John Waters Vs Adam Schankman: The Remake Phenomenon

Hollywood revels in remaking classics. This ranges from the thrillers such as The Hitcher and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre to musicals such as Annie and Hairspray. With these remakes, people form their own opinions concerning which films are good or bad, but between the classic and the modern film, how can one tell what makes a movie good? Can it be taking hold of the moviegoers' attention and not releasing it for many years afterwards, or is it concerning the present and what will entertain audiences right now? In the movie, Hairspray, that Adam Shankman redid in 2007 from its original production by John Waters in 1988, Adam Shankman decides to take the movie to a whole new level by making this classic a musical ensemble. In doing this, he changes his view of the story and recreates it towards his own liking. Even though both films send a clear message concerning black integration, one must decide if the portrayal of gender in either film was depicted better or worse in comparing the 1988 version to the one done in 2007.

One of the first major ways that both directors differ in their view of gender is their casting of Edna Turnblad. In the 1988 version of Hairspray, John Waters decides to take a radical turn in his casting of Edna by hiring Harris Glen Milstead. This is not the name most people know her as though because her stage name is Divine. Divine possesses a flamboyant and unique personality and is never afraid to be herself. She is an out-of-the-closet transvestite who prevails at expressing her sexuality in any manner she sees fit. By casting Divine, John Waters set himself up for scorn and humiliation. In the 1980's, casting a known transvestite in an upcoming motion picture resided as unheard of. Somehow, the film prevailed as a hit as it received seven nominations including "Best Supporting Male" for Divine and grossing over six million dollars. In casting Divine as Edna, John Waters showed that he remained unafraid to look outside of the box to grab moviegoer's attention. In the public's eye, one sees that "the gay male celebration of the Hollywood musical is one of the most widely noted aspects of gay spectatorial relations" (Benshoff 75). John Waters takes a different route by casting Divine in a film that is not a musical, even though it eventually becomes one. He also brings the gay community into the public's eye by showing them that the gay community persists in being interested in doing more than just musicals.

Shankman, on the other hand, decides to take a very different turn in his casting of Hairspray when he cast Edna Turnblad. He decides to cast a married, well-known, straight actor who has been in musicals before. John Travolta, though never playing a woman before, has sings and dances in the musical Grease. Back for another swing, he takes the part of Edna Turnblad. By casting a straight, male actor for the part of Edna Turnblad, Adam Shankman inadvertently changes her character. He first of all shows that "the performance of both femininity and masculinity can be undertaken by men and woman" (Bateman 722). This portrayal of femininity is done very well as one gets lost in her character and forget that she is even being played by a male figure. One way John Travolta expresses masculinity through the female character is done through being a dominant character. Compared to the first film, Edna presents herself as a much more domineering character. A depiction of Edna's dominance is portrayed when she decides what Tracy should do in her future without consulting her husband. She also kicks her husband out of the house when she catches him with another woman. She is seen as the alpha member of the family.

The second character that they portray differently in the film is Motormouth Maybelle. Waters does not do this by casting the character in a different fashion, but by shaping her personality differently. The 1988 version of Hairspray classifies itself as a dramatic comedy featuring musical pieces. Waters focuses on the comedy aspect of his film in such a way that it could almost be seen as a parody of black integration. He takes every aspect of black integration and intensifies it to make it comical. One of these aspects is the character of Motormouth Maybelle. Motormouth Maybelle fills the position of the black host on "The Corny Collins Show" every Negro day, which the show hosts once a month. Compared to her counter-host, Corny Collins, the audience sees Maybelle as a blabbering woman who loves music. No one takes Motormouth Maybelle seriously because not only is she a woman, but she is also black. She is only seen as comic relief.

Adam Shankman goes in a completely different direction with Maybelle's character. His film is embodied as a musical romantic comedy concerning black integration. Though his film has comedic aspects to it, it mostly focuses on the story of black integration on Baltimore television. It attains a much more serious tone then its previous display on black integration. One of the ways that Adam Shankman does this is by changing the personality of Maybelle. Though he keeps her name as Motormouth Maybelle he never flaunts it. He does not let audiences form their opinion of Motormouth Maybelle's character as it relates to her name. By doing this, he does not use her as comic relief, but helps her be distinguished as an important character. He not only has her seen as the other talk show host, but also gives her a true personality. He casts Queen Latifah as Motormouth Maybelle to portray her as an outspoken female who stands up for what she believes in. Since many viewers respect Queen Latifah as an actress to begin with, she is not instantly observed as comic relief, but is regarded as dignified. He even devotes an entire song to her concerning black integration called, "I know where I've been." This song is about standing up for what people believe in. It discusses the road that black people have to take for acceptance and freedom. It also discusses the hardships and struggle they all have to endure to receive acknowledgement and recognition by the people of the United States.

Though there are many differences in the way these two films portray gender, they also have similarities. Tracy Turnblad is played by two pleasantly plump girls who understand their beliefs and want to fight for them. They are both portrayed as the protagonist of the film and discerned as strong willed and outspoken. For example, they both defend their hairstyle during class because a student complains they cannot see the board. They fight for their right to portray their individuality. It is riveting to see what being outspoken and following what ones believe in can truly accomplish if one never gives up and always fight. It is also interesting because in the 1980's women were still looked down upon and was not supposed to have opinions. It was assumed that they respect their authority figures without attest. Since both directors see it as very important to show Tracy as a woman with an opinion, they acknowledge their views of her personality by portraying it throughout the film.

They also cast two skinny blonde girls as the antagonist of this film. Amber von Tussle is a girl who everyone wants to be like. Amber realizes this and flaunts her good looks and dancing talent to win the affection of her classmates. When Tracy comes along and out-dances Amber, she gets very upset and tries to sabotage Tracy's attempts to join the show. During Tracy's interview, she throws out snide comments to try to make the rest of the committee look down on Tracy as well. Both directors feel it very important to show Amber as someone who always gets what she wants. The directors both feel that casting "ugly people to play beauties" and "beauties to play uglies" plays a significant role in the story (Braendlin 167). With her good looks on her side, Amber is seen as beautiful on the outside, but hideous on the inside. On the other hand, even though Tracy is not seen as the typical beauty pageant queen, she does entrance audiences with her fiery attitude and desire to accomplish anything. In this way, the audience starts to see the importance of personality. They pull away from the notion that being beautiful will make them successful.

In Hairspray, the audience sees the many similarities and differences in either director's take on gender. As for which film is better, the newer film relates to audiences in a more fluent and identifiable way. While keeping audiences engaged with its advanced dance numbers and outrageous songs, it also adds an original look on the spectacular story by portraying a few supporting characters with different personalities. It also keeps some of the silliness of the original film, so audiences do not get too wrapped up in the soberness of the story. It keeps the movie light with a unique script, while also portraying the black civil rights movement and how much of a struggle it really was. The older film, on the other hand, focuses too much on witty costumes and nonsense dialogue. It does not show depth in the message that the story is telling and instead flaunts black integration as comical. Though John Waters incorporates a different approach in catching audience's attention by casting Divine, it does not seem to be enough to carry the weight of the entire film. Overall, the new film overrules the classic by keeping audiences engaged throughout the entire film. It will be an entertaining and thoughtful movie for many years to come, which is more than anyone can say for its older counterpart.

Works cited

Bateman, David. "Project Muse." Hairspray 15 Aug 2002 719-722. 28 Oct 2008 .

Benshoff, Harry. Queer Cinema: The Film Reader. 1. New York: Routledge, 2004.

Braendlin, Bonnie. Cultural Power/Cultural Literacy. Tallahassee: The Florida State University Press, 1989.

Hairspray. Dir. Adam Shankman. Perfs. Nikki Blonksy, John Travolta, Zac Efron. DVD. New Line Cinema, 2007.

Hairspray. Dir. John Waters. Perfs. Rikki Lake, Deborah Harry, Michael St. Gerard. DVD. New Line Cinema, 1988