list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around A Chorus Line on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/A_Chorus_Line/6017/default.aspx Title: A Chorus Line
Year: 1985
Director: Richard Attenborough
Plot: Broadway's celebratory musical about rejection makes it to the screen in a fizzless adaptation by Richard Attenborough that misses the whole point of the Broadway show -- i.e. the dancing and the dancers. Instead, the dancers become a limp Greek chorus for the dead love affair between a choreographer, Zach (a pre-Gordon Gekko Michael Douglas) and his old flame, Cassie (Alyson Reed) the star dancer. Zach is holding try-outs for a new Broadway musical and, as armies of dancers are brought on stage to audition for Zach, he sits in the darkened recesses of the theater, puffing on a cigarette, as he winnows out hopeful dancers who want to become part of the chorus line for Zach's new show. Finally, Zach has reduced the dancers to 16 men and women, and he asks each of them to step to the footlights and tell him about their lives and their dreams. But backstage, while the dancers are confessing their pasts to Zach, Zach's past walks through the stage door. Cassie, Zach's ex-lover, whom Zach met, courted and broke up with in the theatrical environs, has returned. Once a big star, Cassie has returned to the theater -- not to see Zach but to audition for Zach's musical. She needs the work. ~ Paul Brenner, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 20
Number of Lists: 12
Number of blog posts: 2
SpoutRating: 2
]]>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 16:09:39 GMTA Chorus Line1985Richard AttenboroughBroadway's celebratory musical about rejection makes it to the screen in a fizzless adaptation by <a href="/players/P____80152/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Richard Attenborough</a> that misses the whole point of the Broadway show -- i.e. the dancing and the dancers. Instead, the dancers become a limp Greek chorus for the dead love affair between a choreographer, Zach (a pre-Gordon Gekko <a href="/players/P____88134/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Michael Douglas</a>) and his old flame, Cassie (Alyson Reed) the star dancer. Zach is holding try-outs for a new Broadway musical and, as armies of dancers are brought on stage to audition for Zach, he sits in the darkened recesses of the theater, puffing on a cigarette, as he winnows out hopeful dancers who want to become part of the chorus line for Zach's new show. Finally, Zach has reduced the dancers to 16 men and women, and he asks each of them to step to the footlights and tell him about their lives and their dreams. But backstage, while the dancers are confessing their pasts to Zach, Zach's past walks through the stage door. Cassie, Zach's ex-lover, whom Zach met, courted and broke up with in the theatrical environs, has returned. Once a big star, Cassie has returned to the theater -- not to see Zach but to audition for Zach's musical. She needs the work. ~ Paul Brenner, All Movie Guide20Tag Target (>10)1222http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t27583b3rn5.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/A_Chorus_Line/6017/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/rcm/archive/2007/9/14/19786.aspx Post By: RCM
Post To: RCM Blog
Post Date: 9/14/2007 6:05:13 PM
Body: My mother took me to go see this at the Fox Theatre and I fell in love with it (I adore musicals anyway), the music, the plot, the humor, everything was great. That christmas my mother also bought me the DVD. This was the biggest disapointment of my life. The movie followed the play, but it left out so much of the great parts. Most of the awesome songs were replaced by one song about sex. What a waste of good writing. I personally woldn't bother watching this and go see the play itself, its well worth it.
]]>Fri, 14 Sep 2007 22:05:13 GMTRCMRCM Blog9/14/2007 6:05:13 PMMy mother took me to go see this at the Fox Theatre and I fell in love with it (I adore musicals anyway), the music, the plot, the humor, everything was great. That christmas my mother also bought me the DVD. This was the biggest disapointment of my life. The movie followed the play, but it left out so much of the great parts. Most of the awesome songs were replaced by one song about sex. What a waste of good writing. I personally woldn&#39;t bother watching this and go see the play itself, its well worth it. http://www.spout.com/blogs/jlgdrd/archive/2007/7/2/12854.aspx Post By: jlgdrd
Post To: Wicked Fun
Post Date: 7/2/2007 3:04:00 PM
Body: What can I tell you about De-Lovely, Irwin Winkler's musical biopic on the life of Cole Porter? It's disappointing, but not overwhelmingly so. It's engaging and more than pleasurable enough to warrant your time and the cost of a ticket. When it clicks, it's amazing. When it falters, the result isn't fatal. It takes a lot of risks, which more often than not succeed to great effect. There are times when the set pieces, acting, dialogue, lighting almost melt as the film combines it with Porter's wistful, ruminating music and you can feel the flood of emotion surpassing contextual detail. Borrowing from other films, such as Pennies from Heaven, A Chorus Line, and especially All That Jazz, De-Lovely's music spills over into reality. Performance as artifice is deconstructed. Kevin Kline (as Porter) and Ashley Judd (Porter's wife Linda) are inspired casting choices. Kline can seem self-absorbed without being dull. His desire to be liked makes us forget his compulsive need for attention. His performance, which feels restrained (for him) has just the right mix of charm and bravado to buffer Porter's egotism. Judd has a quiet, luminous air of sophistication that never comes off as cold or detached. The costumes (by Clare Spragge and Giorgio Armani) have an understated glamour that is dazzling without being ostentatious. It does go on a bit long, and there's an annoying ambivalence (if that's what it is) towards the material that diminishes the film.At the onset of De-Lovely, the aged Porter is visited by a man named Gabe, who orchestrates a musical of Porter's life, just for him. Porter reacts and reminisces throughout, but the players (including himself in the past) cannot hear him. The focal point of the film is Porter's marriage to Linda. He explains very early in their relationship his sexual predilection for men; he never hides it from her. When they marry, she does not function as a beard. (She says, "I think you like men more than I do," one of the best and most telling lines). They have an understanding, rather than an arrangement, which eventually causes them both intense anguish and remorse. Presumably, if queer sex weren't stigmatized, Porter could have acted on his same-gender romantic impulses without being such an opportunist. By all accounts, he was forthright about his tastes, but had to pay extortionists to keep this information from the public at large. Winkler uses the marriage to beg the question of Porter's bi-sexuality. But he never makes it clear whether he blames Porter or the times in which he lived. This, I think, is one of the serious problems with De-Lovely. It either makes a point repeatedly or leaves out vital information. There are astonishing scenes like the one where Porter guides a man identified only as "Jack" (John Barrowman) through "Night and Day." We can see desire gleaming in their eyes, we can see them connecting, but we never see them in bed. A scene in a gay bar (again, masterful, daring in its way) suggests a kind of depravity, as if Porter's sexuality, rather than, say, selfishness or naiveté were the culprit. As Cole's marriage to Linda starts to sour, we see her martyrdom, the despair she can't bring herself to disclose, but can't tell if he's ignoring her or clueless. I think De-Lovely could have made its point without quite as many harrowing scenes of grief and torment. They are important, but after awhile redundancy starts to get the better of us. And if indeed, the Porters were a casualty of unenlightened times, Winkler doesn't seem to get that the same motives (commercial or professional) that hindered Porter have also tainted his film. Still, De-Lovely compensates for its failure of nerve (or muted homophobia) with style and velocity. There are numerous cameos by contemporary musical artists (Alanis Morrisette, Diana Krall, Elvis Costello, Robbie Williams) that in another film might have seemed gimmicky, but here, seems to bring just the right touch. There's an ease and authority about most of the musical numbers that feels spontaneous and smooth, that gives you the upshot and elation without looking stagy or self-conscious. A wonderful, dark, evocative moodiness permeates the film. The songs emerge plausibly from the plot (and for the most part) without beating us over the head. When a film reaches a certain level of expertise, it can, to a certain extent, make its own rules. De-Lovely succeeds, often, by sheer force of competence and confidence. It stumbles when Winkler goes for intellect over intuition. There's a certain amount of justice, I suppose, in the fact that the musical productions are often smarter than the dialogue. When De-Lovely is smart, it's very, very smart. When it gets didactic, it drops like a cannonball.
]]>Mon, 02 Jul 2007 19:04:00 GMTjlgdrdWicked Fun7/2/2007 3:04:00 PMWhat can I tell you about De-Lovely, Irwin Winkler's musical biopic on the life of Cole Porter? It's disappointing, but not overwhelmingly so. It's engaging and more than pleasurable enough to warrant your time and the cost of a ticket. When it clicks, it's amazing. When it falters, the result isn't fatal. It takes a lot of risks, which more often than not succeed to great effect. There are times when the set pieces, acting, dialogue, lighting almost melt as the film combines it with Porter's wistful, ruminating music and you can feel the flood of emotion surpassing contextual detail. Borrowing from other films, such as Pennies from Heaven, A Chorus Line, and especially All That Jazz, De-Lovely's music spills over into reality. Performance as artifice is deconstructed. Kevin Kline (as Porter) and Ashley Judd (Porter's wife Linda) are inspired casting choices. Kline can seem self-absorbed without being dull. His desire to be liked makes us forget his compulsive need for attention. His performance, which feels restrained (for him) has just the right mix of charm and bravado to buffer Porter's egotism. Judd has a quiet, luminous air of sophistication that never comes off as cold or detached. The costumes (by Clare Spragge and Giorgio Armani) have an understated glamour that is dazzling without being ostentatious. It does go on a bit long, and there's an annoying ambivalence (if that's what it is) towards the material that diminishes the film.At the onset of De-Lovely, the aged Porter is visited by a man named Gabe, who orchestrates a musical of Porter's life, just for him. Porter reacts and reminisces throughout, but the players (including himself in the past) cannot hear him. The focal point of the film is Porter's marriage to Linda. He explains very early in their relationship his sexual predilection for men; he never hides it from her. When they marry, she does not function as a beard. (She says, "I think you like men more than I do," one of the best and most telling lines). They have an understanding, rather than an arrangement, which eventually causes them both intense anguish and remorse. Presumably, if queer sex weren't stigmatized, Porter could have acted on his same-gender romantic impulses without being such an opportunist. By all accounts, he was forthright about his tastes, but had to pay extortionists to keep this information from the public at large. Winkler uses the marriage to beg the question of Porter's bi-sexuality. But he never makes it clear whether he blames Porter or the times in which he lived. This, I think, is one of the serious problems with De-Lovely. It either makes a point repeatedly or leaves out vital information. There are astonishing scenes like the one where Porter guides a man identified only as "Jack" (John Barrowman) through "Night and Day." We can see desire gleaming in their eyes, we can see them connecting, but we never see them in bed. A scene in a gay bar (again, masterful, daring in its way) suggests a kind of depravity, as if Porter's sexuality, rather than, say, selfishness or naivet&eacute; were the culprit. As Cole's marriage to Linda starts to sour, we see her martyrdom, the despair she can't bring herself to disclose, but can't tell if he's ignoring her or clueless. I think De-Lovely could have made its point without quite as many harrowing scenes of grief and torment. They are important, but after awhile redundancy starts to get the better of us. And if indeed, the Porters were a casualty of unenlightened times, Winkler doesn't seem to get that the same motives (commercial or professional) that hindered Porter have also tainted his film. Still, De-Lovely compensates for its failure of nerve (or muted homophobia) with style and velocity. There are numerous cameos by contemporary musical artists (Alanis Morrisette, Diana Krall, Elvis Costello, Robbie Williams) that in another film might have seemed gimmicky, but here, seems to bring just the right touch. There's an ease and authority about most of the musical numbers that feels spontaneous and smooth, that gives you the upshot and elation without looking stagy or self-conscious. A wonderful, dark, evocative moodiness permeates the film. The songs emerge plausibly from the plot (and for the most part) without beating us over the head. When a film reaches a certain level of expertise, it can, to a certain extent, make its own rules. De-Lovely succeeds, often, by sheer force of competence and confidence. It stumbles when Winkler goes for intellect over intuition. There's a certain amount of justice, I suppose, in the fact that the musical productions are often smarter than the dialogue. When De-Lovely is smart, it's very, very smart. When it gets didactic, it drops like a cannonball. http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Classic/MemberTagFilms.aspxClassic
Number of films tagged: 816

Number of people who tagged: 313

Number of times used: 1454

]]>Sat, 19 Dec 2009 23:30:46 GMT8163131454Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Great/MemberTagFilms.aspxGreat
Number of films tagged: 231

Number of people who tagged: 202

Number of times used: 371

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 17:11:49 GMT231202371Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/fun/MemberTagFilms.aspxfun
Number of films tagged: 459

Number of people who tagged: 142

Number of times used: 296

]]>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:23:09 GMT459142296Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/musical/MemberTagFilms.aspxmusical
Number of films tagged: 174

Number of people who tagged: 109

Number of times used: 356

]]>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 20:03:25 GMT174109356Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Dance/MemberTagFilms.aspxDance
Number of films tagged: 80

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 101

]]>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:25:46 GMT8047101Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/terrible/MemberTagFilms.aspxterrible
Number of films tagged: 59

Number of people who tagged: 47

Number of times used: 64

]]>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:51:39 GMT594764Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/adaptation/MemberTagFilms.aspxadaptation
Number of films tagged: 126

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 137

]]>Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:17:59 GMT12625137Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/broadway/MemberTagFilms.aspxbroadway
Number of films tagged: 162

Number of people who tagged: 16

Number of times used: 21

]]>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 04:12:01 GMT1621621Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/Ballet/MemberTagFilms.aspxBallet
Number of films tagged: 24

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 26

]]>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:25:47 GMT241426Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dance-art/MemberTagFilms.aspxdance-art
Number of films tagged: 1505

Number of people who tagged: 10

Number of times used: 12

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT15051012Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/audition/MemberTagFilms.aspxaudition
Number of films tagged: 114

Number of people who tagged: 8

Number of times used: 10

]]>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 19:02:04 GMT114810Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/dancer/MemberTagFilms.aspxdancer
Number of films tagged: 120

Number of people who tagged: 7

Number of times used: 17

]]>Fri, 10 Jul 2009 20:44:44 GMT120717Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/musical-play/MemberTagFilms.aspxmusical-play
Number of films tagged: 454

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 7

]]>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:13:22 GMT45467Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/backstage/MemberTagFilms.aspxbackstage
Number of films tagged: 320

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Mon, 25 May 2009 13:41:41 GMT32044Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/showbusiness/MemberTagFilms.aspxshowbusiness
Number of films tagged: 419

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 4

]]>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 13:12:01 GMT41944Tag