The Best Director Chapter 480: Mamma Mia!

Chapter 480: Chapter 480: Mamma Mia!

“Two tickets for ‘Mamma Mia!’ please,” “We’ll take five for ‘Mamma Mia!’…”

It was another joyful weekend, and custors were lining up in droves at the ticket counters of 3025 North Arican Cinemas. Movie tickets were being sold, with ‘Mamma Mia!’ the blazing new film taking the lion’s share. Whether they were seasoned audience mbers who had seen the stage play, or newcors to the story, they shared the sa anticipative mood—the trailers for ‘Mamma Mia!’ were too amazing!

Catchy and pleasing songs, lively and humorous dance sequences, spirited and lively performances, dialogue full of laughs, and the joyous atmosphere were highly appealing, not to ntion the scenic beauty of the small island. All of these elents were built on an interesting wedding story and a wildly popular classic stage play. For those who love musicals, there was no film more anticipated than this one, at least not this year.

Moreover, the casting was incredibly enticing, the biggest highlight naturally being ryl Streep singing and dancing. Since ‘The Devil Wears Prada,’ Streep’s comrcial potential seed to have suddenly exploded, appearing repeatedly in comrcial films. Now, at the ripe age of 56, she was playing a role full of youthful energy in a musical, which truly made her fans and followers perspire with anxiety, still unsure whether that was good or bad.

At the sa ti, there was the invincible youth Amanda Seyfried, British actor of considerable talent Dominic Cooper, and the group of charming old-tirs Pierce Brosnan, Colin Firth, Stellan Skarsgard…

“Hahaha!” “Hehehe!” In the auditorium, as the fantastic story unfolded on the big screen, waves of laughter erupted from the crowded seats, indicating that Universal Studios had launched another great musical film. Whether they were fans of ‘Mamma Mia!’, admirers of Universal Studios musicals, or general audience mbers, the vast majority were not disappointed. These 110 minutes of vocal performance were an imnse pleasure.

However, what they did not know was that another version of ‘Mamma Mia!’—produced by Tom Hanks’s Playtone and led by Universal Studios—wasn’t as satisfying.

In fact, the ’07 Universal Studios version and the ’08 Universal Studios version had the sa director (Phyllida Lloyd), screenwriter (Catherine Johnson), and lead producer (Judy Crayr), and were crafted by the original stage crew. The main casting was nearly identical, a result of Crayr and her team’s consistent vision. However, due to differences in the list of producers, original score, editing, choreography, and other staff mbers, the two versions of ‘Mamma Mia!’ were vastly different.

This was not in terms of the story itself. So changes in narrative pacing and musical style were enough to cause a radical transformation in a musical film.

Wang Yang was aware of the flaws in the ’08 Universal Studios version of ‘Mamma Mia!’ and the chief criticisms from the audience, and naturally, he was not going to sit idly by and let things remain the sa. The aggregated reviews on Rotten Tomatoes summarized the Universal Studios version: “This jukebox musical is filled with easy fun, but the rough singing and affected mannerism might make you think they’re ‘Dancing Queen’ from the beginning to end.”

The biggest issue lay with the songs and dances. On one hand, all its musical numbers used hits from the Swedish band ABBA, reigning from the 1970s, with so songs almost entirely retaining the original arrangents.

That was not surprising, as Catherine Johnson was herself a hardcore fan of ABBA, and even the na ‘Mamma Mia!’ ca from one of ABBA’s signature pieces. Crayr also said, “ABBA’s songs are the best drama,” so ‘Mamma Mia’ beca the the song, with plots crafted just to integrate those tunes.

Roger Ebert from the Chicago Sun-Tis said, “ABBA’s songs are wall-to-wall. Do you like that sort of thing? I don’t, not really.” Christian Toto from The Washington Tis said, “Mamma Mia!’ is a sloppy, chaotic ornant of music, only enjoyable in the three minutes of happiness that follow the end of the damn ABBA songs.” Dezhada Gobel from E! Online said, “‘Mamma Mia!’ even lacks one big beautiful part, too many songs cut it into tiny little pieces.”…

A stage play is a stage play, a film is a film. If a movie loses the rhythm and storytelling properties inherent to film, it’s bound to result in disaster. An even greater problem was actually the singing, the perforrs.

“ABBA ruined, impressive feat you morons!” “Stupid little incidents, terrible singing, I regret not damaging my ears on purpose while watching this movie.” “So of the singing sounded like Karaoke at a local bar.”… The audience reviews were ubiquitous with “Great music, terrible singing.” If having too much ABBA was a flaw, the awful singing magnified that flaw to an intolerable extent.

One characteristic of recently released musicals is that the actors themselves perform the songs on screen, a trend now set by ‘High School Musical.’

Everyone in the ’08 Universal Studios version underwent two to three months of specialized singing training, and most of them botched it… Singing is different from other things; talent truly matters, and sotis hard work cannot compensate for its absence. However, this applies to pop star levels, not “very professional, very pleasant” not young like Jessica and Rachel back in the day who, although far from stunning, were youthfully vibrant and refreshingly energetic, covering many shortcomings. This was evident as Amanda Seyfried escaped criticism and, instead, received considerable praise.

Of course, young people have strong learning capabilities, but it’s harder for the elderly. After a grueling round of practice, ryl Streep sang quite well; she always managed to shine. Colin Firth was barely passable, whereas Brosnan and Skarsgard were truly performing karaoke, their nervous and trembling voices, and the evident wavering showing off their amateur level. When everyone was used to hearing ABBA’s top-notch performances, things plumted from just passable to amateur… resulting in rotten tomatoes and stinking eggs.

To secure the film rights, Fla Movies, led by Wang Yang, promised Judy Crayr and others that they wouldn’t interfere too much to ensure that the film adaptation of “Mamma Mia!” would have the appearance they desired and not destroy the classic stage play. However, this did not an Fla was hands-off; they needed the experience of producing musical films and wanted to make the movie the best it could be, which was why they chose Fla Movies and Marvelous Yang.

Once Wang Yang recognized where the problems lay, solutions followed. He repeatedly clarified to Lloyd, Catherine, Krar, and others that they absolutely must not bring a fan ntality into the film. The inclusion of ABBA songs on the big screen was fine but should not be excessive; more attention needed to be paid to the film’s pacing. He also discussed with them at length the differences in expressiveness and narrative thods between stage plays and films, sharing experiences and viewpoints.

Consequently, changes arrived. The Fla version of “Mamma Mia!” was leaner yet richer in its selection of tracks. There were no wall-to-wall ABBA songs and no sacrificing plot for the sake of songs. Everything was aid to fit and serve the story, which actually caused Crayr and others quite a bit of pain due to the cuts they had to make.

On the huge issue of singing abilities, Wang Yang also found it very tricky. Starting the shoot two years in advance wouldn’t turn Brosnan and the others into Elvis, The Beatles, or Jackson. The outco of a few months’ training would be roughly the sa as they could not undergo full-ti training for as long as half a year to a year for a single film, plus there was the matter of innate talent; and they couldn’t use singers to dub for the actors, leaving no shortcuts.

Unless they found actors with excellent singing abilities to play the lead roles. However, that might compromise acting skills, and secondly, Crayr and others were set on Streep, Brosnan, and the rest. Therefore, Fla had to find better training and recording teams, extend the main cast’s training ti as much as possible, and from song selection, consider their vocal characteristics and emotional engagent, among other singing abilities. They preferred to let production costs soar rather than to have subpar singing—as long as the performance was at least passable and not deed “terrible” by the audience…

There were problems with the songs and the dances, as “pretentious dance steps” naturally weren’t impressive. Both choreography and cinematography bore so bla, but it’s not like the choreographers could be faulted— the main actors were quite aged at the ti of shooting the 2008 version: Streep was 57, Brosnan was 54, Firth was 47, Skarsgard was 56, and they were not professional dancers. Could they compete with “Step Up”? They simply couldn’t keep up!

But the dance in “High School Musical” wasn’t necessarily breathtaking either. The key issue was how they integrated with the scenes, and displeasing songs made the audience focus more on the dance, becoming more critical.

Although Annie Fletcher, Fla’s ace dancer, did not serve as the choreographer, the Fla team, hardened by the “High School Musical” series and other films, and the artistic direction team led by Fletcher brought a wealth of vibrant dance experience to “Mamma Mia!” The younger cast, like Seyfried, goes without saying, but even the older mbers were able to perform more professional dance moves with ease, making the scenes feel alive with movent.

On the other hand, there were various problems brought by the director. In fact, if one were only to consider production itself, neither Universal Studios nor Fla would have wanted 50-year-old British lady Phyllida Lloyd as the director—she was a fantastic stage play director, but entirely new to films.

“Look at its cheap costus, clunky dance steps, and terrible cinematography—a true disgrace,” mused Elizabeth Weisman of the New York Daily News. “Watching this jaunty pop-musical adaptation, you can have a perfectly delightful ti, but you have to admit it’s quite a ss,” noted A.O. Scott of The New York Tis. “A philosopher once said, ‘Beware. The people on the big screen are having more fun than the ones sitting in the audience.’ Mama Mia! That’s a good piece of advice,” quipped Kenneth Turan of the Los Angeles Tis…

Fla could have made better choices, such as going with Sarah Schulman, but they still passed the microphone to Lloyd because of the original cast.

Despite having a whole troupe of fine actors, many Arican and United Kingdom “national treasures,” who would be considered apt if not them, it was a puzzle that “poor performances” gathered aplenty criticism. Naturally, this wasn’t referring to Streep; other cast mbers, new and veteran, however, were widely criticized. The main issue was about getting the hang of it: how to grasp the style of stage performances for a movie? Lloyd evidently didn’t provide much good direction, including in costu, cinematography, sets, and various other departnts.

Considering that the costu designer for the 2008 Universal Studios’ rendition, Ann Roth, was a four-ti Oscar nominee for Best Costu Design and had won an award (1/4), it was really frustrating to hear critics scoff at the “cheap costus.”

Even though Fla had the money and experience—and Wang Yang had the foresight, unable to replace Lloyd—many problems were inevitable, as perfection is often elusive in life. Yet Fla wasn’t without strategies. Wang Yang didn’t have ti to act as a producer, being busy with “500 Days of Sumr” and award season, and Annie Fletcher, feeling tired, declined the producer’s invitation as well. Coupled with the “original cast”, thus Fla’s strategy focused on post-production editing, bringing on board the esteed editor Margaret Goodspeed.

However, despite that, despite the 2008 Universal Studios’ version batting a Rotten Tomatoes score of 54%/41%/76%, mainstream dia disdained it, and audience scores weren’t high, seemingly a bad movie, “Mamma Mia!” indeed had its unique charm. Colliding head-on with the formidable and crazy “The Dark Knight” at its release (July 18, 2008), its opening box office haul still impressively reached $44.84 million, with final North Arican earnings of $143 million, overseas $465 million, and a global box office soaring to $609.8 million, while its production cost was $52 million.

So problems were nipped in the bud, and so found their solutions and cures, with comndable execution. The “change” was significant; Fla’s version of “Mamma Mia!” with a production budget of $65 million was freshly released in several major markets including North Arica, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

It is now June 2006, its contemporaries are the cody “Crazy Priest,” the Arican version of the romance “Untouchable Lovers,” the family cody “Garfield 2,” the second-week showing of “Cars,” and the third-week showing of “The Break-Up”… How will its reviews, word of mouth, and box office performance pan out?

As night turns into day, newspapers with the scent of ink and printed with reviews of “Mamma Mia!” hit the shelves, while audiences go to IMDB, Rotten Tomatoes, and other places to cast their scores. (