Musical mergers between Broadway and Hollywood usually are marriages of convenience, almost always the result of economic rather than artistic factors and frequently disasters in both categories. In 15 years, there have been only a few film musicals that have made money and just one -- "Cabaret" -- that achieved universal critical acclaim also. And the contenders have included such long-run stage giants as "Fiddler on the Roof," Hello, Dolly!" "Hair," "Grease" and "Godspell."
          Now it's "Annie's" turn and, despite breathless announcements of record budgets and worldwide talent hunts, history suggests that the project faces an uphill struggle. Aesthetic considerations aside, the final decision on the film "Annie" will be made at the box office, and there the picture is bleakest. Musical comedy adaptations account for less than 5 percent of history's most lucrative films. As of Jan. 1, 1981, the trade journal Variety listed the top grossing films of all time in the United States and Canada. According to that list, the top 10 film versions of musical comedies, with their dates and rental revenues, so far, were:

RANK        FILM TITLE         YEAR      REVENUE
  1    "Grease"                1978   $96.3 million
  2    "The Sound of Music"    1965   $80   million
  3    "Fiddler on the Roof"   1971   $50   million
  4    "Funny Girl"            1968   $26.3 million
  5    "Cabaret"               1972   $20   million
  6    "South Pacific"         1958   $17.5 million
  7    "Oliver!"               1969   $16.8 million
  8    "Hello, Dolly!"         1970   $15   million
  9    "Paint Your Wagon"      1969   $14.5 million
 10    "Camelot"               1967   $14   million

          In order to make a list of 10 films, it was necessary to seek as deep as 220th place on the all-time list -- "Camelot." "Grease was in fourth place, behind the two "Star Wars" films and "Jaws." Even more revealing, however, was a list in the same issue of Variety showing which big budget films (over $10 million) had made back their costs. Producers guard specific budget information religiously and film cost are mostly speculative, especially when the budgets are less than $10 million.
          Of the four top-10 musicals on the Variety list, which goes back to 1956, only one -- "Oliver!" with a $6.8 million profit -- paid for itself. "Camelot," "Hello, Dolly!" and "Paint Your Wagon" have not. Interestingly, the top six films were not on the big-budget list, implying that they cost less than $10 million. If so, the return on "Grease," must be tenfold, with "The Sound of Music," "Fiddler," "Cabaret" and "South Pacific" not far behind.
          Recently, two recognized experts were asked to comment upon the perilous path from stage to screen. Lehman Engel is an institution in the musical theater, a Broadway conductor whose work goes back to 1936, a composer for both stage and electronic media, author of nine books on the subject, a three-time Tony Award winner and, for several years, head of the Broadcast Music Inc. (BMI) Musical Theatre Workshop.
          Miles Kreuger is unknown outside the business but a legend inside it as the collector of the most complete and organized body of musical theater materials in the known world. Currently an instructor at the University of Southern California, Kreuger heads the Institute of the Americal Musical in Los Angeles.
          Kreuger says there was an era when film musicals did work, whether inspired by a play or not, and were elevated to the status of art. That was the period from the advent of talking films to the late 1950s. In Kreuger's view, there are two ways to go at transferring a musical play to film, remaining true to the show's roots and re-creating the theatrical effect, as in "The Pajama Game," for example, or the using of the stage material as a springboard to create a new vision, as with "Cabaret."
          "Highly stylized levels of reality are the hardest to transfer to film," he said. That's why 'Hair,' 'Man of La Mancha' and 'West Side Story' don't work. It would have been necessary to alter the material so drastically that a whole new work would have had to emerge. That's why they're having such difficulties planning a film of 'A Chorus Line.' Nobody has come up with a valid visual concept."
          "When I heard 'A Chorus Line' was to be done as a film," agreed Engel, "I cringed. It's basically and fundamentally a stage piece. When those dancers start talking and singing of their lives when they were growing up, the film will be forced into flashbacks."
          Engel and Kreuger agree on the film version of "The Sound of Music," too. It's better, they say, than the play. "That's because the camera so loves the Alps and Salzburg," Engel said.
          "The beauty of the setting heightens the sense of loss and outrage when the Nazis invade," agreed Kreuger.
          A conclusion, therefore, is that a musical being adapted for the screen has a better chance if the setting is more accessible to camera than it is to the stage. Such is not necessarily the case with "Annie" and its series of interiors. Such is certainly not the case with "A Chorus Line," which is set ... backstage in a theater.
          "Everybody directing or forming a film version of a musical seems to say 'I'm going to be different,'" observed Engel. "Sometimes they cut out the best material." He cited the filming of "Oklahoma!", in which one of the villain's songs was cut, leaving the character totally without motivation. "I guess the filmmakers felt 'Lonely Room' would never be a pop tune," Engel said.
          Both agree that having the original creators of a stage musical handle its transferral to film guarantees nothing.
          "It depends on who they are," said Engel. "It would be nice to have them around at least as advisers. Remember, these are people of great talent who have spent years honing and shaping this material. But, of course, Jerome Robbins walked off the set of 'West Side Story' and Leonard Bernstein and Stephen Sondheim refused to be involved."
          "Having a majority of the original creators helped 'The Pajama Game,' for instance," said Kreuger, "but look at 'Cabaret.' Only one actor, Joel Gray, carried over from the stage version and none of the creative staff was the same."
          Stars don't make an automatic difference, either. Barbra Streisand made money in "Funny Girl" but couldn't help "Hello, Dolly!" Julie Andrews wasn't considered a big enough name for the film of "My Fair Lady," so Audrey Hepburn was substituted. By the time "The Sound of Music" was shot a few years later, Andrews was inserted in a role created by Ethel Merman. Natalie Wood replaced the original star of "West Side Story," Carol Lawrence, while Ethel Merman has been replaced by everyone from Rosalind Russell to Doris Day.
          "More musical films have been ruined by having the wrong star than helped by having the right star," said Kreuger. "There's no hard rule. It depends on the vision of the filmmaker. Certainly it has nothing to do with the marketing push toward lavish production values. 'Cabaret' was done in mono sound and no wide screen."
          "You can't just photograph a musical as it appeared on stage," Engel said. "You've got to expand it. But you've got to retain its emotional flair. If you disturb that emotional core, you're in trouble."
          "Cabaret" and "The Sound of Music" got high marks from both experts. "West Side Story" and "Fiddler on the Roof" were condemned by both. Engel chose not to pursue the specifics much further, but Kreuger had no such hesitation. His short list of goodies included the above plus "The Pajama Game," "The Gay Divorcee," "Damn Yankees," "Bells Are Ringing," "The King and I," "Call Me Madame" and "Grease." "Miraculously, 'Grease' worked for me," he admitted. "I thought the stage version was grubby."