Musical Mondays Week 21 Guys and Dolls

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

I first saw this movie in high school, and even then, even with a rudimentary knowledge of film (especially musicals), even without obsessively looking shit up on IMDb, my first thought was "why is this dope Brando mumble-singing when they could have cast Gene Kelly?!?!" It's just frustrating because, as has been said before, Sky doesn't really do anything likable in the movie. I agree that Kelly is not innately dangerous, but I don't find Brando to be dangerous or intimidating as Sky anyway, so if he's not going to be dangerous, at least make him charming. At least make him someone who could conceivably show Sister Sarah a good enough time in Havana that she'd fall in love with him over the course of 72 hours, instead of just getting her drunk. The idea of Jack Lemmon as Nathan Detroit I think is perfect, and since Detroit doesn't have the burden of the vocal theatrics required for "Luck Be a Lady," I think he could pull it off. Most of Sinatra's songs aren't half as difficult as that one.

 

And fuck, IMDb says that Marylin Monroe was considered for Adelaide. I know she would definitely be too young, but I don't care. That would be amazing. Jack Lemmon actively trying to avoid marrying Marylin Monroe? The comic possibilities of that are legion. "Pet Me Poppa" would have been even creepier and scuzzier a song-and-dance number though.

[kateacola 2440]

I love GK, too. And if it were just a question of singing and dancing, I'd agree. My problem is GK just doesn't feel dangerous enough.

Idk, none of them felt that dangerous to me honestly. I think Gene Kelly is way more charming and overall more likeable than Brando. And I'm able to forgive Kelly's characters more if they have unredeeming qualities since he's charming.

I wasn't fully on board with the Sky/Sarah relationship.

 

I did not understand why Sister Sarah fell for Sky at all - nothing he did really showed he was a good guy nor that he would become a good guy. I can get being attracted to him, but other than that he doesn't have any real redeeming qualities. This movie takes place in what, like 72 hours? Why was he even going to Havana at all? It seemed like when he got there all he did was tour churches (by moonlight? What time is it?) and get Sister Sarah drunk, then come back to New York like 5 hours later.

^I agree with all this. And if it was GK instead-- it'd make more sense for Sister Sarah to fall for him. Cause GK is charming AF.

[Cameron H. 23786]

I dont know...these guys are supposed to "made" men, right? And I'm not sure that either of them is supposed to be charming. I just don't see Big Jule being intimidated by GK. For the "love story" parts, sure, GK could have helped scrub out some of the scuminess, but for the mobster parts, I just don't see it.

 

Maybe that's what I'm trying to say. It's not that they're "dangerous" it's that they're scumbags, and I simply can't imagine either GK or Lemmon in those parts.

 

 

[tomspanks 9039]

I've still got about 50 minutes left to watch (my god was it always this long?), but wanted to say I tried to play "spot the PoC" in this movie and came up with 3 total. I thought it was 4, but it was just a poorly lit scene.

[SaraK 1980]

I've still got about 50 minutes left to watch (my god was it always this long?), but wanted to say I tried to play "spot the PoC" in this movie and came up with 3 total. I thought it was 4, but it was just a poorly lit scene.

 

Oh this movie felt very long. Not helping was the fact that I got the DVD from the library and had no way to see where I was at. I finally just wikipedia'd the song lists so I could have a sense of how far I had to go.

[grudlian. 4725]

I've still got about 50 minutes left to watch (my god was it always this long?), but wanted to say I tried to play "spot the PoC" in this movie and came up with 3 total. I thought it was 4, but it was just a poorly lit scene.

It's a 1950s Hollywood movie. I'm surprised the number is that high. Even movies explicitly about people of color still had white people putting on black face and brown face.

 

But let's save that for if we ever cover West Side Story.

[tomspanks 9039]

It's a 1950s Hollywood movie. I'm surprised the number is that high. Even movies explicitly about people of color still had white people putting on black face and brown face.

 

But let's save that for if we ever cover West Side Story.

 

Of course I know that! That's the point lol.

[Cinco DeNio 5290]

It's a 1950s Hollywood movie. I'm surprised the number is that high. Even movies explicitly about people of color still had white people putting on black face and brown face.

 

But let's save that for if we ever cover West Side Story.

I recently saw an ad for Holiday Inn as a Broadway show. All I could think was "How did they do/get around that February Abraham Lincoln blackface number?"

[sycasey 2.0 2301]

I don't mind that the main characters are kind of loutish assholes, because ultimately this is supposed to be a cheeky comedy musical. They don't have to be virtuous for me to enjoy it.

 

That said, I think this movie takes a kind of strange approach to the material. It feels a little too serious and uptight, not fast and fun like the musical calls for. Brando is miscast -- he's a mediocre (at best) singer and his naturalistic style clashes with the broadness of the material. Sinatra also feels a little too subdued, maybe trying (and failing) to calibrate to match Brando's performance. They have zero chemistry together. The show wants you to be "in" on the joke that these gangsters are not actually worthy of pity, but the movie itself doesn't always seem in on that joke.

 

Anyway, the music is still great, and these 50s movie musicals always had a certain technical proficiency that renders them watchable on some level. It's not a terrible movie, just uneven.

[Cameron H. 23786]

I've still got about 50 minutes left to watch (my god was it always this long?), but wanted to say I tried to play "spot the PoC" in this movie and came up with 3 total. I thought it was 4, but it was just a poorly lit scene.

 

I wanted to fast forward so many times. I didn't, but by God was I close.

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

Anyway, the music is still great, and these 50s movie musicals always had a certain technical proficiency that renders them watchable on some level. It's not a terrible movie, just uneven.

I agree. The music is fantastic and the actual musical numbers are expertly staged. I was also engrossed by the total artifice of the production design. I know it's meant to emulate a stage musical, but on screen, being so far removed from the reality of the New York it's supposed to represent, it borders on Expressionism. Or at least 1950s Big Hollywood Studio version of Expressionism. A feast for the senses, a famine for the soul. Like Pirates of the Caribbean 3, but about gangsters and gambling instead of pirates and magic.

[tomspanks 9039]

Anyway, the music is still great, and these 50s movie musicals always had a certain technical proficiency that renders them watchable on some level. It's not a terrible movie, just uneven.

 

My favorite part is the music (although boo for cutting out I've Never Been in Love Before). Any time you bring an English horn into the mix, I'm gonna give you brownie points.

[Cakebug Tranch 6873]

Wow! I totally didn't expect this to be a controversial choice - I thought I'd kind of let the team down by picking a 'classic' instead of something difficult. Delighted to see that there's room for debate on this, and although i doubt I'll chime in much (work is slamming me and I didn't get to rewatch MY OWN FILM) I'm loving this energy.

 

I'll leave you with this little gem about "Titanic Thompson", the real-life gambler who Sky was based on: the "man who would bet on anything".

 

http://guysanddollsbsu.weebly.com/runyonland.html

[grudlian. 4725]

I don't mind that the main characters are kind of loutish assholes, because ultimately this is supposed to be a cheeky comedy musical. They don't have to be virtuous for me to enjoy it.

I have no trouble with unlikable characters as leads. I sometimes start having issues when the movie sides with them. I guess I didn't get how tongue in cheek the movie was supposed to be.

[sycasey 2.0 2301]

I have no trouble with unlikable characters as leads. I sometimes start having issues when the movie sides with them. I guess I didn't get how tongue in cheek the movie was supposed to be.

 

Yeah, I think the movie kind of misses on the tone you get in a (successful) stage production. It's supposed to be funny.

 

The most successful revival of this show on Broadway starred Nathan Lane. That's the best tone: big, brassy, and silly. I'm not sure this movie completely gets that last part.

[tomspanks 9039]

Can we talk about that rushed ending in Guys and Dolls? Sarah quietly leaves the meeting and then next thing we see is the double wedding in Times Square. Huh? I found this so jarring. I don't understand how Sarah and Sky were able to reconcile. Is it because Sarah found out that Sky told Nathan that Sarah never went to Havana? And Nathan finally agreed (sigh) to marry Adelaide, but why? The last scene they had together before the wedding was when he walks out on her at the restaurant. She sneezes, and he doesn't even turn around to say gesundheit like he usually does. It seemed like the final nail on the coffin of their dead relationship. Him sneezing at the altar did not bode well for their future either.

 

However, I loved Adelaide's pale lavender wedding dress. It seemed very fashion forward to me - although I admit I'm not familiar with the history of wearing a white dress on your wedding day in America.

[kateacola 2440]

Can we talk about that rushed ending in Guys and Dolls? Sarah quietly leaves the meeting and then next thing we see is the double wedding in Times Square. Huh? I found this so jarring. I don't understand how Sarah and Sky were able to reconcile. Is it because Sarah found out that Sky told Nathan that Sarah never went to Havana? And Nathan finally agreed (sigh) to marry Adelaide, but why?

 

Yeah, I think Sarah forgave Sky since she knows he actually won the bet.. because he did take her to Havana. But Sky told Nathan he didn't take her. So she realized he wasn't a total bad guy? I get that she could forgive him but I don't think that means she should marry him, lol. I wasn't totally down for their relationship, but I did like it more than Nathan/Adelaide's. Their relationship felt pretty one sided.

 

The ending felt a bit rushed to me (but I'm not saying I want it to be longer..).

 

I had a hard time getting through the last bit as well...But like everyone else has said, I did enjoy the music/ songs. And the dance number in the nightclub (before the fight broke out) I liked a lot. The characters I did not care for too much, so it did prevent me from really enjoying.

 

And speaking of the fight.. I was shocked Sarah was hitting people and throwing punches, lol.

Guess she's an aggressive drunk?

[Cameron H. 23786]

Off topic, I just watched North by Northwest today. Now that ending felt premature. But considering how badly Hitch seemed to want to get to that visual of a train entering a tunnel, I'm not entirely convinced it was unintentional.

[Quasar Sniffer 4174]

 

Yeah, I think Sarah forgave Sky since she knows he actually won the bet.. because he did take her to Havana. But Sky told Nathan he didn't take her. So she realized he wasn't a total bad guy? So I get that she could forgive him but I don't think that means she should marry him, lol. I wasn't totally down for their relationship, but I did like it more than Nathan/Adelaide's.Their relationship felt pretty one sided.

 

The ending felt a bit rushed to me (but I'm not saying I want it to be longer..).

 

I had a hard time getting through the last bit as well...But like everyone else has said, I did enjoy the music/ songs. And the dance number in the nightclub (before the fight broke out) I liked a lot.

 

And speaking of the fight.. I was shocked Sarah was hitting people and throwing punches, lol.

Guess she's an aggressive drunk?

I think the Nathan/Adelaide relationship was really entrenched in the mid-century married/dating couple tropes of "Guy is a ne'er-do-well who constantly schemes and doesn't know how good he has it but she loves him anyway" and "Girl is kind of a dope who easily accepts lies and just wants to settle down and be married so she can give up this whole business of 'thinking for herself.'" Both parties are pretty much good at heart, which is how they are able to stay together, but forget that part after each episode/plot point is resolved.Not good enough to stop behaving badly, but good enough to feel bad when they behave like pieces of shit. It's very sitcom-y, which makes it an odd fit for a two-and-a-half-hour movie musical spectacular. Adelaide is a long way from Lorelei Lee and Dorothy Shaw in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.

[Cameron H. 23786]

Tom - I just read your Letterboxd review. Okay, okay - that bugged me, too. Do you think they really spelled "coconuts" that way or do they mean a "cocoa nut?" I couldn't see the actual merchandise.

 

I also thought the price of Orange Juice was a bit steep.

[SaraK 1980]

Can we talk about that rushed ending in Guys and Dolls? Sarah quietly leaves the meeting and then next thing we see is the double wedding in Times Square. Huh? I found this so jarring. I don't understand how Sarah and Sky were able to reconcile. Is it because Sarah found out that Sky told Nathan that Sarah never went to Havana? And Nathan finally agreed (sigh) to marry Adelaide, but why? The last scene they had together before the wedding was when he walks out on her at the restaurant. She sneezes, and he doesn't even turn around to say gesundheit like he usually does. It seemed like the final nail on the coffin of their dead relationship. Him sneezing at the altar did not bode well for their future either.

 

However, I loved Adelaide's pale lavender wedding dress. It seemed very fashion forward to me - although I admit I'm not familiar with the history of wearing a white dress on your wedding day in America.

 

Two things really bummed me out about that wedding. #1 is Sarah not getting to wear a wedding dress or something other then her dumb uniform. #2 is the fact that it was a double wedding - the guys didn't really seem to be good friends at all and the women didn't even know each other. How disappointing for everyone

[kateacola 2440]

I think the Nathan/Adelaide relationship was really entrenched in the mid-century married/dating couple tropes of "Guy is a ne'er-do-well who constantly schemes and doesn't know how good he has it but she loves him anyway" and "Girl is kind of a dope who easily accepts lies and just wants to settle down and be married so she can give up this whole business of 'thinking for herself.'" Both parties are pretty much good at heart, which is how they are able to stay together, but forget that part after each episode/plot point is resolved.Not good enough to stop behaving badly, but good enough to feel bad when they behave like pieces of shit. It's very sitcom-y, which makes it an odd fit for a two-and-a-half-hour movie musical spectacular. Adelaide is a long way from Lorelei Lee and Dorothy Shaw in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.

 

Yeah, I get their relationship made sense at the time. But still wish there was more charm to these characters. Or some sharper dialogue like there was in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes.

And speaking of, I saw another potential/alternate casting on IMDb :

 

Before Samuel Goldwyn outbid Paramount for production rights, the studio was hoping to assemble his dream cast: Clark Gable (as Sky Masterson), Bob Hope (as Nathan Detroit), Jane Russell (as Sergeant Sarah Brown), and Betty Grable (as Miss Adelaide).

I think Jane Russell would be an interesting Sarah.. but kind of hard for me to picture.

[tomspanks 9039]

Tom - I just read your Letterboxd review. Okay, okay - that bugged me, too. Do you think they really spelled "coconuts" that way or do they mean a "cocoa nut?" I couldn't see the actual merchandise.

 

I also thought the price of Orange Juice was a bit steep.

 

Oh, those were definitely coconuts. Apparently that's how they used to spell it, although by the 1950s, usage was on the decline.

 

[Cameron H. 23786]

Two things really bummed me out about that wedding. #1 is Sarah not getting to wear a wedding dress or something other then her dumb uniform. #2 is the fact that it was a double wedding - the guys didn't really seem to be good friends at all and the women didn't even know each other. How disappointing for everyone

 

Especially, when you consider their wedding had to be rushed because they scheduled it during rush hour in the middle of Times Square

 

Why couldn't they just arrange it to be at Sky's 4 AM Special Time? It would have been more meaningful (at least for him ans Sarah) and it wouldn't have to be so rushed.

 

 

Oh, those were definitely coconuts. Apparently that's how they used to spell it, although by the 1950s, usage was on the decline.

 

 

[grudlian. 4725]

 

Oh, those were definitely coconuts. Apparently that's how they used to spell it, although by the 1950s, usage was on the decline.

 

For some reason, I have very vivid memories of old Peanuts comic strips from the 50s spelling coconut that way semi regularly.