MovieChat Forums > West Side Story (2021) Discussion > You need to watch 1961 and 2021 back to ...

You need to watch 1961 and 2021 back to back to see how weak remake is

posted 2 years ago by emori (3092)
17 replies | jump to latest

Everything from actors, style, dancing is so much worse. 1961 has such unforgettable style. You can rewatch it again and again. 2021? I couldnt even finish it so boring it was.

All actors from original are better. I cant even remember any gangs member. While in 1961 everyone were memorable and charismatic. Casting department did bad job.

Only Anita actress kinda tried to act seriously. All other were bad. Ok Riff was semi interesting too.

Bernardo was horribly miscast. Greek guy in 1961 was so charismatic and charming. He was hot. You liked him and was sad when he died. Because he was good guy. He had class about him. They was he handled himself.

New one? He was annoying brat. You couldn't stand him the moment he showed up. He was possessive of his sister, acting like he was her owner and couldnt be talked to. When he died - you felt nothing. Not to mention he didnt shaved clean and always was looking dirty like he came from 2 days shift in mine. Completely two different Bernardos.

Maria was charisma less in 1961 and charisma less in 2021. Same with Tony. Its like they were always extras for main story - rival of gangs.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

thanks for a good post, emori. As a devout fan of the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story, I never thought that Spielberg's reboot/remake of WSS would be any good, and I was proven right when I watched a TV program not that long ago. which emphasized the comparisons between the old and the new West Side Story film versions. My preference for the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story was re-enforced. I also listened to the soundtrack of the new film version of West Side Story on youtube. It was very metallic-sounding and flat in many places. Rachel Zegler's singing voice was too far back, too nasal, and not projected far enough forward. Ansel Elgort's singing voice was nothing to write home about it, either.

It is true that in both the old, original 1961 film version of WSS and the new film version, that the Jets and Sharks in conflict walked off with the film, and that was also true with the stage version(s) of West Side Story, as well. There's no question about it. The original film version of West Side Story expressed the various emotions in the story behind WSS itself beautifully, in the form of dance, including the Rumble.

The Sharks and Jets in the new West Side Story looked too much like the newsy boys, and their girls looked far more like wealthy suburban prep-school girls who were dressed to the nines for partying around town than a bunch of gangsters' girlfriends.

The backdrop scenes in the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story, including the opening overture, and the aerial views of 1950's-1960's West Side of Manhattan, and the gradual zeroing in on the finger-snapping Jets were also an integral part of why the original film version of WSS was so excellent. The on-location scenes and sound stage scenes were seamlessly combined to look uncannily like the impoverished, rough and rundown sections of the city, while the backdrops in the new film version of West Side Story looked far more like the tonier, wealthier parts of the city, rather than the impoverished, rough area

[–] puplover (89) 2 years ago

100 % agree. WWS 1961 was absolutely perfect. There was absolutely zero reason to remake it. It can't be improved. And it wasn't. PS- I KNEW I was in for directorial masturbation when I noticed the remake was 30 MINUTES longer the the original. Just shameful.

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Running time for 1961 version: 2 hr 33 min
Running time for 2021 version --2 hr 36 min.

Where's this nythical extra 30 minutes?

[–] puplover (89) 2 years ago

I stand corrected. I suppose it just FELT longer. We don't need any backstory for these characters; it's superfluous and absolutely ruins the mystique.

[–] luvthepros (560) 2 years ago

You may not need the backstory but so many people have commented that they appreciate the back story for these characters, myself included. Giving depth the characters is never a bad thing and Spielberg gave us that.

[–] luvthepros (560) 2 years ago

There is only a run time difference of 3 minutes and I believe most of that is for the credits at the end of Spielberg's film.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

Hi, puplover. I totally agree with you about the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story, which, imo, is the real deal, if one gets the drift. Reboots and remakes of older classic films generally lack the charm, charisma and personality of the original(s), and the reboot/remake of the film version of West Side Story was no exception!

I differ with you in just one very minor repect, however: The 2021 version was only six minutes longer than the original 1961 version, the latter of which is 2 hours and 30 minutes long. The 2021 film version was 2 hours and 36 minutes long.

I've seen parts of the 2021 film version of West Side Story, which I saw on a TV program not that long ago, on a TV program that emphasized the comparisons between the old and the new film versions of West Side Story, which re-enforced my preference for and devotion to the old, original 1961 film version.

I also listened to the soundtrack/musical score of the 2021 film version of West Side Story on youtube, just out of curiosity. It was very metallic-sounding, and went flat in many places, plus Rachel Zegler's singing voice was too nasal, too far back, and not projected forward enough. Ansel Elgort's singing voice was nothing to write home about, either.

I see nothing that pretty about Rachel Zegler, either. I think that Natalie Wood had a more natural beauty to her.

[–] janelsenor (2042) 2 years ago

I agree overall.

The new Anita was good, but had the shadow of Rita Moreno over her. New actress was good, but not that good.

New Riff was interesting, and I liked the actor. But the writing failed him. I get adding a darker side to Riff, but not at the expense of his and Tony's friendship, which barely exists in this version.

I liked the new Maria and Tony individually, but they didn't sell me as a love at first sight couple. Say what you will about how odd a casting choice Richard Beymer was for Tony, he and Natalie Wood worked together onscreen. I bought their chemistry and they sold me as being a couple, as ridiculous as the story is.

If I had to pick a few things I thing the remake did better, I'd say I liked the way the song "Maria" was shot was better. It was more visually interesting and I just preferred it to the static, cheesy, rear projected walking Tony in the original. I'd also say "Tonight, Tonight" was shot better and way more interestingly compared to the static, cheesy, background blurred way it's present in the original, but it's hampered by the lack of chemistry between the actors.

While the new one had some interesting ideas, they ultimately went nowhere or were made at the expense of the original story.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

Frankly, I tried watching the new movie version of West Side Story, and could not/would not bring myself to sit through it. Not only was it made at the expense of the original story, but it was way overdone, too violent, and too hyped up.

Hey, Spielberg......Just WHAT the hell did you think you were doing and trying to prove? I've liked a number of your movies, but I think you got in way over your head.

[–] Roguemail (1564) 2 years ago

Can you not see that the problem is you, and your unwillingness to entertain a different version of a movie you like?

You have based your criticism of the movie on trailers, the soundtrack, but not the actual movie itself which you steadfastly refuse to watch.

The purpose of a remake is not to better the original, or because there was something wrong with the original. It's just a new version of an old story. It's done all the time.

Why on earth people get upset and emotional because their favorite films are remade is completely beyond me.

I am halfway through the movie (got interrupted for various reasons) but will watch the second half tonight.

I can tell you that what I have seen so far, you are way off. Its really quite good, and respectful to the original. Choreography and vocals are very good.

Is it as good as the original? Who cares, frankly. I am able to separate originals and remakes and accept them for what they are.

For me, to go back and watch the original and make comparisons just seems obsessive.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

Oh, shut up yourself, roguemail. You're the one with the problem, and not me. I'm not asking you to agree with my opinion of the reboot/remake of the film version of West Side Story, but to just accept the fact that I've got a different opinion/viewpoint of it, and that's that. What's there not to get?

[–] luvthepros (560) 2 years ago

Spielberg's film is not a "remake/reboot" of the 1961 film. Spielberg made another adaptation of the original WSS stage play and used that book to base his film on. I don't know why anyone would even consider comparing the two films as the source material is the stage play.

This story of Romeo and Juliet has been adapted more times than anyone can count. The stage play alone has been produced on stage countless times, including high school productions and local theater. There have been a total of five (5) revivals of the original stage play on Broadway!

Spielberg made a comment in an interview that he hopes and expects another film maker to film another adaptation in another 50 or 60 years from now of the original source material of the stage play. He said that this story is important enough and the work is a classic to deserve a new adaptation for other generations to enjoy.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

I disagree with you here, luvthepros. A reboot/remake of a film is a reboot/remake, and that's that. If Spielberg's reboot/remake of the film version of West Side Story isn't a reboot/remake, then what is it? I don't buy into the idea that it's an adaptation of the original 1957 Broadway stage musical of WSS.

Spielberg and his minions decided to make the film version of West Side Story into a more violent, grittier and gorier version, in the name of realism, because that's what sells, these days. Just because Spielberg busted his hump to get the rights to the film version of West Side Story doesn't mean it was a wise decision on his part.

Spielberg would've been better off creating his own film with the same theory, or a similar theory to West Side Story, instead of deciding to reboot/remake a beautiful classic movie-musical that won 10 well-deserved and well-earned Academy Awards, including Best Picture, when it came out into the movie theatres, in October 1961.

[–] luvthepros (560) 2 years ago

I'm so glad to hear you did make an attempt at watching Spielberg's film. After many many times saying you would never watch this film, I'm glad you gave it a try.

What you found difficult to enjoy in Spielberg's film is exactly what I found this story needed to give it a realistic spin on this timeless story. I absolutely love the realism with the violence. Gangs did not "dance" around.....no pun intended.....when they fought each other. There was violence and Justin Peck made sure his choreography sent that message that these guys were not playing around.

I don't think there was any expense of the original story as I see a parallel to the story in both adaptations of the stage play. The story is Romeo and Juliet; boy meets girl; love at first site and the families/gangs don't like it. Both films relay that message. One version is sugar coated with a cherry on top and the other is realistic and gritty. I prefer the latter.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

To each their own, but there are times when a more realistic, grittier expression to something is appropriate, and times when it's not appropriate. Since West Side Story is a musical, I consider the overall style of the old, original 1961 film version of West Side Story more appropriate, because it tells the whole story far more through dance, and has more light to it, because it's a musical. I don't consider the old, original 1961 film version sugar-coated with a cherry on top, at all. I do, however, consider Spielberg's take on the film version of West Side Story too heavy, forced, bombastic, violent, and not appropriate for a musical.

The kind of realistic, violent and grittier version that you and lots of others who support the reboot/remake of the film version of West Side Story support is appropriate for another kind of story, such as Rebel Without a Cause, or another ordinary movie about gangsters, but not for something such as West Side Story.

[–] luvthepros (560) 2 years ago

I never did see the original Broadway production of WSS but from what I have read, that Broadway version which was based on the book by Arthur Laurents was more violent than the 1961 film. This is why Spielberg's film is more violent as he adapted the stage play and did not follow the 1961 film.

I have no idea but I would imagine Jerome Robbins' choreography was either very similar or pretty much the same for the original Broadway play and Wise's film. That is where the two films definitely differ as Justin Pecks vision for Spielberg's film was grittier.

Either way, as you have said, everyone has their own likes and dislikes and are entitled to them. These films lend themselves to personal subjectivity......just like food likes and dislikes.

[–] mplo (2305) 2 years ago

You made some good points, janelsenor! You said some stuff that I wish I could say! Bravo, and thank you, thank you, thank you.

I'm a devout fan of the old, original 1961 film version, and I'll stick with that one!

Sorry to be so blunt, but I can't help how I feel.