 

[Mark Bendiksen]

That may be true. I doubt the marketing department spends too much time and money debating how best to market films like this to people like me (heterosexual males who also love musicals and show tunes). I realize we're probably considered a "minority".

Overall, I'm a fan of this film, despite some of its flaws. Looking forward to the new DVD....

 

[Steve K.H.]

I didn't like the lack of skin, explosions, and blood.

Oh yeah, it's a musical.

People who like comedies should comment on whether the SE of their Comedy is worth it.

Same with Dramas.

Same with Documentaries.

and...

...same with musicals. I don't like every musical either, (sound of music, Oliver are certain exceptions) but it's clear this is a pretty cool package - must be good if HTF's Boulet recommends it.

I had to get that off my chest and now for something more important.

Merry Christmas all...

:star:
:star: :star:
:star: :star: :star:
:star: :star: :star: :star:
:star: :star: :star: :star: :star:
:star: :star: :star: :star:
:star: :star: :star:
:star: :star:
:star:

 

[Cees Alons]

From Gere's biography at IMdb:

Suggests strongly that he "can dance" after all.

London is a grim place for stage failures and weak performances.


Cees

 

[Alejandro]

Actually, that is his ONLY musical background. Was he so bad at it? I don't know. What I do know is that he was the LAST in a long list of possible Billy Flynns. Everyone from Travolta to Hugh Jackman rejected the part (idiots! what a part!) and Gere even said he wouldn't audition for it. Marshall would have to trust Gere's affirmation that he could sing and dance.
Anyways, I don't think Gere was that bad (he won a Golden Globe, after all) but when I see him onscreen I can't help but imagine Jackman in the role. He would have been swell.

 

[Jack _Webster]

I'll probably pass on this. I have the original DVD, which I have to mostly complete my collection of Oscar winners. I wasn't a fan of the film when it first came out, and even though I've come to like it quite a bit more in the past couple years, I still think it may not have deserved its Best Picture Oscar. It's weird since I usually love musicals to death. Maybe it was the lack of a romantic theme (I absolutley loved MR! & PotO - I guess I'm just a hopeless romantic).

Still, I guess if I didn't have the movie already, I'd probably pick it up.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Cees: I read that and don't see where that strongly suggests he's got an ability to dance. I just look at his performance in Chicago and see that as proof that strongly suggests the opposite!

 

[Patrick Sun]

But he can Jig! Or is that Gig?

 

[Robert Harris]

If one takes a look back at movie musicals, there is an undeniable fact that the form pretty much died out by 1970, and with few exceptions became boxoffice poison.

The concept of the musical and its Broadway roots is something that people are either attuned to or not.

For many, an actor breaking into song is something that just doesn't work and never will. And for those, finding a great movie musical can be a problem, should they even be interested.

The fact that Rob Marshall, with his background in live theater, took on the daunting task of attempting to create a musical for the modern cinema with its fast-paced taste, against incredible odds, gives him a solid place in the history of the cinema.

To my mind, he succeeded mightily.

One of the problems faced in casting a film, is that you need known names to bring in an audience and to get a film properly situated for release.

The chosen cast worked in Chicago's favor. And the fast-paced modern cutting was useful in possibly hiding some of the problems of taking non-dancers and placing them front and center. You can almost cut around any poor performance, but that wasn't the case (or the need) here. It was merely a bit of extra help in making everything believable.

For those who have not seen this film as film on a huge screen, the strobing effects in the final number should not be confused with digital artifacts - confusion which may or may not be occurring. I also noted that there was a post suggesting that Chicago had the digital problems of other Miramax films of the era on DVD. This is incorrect. The transfer, compression and authoring have been superb.

To me, and I've told this to Rob Marshall, Chicago stands as one of the great movie musicals. Over the next few days, I'm trying to find time to screen both Rent and Geisha, to see how the musical may be evolving and his new work. I look forward to both.

I was going to do an "A Few Words about..." in regard to this disc, which I feel is worth the upgrade for those who are not going to involve themselves in high definition with immediacy.

I've gone through comparing the old and new discs, and thank David for allowing me to now relax and rest on his review, with which I totally agree.

RAH

 

[CraigF]

I would be one of those. I have a very hard time getting any enthusiasm to watch a musical show. I have purchased several of the better-reviewed musical DVD's here, sort of forcing myself to expand my horizons, and partly because a bit of pain supposedly builds character. So far, I must admit I haven't disliked any of them.

I thought Chicago was very cleverly done, I think I was even quite impressed (remember, I don't watch many of these). I suspect it was done in a way that would appeal to more people "like me", as Robert alludes to, and I think it's successful. I think what I liked the best is how the musical numbers integrate so well with telling the story, they aren't an "interruption" like they seem to me in older musicals. Also, this is a much grittier story than what I've seen in a musical before, much less fluffy.

As for the PQ, I didn't see any artifacts. But to me there seems to be some sort of "haze" throughout. Hard to describe, but some slightly foggy veil between me and what I think I should be seeing. I thought it might be to give the impression of being in a smoky club, but no, it's not totally that, it is something I've noticed on other Miramax discs too. I still think there's something not quite right there. But if people say it matches the film's look...

 

[DaViD Boulet]

:b

Thanks RAH!

 

[BarryR]

I like and admire CHICAGO a great deal. But the true acid test now for audiences is THE PRODUCERS, which unapologetically reaches back a good forty or so years and presents a more conventional way of photographing a Broadway musical--much of it "all in one," without resorting to flashy editing to disguise or win over performances and material. And, best of all, courageously letting characters suddenly start dancing and singing full tilt, just like the best of 'em when musicals ruled Hollywood.

All I can say is....hooray!

 

[Porter Faulkner]

As a film director Rob Marshall is an adequate stage choreographer. He is neither a genius nor a great director, merely someone who was in the right place at the right time but certainly no match for a Fosse or Strohman. 'Chicago' has a long history on stage in many different incarnations. When the time was right after 'Moulin Rouge' and other mediocre recent screen musicals it seemed right to finally bring 'Chicago' to the big screen.

Borrowing heavily on these various stage versions and with a lot of help from his technicians Marshall's version is yet another take on 'The Emperor's New Clothes'- look closely and its really nothing to do with a good screen musical at all. Simply flash trash, too much trickery and easily forgotten.