MovieChat Forums > West Side Story (1961) Discussion > Probably the best decision(s) they made ...

Probably the best decision(s) they made for the movie

posted 15 years ago by StrongRex
75 replies | jump to latest

Just reading the play script...it is so full of awkward and rushed dialogue, inconsistencies with characters and situations, and several of the scenes are misplaced. Whoever decided that "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" should be in the scenes they are in the play...that alone shows the author's writing leaves a lot to be desired. Arthur Laurents, I am looking at you.

Yes, I have heard the argument that "Gee, Officer Krupke" is supposed to be an angry song. Yes, I have heard the argument that "Cool" was meant to show Riff as a powerful leader. But those arguments still do not match up, and I'll tell you why.

The Jets may have been angry when singing "Gee, Officer Krupke," but there were still comical elements in the song that's guaranteed to make people laugh. I'm not saying it's a happy-go-lucky song, but it's still very comical. After Riff's death, we are not supposed to laugh. The enjoyable moments were supposed to be before the rumble, and now that it's happened and lives have been lost now it is time to get serious. The movie did a wonderful job of making this clear but the play did not. And just the general way this scene was written, it just didn't have that same effect on me. It didn't seem to me that the Jets were really that concerned about what just happened, that they even cared. They just didn't seem to be reacting as urgently and drastically as they should have been. Unlike in the movie, where they were going insane and ready to tear the Sharks limb from limb, and where "Cool" actually applied to the particular situation, they showed little worry about the after-effects of the rumble, they sang "Gee, Officer Krupke" even though it had nothing to do with making sure they got revenge on the Sharks, and then when Anybodys shows up then they decide to take their situation seriously. That seemed really forced and out of place.

Which brings me to my next point; of all the Jets they could have chosen to take Riff's place as leader, they chose Action. And they don't give any early hints or indications that Action is going to mature enough to be a good leader when the story calls for it, Oh No!! He goes out of character and immediately becomes the cool-headed, authoritative type for no reason when throughout the entire story, he is consistently portrayed as hot-headed, always ready to fight, always yelling and using his fists, and he would NEVER make the good decisions the writers forced him to make. This is what I mean by character inconsistencies. Action didn't become the way he did in the second act because he had the character development for it, he became the cool-headed authority because the plot needed him to be.

Here is where the movie got this right: They, as we know, put "Gee, Officer Krupke" after the dance and before the war council, and they put "Cool" after the rumble which, as I said, applied way better to their current situation and actually made sense. AND, they kept Action in character and chose a better, more realistic candidate to replace Riff: Ice. This character should have been in the play!

Another song in a different scene I sort of have a problem with is "I Feel Pretty" taking place after the rumble and before Maria finds out that Tony killed her brother Bernardo. I'm not as nit-picky about this scene as the other two I mentioned, because you can't really blame Maria for not knowing the truth yet. But at the same time, the tone of this scene is still inappropriate if it immediately follows a horrible, gut-wrenching sequence of violence. And in the back of our minds we know that Maria's happiness is going to be horribly shattered when she hears what Tony did, and it's just more torture on the audience. At least in the movie, when the song took place in the bridal shop, you still had hope that everything was going to work out well for our two lovers. Seeing her perform it after the rumble is just torture, and for the same reason I gave for "Gee, Officer Krupke," there's not supposed to be more fun to play out through the plot. After the rumble, it's serious business.

The dialogue also flows better in the movie; when reading the script most of the lines were shorter, more choppy, and just plain awkward like they've turned in the first rough draft. You could just tell the writers could have worded the lines a lot better. In the movie, I felt the lines were almost perfect.

I'm not saying I didn't like the play, but I sure as heck liked the movie a LOT better than I did the play. I still consider West Side Story to be my favorite musical of all time, and Tony is still my number one dream role onstage. Hopefully, if I even do get the role the director might make similar changes to the script to make it more like the movie. I know that's not likely to happen but I can dream.

I heard they put on a revival of West Side Story a couple of years ago if I'm not mistaken. All I heard was they gave the Sharks more dialogue in Spanish, and dubbed the entire "I Feel Pretty" number in Spanish. I don't know what else they did, but I don't think it included putting "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" in their proper places. You would think after making the movie and seeing the difference of the plot's improvement, they would have made those same changes to the play so it would have made more sense. Unfortunately, they still haven't, and that just really gets on my nerves. At least I still have the movie to enjoy; the people who made that at least fixed those mistakes.

[–] redavdp 13 years ago

I Like the movie version really much.

I saw it in theaters a couple of times (Broadway, Amsterdam, local)
The theater versions were in both the movie and the original layout/lyrics of songs. I like the movie version of the play.

But strange you couldn't perform the movie version, a saw it on stage!

Could be... Who knows...

[–] bradford-1 13 years ago

I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that the song placements in the stage version were dictated by scene/costume changes. Obviously, a film doesn't have to worry about moving furniture, props and changing dresses or shoes. Maybe someone who has the playscript can see what precedes and follows "Cool" and "Officer Krupke."

"May I bone your kipper, Mademoiselle?"

[–] cada123 13 years ago

>I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere that the song placements in the stage version were dictated by scene/costume changes.

I read something similar; not only that, but because there Were those changes, there would be "down time" in which the audience would sit there, between Acts... and their conflicting emotions needed to be addressed - so that changes in emotions on stage would do that. (Something I do not understand, at All!) Whereas in the movie, which has but one intermission and no "down time" between Scenes and Acts, the tension builds... and builds. And the songs therefore also need to build tension. (Which makes a lot more sense.)

[–] StrongRex 13 years ago

Actually, without "I Feel Pretty" in the bridal shop scene, I can't see how there would be enough time for Tony to change out of his dance clothes into regular clothes!

I don't buy the changes in emotions for audiences either. The building of tension in stage shows was not a new thing; it has been going on for THOUSANDS of years worth of theatre. So that excuse for having Cool and Officer Krupke be where they are in the play is stupid.

[–] Taylorfirst1 13 years ago

The OP is 100% correct. Kudos.

[–] StrongRex 13 years ago

Thank you.

[–] Agamemnon7 13 years ago

Oddly enough, the sequencing of COOL and GEE, OFFICER KRUPKE! works either way, but I do prefer it in the film. (AMERICA and TONIGHT are also reversed on screen, probably because the Sharks are now involved in AMERICA but need to be gone in time for Tony and Maria to be alone on the fire escape.)

The one glaring problem that Lehman truly cleaned up with his screenplay is almost never commented on. In the play, Tony promises Maria he will stop the rumble, joins Riff a few minutes later in the Quintet to sing about how he'll be there supporting the Jets in their fight against the Sharks, and then of course shows up to try to stop it. It's illogical sequencing in every way. In the film, Ice and Riff sing about the oncoming rumble without Tony. He makes his promise to Maria, sings only about Maria in the Quintet, and then shows up as planned to stop the fight. It makes a lot more sense.

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

The one glaring problem that Lehman truly cleaned up with his screenplay is almost never commented on. In the play, Tony promises Maria he will stop the rumble, joins Riff a few minutes later in the Quintet to sing about how he'll be there supporting the Jets in their fight against the Sharks, and then of course shows up to try to stop it. It's illogical sequencing in every way. In the film, Ice and Riff sing about the oncoming rumble without Tony. He makes his promise to Maria, sings only about Maria in the Quintet, and then shows up as planned to stop the fight. It makes a lot more sense.

Hmmm....hmmmm....

You know, you are absolutely right! I never thought of that. Of course, I always preferred the movie's interpretation of that scene anyway, but before you said that I didn't really care either way.

[–] johnlenonomusic 12 years ago

And now, some fun facts about decisions made in the movie from Stephen Sondheim's book of lyrics, Finishing the Hat:

On "America" with boys:
"'America' was intended to be an argument between Bernardo and Anita, partly to enrich their relationship by adding some contention to it, since Arthur [Laurents] had no time in the libretto to explore it, but Jerry [Robbins] insisted that the song be for girls only, as it was his only chance for a full-out all-female dance number in the show. The character of Rosalia was invented to take Bernardo's point of view. When the movie was made four years later, Jerry agreed to have the number danced by both the men and the women and to revert to the original lyric, which went like this:

[movie lyrics here]

This lyric is sharper and easier to understand than the version I came up with for Jerry, maybe because I resented having to change it, but more likely because it's rooted in real character conflict rather than in an artificial argument consisting of punch lines set up by an ad hoc straight man (woman, in this case). In fact, because Rosalia is a nonentity, the stage version makes Anita something of a smartass."

On the Quintet happening after "One Hand...":

"...The most instructive aspect of the piece ["Quintet"] for me was that we wrote it to occur before the scene in the bridal shop, since we felt that Tony would never agree to rumble after he'd "married" Maria. Jerry, however, refused to listen to that logic and insisted that the number should occur after the bridal-shop scene. Even Arthur couldn't get him to come around; Jerry just folded his arms, shut his eyes and shook his head at every argument. That was his customary manifestation of adamant stubbornness whenever he couldn't articulate his reasons; it happened frequently, as verbal articulation was Jerry's enemy, and he became a fortress of refusal whenever he glimpsed a lucid argument on the horizon. We did get him to agree to two run-throughs of the show, one with the "Quintet" before the bridal shop and one after it and, as you might guess, Jerry turned out to be right. The plot logic may not have made much sense, but the show flowed better. That was when I learned there is a significant difference between logical truth and theatrical truth."

On "Cool" and "Krupke":

"As for the inappropriateness of the moment, I suggested to Jerry and Arthur that we switch this song with "Cool." The playfulness of "Krupke" belonged in the first act, I argued, whereas "Cool" was precisely the kind of song that they'd sing in their second act state of tension. Jerry was persuaded to try it in Washington, but found that the way the scenery had been planned ("Krupke" on a shallow stage, "Cool" on a full one), prevented him from doing it. When the show was sold to the movies, however, he did indeed switch them. I'm no longer sure if it was for the better or not, and ever since then I've been haunted by the feeling that I shouldn't have opened my mouth."

Just some food for thought from the man.

_________________________________

I joined IMDB and all I got was this lame-ass signature.

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

For the most part, Stephen Sondheim seems to have a good head on his shoulders. But...of course he did the right thing by opening his mouth about "Cool"! For the reasons I listed before, "Cool" and "Gee, Officer Krupke" don't work in the places they are in the stage show. They just don't. It was definitely for the better when they were switched in the movie; so much better that copyright policies made for West Side Story should allow directors to change them if they so desire. It really makes me mad that they don't. Same with "America" (which Sondheim was also absolutely right about).

[–] johnlenonomusic 12 years ago

I sympathize on "America," but I have different feelings about "Cool." Don't get me wrong, I'm not disputing it was in the right place for the movie. It's my favorite scene in the film, and it's not for nothing that "Cool" was selected to represent West Side in the MGM/UA retrospective That's Dancing!. But "Krupke" works equally as well for different reasons.

"Krupke" on stage is an unexpected lift from the tragedy just re-enacted in the ballet (if the ballet had been kept in the film, I think it would have been harder to argue switching the songs for film). Correctly sung and acted, it is less the vaudevillian turn demonstrated in the film than a sardonic, even bitter indictment of the adult society these boys feel they are up against. In this light, the song does not come a moment too soon. (If you're ever privileged enough to find clips of the 2009 Broadway revival, an otherwise mistaken attempt at putting a new spin on the piece by the late Arthur Laurents, they nailed the Act Two setting of "Krupke" in a way that few casts match. It was funny, but also horrifying; it was the one moment in the show where the boys actually acted like gang members you'd be afraid to meet in an alley.)

Lightening the tone, playing the laughs and not the bitterness, was the only way to make it work in the earlier spot, a point in time where some empathy for, even identification with, the gangs is still required. But the "Krupke" scene in the film is too early in the scenario for us to witness the cynicism the stage-Jets get to express. The shoot-from-the-hip irreverence makes them come off as savvy and menacing, if flippantly so, and that must not happen too soon. Their fortified autonomy, their "us against the woild" philosophy, is a sentiment the audience can accept only after the grudging attempts of "mixing" and "making nice" have proven futile. While the film Jets are prepared to work around the necessary evils of adult society, an agenda that includes ridicule, the stage Jets have reached a more critical point of learning wherein adult interference is so impotent as to be meaningless.

In the play the number is disturbing and funny; in the film it is funny and vapid -- the point is made but in the absence of any affronts more serious than the dumping of paint or even the cutting of an ear, the message connects to nothing. The film version of West Side would work exactly as well, if not better, with this beloved number omitted (yeah, that's right, they should have cut the song), and the same cannot be said of the play. The comic turns serve to make Riff more likable, which is effective, and it demonstrates the talents of at least four more actors, but the story is advanced not an inch.

_________________________________

I joined IMDB and all I got was this lame-ass signature.

[–] Agamemnon7 12 years ago

Thank you for the info, John!

I truly believe the sequencing of these two numbers works either way, but I prefer it in the film.

[–] johnlenonomusic 12 years ago

And to briefly summarize for those who couldn't read it, I believe each song works in that slot, but that if they were moving "Cool" to that slot for film, "Krupke" should have just been cut.

_________________________________

I joined IMDB and all I got was this lame-ass signature.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] johnlenonomusic 12 years ago

They both work in that slot, but one works better for film than the other.

ON STAGE
* An unexpected lift from the tragedy just re-enacted in the ballet
* Not so much the vaudevillian turn of the film
* A sardonic, even bitter indictment of the adult society these boys feel they are up against

ON FILM
* Has to be played for laughs that early in the film
* Why? It's too early to play the cynicism
* The shoot-from-the-hip irreverence makes them come off as savvy and menacing, if flippantly so, and that must not happen too soon
* Their fortified autonomy, their "us against the woild" philosophy, is a sentiment the audience can accept only after the grudging attempts of "mixing" and "making nice" have proven futile, which hasn't happened in the film
* As such, the song is funny in the film where it was put, but it connects to nothing -- nothing touches off the song in a way that makes it meaningful

As such, my opinion remains:

"Krupke" works on stage. "Cool" works on film for that spot. But in spite of being better placed in order to do what the film wanted to do, "Krupke" still lays an egg because it comes from nothing that early in the picture. So, my feeling is, move "Cool" because it works better there, but cut "Krupke" because there's no meaningful justification for the tone of the lyrics, and playing it more for the laughs doesn't disguise that. It's funny, but why is it happening? Know what I mean?

_________________________________

I joined IMDB and all I got was this lame-ass signature.

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

But in spite of being better placed in order to do what the film wanted to do, "Krupke" still lays an egg because it comes from nothing that early in the picture. So, my feeling is, move "Cool" because it works better there, but cut "Krupke" because there's no meaningful justification for the tone of the lyrics, and playing it more for the laughs doesn't disguise that. It's funny, but why is it happening? Know what I mean?

I disagree that "Krupke" came out of nowhere for its spot. Krupke and Schrank had been on the Jets' butts for their behavior possibly for years, and their resentment had just been building up. Making fun of the cops behind their backs is something they've always done. Remember in the beginning when Snowboy mocked Krupke for saying "Goodbye boys"? In the stage version, A-Rab adds "They make a very nice couple" (Krupke and Schrank). And just before the song, one of the other Jets (I believe it was Tiger) mocked Krupke for saying "And don't let me catch the none of youse around here when I get back!" right after he left.

Nothing big really NEEDED to happen for Krupke, because it's not a big, significant song. It's a show stopper; it doesn't move the story in any way. All it reveals is how the Jets view the world and how they believe everyone views them; much of what we already know. They were doing something the exact same thing in the beginning; in this scene it was just made into a song. This refutes your claim that "Krupke" doesn't come from anywhere when placed pre-rumble. Krupke is albeit sarcastic and cynical, but it is still comical and we learn nothing new from it. The song came from Krupke attempting to question the Jets, and of course they didn't like it so they made fun of him after he left.

"Cool" moves the story in a BIG WAY. It makes perfect sense for it to be after the rumble. If I were involved in a serious crime in any way, even if I didn't directly commit it, I would be feeling VERY messed up. I would be worried about what would happen to me and what I should do next. That's exactly how Baby John and A-Rab felt before they met up with the Jets, and when they did, every one of them was feeling exactly like that. Ice gave them that answer with "Cool." There is no reason for that song to be there because nothing big and serious had happened, so there is no reason for them to do what the song says. During that scene, it was okay for them to make fun of the cops because their state of mind allowed them to do so, but it's much more realistic for them to be worried about what the cops would DO to them if they were found after Tony had killed Bernardo.

[–] johnlenonomusic 12 years ago

On film, it laid an egg. It was the right spot for it if you wanted to keep it in, but nothing so big has happened to the Jets to necessitate the anger and sarcasm in that song. It was empty of motivation. On stage, it's more part of the whole. "Cool" is in the best spot for film, and as such, is all that needs to be there. Watch it again knowing "Krupke's" full context. You'll see what I mean.

_________________________________

I joined IMDB and all I got was this lame-ass signature.

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

Again, "Gee, Officer Krupke" is NOT an angry song. There's nothing in the music to suggest fury or tension, it's jaunty and happy-go-lucky. The movie clearly portrayed the Jets as having fun in the song.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

Exactly. It's what anyone would do to someone they didn't like who was in a higher position than they were. Students do it to teachers. Employees do it to their bosses. In this case, gang members were doing it to a cop.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

And that's what makes the atmosphere so hilarious and lighthearted. That's why it does not fit after the rumble at all; "Cool" fits the tragic, suspenseful atmosphere afterward so much better. Why would anyone lampoon their superior rank behind their backs for the fun of it when something traumatic just happened to them, especially if they were in danger of getting into serious trouble?

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] PillowRock 12 years ago

but nothing so big has happened to the Jets to necessitate the anger and sarcasm in that song.

I disagree. Their entire lives have happened, and the anger and cynicism in the song is entirely appropriate for what the song is telling us about the entire backstory that those characters have lived through.

In fact, that is what I see as being the function of the "Krupke" song in the movie: It reveals character. It tells us the characters' backstories (both in terms of what it says about their homelives and what is implied about how much time they've all spent "in the system") and explains their motivations to a large degree.

In that regard, "Krupke" does for the Jets what "America" does for the Sharks (in the movie version, with the guys included). The anger and cynicism of the Jets is justified by their life experiences (as laid out in "Krupke") just as the Sharks' anger and cynicism is justified by their life experiences (as laid out in "America"). I think that placing that parallel character development for both gangs between the dance and the war council works quite well. With the songs, both sides having a complete unwillingness to back down regardless of consequences becomes an understandable outgrowth of character, instead of an arbitrary requirement of the plot.

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

Their entire lives have happened, and the anger and cynicism in the song is entirely appropriate for what the song is telling us about the entire backstory that those characters have lived through.

Only one problem: there is no anger or cynicism in the song. It's jaunty, comical, and happy-go-lucky. Therefore, it doesn't fit after the rumble.

[–] PillowRock 12 years ago

Their entire lives have happened, and the anger and cynicism in the song is entirely appropriate for what the song is telling us about the entire backstory that those characters have lived through.

Only one problem: there is no anger or cynicism in the song. It's jaunty, comical, and happy-go-lucky. Therefore, it doesn't fit after the rumble.

First:
I apologize in advance, but I have to ask:
Did you read my entire post? Or did you see a couple of keywords that you didn't like in the second sentence and stop there?

The reason that I ask is because my previous post was arguing in favor of the movie's placement of the songs.

Second:
The entire song is nothing but an extended heaping of ridicule on every piece of the legal and and social services machinery for their uselessness and cluelessness, both individually and collectively as a contradictory bureaucratic mess where everybody just wants to clear the file from their desk and pass the problem to someone else. And you claim that there is no cynicism in there?

I agree with you on the macro point that the movie's song placement is much better. However, the claim that there is no cynicism in "Officer Krupke" strikes me as the single least supportable statement made in this thread. And considering what I think of the other poster's contention that "Krupke" should have been cut, that's saying something.

Third:
Happy-go-lucky? I wouldn't go that far. I think that the only and last time when the Jets' overall attitude approaches happy-go-lucky is in the early part of the prologue when the Sharks hadn't yet started to come together to oppose them. However, even then they seemed just a little too paranoid and jealous about guarding their turf for the full meaning of that phrase to apply completely.

Jaunty? I'm not certain that's the adjective that I would choose; although I know what you mean and I'm not sure what I would replace it with. They're in the mode of posturing in front of their friends to demonstrate how cool they are, how unconcerned in the face of cops and courts. They're consciously putting on an upbeat front that most of them wouldn't have if they were alone (and that the majority of them were not demonstrating before Riff showed up and talked them into it). That doesn't necessarily mean that their underlying feelings couldn't include any anger. (Actually, for a couple of the Jets I'm not sure that anger is ever all that far below the surface.)

Comical? Of course the delivery is comical. They're making fun of the objects of their scorn. Make no mistake, though; despite the delivery being in the form a joke, the idea being expressed is still "scorn". I suppose you could make an argument for the distinction between "scorn" and "anger". However, given that the song starts out of dialog complaining about being rousted just for being there when they weren't doing anything, and ends with the collective exclamation of the (none too subtle) euphemism "Krup you!" ...... I think that there's an element of anger mixed in there as well.

And, yes, I agree that jokes would not be the way that they would express those things immediately after seeing Riff (and then Bernardo) stabbed to death.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] StrongRex 12 years ago

Oh okay, I see what you're saying. I think I just misunderstood your post.

I said happy-go-lucky because when you watch the number, they're laughing and having a good time, even with their cynicism. And yeah, maybe I misunderstood that word as well. I only said it wasn't an angry song like so many people claim it to be; it's really only the last few lines that reveal their actual anger.

And the fact that it's comical alone is enough to disqualify its place post-rumble. We are not supposed to laugh after Riff and Bernardo were murdered; we're just not. It's at that point where there is nothing but seriousness and there's not supposed to be any more "fun" to be had. I know you recognize this, but there are just so many who don't.

And one point I made that no one else seems to try to refute is the fact of Action being completely out of character.

[–] friendoffilm 11 years ago

in any case, I don't think that "Officer Krupke" should've been cut, at all, because that scene, too, is a very integral part of the story.

I do agree with the decision to switch the order of Officer Krupke and the Cool scenes around when the film version of West Side Story was made, however.

[–] friendoffilm 11 years ago

Thanks for an excellent post, Dan_the_Man_88. It's very spot-on, and it says many things that I wish that I could say, very articulately and succinctly. Bravo!

[–] StrongRex 10 years ago

Thanks, friendoffilm. This is a topic I feel very strongly about.

[–] friendoffilm 10 years ago

Hi, Dan_the_Man_88. You're welcome. Glad I was able to be of some help by giving you support and encouragement. You post about West Side Story, and other stuff so articulately that it's wonderful. Thanks very much again.

[–] StrongRex 10 years ago

I'll need to post this sometime on the remake board. I need to edit and add needed arguments for this essay.

[–] friendoffilm 10 years ago

This:

I'll need to post this sometime on the remake board. I need to edit and add needed arguments for this essay.

would be a cool idea! Go for it!!

[–] StrongRex 9 years ago

Just posted it.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3581652/board/thread/248095965

[–] marvelass 10 years ago

Now comes the contract from the theatrical leasing agency, Music Theater International. There were a bazillion clauses in the contract about what we could and couldn’t do with the show. Among them –

- We were NOT allowed to cut any music. This created a problem, because I wanted to trim the “prologue” and the dance break in “COOL” a little bit, due to having kids that weren’t really dancers, and because I’m not a true choreographer.
- We were NOT allowed to add the boys into “AMERICA”. I hadn’t planned on altering the song, I just wanted the boys in the number. We were strictly and specifically forbidden. I had to re-do all the choreography.
- We were NOT allowed to move “COOL”, “KRUPKE”, and “I FEEL PRETTY” from their original spots.

Frankly, I was surprised that their estates allowed Glee to do the film version of "America" when the kids put on a high school production of West Side Story.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvV1mfjuReU

They even altered it a little by having the Jets (and their girls) crash the song:

Anita & Shark Girls: Here you are free and you have pride
Riff, Jets & Girls: Long as you stay on your own side!
Anita & Shark Girls: Free to be anything you choose
Riff, Jets & Girls: Free to wait tables and shine shoes!

Even though it made no sense to have them there, it was a nice touch, nonetheless. That would be something they would say but only something you could get away with on a stage, where characters can interject even though they're not part of the scene.

.

[–] StrongRex 10 years ago

That is interesting. I never got into Glee and don't plan to for personal reasons, but this is interesting. I wonder if it's because they know deep down, that the film version of "America" is better.

[–] Alchemistlover 10 years ago

I had no idea Glee did that song until you mentioned it and actually really like that idea. You're right it wouldn't make sense them being there but it could also be the Sharks are imagining them saying that.

[–] MrJJay 8 years ago

I didn't see the play yet (a great company is coming in may to Turkey which I'm hoping to see) but even then I agree with you ℅100. I'm hoping the company will adapt the film version but I know im just wishful thinking.
You have clarified your reasonings very articulately. There are many purists that consider the original always the best but that's not always the case. The structure of the film version is clearly better than the stage version. Even people here agree with you which is not something I would think as people generally tend to favour the original concept as I said. I wish the contract wouldn't insist on using only the stage version. You seem to have really grasped the core of the musical and I'm sure you will get the chance to play Tony one day. :)