Chicago is not a better movie than The Pianist, or The Hours, or The Two Towers and it’s in no way as fascinating as Gangs of New York. I think its Oscar win over those films is a great example of how the Academy often goes for safe options with its Best Picture winners.
But I also think having the film amongst that company does a disservice to the film itself. I love Chicago, but I also don’t think it’s a great film. I think it’s a very good film, which is amazingly entertaining and really well shot, but it’s definitely not a great.
I love the staging of the film and how the musical numbers are largely fictitious but become less and less overtly stagey as the film goes on. The first few numbers are essentially just straight up song and dance numbers taking place on an imaginary stage in Roxie’s mind and I could of love how each performance becomes bigger and bigger until you’ve got the likes of Razzle Dazzle which feel completely divorced from the stage. It’s an interesting decision and when it’s used to showcase the psychological situation of the characters it provides a kind of fascinating insight. That’s the thing I kind of love about the film, how the musical numbers are staged like the machinations of a person’s mind. Richard Gere tap dancing as he works his way around a tricky piece of evidence is a really overt version of this, but most of the songs represent the emotional or psychological state of their characters.
It’s also amazingly staged and shot, Marshall’s choreography and direction really helping numbers like Cell Block Tango and We Both Reached For The Gun get a sense of energy and fun. I think more than anything else the film, aside from a few odd moments, is just kind of fun. It kind of feels very classical in how its staging itself as a musical and I appreciate that, but I feel I may be in the minority.
