There is something about a good musical that
is magical. The notion that characters might just break out
into song and dance is so purely fantastical that is creates
the exact sense of refreshing escapism that we go to movies
and the theater for.
Musicals are still as popular as ever in the
world of theater, but filmed musicals sort of dipped out of
the public eye. Perhaps part of the reason is that musicals
are really action films -- the are all about movement and music
-- and many action directors these days just don't seem to have
the attention span required to stay on a full musical number.
Of course, it was inevitable that movie musicals
would make a comeback. It just took a few brave directors to
figure out how to reinvent them slightly for the modern audience.
The brilliant Moulin Rouge generated some excitement and now
Chicago follows it up.
I think the primary difference between the
new movie musical and those of yesterday is in the presentation.
It used to be that there was no shame in having the performers
sing right to the camera, to blatantly break that fourth wall
when the music started up. In fact, it was almost celebrated
to the point where the upcoming song was telegraphed to the
audience as if to say, "sit up and pay attention because
here's the important part."
Chicago makes in interesting choice in that
there is still plenty of set-up to the songs, but the presentation
is almost like a documentary. There is a real sense that we
might be watching a theater production that just happened to
have some cameras filming it rather than something created specifically
for the screen. Watch the actors carefully -- they are playing
to an audience that isn't us. Films, by very nature are very
voyeristic and by not having the actors perform their numbers
to the camera helps to maintain that separation of the audience.
Another big change in movie musicals is that
there seems to be even more of a push to create stories that
don't require the songs. Chicago, a story about jealousy, desires
and the media glorification of violence, could just as easily
have worked as either a drama or a dark comedy completely without
the music. These aren't flimsy segues from song to another,
but a real linear story.
The essense of Chicago is what people will
do for fame. The story takes place in the 1920's and our main
character is Roxie Hart (Renee Zellweger). Roxie wants to be
on stage and as we find out in the early moments of the film,
she's willing to kill for it.
Roxie's idol is Velma Kelly (Catherine Zeta-Jones),
who was part of a sister act until she murdered her sister and
husband in a jealous rage. Roxie winds up in the same prison
with Velma and a slew of other women who have all been charged
with murder. On death row, facing execution if she's convicted,
Roxie finally finds fame as the radio and newspaper reporters
flock to her story.
Enter shyster lawyer Billy Flynn (Richard
Gere). Flynn doesn't care about guilt or innocense -- if you've
got the cash, and your case is enough to give him headlines,
he'll get you off. Flynn was initially representing Velma Kelly's
case, but he sees more opportunity in Roxie. This, of course,
sets up rivavlry and competition between Velma and Roxie as
they struggle to take control of the spotlight.
The interesting thing is that Roxie isn't
really a performer, she just wants to be. She's rough around
the edges and, were it not for the fact that she murdered someone,
would never have found the fame she wanted. The musical numbers
are glitsy and over-the-top because they aren't real. Instead,
they exist as Roxie's fantasy world. In her mind, all the world
really is a stage.
The fact that Renee Zellweger is, herself,
a little rough around the edges only lends credibility to the
character. It wouldn't have worked if she had been as accomplished
a singer and dancer as Zeta-Jones, who was a stage performer.
That isn't to say that Zellweger doesn't turn in a stellar performance,
in fact it's more a statement that the casting was just right
both for the film and the characters.
Also just right was the direction and production
design. Much of the film was crafted on giant stages and set
up and choreographed as though it were a theater production.
Even the lighting of the musical numbers is far more remeniscent
of stage lighting than film lighting. Quick cuts within the
numbers are timed to the beats of the music and help to create
the visual theme of Roxie's imagination.
There are times when I don't agree with Academy
Award nominations and winners. The spectacle seems to often
be more a popularity contest than anything based on actual acheivement.
However, the Academy sometimes gets it right. Chicago won the
Best Picture honors and I really think that for the year 2002,
no other film was more deserving. Chicago was the essense of
the spectacle that we all go to movies to see.
