Why musicals are bad

So opera can sometimes be borne, if not positively enjoyed. Indeed, it may well be because we value them both so highly that we loathe them both being travestied. How could anybody who loves great music or true drama possibly enjoy the pap versions of them to be found in the average musical? They just want to be pumped up with emotion by any means, lacking perhaps any interior life of their own.

We who quietly shun musicals — since I am undergoing a course of root canal treatment at the moment, I can truthfully report I find it less trying than sitting through a musical, and you feel miles better afterwards as well — are the silent majority, I believe. It is the poor saps who like them who are in the minority, the freaks.

ES Money. The Escapist. As soon as you put that on screen, the musical shifts from playful ostentation to something a bit more uncomfortable. In film form, background singers and dancers feel awkward and out of place. Ballads in particular look strange because the actors are just standing there, singing to themselves or another actor rather than singing to the audience, as they would in the theater.

In other words, a lot of what is missing is the audience, a key part of a live performance, and film adaptations must try to recreate this experience while being limited by a true fourth wall. That said, some movie musicals are incredibly effective. The combination of expertly choreographed dancing, catchy music and an incredibly talented cast make it an effortlessly charming and timeless film.

Christopher Walken! There is no such thing as a perfect movie musical, and there are few excellent ones. Part of it depends on the material that they are given, but even then things might not fall into place if the direction or production is shaky. Too many songs are cut — Or even just trimmed, really. When audiences go to see a musical, they obviously are doing so because they expect there to be some actual MUSIC in these stories. Why remove something that could be one of the biggest highlights of a movie for audiences, just as it might have been a highlight for theatre audiences?

While each of them may have been talented in other areas, none of them did a particularly convincing job at playing the characters they were cast in. Perhaps they do this under the assumption that it will make them more money, but when the result is more and more critical failures that only serve as an insult to movie musicals, and arguably do long-term damage to the overall genre, is it really worth it?

Generally deviates from the original material — Perhaps the best example of this would be Annie, when the film adaptation included several changes from the original Broadway musical. When these changes were made, the film was largely criticized not just by fans of the original musical, but by film critics and audiences in general.

When a musical is already beloved and considered a classic, why make any changes to it that would potentially damage its reputation? So what do you think? Any reasons we may have left off the list?