MovieChat Forums > Fame (2009) Discussion > Why it doesn't work

Why it doesn't work

posted 14 years ago by dizzy_hampster
23 replies | jump to latest

When I first saw the previews for this- I thought it was just one big long music video so I wasn't expecting much out of this. I was right to be hesitant but not for the reason I thought.

The original FAME showed the dedication each of the characters brought to the craft. It was about how their passion for their art and their lives interacted. Each scene involving a character was meant to show where he/she was at and the growth occurring artistically or personally. There was an explanation of who each character was and how the school operated.

This version of FAME stole scenes, dialogue, & music from the original but forgot to include the heart. The opening sequence was almost a shot for shot of the original but failing to include some audition scenes that would reveal how cut-throat the process is.
My biggest gripe though is that the original characters were chopped up and then randomly assigned to new characters. The character Denise takes scenes that previously belonged to Bruno, Doris, and Coco. But Bruno can also be seen in Marco and Victor. Jenny, who is the new version of Doris, is supposed to be so inhibited and shy at first that she cant even shake herself loose in class- but the next scene takes place in the lunch room and there she is dancing on the tables and grooving without any hesitancy... but wait! Now Jenny is Coco's character and getting taken advantage of (a scene that originally showed how Cocos ambition caused her to compromise herself but here just says a nice girl got taken in by a guy she idolized a bit). Alice's character is supposed to be the ice-queen of the original (forgot her name) as said by the two boys watching her dance- yet all we see is her exuberance and somewhat rebellious nature against her parents. The original movie had everyone dancing in the street to Bruno's tape- a moving scene that showed him how much other people appreciated his music and moved them into the streets dancing yet in this version the scene is a shadow of the meaning when Denise doesn't want it played because her daddy might get mad and wasn't so horrible to make people stop dancing at a party. just how does that impact the character? And who was the guy with the camera? I get that he was supposedly the new Ralph obsessed with his craft but it was always awkward when he was on the screen because we don't know anything about him. Andy is successful and is interested in Jenny but otherwise serves no purpose.

I could go with all of these changes and revisions if they actually worked- but they are pointless and do not serve to enhance the characters, the storyline, or the message in any way. The worst offense this movie makes though is that the art performances in no way enhance the story. Where do we see relationships change in the middle of a dance? Where do we see competition in characters giving monologues? The singing does nothing to show the internal chaos of a character.

This movie relied too much on being stylized and glamorous. The original wanted to show the gritty side of things and how your art can be both your savior and your downfall. This one just seems like a bunch of scenes thrown together to make a pretty movie and show off some singing and dancing. It cant decide what it wants to be: an updated version of the original or a bright shiny fun movie like High School Musical; the indecision keeps it from being anything. I'm sure young viewers will enjoy it but there is no way they are going to remember it 5 years from now, let alone have viewers passionate about it 25 years like the original.

[–] Kariann1964 14 years ago

Very good summary, dizzy! One mistake viewers will make is to think it will be FAME Part 2. Just forget you saw the first movie. It will make it a little bit easier to digest. I enjoyed Debbie Allen, but her time was limited to just minutes. I also expected more time for Kerrington detailing more of her background. Also, I wanted more dancing from her after "knowing" her talent on "So You Think You Can Dance." I bet many who paid to see this movie did so because of her appearance.

[–] Tsavo 14 years ago

I love the original movie and the series, I have yet to see the remake but I've been rather wary about it.. it's bad enough that people think High School Musical was some great feat, I am just not sure I can handle a film that I have been told for all intent and purposes wanted to be just like HSM, until I see it I wont know, but I thank you for your anylization of it, if I do see it i will be keeping my eyes open for those bits of character.

[–] Dash99 14 years ago

Agree with the OP conclusions. But to the above poster HSM and this Fame remake are two totally different kinds of films, I thought so comparing them is pointless. I never expected it to be like HSM, nor was it anything like it. I like HSM for what it is, but the thing where the Fame remake fails is it doesn't live up to the original.

Fame was an adult film which just happened to be about teenage characters, this film can't make up its mind what it wants to be.

[–] Tsavo 14 years ago

Hmm.. that does make sense.. and I wasn't trying to say that it WAS HSM, but that I was given the impression that it had been dumbed down to a level closer to HSM, I wont know until i see it, but equally, not knowing what it is can also be a HUGE problem. I also heard that the characters where mismatched and rather inconsistent all throughout.

[–] Tsavo 14 years ago

[–] lukn4frnz 13 years ago

HSM, yeah that's what it felt like. Like it was a G-rated version. The original was grittier, I was able to feel some of the pain of the characters, the gay guy, the woman who got videotaped naked. This one was just blah.

[–] Faye-9 14 years ago

I agree Kariann1964. I LOVE SYTYCD and all the people associated with it. When I saw this film promoted I couldn't wait to go see them dancing on the big screen. Then it never came to a big screen near me. I was puzzled as to what happened. I never read any reviews that it died...but assumed it must have. I did finally rent it last weekend and was TOTALLY disappointed. I don't relate to the first Fame, so I wasn't comparing it to that one, which should have given me an advantage while viewing this one. I still didn't like the way it laid out.

I agree with one post that said it should have been a TV series. That would have been WAY easier to enjoy in the style they made this "film". So sad too, cuz I wanted SO much to see Debbie Allen, Adam Shankler, Simon, Mary, Mia and ALL the other choreographers from SYTYCD sit downhill of its success and prosper big time. I so wish the mainstream audience was mesmerized by dance the way I am. I wish the infatuation with American Idol, which to me is the MOST boring, repetitive concept in the world, would die off and go away. I NEVER watch that stupid show. How many new singers can an industry, and audience, support at once? Good lord! I think it takes a million times more strength, effort, talent and perseverance to become a good dancer and I wish dancers got more praise, fame and glory. Gregory Hines, et al, were lucky... I so wish the trend would shift! At any rate. I feel bad that I hated this film. I really really REALLY wanted to love it. By the way, I'm NOT a dancer, but wish I could have been.

[–] Celtosealic 14 years ago

I've only seen THIS Version, and not the 1980 version, though I always wanted to. After watching this version, I thought, "Ah, it was all right, music was good anyways though I didn't get attached to ANY of the characters, but okay I'll give the 80's version a try"... I watched the first scene of the 80's version (the auditions) and came to the conclusion it was the exact same movie and wasn't good enough to watch twice so I turned it off. Maybe after reading your review I will have to give it a second try one day.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
John 3:16

My Site
http://naivaze.com

[–] mylesthompson 14 years ago

I agree with every word you wrote. I lament this new generation who haven't got the ability to concentrate beyond a two minute scene, especially if the camera is still. Not everything has to be shot like ER! There was a gritty realism to the original Fame and a heart in the tele series. This new version is vapid gloss with a poor soundtrack that seemed to be cobbled together one night over a pizza and beer. Not even the presence of Megan Mullally could elevate it. Her uneven performance of her song was hideous and her teacher character seemed medicated some of the time and far too familiar with the students. Actually perhaps that would have been an original avenue to explore. Far too interesting for this schlock!

[–] someofusarebrave 13 years ago

WORD on everything else I've read here. After growing up on musicals with heart and watching/listening to 'Rent' blow my mind and steal my breath away, this was a huge disappointment. There was so much potential, and I think it really showed through in scenes like the finale and the one girl singing by herself in the auditorium. However, I thought anything good about it was way overshadowed by the fact that the entire plot of the movie was a throwaway.
I also didn't happen to think that any of the main characters were all that particularly mind-bogglingly awesome at their crafts. I mean, maybe I just went to a school with very talented people or hung out with such folks, but dancing and singing and acting have gotta be pretty good to impress me and these folks just weren't. Plus I just gotta add that most singers who intend to sing professionally take a while to learn how to sing from the correct parts of your body to avoid straining your voice and get the projection you need to be on a stage in front of a crowd. It's just not something you can teach yourself.
Plus--and I just looked it up to make sure--the vast majority of the actors and actresses playing characters supposedly in their teens are in their mid-twenties in real life. I realize the appeal of such a decision, but this is not some stylized world where anything goes and characters obey the laws of some fictional, fantastical universe a la Buffy. This is a musical that virtually entirely takes place in a school and really actually ought to have been entirely filmed there, as there have been too many movies made in New York so far and the movie was too similar to 'Rent' I think to also have occupied the same territory. How difficult would it have been to at least find actors and actresses who were no more than twenty-two, instead of finding several who are twenty-eight years old and look it? Plenty of other movies manage to cast children successfully--'Akeelah and the Bee' comes to mind. How much easier should it all have been with teenagers? Why take the easy route?
This movie could have been another thirty minutes, easy. It could have avoided the tendency to wander aimlessly around New York for little to no apparent reason showing scenes that could have been covered by exposition or quick rewrites of scenes. It made the young women seem incredibly naive--and downright unbelievably so, in Jenny's sake--or kind of stupid and very unsympathetic, like blonde dancer girl. Not what you want in your leads.
Yes, it must be said--Megan Mullaly cannot sing. She can do many things, but singing is not one of them. No offense, lady.
Also--writers, please take note--if you feel the need to have another character point out how good someone's singing or acting or dancing is, then the art isn't speaking for itself and you should really rethink your cast.
Der.
If you're going to remake a great movie, ya need to wait 'til you have an equally great concept to go along with it--otherwise desist.
For all of our sakes, desist.

[–] missvassy 12 years ago

Um... Megan Mullaly CAN sing and quite well even if it is nto the particular style you are used to. She has been on Broadway in several musicals.

[–] LadyCynderella 14 years ago

Very good review. This movie was okay but lacked the heart of the original. There were way too many characters to care about. I also noticed that Jenny was supposed to be Doris from the original but quickly moved out of that character into another one. I wish there were more of the teachers in the movie. I found their characters more interesting than the students (and I love the actors of course). And really... Debbie Allen not on stage? That's just wrong.

Ood Sigma: We will sing to you Doctor. The universe will sing you to your sleep.

[–] CaZSuede 14 years ago

I think the issue is the era we live in.

Fame (1980) grew up in a time where there was grit and in the movies we saw. NYC was a dirty and cut-throat place and the world was harder.

Fame (2009) is a world which is post MTV and if it doesn't have a sheen and polish to it, kids don't watch it. That's why most of the kids in this movie aer pristine and clean. It also goes with the re-invention of Guilardi's New York City, which is now a clean, mini-disneyland.

Another TV show that has gone this way is the teen show Degrassi High. Compare the one from the 1980's to the one that happened this Millenia. Many people will say that the new one is completely glossy with a superficial look at teen issues.

Teens will probably say that they can't bother to watch the original (which I was a huge fan of) because it is outdated.

Methinks that it us just 1980's kids that are just getting older....

[–] alithre 14 years ago

CaZ ~ EVERYTHING you said and more, is RIGHT ON.

I'm trying to watch Fame 2009 right now, and it is downright painful and depressing. Nowhere near the originally raw tenacity and grittiness of the original movie from '80, which unfortunately the makers of this modern film failed to realize was it's true appeal in the first place.

There were a couple of attempts at it though - in particular grabbing out the old speakers from storage to plug in during the lunchroom scene, even though the re-creation of that entire "Hot Lunch Jam" MISSED THE MARK COMPLETELY.

I LOVED the original Fame for the sheer survival of it all growing up in the gritty NY scene. A couple of kids were upper-class privileged in the first film, sure. But for the most part all the rest were from working class neighborhoods - or worse. And they succeeded through sheer talent.

But this? Please. Even the attempted raw "grittiness" of these modern day students is laughable. Indeed an MTV generation at its best where even the poorest of street kids (LOL!) have access to their cell phones and computers and video cameras, while living in the midst of "poverty." That's not poverty folks - that's called getting your priorities skewed when you have access to every modern day electric luxury but can't pay your grocery or electric bill. Stupid. And it shows. Was disappointed when dude started tap dancing in the lunch room. Really? Nice tap shoes man ... but I preferred Raul/Freddie's tennis shoes with the bottle caps glued to the bottoms. AND Leroy's strong, sexy and powerful dance without any help from taps whatsoever. (I miss Leroy)

The kids in this film are like cardboard cutouts who don't even come close to the raw skill it took to be accepted at this school. Fame Redux makes it looks like they hand those spots out to anyone who shows up.

But worth a mention - I enjoy watching the teachers. They are seasoned actors who were likely familiar with the original Fame and "got it right." Not a lot of the kids in this film did. Didn't even come close, and needed a helluva lot more backbone to make this film work. A real shame. Couldn't wait to watch this PG(?) film with my daughter, because she too is raised with that will to survive mantra the original Fame cast had. Face it folks, that's the only way you're gonna survive in this nutty world.

We turned Fame '09 off in less than 30 minutes.

I usually don't pay much attention at all to "Star" ratings at IMDB ... but in this case the voters (who are all to often jaded in the first place) got it right too.

There. I've said my piece; spending way too much time writing it all out than what Fame 2009 deserves. HOPEFULLY fans of of Fame 1980 will understand and know exactly where I/We are coming from.

Peace.

[–] CaZSuede 13 years ago

That song would characterize the struggles that characters from both movies are going through.

In the original CoCo is a true stuggling actor, she has no homelife to speak of, no future without her artistical talents. She truly sings from the heart and knows that she alone is the person that will have to find her own path in the world. It has real impact when she sings this song.

In this one, Denise sings this song because her father doesn't want her to waste her time with modern music. So she is somber and wants to break from her father's control so she sings this song.

One is about surviving on the street with your talents and finding your place in life, the other is getting to do what you want without Daddy scolding you.

[–] OmarLove 13 years ago

my opinion is that the film should have been AT LEAST an hour longer. The charcaters did got get even screentime, the film was so short that the storylines they did have could not be developed. Things happened, like the guy who got scammed by that producer dude, that needed more resolution or exploration of his feelings after. That was its main problem...it needed to be way longer, and perhaps cut down on the amount of main characters.

Rahul...naam to suna hoga?

[–] saraannepotter 13 years ago

Or at least fifteen minutes shorter. It...man, I love these kind of movies more than anybody, and after seeing this version of Fame, I want my 1hr45min back.

(Massive spoilers ensue, though none should come as any kind of surprise to anyone.)

So it's not 1980. Duly noted. That wasn't my issue. The characters were all over the place; none were ever really developed, and each year abruptly shifted into the next, with so many loose ends that I gave up trying to keep track. Fame is a show that demands its characters to 'dig deep down to the bottom of their souls' (to mix some musical references here) and we got...nothing. No one progressed; no one went anywhere.

Let's see: Jenny loosened up a teeny bit, but her part of the show's closing number wasn't a whole lot more animated than "Someone to Watch Over Me" from her freshman year. Denise wore different clothes and (literally) let her hair down. Malik started angry and ended slightly less angry, and started rapping rather than let himself be the slightest bit vulnerable onstage. And then there was this producer kid who got scammed, and the kinda-shaky dancer kid who tried to kill himself but instead is going to waltz happily back to Iowa to be (God forbid) a TEACHER. (Because everyone knows teachers are just frustrated wannabes who couldn't be successful themselves.) And then some girl on Sesame Street...ah, whatever. There are too many of them to keep straight, and none of them could make me care enough to want to try. The whole thing was just so frustratingly truncated and shallow, trying to cram ten films into one.

It wasn't entirely the cast's fault. Actually, it was a tragic waste of a fine cast, particularly the adults. Megan Mullally had a fun, if uneven moment at karaoke (just to hammer home the teachers-are-really-failures-in-hiding theme), but her arc could have been much more interesting and much more darkly funny. Someone else very astutely noted that she seemed awfully medicated through most of it, though whether that was an acting choice or simply how Mullally managed to live with herself while filming shall forever remain a mystery. Kelsey Grammar, Charles S. Dutton, Bebe Neuwirth, flipping Debbie Allen herself: all gifted performers and Broadway veterans, and all barely blips on the screen.

It's not just a bad film. It's infuriating, because the talent was there, and it could have been a really good, even great, movie.

[–] Mermaid77 13 years ago

Horrid disappointing tripe. I agree with everyone here--why did they make this?? It was like a series of awful commercials strung together.....the original was so amazing and even the series. It was one of the main influences on me going into the performing arts. Another major problem with this film was-doesn't the filmmaker kid have google?? He probably could have figured out that he was being scammed ugh this film was awful! They should have saved it to be a mini series on abc family or something! The original dealt with so many relevant issues- not just for artists, but for teens and parents- community issues. It tackled teen pregnancy, racism, homosexuality,exploitation, sexism, racism, class issues and a whole host of other issues! This tackled very little with no exposition, no heart, no attachment to the characters. The original was inspiring. This one is just eye candy with no substance. I checked out when it was clear the entire film was going to become a music video until the credits role. I'll even take step up over this crap any day!

[–] javirielife 13 years ago

Wow, I didn't watch the original (didn't know it was a remake until today), but this was a really good review, it's probably why I felt like this movie had a good template, but not developed well... it was bits and pieces of what sounds like a great original film... smh

I thought the problem was that Fame had too many characters, therefore we didn't really get to make a connection with any of the characters.

BTW, was the cast of the original this large?

http://jpdeviantartist.deviantart.com/gallery/#_featured

[–] Mermaid77 13 years ago

The original cast was just as large, but the story lines were all kind of entertained and it had an inherent intimacy that this one could never hope to have

[–] shoppermom26 8 years ago

The cast of the original was large, HOWEVER, they focused mainly on 5 or 6 characters and the rest were more background. Doris, Ralph, Montgomery, Coco, Bruno, and Leroy were the main characters with Hilary and Lisa more secondary but still important. More focus was given to Doris, Montgomery, and Ralph so their story was more fleshed out.

The remake seems to spread itself far too thinly

[–] Goodbye_from_Fox_In_A_Box 13 years ago

I agree with everything you say. I saw the original when it first came on cable, probably in 1981, I was 11 or 12, and it was one of my favorite movies, one that I've seen over and over again. I was so looking forward to this one, and it was an epic fail, for all of the reasons mentioned in this entire thread.

I'd also like to add that the audition scenes seemed to be a bit of a scam. Some of them were horrible, yet they still made it into the school??? The kid who got scammed did a poor-kid's DeNiro in Taxi Driver, over the top, and he got in? What??

And why, for the love of all things good, would they have Jenny sing at graduation? At a school that has an entire section devoted to up-coming professional singers, they ask Jenny? Huh????

Everything that worked in the original failed in the 'reboot'. It's like they didn't even try. Like they figured if they made a movie about THSFTPA and call it 'Fame', ppl will flock to it, so why bother with credible storylines and character development?!?!

"I hardly know, which way is up, or which way down" - "I Feel Possessed", Neil Finn

[–] R_Kane (15828) 3 years ago

Too long.