The Supremes Vs. Dreamgirls

[CoolKatz]

Part I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI79y0ojZfM

Part II

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edvK6LDgQQc

[monicarivers]

Part I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI79y0ojZfM

Part II

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edvK6LDgQQc

This was a fun trip - thanks for posting!

[midnightman]

Yeah, my views are about the same as this guy. There were subtle similarities and differences between the Supremes and the Dreams but I'm not buying that excuse made by Tom Eyen at all! LOL And the movie version didn't help matters hehe

[captainjames]

It didn't help that Mary's book was titled "DreamGirls" and at first she embraced it and then latter said it wasn't he story of the Supremes. I didn't like the way Mary's supposedly role was portrayed in the movie. Perhaps Mary didn't either.

[TYK1986]

I think all of the Supremes, including Florence if she were alive, wouldn't be happy with the comparisons people made between the Dreamgirls and the Supremes. Effie comes over as being jealous throughout parts of the movie. I think that definitely did not portray Florence in a good way. Or the part where Deena doesn't want to do lead??? Diana was always ready to do the lead. Where there any significant differences between the stage musical and the movie that made it less/ or more based on the Supremes?

[Circa 1824]

DreamGirls had Jennifer Holiday. ..... a massively powerful singer
Supremes had Florence Ballard .... basically an average singer

Big difference

[reese]

I think all of the Supremes, including Florence if she were alive, wouldn't be happy with the comparisons people made between the Dreamgirls and the Supremes. Effie comes over as being jealous throughout parts of the movie. I think that definitely did not portray Florence in a good way. Or the part where Deena doesn't want to do lead??? Diana was always ready to do the lead. Where there any significant differences between the stage musical and the movie that made it less/ or more based on the Supremes?

The movie went overboard trying to connect itself to Motown and the Supremes.

In the musical, Curtis was their manager. In the film, he is their manager as well as the owner of their record label. In addition to Dreams releases, the label puts out an album of MLK speeches, just as Motown did. Besides the use of familiar Supremes album covers, the film also emulated their LOVE CHILD Ed Sullivan appearance. Curtis' label also has a family group of young brothers whose lead singer is infatuated with Deena, just as Michael was with Diana. The film also has a Motown 25-like tv special, complete with Deena entering through the audience just as Diana did. It has been a while since I saw the musical, but I don't remember any of these things in it.

[khansperac]

The musical was based out of Chicago. In the movie they changed that to Detroit.

[captainjames]

I will go with it was messy and hard to connect the dots. Although, they did a good job of trying to hide from being sued. The missing part was Flo who had signed away all rights back in 1967. Flo was no Holiday or Hudson but she was not that indispensable, because people didn't forget.

Although, Florence rape had to be traumatic for her during this time, I think what ate at her most was Berry Gordy and her husband. Thomas working for Motown and then her manager just didn't seem like a good fit. Flo constantly say Mary and Diana were sisters but when speaking about Berry she is very bitter.

[midnightman]

I have to agree. Flo would've been pissed at the Dreamgirls thing if she was alive.

[RanRan79]

The movie went overboard trying to connect itself to Motown and the Supremes.



That's it in a nutshell. I've never seen the musical, outside of some of what I've seen on Youtube. But it's my understanding that the musical took plot points from the most basic information regarding the Supremes, without making it appear too much like the real thing. I intended to go to the movies to see Dreamgirls when it came out but never could get there. I'm so glad, because when I saw the movie on video I was pissed at how far the director went to make Dreamgirls the Supremes. While there were already people buying into the musical being the story of the Supremes, the movie pushed it overboard and now it was the Supremes' story to a whole new generation of people. Berry, Diana, Mary, should've sued the shit out of everyone involved. Could you imagine someone doing this to the Beatles? Hell, to the Beach Boys even? And get away with it? I saw Dreamgirls once, and if I detach myself from my feelings as a Supremes and Motown fan, I have to say overall the movie was really good. But I saw it once. Can't imagine sitting through it again.

[khansperac]

The musical was truly something special. Like a critic once said, broadway had been struck by lightning, or a earthquake, or whatever it was lol. The movie was a great disappointment for me. It does not hold up to the stage production. If anyone ever has a chance to see a traveling production, I urge you to see it. The only downside now is that they are starting to change the stage show- by incorporating the new/movie song “listen” by Beyonce.

[captainjames]

yes I remember that --- what was the point behind Listen ?

[sansradio]

yes I remember that --- what was the point behind Listen ?

To give Beyoncé a shot at an Oscar for Best Original Song, plain and simple. As much as I stan for Bey, it was painful to experience, at an opening night screening I attended, every number get applause from the audience...except "Listen." Crickets. I thought, "Wow, that really fell flat."

[luke]

I saw the original Broadway show with Jennifer Holiday, Loretta, Sheryl Lee...when Jennifer sang And I Am Telling You I have never seen anything like it. There was stunned silence for a few seconds when she finished and then applause like I’ve never heard!