Back to the Source Material
Mar. 14th, 2006 10:22 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)

I finally saw the actual movie of Sunset Boulevard (for WORK, how cool is that?) and ... wow. First of all, I was majorly, majorly congratulating myself because the mannerisms, posture, expressions, and just the way Joe was physically acted was exactly what I see in my head just going solely off Kevin Anderson's performance in the soundtrack. KEVIN ANDERSON, YOU ARE AMAZING! I mean, even stuff like how he glares at Norma while giving Betty the address on the phone – I could see that in the voice acting! Caw ... awesome. I rock. ;)
Anyway, the reasons I'd put off watching it for so long:
1. I didn't want to mess with the pretty pictures in my head
2. I was afraid that the L.A. production was trying to more closely resemble the movie (because its audience would be more familiar with it) and therefore the movie would be responsible for how comically horrible it was. This would have been entertaining, just as listening to the LA soundtrack is entertaining, but also BAD.
Luckily it was a much more restrained, realistic performance, more like the London one ... if not even more restrained because it's not a stage musical. Norma was allowed to be the only ham, Betty was sweet, Joe was bitter, and it was all good. As for the pretty pictures, well, all it did was improve things, as I am weak at set and costume design, which is what the movie had in spades.
I was also amazed how masterful the stage play adaptation was ... eight minutes of exposition in the movie gets condensed into a three-and-a-half minute musical number that is mostly chorus members singing and dancing, and yet nothing was lost. I have to admit I kind of prefer it that way ... it's probably just because that's what I'm used to, but while watching the movie I just wanted it to get on with the plot. The big chorus number also evokes the hustle and bustle of the studio, which is a marked contrast to the stifling silence of Norma's house, something that's a little lacking in the movie because studio scenes are usually two or three people in an office discussing something quietly. There are obvious budget reasons for why each medium did what, but still... I also prefer how, in the musical, Betty's subplot is maintained more steadily throughout the story, thus keeping it in the audience's mind and also providing a constant foil for the relationship with Norma – the chronological approach to the various scenes leading up to the climax is nice, too; I don't know why they did the whole finishing-the-script scene in a flashback in the movie. Dialogue-wise, I knew they'd lifted most of the play's lines right from the movie, but it was still weird to hear them, almost word-for-word, not sung. Being so familiar with the music, I can hear, in the way the lines are delivered, how the lyricists and composer set music to them, but to come up with that from scratch? Amazing. Musical composition is still an unfathomable magical process to me.
And of course the music ... well. I won't bother to compare the music in a blockbuster musical whose main selling point is its composer to the incidental music in a straight movie that's far more about the actors, but let me just say: how is it that the opening theme in the musical can sound more like an old movie score than the actual score of an old movie? Probably playing on stereotypes and perceptions rather than historical evidence. But it's good.
MONDAY's SKETCHBOOK
Page One - Bus people, including one who looks like an octopus or something.
Page Two - Brutha ventures into Ephebe, and I forget how to draw Joe. My sister wrote the little comment next to the Brutha sketch; it refers to something we came up with on Sunday when I demonstrated that I am, fundamentally, an evil evil person. I pointed out that one of the songs we sang (that was NOT the horrible one; in fact it's quite nice) closely parallels plot elements in Small Gods (which I'm sure were included in the book because they're stereotypically biblical) except for the part of the refrain that goes 'I go before you always' because Brutha always carries Om on his back. So we came up with a bunch of stuff like 'I'm right behind you!' 'I've got your back!' and of course 'I'm watching your back – literally!' This is why we should not be allowed to sit together.
Page Three - I remember how to draw Joe, and the sketching of the SLC Museum of Natural History's desert tortoise specimen last summer as well as notations during a TV special on desert tortoises seem to finally be sinking in and I'm structuring the head more correctly. (It's taken long enough!) Now I just need to make the design more ... designy.
HAPPY BIRTHDAY, UBIQUITOUSPITT!
I'm first!
Date: 2006-03-14 07:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-14 07:43 pm (UTC)Well . . .
Date: 2006-03-14 08:07 pm (UTC)A2
Re: Well . . .
Date: 2006-03-14 10:38 pm (UTC)Re: Well . . .
Date: 2006-03-15 01:49 am (UTC)[writes is down]
Om = love. And cleansing fire. And pain.
Date: 2006-03-14 08:18 pm (UTC)Re: Om = love. And cleansing fire. And pain.
Date: 2006-03-17 03:46 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-14 08:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-14 09:13 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-14 09:27 pm (UTC)Tortoises are cool. They're like some throwback to the Mesozoic Era. More so than the tuatara, but almost exactly as much as the crocodile.
no subject
Date: 2006-03-14 09:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 07:42 pm (UTC)It's not the most interesting city I've ever been to. It has a good maritime museum, though.
Also in Aberdeen . . .
Date: 2006-03-17 04:20 pm (UTC)A2
Re: Also in Aberdeen . . .
Date: 2006-03-17 11:25 pm (UTC)Uh, we are talking about the same Aberdeen, right?
Re: Also in Aberdeen . . .
Date: 2006-03-18 03:46 am (UTC)A2
Re: Also in Aberdeen . . .
Date: 2006-03-18 11:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 12:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 12:09 am (UTC)Thanks. :)
no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 12:09 am (UTC)*wow*
Yeah, that was me. If you didn't realize...
no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 03:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 03:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-15 04:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-16 06:20 am (UTC)-Loved the hands - beautifully designed, lovely shapes and pencil strokes - want to know who the funny little guy in the corner is!
-It wasn't just you: I thought the jokes about "I got your back" were really funny, too!
-I wondered if there was a way to keep the structure of the jaw showing through Om's mouth shape ("let there be melons!") that would still look good - if there is, I couldn't figure out how to do it (warning: another incoming crap email)
no subject
Date: 2006-03-16 11:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-16 11:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-21 03:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-03-21 06:54 am (UTC)