How do you categorize musicals?

[Ollie]

I often claim to dislike musicals, although TCM's showings of '30s and '40s musicals makes me eat those words more often than not.

How do you fans of musicals categorize them? You probably don't like all of them. Have you segregated your Likes and Dislikes into groups, and can you give your reasons?

Some folks suggest that I watch certain "studios' musicals" as if that's a category.

My ignorance in them has me lumping them by time-period - '30s and WWII-era musicals seem to be pleasing to my palate, but then my favorites (SINGIN' IN RAIN, PAINT YER WAGON) have the distasteful element ("music appears out of nowhere") that my least favorites (SHOWBOAT, MEET ME, 7 BRIDES) have. The only difference: I like the actors in my favorite musicals, and I don't care for the actors in my least favorites.

But is that actually MY real reason? I don't know.

So, do you have reasons for segregating groups of musicals? Have you "converted" a musical hater into something more positive thru either your reasoning power or by exposing them to a group of musicals?

In other words - is there ANY hope for me understanding why I like some but not others?!!

[jdb1]

For me, Ollie, it's very much a case of who wrote the songs. That's something I always look for in the credits, if it's not obvious to me that it's a Cole Porter, Irving Berlin or George/Ira Gershwin opus. To me, that makes a great deal of difference. Whereas I might find a Danny Kaye musical a bit frantic and over-the-top, I very much enjoy his performance of the clever songs that were written for him by his wife, Sylvia Fine. Anything with songs by Schwartz and Dietz is bound to be at least in part excellent; and Rodgers and Hart/Hammerstein's works will at least provide wonderful listening, even if the movies themselves aren't so great, and so on.


Maybe that is one of the things that does it for you, because you enjoy the score of one musical better than another.

[Ann Harding]

I am probably a bit odd, but, my way of categorizing musicals is the 'choreographic' films and the 'singing' films. I tend to prefer the ones with an emphasis on dancing (mostly the one with Cyd Charisse, Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire). It's just that I am not very keen on Rodgers & Hammerstein; I prefer Cole Porter and Gershwin.

[Ayres]

Wow--great question. I could probably write a treatise about this, of course, but I guess the short answer would be

First of all, are they Astaire or non-Astaire? [wink]

Mainly I tend to think of them by studio, because there was a style that each studio imprinted on them and many other genres. Sometimes this even happened within the same studio with different units, such as the Freed and Pasternak units at MGM. (E.g., the Pasternak musicals were often operettas or contemporary stories with operatic or operetta-style singers, while the Freed unit material was usually built around American popular song and emphasized dancers more than the other unit.)

In the '30s or '40s, Warner Brothers musicals tended to have the same snappy urban quality as its gangster pix (with Jim Cagney more than capable in both); RKO had Astaire and Rogers; Universal (which films are buried in a vault now) was famous for teenage capers and for starring Donald O'Connor; Fox presented lovely blondes (Alice Faye, Betty Grable), dark-haired leading men and Carmen Miranda; Columbia had a patriotic tapper in Ann Miller and of course the terpsichore of the gorgeous Rita; MGM had several amazing dancers and money enough to come up with some breathtaking production numbers. I've heard it argued that in the musical film's early days, Paramount made the best. Theirs always had a certain sophistication, even when Betty Hutton was in them!

That's just a rapid, off-the-top-of-my-head overview, but I think all of them together make for a cornucopia of enjoyable styles. I love most of them, though I find myself watching dance musicals more than any others, and if I had to pick the most-watched studio, it would be a toss-up between MGM and RKO. So I guess you could say I tend to think of musicals in terms of which dancers appear in them, as well.

[ChiO]

I hear you, Ollie!

If asked the "type" of movie I like least, "Musical" is my typical response. There are several, however, that I really really like and I can't connect the dots as to why.

I do know that if Julie Andrews or Barbara Streisand is in it, it's unlikely that I'll like it...if I'll even watch it. Fred Astaire (for both singing and dancing) is a plus, but Ginger Rogers as a partner is a minus. Love watching Eleanor Powell dance. Ditto the Nicholas Brothers. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN and AN AMERICAN IN PARIS are favorites, but that's primarily because of the cinematography (and the legs) when Cyd Charisse is on-screen. Like Natalie Wood and Richard Beymer, but love everything and everybody else in WEST SIDE STORY. In OKLAHOMA! and CAROUSEL, it's the songs -- but I dislike most of the rest of R&H's musicals.

My favorite: probably ALL THAT JAZZ. Ben Vereen, Ann Reinking, and an upbeat story about a lovable dancer, choreographer, director and all-around good guy -- can't beat that.

[halcarter]

I have always been impressed with the cleverly turned phrase. So much I often compliment people on their use of words and phrases. Perhaps lacking in the skill myself causes me to be enthralled with good conversationlists.
So for me, Ollie, if the songs (words and music) are good I can sit through anything. And that is how I would answer what category musical I like.
Let me borrow this little note I found on TCM:

"I was always amazed how good we were and how simple it was." --Frederick Loewe's message which was read at the memorial tribute to Alan Jay Lerner in 1986.

And I believe that....I think great music comes a heck of a lot easier than most would think and probably much easier than bad music.

[Ollie]

Thanks for all of these, and please keep them coming.

[charliechaplinfan]

I am probably a bit odd, but, my way of categorizing musicals is the 'choreographic' films and the 'singing' films. I tend to prefer the ones with an emphasis on dancing (mostly the one with Cyd Charisse, Gene Kelly and Fred Astaire). It's just that I am not very keen on Rodgers & Hammerstein; I prefer Cole Porter and Gershwin.

Christine, you are not odd at all. I categorise my musicals by the dancing and your three mentioned dancers are my very favorite.

I categorise Gene and Fred very differently. Gene is a much more exuberant experience whereas Fred is just sheer style and sophisication.

Having said that some musical scores I adore and I've started collecting them so I can sing along whilst I do the chores .

[Synnove]

I love musicals. The ways I tend to separate the different genres of musicals in my head are:

Those that are in a classic operetta style, like the ones with Jeanette McDonald, and many others. Well, a lot of musicals are like that really. I don't know where the boundaries lie.

Busby Berkley pre-code style - only about three or four movies fit into this category as far as I know, and I love them to death. I've seen them too many times. These movies have a great deal of humour, and a pretty sharp edge, with serious undercurrents. The musical numbers also showcase these things, even if they have nothing to do with the plot.

Lighthearted fluff with toe-tapping hit songs and great dancing - there are a lot of musicals like this, but Fred and Ginger did them the best. They don't take themselves seriously, they have class, they have great songs and cheer you up. If they're done well, that is. If not, or if I don't like them because of some hangup I have, they tend to make me feel vaguely ill.

Musicals dealing with really dark topics - they have to have either dark humour or really good music to work. Sweeney Todd goes here.

Topical musicals - Grease? Westside Story? Rent? I guess?

Andrew Lloyd Webber musicals - are very dramatic and a lot of the dialogue, sometimes all of it, is told in song. Again, it has to have really good music to work. I hate it when the melody and the lyrics don't live up to the build-up, the importance that is placed on them. If they don't have a great deal of humour to balance out the seriousness and slow tunes, I fall asleep. I can sort of see why people like The Phantom of the Opera, though. But it's not my cup of tea.

The Threepenny Opera - deserves a category on its own. It had a very fresh sound when it came, different from the operetta style and much more interesting. The songs are the best.

This is only in my head, based on limited experience. It doesn't always make sense.

[Ollie]

(Christine's not odd?!! Darn - I guess I lost that bet!! ha ha)

I've spent so many decades claiming to avoid musicals and then accidentally stumbling (and liking) some. I think this past 6 months has probably seen me fall flat into them ("Help! I can't get out of them!") and I ended up with some tendency of an era-based prejudice. "Why can I suddenly tolerate all these '30s and '40s musicals?"

Yet so many favorites are clear violations of that apparent prejudice, and your own segregations give me ideas of what to study next. Of course, there's probably no real answer here, but like the Ministry Of Silly Walks advocatves, "...just a little more research!"

[Ollie]

Do you know why you've evaluated stage performances higher than films?

I have a feeling my expectation levels are very different because I've had a great time with just about every stage-musical, even when I disliked or even avoided those movies despite the film having superior singers, dancers, choreography, sets, etc.

[melwalton]

I judge by whether I like the songs and their presentation, ie: whether the band and or singer is what I think good.
I've sat through clunkers just to hear songs.. One comes to mind, " In Old Chicago' ( this'll get me some heat 'cause it was popular.) I didn't like it but watched it several times to hear Alice Faye and quartette do ' I'll never Let You Cry over Me' I could bore you with dozens more but I think I got the ides across, .... mel