»

[merylsilverburg]

I don't know how many of you guys will see this but I saw it yesterday (3 days off from work, woot! ) and I just wanted to share my review of it - I'll try to keep it spoiler-free but it's gonna be long, you've been warned!

When my sister and I first saw the trailer, we were pretty appalled by it for two reasons: 1) Depp's singing threw us off because we were so used to the versions we saw and 2) Bonham-Carter seemed very blank and lazy...her movements, her expressions seemed very lazy, if anyone understands what I mean. We were pretty irritated especially at the latter because Lovett is a great character and we know that Bonham-Carter could act so we didn't understand why she's trying to portray Lovett in this slovenly manner...

...then we found out she got pregnant during filming which completely explains her blank stares and her bloated, swollen appearance. Seriously, when you look at her in the trailer alone, she really seemed not like herself. We didn't know how bad it was going to be so we went to see the film with an open mind.

The film's opening was intriguing, it was done in a style reminiscent of Burton’s "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." Then throughout the film, there were highs and lows. One high point is visuals, Burton's films tend to be visually appealing even while devoid of color. The sets were beautiful, the costumes were great, the makeup was beautifully done, the meat pies looked revolting...overall the visuals were not the problem.

One of the problems came from the acting surprisingly. I'm fine with different portrayals of these characters because they can be molded in almost any way. I was really hoping that everyone would make their characters their own but this wasn't the case for all. I did not like Depp's portrayal of Todd. He made the man angry and angry only throughout the entire film - which yes, he has every right to be considering the situation. BUT, the whole purpose is to feel sorry for Todd because of the situation...in order to do that, you must make the character have a range of emotions not just anger alone. You cannot connect to the character if the guy is consistently angry/seething during dialogue and during the singing parts where he's supposed to be: reflecting, listening, in anguish, etc. For example, the 'Johanna – Trio' song. In this, Anthony sings about stealing Johanna away (from the Judge) and Todd reflects how he'll never see his daughter but he's going to forget her, let her go: "Look up, Johanna! Another bright red day...we learn, Johanna, to say...goodbye..." (this is the saddest song, IMO, I always tear up when I hear it). I expected Depp to show the sorrow but peace of mind from Todd's decision but Depp didn’t do any of that! He simply sang the song without feeling it. It made me angry because the whole sequence focused on the "humorous" killing and blood of the men in the chair rather than the lyrical emotion. So yeah, Depp simply made Todd angry, angrier, and angriest for most of the film. This is disappointing because Depp knows how to act and he showed this with his expressions during the song 'Worst Pies in London.' I don't know if Depp could not understand this character or if he was distracted because it was shown in a "making of" on TV that he was trying to help Bonham-Carter with her lines due to her pregnancy. I don't know...either way, I was disappointed.

Bonham-Carter, what to say? It was her pregnancy that ruined her character for me. I excused her for it because I know she could've made Lovett absolutely fantastic had she not been pregnant and it wasn't her fault. But again, you can tell she was feeling ill or uncomfortable throughout the entire film, especially during the song sequence of 'Not While I'm Around' and

Spoiler: show

when she leaves Toby in the bakehouse...she literally grunted while turning the meat grinder and she sort of stomped towards the door as she was leaving...I guess it could be interpreted that she was feeling upset at the situation but I know that's not the case

. What also was disappointing was her lack of wit and humor playing Lovett. I don’t know if this was Burton's decision but Bonham-Carter could've and should've been funnier delivering her lines; she had many opportunities but also, some of them were cut from the film. For example, the original spoken beginning of 'A Little Priest' where Lovett is supposed to say "But you know me! Bright ideas just pop into me head and I keep thinking..." was a great opportunity to inject humor but it was cut out. She played her absolute best (which was not only the best scene in the whole film but the best acting from Depp as well) during the song 'By the Sea.' I feel she wasn’t pregnant here yet because she did not look bloated or ill or unfocused in this whole thing! This part was SO enjoyable because you could see Bonham-Carter portraying Lovett the way she would’ve played her! Fantastic. But other than this, her Lovett ended up to be pretty dull and boring. Again, disappointing but excusable.

As for the others, Rickman knows how to play menacing characters rather well so his judge was fine but nothing too special. My favorite moment from him was his dumbfounded expression and hand gesture when he

Spoiler: show

didn't understand Johanna's hesitation to marry him...hilarious!

The girl and boy playing Johanna and Anthony were great although the boy was a bit better than the girl...it might have to do with a lack of dialogue on the girl's part so I didn’t mind so much. The boy playing Toby disappointed me though...he's the right age and he sings wonderfully but he showed no emotion or expression whatsoever except for a few parts. He looked like he was trying to remember his lines/lyrics so much that he forgot act along the way. In particular, he should've played his role during the advertising song 'Pirelli's Miracle Elixir' better and showed more emotion during 'Not While I’m Around.' Baron Cohen as Pirelli was fine but almost forgettable. Sorry, he just wasn't too memorable for me. The only person who really acted well was the fellow playing the Beadle. He pretty much owned that role and you will walk away hating him, enough said.

The song edits and cuts and the singing turned out not as bad as I thought but I still have some problems. One song that I am sad was cut out was the 'Kiss Me' duet between Johanna and Anthony which leads into the Beadle's song 'Ladies in their Sensitivities.' It's a great duet but it also plays a logically into the story because it's when Johanna and Anthony first speak with each other. This was not the case in the film so basically Johanna and Anthony simply had those 'love at first sight' moments and only spoke to each other near the end of the film. Kinda stupid; not too thrilled but I guess it works. 'A Little Priest' should’ve been funnier but all the editing left the song very dull instead of delightfully twisted as it should've been. The Beggar Woman's vulgar yet funny dialogue in 'Alms, Alms' was cut so I was sad. But I loved how Burton left the 'Ballad' as instrumental background music, this was a very good decision!

Each actor sang rather well; Depp made some of the songs his own, particularly 'Epiphany' but again, this is an angry song and he was pretty much angry throughout the whole film anyway so this was fitting. Rickman and Baron Cohen were good, Beadle was fine, but Johanna, Anthony, Toby, and the Beggar Woman were great! The Beggar Woman hit all the exact notes which made me happy. But Bonham-Carter really cannot sing, IMO. She sings wispy and delicately which is not fitting for Lovett's character. I cringed when she sang the line "Yes, yes, I know my love!" in 'A Little Priest' and for most of the other songs. However, if her acting was great ('By the Sea') I actually forgot about her singing because the acting was so good.

My final gripe has to do with Burton's overall decision on this production. He did stay very true to the original story and I really appreciate that. But I felt he was trying so hard not to get maimed by fans of the original and sticking to the whole horror, silent movie feel that he lost focus on another aspect that makes his films enjoyable: humor. Yes, the story is very dramatic but it’s also quite funny in a dark way. Burton has an odd but accessible sense of humor, which I hoped he would've spread throughout the film; he had the potential and opportunity. However, his zany humor was only shown during 'By the Sea.' I feel that he was able to get creative with this song's portrayal because the result was essentially Burton's style and it really shows - this is the best scene in the whole film. And then parts that shouldn't be funny were made to be funny like, again, the 'Johanna – Trio' and some other parts. It seemed his level of humor amounted to showing exaggerated blood (pools or squirts) which was really disappointing. Another thing is the dialogue. The original dialogue was there and I liked how Burton threw in new things for Toby and others to say but because the songs were meant to be dialogue too, I felt Burton didn't know how to balance the two. And with some songs being cut (that filled the gaps in the original story) the audience may be left going "Huh?" at moments.

Anyway, if the acting hit the right notes and the humor was there, I would've said that this is the best version. But the overall film ended up to be too dull and Burton’s creative vision didn’t shine through as much as it should've been.

I'd be interested to hear what you guys though of the film especially if you've never seen the original. ^_^

Sorry again for the long post.

[goodman]

I thought it was ok, too, i saw it on friday early. Overall its an interesting story, i had never seen the story before. Definitely very graphic, which i think could have been lightened some, not the need to see such open violence. Being a fan of a lot of Burton's movies, this one came up on the lower end, it didnt do much for me as far as entertainment or lasting appeal. So although it does have a interesting story, and there is some neat execution of the scenery and plots, i left kinda feeling a void, and glad to be getting out of the theater. Its a fairly long movie, also, so the development took a good while and ended with many things happening at once.

[merylsilverburg]

I honestly didn't think it was graphic although many people share your opinion, goodman. This woman a few seats in front of me kept groaning and turning her head away whenever there was blood. I felt the blood was overdone as a means to be "comical" and unrealistic. If the film has genuine-looking blood, it would probably come off as a horror film, I suppose.

What part of it did you feel it was a void for you? Lack of development? Too slow-paced? Not enough dialogue? I'm very curious to hear your thoughts since you've never seen other versions.

I think you should give the broadway versions a try...there's a lot more humor (still dark though) in those than in Burton's version so maybe you might enjoy them.

[goodman]

Yeah it was slow paced, and too long, as i mentioned. A lot happens towards the end of the movie after taking a long time to develop. And then there is kinda the element of not really belieiving you go out and kill 20 people to make up for being jailed for 20 years. Even if it was an eye for an eye he is in the wrong since there were no deaths involving him or his family although the lady had said his wife was posioned. Overall its just not a great movie, i expect the broadway version, which is what the show is meant to be made for, is noticeably more upbeat and watchable. This isnt something ive spent a lot of time thinking about (i watch a lotta flicks), but had been kinda looking forward to this flick, but any movie i watch and am ready for it to be over says its clearly not endearing me to the big picture..........

[merylsilverburg]

I had the same thoughts you did that it wasn't right to go off killing innocent people just because you were wronged. The only person he should really get is the Judge and Beadle. But he wasn't going to kill every person until he

Spoiler: show

missed his chance with the Judge. That's when he sang 'Epiphany' representing how his insanity finally emerged. And it wasn't his idea to go baking people into pies, it was Lovett's. She's actually quite evil but Burton's version humanized her by having her show compassion towards Toby while Todd came off as a full blown maniac. Either way, Todd was rightly punished in the end when Toby slit Todd's throat. It comes full circle: Todd was wronged at first but because he killed innocent people in his quest for revenge, he deserves to die at the end and that's what happened. It still ends up tragic because of Toby though. Burton's version leaves Toby's future a mystery; it seems that Toby will be the next Sweeney Todd. In the original version, Toby goes insane and continues to bake the pies when the authorities arrive. The latter is a bit more tragic because the authorities might assume that Toby is responsible for all the deaths and sentence him.

I think that Depp botched up the job of making people feel sorry for Todd while at the same time detesting him for killing innocent people. Depp made Todd insane all the way through which I think is very stupid of him.

Also, it's true that

Spoiler: show

no one in his family died but because at the beginning Lovett said that Lucy poisoned herself, Todd thinks she's dead even though Lovett never said she died. Lovett was cunning because at the end of the story, she sings "No, no not lied at all...no I never lied, said she took poison, she did, but never said she died."

So this makes it seem like he has nothing else to live for even though Johanna is still there...but Anthony is going to whisk her away so, again, he has nothing left.

It's okay if you decide not to watch the original versions. I just suggested it in case you were curious how the original story/feel went compared to the new one.

[goodman]

I will indeed check into other versions of this story, for sure, i liked the premise originally . And i remain a big Burton fan, and glad he is still creating, i was a big fan of Corpse Bride and own it on dvd...

[merylsilverburg]

Oh I love the "Corpse Bride" too! It's not as creative as "Nightmare Before Christmas" but I still think it's great. Also, I'm glad Burton had enough common sense to conclude the story the way it did.

[goodman]

There is a stage presentation of Sweeney Todd, no doubt wanting to milk the success of the movie. It will be in a few weeks, depending on how busy i am i may go see it. Either way i will keep my eyes open for future showings to get another view of this storyline/show.

[merylsilverburg]

Sorry for the late reply. If you do get to see it, it'll probably be longer than the film version with all the additional songs that were cut from the movie. But I hope you enjoy it.

[Pu the Owl]

I finally got to see this movie - we don't only have crap games distribution here, also movies distribution.

I haven't seen other versions of the story, including the movie with Angela Lansbury, so I can't compare Burton's work with others'. I must say I agree with most of meryl's post. I was a bit disappointed by the repetitiveness of the movie, especially in emotions depicted, and I was left with the impression something was missing. I also didn't like the rethoric aspects of some parts of the movie, and I thought a bit more of Burton's distinctive humour could have helped. Alas, humour was absent almost throughout the entire film, and characters appeared flat and dul, not developed and reasonable at alll. Especially Todd, though I think Depp is usually a great actor, was completely charmless and uninteresting. The dialogues were mediocre and, I guess for the reasons meryl explained - scenes/songs left out that should have been present? - I got the impression the story lacked some important motives and connections between parts.

The movie was ok overall, but I expected more considering the cast and considering it was Burton.

[merylsilverburg]

I'm really sorry that you had to see it so late Panuru! But, as you already know, you didn't really miss much...

Thanks for replying btw. I'm amazed that someone who's never seen the original version found this version mediocre...meaning this version really is bad on many levels.

As for dialogue issues, with the cut of certain songs (which really isn't much honestly) I hoped Burton would've added even more or new dialogue. I'm sure it would've helped create a good narrative flow instead of making this "cinematic" version very...well...uncinematic.

In the end, it doesn't matter. People are going head over heels for this version which is a real shame but just goes to show how stupid people are for favoring a film based merely on sex appeal.

[Pu the Owl]

I read contrasting opinions on this movie. I wasn't sure I wanted to see it before going because I got the impression the positive reviews were partial while the negatives were not. Now I sort of feel I was right. BTW, I still had fun. And to tell the truth, I was disappointed by Charlie and the chocolate factory as well. But since I like Burton a lot, I'm very hopeful his next work will be better in my eyes.

[goodman]

Yeah id agree that there isnt much for people to be "up" about on this movie, overall its a downer. But there is no accounting for taste, and no doubt what the general public considers good often isnt what i would consider it...

[Hylas]

I'm planning to rent this in the future, but I don't know if I'll ever be able to see the older version(s)?

[tempted]

It took me 3 attempts to see it.. because i kept falling asleep. I guess that alone says all about what i think of it.
I didn't see the first one so i can't say anything about differences, but this one, wasn't that interesting IMO.

[Meiko]

I haven't seen any of the Sweeney Tood movies, because the story is just... not for me

I don't see why everybody should always compare a new movie with an older one. I think you don't always have to see both to have an idea or to like or dislike something, no?

[merylsilverburg]

I know I shouldn't compare the new film to the old ones but I couldn't help it: I really loved the old versions more and couldn't help but be biased. But I truly did want to love the new one as much because of improved set designs, costumes, makeup, and I like Burton's films and his zany humor...but it just didn't work out and I'm very sad about it. Which is probably why I was particularly critical.

And I was afraid I was being too biased which is why I asked and welcomed any responses from those who haven't seen the old versions. But everyone who's posted so far are saying the film is merely okay...so it confirms that it's not just only me who felt this production was mediocre.

[goodman]

Although ive seen a blurb about a new Depp film that may look interesting, his last 3 films havent been very good for him overall. Im sure they made plenty of money, but both Pirates and now Sweeney Todd are mediocre to below average examples of films he has decided to take on. Maybe he will gauge his performances more over the next year or so...

[merylsilverburg]

In regards to Burton, I checked a list of his upcoming projects on IMDB and he is planning on directing an Alice in Wonderland film. I must say, though I'm disappointed with Sweeney Todd, I'm quite excited for Alice in Wonderland. The story is dark yet wild enough for Burton to, hopefully, get creative with. I read people rallying for Depp to play the Mad Hatter and Bonham-Carter to play the Queen which is quite irrita - actually, no, it's pissing me off. Please, Burton, cast other people! Someone on IMDB suggested Eddie Izzard as the Mad Hatter and I think that'd be brilliant, I love this guy!

[Pu the Owl]

Uhmm... I don't know about it. People's been willing to see an adaptation of Alice in Wonderland by Tim Burton for ages. But I'm not sure I completely like the idea. I can't even say why. It's just, you know, a feeling.