Don't like this Broadway version, movie is better
341414
I needed this CD because I will be appearing in a community play of the Broadway version of Grease. I am more used to the movie version and much prefer it.  I feel I will need to learn many songs that I am not familiar with, hence, this purchase.
2737361
This score isn't faithful to the Broadway version.  It completely omits Anita's introductory section: "Puerto Rico, my heart's devotion. Let it sink back in the ocean. Always the hurricanes blowing, always the population growing, and the money owing..."  Also during the chorus, it has the "male/female" lines mixed-up.  But I used it to teach my kids one of the songs to "West Side Story" when we were studying Puerto Rico, so it worked for that purpose.  But don't get it if you want an accurate version of the song; it's very simplified.
2039926
I hope Marion Zimmer Bradley made good coin for the rights to her amazing book, because the movie stinks. The costumes are great, the music is great, the acting is ok, but the adaptation is horrible. Morgaine is entirely changed in her focus and drive, which spoils the whole story. Your time and money would be much better spent on the book - It is amazing.
84307
I used to read an adapted version of this that had pictures and changed a few things (I believe it the company was Illustrated Classics) and honestly? It was way better. In this original version the father is preachy and annoying. He makes fun of his kids for acting like kids. If you want to experience the story I'd suggest finding the Illustrated Classic version or watching the movie (which I haven't seen in a while, but I remember liking it alright) Also, so much racism. Like, a lot. Even for an older book.
3033034
I love the stage musical, so was VERY disappointed in the movie. This musical should only be done on the stage.
4345099
The title for this review is clearly what this revival was. It was okay. Nothing special about it. They did make it look more like the comic strips, but it clearly didn't capture the mood.

One problem I had with the revival was the addition of new material. I'm fine with new material to a show, but this show has added too much. Plus, it doesn't mix the original material. Example, in the song "You're A Good Man, Charlie Brown" there was the addition of new material. Personally, I don't like it. Some of the good things need to be left untouched. The new material sounds new. It doesn't have the charm and sweetness of the original. Another thing I didn't like is the orchestration. Sounded to 'pop' to me.

My suggestion is to purchase the original 1967 Off-Broadway production which is much more superior to this. The voices of the characters sound like what I imagined them to be. In the original production, Lucy is not a singer. She goes off key and is aggressive. This new production has a Lucy that can sing and sounds too pretty if you ask me.

Buy the original cast recording, it is much more superior and fun!
4385679
The original was better, made more sense, was much better organized, and had better acting.
This movie is overdone, disorganized, and is lacking any real plot,  imho.
Some of it is even laughable, and not in a good way.
Disappointing.
4167738
The original version was much better.  Laurence Olivier cannot be bested as Heathcliff.  This version was a waste of time.
2902223
At first listen, the "New Generation" of Jeff Wayne's Musical Version of War of the Worlds sounds a lot like the original on a heavy dose of steroids -- it's louder, bolder in its use of sound effects (which were mostly absent -- apart from the ubiquitous "U - La!" -- from the original), most of which are a distraction from the music and the drama, rather than enhancing either. And that goes on repeated plays. But where this production fails is on larger dramatic terms -- Liam Neeson is fine, if a bit rushed at times, as the narrator (I guess this generation of actors has to re-learn the value of pauses, and silence, in dramatic presentation), and Gary Barlow is a somewhat pallid successor to Justin Hayward on "Forever Autumn," in both musical and dramatic terms (the song is about profound, life-shattering LOSS!); but the real failure comes with Maverick Sabre and Joss Stone as Parson Nathaniel and his wife Beth -- their performance, when compared with that of Phil Lynott and Julie Covington, is like taking in a polished high school production, versus something closer to the Royal Shakespeare Company. In my shop, when I play the original, I've seen people stop what they're doing to take in the original version of this sequence, while this new one, played in the same music store, is just ignored (except by people who remember the original and ask what's "wrong" with this rendition). I'm glad Wayne still has an interest in this work, but people should stick with the original.
1513981
I was looking forward to watching this with the Dickens Bicentennial this year. As it opens, you can tell it had great production values -- costuming, set design, all superb.  It opens with a slight but forgiveable deviation from the original.  Unfortunately, the deviations grow ever larger through the course of the movie to point that it dropped from being a 4.5 star rendition to 2 stars.

I don't mind someone thinking they can try to improve on Dickens' material -- the musical version was indeed an improvement in many ways -- but these unnecessary changes, from the constant focus on Fagin's Jewishness (including his final court scene) to Bill Sikes' final kidnapping of Oliver and run through the streets of London, were no improvement.  Even poor Mr. Bumble's unhappy marriage to Ms. Corney is rewritten to suit someone's ego.  The little psycho drama with Bill Sikes at the end instead of using Dickens' original dramatic ending was as pathetic as the ego that conjured it up and was very much out of character.  I don't know whether to blame Ms. Sarah Phelps (credited with writing) or Coky Giedroyc (credited as director) but I found this truly upsetting.

Timothy Spall turns in a highly original version of Fagin.  He's not at all what one pictures after seeing Ron Moody or Ben Kingsley but he is quite believable in the role.  Sophie Okonedo also gives a slightly different but acceptable twist as Nancy.  Her performance is powerful until ruined at the end by the aforementioned psychodrama.  Edward Fox's Mr. Brownlow was less charitable than seen in other renditions but a powerful performance (as always true of Mr. Fox) and strangely in character even when inconsistent with Dickens' masterpiece.  William Miller's Oliver Twist just felt ... bland.  He just doesn't convey the sense of innocent naivete Mark Lester gave the role; he almost seemed like he'd have had more fun if he'd been able to play the Artful Dodger.

In the end, while this aired on PBS's Masterpiece, it is far from one.  The superb photography, set and costume design cannot compensate for the unnecessary changes to the material.  If you're a Dickens fan, do yourself a favor and watch any other version of this story -- even one of the Disney renditions.
422098
I've read Jane Eyre four times, have taught it twice, and watched six Jane Eyre films - most several times. This one, in my opinion, is one of the two worst. I saw it originally on the big screen and was very disappointed with it - it left me cold because there was no chemistry whatsoever between the characters, no convincingly playful interchange, no real development of their relationship, and very little expression on the part of either Rochester or Jane to reveal their emotional struggles. Michael Fassbender also makes a very poor Byronic hero and doesn't have the right personality at all for Rochester.

In regard to the plot - the out-of-order chronology was bothersome, Granted, given it's a two hour film, some scenes that are in the book will be omitted - but what is omitted here are scenes that show the development of feeling and connection between the characters and engage the viewer....as well as a few key episodes like the gypsy episode. And certainly an unnecessary plot change occurred in the Rivers episode and even in Rochester's behavior at the end of the film.

Given the good reviews the film has received, I thought I'd give it a second chance and watch it on dvd. What a disappointment. It is even worse than I had remembered. I actually kept cringeing watching it, remembering how well some of the scenes are portrayed in some of the other Jane Eyre films, and how flat they are in this one.

My favorite version of Jane Eyre by far is the Ruth Wilson/Toby Stephens one - one of the greatest Masterpiece theater shows of all time. Absolutely perfect chemistry between the two characters. Other favorites - the Ciaran Hinds/Samantha Morton, Timothy Dalton/Zelah Clark and Orson Welles versions although all of those have one or more plot problems.  But at least the main characters are well-cast and their is real chemistry between of them. At the bottom of my rating scale are this version and the Susannah York version, and I place the William Hurt version only a step above those because he is so miscast as Rochester.

Do yourself a favor and watch the version with Ruth Wilson and Toby Stephens (Maggie Smith's son). And read the book. It's superb.
4043269
I knew the score, but had never seen A Little Night Music, when I discovered this video at my library. I was so disappointed with the majority of the film. There is somewhere a filmed stage version of a New York City Opera production that is much much MUCH better. I was bored with the movie, and sometimes I wondered why I was even bothering to watch it. It is terrible.
4180958
I read the lukewarm customer reviews before deciding to get this particular version anyway - I had seen the Lincoln Center performance a few years ago and loved it, but the reviews of the cd were right!  This is a very disappointing rendition; it sounds as if the songs were being sung in a recital, not a Broadway performance, very lifeless.  Especially disappointing is Bali Ha'i - sung too technically correct without any drama or spirit.

If you want a great performance get the PBS Great Performances version from 2006 with Reba McEntire as Nellie Forbush, Alec Baldwin as Sgt. Billis, and Brian Stokes Mitchell as de Beque. THIS is the definitive version - I can't recommend it enough!
2166936
I've been a fan of Sweeney Todd for a long time. I saw the movie and loved it, I thought it was a brilliant adaptation.

I bought this book hoping to find out more about the making of the movie, which it does do, it just doesn't do it well. Their are several glaring inaccuracies (on both ends of the spectrum, about Burton and about the musical.) The prose is somewhat mundane (not that I expected genius from a picture book about a movie) as well as being  a little too focused on Johnny Depp and Tim Burton, as opposed to the actual film making process. I was also hoping for a little more on Sondheim and the other contributers to the music as opposed to the whole three or so pages and seldom references to him.
1451465
This film is not nearly as funny as it should be.  It was nowhere close to "There's Something About Mary."  Ben Stiller did a surprisingly good acting job in the film, but the film itself was not consistently laugh-out-loud, and I generally laugh at stupid, silly films that have the raunchy scenes that this film had.  What makes matters worse is that this film is based on the screenplay by Neil Simon.  Neil Simon plays are funny mainly because the lines are good.  This film seemed to lack the clever script and instead focused on sex and swearing, which can be funny in other films, but I think the fact that I saw and really enjoyed the original version of this film made me realize how less superior this one is.  In addition, for some reason, this DVD has been edited from the original version.  That seems absurd to me.  Yes, the DVD contains many Rated R scenes, but why the original version is not being sold is beyond me.  That in itself reduced my rating by one star.
3267459
I was not enthused by the prospect of yet another play on TV. As an Olivia Newton-John fan, the 1978 movie version is the definitive version. I did not intend to watch Grease: Live, but got suckered into it by my niece. Other than Eve Plumb's performance as Mrs. Murdock and Kether Donohue's as Jan, the acting was mediocre, wooden, and, in some cases, a pale imitation lines delivered so much better by the actor from the movie. Plumb steals the show. Several times the music overwhelmed the singing. The stand out numbers were the Hand Jive scene, There Are Worse Things I Could Do, and the closing We Go Together. It was interesting the things they sanitized for this production while leaving other things in. Apparently, I am much too delicate to see Sandy with a cigarette, hear Rizzo sing "fongol," or watch Danny run around the car with saran wrap... but I am not too delicate for all of the crotch thrusts and fake titty grabbing. I give this three out of five stars because of Plumb and Donohue. What was good about this could not rescue what was bad. I had more fun singing along to the songs in an attempt to irritate my niece than I did by the production itself.
4807759
I didn't care for this recording at all. It diminishes Gershwin's masterpiece in more ways than I can count. The singers, with the exception of the always brilliant Audra McDonald, were allowed to embroider vocal lines shamelessly, the new orchestrations were unnecessary, and I simply felt the director didn't understand what the show is really about. Porgy was merely adequate, Sportin' Life was weak. Okay, so it wasn't being presented as an opera, but still, even a Broadway show should have some clarity and be well-sung. My two stars were given instead of one only because of McDonald.