VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,2/10
12.136
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Un regista esigente fa audizioni a potenziali attori per un ruolo in un nuovo musical.Un regista esigente fa audizioni a potenziali attori per un ruolo in un nuovo musical.Un regista esigente fa audizioni a potenziali attori per un ruolo in un nuovo musical.
- Candidato a 3 Oscar
- 8 candidature totali
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- QuizIn the pre-Broadway run, song "Dance 10, Looks 3" was listed as "Tits and Ass", but it was changed when the production reached Broadway, the logic being if it were a surprise during the show, it would get a better audience reaction.
- BlooperIn the final dance scene at the end of the audition sequence, clearly visible are dancers who have been shown to be rejected.
This scene isn't intended to be in continuity but is more like a curtain call (as it was in the Broadway musical).
- Versioni alternativeThe international print of the movie has a different opening credits sequence. All the titles appear with scenes around Manhattan, which opens the film, and then we see the shot of the theater as the dancers are lined up and walking in the theater; there is also no sound of Larry directing the dancers until the first shot inside the theater.
- ConnessioniFeatured in Zomergasten: Episodio #2.1 (1989)
- Colonne sonoreA Chorus Line
Conceived, Choreographed, and Directed by Michael Bennett
Book of the stage play by James Kirkwood Jr. (as James Kirkwood) and Nicholas Dante
Music by Marvin Hamlisch
Lyrics by Ed Kleban (as Edward Kleban)
Produced on the stage by Joseph Papp
a New York Shakespeare Festival Presentation
Recensione in evidenza
Richard Attenborough's totally ordinary and exasperating screen version of Michael Bennett's brilliant stage musical "A Chorus Line" is a classic example of how to do everything wrong in a stage-to-film adaptation.
First off, hire a director who has absolutely no idea how to stage a musical or judge musical talent. Allow him to hire a cast based on looks and youth as opposed to actual talent, update the setting from 1975 to 1985, then let him throw out the original production's ground-breaking choreography as being "dated" and hire the "Flashdance" choreographer to create '80's style dance routines that will look ridiculously dated 20 years later. And don't worry if the director doesn't even understand the meaning and purpose of the original show; after all, the show really isn't about aging dancers hoping for one more show so they can cling onto their dreams for a while longer. No, no, no. As he said at the time, the show is about "kids trying to break into show business." As a result, he doesn't have to even think about hiring the original cast as they are "now in their thirties and forties." (Note: all this is recounted in the book "On the Line" by Thommie Walsh and Baayork Lee.)
Then, to top it off, allow him to change the focus from the dancers themselves to a corny backstage love story between Zach the choreographer and Cassie, the fallen "star," who has come back to beg her old flame for a job. Finally, take the show's showstopper, the beautiful and unforgettable "What I did for Love" away from Diana, give it to Cassie, and turn it from an anthem about giving up your life for your dreams into a love song to a jerk. And make sure you cast a star like Michael Douglas as Zach and then cut to a reaction shot of him a dozen times during the dance numbers even if it is incredibly distracting. After all, people came to see him and not the dancing.
I could go on and on, but why bother? The truth is, with a couple of exceptions, nobody in this cast sings or dances convincingly on a Broadway level, and my bet is most wouldn't make it on the dinner theater circuit either. The exceptions? Vicki Frederick is a hoot as Sheila, the senior (and most cynical) of the dancers. Gregg Burge has a fun dance solo in the original tune "Surprise, Surprise," but then they ruin it by having him joined by the rest of the cast. And Alyson Reed is very good and convincing as Cassie, the star. But why, oh why did they replace Cassie's brilliant solo "The Music and the Mirrors" with the terrible original tune "Let Me Dance With You?" This and the bowdlerization of "What I Did For Love" alone sink the film. Not to mention that the show's other showstopper "Dance Ten Looks Three" is ruined by the terrible performance of Audrey Landers, who was obviously hired due to her gorgeous looks rather than her obvious lack of talent.
Any way, "A Chorus Line" is an major disappointment, especially now that Rob Marshall and company have shown us how to adapt a musical with his marvelous film version of "Chicago" which seems headed for a Best Picture Oscar. Ironically, both musicals debuted on Broadway the same year (1975) and while "A Chorus Line" was the bigger hit, because they got the film version of "Chicago" right and this one so wrong, "Chicago" seems destined to go down in history as the better production. Maybe if they'd waited for a more appropriate director with a real vision for this film, things would be different. Oh, the possibilities--- ** (out of *****)
First off, hire a director who has absolutely no idea how to stage a musical or judge musical talent. Allow him to hire a cast based on looks and youth as opposed to actual talent, update the setting from 1975 to 1985, then let him throw out the original production's ground-breaking choreography as being "dated" and hire the "Flashdance" choreographer to create '80's style dance routines that will look ridiculously dated 20 years later. And don't worry if the director doesn't even understand the meaning and purpose of the original show; after all, the show really isn't about aging dancers hoping for one more show so they can cling onto their dreams for a while longer. No, no, no. As he said at the time, the show is about "kids trying to break into show business." As a result, he doesn't have to even think about hiring the original cast as they are "now in their thirties and forties." (Note: all this is recounted in the book "On the Line" by Thommie Walsh and Baayork Lee.)
Then, to top it off, allow him to change the focus from the dancers themselves to a corny backstage love story between Zach the choreographer and Cassie, the fallen "star," who has come back to beg her old flame for a job. Finally, take the show's showstopper, the beautiful and unforgettable "What I did for Love" away from Diana, give it to Cassie, and turn it from an anthem about giving up your life for your dreams into a love song to a jerk. And make sure you cast a star like Michael Douglas as Zach and then cut to a reaction shot of him a dozen times during the dance numbers even if it is incredibly distracting. After all, people came to see him and not the dancing.
I could go on and on, but why bother? The truth is, with a couple of exceptions, nobody in this cast sings or dances convincingly on a Broadway level, and my bet is most wouldn't make it on the dinner theater circuit either. The exceptions? Vicki Frederick is a hoot as Sheila, the senior (and most cynical) of the dancers. Gregg Burge has a fun dance solo in the original tune "Surprise, Surprise," but then they ruin it by having him joined by the rest of the cast. And Alyson Reed is very good and convincing as Cassie, the star. But why, oh why did they replace Cassie's brilliant solo "The Music and the Mirrors" with the terrible original tune "Let Me Dance With You?" This and the bowdlerization of "What I Did For Love" alone sink the film. Not to mention that the show's other showstopper "Dance Ten Looks Three" is ruined by the terrible performance of Audrey Landers, who was obviously hired due to her gorgeous looks rather than her obvious lack of talent.
Any way, "A Chorus Line" is an major disappointment, especially now that Rob Marshall and company have shown us how to adapt a musical with his marvelous film version of "Chicago" which seems headed for a Best Picture Oscar. Ironically, both musicals debuted on Broadway the same year (1975) and while "A Chorus Line" was the bigger hit, because they got the film version of "Chicago" right and this one so wrong, "Chicago" seems destined to go down in history as the better production. Maybe if they'd waited for a more appropriate director with a real vision for this film, things would be different. Oh, the possibilities--- ** (out of *****)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is A Chorus Line?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- A Chorus Line
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 27.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 14.202.899 USD
- Fine settimana di apertura Stati Uniti e Canada
- 222.919 USD
- 15 dic 1985
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 14.203.951 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 58 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 2.35 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
What is the Brazilian Portuguese language plot outline for Chorus Line (1985)?
Rispondi