2002--Chicago, Rob Marshall

2002—Chicago, Rob Marshall

Nominated: Gangs of New York, The Hours, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The Pianist

Should Have Won: Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

Be sure to see: My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Punch Drunk Love, They, 28 Days Later, Whale Rider

“I don't mean to toot my own horn but if Jesus Christ lived in Chicago today and he had come to me and he had five thousand dollars, let's just say things would have turned out differently.”--Billy Flynn

     The first musical to win best picture in 34 years, Chicago tells the story of Roxy Hart, a wanna be Broadway star who is imprisoned when she kills her lover only to find that the star she admires most, Velma Kelly, is also imprisoned for murdering her adulterating husband. Roxy looked up to Velma because she aspired to be the kind of star Velma is, and after the murder she gets the headlines. This causes a riff in the prison and Warden Mama Morton steps in. Roxy hires Billy Flynn, a very suave and accomplished lawyer to take her case.

     Chicago was a head-scratcher for me. On one hand, I liked a great deal of it. I enjoy musicals and some of the numbers were very good, especially “Cell Block Tango” also known as “He had it comin'” where different inmates sing about how they killed their husbands and “They both reached for the gun” which is a really creepy ventriloquist scene. It is played out like Flynn is the ventriloquist and Roxy is the puppet. This song itself is pretty catchy but the visuals, particularly Renee Zelweger's obscure facial expression and arm movements, bring the scene home.

     What made this movie memorable are the songs (as it should be with any musical) and the editing. Technically it was very stellar and the scenes in between the numbers were great. Some musicals you don't really care about filler scenes but I did about these. I did enjoy the movie but something was amiss with it. It seemed to me like the performers were acting for us, the audience. For me, a great musical should let the performers just do their thing. It was almost like Zelweger and Catherine Zeta Jones were saying “Hey look at us up here dancing and stuff! Pretty fun, huh?” or the director was saying “Hey, look at these cuts here. Flashy, huh?” I don't know, it is tricky to say. I enjoyed what I saw; I even enjoyed some of these dance numbers but I look to Singin' in the Rain as the movie all musicals hold as their measuring stick. I see how Gene Kelly and Donald O'Connor didn't have to do act like that for us. Perhaps it is because are phenomenal dancers or maybe because they are dancers acting in a movie whereas Zelweger and Zeta-Jones are actors dancing in a movie. 

 

     I liked during the court scene how they use musical numbers to interact what the actual scenes are, like Billy Flynn literally tap dancing cut in with him figuratively tap dancing his speech to the jury.  It is still a very good film. I enjoyed it a lot. I like that it was a musical even though it could have been fine as a prison drama without the songs. And the acting outside the music was fine too. In fact, Catherine Zeta-Jones and Queen Latifah were both nominated for supporting actress with Zeta-Jones nabbing the award from her costar. I agree with the win. For me the sum just wasn't equal to all of the parts. I liked the acting. I liked the musical numbers. I liked the editing. I liked the cinematography. But all together I was left saying “Yeah, that was a pretty decent movie” but not really feeling awed. I like musicals and prison movies are okay, so why didn't this work completely for me? The second Lord of the Rings installment and Gangs of New York should have edged it out. Add it to 1994 as another case where the third best film of the year took home the statue. Yes it is recommended. I liked it, but I think it was given the statue because it is a show business movie and the Academy Awards is a show business institution. That's Chicago.