MovieChat Forums > Fanny (1961) Discussion > Why not a musical?

Why not a musical?

posted 16 years ago by Pamactress
8 replies | jump to latest

Anyone know why the decision was made, when the film was produced, to drop all of the luscious songs from the Broadway musical? Okay, so they did keep many of the melodies as background music, but this is small consolation. The Broadway score has always been most beautiful, unusual, and interesting, and one of my favorites. Why did Hollywood so often make such bad decisions regarding turning B'way musicals into movies?

[–] DryToast 16 years ago

<<Why did Hollywood so often make such bad decisions regarding turning B'way musicals into movies?>>

You might ask the question more narrowly: why did Warner Brothers so often make such bad decisions regarding turning B'way musicals into movies? Jack Warner thought that musicals were out in 1960 and audiences didn't want to see them. Within the next few years the same man would film Gypsy without Ethel Merman and My Fair Lady without Julie Andrews.

"Footman...shine my shoe. Shine my shoe."

[–] blondee661 16 years ago

Apparently the music was cut because musicals were growing unpopular with movie audiences. Warners never did a great job when it came to musicals like the examples mentioned above. The only time I think Warners got it right with a musical was The Music Man.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] markedjuan 12 years ago

It was Jack Warner who insisted on deleting the songs. He said musicals weren't making any money, though he must have gagged when West Side Story, which was also released in 1961, grossed over %40 million.

But I like Fanny the film as it is, without the songs. It's such a romantic movie and everyone who was involved in it did such a splendid job. And Leslie Caron never looked prettier.

Fanny also did very well at the box office and was nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] DryToast 16 years ago

Received and replied to.

"Footman...shine my shoe. Shine my shoe."

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mdonln 9 years ago

Pamactress says > Why did Hollywood so often make such bad decisions regarding turning B'way musicals into movies?

Adapting successful Broadway shows for film makes perfectly good business sense but Broadway is one thing and Hollywood is another. If they want to make a successful movie, filmmakers have to consider many things especially the audience.

Are they trying to redo a show that worked well on Broadway and will attract that audience; or are they making a film that will work in movie theaters and appeal to, what tends to be, a broader, younger, more diverse audience?

Movie musicals don't always work for a number of reasons. From what I've seen, the plots tend to be thinner yet the length of the movie is usually longer and the size of the budget is bigger. Also, the actors who can sing, dance, and act equally well, aren't usually the same ones who have the biggest box office draw. And, musicals seem to show their age or don't stand the test of time too well.

I love music and dancing but I'm not a fan of movie musicals. As was done in Fanny, I'm all for stripping away all on-screen musical components from movies. The only exception is when the singing and dancing is integral to the story; as is the case with the Sound of Music. Otherwise, I find it unnatural and very annoying when characters spring up and start singing and dancing for no apparent reason.

Stories that go the other direction, from the big screen to Broadway, have musical numbers added so they'll work as a live show. The same should be true of Broadway stories that move to the big screen.