#4301
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:18pm
Did you write that review before or after you saw the movie?
Into the Woods Official Movie Thread — Page 173
#4302
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:21pm
Went to a sold out matinee at the Ziegfeld today. Perfect theatre to see it in and with a crowd who very clearly knew the musical. When it faded to black at the final frame, the entire theatre let out a sigh of happiness and gave a huge round of heartfelt applause. It's not perfect, but it's pretty close. If I had to request one do-over it would be, as best12bars said, to give a bit more breathing room for the second half. Maybe an extra 2-3 minutes, just to really let the characters' emotions set in. But, honestly, I can't complain. Not when this is what we got.
Everyone is pretty stellar in this but we ALL must give special attention to Ms. Blunt who has made the finest Baker's Wife since Joanna Gleason. So much heart, wit, tenderness, spontaneity and a truly beautiful voice. And, to top it all off, it comes across as so effortless. It's the kind of performance that should be considered for every major acting award because she completely inhabits her character and becomes the most crucial piece of the movie without ever calling attention to herself. Sadly, because there are no "tricks" or tear-down-the-wall dramatics to her performance, it's very possible that she will be shut out of the Oscar race. But she should take comfort in knowing that she succeeded flawlessly with a part many talented actresses have failed in. It's amazing how when we all were dream casting this movie, her name never came up for the Baker's Wife. Now I can't imagine any other actress in Hollywood who could've done half of what she did.
Have every intention of going again. If today's crowd was any indication, I won't be the only one.
Also, all Hollywood directors take note of the 16-minute Prologue in this movie: THAT is how you f*cking direct a musical number.
Everyone is pretty stellar in this but we ALL must give special attention to Ms. Blunt who has made the finest Baker's Wife since Joanna Gleason. So much heart, wit, tenderness, spontaneity and a truly beautiful voice. And, to top it all off, it comes across as so effortless. It's the kind of performance that should be considered for every major acting award because she completely inhabits her character and becomes the most crucial piece of the movie without ever calling attention to herself. Sadly, because there are no "tricks" or tear-down-the-wall dramatics to her performance, it's very possible that she will be shut out of the Oscar race. But she should take comfort in knowing that she succeeded flawlessly with a part many talented actresses have failed in. It's amazing how when we all were dream casting this movie, her name never came up for the Baker's Wife. Now I can't imagine any other actress in Hollywood who could've done half of what she did.
Have every intention of going again. If today's crowd was any indication, I won't be the only one.
Also, all Hollywood directors take note of the 16-minute Prologue in this movie: THAT is how you f*cking direct a musical number.
"Sing the words, Patti!!!!" Stephen Sondheim to Patti LuPone.
#4303
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:22pm
- "Last Midnight". There really was no reason for her sing this song. It made no sense.
LOL, GIRL BYE!
LOL, GIRL BYE!
#4304
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:28pm
Sorry Ljay but The Witch's arc got so rushed and by the time Last Midnight came, there was just no impact. No weight to her character. She really got butchered in the 2nd half.
#4305
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:47pm
These reviews are making me excited. BTW: Is HELLO, LITTLE GIRL THAT disturbing and uncomfortable? My heart is full of joy, reading the comments that people were uncomfortable with it!
#4306
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:51pm
That scene was pretty abysmal if you ask me. It WAS disturbing, but not in the way it should have been.
#4307
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:52pm
I wasn't able to see it today because of the holidays but I'm going tomorrow and writing a review for it.
#4308
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:58pm
"It's like she didn't even care. "Oh that doesn't matter now". It's like she just got told that the sky is blue."
I found Kendrick's downplaying that line to be exactly right. And very smart and funny.
No, not exactly as if she had just been told that the sky was blue. Rather like she, a not very happily married woman who thinks she might be killed by a Giant at any moment, has just been told that her husband whom she - and the entire kingdom - already suspects is sleeping around has done exactly that. And not as if she didn't even care. But rather as if, amid all the madness of much greater import, she is putting on a good show that she doesn't.
I found Kendrick's downplaying that line to be exactly right. And very smart and funny.
No, not exactly as if she had just been told that the sky was blue. Rather like she, a not very happily married woman who thinks she might be killed by a Giant at any moment, has just been told that her husband whom she - and the entire kingdom - already suspects is sleeping around has done exactly that. And not as if she didn't even care. But rather as if, amid all the madness of much greater import, she is putting on a good show that she doesn't.
Updated On: 12/26/14 at 11:58 PM
#4309
Posted: 12/25/14 at 11:58pm
Then can't wait to read your review Musical Master! I loved reading everyone’s reviews so far!
This movie adaptation of Into the Woods was beautiful. Great. Fantastic. Wonderful. Amazing. All the little tiny “bad” things, were really just fine.
The whole ensemble is so strong and give such great performances. Everyone did great, really. My favorite character was the one I played in high school, Rapunzel’s Prince, partly because I played him but mostly because of his character, that his actor talked about, trying to be the best prince charming but failing hilariously…oh, and he’s so cute, of course.
I wish we saw the Witch actually transform like we saw for Cinderella. The camera showed us Cinderella's transformation in it's entirety but not the Witch’s. I felt gyped.
Emily Blunt really sang and acted so beautifully, her “Moments in the Woods” was so good and I felt so bad when she was about to die. Though, her death could have been shown slightly more, it was kind of hard to tell what happened to her until Jack said it.
I rationalized Rapunzel’s non-death and the “Witch’s Lament” as that the Witch is worried Rapunzel could die from the not listening to her because of the Giant out there and Rapunzel will meet a bad fate because of that, as opposed to when she actually does meet a bad fate via the original’s death. Her death still would have made more actual sense of the “Witch’s Lament” lyrics, and of the Witch leaving the world (I still wonder why she would leave it when Rapunzel’s still in it and there’s hope for her to be with the Witch?). I admit giving Jack to the Giant could be her way of saving Rapunzel from the Giant, but the question of why she leaves the world still lingers for me. Thankfully her “Last Midnight” was glorious and she didn’t “turn into” a tar pit, she sank into the earth and it left behind tar. So there is still the possibility she went to live with her mother, and made ugly again, as she asked for. Or at least, it fits that she got taken "away from this bunch".
Cinderella’s Mother’s appearance and singing was so beautiful. It makes me wonder why if her and the Baker’s Father and the Baker’s Wife could reappear, why not the rest of the cast singing the “Finale” as the living characters left the woods and rebuilt a home for themselves? It was an idea I had and one that James Marshall thought of but for some reason decided against in the end. The ending was beautiful, but then the "Finale" was reduced to a credits song that people got up and left during which I thought was quite bad to do to that wonderful music.
A lot of problems people had, like the children being too young or the tone shift and quick pacing and being too claustrophobic and feeling like a set and cutting too much from one story to the next and no imaginative directing – I found NONE of such problems with the film. The songs “I Know Things Now” and “Giants in the Sky” were kind of halting, but I think they did about the best they could do with them. Probably the only thing that could have improved them would have been if maybe Little Red sang to her Granny about why she strayed and caused the whole wolf problem (and just change the “at the end of the path was granny once again” to “at the end of the path, were you once again/I found you once again” or something), and if we saw the land of the giants. But the budget didn’t allow for that, as James Lapine revealed in an interview. And I guess Jack should have been merely climbing the tree (like climbing the beanstalk) and acting out things on the tree, not so much just walking on it and "dancing" on it. Also, would have been nice to see Cinderella’s ball, at least for the first time she danced with the prince and she ran away, but Lapine said the budget didn’t allow for that, either. I actually don’t think the characters singing “I Know Things Now” and “Giants in the Sky” to themselves, ala Cinderella (without the time-slowing) would have been bad…
I wasn’t even bothered by Johnny Depp, I thought he was pretty good, and the weird visualization of Little Red getting eaten and falling into his stomach to find granny was only a little poor, like how his stomach looked like sheets, but that was about it.
I think the editing and cutting that makes movies actually improved upon the show, allowing for things to happen quickly. I wish Cinderella’s transformation and Rapunzel’s tears had magic special effects (leaves blowing around Cinderella were actual leaves and not actual magic, the magic was invisible, and I wish it was visible, like the flashes of light, puffs of smoke, et cetera in the rest of the film. I would have chosen a sparkly glow for Cinderella's transformation and a tiny glimmer of light as the tears heal the prince's eyes for Rapunzel.).
The title of the film should have appeared at the very beginning! And we go through the letter “o” into the next scene just like the leaked script described! Oh well...
I found it odd when “On the Steps of the Palace” had the lyrics “you’re starting to stick to the steps of the palace” and “you’re still standing stuck in this stuff on the steps” and…Cinderella was doing none of those things. Her shoes were, which kind of “represented” it, and I know that her moving around the steps is much more dynamic, but I found it weird and I think we could have just gotten enough acting and movement from Cinderella’s upper body as she stood in the pitch to make a little more sense of the song…
The Prince’s dalliance with the Baker’s Wife was great…but when we come back to them at the end of it, instead of acting like they were only kissing, they should have changed it and left it open for audiences to think “maybe they did have sex” that would fly over kids and even some parents heads, because honestly, they would not merely want to kiss each other.
Oh, the Witch should have told Rapunzel “I was going to come back for you when you had learned your lesson” so we know she wasn’t banishing Rapunzel for good. That part got cut and I wonder why, I feel they mistakenly did it. I feel James Corden should have started to show the pain and sad emotions over his wife’s death as soon as he learned of it. He did finally show it in the scene after, but if you learn your wife’s dead…I don’t know, I think you would act a little more emotionally the very first time you hear it. I also felt Jack should have showed more emotion over Milky White’s death. And over his mother’s death, though he did show some emotion, just…think he needed more…but I thought this of the original Broadway cast show performance, too. And I think Cinderella should have been sadder about her mother’s grave being destroyed. However, I started to cry when James Corden finally does cry.
I, like best12bars and others, felt the film was kind of too quick and didn’t “breathe”, but it’s really, really minor, and really fine.
I think they should have finished the entire "No One Is Alone" instead of being cut off by the Giant. They were singing it so beautifully!
In the end, this film was a triumph. A wonderful adaptation of a brilliant show into a magical movie. It finally made it to the screen, and made it well. I loved it.
Showface, I enjoyed you’re glowing review and am happy the film made you so happy. It made me so happy,too. Loved what you said about Rapunzel’s Prince, and I agree. But what change was made to the Baker and his Wife’s relationship in the 2nd act that you said was “much welcome”? Oh, and I may agree with what you said about “I Know Things Now” being more like how Little Red imagined of what happened to her, but I hated the wolf silhouette. It should have looked more like a real, scary wolf, to me, and not had her look at the camera and pull the curtain...that was weird...
I have to agree TazTarney, Cinderella should’ve had more emotion and thought in her learning of what the prince did.
This movie adaptation of Into the Woods was beautiful. Great. Fantastic. Wonderful. Amazing. All the little tiny “bad” things, were really just fine.
The whole ensemble is so strong and give such great performances. Everyone did great, really. My favorite character was the one I played in high school, Rapunzel’s Prince, partly because I played him but mostly because of his character, that his actor talked about, trying to be the best prince charming but failing hilariously…oh, and he’s so cute, of course.
I wish we saw the Witch actually transform like we saw for Cinderella. The camera showed us Cinderella's transformation in it's entirety but not the Witch’s. I felt gyped.
Emily Blunt really sang and acted so beautifully, her “Moments in the Woods” was so good and I felt so bad when she was about to die. Though, her death could have been shown slightly more, it was kind of hard to tell what happened to her until Jack said it.
I rationalized Rapunzel’s non-death and the “Witch’s Lament” as that the Witch is worried Rapunzel could die from the not listening to her because of the Giant out there and Rapunzel will meet a bad fate because of that, as opposed to when she actually does meet a bad fate via the original’s death. Her death still would have made more actual sense of the “Witch’s Lament” lyrics, and of the Witch leaving the world (I still wonder why she would leave it when Rapunzel’s still in it and there’s hope for her to be with the Witch?). I admit giving Jack to the Giant could be her way of saving Rapunzel from the Giant, but the question of why she leaves the world still lingers for me. Thankfully her “Last Midnight” was glorious and she didn’t “turn into” a tar pit, she sank into the earth and it left behind tar. So there is still the possibility she went to live with her mother, and made ugly again, as she asked for. Or at least, it fits that she got taken "away from this bunch".
Cinderella’s Mother’s appearance and singing was so beautiful. It makes me wonder why if her and the Baker’s Father and the Baker’s Wife could reappear, why not the rest of the cast singing the “Finale” as the living characters left the woods and rebuilt a home for themselves? It was an idea I had and one that James Marshall thought of but for some reason decided against in the end. The ending was beautiful, but then the "Finale" was reduced to a credits song that people got up and left during which I thought was quite bad to do to that wonderful music.
A lot of problems people had, like the children being too young or the tone shift and quick pacing and being too claustrophobic and feeling like a set and cutting too much from one story to the next and no imaginative directing – I found NONE of such problems with the film. The songs “I Know Things Now” and “Giants in the Sky” were kind of halting, but I think they did about the best they could do with them. Probably the only thing that could have improved them would have been if maybe Little Red sang to her Granny about why she strayed and caused the whole wolf problem (and just change the “at the end of the path was granny once again” to “at the end of the path, were you once again/I found you once again” or something), and if we saw the land of the giants. But the budget didn’t allow for that, as James Lapine revealed in an interview. And I guess Jack should have been merely climbing the tree (like climbing the beanstalk) and acting out things on the tree, not so much just walking on it and "dancing" on it. Also, would have been nice to see Cinderella’s ball, at least for the first time she danced with the prince and she ran away, but Lapine said the budget didn’t allow for that, either. I actually don’t think the characters singing “I Know Things Now” and “Giants in the Sky” to themselves, ala Cinderella (without the time-slowing) would have been bad…
I wasn’t even bothered by Johnny Depp, I thought he was pretty good, and the weird visualization of Little Red getting eaten and falling into his stomach to find granny was only a little poor, like how his stomach looked like sheets, but that was about it.
I think the editing and cutting that makes movies actually improved upon the show, allowing for things to happen quickly. I wish Cinderella’s transformation and Rapunzel’s tears had magic special effects (leaves blowing around Cinderella were actual leaves and not actual magic, the magic was invisible, and I wish it was visible, like the flashes of light, puffs of smoke, et cetera in the rest of the film. I would have chosen a sparkly glow for Cinderella's transformation and a tiny glimmer of light as the tears heal the prince's eyes for Rapunzel.).
The title of the film should have appeared at the very beginning! And we go through the letter “o” into the next scene just like the leaked script described! Oh well...
I found it odd when “On the Steps of the Palace” had the lyrics “you’re starting to stick to the steps of the palace” and “you’re still standing stuck in this stuff on the steps” and…Cinderella was doing none of those things. Her shoes were, which kind of “represented” it, and I know that her moving around the steps is much more dynamic, but I found it weird and I think we could have just gotten enough acting and movement from Cinderella’s upper body as she stood in the pitch to make a little more sense of the song…
The Prince’s dalliance with the Baker’s Wife was great…but when we come back to them at the end of it, instead of acting like they were only kissing, they should have changed it and left it open for audiences to think “maybe they did have sex” that would fly over kids and even some parents heads, because honestly, they would not merely want to kiss each other.
Oh, the Witch should have told Rapunzel “I was going to come back for you when you had learned your lesson” so we know she wasn’t banishing Rapunzel for good. That part got cut and I wonder why, I feel they mistakenly did it. I feel James Corden should have started to show the pain and sad emotions over his wife’s death as soon as he learned of it. He did finally show it in the scene after, but if you learn your wife’s dead…I don’t know, I think you would act a little more emotionally the very first time you hear it. I also felt Jack should have showed more emotion over Milky White’s death. And over his mother’s death, though he did show some emotion, just…think he needed more…but I thought this of the original Broadway cast show performance, too. And I think Cinderella should have been sadder about her mother’s grave being destroyed. However, I started to cry when James Corden finally does cry.
I, like best12bars and others, felt the film was kind of too quick and didn’t “breathe”, but it’s really, really minor, and really fine.
I think they should have finished the entire "No One Is Alone" instead of being cut off by the Giant. They were singing it so beautifully!
In the end, this film was a triumph. A wonderful adaptation of a brilliant show into a magical movie. It finally made it to the screen, and made it well. I loved it.
Showface, I enjoyed you’re glowing review and am happy the film made you so happy. It made me so happy,too. Loved what you said about Rapunzel’s Prince, and I agree. But what change was made to the Baker and his Wife’s relationship in the 2nd act that you said was “much welcome”? Oh, and I may agree with what you said about “I Know Things Now” being more like how Little Red imagined of what happened to her, but I hated the wolf silhouette. It should have looked more like a real, scary wolf, to me, and not had her look at the camera and pull the curtain...that was weird...
I have to agree TazTarney, Cinderella should’ve had more emotion and thought in her learning of what the prince did.
Updated On: 12/26/14 at 11:58 PM
#4310
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:09am
"I rationalized Rapunzel’s non-death and the “Witch’s Lament” as that the Witch is worried Rapunzel"
It sucks that you felt the need to have to rationalize it in the first place.
It sucks that you felt the need to have to rationalize it in the first place.
#4311
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:15am
" I feel James Corden should have started to show the pain and sad emotions over his wife’s death as soon as he learned of it. He did finally show it in the scene after, but if you learn your wife’s dead…I don’t know, I think you would act a little more emotionally the very first time you hear it. I also felt Jack should have showed more emotion over Milky White’s death. And over his mother’s death, though he did show some emotion, just…think he needed more…but I thought this of the original Broadway cast show performance, too. And I think Cinderella should have been sadder about her mother’s grave being destroyed. However, I started to cry when James Corden finally does cry."
Yup Yup. Like I said, SOOOO many emotional beats were missed. Act 2 was so rushed. It was almost like Rob Marshall was apologizing for it.
Yup Yup. Like I said, SOOOO many emotional beats were missed. Act 2 was so rushed. It was almost like Rob Marshall was apologizing for it.
Updated On: 12/26/14 at 12:15 AM
#4312
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:17am
Thanks for informing everyone of the proper way one expresses grief or loss. As we all know, there is only ONE way ANYONE can express those emotions. Where were the immediate tears and hair pulling and shouting to the heavens "WHY???"
"Sing the words, Patti!!!!" Stephen Sondheim to Patti LuPone.
#4313
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:20am
Sorry you don't like other opinions.
#4314
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:39am
I'm getting angry with these ignorant parent reviews. I've read about three that complain about "having their children watch a MARRIED WOMAN kiss another man." One person even said the movie "portrayed an affair as okay." A bunch of people said it should have ended at the wedding.
1. You don't get to be that parent who complains when their kids watch movies YOU TOOK THEM TO that you find inappropriate. It was your responsibility to look the damn movie up.
2. I'll never understand parents who coddle children like this. Your kids saw a woman have an affair. That's a thing that happens in the real world. What exactly is the point of shielding kids from really basic real-world things they're going to learn some day anyway? Should I never teach my children what war is? Should I just pretend that divorced people aren't a thing? Ugh.
3. It pokes Mr. Irony in the backside when parents complain that the movie didn't end at "Happily Ever After". A huge theme of ITW is "Careful the tale you tell that is the spell..." Don't constantly reaffirm dangerous one-sided promises of happiness you know aren't guaranteed.
Despite its flaws, Into the Woods is pushing the limit of well-meaning but harmful parenting methods, and in a sick way, I'm kinda enjoying the hate.
1. You don't get to be that parent who complains when their kids watch movies YOU TOOK THEM TO that you find inappropriate. It was your responsibility to look the damn movie up.
2. I'll never understand parents who coddle children like this. Your kids saw a woman have an affair. That's a thing that happens in the real world. What exactly is the point of shielding kids from really basic real-world things they're going to learn some day anyway? Should I never teach my children what war is? Should I just pretend that divorced people aren't a thing? Ugh.
3. It pokes Mr. Irony in the backside when parents complain that the movie didn't end at "Happily Ever After". A huge theme of ITW is "Careful the tale you tell that is the spell..." Don't constantly reaffirm dangerous one-sided promises of happiness you know aren't guaranteed.
Despite its flaws, Into the Woods is pushing the limit of well-meaning but harmful parenting methods, and in a sick way, I'm kinda enjoying the hate.
#4315
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:46am
I agree Hagenisnotakitty. But just to play devil's advocate, Look at the way this film is marketed. Disney wanted kids to see this film. They pretty much relied on kids dragging the parents to see this film so they can could see all their favorite fairy tale characters. This show was never intended for children. It was intended for the parents of children. Parents don't really have a right to be angry but I can see why they might feel a bit off after watching the movie.
#4316
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:54am
I'm still processing my thoughts (and how exciting to watch a movie musical with enough "there" there to process), but generally I thought it was stunning. Like Besty and others said, my main issue with it is that it was way too rushed; on one hand, that was great because it moved at such a fast pace, but I couldn't help but wish Marshall held on longer for a beat or two at times before a character moved on to the next line to emphasize some of the humorous or emotional moments of the film. When I think about it though, the overall film was so gorgeous and well done that the pacing issue doesn't impact my take on the movie and the experience of the movie--and God, how grateful I am that Rob Marshall gave us an INTO THE WOODS that is an experience to watch.
The most surprising part for me was how taken I was by the story and characters. Now, I have seen that filmed production more times than I can count. It holds a very special place in my heart because when I moved to the US at 15 (almost 15 years ago) and spoke no English, I saw it in my high school drama class and while I didn't understand the language, I was so deeply moved by it and it provided me with joy at a time when I was miserable in every way. All this to say, I've seen it so much and it has accompanied me through so many phases of my life, the last thing I expected was to be surprised or fully immersed in it. But God I really was. I found myself smiling like an idiot at Cinderella's back-and-forth during "On The Steps of the Palace," laughing at the princes during "Agony" (a number I always skip when I listen to the album), and crying when the Baker's Wife appears on screen during the "No One is Alone" reprise. Thank you, Rob Marshall.
The casting is out of the world. Streep hasn't been this good since THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA. She doesn't ham it up as the Witch; instead, she centers on the Witch's obsession with being a mother. She is haunted and haunting, and terrifying in how unstable she is. And that voice! She hits some gorgeous notes throughout. "Last Midnight" is one of my favorite show tunes and everything about the number is orgasmic, from the staging to the effects to Streep's spectacular singing and acting.
Everyone else is wonderful. Emily Blunt, whom I wasn't too keen on when the casting was announced, floored me with her performance of one of the most deceptively difficult roles in the musical theatre canon. Her interactions with Kendrick's Cinderella were wonderful, her chemistry with James Corden--who is a fantastic Baker--was through the roof, with "It Takes Two" being one of the best numbers in the movie. Anna Kendrick was perfection as Cinderella, Lila Crawford was absolutely convincing and refreshing as Little Red, and Pine and Magnussen were hilariously two-dimensional (though they both get nice character moments that flesh out the characters more than in the stage show).
What I loved about it is how perfectly Marshall cast every single role, which calls attention to how Lapine and Sondheim created completely unique characters; no one is wasted yet I wanted to see more of everyone. Tracey Ullman and Christine Baranski were so ideal, and I adored Lucy Punch and Tammy Blanchard as the Stepsisters. Even Mackenzie Mauzy made me care about Rapunzel, a character I always thought of more as a device than someone I cared about (though I do miss crazy Rapunzel at the end).
The musical elements are so well handled. Marshall honors the seamlessness of the original piece and the way Lapine's book and Sondheim's score are so integrated it's hard to separate one from the other. The darker moments are tastefully handled, and I didn't have an issue with any of the changes made to the script because this version always stays true to itself, and it truly captures the beauty of the original piece while being its own thing. I immediately feel I have to see it again. My favorite movie musical since CHICAGO, and an instant classic.
The most surprising part for me was how taken I was by the story and characters. Now, I have seen that filmed production more times than I can count. It holds a very special place in my heart because when I moved to the US at 15 (almost 15 years ago) and spoke no English, I saw it in my high school drama class and while I didn't understand the language, I was so deeply moved by it and it provided me with joy at a time when I was miserable in every way. All this to say, I've seen it so much and it has accompanied me through so many phases of my life, the last thing I expected was to be surprised or fully immersed in it. But God I really was. I found myself smiling like an idiot at Cinderella's back-and-forth during "On The Steps of the Palace," laughing at the princes during "Agony" (a number I always skip when I listen to the album), and crying when the Baker's Wife appears on screen during the "No One is Alone" reprise. Thank you, Rob Marshall.
The casting is out of the world. Streep hasn't been this good since THE DEVIL WEARS PRADA. She doesn't ham it up as the Witch; instead, she centers on the Witch's obsession with being a mother. She is haunted and haunting, and terrifying in how unstable she is. And that voice! She hits some gorgeous notes throughout. "Last Midnight" is one of my favorite show tunes and everything about the number is orgasmic, from the staging to the effects to Streep's spectacular singing and acting.
Everyone else is wonderful. Emily Blunt, whom I wasn't too keen on when the casting was announced, floored me with her performance of one of the most deceptively difficult roles in the musical theatre canon. Her interactions with Kendrick's Cinderella were wonderful, her chemistry with James Corden--who is a fantastic Baker--was through the roof, with "It Takes Two" being one of the best numbers in the movie. Anna Kendrick was perfection as Cinderella, Lila Crawford was absolutely convincing and refreshing as Little Red, and Pine and Magnussen were hilariously two-dimensional (though they both get nice character moments that flesh out the characters more than in the stage show).
What I loved about it is how perfectly Marshall cast every single role, which calls attention to how Lapine and Sondheim created completely unique characters; no one is wasted yet I wanted to see more of everyone. Tracey Ullman and Christine Baranski were so ideal, and I adored Lucy Punch and Tammy Blanchard as the Stepsisters. Even Mackenzie Mauzy made me care about Rapunzel, a character I always thought of more as a device than someone I cared about (though I do miss crazy Rapunzel at the end).
The musical elements are so well handled. Marshall honors the seamlessness of the original piece and the way Lapine's book and Sondheim's score are so integrated it's hard to separate one from the other. The darker moments are tastefully handled, and I didn't have an issue with any of the changes made to the script because this version always stays true to itself, and it truly captures the beauty of the original piece while being its own thing. I immediately feel I have to see it again. My favorite movie musical since CHICAGO, and an instant classic.
"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"
Updated On: 12/26/14 at 12:54 AM
#4317
Posted: 12/26/14 at 12:54am
@Hagenisnotakitty
I don't disagree that parents should be smarter about what they take their kids to before they think they have a right to complain...
...however, the argument "that's what happens in the real world" as justification for it to be in a film is poor justification. I can give you real world moments you wouldn't be so pleased to see on film or surprised by.
Because STDs happens in real life, but that certainly isn't something that happens in film, book or tv when people have uncountable sex partners. If STDs were something that weren't easy to contract or people were smart enough to not contract them, there wouldn't be a high amount of people with them right about now...you know, in the real world.
I agree that Into the Woods has valid points that are within the well-told story, even in the "dark" second half.
I don't disagree that parents should be smarter about what they take their kids to before they think they have a right to complain...
...however, the argument "that's what happens in the real world" as justification for it to be in a film is poor justification. I can give you real world moments you wouldn't be so pleased to see on film or surprised by.
Because STDs happens in real life, but that certainly isn't something that happens in film, book or tv when people have uncountable sex partners. If STDs were something that weren't easy to contract or people were smart enough to not contract them, there wouldn't be a high amount of people with them right about now...you know, in the real world.
I agree that Into the Woods has valid points that are within the well-told story, even in the "dark" second half.
#4318
Posted: 12/26/14 at 1:00am
If Rob Marshall is going to do FOLLIES as a future film, I think he has A LOT to live up to. But with a great team behind him it could actually work.
#4319
Posted: 12/26/14 at 1:22am
Can FOLLIES go back to Sam Mendes?
Give me claws and a hunch, just away from this bunch.
#4320
Posted: 12/26/14 at 1:31am
@TazTarney
"I just got home from seeing it and I must say I am rather shocked at the love for this film."
I'm not shocked. The second half felt rushed because they dropped two songs...well really three (right?) and they didn't have two characters that make up most of the second half The mysterious man and the Narrator...then they dropped Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. Cause people in the movie audience would have a terrible time following what all that actually meant. That's a lot of loss making the second half way shorter.
I really wish there was "No More." It's my favorite and that really shows the Baker's sadness.
"- Christ Pine was good. Definitely didn't steal the show though and Agony is overhyped, but he was serviceable. His voice is spectacular."
Eh...I have seen several versions of this play and love each one for their own way of telling the story. And it's why I love it so. The most recent version was at a small playhouse and their idea of what the Princes' Agony should be like was quite silly, but I still remember it and like it.
I think the film version was very smart. The Princes aren't a major part of the film and they needed this moment to establish more personality and such and I think it did well with the facial expressions and the splashing. I like the scene. One of my favorite.
""Hello little girl". What was that? It looked like Rob Marshall had no idea what do with that scene. It really just did not work on film. I'm also confused as to what exactly Johnny Depp was? Was he a wolf? Was he a man wolf? Why does a wolf have a suit on? The whole scene just made absolutely no sense. My audience burst out laughing during the song and I had no idea why. Also, Johnny Depp needs to stop being in musicals."
They laughed because it's uncomfortable what was being shown. It is very creepy...and yet that's how it should be. And he's the only animal human in the film. The way he looks matters not that much since I've seen versions that gave him balls and other silly things. If we're going to nitpick about that, might as well nitpick over how he ate the grandmother and Little Red whole enough that when the Backer cut him open that they could still be alive...
""I know things now". Didn't work. Completely stopped the pacing and was so awkward. I wish they had just cut it but then of course the theatre queens would have gone Ape sht. Lilla did great in it though and she tried her best, the song just didn't work where it was at and probably wouldn't have worked in any other place."
That doesn't make sense. She had to work through what she just went through and then hand over the cape. How does it not work?
"- Daniel Huttlestone. The kid needs to take acting lessons. But I could understand him in this movie so at least there is some progress. He wasn't downright bad, but he was very weak and the other actors carried him."
We'll just have to disagree.
"- The Witch's character arc. I rolled my eyes during her little lament (way to half ass the end, Streep). So let's see, Rapunzel rides off with her prince and never wants to see the witch again. Cool. That's fine. That worked. But THEN Witch sings this little song about how children don't listen. It completely fell flat. If you don't know the musical then it probably seemed fine, but at that moment in the movie I completely lost all interest for the Witch."
I know the musical. That part didn't bother me at all.
"- "Last Midnight". There really was no reason for her sing this song. It made no sense. Streep sounded great on it though."
It made sense. She was frustrated with all of what was going on and she'd rather be taken then have to deal with anyone that's there. Plus it's her way of throwing a fit.
"- The Baker's wife infidelity. Yes we get it Disney, you want kids to come see this so only light kissing can be seen. Lord it's almost like her adultery didn't even matter. I mean all she did was make out with the prince for 10 minutes. This big moment just seemed so small. And the way they handled her Death was laughable. It was almost as bad as Marion Cotillard's death in Dark knight rises."
The point is made. They did a lot of kissing. She felt bad, it didn't have to go all out. In the musical it's left up to interpretation whether or not they did anything but roll around in the forest. You can argue it's more but that's your imagination, not mine.
Have you seen the musical? They never show her dying. They show her just like that...about to die and then Jack comes and says he saw her body. Then my favorite song happens.
"- MISSED BEATS! That's the biggie. So many missed emotional beats in this film. Maybe it had to do with the crap opening to the 2nd act. I was laughing (but crying on the inside) when Cinderella gets told by the birds that her Prince has cheated. It's like she didn't even care. "Oh that doesn't matter now". It's like she just got told that the sky is blue.""
What is she supposed to do? What version have you seen that she does much else? Does she storm through the forest to find him and punch him? I don't understand what it is that was shown in her character that she would blow up like you wanted her to. Like she's supposed to be upset over what she already knew possible after seeing him three nights dancing. Do you think he only danced with her? Why else would someone run three times if not to tell themselves this is a bad idea? Her finding out that he was being a bad, bad boy in the forest was already known because the Baker made that snide comment and she didn't hardly react, cause she knew it was true.
"- "No one is alone" a complete miss."
How? Jack and Little Red Riding Hood are upset because they're alone.
"The main problem I found with the film is that it felt so shallow. It was almost like nothing mattered in the 2nd half of the film. All the beats were rushed, poignancy of lines were completely missed. I mean, "No one is alone" is suppose to be that that 11 o clock number that just hits you in the heart. I felt nothing. People around me kept looking at their watches. The song lost all it's poison."
Nope. It had all the right "poison" for me and those around me. If we are going to go with hearsay, by all means m audience was opposite.
"In all I don't think it's a bad film and if you don't know the musical that well then you will like it a lot more. I just found most of it shallow and missing the mark. Not all was bad, Agony was funny and blunt and James had good chemistry. She doesn't hold even half a candle to Joanna Gleason but then again no one really does. I give this film 6/10"
I love the musical since forever. It's one of the only musicals I have ever seen more than once on stage and ever will. Each version makes me love it more. And this film is no different than a stage version.
I think your problem is you like a version better than this and therefore don't want it to be good.
Which is a huge problem, because comparisons are unfair when you are never going to allow anything to beat what you think is best.
Opinions are wanted and needed, but in this kind of thing if you really believe what you are saying, someone telling you you're utterly wrong won't hurt your feelings, it'll only make you want to argue more. Which is fine, but I only say that because I don't reply to stop an opinion, but question it. I don't see how what you've complained about is really any different than a parent complaining about taking their children and it's the fault of the film itself.
"I just got home from seeing it and I must say I am rather shocked at the love for this film."
I'm not shocked. The second half felt rushed because they dropped two songs...well really three (right?) and they didn't have two characters that make up most of the second half The mysterious man and the Narrator...then they dropped Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. Cause people in the movie audience would have a terrible time following what all that actually meant. That's a lot of loss making the second half way shorter.
I really wish there was "No More." It's my favorite and that really shows the Baker's sadness.
"- Christ Pine was good. Definitely didn't steal the show though and Agony is overhyped, but he was serviceable. His voice is spectacular."
Eh...I have seen several versions of this play and love each one for their own way of telling the story. And it's why I love it so. The most recent version was at a small playhouse and their idea of what the Princes' Agony should be like was quite silly, but I still remember it and like it.
I think the film version was very smart. The Princes aren't a major part of the film and they needed this moment to establish more personality and such and I think it did well with the facial expressions and the splashing. I like the scene. One of my favorite.
""Hello little girl". What was that? It looked like Rob Marshall had no idea what do with that scene. It really just did not work on film. I'm also confused as to what exactly Johnny Depp was? Was he a wolf? Was he a man wolf? Why does a wolf have a suit on? The whole scene just made absolutely no sense. My audience burst out laughing during the song and I had no idea why. Also, Johnny Depp needs to stop being in musicals."
They laughed because it's uncomfortable what was being shown. It is very creepy...and yet that's how it should be. And he's the only animal human in the film. The way he looks matters not that much since I've seen versions that gave him balls and other silly things. If we're going to nitpick about that, might as well nitpick over how he ate the grandmother and Little Red whole enough that when the Backer cut him open that they could still be alive...
""I know things now". Didn't work. Completely stopped the pacing and was so awkward. I wish they had just cut it but then of course the theatre queens would have gone Ape sht. Lilla did great in it though and she tried her best, the song just didn't work where it was at and probably wouldn't have worked in any other place."
That doesn't make sense. She had to work through what she just went through and then hand over the cape. How does it not work?
"- Daniel Huttlestone. The kid needs to take acting lessons. But I could understand him in this movie so at least there is some progress. He wasn't downright bad, but he was very weak and the other actors carried him."
We'll just have to disagree.
"- The Witch's character arc. I rolled my eyes during her little lament (way to half ass the end, Streep). So let's see, Rapunzel rides off with her prince and never wants to see the witch again. Cool. That's fine. That worked. But THEN Witch sings this little song about how children don't listen. It completely fell flat. If you don't know the musical then it probably seemed fine, but at that moment in the movie I completely lost all interest for the Witch."
I know the musical. That part didn't bother me at all.
"- "Last Midnight". There really was no reason for her sing this song. It made no sense. Streep sounded great on it though."
It made sense. She was frustrated with all of what was going on and she'd rather be taken then have to deal with anyone that's there. Plus it's her way of throwing a fit.
"- The Baker's wife infidelity. Yes we get it Disney, you want kids to come see this so only light kissing can be seen. Lord it's almost like her adultery didn't even matter. I mean all she did was make out with the prince for 10 minutes. This big moment just seemed so small. And the way they handled her Death was laughable. It was almost as bad as Marion Cotillard's death in Dark knight rises."
The point is made. They did a lot of kissing. She felt bad, it didn't have to go all out. In the musical it's left up to interpretation whether or not they did anything but roll around in the forest. You can argue it's more but that's your imagination, not mine.
Have you seen the musical? They never show her dying. They show her just like that...about to die and then Jack comes and says he saw her body. Then my favorite song happens.
"- MISSED BEATS! That's the biggie. So many missed emotional beats in this film. Maybe it had to do with the crap opening to the 2nd act. I was laughing (but crying on the inside) when Cinderella gets told by the birds that her Prince has cheated. It's like she didn't even care. "Oh that doesn't matter now". It's like she just got told that the sky is blue.""
What is she supposed to do? What version have you seen that she does much else? Does she storm through the forest to find him and punch him? I don't understand what it is that was shown in her character that she would blow up like you wanted her to. Like she's supposed to be upset over what she already knew possible after seeing him three nights dancing. Do you think he only danced with her? Why else would someone run three times if not to tell themselves this is a bad idea? Her finding out that he was being a bad, bad boy in the forest was already known because the Baker made that snide comment and she didn't hardly react, cause she knew it was true.
"- "No one is alone" a complete miss."
How? Jack and Little Red Riding Hood are upset because they're alone.
"The main problem I found with the film is that it felt so shallow. It was almost like nothing mattered in the 2nd half of the film. All the beats were rushed, poignancy of lines were completely missed. I mean, "No one is alone" is suppose to be that that 11 o clock number that just hits you in the heart. I felt nothing. People around me kept looking at their watches. The song lost all it's poison."
Nope. It had all the right "poison" for me and those around me. If we are going to go with hearsay, by all means m audience was opposite.
"In all I don't think it's a bad film and if you don't know the musical that well then you will like it a lot more. I just found most of it shallow and missing the mark. Not all was bad, Agony was funny and blunt and James had good chemistry. She doesn't hold even half a candle to Joanna Gleason but then again no one really does. I give this film 6/10"
I love the musical since forever. It's one of the only musicals I have ever seen more than once on stage and ever will. Each version makes me love it more. And this film is no different than a stage version.
I think your problem is you like a version better than this and therefore don't want it to be good.
Which is a huge problem, because comparisons are unfair when you are never going to allow anything to beat what you think is best.
Opinions are wanted and needed, but in this kind of thing if you really believe what you are saying, someone telling you you're utterly wrong won't hurt your feelings, it'll only make you want to argue more. Which is fine, but I only say that because I don't reply to stop an opinion, but question it. I don't see how what you've complained about is really any different than a parent complaining about taking their children and it's the fault of the film itself.
#4321
Posted: 12/26/14 at 1:40am
"I think your problem is you like a version better than this and therefore don't want it to be good."
Not at all. No one was more excited than me when I heard this film was actually happening. Is it so hard to believe someone didn't go crazy for this film? It's funny cause most of the people who are saying the film was great and stuff still acknowledge the problems with the pacing and the rushed feeling. Which is great.
I have no problem if other people thought it was great, like I said in my original post, It's not a bad film. I have no problem with you thinking I am "utterly wrong" but I do have a problem with you coming to baseless conclusions on why I didn't go gaga for it. Because I didn't want it to be good? Plzzzz. If I didn't want it to be good, then I probably would have just skipped it. Why sit in a theatre for 2 hours knowing you aren't going to like something? I went in with an open mind and came out feeling dissatisfied. What's wrong with that?
Not at all. No one was more excited than me when I heard this film was actually happening. Is it so hard to believe someone didn't go crazy for this film? It's funny cause most of the people who are saying the film was great and stuff still acknowledge the problems with the pacing and the rushed feeling. Which is great.
I have no problem if other people thought it was great, like I said in my original post, It's not a bad film. I have no problem with you thinking I am "utterly wrong" but I do have a problem with you coming to baseless conclusions on why I didn't go gaga for it. Because I didn't want it to be good? Plzzzz. If I didn't want it to be good, then I probably would have just skipped it. Why sit in a theatre for 2 hours knowing you aren't going to like something? I went in with an open mind and came out feeling dissatisfied. What's wrong with that?
#4322
Posted: 12/26/14 at 2:20am
You sit there so you can say you saw it and then have a valid reason to have an opinion on it. That's not hard to believe. People do that. I have done that. I did that with the Twilight films when I used to write movie reviews. I saw them just to bash them. And when I stopped writing reviews it was when the second part of the last film came out and since I had no reason to complain about them anymore, I didn't bother going to see that film. I still recall seeing one the night before...the screaming was unbearable. Like being in a theater with banshees.
It's not hard to believe someone would go just to have an opinion, especially after all the gushing.
Which I don't gush. It's sticky.
"Is it so hard to believe someone didn't go crazy for this film?"
I expect no one to really go crazy for the film. It is a film version of a stage musical...the book...I mean musical will always be better. That goes without saying or so I think.
And because of that people tend to see movies (based on books or film) under this unnecessary light...one they'd never put on any other film...the kind their carpets wouldn't want to be put under.
It's like those that complain about Jurassic Park being nothing like the book. It's not, but that's an invalid argument to make when the film is good just as the book is, just not in the same vain.
My favorite song is missing from this film version. No More is my favorite after No one is alone and after Your Fault. Hearing that it wasn't going to be in there along with no second Agony was pretty disappointing, but understandable. I went in knowing this was going to be different. Knowing it wasn't going to be like any stage version I've seen. And I also prepared myself for the lack of charm it might have because the stage version has that charm with the sets not being so well and the cow being utterly fake (which adds to the humor)...and I thought it was a good version.
The problem isn't the difference of opinion. The problem is the bashing. Most of what you have to complain about is more petty than anything else.
It's not hard to believe someone would go just to have an opinion, especially after all the gushing.
Which I don't gush. It's sticky.
"Is it so hard to believe someone didn't go crazy for this film?"
I expect no one to really go crazy for the film. It is a film version of a stage musical...the book...I mean musical will always be better. That goes without saying or so I think.
And because of that people tend to see movies (based on books or film) under this unnecessary light...one they'd never put on any other film...the kind their carpets wouldn't want to be put under.
It's like those that complain about Jurassic Park being nothing like the book. It's not, but that's an invalid argument to make when the film is good just as the book is, just not in the same vain.
My favorite song is missing from this film version. No More is my favorite after No one is alone and after Your Fault. Hearing that it wasn't going to be in there along with no second Agony was pretty disappointing, but understandable. I went in knowing this was going to be different. Knowing it wasn't going to be like any stage version I've seen. And I also prepared myself for the lack of charm it might have because the stage version has that charm with the sets not being so well and the cow being utterly fake (which adds to the humor)...and I thought it was a good version.
The problem isn't the difference of opinion. The problem is the bashing. Most of what you have to complain about is more petty than anything else.
#4323
Posted: 12/26/14 at 2:26am
Can I get some potato salad with that ham, Meryl? Oy.
#4324
Posted: 12/26/14 at 2:33am
"The problem is the bashing. Most of what you have to complain about is more petty than anything else."
LOL. This isn't bashing. No offense but I'm not really interested in your fantasy analysis on why you think I'm not raving about this film. Guess we will just have to agree to disagree. Happy Holidays :)
LOL. This isn't bashing. No offense but I'm not really interested in your fantasy analysis on why you think I'm not raving about this film. Guess we will just have to agree to disagree. Happy Holidays :)
#4325
Posted: 12/26/14 at 4:30am
Sam Mendes, yes. YES YES YES.
SKYFALL is one of my favorite movies ever.
SKYFALL is one of my favorite movies ever.
Maximum Thread Size of 5,000 Messages Reached
Please Start a New Thread!
Please Start a New Thread!
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $72
Tickets From $65