Into the Woods Official Movie Thread- Page 49

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 1:37pm

WOW what an awesome read. I would definitely have been interested in seeing Elijah Wood as Jack. Cher would have been an awesome choice for the Witch. Really glad the film didn't happen in 1996 though, The Baker's Wife spoiler made me cringe.

The article asks: "do you like that the Mouse & Rob Marshall seem to be circling back on Penny Marshall's original idea? Which was to turn this movie musical into a genuine event by loading the production up with as many stars as possible?"

I am pretty excited for this movie but at the same time I really don't think its the kind of film that needs a huge amount of Stars in it. I don't think they will detract from the film but i don't think its necessary either. Into the woods is an ensemble show and i really think this is the type of show that really speaks for itself.

Question: Do you guys think its a good idea to sell this film as a Big Hollywood Christmas Blockbuster? It just seems like the marketing of this film is a bit off to me. I have never considered ITW to be showy or "blockbustery" at all. Its more of a subtle piece if you ask me. It seems like they are trying to ride on the coattails of Les Mis ( can't say I blame them though).

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 1:51pm

The Christmas date seems more about Oscar season. If they really wanted to sell it as a blockbuster-adventure, they would have gone for May or June. Or an earlier "Oz the Great and Powerful" date of April.

As to your question, with a bunch of recognizable fairy tale characters in an ensemble story, it's easy to see why it would work well with a celebrity cast.

In movies with new characters, it can often be distracting, because the audience is trying to get to know all the characters within the story, and suddenly they're pulled out of it with "OMG! That's my favorite actor!" If you already are familiar with the character and that character's initial situation, you have enough time to get over the "celebrity distraction" and get into the story. By the time you come down out of the clouds, they're onto the new plot points and you're already settled in.

(Probably too much psychology there, but that's the way I see it.)

And Disney, in their best "Oz the Great and Powerful" fashion, will promote the hell out of the stars, the characters, and their stories. I predict a huge hit!

... unless they screw it up.

[jacobsnchz14]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 1:52pm

I agree about "coattailing" Les Mis... I see it as a Les Mis-type "event" more geared toward families. Almost every kid and teen I know has heard about the Les Mis hype and they haven't seen it or their parents didn't think the kids were ready to see it... but it all goes back again to gearing ITW towards Disney's key demographic: families and kids.

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:03pm

Very good points best12bars I agree with you about the blockbuster family thing. The next question is silly cause the movie isn't out yet but here goes: Can you see the source material actually getting nominated for Oscars? Do you think the characters are oscar worthy? The only characters i can see being Oscar worthy are The Witch and Baker's wife. The production team must be going for more of the dark route with this film if they think it has a chance to be up for Oscars.

"but it all goes back again to gearing ITW towards Disney's key demographic: families and kids."

Which is why I am a bit confused on why they would release this during Oscar season instead of a summer thing.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:16pm

You can call it Oscar season, sure, but December is also family-friendly season. Sounds like a scheduling no-brainer to me. (I'm just a little bugged because they're opening the same day as a small family drama I worked on-- c'est la vie, c'est la guere.)

And can you imagine ITW going up against Man of Steel, World War Z, and Iron Man 3 if they had tried to mount a summer campaign? Hopeless for a show boasting this pedigree.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:23pm

I definitely see the Christmas release date as an attempt to position this as a family-friendly blockbuster. I'm sure they'll mount an Oscar campaign and all that, but if you look at how much money films released on Christmas have made recently, you'll see where Disney was coming from. Movies like ALVIN AND THE CHIPMUNKS and TRON have benefitted from this release date, even something as awful as PARENTAL GUIDANCE this past year managed to make money just based on the fact it was a film all families could go and see together. Of course, if the film is a huge hit, it'll turn give it a much bigger chance to be remembered come Oscar time; they'll obviously mount a huge campaign, but I wouldn't be surprised if this turns out to be much more of a HAIRSPRAY than a CHICAGO.

[jnb9872]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:25pm

I'm not sure where you get that they must be going "dark" because they're playing for Oscars. To me, a closer analogy for the business end of this, rather than LES MISERABLES, would be HUGO. Another big family-friendly, technically-demanding and Oscar-contending movie. LES MIS has a franchise name unto itself, WOODS will have the recognizable fairy tale characters and Disney's $$$ backing its publicity. It would do better as a big family alternative for the holidays than a summer tentpole, where it can all too easily be swallowed up by superheroes and animated movies. Plus, it could have longer box office legs with a push for awards, Best Picture with the expanded field plus some technical and probable acting chances (I'd argue it's less likely that we can predict acting nomination likelihood by roles alone; Fantine got Anne Hathaway and Patti LuPone awards in different categories yet Randy Graff wasn't nominated. The politics of Oscar positioning not to mention, you know, how the cast does and if anyone like Hathaway leaps off the screen with tidal waves of buzz to earn a place in the running...)

[Gorlois]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:30pm

Apparently, Christmas Day is a huge day for families to go to the movies. So the family aspect still plays into Disney's decision making-- it's not just about the Oscar bait. Disney also doesn't have any other fairy tale movies coming out around that time of the year, either. Had they released it this year it would have competed with "Frozen." Next year Disney animation is releasing a movie more akin to "Wreck it Ralph" so it shouldn't split their audience up.

I'm excited to see how the movie does at the Oscars. I imagine this year's race will play into it as well-- if Streep wins for "A:OC" will voters give her a fourth leading Oscar for the Witch? Or will Disney move her to supporting for a second Oscar in that category (& to increase Blunt's chances)? It's all too early of course, but it'll be a fun race, regardless. And no matter what happens between now & Christmas Day '14, I think it's safe to say Streep is a lock for nomination. Unless the movie misfires badly, which is a risk with any movie musical.

I have a gut feeling that with the star and the change of medium, the Baker has a chance to be nominated, too. But that's really too early.

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:31pm

As for Oscar nominations, I'm sure they'll campaign hard for every single award including best documentary short. But if the thing's any good at all, they'll have an excellent chance of nominations for picture, director, a host of supporting actors/actresses (which would include Streep), original song, score, DP, VFX, sound FX, editing, and every design award in the book.

[jnb9872]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:32pm

Ha, did the four of us answer your question broadway guy? We all took the same basic answer and expanded on it four different ways.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:36pm

As Besty has pointed out before, fantasy as a genre has a very hard time doing well at the Oscars. Of course you have something like RETURN OF THE KING making a clean sweep at the awards, but that was the exception rather than the rule; it's also important to note that from all three films, only Ian McKellen got nominated one year and didn't win. And yes, awards work differently than the Tonys sometimes, SWEENEY TODD got its two lead actors Tonys but Helena Bonham Carter didn't even crack the top 5 at the Oscars, while Depp got a nomination but had zero chances of winning against Daniel Day-Lewis' mammoth performance in THERE WILL BE BLOOD. I honestly don't see anyone from INTO THE WOODS managing to get nominated for an Oscar, and that doesn't mean it'll be a bad movie or that people will give bad performances, it's just a bit of an uphill battle. Of course, the film might hit all the right notes and get in, the Academy is a bit more unpredictable than people give them credit for. Regardless, with casting just starting to shape up, it's moot to talk about Oscar chances when a single frame hasn't even been shot.

[Gorlois]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:36pm

Yeah, when I was typing other people answered before me. I wasn't trying to beat a dead horse or anything. Lol

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:45pm

Oh, I agree that Christmas is second only to summer for box office. And it's family season, as you say.

As far as Oscar nods, I expect it will be in serious consideration for all behind-the-scenes awards: Art Direction, VFX, Sound, Sound FX, Costumes, Makeup, New Song, Adapted Screenplay, Editing.

(Again, as long as they don't screw it up. )

And perhaps the two biggies, which would be tough but not impossible: Best Director and Best Picture.

The toughest long shots will be the performances. Very few (seriously, think about it) actors who have played in fantasies or fairy tales ever get nominated. Add to it that this is an ensemble piece, and that puts nearly all of them fighting for the "supporting" slots. I just don't see it happening, frankly. Even if they're all wonderful.

But it will be their performances, above all else, including direction and even the material, that will earn it a Best Picture nod, if it happens to get one.

Also, while if it's strong enough and gets a Best Picture nomination, remember that in the entire history of the Academy, only one fantasy film has ever won Best Picture: LOTR: Return of the King. That's it. Just one.

EDIT: ray, you beat me to the punch! I take too long to type sometimes. LOL

Updated On: 6/25/13 at 02:45 PM

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 2:58pm

LOLZ I definitely got my answer.

Someone said Streep is a lock for A nomination, I don't think thats necessarily true. Streep is clearly a Favorite but I don't think we should put much stock into her performance until we actually see it. I'm not saying she won't get a nomination ( she probably will) But lets not jump to conclusions yet.

After reading the script it seems like They are going to be faithful to the Musical so that leads me to believe that this will have an honest chance at some Oscars. I can't really see this getting a Director nomination though but we shall see.

I think the nominations will ride on how well they do the 2nd half of the film. Will they charge in and create the gritty realism or will they take a step back and try not to spoil the magic? We shall see. I can see this being another LIFE OF PI where it takes all the technical noms. Streeps best chance at a nomination will probably be in Supporting. I doubt they are going to want to make Streep and Baker's wife go head to head if she delivers.

If this film is anything Like i picture it in my head I could see this film getting the following nominations:

-Best Picture
-Best Actress
-Featured Actress
-Featured Actor?
-Screenplay
-Original Song
-Costume Design
-editing
-visual effects

But Honestly I am just day dreaming at this point so don't take any of those predictions seriously. They are just for fun.

This could also end up as more of a HAIRSPRAY thing and completely miss out on awards. This could also be a huge misfire like EVITA but i don't think it will be.

I could also see this fall into the PHANTOM film trap where people said it was an uninspired movie that felt to stagey. Thats what i noticed when reading the screenplay, It was very faithful to the stage but i just felt like i was reading the Broadway libretto. I hope they do something to this film that the stage could not recreate.

Anyone know if they will be doing Live singing on set? I don't think it worked for Les Mis but this is the type of show that I think could really benefit from that method.

Updated On: 6/25/13 at 02:58 PM

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:02pm

Besty, are we the same person?
I think it's almost guaranteed that it'll get in for all the "below the line" awards, Marshall's films consistently deliver on that front and here he is working with material that is almost by nature not only likely to get nominated but win some of those awards. Marshall has a lot of backlash to overcome before landing a Director nod, but Disney is a good friend to have on your side when it comes down to campaigning. Picture is more of a possibility, I mean if the unwatchable EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE could get in, INTO THE WOODS can too. I really disagree with people saying Streep is a "lock," I want to say (and some of you who are better at researching and trivia can help me here) that no one has ever gotten in for playing a Witch in a film, not Margaret Hamilton, not Charlize Theron, not Anjelica Huston, etc.
EDIT: I think, in a fashion similar to HAIRSPRAY, the film will fare a lot better at the SAG than it will at the Oscars. Actors love Marshall, his three prestige projects have all done well with SAG, they also love musicals, same with the Globes.

Updated On: 6/25/13 at 03:02 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:06pm

No way is Streep (or any other actor) a "lock" for a nomination for this film.

Updated On: 6/25/13 at 03:06 PM

[Gorlois]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:22pm

I'm not surprised people would disagree with calling Streep a lock, people are always antsy about that kind of thing so far in advance before Oscar season (and understandably so, considering the movie hasn't even started filming yet).

But you don't cast Streep as the Witch without expecting results.

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:23pm

"Marshall has a lot of backlash to overcome before landing a Director nod"

Backlash for what?

[Gorlois]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:26pm

Most would argue that he hasn't made a good film since CHICAGO, and that NINE was especially heinous.

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:27pm

Cause its kinda true LOL.

[best12bars]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:30pm

Well, his last movie made $241 million at the box office in the U.S. Another $800 million overseas.

That's over $1 billion.

So Disney likes him.

A lot.

[taylor_kras]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:40pm

I have high hopes and low expectations which should help me enjoy it either way.

[ljay889]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:47pm

Are we really predicting Oscar nominations for a film still in the casting phase?

[Brave Sir Robin2]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 3:50pm

I think, if she gets the right buzz, Emily Blunt could get a nomination, as could Jake Gyllenhaal. Anna Kendrick has a shot depending on the success and release of THE LAST FIVE YEARS. If it becomes the sleeper hit of summer 2014, she could get a leading actress nomination for YEARS and not featured actress for WOODS.

Or Meryl for leading and Emily Blunt for supporting.

[broadway guy]

Posted: 6/25/13 at 4:37pm

I'm really curious to see how Blunt will do with this Role. I think its definitely one of the more trickier roles for women and I think there are so many ways you can do it. Very Excited to see her Portrayal.

Sir Robin You really think Jake could get a nomination? I'm not attacking you or anything, it just seems like His role is very Over the top and One dimensional. I can't see the academy going for it.