For this article, we will look back over other sequel examples that have changed genre from the first. We will analyse whether Joker: Folie à Deux can succeed and look at other franchises that could benefit from taking a different track.

Changing Beats

Film franchises regularly shift focus over time. By King Kong’s third feature appearance, the series had morphed from a fantasy horror adventure to sci-fi-inflected action. Aliens famously changed its series from horror to more of an action focus. Many serious series have also become more comedic and vice versa (the Evil Dead trilogy and the recent Ghostbusters films).

These genre shifts happen for many reasons (creative and financial) but do these changes land well at the box office? After all, it can be alienating for fans to see a movie series built on one genre’s principles suddenly shift to another. While also seeming confusing for general audiences.

Generally, it’s impossible to say. Sometimes a genre shift can go down well if the prior film was already successful (Alien and Aliens) or if it shakes up a fairly predictable franchise (Ghostbusters). However, even films with solid fanbases can see a genre change undercut their success financially (Return To Oz) or in terms of reception (Halloween 3). So there’s no guarantee that a genre change would automatically yield failure or success for a sequel.

A Different Devil

But regardless of financial success will this change suit Joker’s dark world? Well from a talent perspective, it could certainly work. Both Lady Gaga and Joaquin Phoenix have experience with singing and dramatic roles (A Star Is Born and Walk The Line). Director Todd Phillips and cinematographer Lawrence Sher also have experience making films based on music. Phillips directed Phish’s concert movie Bittersweet Motel and Sher shot a Dua Lipa music video. So the talent is there to make the film work.

Additionally, the series change can work tonally. One of the first film’s highlights was the stair dance sequence, which shows that music and theatricality are nothing alien to this Joker. Joker also trades on us not knowing whether something is real or in Arthur Fleck’s head, making for a perfect excuse to make the film a musical.

This doesn’t mean it will definitely be a success. Musicals are struggling to draw box office numbers, genre changes are unsure things in franchises and the conceit could not work from a story perspective. This merely means a genre change isn’t necessarily a bad idea.

Change The Record

Lastly, for fun, here are three film franchises that could benefit from a genre change. 

Batman (Main Series)

For decades, it feels like DC has been afraid to let Batman have some fun in his main cinematic releases (only seeming to lighten up in spinoffs). With every new adaptation upping the Bat-misery a comedic Batman film would be very welcome now. All they would need to do is have Batman and a version of Robin fight a villain without the fate of Gotham being at stake and have a laugh with the universe.

Knives Out

The Knives Out series has successfully updated the murder mystery formula for modern audiences but unlike other franchises it hasn’t gone outside its genre wheelhouse (like A Haunting in Venice). Writer/director Rian Johnson has often upended expectations, and with the series having fantastic casts and social commentary the films could easily switch to another sub-genre while keeping it based in modern times so long as it has something to say. Imagine Benoit Blanc investigating a musician’s death leading into a musical story about how the music industry exploits radical images for profit. Who wouldn’t watch that?

Halloween

After so many lacklustre sequels and requels that all boil down to Michael Myers stabbing people Halloween should return to its long-abandoned anthology idea. Just give the brand name to an up-and-coming creative team and let them do something different in any horror sub-genre they want.

Do you think Joker Folie à Deux’s genre change will work well or hinder its success? And what film franchises do you think would benefit from a genre change?

Also Read: The Perfect Batman: A Look At The Actor & Director Duos Behind The Films

The post Reinventing the Franchise: Will Joker: Folie à Deux’s Musical Twist Succeed? appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

What is an EGOT?

There is no official EGOT award but rather just an idea. The term EGOT was coined by Philip Michael Thomas, best known for TV show Miami Vice, who said he wanted to win all four awards in his career (as of writing, he has won none of them). Thomas went so far as to have the letters put on a gold chain he wore around his neck; fans of 30 Rock will know that the character Tracy Jordan bought this item and started his own EGOT quest. The four awards recognise excellence in television (Emmy) music (Grammy) film (Oscar) and theatre (Tony) and for anyone to be as talented and creative to excel in all of these different categories is very impressive.

To use Mel Brooks as an example – he won as Emmy in 1967 for writing on The Sid Caesar, Imogene Coco, Carl Reiner, Howard Morris Special, a Best Writing Oscar in 1968 for The Producers, a Grammy in 1998 for Best Spoken Comedy Album for The 2000 Year Old Man In the Year 2000 and in 2001 a Tony for Best Musical for The Producers. In fact, Brooks has won numerous Grammys, Tonys and Emmys, but only one Oscar.

How To Get One

Observant readers may have noticed a common theme in EGOT winners – music. Emmy, Oscar and Tony awards are connected to the acting world, a Grammy for music (although they give awards for comedy albums, spoken word etc). As such most of the winners of an EGOT have a musical background, looking through the 17 EGOT winners 11 have job titles relating to music (singer, composer, lyricist). And, of course, you can win Oscars, Tonys and Emmys for being involved in music rather than acting -such as EGOT winner John Legend. He won the four awards in consecutive years (technically his first Grammy was in 2006 and the four consecutive awards is in reference to another Grammy he won in 2016), and has the most Grammy awards of any EGOT. So perhaps the most direct way to get an EGOT is write or perform music. Some people have also proposed an ESOT – with the G for Grammy replaced with an S for SAG Award, which only gives awards for acting, not music.

Future Potential EGOTs

Lady Gaga: many mocked Lady Gaga as just someone who wore odd outfits and would be a passing fad but she’s still going strong, moving into dramatic acting to critical acclaim. With plenty of Grammys and an Oscar already she’s halfway there.

Christopher Guest: the creator of This Is Spinal Tap has an Emmy and a Grammy (and quite frankly should have an Oscar for This Is Spinal Tap) and can clearly work in both acting and music which gives him ample opportunities.

Matt Stone and Trey Parker: the creators of South Park have a Tony, Emmy and Grammy already and only need that Oscar. The pair were robbed at the Oscars in 2000 when Blame Canada from South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut, was beaten for Best Song by You’ll Be In My Heart from Tarzan by Phil Collins.

It can take decades to complete an EGOT; it took actor Helen Hayes forty-five years to complete and Audrey Hepburn’s Grammy, her final missing award, was given posthumously. So anyone looking to win one should get started.

Also Read: 10 Iconic Horror Movie Masks

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post EGOT: The Most Exclusive Award In Entertainment appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

In this article, we will be comparing the 1937, 1954, 1976, and 2018 versions of the story across various categories to see who was more successful at what. Then at the end, we will add up the score and declare a winner. Let’s begin by looking at our stars.

The Best Star Couple

This is definitely the hardest topic to make a decision on. Despite each film’s flaws, all the central couples have fantastic chemistry. To pick between the couples, therefore, it becomes a question of which duos work best together and do the characters work as well individually?

The 2018 couple have some beautiful moments, like how Jack turns Ally’s feelings about her nose into a cute display of affection between them. Lady Gaga is also terrific as Ally. Her great vocals make her musical numbers a joy to behold, and she does well pulling off her character’s vulnerability. That said, the movie focuses so much on Bradley Cooper’s Jack and them as a couple that we don’t get to know much about what makes Ally a true star. She has a great voice but as this franchise often shows, sometimes that isn’t enough. Some of the couple’s fights also feel too mean-spirited. Which can sour some on their relationship. Then there is Jack, who despite having a decent amount of back-story, feels like a typical cliché burned-out rock star. Which is disappointingly bland for a modern adaptation of this story. And Cooper’s mumbling performance quickly becomes irritating.

There is a marked improvement in the 1976 central couple. Barbara Streisand and Kris Kristofferson unlike Cooper and Gaga feel more like equals. Both get similar screen time devoted to them and both get musical numbers showcasing their star talent. Something the earlier films lacked. Streisand’s Esther is also a departure from many of the franchise’s female leads as she is very self-confident. Even getting out of her depression in the finale by herself without being pressured, like other leads. Making her a welcome change. Kristofferson also feels authentic as rock star John Norman Howard. But every improvement here brings a drawback. Despite feeling more like equals, some of this movie’s choices destroy John’s likeability, such as when he cheats on Esther. Streisand’s confidence and lack of background also makes her less relatable than other franchise leads. And regrettably, Kristofferson just doesn’t compare to the male stars in earlier adaptations.

The original 1937 film easily makes the audience warm to the stars. Thanks to the lead’s chemistry and how real it feels compared to the film’s superficial presentation of the rest of Hollywood. Janet Gaynor’s Esther feels very grounded and sympathetic. Her backstory of coming from a low-income home and how hard she works to break into the movie business instantly endears her to audiences. And Fredric March is on top form as Norman. He’s funny and likeable and seems genuine. However, the film does wind up focusing too much on March’s character by the end. Leaving Gaynor on the sidelines and making this partnership also feel unequal. It also doesn’t help that the film gives us very little to convince us of Esther’s supposed star talent.

Judy Garland and James Mason however are the best couple. They feel like a loving husband and wife, their similar time on-screen makes both feel equally important and despite their dark moments, they never feel malicious towards one another. Both actors also offer stellar performances. Judy Garland’s Esther mixes the finest qualities of all the franchise’s female leads. Like Gaga and Gaynor, Garland feels very human. Persevering through many dead-end jobs to keep her dream within reach. And like Streisand you can see what makes Garland’s Esther stand out, thanks to her musical performances across the narrative. But what elevates the character is Garland’s raw and impressive performance. She sings, dances, and runs the gamut of emotions, sometimes going from infectiously happy to emotionally distraught within the same scene, without it feeling overdone. Other leads may do some things mildly better, but Garland’s Esther is a genuine star. And despite the narrative not giving Mason’s Norman much to demonstrate why he’s famous, his performance is still great. His love for Esther feels incredibly sincere, he has impeccable comedic timing when it is called for and his drunken antics have a huge amount of pathos to them. Mason feels like someone truly self-destructive, but his performance makes him someone you truly want to see succeed. Ultimately both actors offer magnificent performances which greatly impact the audience and work well together and separately, making this couple the winner.

Winner: A Star is Born (1954)

The Best Supporting Cast

Conversely, this section is easy to select a winner for. As many of the movie’s focus, understandably, on nailing the central relationship over developing the supporting cast. Oliver Niles (Charles Bickford) and Danny McGuire (Tommy Noonan) in the 1954 version along with Bobby Ritchie (Gary Busey) in the 1976 version are notable. But they don’t make much of an impact compared to the leads.

The 2018 version is a step up. Characters like Ally’s endearing dad Lorenzo (Andrew Dice Clay), the deadpan funny ‘Noodles’ Stone (Dave Chapelle), Rafi Gavron‘s slimy executive, and Sam Elliott’s great emotional turn as Jack’s brother Bobby all stand out and give the movie more substance. 

But when compared to the number of stellar supporting characters in the 1937 movie nothing comes close. There is amoral publicist Libby (Lionel Stander), the initially dismissive but ultimately caring studio head Oliver Niles (Adolphe Menjou), the adorably kind assistant director Danny McGuire (Andy Devine), Esther’s fire-tongue grandmother Lettie Blodgett (May Robson), and even Esther’s landlord (Edgar Kennedy) is given enough to make him memorable. With many unforgettable supporting characters both big and small, the 1937 version takes the prize. 

Winner: A Star is Born (1937)

Which Movie Tells the Story the Best?

Now let’s examine A Star is Born’s story and see if we can say which film delivers it in the best way. The story across all the adaptations has very similar beats. A fading creative celebrity discovers an up-and-coming star by chance and is so impressed by them that they decide to help get them noticed. Upon doing so the up and comer eventually becomes a huge star and they decide to marry the fading celeb. Eventually, the new stars fame begins eclipsing the fading celeb, making them jealous and resulting in many spats. Then an outburst at an award show results in the celeb’s disgrace. They try to better themselves but something to do with the industry stops them. Eventually resulting in the fading celeb taking their own life to save the star’s reputation. Finally, after grieving the star returns to the spotlight in tribute to their partner.

In terms of who delivers the story the best, surprisingly, the 1976 version is the most well put together. Unlike the 1937 version, you get to see both leads perform some good music which helps us to buy both people as stars in their own right, rather than needing the movie to tell us. The film also gives equal focus to both journeys which doesn’t result in one being short-changed like in the 2018 version. And the conclusion feels a lot more satisfying than the 1954 version because it doesn’t result in the star becoming a monument to the fallen celeb, neither are they pressured to get over their death, instead of allowing the star to be her own person. While it does have some stumbling blocks, the 1976 version from a narrative perspective delivers the best version of this story. 

Winner: A Star is Born (1976)

The Best Music

Lastly, while this category excludes the 1937 entry, music and musical numbers have been an established part of this franchise since the 1954 movie. So it would be remiss not to discuss it here.

A Star is Born (1976) has some great tracks. Particularly the fun Queen Bee, Kristofferson’s rock anthem Watch Closely Now, and Streisand’s showstopping reprisal and upgrade of the song with the long mashup With One More Look At You/Watch Closely Now. With that said despite how nice the songs are, unlike other films in the franchise the music here doesn’t leave too much of a lasting impression.

Something which no one can say about the 2018 version. Of course, this version features the song Shallow, which has since become a hit in its own right thanks to Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper’s delivery. It even managed to reach number one in the UK during the film’s release. And this version also features underrated songs such as Gaga’s cover of La Vie En Rose. But despite its highs a lot of the songs do end up falling into the background when compared to the iconic Shallow.

However while Shallow may be good it doesn’t beat the huge blowout numbers of the 1954 version. Such as the legendary Born in a Trunk, which mixes styles and moods in a way that should never work. But thanks to Judy Garland’s bravura singing it becomes a monumental triumph. There is also the poppy and uplifting Lose That Long Face, which never fails to make you smile. And there are catchy and joyous numbers like Someone at Last and Gotta Have Me Go With You. All of which will remain in your mind long after the credits role. With the sheer number of great tunes available within the 1954 version, it is the clear winner of the section.

Winner: A Star is Born (1954)

Overall Winner: A Star is Born (1954)

Final Thoughts

Many may take umbrage with the lack of love shown for A Star is Born (2018) in this article. But be assured the 2018 version is a solid adaptation of the story. With some good songs, an impressive lead performance from Lady Gaga, and a good supporting cast. It is just that when compared to other versions of the story it does feel underwhelming. 

The 1976 version is a good update of the story for the rock star era. It does lack relatability, but it makes up for that with some good music, fantastic chemistry from the two leads, and structurally the best telling of the story.

The original A Star is Born (1937) remains a well-made piece of classic Hollywood cinema. With iconic and engaging leads, an incredible supporting cast, and a fascinating story that has proven very enduring over the years.

But with astounding central performances from Judy Garland and James Mason, both of whom have electrifying chemistry, an epic scale, amazing musical numbers, and a story that while not perfect still manages to have a great emotional impact on the viewer, A Star is Born (1954) is the star of the franchise.

Also Read: Who Did It Better: Miracle on 34th Street

Your contribution to Big Picture Film Club will allow us to continue to produce content. No matter the amount your contributions are greatly appreciated.

The post Who Did It Better: A Star is Born appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.

Why now?

A Star is Born was released on October 5 and is in cinemas now – catch it while you can!

In a nutshell

Jackson Maine (Cooper) is a famous country singer with a severe alcohol and drug addiction. After a show in California, he stumbles across Ally (Gaga) performing at a drag bar. Blown away by her talent, Jackson invites her into his world in the music industry, where she quickly rises to fame as the two become romantically involved.

Who’s it for?

Anyone who’s a fan of music, Lady Gaga, or well-made movies should prioritise this one. It’s rated 15 in the UK – there’s fairly mild language and drug use, as well as some sexual scenes and brief nudity, so I wouldn’t advise bringing kids along. But for a 15 in today’s market, it’s pretty tame.

Who’s in it?

A Star is Born has a strong supporting cast (including Sam Elliot and his glorious moustache, which deserves a credit of its own) and features a few nice little cameos, but this is all about Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga.

I can’t emphasise strongly enough how incredible these two lead actors are together in this film. Their chemistry is off the scale and their individual acting throughout the movie is of the highest quality.

I’ll admit that, before watching it, I wasn’t overly fussed on seeing Lady Gaga in a romantic drama featuring lots of country music. But her performance forced me to eat my words, my hat, my arm…anything that was remotely edible, in fact. She is unbelievable in this film, both in terms of her acting and, of course, her singing. The first time she truly breaks out the full power of her voice on stage in the movie, your jaw will hit the floor.

The same can be said of Bradley Cooper, whose own musical talents are on full display here. The opening scene, which features his character Jackson on stage, is absolutely electric, pulsating with energy and pounding rhythm. And as the more seasoned actor, his performance is impeccable.

Oh, and did I mention he directed it, too?

The good stuff

There’s very little to say about A Star is Born that isn’t good. It has a great (albeit rehashed) storyline, excellent acting, and is technically superb in terms of direction, cinematography and editing – all credit to Cooper, really.

For me, it felt like Lady Gaga set aside her controversial, OTT musical image and fully embraced her status as a genuine Hollywood actress – she’s almost unrecognisable in the opening scenes, though she becomes more Gaga-ish as the film progresses. I was pleasantly surprised/shocked by how good she was.

The film also features an extremely photogenic dog that stole a couple of key scenes – I found out afterwards that he actually belongs to Bradley Cooper in real life, too!

The not so good stuff

I struggled to fill this section this time. Unless you don’t like films about the music industry or you’re not into romance (or heavy subject matter like addiction and strained marriages), then you may not enjoy this movie. It’s also very emotional towards the end and quite a few people in our cinema screening were bawling in the final act. But if you can handle those things, you won’t have a problem.

The bottom line

A Star is Born is one of the best films I’ve seen in a long time. I tend to be very positive about most of the movies I see, but this one really knocked it out of the park. I would be flabbergasted if it doesn’t win (never mind be nominated for) Oscars in February.

Go see it now, and be prepared for something that sticks with you long after viewing.

Verdict: (5 / 5)

The post Review: A Star is Born appeared first on Big Picture Film Club.