In an effort to cash in the film version of the hit Broadway show of the PIRATES OF PENZANCE which had Linda Ronstadt, Kevin Kline (in his star making role), Angela Landsbury, George Rose and Rex Smith, the producers of THE PIRATE MOVIE threw boatloads of money into a similar project that starred Kristy McNichol and Christopher Atkins. Despite pretty much making it's money back (it cost 5.6 million and made 9 million at the box office) it is considered a disaster and is a punch line to many jokes. While on the other hand, the Kline/Ronstadt version died at the box office (it was released on pay per view the same day it went into theaters and tweaked the show and made less than a million dollars because theaters were strong enough to tell Hollywood to F-off) but is now considered something special.
I saw both films/versions in the theater and I really haven't seen either since then. The reason I haven't seen the PIRATE MOVIE is that it never really was on cable and it wasn't something I ever felt the need to rent. PENZANCE was on cable and elsewhere but other than background music I never sat down and really watched it again.
THE PIRATE MOVIE is a kitschy attempt at madcap teen musical using the PENZANCE story as a frame work and new songs that mimic Gilbert and Sullivan and aren't as bad as you might think. It has lots of one liners, lots of groaners, and actually a reasonable amount of entertainment that on seeing it again I was kind of wondering why this doesn't have a dedicated fan base that has made it into something. I'm not saying it's great, but I do think the film is better than it's reputation suggests and I understand why I gave it 3 out of 4 stars when I saw it.
The plot has McNichol as an exchange student in Australia who goes to a pirate festival, and is left behind by the host family. Giving chase in sailboat she get thrown overboard, is knocked unconscious and dreams a PENZANCE style adventure.
It's not high art, but the clunkiness has its charm with a couple of the musical numbers actually being pretty good. You may not love it, but it wouldn't kill you to see it.
THE PIRATES OF PENZANCE died at the box office, which before it was released would have been a thing that wouldn't seem possible. Starting life as a free show in Central Park it proved so popular they moved it to Broadway where it wowed them and had pundits promising all sorts of good things to be spawned from it.
Moving the cast from theater stage to soundstage they made a film of the original cast using theatrical style backgrounds, removing a couple of songs and tweaking a few others. The result is a film that captures the stage play.
It was by, some accounts going to be a big deal when it was released. Riding high on the love of the Broadway show and the spiking popularity of the cast, I remember reading how people were saying that this was going to be the next big thing.
Then the bottom dropped out. The producers made a deal to open the film on the same day it hit theaters on pay per view on cable. The hundreds of screens dropped to well under a hundred. The next big thing was detoured into the parking lot of the next big disappointment as the potential audience was decimated. While the film made a tiny bit of money, the experiment of same day release had gone horribly and essentially killed it.
The film itself isn't bad, It, like THE PIRATE MOVIE, has it's own issues, namely the fact that it isn't a film but a filmed stage play. I'm not sure who thought the film would work like this but it was a bad idea since the film doesn't feel like anything but dress up. That can almost always work on stage, but if done as a film that is trying to be more than a film staged play, it's deadly.
To be honest I like the performances but the refusal to commit to either real or unreal really bothers me and creates a texture I don't want to revisit. It even makes George Rose's Modern Major General song a bit less thrilling because we get the sense it could have been done in pieces.
It's not a bad film, but it's not a great one, which is why I never revisit it.
(Interesting aside- I had a discussion a few years back with someone who said that the pay per view debacle was intentional. The producers realized that despite the popularity of the show and the hype they knew they were going to have a film that didn't play well with theatrical movie audiences. To that end they would roll the dice- perhaps get extra money from the curious - and then be able to write off the film as a noble failure to the backers by saying they tried. It was a way of saving face and getting a tax right off. I have no idea if it's true, but it was something I heard in a Broadway theater during an intermission discussion.)
No comments:
Post a Comment