To dub or not to dub? When it comes to music biopics, it's the only question

In “Judy,” Renee Zellweger does her own singing instead of having Judy Garland’s voice dubbed into the film. That was a mistake.Photo: David Hindley / Roadside Attractions

Any time someone makes a musical biopic, the choice must be made: live singing or dubbing? Does the star of the movie do all the vocals, or does the movie rely on dubbing in the real singer’s voice?

A lot hangs on that decision.“Bohemian Rhapsody”就不会没有房地美Mercu相同ry’s voice blasting out of the theater speakers. (Though, his voice was mixed with that of two others, including star Rami Malek.) Conversely, it seems to me acolossal mistake that “Judy,”the new Judy Garland biopic,didn’tuse Garland’s voice, but letpoor Renee Zellwegergo out there and drown in scene after scene.

But here’s the thing: The right course is not the same for every movie. Sometimes dubbing is the way to go. Other times it’s fine for the star to let loose and belt it out. Filmmakers should figure out which of the following scenarios they’re in before making their choice.

So how do you know when to make the right call? Here’s a guide:

Tom Hiddleston did an adequate re-creation of well-known Hank Williams songs in “I Saw the Light.”Photo: Sam Emerson / Sony Pictures Classics

1. Adequate recordings of the singer are just not available.

This situation is easy. Then there is no choice. Every recording of Enrico Caruso is tinny and scratchy, so Mario Lanza did all the singing in “The Great Caruso” (1951), and he was great. The recorded legacy of Hank Williams sounds considerably better, but those recordings also sound old. For “Your Cheatin’ Heart” (1964), Hank Williams Jr. dubbed his father’s voice (George Hamilton starred), and though Junior’s voice even at 15 years old was considerably deeper than his old man’s, he had the style right. Forthe 2016 Williams biopic, “I Saw the Light,” Tom Hiddlestondid his own vocals, and he was perfectly adequate.

2. Sometimes the recorded output is vast and of high quality, but you have an actor who really sounds like the singer.

“The Doors” (1991) might not be a great movie, but Val Kilmer sounds so much like Jim Morrison that there was no point in dubbing in old recordings. The same was the case with “Coal Miner’s Daughter” (1980): Sissy Spacek sounded very much like Loretta Lynn (in some cases, even better). A filmmaker has more flexibility if the actor is actually singing, so, in a situation like this, the choice is clear.

In “The Runaways,” Dakota Fanning (left) as Cherie Currie and Kristen Stewart as Joan Jett did their own singing.Photo: David Moir / Apparition

3. Not enough people know the difference.

“The Runaways” (2010), the story of the revolutionary 1970s girl band, is a terrific movie, and most people watching won’t know that Dakota Fanning sounds nothing like lead singer Cherie Currie and that Kristen Stewart sounds a lot like Joan Jett. Actually,Iknew, because I was obsessed with them as a teenager, but I loved the movie anyway.

Sometimes the choice is clear. When the subject of a biopic simply cannot be imitated, their voice must be dubbed, as was done in “Ray,” starring Jamie Foxx.Photo: Nicola Goode / Universal Pictures

4. No one, but no one, sounds like the original star.

In that case, it should be easy. Freddie Mercury,Ray Charles (“Ray”), Tina Turner (“What’s Love Got to Do With It”), Al Jolson (“The Jolson Story”), Edith Piaf (“Ma Vie en Rose”), Patsy Cline (“Sweet Dreams”) — theyhadto be dubbed. And they were. And the movies were successful.

But it’s in this category that the problems crop up. The filmmakers must know — and the actors must have the humility to appreciate — when they’re depicting someone who can’t be imitated. I think, for example, it was a mistake thatJoaquin Phoenixsang asJohnny Cash in “Walk the Line.”The movie was good, but the performance scenes were a bust, because Phoenix just didn’t have the voice. No one does.

Taron Egerton could not do justice to Elton John’s songs in “Rocketman.”Photo: David Appleby / Paramount Pictures

A less clear-cut case was“Rocketman.” Conceivably someone could have done justice to the vocals of Elton John. But clearly, it was not Taron Egerton.

Which brings us back to “Judy.” This is the part I don’t understand. How could anyone who appreciates Judy Garland’s voice not know that she couldn’t be imitated? I could see someone thinking maybe, just maybe, they could do the vocals in a movie about, say, Mick Jagger or David Bowie. But you should not even imagine trying to sound like Robert Plant, or Maria Callas, or Joni Mitchell. You have to let some people sing for themselves.

The people who made “Judy” had one and only play here, and they didn’t see it. They should have put Zellweger onstage, have her move her lips, and put Judy to work for them.

点评:“朱迪”将是一个伟大的电影,如果任ee Zellweger had one important thing

Insight on downside of fame helped Zellweger understand Judy Garland

Review: ‘Rocketman’ is a self-pitying mess with great songs — sung badly

‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ is splashy, half-true and just right for Freddie Mercury