ROTTEN TOMATOES: Hairspray: Making Musicals Hot Again

Hairspray: Making Musicals Hot Again

Page | 1 2 3

RT: Do you think you'll continue in films, or do you have plans to do theater?

NB: I definitely think, I pray to continue in films, I've gotten the film bug and I love it --

AS: She has a great relationship with the camera. That's not something that she can learn, or buy, or anything like that; that's the "It" factor.

I think we started out, and right away I had the camera this close to her and she didn't even blink. I'm telling you, half that board [points to the Hairspray poster credits] -- and I'm not gonna tell you who - you start moving that camera close and they start moving away, or if it drops, they're suddenly dropping. You know what I mean? She just was like, "What do you want me to do?" So I think she should do more movies.

NB: I want to do more movies. That's what I want to do. Maybe some day, if I have the hunger to go to Broadway and maybe originate a role, that'd be cool --

AS: I'll say!

NB: -- But, you know, I want to right now stick in more films. Films would be amazing.

Q: Adam, what's next for you?

AS: An Adam Sandler movie, Bedtime Stories. At Disney, it's a really giant holiday Adam Sandler movie for next Christmas. Him and kids; a lot of CG, lot of fantasy world. It's like Liar, Liar and Princess Bride mashed up. He plays this guy who has no relationship with his niece and nephew, and his sister loses her job at a school and he has to take care of her kids while she goes and looks for a job elsewhere. He's at a crisis point in his career, and he starts taking care of the kids and he's telling stories and as he's telling stories about this magical, kind of fairytale world -- which we go into, and all of our characters from the real world go into the fantasy world, with him as the big shiny knight - the things that happen in the stories start happening in his actual life, in a really weird way. So he's like living in terror of what's happening. And it's what the kids contribute to the story that's making it all happen. So it's very magical and about family, about finding family. For whatever reason all of my work ends up coming back to family. Maybe it's the Jew thing.

NB: No, it's the good heart, and the love for life, that's what it is.

AS: Charlie Brown!

RT: So no remake of Pink Flamingos for you?

AS: Oh boy! I'm not sure -- no, I would leave that to others! I think that there are...darker sorts to take that on. Why would you ever remake a John Waters movie just to remake a John Waters movie? What a terrible idea! It has to have some compelling things -- it's the music that made us want to do this.

Related Items

Celeb:	John Travolta
	Christopher Walken
	Queen Latifah
	Adam Shankman
	Amanda Bynes
	Brittany Snow
	Zac Efron
	Nicole Blonsky

Page | 1 2 3

(1-20 of 40 posts) | Reply

Bloody Mathias writes:
on Jul 20 2007 11:37 PM

Musicals will never be an "it" genre in theaters again.
Hell, i'll be surprised if it makes over $25 mill this weekend and $75 mill domestic.

If studios are hoping to get another lightning in a bottle again in which mothers and girls come back over and over again to see it ala Titantic, they'll be hoping a long time.

Wise up studios, one musical a year is acceptable, anymore is asking for embarrasment.

(Reply to this)

Count_Vertigo writes:
on Jul 21 2007 02:56 AM

In reply to this comment (#956878)
If a musical is done well there's no reason why there can't be 2 or 3 musicals a year. The reason The Producers and Rent flopped is because they both sucked in their own special ways. They tried to be too much like the stage play. In the case of The Producers it was done almost literally like the actual show. Everybody who saw the play on stage had already seen the movie without even going to it. Rent tried tacking a specific year onto the story, which not only dated it, but was also set a few years ahead of some of the references in the lyrics (see the Thelma & Louise reference versus the date in the opening scene). Even Phantom of the Opera, though being beautifully shot, drove me nuts with the Phantom as "rock star" and the dropping of the chandelier in the wrong part. The films seemed to be cranked out by studios just looking to cash in on the "hot" thing to do at the time. Thank God for Moulin Rouge bringing back the notion that a movie musical could be successful! Now they just need to keep up the passion to get it right like Hairspray or even the hidden gem, Once, to keep it going! We'll see how Mamma Mia does next year. Though never do Cats, and please push Chess to the front of the list.

(Reply to this)

dudemovies writes:
on Jul 21 2007 05:20 AM

I really like Rent a lot it was about real life in that time not neccessarily real life now but it was very enjoyable espically when Wilson Jermaine Heridia was on the screen.

(Reply to this)

new12play writes:
on Jul 21 2007 06:52 AM

In reply to this comment (#956878)
Yeah, because 75 million would be so disappointing for this movie's box office...plenty of movies this year wish they had that distinction. I don't think this movie's expectations are beyond that, so reaching 75 mil or more would be an accomplishment.

(Reply to this)

Now it's dark writes:
on Jul 21 2007 07:57 AM

Fags.

jk

(Reply to this)

daycare writes:
on Jul 21 2007 08:50 AM

Hairspray is not only in the top 5 best reviewd film of the year but it is the best film of the summer.

(Reply to this)

EvaaaAdamsonnnx writes:
on Jul 21 2007 11:29 AM

The best film I have seen in years
10/10

(Reply to this)

knowingtoast85 writes:
on Jul 21 2007 11:54 AM

In reply to this comment (#957171)
Moulin Rouge divides a looooot of people, I'm not sure it was wholly successful in that respect.

Mathias might sound cynical, but we do have to wonder if musicals are really part of the country's cyclical tastes in film or just dead and zombified. The genre is not going to find itself by playing the nostalgia card. The classics persist because they remind us of happier times when bursting into song was grand, acceptable, cheesy fun. Now it just seems insincere.

And yet the sophistication in technology and editing that newer films can afford a production haven't really done anyone any favors. They mask a star's lack of dance training (see "Chicago"), or pile on enough layers of voice tracks to give their warbling more heft. People tend to notice this. So what to do?

In the end it all depends on who's buying the tickets, obviously, and for years and years teenage boys have led the pack. Parents are staying home, they're renting, they're getting involved with Netflix. Of course, my sample population consists of one town's worth of people who come into the video store where I work, but the results are consistent enough for me to feel confident in saying that. Most girls I know would rather see "Harry Potter" than waste their time on something they already saw years ago when it was called "Grease." And forget mobilizing the grandparents; nowadays it seems a fart will offend their delicate sensibilities, let alone 99% of the stuff that makes the best current cinema provocative and exciting.

Shrewd casting might make "Hairspray" a little coin (notably Travolta, Walken and Efron, all for obvious reasons), but it will not make musicals hot again. It will take great, charismatic close-up actors who are singing and tapping marvels, and directors with fresh ideas. And of course, memorable tunes.

But yeah, 2 or 3 seems completely doable.

(Reply to this)

curtis writes:
on Jul 21 2007 12:12 PM

hairspray made more then 11 million on Friday. Beat harry potter little 9 million. People have spoken, hairspray is one of the years best.

(Reply to this)

Kollikodon writes:
on Jul 21 2007 01:59 PM

... heh... not a huge fan of musicals... but Hairspray kept things lively and entertaining enough for me to think otherwise about the genre...

hmm... best movie Ive seen this summer... sober... dont even make me bring up Spiderman 3....

(Reply to this)

bmg615 writes:
on Jul 21 2007 02:59 PM

Hairspray made $11 million yesterday (Friday), by far the biggest opening day ever for a musical (excluding cartoons). Most musicals make barely that much during their entire opening weekend!

It was only a tiny bit behind Chuck & Larry's $12.4 million and ahead of Harry Potter's $10.5 million.

If it holds up well over the rest of the weekend (family films usually do), Hairspray could make as much as $34 million over its first three days. That means it could potentially be the number one movie of the weekend, if Chuck & Larry holds up similar to other Sandler movies and makes around $33 million.

Hairspray could actually beat Chuck & Larry and Harry Potter!!! That would be one of the most stunning upsets in recent movie history, as far as I can recall!

And even if it doesn't come in first, I would say that a $30 million opening weekend means that musicals are "hot again"!

(Reply to this)

dyedrip writes:
on Jul 21 2007 03:25 PM

This is the first movie, musical or not, that I've been to in YEARS where the whole audience applauded at the end. Stopped and talked in the isles after, people were humming the tunes. Young and old laughed out loud. I loved this movie. I'm pleased Waters and Jerry Stiller ( the dad in the original) did cameos. This is nothing like Grease!

(Reply to this)

killermonkey8822 writes:
on Jul 21 2007 03:54 PM

Grease sucked. Phantom of the opera sucked. Pretty much every musical i have seen sucked (except for rock n' roll high school and the wall, but the wall was more of a rock opera and rock n' roll high school, i guess was not really a musical) but either way maybe i just hate musicals like this, but am i the only person who thinks that John Travolta is a complete and total ***.

(Reply to this)

rabid1017 writes:
on Jul 21 2007 04:50 PM

In reply to this comment (#957960)
The "year's best" is not determined by opening weekend gross. If it were, however, then "the people have spoken" and these are the year's best:

Spider-Man 3 $151,116,516
Shrek the Third $121,629,270
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End $114,732,820
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix $77,108,414
300 $70,885,301

Once Hairspray breaks $70 million in its opening weekend you can come back and talk about how "the people have spoken," otherwise you'd be wise to realize that quality and box office gross have almost no correlation whatsoever. Hairspray's either a good movie on its own merits or it isn't. It's opening gross has no impact on that whatsoever, one way or the other.

(Reply to this)

curtis writes:
on Jul 21 2007 05:29 PM

In reply to this comment (#959149)
how many of the movies you named have an 94% on rt page

(Reply to this)

rabid1017 writes:
on Jul 21 2007 08:30 PM

[quote]how many of the movies you named have an 94% on rt page[/quote]

None of them, but if RT percentage is the guide of what constitutes the best movie of the year then I believe Ratatouille is it.

Look, if you like the movie, fine. If you think it's the best movie you've seen this year, fine. But you might want to stop trying to objectively prove that it's the best movie of the year, since every standard you pick has a movie from this year that rates higher.

(Reply to this)

rabid1017 writes:
on Jul 21 2007 08:31 PM

[quote]how many of the movies you named have an 94% on rt page[/quote]

None of them, but if RT percentage is the guide of what constitutes the best movie of the year then I believe Ratatouille is it.

Look, if you like the movie, fine. If you think it's the best movie you've seen this year, fine. But you might want to stop trying to objectively prove that it's the best movie of the year, since every standard you pick has a movie from this year that rates higher.

(Reply to this)

CMPunk>you writes:
on Jul 21 2007 08:58 PM

Only way I'll ever see this is if my girlfriend would want to. Otherwise, I'll never think of paying to see this. I don't care if the critics love it, it just looks f'ing stupid.

(Reply to this)

dolby70mm writes:
on Jul 22 2007 07:24 AM

...and they were all under the radar and they were surprise hits, and believe me no one was more surprised than myself."

Wow, sounds like he puts a lot of effort into his "job."

(Reply to this)