#4576
Posted: 12/30/14 at 5:56pm
Was Melissa McCarthy's for Bridesmaids?
Into the Woods Official Movie Thread — Page 184
#4577
Posted: 12/30/14 at 5:59pm
^^^ 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.
"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"
#4578
Posted: 12/30/14 at 6:03pm
I don't think that the Prince has enough of a character to earn a nomination. After the cuts they made, the Prince became a pretty flat part.
Plus I thought that Pine was only ok. He wasn't great.
Plus I thought that Pine was only ok. He wasn't great.
#4579
Posted: 12/30/14 at 6:10pm
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.
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.
Keeping BroadwayWorld Illustrated
#4580
Posted: 12/30/14 at 7:18pm
Chris Pine was great, but not amazing enough to warrant any kind of Oscar nomination. He was just hamming it up, not a big stretch really. Enjoyable? Sure. Remarkable? Not really.
I'd love to see Billy Magnussen's leather pants get a nomination, though. Now THERE was some jaw-dropping work!
I'd love to see Billy Magnussen's leather pants get a nomination, though. Now THERE was some jaw-dropping work!
#4581
Posted: 12/30/14 at 7:53pm
@ray-andallthatjazz86 I never saw it, that's why I was asking. lol. But I remember reading an article somewhere about how it was a surprise she was nominated.
#4582
Posted: 12/30/14 at 7:58pm
To all unimpressed by Chris Pine...does that mean you agree with every winner of an Oscar and a Golden Globe
#4583
Posted: 12/30/14 at 8:01pm
I think the "best" review I saw was one that was just ripping Chris Pine apart for his performance, saying that he was so over the top and they didn't understand why the director didn't tell him to reign it in, and then after going through all this stuff about it, the reviewer goes "or maybe that's the way it was supposed to be"
It's pretty sad really, how many reviews I've seen from people who clearly do not get this show.
It's pretty sad really, how many reviews I've seen from people who clearly do not get this show.
#4584
"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 personally didn't find a problem with this. We saw it in real time - and then when she was relating what happened to the Baker, we saw the flashback. The first time we imagined what happened, and then we saw actually what happened from LR's point of view. I didn't love Johnny Depp's wolf but he didn't bother me either.
I also didn't need Rapunzel to die for the witch to be bitter..I mean she made the choice to leave. That seems ultimately worse than death to a "mother."
I do agree Act 2 felt a little less clear than it might have - they really tiptoed around the deaths, not sure if that helped. I appreciate it needed to fit into a time frame - and I am not asking for another half hour - but a few seconds here and there to see the witch mourn, etc. wouldn't have hurt IMO.
Sondheim music is not that "hum"-able as a whole. It sort of reminds me of Matilda in while that it might be intelligent beautiful music, as a whole, you don't go out singing the songs. You have to really pay attention to the music and lyrics to fully appreciate them..which people don't often do the first time around. Me - I can't get "You are not alone" out of my head.
I just saw it again - it's fresh in my mind.
Posted: 12/30/14 at 8:24pm
"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 personally didn't find a problem with this. We saw it in real time - and then when she was relating what happened to the Baker, we saw the flashback. The first time we imagined what happened, and then we saw actually what happened from LR's point of view. I didn't love Johnny Depp's wolf but he didn't bother me either.
I also didn't need Rapunzel to die for the witch to be bitter..I mean she made the choice to leave. That seems ultimately worse than death to a "mother."
I do agree Act 2 felt a little less clear than it might have - they really tiptoed around the deaths, not sure if that helped. I appreciate it needed to fit into a time frame - and I am not asking for another half hour - but a few seconds here and there to see the witch mourn, etc. wouldn't have hurt IMO.
Sondheim music is not that "hum"-able as a whole. It sort of reminds me of Matilda in while that it might be intelligent beautiful music, as a whole, you don't go out singing the songs. You have to really pay attention to the music and lyrics to fully appreciate them..which people don't often do the first time around. Me - I can't get "You are not alone" out of my head.
I just saw it again - it's fresh in my mind.
#4585
Posted: 12/30/14 at 11:42pm
I'm gonna be honest: I missed "Maybe They're Magic" more than "No More" or even "Ever After." Would have been nice for the scene with "So Happy" to be included only because I didn't find it terribly clear as to why they all chose to go back in to the woods. Other than that, a faithful adaptation.
"I saw Pavarotti play Rodolfo on stage and with his girth I thought he was about to eat the whole table at the Cafe Momus." - Dollypop
#4586
Posted: 12/31/14 at 12:34am
Am I the only one who thinks the IMDB Parental Guide for ITW is a little dramatic?
"6/10 There are multiple acts of thievery, murder/manslaughter, accidental death, poking human eyes out, amputation, kidnapping, elder abuse and child neglect."
"Jack's mother, while not outright abusive, does tend to slap her child around during the prologue. Jack seems to be brain-addled, and we're slightly led to wonder if the mother's "abuse" is to blame."
"It's also worth mentioning that the Witch's transformations (there are two, plus one mostly played-out offscreen) are very intense and they move her in violent ways."
"6/10 There are multiple acts of thievery, murder/manslaughter, accidental death, poking human eyes out, amputation, kidnapping, elder abuse and child neglect."
"Jack's mother, while not outright abusive, does tend to slap her child around during the prologue. Jack seems to be brain-addled, and we're slightly led to wonder if the mother's "abuse" is to blame."
"It's also worth mentioning that the Witch's transformations (there are two, plus one mostly played-out offscreen) are very intense and they move her in violent ways."
Updated On: 12/31/14 at 12:34 AM
#4587
Posted: 12/31/14 at 12:36am
"It's also worth mentioning that the Witch's transformations (there are two, plus one mostly played-out offscreen) are very intense and they move her in violent ways."
WTF????
WTF????
#4588
Posted: 12/31/14 at 1:09am
What? The head slapping is abusive? The child thinks a cow is a he. Any child that thinks a cow is a he deserves to be hit until the "S" comes back.
HAHAHA..pocking human eyes out? Is there a phrase they say poking animal eyes out?
Amputations? Good grief.
Uhm...where's the elder abuse? Jack's mom getting shoved?
THANK GOD this musical was made before any of these nut cases could voice an opinion. If they attempted to create it now days we'd be out of luck...it would die before it even started.
HAHAHA..pocking human eyes out? Is there a phrase they say poking animal eyes out?
Amputations? Good grief.
Uhm...where's the elder abuse? Jack's mom getting shoved?
THANK GOD this musical was made before any of these nut cases could voice an opinion. If they attempted to create it now days we'd be out of luck...it would die before it even started.
#4589
Posted: 12/31/14 at 1:13am
I don't know why they didn't include "Maybe They're Magic." I wanted to see the cow crying.
That's my favorite thing about seeing it on stage...the fake cow. What they do with that cow.
And moments like this:
http://youtu.be/U-1_4VwHGdo
Oh, he was a quick one, that Jack.
That's my favorite thing about seeing it on stage...the fake cow. What they do with that cow.
And moments like this:
http://youtu.be/U-1_4VwHGdo
Oh, he was a quick one, that Jack.
#4590
Posted: 12/31/14 at 4:04am
@ray-andallthatjazz86 I never saw it, that's why I was asking. lol. But I remember reading an article somewhere about how it was a surprise she was nominated.
Melissa McCarthy's nomination for Bridesmaid>/i> wasn't really a surprise. As soon as the movie came out in the spring of 2011, reviewers commented that she would be a good candidate for Supporting Actress if the Academy remembered that far back into the year.
Furthermore, McCarthy got nominated for 3 of the 4 precursor awards: BFCA (aka Critics Choice), SAG, and BAFTA. The Golden Globes were the only ones who failed to nominate her.
For what it's worth, I thought her nomination was deserving. She starts out very broad and slapsticky, but she had two scenes that clinched it for her, especially the part where she literally gives Kristin Wiig a reality slap.
Melissa McCarthy's nomination for Bridesmaid>/i> wasn't really a surprise. As soon as the movie came out in the spring of 2011, reviewers commented that she would be a good candidate for Supporting Actress if the Academy remembered that far back into the year.
Furthermore, McCarthy got nominated for 3 of the 4 precursor awards: BFCA (aka Critics Choice), SAG, and BAFTA. The Golden Globes were the only ones who failed to nominate her.
For what it's worth, I thought her nomination was deserving. She starts out very broad and slapsticky, but she had two scenes that clinched it for her, especially the part where she literally gives Kristin Wiig a reality slap.
Salve, Regina, Mater misericordiae
Vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra
Salve, Salve Regina
Ad te clamamus exsules filii Eva
Ad te suspiramus, gementes et flentes
O clemens O pia
Vita, dulcedo, et spes nostra
Salve, Salve Regina
Ad te clamamus exsules filii Eva
Ad te suspiramus, gementes et flentes
O clemens O pia
#4591
Posted: 12/31/14 at 8:13am
Regarding the parental advisory. The writers aren't "nut cases". Parents need to know if this is a kids movie. It isn't. Having specific descriptions of events should help a parent decide if this movie is appropriate for their particular child. The descriptions are just that. They are not judgements or condemnations. That being said, are we not shocked when the kid's head is slapped? When eyes are gouged, when toes sliced, and yes, when giants killed? Deserving or not is the discussion. But it is helpful to parents knowing what they are in for. The advisory was just fine.
#4592
Posted: 12/31/14 at 8:32am
But what is even remotely "violent" about the Witch's transformations??
#4593
I had an interesting –- and irritating -– experience on my second viewing. Shortly into the act-2 portion of the movie, somewhere just before “Any Moment,” three ladies across the aisle from me suddenly decided that the movie’s being a musical was ridiculous, and every time a character would begin singing, they’d whisper and giggle. They got bolder about it all throughout “Moments in the Woods” and “Your Fault,” and by the time “No One is Alone” rolled around, they were lol’ing and talking openly to one another. Then the cellphone screens began lighting up and they spent the last 10 minutes alternately giggling and texting (or checking Facebook or whatever). They bolted in the dark as soon as the camera panned up to the sky on the final notes of “Children Will Listen.”
But they didn’t make a peep for the first 3/4 of the movie. I guess they just hit a point where they’d had enough.
Posted: 12/31/14 at 9:17am
I had an interesting –- and irritating -– experience on my second viewing. Shortly into the act-2 portion of the movie, somewhere just before “Any Moment,” three ladies across the aisle from me suddenly decided that the movie’s being a musical was ridiculous, and every time a character would begin singing, they’d whisper and giggle. They got bolder about it all throughout “Moments in the Woods” and “Your Fault,” and by the time “No One is Alone” rolled around, they were lol’ing and talking openly to one another. Then the cellphone screens began lighting up and they spent the last 10 minutes alternately giggling and texting (or checking Facebook or whatever). They bolted in the dark as soon as the camera panned up to the sky on the final notes of “Children Will Listen.”
But they didn’t make a peep for the first 3/4 of the movie. I guess they just hit a point where they’d had enough.
CHURCH DOOR TOUCAN GAY MARKETING PUPPIES MUSICAL THEATER STAPLES PERIOD OIL BITCHY SNARK HOLES
#4594
Posted: 12/31/14 at 10:00am
"I don’t find that KPCC piece persuasive at all, mostly because I disagree with his conclusions – “Giants in the Sky” didn’t frustrate me"
I completely agree Mysterious. The premise that it isn't filmic for a character to describe a dramatic event in monologue without showing us what happens? Has Greene never seen Bergman, Kubrick, Preminger, Kurosawa? There is no reason that the same exciting evocative tension that can come from a character describing a vivid event without showing us the event, or with only showing us glimpses of it, can't apply to a song - particularly a Sondheim song - as it can also apply to a dramatic monologue. And for me Marshall's choice to shoot "Giants" mostly through Jack's retelling to the Baker, and wonderful isolated fragments of Jack's narrative, was very exciting.
shot from above: The roof, the house, and your Mother at the door - was perhaps the most beautiful moment in the movie, all the more so because Marshall judiciously opted to show us only brief moments of Jack's journey.
I completely agree Mysterious. The premise that it isn't filmic for a character to describe a dramatic event in monologue without showing us what happens? Has Greene never seen Bergman, Kubrick, Preminger, Kurosawa? There is no reason that the same exciting evocative tension that can come from a character describing a vivid event without showing us the event, or with only showing us glimpses of it, can't apply to a song - particularly a Sondheim song - as it can also apply to a dramatic monologue. And for me Marshall's choice to shoot "Giants" mostly through Jack's retelling to the Baker, and wonderful isolated fragments of Jack's narrative, was very exciting.
shot from above: The roof, the house, and your Mother at the door - was perhaps the most beautiful moment in the movie, all the more so because Marshall judiciously opted to show us only brief moments of Jack's journey.
Updated On: 12/31/14 at 10:00 AM
#4595
Exactly, henrik. Just because film allows things to be done does not mean they should be done.
And thank you for mentioning "the roof, the house, and your mother at the door." That was a moment in the film where I spontaneously cried, not just because the sentiment is so beautiful and revelatory, but because when I've listened to this song in any iteration, that's always been a vivid moment in my imagination. The way the music opens up like a flower steals the breath away. And Marshall doesn't overdo it. He gives us a quick glimpse. And I gasped and cried. And I don't think I would have if we'd been shown Jack's whole journey. That's a huge discovery he makes in the song. It deserved to be highlighted.
Posted: 12/31/14 at 10:11am
Exactly, henrik. Just because film allows things to be done does not mean they should be done.
And thank you for mentioning "the roof, the house, and your mother at the door." That was a moment in the film where I spontaneously cried, not just because the sentiment is so beautiful and revelatory, but because when I've listened to this song in any iteration, that's always been a vivid moment in my imagination. The way the music opens up like a flower steals the breath away. And Marshall doesn't overdo it. He gives us a quick glimpse. And I gasped and cried. And I don't think I would have if we'd been shown Jack's whole journey. That's a huge discovery he makes in the song. It deserved to be highlighted.
CHURCH DOOR TOUCAN GAY MARKETING PUPPIES MUSICAL THEATER STAPLES PERIOD OIL BITCHY SNARK HOLES
#4596
I also think "Moments in the Woods," sadly, doesn't have the impact I want to it in the movie. And I don't think it's Emily Blunt; I think it's the way Marshall filmed it. I can't even articulate what I wish he'd done differently. Or maybe it's the memory of Joanna Gleason almost stopping the show with it. But it doesn't feel cathartic in the film, and it should.
Posted: 12/31/14 at 10:23am
I also think "Moments in the Woods," sadly, doesn't have the impact I want to it in the movie. And I don't think it's Emily Blunt; I think it's the way Marshall filmed it. I can't even articulate what I wish he'd done differently. Or maybe it's the memory of Joanna Gleason almost stopping the show with it. But it doesn't feel cathartic in the film, and it should.
CHURCH DOOR TOUCAN GAY MARKETING PUPPIES MUSICAL THEATER STAPLES PERIOD OIL BITCHY SNARK HOLES
#4597
Posted: 12/31/14 at 10:35am
That's funny. I guess we had somewhat polar experiences -- the "Any Moment"/"Moment in the Woods" sequences were perhaps my favorite in the film.
#4598
I really enjoyed "Any Moment," but "Moments in the Woods" felt so point-and-shoot to me. I wanted a little flourish somewhere, maybe. I don't know. I'm going to pay closer attention next time. Maybe I'm missing something.
I did, however, love the way he handled her death. Both times I've seen it, the audience went deathly silent.
Posted: 12/31/14 at 10:39am
I really enjoyed "Any Moment," but "Moments in the Woods" felt so point-and-shoot to me. I wanted a little flourish somewhere, maybe. I don't know. I'm going to pay closer attention next time. Maybe I'm missing something.
I did, however, love the way he handled her death. Both times I've seen it, the audience went deathly silent.
CHURCH DOOR TOUCAN GAY MARKETING PUPPIES MUSICAL THEATER STAPLES PERIOD OIL BITCHY SNARK HOLES
#4599
Posted: 12/31/14 at 10:58am
@Comden Green
I don't know. Those descriptions are misleading at best. Nothing is shown when the toe or heel are removed. The sound is all you get. Same for all the deaths aside from the Giantess (I think) and the Wolf. And the Wolf is no different than any fairy tail.
Again, these parents are treating their children like Little Red prior to her song. As if she's far too precious to know certain things. And, if they allow them to watch the nightly news, this is far tamer than that.
That should be part of that Guide.
@themysteriousgrowl
Those women are idiots. Who goes to a film and doesn't know what it's about? I'm surprised they were women and not teenagers.
I think that the film suffers from not having spacing where people are "supposed" to feel something like in the musical. And when people are left without a prompt they feel as if something is left out. I, for one, don't feel that. I dislike prompts. I just like to watch and feel.
I don't know. Those descriptions are misleading at best. Nothing is shown when the toe or heel are removed. The sound is all you get. Same for all the deaths aside from the Giantess (I think) and the Wolf. And the Wolf is no different than any fairy tail.
Again, these parents are treating their children like Little Red prior to her song. As if she's far too precious to know certain things. And, if they allow them to watch the nightly news, this is far tamer than that.
That should be part of that Guide.
@themysteriousgrowl
Those women are idiots. Who goes to a film and doesn't know what it's about? I'm surprised they were women and not teenagers.
I think that the film suffers from not having spacing where people are "supposed" to feel something like in the musical. And when people are left without a prompt they feel as if something is left out. I, for one, don't feel that. I dislike prompts. I just like to watch and feel.
#4600
Posted: 12/31/14 at 11:23am
"I also think "Moments in the Woods," sadly, doesn't have the impact I want to it in the movie. And I don't think it's Emily Blunt; I think it's the way Marshall filmed it. I can't even articulate what I wish he'd done differently. Or maybe it's the memory of Joanna Gleason almost stopping the show with it. But it doesn't feel cathartic in the film, and it should."
Is the entire song in the film? I was very much caught up in the number, but the tiny part of me that wasn't engrossed seemed to think it was missing something...
Is the entire song in the film? I was very much caught up in the number, but the tiny part of me that wasn't engrossed seemed to think it was missing something...
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