Into the Woods Official Movie Thread- Page 195

[sarahb22]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 5:57pm

BUT Cinderella's prince from the animated film and her prince from ITW are different characters. Ditto Rapunzel's prince. He's not Flynn Rider - he's a completely different character.

I'll bet if you put some cosplayers in WDW or Disneyland dressed like the princes in ITW, they'd be popular. They'd be asked to sing "Agony" every 5 seconds...but I can guarantee you they'd get attention. And it's not like their costumes are similar or anything. I'd LOVE to see them do that!

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 6:57pm

Glad this thread finally has the right title...

When Cinderella says, "And you've learned something too, something you never knew...", what does she mean? What did she learn? That she can let other people decide things for her? Doesn't sound like much of a lesson.

Updated On: 1/6/15 at 06:57 PM

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 8:40pm

Great question, Magical.

Perhaps it's that when one is presented with two options, nightmare or dream, neither seeming right or real, that the best strategy is to keep all options open.

In the traditional Cinderella story, the heroine has always let others decide her fate.
Here at least, acknowledging that she doesn't know what she wants, and perhaps finding that acknowledgement somewhat liberating, Cinderella makes a choice of leaving her and all of us in suspense. She leaves the Prince a clue.
It's not much of an exercise of empowerment - and it's far from the complete lesson Cinderella learns in Into the Woods: that she wants neither nightmare nor dream but something in-between - but it's a turn in her story.


Updated On: 1/6/15 at 08:40 PM

[Bucky Builder]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 9:44pm

"I'll bet if you put some cosplayers in WDW or Disneyland dressed like the princes in ITW, they'd be popular. They'd be asked to sing "Agony" every 5 seconds...but I can guarantee you they'd get attention. And it's not like their costumes are similar or anything. I'd LOVE to see them do that!"

Judging by the audience score at RT, I think you may be overestimating people's love for this film.

[Mr. Nowack]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 9:58pm

It should be noted that not every person who saw the film went and put their thoughts on RottenTomatoes. It's very likely that only those who were thoroughly displeased will seek out to write reviews on it.

[binau]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 10:08pm

I mean, that may be partly true but given the range of audience responses on Rotten Tomatoes does range from very high to low, there are people that go there to say how much they liked the movie too.

The imdb rating (7.1/10) isn't particularly high either.

Based on the response here, it seems theatre fans might have had stronger reactions than the general public?

[dramamama611]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 10:08pm

^By that logic, wouldn't ALL films on RT get low numbers?

[Starship]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 10:19pm

I think the general response from the public was mixed. I think it's fair to credit a large portion of the financial success of the film due to the combination of the recognizable names and the "Disney fairytale" vibe. Both helped draw a large number of family audiences in who weren't familiar with the material before. I think the low audience ratings come from the fact that it didn't turn out to be the "happily ever after" everybody thought it would be.

[ljay889]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 11:27pm

Wow! Final album sales are in, and the soundtrack is still projected for #3 on billboard! Official numbers will be out Thursday. Amazing.

http://www.hitsdailydouble.com/sales/salescht.cgi

and I love how BWW keeps stealing my information and misrepresenting it in their articles. Updated On: 1/6/15 at 11:27 PM

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 6:15am

I find it laughable that people use Rotten Tomatoes and/or imdb ratings to not only gauge the validity of any given film but as a guide to what to go see. Any fool on the internet can go and write crap about a movie "just because" and drive those "percentages" or ratings down.

I'm from the school of "I like what I like" regardless of whether the film got a 57% "like" on Rotten Tomatoes or a 2.1 rating on imdb.com. It's ridiculous that people use the ratings on these websites to justify their like and/or dislike about a film.

It's just B.S.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 8:32am

Maybe this isn’t bothering many people, but I’ve seen it brought up here and on IMDb as a criticism or an example of sloppy storytelling or whatever, and so it was on my mind the last time I went to see the movie.

If the witch can teleport, why does she climb Rapunzel’s hair?

Her teleportations are violent and disruptive to her surrounding environment, and Rapunzel’s room in the tower is not only small, but rather tightly packed with furniture and objects. I’d guess her teleporting in and out of there would seriously mess things up.

So, that’s my answer to that question. It’s not a huge deal, but I like to think the creatives think these things out. Details like this begin to nag at me the more I watch a movie if they seem genuinely “wrong” or can’t be justified somehow.

It was tough being a LOST fan.

[J_Jammer]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 10:44am

That's the best reasoning for why she doesn't teleport in that I've read. Not that I've read a lot on it, but from what I have read.

"It was tough being a LOST fan."

I was a fan of the show and just watched it. Never bothered talking about that online. Not like i do other shows.

[J_Jammer]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 10:47am

"I'm from the school of "I like what I like" regardless of whether the film got a 57% "like" on Rotten Tomatoes or a 2.1 rating on imdb.com. It's ridiculous that people use the ratings on these websites to justify their like and/or dislike about a film."

So am I.

I'll see whatever. But if I'm on the fence and the audience and the critics are panning it...I will not be seeing. Not going to chance disliking it. I would if my taste were so drastic in the other direction that if the audience or critics hated it that I would LOVE IT...but that rarely happens.

When it starts to dip below 50% Rotten Tomatoes and below 60 for audience, I question if I want to waste my time.

I saw Into the Woods before the dip in audience ratings, but even if it had before I went I'd still go. That one is immune to that because I wanted to see it.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 11:05am

"I was a fan of the show and just watched it. Never bothered talking about that online. Not like i do other shows."

I watched the majority of the series as it aired, and going online to talk about the show became a big part of the fabric my experience of it -- and that was true for a lot of the die-hard fans. From cliffhanger to cliffhanger, there was a week to speculate on all of the crazy details and events of each episode, and that went on for six years. By the time the show was nearing its wrap-up, I'd made such good friends in the online LOST community, I flew alone to London to spend a week with them, and I'm friends with most of them to this day. My mom thought I'd gone off my rocker.

[Ado Annie D'Ysquith]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 11:28am

I was supposed to go see this tomorrow with a friend- but now she's sick. Ugh. I'm tired of waiting. *returns to soundtrack CD*

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 11:32am

INTO THE WOODS will probably fall in line with DREAMGIRLS, LES MIZ, SWEENEY TODD, EVITA, etc as modern movie musicals, which, despite an initial wave of enthusiasm (likely stemming from musical theatre lovers) seem to slip into the 'mediocre' movie pile in popular (and BWW) opinion over time.

Adapting a Broadway musical into a movie that truly stands the test of time is a tough, tough thing to do. I think CHICAGO remains the only Broadway musical adaption of the last 20 years, that is still routinely considered an excellent 'film.'

[Kad]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 11:40am

"Based on the response here, it seems theatre fans might have had stronger reactions than the general public?"

You mean just like the stage show always has?

[J_Jammer]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:16pm

"By the time the show was nearing its wrap-up, I'd made such good friends in the online LOST community, I flew alone to London to spend a week with them, and I'm friends with most of them to this day. My mom thought I'd gone off my rocker."

I'll correct myself. I was an avid viewer.

That's aawesome to create friendships through a passion.

I've gone and met someone I only knew online. At the time my mom thought i was not too sane. I knew him for a year and a half. I was staying at his house, though. Not a hotel.

It was fun.

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:17pm

As far as entrance to Rapunzel's tower, I suggested earlier that the Witch put a spell on it, and the only way to enter this tower was by saying "Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair to me!" which they all do, and then by climbing her hair.

Just like the cave of wonders in Aladdin ("open sesame!") there is no other way to enter the place.

So the Witch, or anyone else, can't just teleport into it.

This would also explain why Rapunzel herself hasn't used her own hair (after cutting it off) as a rope to escape years ago.

Of course none of that is stated in the script, but it would have taken one crisp sentence to explain it.

[Kad]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:22pm

In the stage show, the Witch performs or is said to be able to perform all sorts of magic, from levitating to resurrection to transfiguration- as well as having the ability to always sort of appear (even if it's not explicitly magical). The fact that, in any incarnation of the show, she never uses all that power to more easily get into Rapunzel's room is not really ever something I considered a plot hole. It's fairy tale world logic.

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:29pm

It's also an exquisite use of manipulation...making your captive your co-conspirator. Rapunzel has to be part of the process of allowing her 'mother' to visit so that the emotional domination is insidious, subtle and complete.

Oooh girl...I'm apparently having some dark thoughts today.

[tenorphil81]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:29pm

So, with all the featurettes Disney has released on this movie, I feel like I've watched the entire "Special Features" section of the future Blu-Ray.

And yes, I'm still buying it.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:30pm

There is obviously also some kind of psychological symbolism to Rapunzel's hair and the bond it creates between she and the Witch (the basis for the sometimes used "Our Little World" duet) which as Kad wisely states, in 'fairy tale ideology" over-rides traditional logic.

[Jay94]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:49pm

Just to clear something up; did Sondheim actually compose the musical underscoring to the movie? I haven't been able to find a clear answer to this especially since David Krane is credited for the 'musical score adaptation'.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:55pm

I'm unsatisfied by fairy-tale logic in this situation. If you invent a character who's all-powerful and then introduce things they can't do, that's a problem, fairy tale or not. The witch isn't said to be all-powerful either on stage or in the movie (the Baker says, "She's a witch; she can do anything," but he's making that assumption on his own; obviously her powers are finite, or she wouldn't have the problems she has), so the powers she's shown to have must be chosen carefully.

I completely agree with Michael Bennett about the power of the symbolic act of climbing her hair, and I like Robbie's explanation of it being a deliberate manipulation, but I'm not satisfied with no explanation just because it's a fairy tale.

As bestie says, it's not addressed anywhere in the script explicitly, so I'm happy to take what is given and weave my own explanation out of it.

IT MAKES ME HAPPY, KAD.

And for the record, it's always been a minor sticking point for me in the show, too, but this is the first time I've put serious thought into it because movies.

Updated On: 1/7/15 at 12:55 PM