Oklahoma! (1999)

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Unshakable, witty and deeply felt, the film will be paying emotional dividends for a long, long time.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

I have some trouble adapting to stage musicals when I see them on the stage. There's something about the fact that the audience is there for pure — absolutely pure — entertainment in the form of singing and dancing, and somehow need a narrative to make it palatable. Opera is even worse for me in this regard. Oh, I know that the narrative can set up the emotional context for a song, so that it can be more effective, but the whole construction seems to reflect some fundamental flaw in our makeup, like our affection for sugar.When a stage musical is filmed, the problem gets worse. Most of these simply take what works on stage and tries to recapture it using the same techniques and values. "Seven Brides" is my touchstone for this. The result is bunch of clumsy stagecraft that does not translate to cinema, combined with those radical shifts from the story to the songs. Usually the older shows have this problem, because the later ones though made for stage are informed by cinema.This avoids all that, by reimagining one of the old horses in a new mold. Apparently, it was quite an effort because the "Foundation" that has a stranglehold over how the material is used had to negotiate every nit. This idea that some survivors of an artist should benefit from something they had no hand in is vile enough; that they can smother its very artistic soul by legal means is worse.Anyway, what we have here is stage presentation reimagined for modern tastes. That means solving the integration of the songworld and the stageworld. The extras explain how this was nurtured, essentially by honing the show by forcing the actors to speak the lines. There's some clever thinking about the dances along the same lines.Then that is restaged for the camera. It pretends to be a performance in front of an audience, as shots from a real performance are spliced in. But the (valuable) extras reveal the rework to bring it to the camera. This is about as good as it gets unless we have something born out of the camera like Taymor has done.I came to this because "Australia" is sticking with me. I learned that Hugh Jackman (unknown to me) is famous for his musical stage presence. Even though this is quite old in this context, I searched it out and was rather amazed. He sings, he dances. He has presence. In fact, his presence is so strong, he gets away with being not excellent in those areas. Presence.That's what he brought to "Australia" that mattered; it seems to be indicative of the national character. The very same scope of presence as Wolverine grates, because it is a substitute. There is some considered colorwork here too.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

Oklahoma was never my favorite musical. By the time I was aware of it, Oklahoma & all of the Rodgers & Hammerstein canon seemed dated, superseded by the darker, more modern Sondheim musicals. But Trevor Nunn's re-imagining of this American classic makes it so fresh & vibrant, it could've opened yesterday. What seemed sappy in the 50s film version now seems innocent, charming, believable-thanks to Nunn's keener dramatic vision & an exceptional cast. Hugh Jackman reinvents the swaggering male musical lead with an irresistible magnetism and ability to infuse a song with emotional realness. When he sings O What a Beautiful Morning, it seems totally spontaneous-a young man singing from the depth of his soul his love of life & everything in it-and we feel this song we've heard for decades is being sung for the first time.The decision to play Laurey (Josefina Gabrielle) as a shy tomboy in overalls, in contrast to the assertive, gingham-clad lasses we've seen in the past, is a wonderfully right one. The attraction between the lovely, thoughtful young girl and the radiantly confident Curly is palpable, and their different temperaments make the parries & shifts of their courtship utterly believable.Gabrielle is an impressive triple threat-a trained ballerina who is also a good actress and a fine singer. Nunn no doubt wanted an accomplished all-round performer to play Laurey so that the Act I ballet could be danced by the same performers who act and sing the parts-not, as is usually done, by dancing alter egos. That alone makes this famously integrated show that much more integrated, and dramatically satisfying. As Aunt Eller, Maureen Lipman is tough, wry, funny, touching, wise -hers is the most captivating performance of Eller one can imagine. She is perfect.Like Laurey, the portrayal of Jud has been rethought. He is still brutal, but you feel the wretchedness, the yearning for acceptance, behind the brutality. Shuler Hensley realizes this brilliantly. He is one of only 2 Americans contributing to this quintessentially American musical (though all American accents are impeccable, and it's refreshing that the script's phony country pronunciations have been pared down to an unnoticeable level). The other is the choreographer Susan Strohman, whose work here is joyous, spectacularly inventive, and (as in the case of the Act II opener The Farmer & The Cowman) electrifying. The dancing, & there's lots of it, conveys the galvanic energy of these very physical frontier folk. It's thrilling to watch the cast's highly skilled dancers doing numbers that build and build to an explosive rapture that makes you wish you could only be up there with them. Strohman, with Nunn and their talented, almost exclusively English team, offer us what must be the finest production of Oklahoma ever staged. How fortunate our cousins across the Atlantic have cast a different light on this national treasure, and revealed new splendors it contains!

I just bought and watched the video of this because I will be in an amateur production soon of "Oklahoma!", and my song was cut out of the 1955 film. First of all, Maureen Lipman was excellent as Aunt Eller, Josefina Gabrielle was a good Laurey, Shuler Hensley was absolutely brilliant as Jud and Peter Pollycarpou was alright as Ali Hakim, although the character he performed was nothing like the character in the script. I thought that Jimmy Johnston and Vicki Simon gave good performances, but they were terribly miscast, making my favourite double-act quite irritating Hugh Jackman is a good actor. He can sing, but he knows it and seems desperate to outsing everyone else, making one dread (quite justifiably) the big title song at the end.What I liked about this production was the very lavish stage and Trevor Nunn's direction. What made me laugh is that the director is clearly trying to be as unlike the 1955 film as possible, and so are some of the cast. However, the other people are copying their 1955 contemporaries (why does Will never pronounce the "t" in "Kansas City"?), and whoever rewrote the script undoubtedly had the film in his mind. The director for the video is treating it as a film rather than a stage show, but the shot goes back to the audience occasionally, reminding us that it is a theatre.The first thing I did after watching the tape was to rewind it and watch it again so that says something. The tape isn't that bad, and is certainly acceptable, at the least. I rated it 8 put of 10. I'd probably give it 8.5.

Back in 1980 or so, I saw the revival of Oklahoma with Christine Ebersole and Christine Andreas at the Forest Theater in Philadelphia before the production came to NYC. It was the first time I saw Oklahoma, but when I saw it, everything seemed to mesh together well. I can't say the same for the PBS broadcast. As I was watching it, I got the feeling that those responsible for the production couldn't decide it if it was an operetta or a musical and it seemes to transition, rather abruptly, between the two. Hugh Jackman is an excellent singer with a strong voice, but he seems to approach the role as if it were an operetta. For me, he never seemed to get into the character of Curley, seeming too "urban".Maureen Lipman seems excellent as Aunt Eller, and Shuler Hensley, who was exceptional in Les Miserables when I saw him, gives a mesmerizing performance. Yet, the "opera-like" sets seem to detract from the production. Luckily the music and lyrics carry the show along (except after the final "Oklahoma" number when the show seems to lose focus. Overall, a dissapointing 7.