Who ever gave the review about the movie said they wouldn't like it because Sinatra was in a musical. I do not get that because Sinatra has been in several musicals especially with Gene Kelly. Or was it just because of the era setting? Anyway the movie is Great, Sinatra's always great. :)
sharei concur.. im pretty sure whoever wrote the review is a *beep* because i really loved the movie.
i bet the author of the review loved the new charlie and the chocolate factory by tim burton... ew. wot a *beep*
I didn't think this was a great movie, I thought it was rather mediocre. But the best thing about the moive was Frank Sinatra, so I don't understand why someone would write something like that.
shareA lot of folks have always hated Frank Sinatra....I am not sure exactly why.
Its New!!!! http://nick.industrialmeats.com/proj/art/GNUe-breakfast.jpg
Can-can is not a particullarly great movie, but I also agree with another poster that Sinatra was the best thing about it just not necessarily in the musical sense. Although I feel Sinatra is one of the greatest singers of all time I felt his portrayal of the character was far more entertaining than his singing in Can-can. Maybe it was just the lousy songs. Honestly I was rather suprised all the songs in Can-Can were by Cole Porter. With the exception of two (It's All Right With Me, and You Do Something To Me) I found the songs to be extremely below the standard of Porter's usual excellence. "Let's Do It" is a good song, but this rendition with Shirley Maclaine was just not all that spectacular, cute maybe, but not spectacular. I guess that is really how the entire movie felt to me; kinda cute but nothing more.
"He's three years old, gentle as a kitten, and likes dogs." - "I wonder whether Mark means that he eats dogs or is fond of them?"
Can Can is not mediocre, it is a great musical and everyone is wonderful in it. The only thing I don't really enjoy is the Adam and Eve play because I feel it drags on for too long.
shareI agree with you 100%. I love Can Can but I do not like the Adam and Eve Part.
share[deleted]
They screwed around with the book in order to accomodate Sinatra, Jourdan and Chevalier. In the book of the play you have four main characters: the priggish judge (Jourdan), the proprietor of the club (MacLaine), her lead dancer (Prowse) and her boyfriend, a crazy Bulgarian artist.
There was no way Sinatra would be believable as a prude so that role had to go to someone else (Louis Jourdan). Sinatra's role was created for the movie. And you couldn't very well make a musical about France without Maurice Chevalier, so a very minor role had to be beefed up to give him the spotlight.
cinefreak
As per the documentary (Making of Can-Can) in the extras DVD, Frank Sinatra co-produced the movie, brought in Shirley McLaine when Marilyn Munroe (the original choice!) didn't show up, and pretty much did a whole lot of other things, was virtually calling the shots by the time the movie started. The role extension, change of storyline (Sinatra gets the girl) etc. were all influenced by him, apparently.
I agree the songs are mediocre (surprisingly disappointing output from Cole Porter) and the film does not last in your mind for long - definitely not a classic like Sound of Music or My Fair Lady, for instance - it is pretty much in the 'Gigi' genre (though I liked Gigi better)...an evening of good family entertainment.
I too thought theAdam and Eve ballet was one of the highlights of the movie - brilliantly choreographed, and Juliet Prowse as the serpent is simply outstanding.
To another previous poster who said Sinatra is a lousy singer, I, well.....disagree!
...it's alright, Ma, if I can't please himshare
To another previous poster who said Sinatra is a lousy singer, I, well.....disagree!
That's a topic unto itself and hard to adequately discuss on IMDB. My wife is a vocal coach. Although she's not crazy about Sinatra, it's not so much about his vocal abilities, which she has no arguments with. She thinks he was very good at what he did. We batted this around for awhile and came to the conclusion that he was an excellent vocal artist but that you might have issues with the particular atmosphere he evokes. I personally think there were some things that he had no equal in and others that he should have stayed away from.
cinefreak
[deleted]
You need to pull your head out of your A$$! Once you do that....you will
be able to HEAR, the crystal cool enunciation and clear articulation that
only Frank Sinatra could bring his way to the songs he sang.
He was known EVERYWHERE, for his ability to phrase a song without
any strain or struggle.
He was a great singer, with every crooner coming after him
doing their level best to imitate his every nuance and sound!
My goodness...check out how he never takes his eyes away from
Juliet Prowse, when he was singing to her; not to mention
the sexy way he delivered that song. My favorite in the whole
movie!
"OOO...I'M GON' TELL MAMA!"
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
When I hear Sinatra's voice it evokes (for me) Vegas in the 50's, the Rat Pack, that whole technicolor, kind of over-blown era. And I'm willing to admit that it's a tribute to the man's artistry that his voice is capable of doing that. But I have to be in the right mood. And sometimes I am. When that mood comes over me I'm always ready to listen to "The Best is Yet to Come" with the Nelson Riddle arrangement.(I love those muted trumpets).
cinefreak
Gigi is a classic and stands alongside My Fair Lady, Oliver,and others. It is better, imo, than Sound of Music. Lerner and Lowe actually lived in Paris while writing and composing the score for Gigi. They were immensely successful in getting the mood of the city in the film.
Everyone in the film was magnificant: Maurice was never better in Thank Heaven for Little Girls, I Remember it Well, It's a Bore, etc. Louis Jourdan was simply great in Gigi conveying a wide range of emotions in the song.
Am I the only one who things Gigi is a masterpiece? Hardly as it won NINE oscars including a well-deserved Oscar for Best Picture.
This film is at best mediocre, and at times, it is almost painfully silly. The Cole Porter songs, however, are magnificent -- "I Love Paris", "It's Alright with Me", "You Do Something to Me", "Let's Do It!". The last is a great example of how delightfully dirty Porter could be with not-so-subtle double entendres that somehow seem more innocent than they actually are. Sinatra's singing outshone his character and the rest of the acting was so-so. The "Adam and Eve" dance was way too long, but certainly interesting and evocative.
shareI'll tell you "why not Sinatra". Because they had to rewrite the whole freaking libretto to accomodate his presence in the film. The role he played wasn't even IN the original show. That goes way beyond "miscast".
share[deleted]
It's a little hard to swallow Frank as a Frenchman. But once past that he gives his usual fine performance. As for his voice, Sinatra was one of the greatest singers of the 20th Century. Right up there with Elvis, Lennon, McCartney , Bono whoever. And I liked the Adam and Eve sequence, I enjoy Shirley MaClain's dancing much more than her acting. I find her girl next door routine annoying, she was good in the Apartment, but otherwise she always seems a bit forced and irritating.
Fox sued Sinatra over his walk-out from the 1955 filming of CAROUSEL. He left on day one of his commitment reportedly due to the shooting of the movie in two processes: CinemaScope 55 (a 65mm format which utilized the Fox Grandeur cameras from the early days of sound) and regular, anamorphic 35mm CinemaScope. Another possible reason is that he was uncomfortable with the borderline operatic score- Henry King recounted in his autobiography that he failed to adequately record the 'Soliloquy' at Fox.
CAN CAN never got great reviews for its stage libretto, however the addition of Sinatra's character- while no doubt good for the box office- threw the narrative totally out of whack. As in another Fox Todd-AO musical (DOCTOR DOLITTLE) whose narrative was distorted due to the ego of the leading actor, the love story viewers are expecting to see realized (ie. that of MacLaine and Jourdan) never comes to its logical completion. If it's true that Sinatra usurped the direction of Walter Lang, he had experienced that before (with Yul Brynner). Nonetheless, the positives are the songs from the play which were retained, the Oscar-nominated orchestrations and costumes, the cinematography of William Daniels (Garbo's favourite cameraman), the lavish sets and the zest of the performances (even by those in roles they were miscast in- MacLaine and Sinatra could never be mistaken for French nationals and seem to make no attempt to give any slight impression of being so).
The negatives (other than those I have already cited) include the deletion of great songs such as 'Allez-vous en' and 'I Love Paris' either at the screenplay stage or in the editing room (both used as background score), the slow patches and the minimizing of Juliet Prowse's contributions in order to please MacLaine (in the play, Prowse's character -played by Gwen Verdon- performed the 'Apache' dance and-if I am correct-was 'Eve' in the Garden of Eden ballet). It was a huge hit in 1960-61 although other, better Broadway-to-Hollywood musicals (CAROUSEL,SILK STOCKINGS,PORGY AND BESS) from the same era did not do so well financially. A mystery.