Just to set the context: since mid September 2017, I've been watching American films (and a handful of British) that are tagged in IMDb with Genre Music or Musical, or that I think of being in that vein. I'm watching them in Release Date sequence, beginning with 1927. I'm currently in 1945, and have viewed more than 400 such films. (Confession: I've skipped all singing cowboy movies, and in the early years I didn't search for online viewing as thoroughly as I've done for most years since.) The breakdown by Genre: 428 total, 350 Musical, 84 Music, 7 both (and that doesn't add up, because 1 title displays the wrong genre, reported here. Here's the search for both; the numbers will grow soon.)
I'm well aware of the IMDb definitions for these Genres, but find them confusing. Here they are:
Musical Should contain several scenes of characters bursting into song aimed at the viewer (this excludes songs performed for the enjoyment of other characters that may be viewing) while the rest of the time, usually but not exclusively, portraying a narrative that alludes to another Genre. Note: not to be added for titles that are simply music related or have music performances in them; e.g., pop concerts do not apply. Also, classical opera, since it is entirely musical, does not apply and should instead be treated as Music. Objective.
Music Contains significant music-related elements while not actually being a Musical; this may mean a concert, or a story about a band (either fictional or documentary). Subjective.
Why confusing? Because most Musicals that I've watched in this project are about people who create some form of musical entertainment. Think 42nd Street (1933), about a newly professional singer/dancer who has to go out onstage, give it her all, and come back a star. Films about the creation of neighborhood fundraisers, radio broadcasts, musical stage plays are all "music related or have music performances in them," as are biopics about composers, singers and dancers, sometimes even impresarios and talent agents. Very seldom is the music performed "burst into" or aimed more at us than at characters onscreen. (Everything onscreen is inherently aimed at us.) Yet most of these movies I've watched are NOT labeled Music. Nor am I advocating that they should be. But they seem to fit the definition.
Please recall the title of my post: ... Why do we want these genres separated? What IS the value of being able to select Music films separately from Musical films, even if all were tagged correctly?
The recent Oscar-winner Coco (2017), is an animated feature about a child who goes on a quest to meet his deceased ancestor, and both happen to be singers; this is tagged Music. Yet Moana (2016), an animated feature about a child who goes on a quest that is not centered on characters who are singers, is tagged Musical. If you agree with the distinction, can you explain it to me? They are both films with onscreen characters who perform several songs onscreen.
Should the definitions be refined, to sound less Either/Or, and more like Music is a sub-genre? So that more films, like La La Land (2016), tagged both Music and Musical, would show up on both lists? If so, does that mean that hundreds of old movies should be tagged with both as well?
Do we have 2 definitions because people shake their heads violently if The Last Waltz (1978) is tagged as a Musical? Should we merge the definitions and call the genre "Music/al"?
