Into the Woods Official Movie Thread- Page 137

[Spil.Berg]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:16am

I actually LOVED THE READER and Kate in it. It was a daring film,

and IMHO Kate deserved the OSCAR even though Angelia was really good in Changeling. It was a great year for Stephen for Billy and The Reader Updated On: 11/24/14 at 12:16 AM

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:20am

Here is a brief interview that Lilla Crawford did.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KhRc7NLzYl4

[Musical Master]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:35am

I'm really liking the positive reviews from people who have seen it at screenings, liking Streep, the cast, the songs and their staging, the production design, Rob Marshall's direction etc.

It does make me curious of how the critics will think about it. Didn't the same thing happen when LES MISERABLES was playing during it's screenings?

But from the clips and footage I've seen... I'm in for a treat!

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 1:38am

Here is what Billboard predicts might happen with Oscar nominations.


Disney Musical 'Into the Woods' Swoops Into Awards Season -- How Far Can It Go?

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 6:36am

"It does make me curious of how the critics will think about it. Didn't the same thing happen when LES MISERABLES was playing during it's screenings?"

No, Les Mis actually got much better first reactions than this film. The first Led Mis screening was at the Lincoln Centre in New York to Broadway geeks. There was never a chance it would not get flat out raves. But then it ultimately got mixed reviews when the embargo got lifted.

Into the woods was screened for LA critics, voters and bloggers and obviously wouldn't get the reaction Les Mis did. In these circumstances, the reactions ITW is much better than Les Mis because of the type of audience, so that's a good thing.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 10:04am

Besty, your point about the difference between a character disappearing from the film with a good deal of screen time left as opposed to a character coming into a film and taking over is typically insightful coming from you. I hadn't really thought about it, but it makes a lot of sense. I guess I get why they want to push Blunt as lead, and obviously Joanna Gleason managed to get that lead actress Tony over someone in a star vehicle like Patti LuPone, but I think the more time passes, the more we realize what Joanna Gleason achieved with that character is in a class of its own and I'm not quite sure anyone will be able to make the Baker's Wife feel as much of a centerpiece and as effortlessly as she did.
I was annoyed when Marion Cotillard was campaigned as lead actress for a clearly supporting role in NINE. Though Cotillard was fantastic in the movie, she was left out of a weak field that included such unforgettable performances as Helen Mirren in THE LAST STATION. Hopefully Blunt can gain some traction over the intolerable Hillary Swank.

[GoSmileLaughCryClap]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 11:25am

Deadline Hollywood is in love.
Deadline Hollywood on Into the Woods

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:10pm

"but I think the more time passes, the more we realize what Joanna Gleason achieved with that character is in a class of its own and I'm not quite sure anyone will be able to make the Baker's Wife feel as much of a centerpiece and as effortlessly as she did."

Everything about this. Which is why Emily Blunt had/has such a hard uphill battle to climb. She is taking on one of the best and trickiest characters in musical theatre. The way the role is written, it isn't really a leading role. Joanna just made it her own in a way no one can really copy effectively and was amaze-balls at it. To put it bluntly. ( haha)

Updated On: 11/24/14 at 12:10 PM

[Larcen26]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:21pm

"but I think the more time passes, the more we realize what Joanna Gleason achieved with that character is in a class of its own and I'm not quite sure anyone will be able to make the Baker's Wife feel as much of a centerpiece and as effortlessly as she did."

I very much disagree with this.
Much like with Hairspray, and other shows (Hairspray is the best example) Into the Woods has both a LEAD and a STAR...which are separate roles.
In Hairspray, Edna is clearly the star of the show...but Tracy is the lead.

In Into the Woods, The Witch is the star, but The Baker's Wife is the lead.

Even the creative team considered The Baker's Wife to be the lead. I wish I could find the quote, but I read once that the team wasn't thinking of Bernadette for The Witch because she was too much of a star to be interested in the Secondary lead.

Oftentimes, The Baker's wife gets overlooked and discounted in a production, but no matter what, she is always the lead.

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:23pm

Disagree. The Baker is the lead. The Baker's wife is more of a supporting role. The way the character is set up, she can't possibly be the lead of the whole show.

[Larcen26]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:25pm

"Disagree. The Baker is the lead. The Baker's wife is more of a supporting role. The way the character is set up, she can't possibly be the lead of the whole show."

Can we agree on Female lead at least?

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:28pm

I think the character is always on the fence of being a lead or supporting. There isn't a real clear answer with how the role is written. I have to ask, would you feel the same way if Kerry O'Malley was the original Baker's wife and you never saw Joanna Gleason do it?

[Larcen26]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:30pm

Aside from the Broadway productions where "Star Status" dictates such things, I have never seen a single production of Into the Woods where I didn't feel that the Baker's Wife deserved the final bow.

The Baker and his Wife are the leads of the show, and of the two, the Baker's wife has better songs, scenes and a much more defined character arc.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:34pm

I didn't say the Baker's Wife was a lead or not, but rather that the character stands on a grey area. Regardless of the creative team's intention, it's hard to think of the Baker's Wife as a conventional lead. She CAN be as depicted by Gleason and Lapine's original vision as a director (though even at the time Gleason won a Drama Desk for Featured Actress in a Musical), but it's easy to allow the performance and the character be more supporting. Gleason somehow made the role feel as relevant to the piece as Momma Rose is to GYPSY, if Blunt is able to do that, she has a good chance of getting in for lead, but it doesn't seem like it from the reviews.

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:37pm

If you look at the history:

-Joanna was nominated (and won) in the Leading category for the tony awards BUT she was nominated (and won) in the supporting category for the Drama desk awards. Bernadette peters was put in the Leading category at the drama desk awards.

-In the 1991 Original London production, Imelda Staunton was nominated (and won) in the Leading category for the Olivier awards.

- In 1999 Sophie Thompson won the Olivier for Best leading actress for the 2nd revival of ITW.

- In 2002 Vanessa Williams portrayal of the Witch was nominated in the Leading actress category at the tony awards for the Broadway revival. Kerrie was not nominated, but she was nominated for a drama desk award in the Supporting category.

So as you can see, It had flipped back and forth and there really isn't a consensus.


Updated On: 11/24/14 at 12:37 PM

[Larcen26]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:43pm

I get that the only "tangible" way to measure it is through the nominations...
But those are as much about (for the lack of a better word) Politics than anything else.

Remember the whole Joel Grey debacle in the Chicago Revival...

It comes down, to me, to looking at the show itself. And The Witch is Supporting/Featured, and The Baker's Wife is the lead.

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:45pm

ray-andallthatjazz86 hit it on the head.

Sadly I have to agree about Blunt. It doesn't seem like she will elevate the material in her own way like Gleason did. Many have tried and failed but I am still looking forward to her performance. Awards aren't everything.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:46pm

Staunton actually won the Olivier for Best Actress in a musical.

Three wins for Best Actress in a musical between the Tonys and the Oliviers is pretty solid reasoning for looking at the role as lead, Kerry O'Malley's Drama Desk nom not withstanding.

[Larcen26]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:47pm

I guess I'm honestly just surprised that people feel that The Baker's Wife is a role that needs to be elevated by a performance.

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:49pm

"Three wins for Best Actress in a musical between the Tonys and the Oliviers is pretty solid reasoning for looking at the role as lead, Kerry O'Malley's Drama Desk nom not withstanding."

But then the obvious question has to come up, Why wasn't Kerry O Malley put in the leading category for Drama Desk? Same with Joanna and Drama desk?

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:50pm

Can we just pretend Kerry O'Malley didn't happen to INTO THE WOODS altogether?

[ShakinBaconGirl]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 12:53pm

"Staunton actually won the Olivier for Best Actress in a musical."

My mistake. While we are on the subject of Staunton, did anyone here see the original London production? I have searched far and wide for more videos of it but I always come up with very little. The production looked absolutely bonkers.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 1:08pm

People keep pointing out in these articles the possibility of another musical cracking the Best Picture Oscar nominee list, but they actually have a much bigger hurdle than that.

It's a fantasy and a fairy tale.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can think of only two fairy tales ever nominated for a Best Picture Oscar --- The Wizard of Oz and Beauty and the Beast (Disney).

Only one fantasy film has ever won (LOTR-Return of the King), and the other two Rings movies were also nominated. You MIGHT get away with calling them "fairy tales" of sorts, and if you really stretch it, throw in "Star Wars" which is sci-fi, but also has a fairy tale approach to it (patterned in part after The Wizard of Oz, according to Lucas).

Yes, "Into the Woods" is a musical, and musicals aren't often recognized with Best Picture nominations ... but fairy tales? Even more of a long shot.

I'm not saying it won't be nominated, but if it is, that's really something to celebrate. Talk about beating the odds.

[PianoMann]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 1:47pm

People keep pointing out in these articles the possibility of another musical cracking the Best Picture Oscar nominee list, but they actually have a much bigger hurdle than that.

It's a fantasy and a fairy tale.

I agree that the film has an uphill battle due to its genre, best12bars, but I think it has some important distinctions that may help it nab a Best Picture nomination. It certainly has Oscar pedigree both in front of and behind the camera (Rob Marshall, Meryl Streep, Stephen Sondheim), has the backing and campaigning of one of the heavyweight Disney studio, and is one of the most esteemed musicals of the last few decades. It's also quite a sophisticated and adult interpretation of fairy tales, elevating what could be considered family fare to something much more high-brow.

Although I'm not sure how the work of Sondheim could / would compare to Tolkein's in terms of honorary status, they are both obviously influential and revered figures, and therefore screen adaptations of their works carry a similar panache.

I certainly don't agree with your assessment, but I think Into the Woods is in a unique position and should definitely be in the conversation despite the genre biases of the Academy.

[best12bars]

Posted: 11/24/14 at 2:08pm

I'm not saying it shouldn't be in the conversation, only that the "musical" genre isn't nearly as much of a long shot as the "fairy tale" genre for past nominees.

I think it stands a good chance of being nominated, which is saying a lot (based on history).