You simply cannot put a couple of cameras in an orchestra pit and film "Stop the World", yet this is exactly what they have done. Starring Newley's stand-in and later replacement when he took the show to Broadway. Tanner tries hard but Tony Newley he ain't! Millie Martin does a little better as Evie but the whole thing makes you yearn for the brilliance that was Anthony Newley. Paul Goodhead - President of the Anthony Newley Appreciation Society Worldwide. (Officially recognised by the family/estate of Anthony Newley).
Add a Review
-
musical-216 June 1999
-
davecarnegie11 December 2004When the film was made it was shot multi camera as it appears Bill Sargent the producer had a thing about this. He had made a bit of a name shooting onto video tape and transferring to film via Technicolor tape to film process. All the playback was done via equipment which was not locked to the cameras, Great fun was had in trying to sync it all up. I myself enjoyed the overtime this film generated in the projection department. When the film exscaped to the cinemas, which those days it was shown own the ABC circuit, the film did not last the week and by the Wednesday was pulled.
-
midge5625 March 2010This was the worst movie I ever went to. It had one scene like a stage, which never changed... which the mostly just one main singer jumping around the stage as he sang. Similar to a one-person stage play with no scenes and no story. Just jumping around the stage from one end to the other while singing.
I don't mind singing. I've seen some decent musicals. Funny Girl had come out not too long before this and there were quite a few musicals during that era. I wouldn't even mind watching someone sing on stage. But this was awful. Painfully horrible. But I would rather buy a record than watch this film.
45 minutes into the movie after waiting for it to do something, it actually made me physically ill. Having to sit in the theater watching the one stage scene for so long... I had to run to the restroom to throw up. That's how bad this movie was... and I wasn't ill before I went in there... and I recovered after leaving.
I was unable to stay in the theater another minute. I had to leave because it was literally making me physically ill. It was supposed to be a double header with "Oliver" but we never made it. I sat there as long as I could but I became so ill from watching it, I had to leave.
It was the movie which made me ill. To this day, it is still the only movie which ever made me physically ill... and remains one of only 3 movies which I hated so much I could not watch them to the end. "Hardware" was another.
Just getting outside the theater was a huge improvement, but it was at least an hour before the nausea from that movie subsided. I've never had motion sickness... but this movie was the closest thing I can think of to describe that. But every minute of this movie was so miserable and so painful that it turned my stomach upside down... literally.
I have never, ever forgotten how much I detested this movie. I was hoping they had destroyed the negative and every copy of the film. -
The music is phenomenal. Which is the only reason this pitiful excuse of a show reached and lasted so long on the stage. Then someone got the idea to film a stage performance of a difficult show and put it on screen to capture more money from movie goers. Problem is movie goers want more from their entertainment than can be captured on film. The end product: stage performances boxed in on a stage that has no imagination (even tho the whole play deals with people using their imagination). Consequently, it was a critical and commercial failure. Just a poor film --- except for the music.
-
I fell in love with Stop the World when I saw it in the West End, starring Anthony Newley and Anna Quayle, back in 1962. It told the story, through songs, speech and mime, of a man's life in a way which has rarely been bettered. Nearly half a century on I still enjoy the songs, on a battered LP, and treasure the memory of Newley's performance.
The film in my view does not measure up to the stage production. This is partly because Tony Tanner, while very good, is simply not Anthony Newley and partly because it is a film of a stage performance which, for some reason, never really seems to work. Theatre audiences are, I suppose, geared to accept the physical limitations of the stage while cinema audiences, even if composed of the same people, are similarly programmed to expect the very different techniques of film. StW makes little attempt to use the latter, basically pointing a camera (or a number of cameras) at the stage and leaving it at that. We are therefore left in a situation which is neither one thing nor the other.
For all that it is useful to have a record of what was a classic show and the film I do find enjoyable if not itself classic. I accept that others will hold different opinions. Even when the show first appeared I heard of several people who walked out because they could not understand its premise and failed to realise that the lack of 'reality' meant that they had to use their imaginations. They are , of course, fully entitled to their views. Nevertheless I find it difficult to accept the comments of a previous reviewer whom the film apparently induced to throw up.I have sat through many films which have bored me rigid but have never as a result felt the urge to vomit. Perhaps I could suggest that he or she see a doctor without delay to assess the cause of this clear over-reaction. -
didi-520 February 2009Without its co-creator and original leading man, Anthony Newley, this film is at a disadvantage right from the start. It's a record of a stage musical, largely filmed in the theatre, with black and white inserts taped at a studio. It only really works because it is fresh and unique, and because of three wonderful songs in particular: 'Gonna Build a Mountain', 'Once in a Lifetime', and 'What Kind of Fool Am I'.
The problem really is that Tony Tanner, although good, is no Newley, and mimicking vocal mannerisms isn't really enough to hide the fact he's a poor substitute. Having said that, the film doesn't lack charm and anything with Millicent Martin has to get the thumbs-up. Perhaps a product of its time, and now rather dated, but watched in the right frame in mind it still stands up, perhaps better than a stage revival would these days. -
joe d22 October 2007My wife and I put on our old VHS copy the other night (having not seen it for many years) and once more became totally absorbed in the production and Tony Tanner's performance. Some have called it outdated but it's pure theater with a theater-type experience as best as could be reproduced on screen. "World's" brilliance is that it's simple story combined with a magnificent score can hold audience captivated, no small achievement considering it is done in mime and soliloquy and performed within the confines of a small circular one-ring circus-type stage with no elaborate settings.
Just magnificent, not matter what generation. -
alfabtch14 March 1999Well staged version of the play usually associated with Anthony Newley. Well performed. A bit dated, but it IS over 30 years old!