How to butcher a musical

Rating: 3/10 (2 May 2008)

Let me start out by saying that I love Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, and Alan Rickman, based on each artists' body of work up until now. Despite this, I hated this film. This is the worst musical I've ever had the displeasure of sitting through in my life.
It would have worked well as a non-musical, but oh, the pain of listening to the actors sing... Singing is an entirely different process of expression in comparison to acting, especially if coming from certain acting methods. The lack of emotional conveyance through the actors' singing, due to their inexperience and timidness, make this a very bland and badly sung musical production. There is not enough irony, emotions, and insanity to make this enjoyable to watch. I do not believe Burton was successful in capturing the same spirit of the original production, which he intended to emulate.
When the musical burst onto the scene in 1979 and through the 80's, it was a revelation at the time due to its original concept. What new concept does Burton bring to the table by making a movie out of this musical? Nothing. Process is different, but the intended product is the same. There is no value added, other than the camera angles, of which Burton does not take full advantage.
His choices in shots and camera angles in this production actually work against him in that they accentuate the blandness of the production. I've always thought Burton's camera angles are average at best, and it shows here. Yes, he chooses some fancy shots, and yes, and he may be an innovator, but he doesn't understand drama in directing. All he appears to want to do in most of his films is put pretty pictures on the screen using technology and beautiful sets, while attempting to tell a good story. It works, sometimes, but not always.
One thing I did take away from watching this is that this film gave me an insight to Burton's film making, by questioning why he made this into a musical. According to him in the DVD special features, he was trying to convey his experience of watching this on Broadway into a movie. I take from this that he makes films because they are satisfying from a sensory perspective. It fits. There are no ambiguities, subtleties, layers, complexity in his films. What he wanted to say is laid out, bare, naked, to fully be understood at one level of understanding for all. A visual thinker; his goal with his films is to give us viewers an insight into his dreams, nightmares.
He loves working with actors with certain look/feel to them, because he is an assembler of sets, colors, actors, designs who puts together pieces to make people see his way. There aren't any difference, artistically, between a claymation figure and a Johnny Depp in a Tim Burton film. Because of this, I would liken him to an illustrator than a true artist--he wants viewers to see, but does not provide any deeper understanding and thought process. One exception to this is his film, Big Fish--which was a shocking, and brave venture beyond his comfort zone for the director. Since then, however, he has become more timid in his artistic choices, rather than grow from it.
As much as I am critical of his current approach to film making, I do love his original visions--there's nothing else quite like them.
Mr. Burton, would you quit with the remakes, and give us more originals?