MovieChat Forums > On the Town (1949) Discussion > Yet another botched musical!

Yet another botched musical!


"On the Town" tells the story of three sailors - Gabey, Ozzie and Chip - on 24-hour leave in wartime New York City. Gabey falls in love with a subway poster of Ivy Smith, "Miss Turnstiles" for the month of June. Gabey, aided by Ozzie, Chip and two of their gals, goes on a hunt for Ivy. After several adventures and a disappointing blind date with Hildy's roommate, Lucy Schmeeler, Gaby finds Ivy. But the leave soon comes to an end, and the sailors depart.

Let me say first that film version of "On the Town" is lively and entertaining, but no more so than many musicals of the 1940s, including "Anchors Aweigh," the very enjoyable 1945 movie starring Frank Sinatra and Gene Kelly as two sailors on leave in Hollywood.

The musical score of that film (by Sammy Cahn and Jule Styne) is excellent. Sinatra's rendition of "I Fall in Love Too Easily" still leaves me with chills. But I'll leave it to others to argue over which is the better film.

There are at least two ways to review "On the Town" or any other film of a Broadway musical: Take it for what it is, or express regrets over what it could have been. I fall into the latter camp.

"On the Town" opened on Broadway in 1944 and ran for more than 460 performances - a healthy run for shows of the time. It was an "integrated" show, in which the book, songs and dances were tightly bound to advance the plot. Choreograper Jerome Robbins created innovative dances full of energy (Robbins later developed a very bad reputation for his emotional tantrums.) The forerunner of "On the Town" was the highly successful Leonard Bernstein-Robbins ballet "Fancy Free." The creation of the musical play was inspired by "Fancy Free," though they have nothing in common except for the three sailors. Much of the money to produce the show was provided by MGM.

(The play was integrated in another sense: six of the performers were black, and they encountered racism when the show went on the road. Gregg Lawrence, in his biography of Jerome Robbins, wrote: "... the press reported that 'Negroes and whites' could be seen dancing together onstage, although one interracial number had been cut as potentially too provocative." In addition, the role of Ivy was played by half-Japanese Sono Osato -- courageous casting at a time when we were at war with Japan!)

In 1960 Columbia Records released "The First Full-Length Recording" of the show, which included members of the original cast:
(Nancy Walker as Hildy the taxi driver, Betty Comden as Claire DeLoone the anthropologist (she was called Claire Huddesen in the film), Adolph Green (Ozzie) and Cris Alexander (Chip) as two of the sailors. John Battles as the other sailor (Gabey) is not heard on the album (John Reardon performs in his place). This is the REAL "On the Town."

But producer Arthur Freed felt that the songs in the play were too sophisticated for film audiences (I suppose that anything more sophisticated than "moon, June and spoon"-type songs were beyond his grasp), so most of the numbers in the play were dropped and second-rate composer Roger Edens filled out the score (I have to assume that Comden and Green were dragooned into writing the uninspired lyrics that accompanied Edens' music). All of this confirms the saw that no one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American people.

Producers weren't entirely at fault. The Production Code Administration's censors were always on the lookout for anything that might violate its strict, moralistic code (the code was co-authored by a Jesuit priest, Father Daniel Lord.) One character omitted from the film is Judge Pitin W. Bridgework, Claire's fiance. The suggestion of illicit sex would never have been allowed. Moreover, in "New York New York," the city is referred to as "a wonderful town"; in the play it's "a helluva town." Believe me, it makes a difference.

Even the two of the three songs that were retained in the movie, "New York New York" and "Come Up to My Place," were reduced to shadows of the original versions. Leonard Bernsteins's jazzy score was castrated by orchestrator Conrad Salinger and clever lyrics were dropped or altered. These changes helped to ruin the film for me.

The play contained five ballets. For the film, Bernstein wrote the ballet "A Day in New York," wonderfully performed by Gene Kelly and other professional dancers. But that ballet wasn't really new because Bernstein created it by borrowing themes from the other ballets in the play.

Among the songs that were unfortunately omitted: "Lucky to Be Me," which has become a standard, sung by Gabey as he awaits his date; "I Can Cook Too," Hildy's witty mating song for Chip; "Carried Away," another funny number sung by Claire and Ozzie in the museum, in which they express a mutual weakness (the song was replaced by the silly "Primitive Man" number, which was only salvaged in part by Ann Miller's dancing; "Some Other Time," a poignant song, with a marvelous vocal arrangement, that acknowledges that the 24-hour leave is almost over (there are about two dozen versions of this song currently in print); "Ya Got Me," a propulsive, bouncy song with a Latin beat that the gang sings to Gabey to cheer him up (this was replaced in the film by an inferior, corny C&W song-and-dance number). None of those songs was too topical or esoteric for film audiences.

For many successful musicals, MGM turned to established outside composers and lyricists. "Meet Me in St. Louis," "The Harvey Girls" and "It Happened in Brooklyn" are just three examples of this.
Roger Edens, who won an Academy Award for his contribution - if you can call it that -- is simply not in their league.

I suggest that anyone who reads this review acquire or hear the 1960 Columbia album, or even the 1992 studio version that includes even more music.

Your high opinion of the film may change significantly.



reply

I do have to say that I miss "I Can Cook Too", "Ya Got Me" and "Some Other Time". The latter is such a beautiful ballad with a gorgeous melody while the other two give so much character to Hildy and the gang. Hildy is by far one of my favorite characters in the musical but in the movie...Ivy takes over just because Vera is so cute!

So I kinda agree with your review but I still like the movie without comparing it to the musical. As a musical film on its own with the play...it's very decent. I like it.



\(^o^)/YATTA
"There's More Than One Way To Eat A Sam and Dean Winchester!"
House M.D.

reply

I completely agree with Kooldancin. I saw the movie before I listened to the stage show and I thought it was fine. Granted I now love the original songs from the show now but the songs they used to replace them with in the movie (i.e. You're Awful, Prehistoric Man, You Can Count on Me) I love as well (so much that they are on my iPod lol).

But if they didnt have such strong leads like Sinatra, Kelly, Miller, and Garrett then yes, it would not have held up as well.

"Attend the tale of Sweeney Todd"
"Official Bleeder" - Town Apprentice

reply

I trust MGM, the greatest Movie Studio that ever existed, knew better as to what audience tastes were back in 1949 than you do.

True the show did well on Broadway but Broadway audiences and movie audiences are two entirely different "beasts". If you want to see how well artistic movies fare look no later than Gene Kelly's movies of the late 50's.

reply

I was introduced to On The Town through the 1949 film, and I've always loved it. But it wasn't until I saw the 1998 revival that I realized how different the stage version was - not just in terms of the score, but also the World War II setting. When the three sailors head back to their ship at the conclusion, they're also heading off to an uncertain fate - perhaps death in the Pacific theater of war - and this is what gives their stay in New York (not to mention a song like "Some Other Time") such immediacy and poignance. Needless to say, I soon came to love the stage version as much as the film.

Many people on the IMDb boards are "remake mad," constantly suggesting remakes of films (Singin' In The Rain, Two For The Road, etc.) that simply don't need to be remade; the filmmakers got it right the first time. However, I would have no objection to another On The Town film, as long as it utilized the show's original setting, score and choreography. In many ways it wouldn't even be a remake; it would actually represent shooting a film that had never been made before.

Still, I'd always have a special place in my heart for the Gene Kelly/Stanley Donen version of On The Town.

reply

I have to say that one thing a remake could NOT have is all that delicious location footage! New York is a very different place today than it was then.

I really like that Prehistoric Man song - so much so, that I'm doing it with a lovey singer with whom I work. She likes it too!

reply

it would actually represent shooting a film that had never been made before.

I think you're onto something here. Gee -- maybe Donen should've remade this movie (or made the movie of the play) instead of trying to remake Charade.

Too bad Betty Comden is gone now....



dolceri ac dolcere

reply

The only reason this movie has had legs over the years is because of the song "New York, New York."

The casting and Ann Miller's dancing help, but the whole mishmash fails to come together in the way that "Singin' in the Rain" or "An American in Paris" do.

Part of the reason too is that the story's framework does not allow Kelly to go off on any epic ballets. It's probably the musical where he dances the least!

"Don't call me 'honey', mac."
"Don't call me 'mac'... HONEY!"

reply

I just watched American in Paris and have just commented on a thread there how bitterly disappointed I was as a lover of the Golden Age Musicals. On The Town for me is almost perfect I love it, as I do Singing In The Rain.
I think On The Town has legs because it is not "fantastical" and it is about "average people - sailors, taxi drivers etc albeit with a Hollywood spin of course.

BTW we have a Gene Kelly season on satellite here in Mauritius, and I just watched Brigadoon - a dreadful movie. PS I am Scottish so that may be part of the reason for my views.

reply

My take is that the film is fine for what it is, and is still watchable today. It is, however, not anywhere close to being the classic that the stage version is. Fortunately, the Broadway theater was allowed a whole lot more freedom of expression than films of this era were. With that said, I think that a more reasonably faithful film version could have been made. All of the Rodgers & Hammerstein films of the 50s and 60s based on their stage shows were reasonably faithful to the original productions, even with the Hollywood sanitizing, and they were all well-received by the public.

reply