a disappointment, even if my expectations weren't high to begin with

Rating: 4/10 (7 January 2008)

I should say it up front, I don't dislike the R&B of the period, as is given tribute via Dreamgirls. I liked hearing the harmonies of groups like the Supremes or other soul groups (I'm assuming Eddie Murphy's performance is inspired by a mix of James Brown and Otis Redding, or others I can't think of right now). I never heard of Dreamgirls before the movie came out. I decided against seeing the movie in the theaters, not because of any outright bias against the actors or the potential of the songs, but because of the trailer. Sometimes a theatrical trailer can sort of spell out, boldly, what the big picture will be. It was something that didn't appeal to me most of all because of the absolute, dreadful appearance of safe, conventional appeal. One might think the director of challenging efforts like Gods and Monsters and Kinsey might try and make a musical with more verve, more soul, more "UMPH", if that's the word. And as a director, Condon did pretty much meet that expectation.
What I didn't expect, and what ended up annoying me about Dreamgirls, is how much the performances, with maybe the slightest exception, fell flat on itself. It's a subjective thing, of course; there's been praise to the sky for the work that Jennifer Hudson and others in the film have done in presenting the usual rags-to-riches-then-some-more-trials-and-tribulations musical story. Which is nothing I can really blame anyone on, as the film does appeal for a core audience that can't get enough of BIG vocals, BIG numbers, FLASHY personalities that pop and go into the, well, expected for 2-dimensional parts (if that). But, for the life of me, I could not stand most of the characters, or the actors playing them, in Dreamgirls.
Jennifer Hudson has been praised most of all, given accolades as a new rising star following her stint on American Idol, and with vocals that, basically, go to a vocal *volume* that is impressive. But volume alone does not a good musical performance make! I never believed her as Effie, not once, except as, in a way, like some big near parody of one of these bigger-than-life and bigger-than-Pete's-sake-ego black women who are so stubborn that it's about as hard as hell to have any sympathy. The character of Effie is meant as the pivotal one, the one whom has the BIG personality, and ends up making a BIG mistake. But Hudson can't fill the shoes, as she just doesn't have the acting talent for it. She was chose for her singing skills, which for her means to belt out every number like she has to reach even the little guy in the back row in Giants Stadium. Aside from the fact, like everyone else, she has to sing such songs that have only so minimal a range with lyrics and tone (the most prominent number, in the 'break-up' scene in the middle of the film, stops the film in its tracks, and not in a good way). I'm in the minority, but she's one of the worst things about Dreamgirls.
But on the flip-side, there's another actor, Jamie Foxx, who despite his actual talents, both at acting and as Ray showed singing, is probably just as ineffectual and, dare I say it in his own way, dull in the part of the domineering manager of the Dreamgirls. There's practically no range for this character for Foxx to play in, and has for 2/3 of the film the exact look on his face, as, through also fault in the script, goes through the motions as with every other bio-pic of a star group of the past. Only the ending tries to give any dimension, which by the end is far too late and even awkward. Beyonce and the other actress do maybe a little better, which is to say they're adequate in the parts. Only Eddie Murphy, who in a sense is just playing a sort of abstracted version of his egocentric self from many other movies he's been in (and better ones, ala Bowfinger, also speaking of himself in the third person), and for his musical numbers does add a bit of a lift to the proceedings. I almost expected from some of the early Murphy/Lightning scenes that the movie wouldn't be very much special, but at least could be easily watchable.
Not a chance; as much as I would want to admire a movie with soul about the soul era's glory of the 60s and 70s, it lacks the passion that could make it a real contender in a time with so few musicals. The trailer also tempts that this will have some strong dramatic direction. Here, too, Condon falters where there needs to be a stronger vision, and he doesn't pull it off (the montages, for example, of the rising star variety for the Dreamgirls in the mid 60s, feels as shallow and empty as anything I could imagine in a summer blockbuster). Now, a lot of people will like this movie, a lot. Maybe I'm just not entirely in the demographic. But Dreamgirls, for me, makes a fatal flaw for a movie musical- the fun and spirit and melding of what works on the stage to the screen clicks off, and the chance for the unexpected is null and void. It made me feel depressed in its lack of respect for the viewer overwhelmed with clichés.