MovieChat Forums > All That Jazz (1979) Discussion > All That Jazz versus Chicago

All That Jazz versus Chicago

posted 18 years ago by IceboxMovies
18 replies | jump to latest

Which do you think is the better film?

All That Jazz- likeable characters, even Roy Scheider's character when he still is unfortunately a womanizer and drug-inducer. Still, these are characters you care about. Some catchy songs and wild dance numbers, which make up for the downbeat ending.

Chicago- dissing this film may be disrespectful to Bob Fosse, but then again he wasn't alive to make the film. I thought Chicago was overrated. Truthfully I didn't like the songs and I especially hated the story... woman commits murder, lies herself out of prison and becomes a star anyway. I could care less about the characters Renee Zellweger, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Richard Gere and Queen Latifah played in that movie. I thought them to be one-dimensional. Why did it win Best Picture, anyway?

So overall, I vote All That Jazz to be vastly better than Chicago. Time for your pick!

I'll bet YOU can't make that slurping sound Anthony Hopkins made in Silence of the Lambs...

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BoomShakaLocke 18 years ago

"All That Jazz", which seemed sort of ahead of its time, whereas "Chicago" was very much of its time. Besides, Bob wasn't there for it, so that magic was missing.

"I like my cheese in the ounces. When they start weighing as much as a Fiat, I get worried."

[–] niara 18 years ago

I loved All That Jazz.

I, too, thought Chicago was over-rated and reminded me why I hate musicals.

[–] cathrynm 17 years ago

Chicago was entertaining, though to me it felt sort of derivative. Like they reverse engineered some old stuff and tried to recreate the old magic. Chicago was like something that's trying to recreate a feeling, whereas All That Jazz is original and is somebody with huge confidence letting it all hang out -- trying out weird ideas.

All that Jazz I feel more like they are really dancing. All that Jazz is real sweaty actual, physical human bodies who jump and around and do stuff and then who are exhausted afterwards. Chicago, I haven't seen it in a few months, but I don't remember the dancing so much -- more the story and songs.

Watching Chicago makes me kind of sad Fosse is dead. It's kind of like seeing Beatlemania rather than seeing the Beatles.

[–] robhumanick 17 years ago

F ck Chicago.

http://projectionbooth.blogspot.com
Strange, what love does.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Lady_Madonna 17 years ago

Yeah, I just watched it last night, simply amazing. I was close to crying at the end. I think I prefer All That Jazz to Chicago. I liked the music in both, but All That Jazz was weird-er and more interesting.

~Aimz~

You talkin to me?

[–] Goofy_Elfman 17 years ago

I'll walk instead of jumping on the bandwagon.

Chicago 10/10
All That Jazz 6/10

"I don't like so much freedom down there. It makes me tingle in my giblets."

[–] jemmima_python 17 years ago

This is a stupid question, you can't compaire the 2, there totally diffrent films.

[–] naillon-2 17 years ago

They're different films, yes, but both were choreographed by Bob Fosse; I have no doubt he'd have direct "Chicago" if he'd been alive to do it. I certainly prefer his directing in "Jazz" to Rob Marshall's ripoff of Fosse's style in "Chicago". I loved Zeta-Jones' performance, but I LOATHED the character of Roxie Hart and couldn't understand why Renee Zellweger was nominated for an Oscar for playing the whiny, greedy, attention-grabbing *****. I'd say "Jazz", because of its unflinching look at the main character, the sympathetic people surrounding him, and best of all, the incomparable Roy Scheider.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] moviesbest 15 years ago

Anyone who replied that you cannot compare any 2 film to find the better one is REAL stupid. How do you think films are judged for awards ?

Anyway these 2 films are not totally different.

[–] aciolino 15 years ago

I guess you're going to find a biased audience here since this is the "All That Jazz" forum; having said that I will say that I walked out on "Chicago" about a third of the way through. My reasons: 1) the dancing was not even real dancing, just kind of gyrating and grinding to the music. 2) the music--my complaint with the Broadway show--the music just isn't that compelling, which leads to the 3) plot, which is the least compelling of all. I found the Broadway production boring, the film, intolerble and pretentious.

All That Jazz, is, to me, a masterpiece of both film making, dance, and choices of music. The cast couldn't have been better.

Um...not close.

[–] mecahill 15 years ago

"Chicago" is the winner in my book. I really enjoy the soundtrack too.

[–] kaisermom2000 15 years ago

Hmmm...comparing apples and oranges...I haven't seen All That Jazz for a number of years, but it was amazing (though confusing, as I saw it when I was relatively young when it was first released)

I am very fortunate to have seen Chicago in it's original stage version (actually starring Gwen Verdon and Chita Rivera) back in the 70's. It included all Fosse's original choreography and was a fabulous production. At around the same time, All That Jazz was also released. I was around 12 or 13 at the time. I certainly did not understand the underlining stories in either production, but the visuals (and dance numbers) of both were enthralling.

The movie version of Chicago was not that bad. It actually did a good job of presenting the musical numbers (so that they were the daydreams of Roxey) - Because (ultimately) what Fosse presented in Chicago had not changed - and it still hasn't. That, we (as a society) make celebrities out of criminals, and criminals out of celebrities. The press tries the court cases before the jury is chosen and opening arguments begin. And that the more likeable and charismatic the criminal is, the more likely that the case will become entertainment. The characters of Chicago were not suppose to be likeable, merely entertaining.

I can't say I like one film better then the other - sometimes I'm in the mood for an orange, and sometimes I feel more like a nice crisp apple.

[–] Billy_McAvoy 15 years ago

I'm with you. I really loved Chicago and think it deserved the accolades it received; but comparing to an actual Fosse Film and it pales. The story and the numbers in "All That Jazz" are the absolute pinnacle of the genre, i.e. there may never be a better musical comedy, on film anyway. I still watch it several times a year and whenever someone tells me this or that musical is the best they've ever seen, I have to sit them down and make them watch "All That Jazz" and it has never failed to amaze. If you're into dance or theater at all you'll have to agree, hands down.

...Guess What S1m0ne! We have now entered an age where we can manufacture fraud faster than our ability to detect it

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] IMDBRefugee1SD (139) 7 years ago

I would definitely give the edge to "All That Jazz". Fosse was scheduled to make a movie of "Chicago" before his death
and no doubt would have made a better version. But Rob Marshall's direction and choreography owe a debt to Fosse's
for the original Broadway show. You're reaction to the show's cynicism is similar to the original Broadway audience's.
The show was not a hit.