First of all, let me say that I believe firmly that a work of art should be judged on its own merits and not in comparison to its source. If we look at "Man of La Mancha" on its own it isn't bad - perhaps a little flat but not bad. The real problem is that the source (Cervantes' "Don Quixote") is simply too big to be able to confine it to the stage or screen. The subtle nuances that Cervantes gave us work beautifully when read - so that our minds can savor them. Humor is a fragile thing and that which is beautiful when written may all too often become slapstick on the stage or screen.
The difficulty in adapting "Don Quixote" to the screen is obvious - Orson Wells couldn't do it - Terry Gilliam couldn't do it. There is a TV movie with John Litgow and Bob Hoskins which is a credible effort - mostly because it doesn't try too hard.
And maybe that's the problem - maybe "Man of La Mancha" tries too hard.
The difficulty in adapting "Don Quixote" to the screen is obvious - Orson Wells couldn't do it - Terry Gilliam couldn't do it. There is a TV movie with John Litgow and Bob Hoskins which is a credible effort - mostly because it doesn't try too hard.
And maybe that's the problem - maybe "Man of La Mancha" tries too hard.