Tommy The Who Analysis
Tommy the album was a groundbreaking record put out by The Who in 1969. It was groundbreaking because it was a concept album that was dubbed the first "rock opera" which followed the story of a deaf dumb and blind man from childhood to adulthood. His life is met with many strange occurrences from being shocked as a small child into a psychosomatic state, becoming a master of all things pinball and finally becoming a Christ-esque figure of a new age cult.
The album was met with two completely different camps. The first of which said that the album was a masterpiece, and haled it as an ushering in of a completely new genre of music. Others felt that it was sick and exploitive, and many people were outraged at the Who for bringing out such a …show more content…
dark and twisted album. The album was evened banned from the air by the BBC. But despite the controversy, the album was a hug success and in 1975, some six years later, someone thought it to be a good idea to turn the rock opus into a feature film.
It is interesting to note that George Lucas was originally approached to direct the film, but he turned it down because he was in the middle of pre-production for American Graffiti. Instead, the project was handed over to the flamboyant British filmmaker Ken Russell.
The film version managed to keep the same overall story as the album, but was different in almost all other aspects, for better or for worse, in which I'll be discussing and outlining in this comparison.
The first major difference when they adapted the album to the movie is that they changed the time the story takes place from 1921 (which was the setting for the album) to 1951 for the film version.
From what I read, Russell did not want to make a "period"piece, and by changing it to 1951, Russell was then able to film more modern images for when Tommy is an adult.
The next major difference from album to movie is the fact that in the album, Tommy's father comes back to kill the mother's new lover. In the film version, Tommy's dad, thought to be dead, comes back and is then killed by the lover. This totally changed the plot of the film, and also the catalyst for Tommy's journey of discovery. In the album, the track Amazing Journey alludes to the fact that Tommy is peering inside himself and he sees a magical wise being inside himself that will eventually lead to enlightenment. In the film, his fallen father now serves as the sought out being, taking Tommy on a journey to self discovery but also to come full circle to find the part of himself that was left by his father. This was a good choice I think. Not only for the reason just mentioned, but it also makes the lover (played by Oliver Reed) into a villainous figure, and helps the viewer cope with the fact that when this funny looking man starts to sing, it's ok because he's an asshole that killed Tommy's pops. It also makes more sense that Tommy would be affected that much more by seeing his biological dad die. He already lost his father once when they thought his plane was shot down by the krauts. Then he comes back, and before Tommy can even be all happy and excited, he looses his dad again. Had his real father killed the lover it would just be another movie of the week. Tommy would just be an angry teen. Maybe shoot up a high school. He certainly would not have been deaf dumb and blind. So that was a good adaptation choice in my humble
opinion.
Another very obvious difference lies within the music itself. The album is composed by Pete Townshend and performed entirely by The Who. The soundtrack of the movie is totally overdubbed and while Pete Townshend also composed the music, all of the singing was done completely by the actors, including Oliver Reed and Jack Nicholson. Ann-Margret actually won a Golden Globe Award for her performance, and Pete Townshend was also nominated for an Oscar for his scoring of the film.
This also drastically changed the mood and style of the film from that of the album. Listening to the album, I felt a very stark and brooding mood and all of the characters were not as diverse because they were all portrayed by one voice, which was that of Roger Daltrey. It made it harder to imagine these characters as people they seemed more like ideas. But for the film, this is where the directing of Russell really shined. He was able to take the ideas of Daltrey's characters, and turn them into living breathing flamboyant entities on screen, and with great effect. On the album the Gypsy Acid Queen and Pinball wizard are integral parts of Tommy's story, but in the music they do not come off as necessarily exciting. But Russell made them forces to be reckoned with on the screen by casting an incredible Tina Turner for the Acid Queen and Elton John as the Pinball Wizard, which easily stole the show in the movie. This made an otherwise morose moment in the album a ridiculous spectacle of lights and noise and insanity in the film. The same can be said for the Cousin Kevin scene, which is totally different from the album to the film.
It should be no surprise, then, to find out that many of the songs from the album were rearranged in order, changed lyrically, or removed altogether for the film. Some examples include of course the change of 1921 to 1951 where they say "I have a feeling 51 is gonna be a good year". Amazing Journey had almost completely different lyrics. Also, references to pinball are removed from the film version of Christmas. I imagine this was done to build up the surprise to people not familiar with the album that this kid's a whiz-maniac who rocks the pinball tables!
The film (and the insane Russell) also gets to embellish themselves with all the symbolism that is sub textual at best in the album. The film focuses more on the lavish lifestyle that Tommy's mother and stepfather enjoy because of Tommy's success as a pinball player. This isn't really explored in the album. However in the film we get to see the progression of wealth, as their home changes from a small suburban house to a sprawling mansion and seeing his mother's lavish jewelry and furs. The religious iconography is also in full effect in the film, from the long blonde hair of Daltrey, the last supper scene with him sitting at the center of the table in his communal home, the T's which looked like crosses. This is clearly a commentary of religion, and I think it is a satirical one as well, with the commercialization of Tommy as a Jesus figure at the holiday camp when everyone is buying up his crap. I also saw the Marilyn Monroe cult as a mockery of organized religion. The churchgoers were blinded, and thus they worshiped whatever was put in front of them- in this case a statue of a pop icon. I think that these themes were there and understood for the most part in the album, but I believe that adaptation wise, Russell saw these references and decided to run with it- with mixed results.
Another great scene which the music was added for the film was that of Ann-Margret being sprayed down with suds, beans, and chocolate sauce from her television set; a literal metaphor for all the commercialistic crap that the TV throws at us every day. A classic scene indeed.
Colors also play a big role in the film. This is most evident in the Gypsy Acid Queen scene in which almost everything is red. Everyone knows that the color red is the color of lust, love, sex, blood, and violence. This scene screams all of the above. This was my personal favorite scene because I felt it symbolized Tommy's death and rebirth into the world. The syringes were full of worldly poison, and we see his body die as he is trapped and engulfed by the iron maiden. It was like the rape of innocence. It opens to show his skeleton. His old self is dead. Then the new messianic Tommy is born again from within the clutches of the iron maiden, or as some could see it as the world. I'm sure I'm reading way too much into it, and I'm terrible with metaphors, but I still loved the scene more than any other.
At the end of the day I would say that Russell took the ideas of a rather slow and gloomy album and turned it into a flamboyant celebration of absurdity, which in many ways works. It is a strange film, a silly film, but also a fun film when compared to the album. Of course people will forever be torn as to which version is better or worse, but it is a great study in what makes an adaptation work or not work.
The album was met with two completely different camps. The first of which said that the album was a masterpiece, and haled it as an ushering in of a completely new genre of music. Others felt that it was sick and exploitive, and many people were outraged at the Who for bringing out such a …show more content…
dark and twisted album. The album was evened banned from the air by the BBC. But despite the controversy, the album was a hug success and in 1975, some six years later, someone thought it to be a good idea to turn the rock opus into a feature film.
It is interesting to note that George Lucas was originally approached to direct the film, but he turned it down because he was in the middle of pre-production for American Graffiti. Instead, the project was handed over to the flamboyant British filmmaker Ken Russell.
The film version managed to keep the same overall story as the album, but was different in almost all other aspects, for better or for worse, in which I'll be discussing and outlining in this comparison.
The first major difference when they adapted the album to the movie is that they changed the time the story takes place from 1921 (which was the setting for the album) to 1951 for the film version.
From what I read, Russell did not want to make a "period"piece, and by changing it to 1951, Russell was then able to film more modern images for when Tommy is an adult.
The next major difference from album to movie is the fact that in the album, Tommy's father comes back to kill the mother's new lover. In the film version, Tommy's dad, thought to be dead, comes back and is then killed by the lover. This totally changed the plot of the film, and also the catalyst for Tommy's journey of discovery. In the album, the track Amazing Journey alludes to the fact that Tommy is peering inside himself and he sees a magical wise being inside himself that will eventually lead to enlightenment. In the film, his fallen father now serves as the sought out being, taking Tommy on a journey to self discovery but also to come full circle to find the part of himself that was left by his father. This was a good choice I think. Not only for the reason just mentioned, but it also makes the lover (played by Oliver Reed) into a villainous figure, and helps the viewer cope with the fact that when this funny looking man starts to sing, it's ok because he's an asshole that killed Tommy's pops. It also makes more sense that Tommy would be affected that much more by seeing his biological dad die. He already lost his father once when they thought his plane was shot down by the krauts. Then he comes back, and before Tommy can even be all happy and excited, he looses his dad again. Had his real father killed the lover it would just be another movie of the week. Tommy would just be an angry teen. Maybe shoot up a high school. He certainly would not have been deaf dumb and blind. So that was a good adaptation choice in my humble
opinion.
Another very obvious difference lies within the music itself. The album is composed by Pete Townshend and performed entirely by The Who. The soundtrack of the movie is totally overdubbed and while Pete Townshend also composed the music, all of the singing was done completely by the actors, including Oliver Reed and Jack Nicholson. Ann-Margret actually won a Golden Globe Award for her performance, and Pete Townshend was also nominated for an Oscar for his scoring of the film.
This also drastically changed the mood and style of the film from that of the album. Listening to the album, I felt a very stark and brooding mood and all of the characters were not as diverse because they were all portrayed by one voice, which was that of Roger Daltrey. It made it harder to imagine these characters as people they seemed more like ideas. But for the film, this is where the directing of Russell really shined. He was able to take the ideas of Daltrey's characters, and turn them into living breathing flamboyant entities on screen, and with great effect. On the album the Gypsy Acid Queen and Pinball wizard are integral parts of Tommy's story, but in the music they do not come off as necessarily exciting. But Russell made them forces to be reckoned with on the screen by casting an incredible Tina Turner for the Acid Queen and Elton John as the Pinball Wizard, which easily stole the show in the movie. This made an otherwise morose moment in the album a ridiculous spectacle of lights and noise and insanity in the film. The same can be said for the Cousin Kevin scene, which is totally different from the album to the film.
It should be no surprise, then, to find out that many of the songs from the album were rearranged in order, changed lyrically, or removed altogether for the film. Some examples include of course the change of 1921 to 1951 where they say "I have a feeling 51 is gonna be a good year". Amazing Journey had almost completely different lyrics. Also, references to pinball are removed from the film version of Christmas. I imagine this was done to build up the surprise to people not familiar with the album that this kid's a whiz-maniac who rocks the pinball tables!
The film (and the insane Russell) also gets to embellish themselves with all the symbolism that is sub textual at best in the album. The film focuses more on the lavish lifestyle that Tommy's mother and stepfather enjoy because of Tommy's success as a pinball player. This isn't really explored in the album. However in the film we get to see the progression of wealth, as their home changes from a small suburban house to a sprawling mansion and seeing his mother's lavish jewelry and furs. The religious iconography is also in full effect in the film, from the long blonde hair of Daltrey, the last supper scene with him sitting at the center of the table in his communal home, the T's which looked like crosses. This is clearly a commentary of religion, and I think it is a satirical one as well, with the commercialization of Tommy as a Jesus figure at the holiday camp when everyone is buying up his crap. I also saw the Marilyn Monroe cult as a mockery of organized religion. The churchgoers were blinded, and thus they worshiped whatever was put in front of them- in this case a statue of a pop icon. I think that these themes were there and understood for the most part in the album, but I believe that adaptation wise, Russell saw these references and decided to run with it- with mixed results.
Another great scene which the music was added for the film was that of Ann-Margret being sprayed down with suds, beans, and chocolate sauce from her television set; a literal metaphor for all the commercialistic crap that the TV throws at us every day. A classic scene indeed.
Colors also play a big role in the film. This is most evident in the Gypsy Acid Queen scene in which almost everything is red. Everyone knows that the color red is the color of lust, love, sex, blood, and violence. This scene screams all of the above. This was my personal favorite scene because I felt it symbolized Tommy's death and rebirth into the world. The syringes were full of worldly poison, and we see his body die as he is trapped and engulfed by the iron maiden. It was like the rape of innocence. It opens to show his skeleton. His old self is dead. Then the new messianic Tommy is born again from within the clutches of the iron maiden, or as some could see it as the world. I'm sure I'm reading way too much into it, and I'm terrible with metaphors, but I still loved the scene more than any other.
At the end of the day I would say that Russell took the ideas of a rather slow and gloomy album and turned it into a flamboyant celebration of absurdity, which in many ways works. It is a strange film, a silly film, but also a fun film when compared to the album. Of course people will forever be torn as to which version is better or worse, but it is a great study in what makes an adaptation work or not work.