Sweeney Todd ... finally

After our abbreviated showing of Sweeney Todd on Saturday, we finally got back to see the whole movie on Christmas Eve. We went with my sister-in-law and her family.

Becky and I both found that we loved the first part of the movie even more the second time around. It does drag through "Pretty Women" and the "Epiphany" but both are essential to the plot and can't be cut.

The last forty minutes of the movie are fantastic. What a thrill. Even though I knew "The Ballad of Sweeney Todd" was not in the film, I still missed the reprieve at the end. There is something satisfying in the stage version when Sweeney rises from the dead to comment on his own demise. Ah well. Still a great movie. I might try to find time after the New Year to go again.

"Lift your razor high Sweeney! Hear it singing yes! Sink it in the rosy skin of righteousness!"

Sweeney Todd: the demon barber of ...

Becky and I went out on Saturday evening to the brand new movie theaters at Clackamas Town Center. They have twenty screens, and unlike the same company's theaters at Eastport, the theater was large and very comfortable. We got our popcorn and drinks (I got a free t-shirt with my large drink) and we settled in for the fun ...

Let me just say that I have been preparing myself to be thoroughly disappointed in this film from the very beginning. I listened to the original cast recording numerous times this past week, as I was just too excited, even though I new this movie would let me down. But, I found just the opposite ... it was delightful. Unexpected and completely entertaining.

Burton has remained faithful to Sondheim's rhythms through and through, while Sondheim has taken a liberal axe to his own work. Thankfully Sondheim and Burton both knew that the music, as written for the stage, would not work unchanged.

While the wonderful Ballad of Sweeney Todd has been removed (as there is no chorus) the underlying music in the transitions pays homage to this absence. What is perhaps most impressive about the film is that Burton has managed to create such stunning visuals that the music almost gets lost at times.

There are moments, however, particularly in the first hour, where Burton seems trapped by material written for the stage. There are several numbers confined in the barber parlour and you can see Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter just trying to break free of the "stage."

It isn't until the "Epiphany" that Burton manages to abandon that world and create a new visual context. This transition caught me off guard, at first, and I felt as though I had missed the leap from one world to the next. At the end of the song, we are pulled back in and everything that preceded it suddenly makes sense, but because I didn't follow the transition, I spent the length of the song wondering how we got from the barber shop out into the streets of London. The other leaps into Sweeney's mind, earlier in the film, and later, were much clearer because the palate shifted.

I was delighted and impressed with Johnny Depp as Todd. While his vocal range is limited, I never found myself wanting more, and while there were times where Bonham Carter's voice obviously reached it's limit, she looked so wonderful that I forgave her instantly. The only real complaint I had with the music was that the pace of many songs felt too slow.

There were, however, several improvements and changes to the music that caught me off-guard and made me smile. There were many compressions of music from different parts of the work into shorter passages that worked marvelously and kept the film moving, and songs that I never liked on stage, suddenly came to life on screen. In particular, Johanna's "Green Finch and Linnet Bird." This song always bored me on stage, but because we can see Johanna's face, and because she can sing it with subtlety that would never work on stage, the song is both engaging and important to the film.

As the movie progressed, I found myself surprised at every new turn. As the bodies started mounting, I was disgusted and delighted all at once by the flowing blood and crunching bones. I found myself cringing and then laughing as each body fell from Sweeney's chair.

We had just watched the marvelous "By the Sea" with its spectacular visuals-- Becky and I both loved this number -- when the screen went blank. The theater went dark for a moment and then the house lights came on. I had been sitting there for more than half an hour thinking "I HAVE to pee" but knowing that I wasn't leaving my seat for anything. So, Becky and I both sprang from our seats and shouted "Intermission!" and ran for the bathroom, hoping we'd get back before it started again. Only, it didn't.

The whole mall was cast in darkness. We returned to our seats and waited patiently for our movie to resume. We had food and liquid refreshment and were prepared to wait out the unfortunate delay ... but after half an hour, they came out to tell us that we had to leave. The electricity was not coming back any time soon. We would have to take a rain check and return another time. Reluctantly, we shuffled out of the theater.

I was quite tempted to head straight to the next showing at the nearest movie theater, but decided to wait for another time ... hence, I can only provide three-quarters of a review. The good news is that I get to watch that first three quarters again (hopefully today,) and THAT is the best part of all!

Who should you vote for?

My sister forwarded this little quiz. Answer a few key questions and find out who you should vote for ...

According to this quiz, I should vote for Chris Dodd (Score 46) followed by Dennis Kucinich (Score 45) and then Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama (all Scored 39).

It's a good thing I don't choose my candidate by just eleven criteria!

"At last my arm is complete again!"

Sweeney Todd has long been my favorite musical. See this post for more about my love of Todd. Tim Burton's adaptation is coming out next Friday, with Johnny Depp as Todd, and Helena Bonham Carter as Mrs. Lovett. Judging from the trailer alone, it looks good, though the music seems to have been watered down a bit (maybe because none of them can sing.) I'm still holding out hope that it will be good and yes, Becky and I will be there opening weekend! Mark and Alan, we will save you some seats. I know you won't miss this movie. ;)

UPDATE: 12/15/07

After listening to the original cast recording as I was cleaning the house today, and wondering how they could possibly keep the long sections of ensemble singing, including much of the finale, I went on line to read some reviews. This series of stories in the New York Times answered many of my questions. I figured that Sondheim was deeply involved in the making of the movie, and I was happy to discover that Sondheim in fact reworked the whole score for the film and had ultimate approval over all casting. So ... I will do my best to wipe my conceptions of Sweeney off the table and see this with open eyes. I know there are millions of people that have never seen Sweeney Todd, and won't know the difference to begin with.

Torture is not okay ... unless ...

The debate about torture, and in particular whether tactics such as water boarding constitute torture, seems to have taken a new tack. I am hearing Presidential candidates say things like "Torture is wrong, however, if American lives are at stake ... then I will use whatever means necessary ..."

Torture is not okay. Ever.

Let me lay down a scenario. Let's say that the US receives credible intelligence that a nuclear bomb is going to be set off in a major US city. Millions of lives are at stake. The US apprehends a citizen, or citizens it believes to be involved. Their intelligence tells them that these people know the where, when, how, and who of this attack. These individuals are questioned. They don't provide any information. They are then handed over to operatives that "torture" them, in order to get the information.

Okay. So we have an imminent deadly terrorist attack on the US. Millions of American lives are at stake. We have people that know where and when and who. They don't want to cooperate. They aren't telling us what we need to know. We torture them to get what we need. We use whatever means necessary to save lives.

Now, using this scenario, perhaps the individuals are involved, and perhaps they give information and the attacks are prevented, however, consider this. What if these people really aren't involved? What if the attacks never happen? What if the intelligence was not quite accurate and these people are innocent? Is it okay to torture innocent human beings because we think they might be able to tell us something to prevent the deaths of American lives? How would you like to be that innocent person?

There is a reason we have a judicial system in this country. There is a reason the Geneva Conventions are in place. In the United States, we operate from the assumption that everyone is innocent, until proven guilty. We can not abandon this principle just because we are afraid. In fact, it is times such as this that we must elevate it, we must exalt it and show everyone that we hold the rule of law above all else.

The longest 412 days we have ever seen ...

January 20th, 2009 can not come soon enough.

There will be a lot going on in these ensuing 412 days. Some of it will be interesting and exciting. I am not so concerned about the election. What worries me is what that maniac in the White House is trying to do in his final year in office.

Last week, Bush tried to put on a happy face by holding a Mid-East "peace" summit in Annapolis. They managed to bring more than 40 countries to the table, but they didn't really accomplish anything. Bush says he is committed to peace in the Mid-East and plans on visiting Israel. We should be wary of anything this President says.

Yesterday, Israel announced plans to expand an East Jerusalem settlement in a Palestinian area that would most likely become their capital in a two state system. Sounds like those peace talks went well.

Bush continues to rattle his saber in regards to Iran. The latest National Intelligence Estimate was released, showing that Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons program. The next thing we see is President Bush acting VERY defensive and hostile in a News Conference. When asked about the NIE report, showing that Iran DOES NOT have a program, the President said this:

Here's what we know. We know that they're still trying to learn how to enrich uranium. We know that enriching uranium is an important step in a country who wants to develop a weapon. We know they had a program. We know the program is halted.

I think it is very important for the international community to recognize the fact that if Iran were to develop the knowledge that they could transfer to a clandestine program it would create a danger for the world. And so I view this report as a warning signal that they had the program, they halted the program. And the reason why it's a warning signal is that they could restart it. And the thing that would make a restarted program effective and dangerous is the ability to enrich uranium, the knowledge of which could be passed on to a hidden program.

And so it's a -- to me, the NIE provides an opportunity for us to rally the international community -- continue to rally the community to pressure the Iranian regime to suspend its program.

Check out that double speak folks. They do not have a program ... but at the very end, he concludes Iran must "suspend its program." !!!!

The President went on in his press conference to say again and again, that IF Iran has the capacity to enrich Uranium, then the world will be completely unsafe. He repeated this many times. "... I see a danger. And many in the world see the same danger. This report is not a 'okay, everybody needs to relax and quit' report. This is a report that says what has happened in the past could be repeated..."

Back in October, the President said that if Iran developed the capacity for nuclear weapons, it could start World War III. Frankly, I am far more concerned that our President's own policies could have that very effect ...