#4326
Posted: 12/26/14 at 5:30am
Thought I would share my (longish) review which I initally posted to FB. I have endeavored to offer impressions/thoughts ONLY; no spoilers. That said, if you would rather not have these impressions/thoughts in your mind before seeing the film, pass on this post and read it after.
Director Rob Marshall took on an enormous (and possibly unenviable) task of adapting source material both dark in tone (despite its fairy tale trappings) and so damn beloved by musical theater/Sondheim fans. The film tells all the intertwining stories quite clearly and he certainly benefits from Sondheim/Lapine's smart expository Prologue, which lends itself so well to cinematic cross-cutting.
Two general issues I have with the film: Pacing and Tone. The pacing does suffer in the second half, as events happen far too fast after the plot's abrupt tonal shift. Moments to breathe and allow the audience process events seem jettisoned in favor of a tight 2:05 running time. I will grant, however, that nothing major plotwise is truly lost here--just some minor bits. The story is told well, despite plot changes/compromises. As for tone, let's be brutally honest here. The second half of "Into the Woods" as source material is going to be dark, at least tonally. It is what it is. That said, cinematographer Dion Beebe's color composition could have helped liven the atmosphere every so often. Dare I say that including the second act reprise of "Agony" could have helped liven things, if only for a moment in the woods? (<< did you see what I did there?)
Screenwriter James Lapine adapts his original stage play rather effectively, re-imagining the narrative structure and removing the fourth-wall element that works well onstage but would have likely sunk this film. The compromises he and Marshall had to make (mostly regarding character deaths and violence), I believe, are largely dictated from the Mouse House. Yet, despite the orders no doubt handed down from Disney, Lapine still manages to retain the essential darkness of the second half.
Colleen Atwood's designs are sumptuous as ever, especially Streep's pre- and post-transformation looks. Was only unmoved by her zoot suit concept for the Wolf, plus Little Red's second cape made no sense as it bore zero resemblance to Depp's duds.
Sondheim's music has never sounded more gorgeous in any medium. Fantastic orchestrations and expert conducting from long-time Sondheim specialists Jonathan Tunick and Paul Gemignani, respectively.
THE ACTORS
Streep? Goddess. "Last Midnight" left me breathless; the mere 3 minutes of "Stay With Me" showed her enormous range. Certainly took this role very seriously, both vocally and dramatically. Lots of great levels to her Witch. We probably couldn't have asked for a better Hollywood actress in this role.
Blunt? A consistently warm, loving, strong Baker's Wife and for an actress with little to no prior vocal experience, she more than rose to the task.
Corden? His hapless, schlubby Baker worked well onscreen. Maybe not the most inspiring vocalist, but he navigates the lyrics with aplomb. His character's emotional breakdown near the end was acted so beautifully. Hopefully this film will truly put him on the map stateside.
Kendrick? Her Cinderella was just fine--didn't blow me away. I find her voice slightly hard to listen to, but oddly enough it has that Disney Princess tone. However, "On the Steps of the Palace" can be a tricky mofo verbally, and she nailed that number.
Pine? Probably one of the most consistent performances of the film. His 2-dimensional Prince was 3-dimensionally hysterical! "Agony" is worth the price of admission. I'd say he's tied with Meryl for MVP of the cast!
Depp? Whatevs. He's not horrible; he's not revelatory. Just another creeper role, I'm afraid.
Mauzy & Magnussen? Rapunzel and her Prince don't get much to do, but Mackenzie Mauzy and Billy Magnussen elicit a lot of pathos, considering how horribly they suffer at the hands of the Witch.
Ullman? Funny, though I was hoping for more of the laffos from a comedienne who is more than capable of providing said laffos. That's the screenplay's issue, though.
Crawford? She came. She sang. She conquered. I'd expect nothing less from a young Broadway Baby, though I was embarrassed for her when she had to deliver an embarrassingly Hollywood line during the final Giant confrontation.
Huttlestone? Could have worked on diction. If you don't know Jack's signature lines or lyrics, they are often lost in his pseudo cockney speaking voice. Fantastic singing.
Baranski/Punch/Blanchard? They ate up these roles. Think of them as the Kardashians of the Grimm Fairy Tale world.
OVERALL...
I found the film to be very good--if not entirely spectacular. Hollywood may have finally done right by Sondheim with this "Into the Woods" and while his work on this film may not pack the artistic punch of his "Chicago", Rob Marshall has--in my humble opinion--redeemed himself after the unfortunate "Nine" from five years back.
Ok, folks, that's all. I am most definitely seeing this again, so I'm looking forward to making new discoveries. Go see the movie, especially if you are on the fence.
Director Rob Marshall took on an enormous (and possibly unenviable) task of adapting source material both dark in tone (despite its fairy tale trappings) and so damn beloved by musical theater/Sondheim fans. The film tells all the intertwining stories quite clearly and he certainly benefits from Sondheim/Lapine's smart expository Prologue, which lends itself so well to cinematic cross-cutting.
Two general issues I have with the film: Pacing and Tone. The pacing does suffer in the second half, as events happen far too fast after the plot's abrupt tonal shift. Moments to breathe and allow the audience process events seem jettisoned in favor of a tight 2:05 running time. I will grant, however, that nothing major plotwise is truly lost here--just some minor bits. The story is told well, despite plot changes/compromises. As for tone, let's be brutally honest here. The second half of "Into the Woods" as source material is going to be dark, at least tonally. It is what it is. That said, cinematographer Dion Beebe's color composition could have helped liven the atmosphere every so often. Dare I say that including the second act reprise of "Agony" could have helped liven things, if only for a moment in the woods? (<< did you see what I did there?)
Screenwriter James Lapine adapts his original stage play rather effectively, re-imagining the narrative structure and removing the fourth-wall element that works well onstage but would have likely sunk this film. The compromises he and Marshall had to make (mostly regarding character deaths and violence), I believe, are largely dictated from the Mouse House. Yet, despite the orders no doubt handed down from Disney, Lapine still manages to retain the essential darkness of the second half.
Colleen Atwood's designs are sumptuous as ever, especially Streep's pre- and post-transformation looks. Was only unmoved by her zoot suit concept for the Wolf, plus Little Red's second cape made no sense as it bore zero resemblance to Depp's duds.
Sondheim's music has never sounded more gorgeous in any medium. Fantastic orchestrations and expert conducting from long-time Sondheim specialists Jonathan Tunick and Paul Gemignani, respectively.
THE ACTORS
Streep? Goddess. "Last Midnight" left me breathless; the mere 3 minutes of "Stay With Me" showed her enormous range. Certainly took this role very seriously, both vocally and dramatically. Lots of great levels to her Witch. We probably couldn't have asked for a better Hollywood actress in this role.
Blunt? A consistently warm, loving, strong Baker's Wife and for an actress with little to no prior vocal experience, she more than rose to the task.
Corden? His hapless, schlubby Baker worked well onscreen. Maybe not the most inspiring vocalist, but he navigates the lyrics with aplomb. His character's emotional breakdown near the end was acted so beautifully. Hopefully this film will truly put him on the map stateside.
Kendrick? Her Cinderella was just fine--didn't blow me away. I find her voice slightly hard to listen to, but oddly enough it has that Disney Princess tone. However, "On the Steps of the Palace" can be a tricky mofo verbally, and she nailed that number.
Pine? Probably one of the most consistent performances of the film. His 2-dimensional Prince was 3-dimensionally hysterical! "Agony" is worth the price of admission. I'd say he's tied with Meryl for MVP of the cast!
Depp? Whatevs. He's not horrible; he's not revelatory. Just another creeper role, I'm afraid.
Mauzy & Magnussen? Rapunzel and her Prince don't get much to do, but Mackenzie Mauzy and Billy Magnussen elicit a lot of pathos, considering how horribly they suffer at the hands of the Witch.
Ullman? Funny, though I was hoping for more of the laffos from a comedienne who is more than capable of providing said laffos. That's the screenplay's issue, though.
Crawford? She came. She sang. She conquered. I'd expect nothing less from a young Broadway Baby, though I was embarrassed for her when she had to deliver an embarrassingly Hollywood line during the final Giant confrontation.
Huttlestone? Could have worked on diction. If you don't know Jack's signature lines or lyrics, they are often lost in his pseudo cockney speaking voice. Fantastic singing.
Baranski/Punch/Blanchard? They ate up these roles. Think of them as the Kardashians of the Grimm Fairy Tale world.
OVERALL...
I found the film to be very good--if not entirely spectacular. Hollywood may have finally done right by Sondheim with this "Into the Woods" and while his work on this film may not pack the artistic punch of his "Chicago", Rob Marshall has--in my humble opinion--redeemed himself after the unfortunate "Nine" from five years back.
Ok, folks, that's all. I am most definitely seeing this again, so I'm looking forward to making new discoveries. Go see the movie, especially if you are on the fence.
The film currently has a 64% audience rating on RT. It'll be interesting to see how word of mouth turns out...
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
