Into the Woods Official Movie Thread — Page 183

He's probably perfectly fine with an 80-piece orchestra accompanying a chase scene in a non-musical movie.

Because that's so realistic.

---

Those are some interesting points you bring up...

At least Lapine considered these additions but in the end I do agree with his reasons to ultimately leave them out.

The numbers were already posted twice. Please see yesterday's posts in this thread.

LEGS! It grossed over 6 million dollars on Monday, with the highest per theater figure among wide releases.

52 million in 5 days.

It's a remarkable figure that no one in the industry was predicting.

This is very good news indeed! I don't think the studios should be so shy about making musicals anymore, not with the success of CHICAGO, DREAMGIRLS, MAMMA MIA! and HAIRSPRAY. Those films proved that if a musical film is done and done well that it can be successful. Every genre of film has it's hits and misses, I don't quite understand why the musical genre is held to a different standard and so scrutinized.

From Rotten Tomatoes.

Secondly, the music was extremely mediocre without a single tune that I can remember. Every time you think the story is going to move another character bursts into song. I enjoy musicals WHEN THE MUSIC IS GOOD. I understand that the nature of musicals is to have characters sing in them but the music seemed like it was to fill in for lack of story rather than for the value of the music itself and it resulted in glacial pacing. Towards the end of the movie (which couldn't come fast enough) I wanted to kill myself every time another song began. Yes, the music was that bad ("monotonous" is the word my wife used).

I am so glad that I don't know people like this. Friends, family, and co-workers of mine who have seen the film have all made positive comments.

Updated On: 12/30/14 at 04:00 PM

Some of the reviewers on Rotten Tomatoes really need to get their hearing checked. I honestly don't think that On the Steps of the Palace and It Takes Two sound alike, but apparently all the songs sound alike to them.

Yeah, I don't necessarily agree with every point the KPCC piece made (ex: like you said, the wolf's howl was an odd thing to highlight), but I do think the film suffered by being too faithful to the original material. Budgetary reasons or not, there's something so stagey about always seeing someone talk/sing about an experience instead of seeing them experience it - Cinderella at the ball, Jack in the giant's land etc. I do wonder what having - at minimum - having another writer joining James Lapine could have accomplished. But, at the end of the day, "book" scenes aside, that's the issue of so many of Sondheim's lyrics. What makes them so beautiful and contemplative and introspective on stage, makes them decidedly un-cinematic. As a theatre audience, our imagination is called upon to fill in those blanks, to make wild leaps in plot and theme. It's much more difficult to get a cinematic audience to do that. For what it is, I still think it's a good film, but I do wonder if, with some radical changes (that probably would have left devoted fans of the original - myself included - butthurt), it could have been much better.

Radical changes? More like trying to make it another generic film to comfort those that need so much because their imaginations can't handle a song instead of a useless visual of giants.

One of the reasons why I love into the woods is the lack of showing the audience every little thing. I don't need to be babied.

it was bad enough they made the Witch say she can't touch the items at least three times. I like that in the musical she can't ever say she can't touch them. She's always interrupted.

Updated On: 12/30/14 at 05:49 PM

I love Chris Pine and he's absolutely gorgeous, but his performance was not worthy of a nomination.

^^^ Yes, she was. I don't really get this idea that comedic performances like McCarthy's or Pine's are considered not worthy. It's a silly misconception that somehow broad comedy is easier to pull off than heavy drama.

---

Full disclosure I did not read all these pages, but here are my thoughts. Perhaps similar ones have been shared.

My favourite parts hands down were the opening number and "Your Fault/Last Midnight." I thought both were staged and filmed wonderfully. Especially the part where Red went literally into the woods. I do wish they had left in some of the reprises of the title song though, I love them onstage. On the whole the movie was wonderfully done, with singing from the first moment to the last, and the numbers were set up and executed beautifully. The cast were all perfect for their roles and sang/acted beautifully.

One exception though: the whole wolf aspect was a mess! Johnny Depp was corny as hell, and I thought it was bizarre how they showed Red going into the cottage then showed it again a minute later as a flashback. What?? Pick one or the other! Though I thought "I Know things Now" was done quite well, and I was wary about it.

I still missed Rapunzel's death. Without it the Witch didn't have a reason to be so bitter about giving Jack to the Giant's Wife and her second act story arc was waaaaay diminished. Though Meryl on a whole of course was wonderful. And Billy Magnussen in those pants...

Honestly I'm glad they didn't go overboard showing the offstage happenings. Just because they can doesn't mean they should. Movie audiences have imaginations too.

I missed "Ever After" and "So Happy" a lot. Without them there was no depiction of everyone's discontent with their happily ever afters. Yes it doesn't have two acts but that break in the action is tremendously important to the developments of the second act and I think that's why that whole section felt lacking. It was all just glossed over and there was no point where it crossed over from what we know to what's new.

On the whole it was a respectful yet different interpretation. It had the essence and message of the show, along with most of the best parts. Yeah some of my favorite parts were left out but that's what the show is for. And that's the problem with adaptations of properties that are wildly popular with a small audience: you can't change too much for fear of disappointing fans even when it means making it into a better translation.

As for the public's critiques of Sondheim's music, I don't agree with them but his songs do tend to have a similar sound and when you haven't listened to them hundreds of times as some of us have they can sound very similar.

---