I wish the music sounded more…
-
They-Call-Me-Steve — 16 years ago(January 29, 2010 06:49 PM)
Dreamgirls came out in 1981 (on Broadway I mean), therefor the songs were written before 1981.
That said, I do agree with the OP and with Pat ODay here for the most part. Though I didn't hate the movie (the acting and story were fine), most of the songs were kinda stinky and really didn't capture the feel of Motown music. Too Broadway sounding, which makes sense I guess, since that's really what they are. -
smeth — 15 years ago(April 18, 2010 09:10 AM)
I am in my 50s, I grew up during this time. I agree completely that the music doesn't sound like it came from the 60s. All of it sounds more like late 70s disco and R&B. Funny thing, the movie music tries to fix this, because the original stage arrangements from 1981 sound like pure 70s disco.
When someone writes music for a musical set in a different time, they have a choice of making the music contemporary or from the earlier period. I think in 1980, Henry Krieger decided to write music from 1980 so that it would sound fresh to the theater audiences.
Examples:
Hairspray (contemporary music)
Little Shop of Horrors (period music)
Years later, for a story
about the music industry of the 60s and early 70s
, the music sounds wrong to people who are familiar with the music. -
BallroomDaysAreOver — 15 years ago(May 17, 2010 09:21 AM)
My opinion: These are not bad songs, and the movie is good but not great.
Fact: They do not sound like authentic Motown.
I am watching the movie as I write this, and so far, the closest any of these songs have come to vintage Motown sound is (I think its called) "I Love You I Do" - It sounds like a Marvin Gaye cut from the
How Sweet It Is
album in 1965, despite the reversed gender role, of course. The very first song The Dreams sing at the talent show in the beginning sounds more like a Kent song. Kent was a much lesser-known black/soul label in the same era where Ike & Tina Turner did some of their early recordings. Motown had a very distinct sound that put it above labels like Kent and Soul City, and that distinction can be attributed almost entirely to two advantages that Motown had on other record labels: The Holland/Dozier/Holland songwriting team, and The Funk Brothers studio band. Neither had anything to do with the music in Dreamgirls, and it shows. NOT to take anything from the movie, because it is good, but it sounds very, very little like soul music from the sixties in general, much less the mighty Motown. -
MsBubbles — 15 years ago(January 29, 2011 06:58 PM)
Smeth - very well written. I agree. I'm watching this movie right now and realize the composers had no intention of making it sound like authentic 60s motown. It does certainly sound more like late 70s, which makes a lot of sense since that's probably when the songs were written.
-
samsan_lee — 13 years ago(May 03, 2012 09:22 PM)
.I thought the music was incredibly lame and boring all sounded alike! I also love Motown classics but this movie filler was just blah.
..
If it was nominated and won Tony Awards, and it mostly played in Broadwayguess who the audience was?
There's your answer , right there.
Its contemporary music, and i'm guessing they couldnt quite get the "period sound", although Condon easily couldve consulted with any number of hip-hop producers such as RZA (Robert Diggs) or Madlib and have gotten an approximation of the sound.
It was more for dramatic effect, and Murphy got a Golden Globe out of it, and Hudson and Oscar.
No harm - except to your ears. LOL -
-
Blackace — 13 years ago(September 09, 2012 07:04 PM)
The music is made for a musical, so it would never sound like Motown songs. The movie is based off the broadway show Dreamgirls. If you've every seen a musical on Broadway, you would understand why the music doesn't sound like what you would hear on the radio. The music was brilliant by the way.
-
Kingactor30 — 13 years ago(September 22, 2012 08:18 PM)
I absolutely love the score, however I do have to say that I'm not a fan of the way the score was treated in the film. It sounded way too contemporary. One example is the way "Heavy" was treated. The film version doesn't sound a thing like a 60's song nor was the instrumentation 60's sounding. I would prefer they treated the score more authentic to the Broadway sound with Motown/60's influences.
-
b-touch — 13 years ago(October 20, 2012 07:21 PM)
When this score was first written in 1978/79, there was a concerted effort to make it NOT sound so much like Motown, for fear of lawsuits from Berry Gordy or Diana Ross. What came out instead was a hodgepodge of non-Motown 60s music (the score draws from Chuck Berry, James Brown, Etta James, and Wilson Pickett, though obviously there is still some strong Supremes influence in there). Most of the arrangements, however, have a strong 70s R&B/disco sound: "Steppin' to the Bad Side", for example, has the definitive 70s disco shuffling high hat and sounds more like Chic ("Le Freak") than anything else.
The renditions of the songs in this film version sound more like Motown/60s music than the original versions ever did - the theme now has a Motown stomp, "Steppin'" goes gospel instead of disco, "Jimmy's Rap" sounds more like James Brown than Kurtis Blow, and "One Night Only" (Effie's version) draws directly from the glossy mid-70s R&B ballad style you might hear in a slow Temptations (Dennis Edwards version), Donna Summer or early Teena Marie record.
Still, even the film versions are hampered by the fact that they have to sound appealing to the MTV crowd that likes and buys a certain style of (heavily synthesized and pitch corrected) contemporary R&B rather than soul music. If you're no fan of "regular" Beyonc or other pop-R&B music, this movie will be a tough sit-through. -
jackiefoxybrown — 13 years ago(February 24, 2013 07:57 AM)
Lol,I'm not too ashamed to say this but I saw this movie for the first time on ABC & I actually feel the same was you do. Even though the movie was decent I found myslef wanting to put ear plugs on because the music is unbearable. I'm a fan of old school music ,exspecially motown,you know motown had those great catchy melodies,hard hitting bass,but the music in the film sounded like music from a middle school urban play,not my cup of tea,but hey who am I to talk I'm not berry gory or some musical guru.
-
b-touch — 13 years ago(March 01, 2013 09:34 PM)
Question - has anyone on here who claims to "like Motown music" ever actually heard a full Supremes live album or seen either of their TV specials?
In performance (and in this film, all but one of the songs the Dreams perform is supposed to be a live performance versus a recording), their arrangements were as (I don't mean this term as an insult) schmaltzy and Broadway-bound as anything in this film.
I know the modern casual fan is likely only familiar with hit singles, but Motown did their best to force the Supremes into a Broadway/Vegas/Copacabana format on numerous occasions. -
alcockell — 12 years ago(June 06, 2013 10:20 AM)
Just streaming this one - http://subscription.we7.com/album/The-Supremes/At-The-Copa-Expanded-Edition?m=0
Yow! Ronnie bloody Hazlehurst, Norrie Paramor or Ron Pearson or what?
HARDLY the same as the Funk Brothers backing them
That house band WRECKED it! -
blue489 — 12 years ago(July 10, 2013 02:33 AM)
In response to B-touch's question I will just speak for those of us who "claimed" to like Motown music. Yes we have heard those live albums and yes we have watched those live performances. What do we think of them? That those arrangements sucked and that it isn't the sound that people are referring to when they talk about Motown or what made the label iconic and so damn good.
I find it hard to believe that the songwriters for Dreamgirls were trying to be that authentic and be like, "Hey so since they are performing live we should make the songs sound like those crappy Las Vegas style arrangements that the Supremes were pushed to perform." (not sure if that was a point you were suggesting).
Whoever posted that response about the songs sounding too show tuney and Broadway is likely because they were written for exactly that - Broadway, makes a fair point. It's just a little bit of false advertising I suppose, since it is about Motown so I would think that those who are interested in the story will like that style of music and would therefore not mind hearing that style of music in the musical.
Again, I still think Little Shop of Horrors and even Hairspray have much better sixties throw-back inspired tunes than this musical. -
b-touch — 12 years ago(August 16, 2013 09:53 PM)
It's true that the songwriters for Dreamgirls weren't trying to be authentic to Motown music - they actually went out of their way to make the songs NOT sound like Supremes songs because they were afraid of being sued when they were writing these songs in the early 1970s/early 1980s. There was also the issue that these songs were originally written to fit together as a cohesive operetta (if anyone has seen or heard the original stage version of Dreamgirls, it's about 70% sung). and to be frank a lot of the songs don't work as well in the film broken up and done on their own.
However, it's also in true that, intentionally or not, in not making the faux-Motown revue you would expect "Dreamgirls" to be, they actually came closer to what the Supremes actually sounded like in concert vs. how they sounded on their albums. Venturing beyond their 25 or so hit singles and their B-sides leads into strange worlds of schmaltz.
I'm not really sure if it's false advertising, because the show didn't have to be what "Motown the Musical" turned out to be, but I suppose that's what the public expects, particularly in the film version where everything is slavishly recreated to look like Motown (and to be clear, the music producers for the film version of Dreamgirls - The Underdogs - did attempt to please all parties by making the songs sound more, uh, Motowny AND more modern AND keep true ot the original piece. A really impossible task taken all together)