Streep's new song reportedly cut from final film- Page 5

[matttaylorr021]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 5:31pm

Here is the full article from EW:

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/08/14/into-the-woods-rob-marshall/

[matttaylorr021]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 5:31pm

Here is the full article from EW:

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2014/08/14/into-the-woods-rob-marshall/

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 5:33pm

^That's been posted already, but thanks regardless.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 9:35pm

"He also guarantees die-hard 'Woods' fans that their favorite moments from the classic musical will be included in the new version. "It's all there," he promises."

Does that mean "No More" is now in or does it mean that "No More" doesn't count as part of "all" or does it mean that Marshall is promising something he doesn't intend to deliver?

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 9:50pm

It was a silly thing to promise, seeing that unless it was filmed exactly as it is on stage (which we all know it wasn't) there isn't any way everyone's favorite moments are in ("Ever After" was one of mine). Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's called an adaptation for a reason.

I definitely think that the loss of that new song means Rapunzel will die. Who cares about what was in and out at a screening over a month ago, they've clearly been doing lots of work on it so who knows what changes have been made. Does anyone think they'll go and put the "Lament" back in? It's probably unlikely, but who knows.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 9:51pm

^^It's MOMENTS not songs that Marshall promised. Personally, I hope the moment where The Baker's Wife comes back (in spirit form) to help her husband out of a rut and tell their tale to their son.

Updated On: 8/14/14 at 09:51 PM

[Showface]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 10:01pm

That part was always there.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/14/14 at 10:22pm

^Really? I have not read the "leaked screenplay" so I wouldn't know. If that's the case, then GREAT! No other cut would matter to me at all. : )

[Showface]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 12:14pm

^Same here. None of the cuts really bother me.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 5:27pm

"Incorrect, songs in the credits are always eligible. "

I believe there's an odd rule like only the FIRST song in the credits is eligible, if they have a second it's not...

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 5:32pm

"^It would've been amazing if the songs in Guido's mind took place in real life and no one notices at all that these women appeared in Rome. But no, the screenwriters felt restricted to a "soundstage" because they felt it was the only way to make it "believeable" which isn't so. "

Am I missing something re Nine? You keep saying the producers and the screenwriters forced all this on Marshall--but wasn't it all ultimately Marshall's concept they were going with?

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 5:48pm

^Here's my theory, Anthony Minghella and Michael Tolkin wrote the screenplay which usually in pre-production, is not altered by the director at the moment and I have read the screenplay it is the same as the movie (with little changes here and there BY Marshall). So if there is anyone to really blame for using Marshall's concept in the pre-production and filming stages of NINE it would have to go to the writers, the director has some things to say but in the end it's a screenwriter who's vision you see on screen.

As for the producers/studio, they were hoping NINE would be another CHICAGO and promoted it as such. We all know how well THAT turned out.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 5:52pm

Your last point is valid. We'll have to agree to disagree on the rest--I think with most film's it's the director's vision you see. And Marshall apparently did do uncredited collaborations on the screenplay. There are exceptions (sometimes a producer is so in control that its really his vision--think Selsnick and Gone with the Wind,) but... Either way, I think marshall could have handled the screenplay with more imagination.

[Musical Master]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 6:03pm

That's true Eric, directors can mess around with a screenplay (ala Robert Stromberg and John Lee Hancock on touch ups to Linda Woolverton's screenplay of MALEFICENT), but at the same time, we don't really know HOW MUCH of Marshall's collaborations on the screenplay were present. I do know that the late Minghella and Tolkin still used Marshall's vision of CHICAGO and thought that it could work with their screenplay to NINE.

But I agree that Marshall could've handled the really weak screenplay better, and yet... The whole movie could've been better. So far for INTO THE WOODS, I think Marshall might more than make up for that.

(But it's starting to become a guilty pleasure movie for me)

Updated On: 8/16/14 at 06:03 PM

[bdn223]

Posted: 8/15/14 at 8:31pm

It is not that a song played over the credits is ineligible, but rather it hinders it from being nominated/winning based on new criteria for the Best Song award that went into effect for the 2008 Oscars or the year the Academy screwed over Marc Shaiman and Scott Wittman. Best Song's criteria used to be based on the song, and the context within the film. Then they changed the rules so that Best song is solely based off the song within the film. This may not seem like much but it meant that producers and studios could not longer send copies of the song on CD or a copy of it on the score to show its complexity or craftsmanship. Now they can only show a clip of the song as it is shown in the film, so songs that play only during the credits are severely hurt because they have no context within the movie.
Thus a song like Come So Far, which I can guess will likely be added as a curtain call to a revival of Hairspray, which was actually an excellent song was not nominated because of its use solely in the credits and instead a only songs that were in Slumdog Millionaire and a song from Wall-E were.

If it is in the credits, Sondhiem will likely be handed the Globe, but the Oscar is another story.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/16/14 at 5:49pm

All I know is that anytime I've seen Into the Woods, I've thought, "You know what this needs? Less songs and more flashbacks."

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 8/16/14 at 6:16pm

It's worth noting that WALL-E's song was only in the end credits, but those credits did continue the story in a stylized fashion.