Fama

I saw this film by myself in the cinema which gave me the chance to really focus on it-since I went to an early show. I thought the film would be a flop-I was kind of just killing time-in a nutshell. Surprisingly, I found the film very well done, hard and soft in all the right places-and bang on in its portrayals of the disciplinarians that exists in many American families. I was completely blown away by some of the music in the film. All in all I had a really good time and wasn't expecting to at all.I saw the film Rent when that came out and I was expecting to have a better time than I did at it-I found Rent depressing whereas this one was really very life affirming in many ways.I guess you either get it or you don't, just like you either appreciate the better dance and trance tunes or ya don't.

Apart from the fact that this movie looks slicker and more technically accomplished than the original 1980 "Fame" movie, this remake is inferior to the original in every way you can think of. Of all the problems in the movie, I think the worst is the fact that NONE of the characters - students or teachers - is fleshed out sufficiently. The movie crams in so many characters that it doesn't have time to follow any for a decent length. The lack of a human angle probably explains why the movie doesn't have any bite - I remember the original movie had more grit and drama. This even extends to the musical/dance numbers - the music is instantly forgettable and the dancing is at its best mediocre. What the movie ends up being is very boring, even if you choose to watch the theatrical cut over the extended cut. Stick with the original movie.

The movie had such a good vibe in the early stages before we actually started to shoot it. In fact, it had such good energy going on, that it was a pity it ended up being cut-up/chop-chopped and 'sanitized'. There were a lot of scenes that unfortunately did not make the final cut. These scenes showed stories about true friendship, love, passion, relationships, sexuality, disappointments and successes in detail thru character development. Though the locked version was 'tamed down' because of the PG rating, a DVD directors cut would probably show the actual stories of the 10 different characters.

It seemed that Mr. Tancharoen forgot (maybe intentionally?) that he had 10 characters to develop. It appeared that there was concentration on one, Ms. Panabaker (and how could her character pass such a rigid audition?), Mr. Book, Mr. Pennie, Ms. Naughton (who sang very well) and Ms. Payne. Whatever happened to Mr. Iacono, Mr. McGill, Ms. Perez de Tagle, Ms. Flores (Did you notice her? what character did she portray?) and Mr. Perez? What are their life stories or experiences? Being part of the crew, I witnessed a number of scenes where Joy (Anna Maria), Kevin (Paul McG, who plays a gay dancer…did you notice?) and Neil (Paul I, obsessed film maker) developed and established their friendship. There was a dramatic/touching scene where Joy and Kevin made the whole crew shed tears and I thought that would have been a clincher in the film. But sad to say, it ended up in the editors bin. Ms. Perez de Tagle should have been given more substantial scenes. She really is a "Joy" to watch. If I may add, Mr. McGill as handsome as he is, should have been given the same opportunity. In my opinion, these three characters would have been able to show the true color of FAME.

Needless to say, Mr. Tancharoen should have captured the true essence of the "New York PA youth" by utilizing and developing all of his characters evenly. In my opinion, he could have done that, if he had chosen to do so. However, it seems that Mr. Tancharoen concentrated on just one character's development……….Jenny (Ms. Panabaker)….whom he had 'captured' and "captivated" way before the filming was over. Sad, utterly sad, but true.

Give it a chance, view it in it's entirety. Maybe a PG-13 rating would have made the FAME re-invention……….'live forever' Thank you.

KW, Beverly Hills, CA

I really enjoyed seeing how talented they were, and it gets you feeling rhythmic. At first, I thought it was going to be a good movie, seeing how the auditions went. But, after that part and they went onto freshman year, I got a little disappointed. They showed the students' problems, and what they're going through to make it to be famous, but it almost seems like the director got bored of the movie itself, and just skipped through a lot in the movie. You don't see how the students' problems were faced and how they were solved, you first see them upset, and then at the end, they're happy and ready to graduate? That's not a very good plot, actually, there isn't a plot at all. I am upset with the movie, but the dancing was great. Overall, it really was enjoyable.

The original "Fame" (the 1980 movie), really affected me at the time it appeared. The reason is, I think, is that the coming of age of young people as artists is much grander than the ordinary sexual awakening. It is driven by deeper urges, and when you see the spectrum (drama, music, dance), some of them are unfulfilled by all of us.

It was extremely well made. It had fantastic songs, lots of interwoven stories with characters that we learned enough about to care (by film standards). What drove the whole enterprise was the open, free energy of these kids. Every one of them burst with connective energy, promiscuously taking risks that are noted several times in the script. The final number is one of the most rousing experiences in filmed song, this despite coming close to the then pervasive Coke "we are the world" meme.

(Folds)

Now this. It is equally amazing. I highly recommend it, especially if you are susceptible to the urge to connect and matter. It shares many of the same plot points, sometimes curiously morphed. It has kids, songs, dancing, performance, etc. But none of the things that worked in the original do here. It isn't a matter of a failed attempt; rather the filmmakers deliberately decided a different strategy.

What happened here, is that instead of investing in the kids, who they are and what they do, the film invests in the space between the movie and us. Its the camera that has energy. Its the images themselves that have character. Its the rhythm of the thing that inserts itself. The yearning is in your desire to enter the thing. It is pretty darn amazing, not just because of the effectiveness of the cinema, but because of the clear intent to transform the energy from the sender to the contract with the receiver.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.