The Music Man, my gift to Loungers!

[elleng]

Internet was out, took out my video, and found it @ utube for y'all!

[Grantuspeace]

1. I heard someone say "Marion the Librarian" just the other day.

I haven't seen this remake. But I believe somethings should never be redone. Hmmmm
But I will give it a try sometime, I am sure.

[csziggy]

4. I prefer the original, but this one isn't horrid

Mostly not what I am used to. Matthew Broderic will never be as good as Robert Preston but some of the musical numbers are better in the newer version.

Compare:
1962

2003

(beginning at 4:40)

Or

1962

2003

[SocratesInSpirit]

7. As someone who has seen both, I don't recommend seeing the 2003 remake...

except to rubberneck at the sheer awfulness. Matthew Broderick was a terrible fit, and if you get Harold Hill wrong, that wrecks the whole show.

[TrogL]

2. OK, why did clicking this thread bring up a window advertising "Ultra Markets"?

Is it just me? I've suspected I've had a virus for awhile. I've run every package against it and found nothing.

[elleng]

3. Prolly just you. Just checked, and get MUSIC!

[agracie]

5. Thumpthin thpecial for sure !!! n/t

[SocratesInSpirit]

6. Eek.

The 2003 remake had the potential to be decent - except they gave the role of Harold Hill to the wrong person. While Matthew Broderick is musically talented and was a wonderful Leopold Bloom in The Producers, he had absolutely no charisma in the role of Harold Hill. But then again, any actor would have difficulty filling the shoes of the late, great Robert Preston.

It's too bad that they didn't cast Craig Bierko or even Eric McCormack in the role, as they were charming Harold Hills in the 2000 Broadway revival, but I suppose they had to go for the biggest name they could find.

[UTUSN]

8. Well, THANKS for that, and you ARE a gift insofar as I can remember how to lounge n/t

[elleng]

9. Hey, UTU!