Personally my biggest beef with the second half of the musical is that when LRRH mentions that they shouldn't be trying to kill the giant because "she's a person, and shouldn't that be wrong?" She never gets an answer. And it's actually a darn good question. "She's hurting people" doesn't seem to be a complete enough answer - why does she have to be killed?
But then, a lot of musicals have problems with their second acts, and Sondheim is no exception. The first act of "Sunday in the Park with George" is brilliant, but the second act never quite finds its voice. Setup is easy; resolution is hard!
@Mrtrobz, I think that "Giant's in the Sky" will show Jack and The Baker in real time and we flashback to the times when Jack climbed the beanstalk and we never see the Giants at all during the song.
sarahb- The line in the show (it may have changed in the movie) is "But the giant is a person. Aren't we to show forgiveness? Mother will be very unhappy with these circumstances."
The brilliance is that she DOESN'T get an answer because there IS no real "answer." Is the Witch wrong for wanting to give jack to the Giantess, when the cold hard facts are that he stole from them and killed her husband and his actions are mainly responsible for the horrible events that have transpired from the Giantess coming down the second beanstalk?
Are the Baker, LRRH and Cinderella wrong for not wanting to sacrifice a child to a Giantess who, though her anger is valid, HAS been causing distress and chaos to a community of many innocent people?
You decide what's right. You decide what's good. Mother cannot guide you.
"Sing the words, Patti!!!!" Stephen Sondheim to Patti LuPone.
As true as that is about you decide, it is ultimately the Witch's fault for the beans' existence.
And if she wasn't at fault for the beans and what happened when they were given away, then she wouldn't have been so careless with them when she said, "Here you want a bean?" and starts tossing them haphazardly.
Sure one could blame Jack, but what Jack did was wonder around and when the Giant saw him he wasn't too keen and chased him despite the fact his wife embraced him.
It's quite careless, as well, for the Giant to follow someone down a stalk he's never been down before and then think that the person he's following will allow him to do so.
Had the giant not been so angry over something so little as a visitor his wife welcomed, the events wouldn't have transpired as they had and had the Witch not have had beans that she did't keep a good eye on, none of this would have happened and then we wouldn't have such a great musical with fantastic points to discuss.
Little Red Riding Hood should not get an answer to that question. That's the point of "No One Is Alone": "Witches can be right, giants can be good, YOU decide what's right, YOU decide what's good." It's not "the authors decide what's right" or some sort of moral hierarchical power decides what's right. That's the beauty of INTO THE WOODS. I call bologne on those people who say the tonal shift in the second act (in the show, no idea how Marshall handles it) doesn't work. It's one of the most genius ways to approach a second act, and INTO THE WOODS would not be INTO THE WOODS without that second act, just like SUNDAY IN THE PARK WITH GEORGE would not be what it is without that second act. To say that the second act of those shows don't work is to entirely miss the point of each piece, and to miss the genius of how Lapine and Sondheim brought postmodernism to the Broadway musical.
"Some people can thrive and bloom living life in a living room, that's perfect for some people of one hundred and five. But I at least gotta try, when I think of all the sights that I gotta see, all the places I gotta play, all the things that I gotta be at"
I agree that most of the negative one's do not really get the show. Act 2 is what really makes Into the Woods so special and wonderful! So, with that said, I really am only going to take the positive reviews seriously, because the positive reviews seem to "get it", and do not write out of disappointment that it is not the stage show.
When is the New York Times review coming out? When is Deadline coming out also, because if Pete Hammond's early reaction tweets are anything to go by, the review will be a rave!
I don't know if this has been posted before but in case it hasn't here is a featurette currently running at select Regal Cinemas that will be showing the film
You go to the video on YouTube, click on the "Share" link underneath the video, then click on "Embed" in the shaded below below it, copy the embed link, and then paste it into the body of your post.
It is really bizarre that with the strong vibe this film is getting, Disney chose only one critic to quote in Sunday's New York Times ad, and it is Richie Ridge from BWW. Remember..he LOVED the Jersey Boys film. He pretty much LOVES everything. I Loved the film as well. but really? Richard Ridge? Look for the ad on his Instagram. I can't figure out how to post it.
I 100% agree with you, casting Sophia Grace Brownlee in the role was the equivalent of casting Pierce Brosnan in a musical film...oh wait....
Thank goodness that Crawford won the role in the end and she's great in that new clip. I have a feeling that she's going to be one of the films many highlights.
She is a standout in her role. She's hysterical, got amazing pipes and just gets that teen [as she is one] attitude that Red needs. I would actually be interested to see what they were planning on doing before the recast...I mean, really, who thought casting that girl was smart to begin with? After seeing Lilla in it, I couldn't imagine that little girl even trying to get through the opening number.
I don't get why the critics keep thinking Little Red and Jack are too young for the sexual awakening subtext. They are both teenagers, at the very beginning of sexual awakening! I know I awoke around 13... And they're what, both 14?
The Parental Advisory page for Into the Woods has been updated. There is one error in it though. It says that Jack's Mother is clubbed in the head, and dies, but apparently, in the movie she is just pushed, hits her head on a giant tree root, then dies.
The rest seems to be accurate, and it seems to have been updated by people who have seen it.
Under "Violence and Gore" it has a 6/10 (which I think has been overrated)
Under "Frightening and Intense Scenes"it has a 7/10 (which I think is slightly overrated.)
Thank you Carlos.. Will be curious to see if they run the Richie Ridge quote anywhere else or if it is only in the New York paper. Really... They might as well have quoted Corine Cohen.
I know that basically anyone can edit these IMDB pages, but some of the statements written are just ridiculous: "The Witch and Rapunzel have another heated yelling and screaming fight. This is more real-feeling as it is not done through song." I mean, why watch a musical, if you don't take the songs seriously?
Just to be clear, I ave NO problem with the tonal shift in act two of the play. In fact, when I showed it to my students, they didn't seem to have a problem with it either. Marshall's handling of that shift is where I have a problem. Given that I still think the rest of the movie is brilliant, it's really just that five minute change that felt really awkward to me.
Hi, Shirley Temple Pudding.
Maximum Thread Size of 5,000 Messages Reached Please Start a New Thread!