Into the Woods Official Movie Thread- Page 69

[Roscoe]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 3:38pm

The road to hell is paved with Rob Marshall.

[Starship]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 3:43pm

Are we still fighting about the whole sexual awakening thing.

Posted: 8/13/13 at 3:46pm

Nope.

Roscoe has joined and is now spewing his typical vitriol about Rob Marshall.

No one's allowed to be optimistic about the film now that Roscoe's put his official stank on it.

Might as well let the thread die, because Roscoe will never let it go.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 4:45pm

Yep.

FindYourGrail has joined and no one's allowed to say anything negative about Rob Marshall and the film now that FindYourGrail's put his/her official Seal Of Eternal Shiny Optimism on it.

Might as well let the thread thrive, because FindYourGrail will always be around to be so relentlessly positive happy and upbeat, feverishly putting those who dare to disagree with him/her in their places. Let none disagree, lest you incur the wrath of GRAIL!

Heil GRAIL! Leader of the Happy Brigades! Let all who dare criticize Marshall's genius report to Track 9 for transportation to GRAIL's HAPPY CAMPS for extermination, oops, re-education in the way of True Marshall Appreciation!!

Updated On: 8/13/13 at 04:45 PM

Posted: 8/13/13 at 5:00pm

Wow. What a sad individual you are.

It's not enough that you post your pathetic nonsense once in this thread, but you return to reiterate it over and over again.

If anyone's unyielding it's you, Roscoe.

Every optimistic comment must immediately be followed by a remark from you in an attempt to invalidate anyone's notion that the film might turn out well.

I'm more than accepting of those who don't like Marshall. But, when you show up in every thread and continue to pollute them with your pitiful snarkiness, then I will say something to counter that.

Sorry. But, I like to go through life with an optimistic outlook and hope for the best.

You just think that you're attitude somehow makes you "better than."

It does not.

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 5:12pm

For what it's worth, I don't feel antagonized by Roscoe's comments. He doesn't like Rob Marshall one bit. I have liked Marshall's work immensely and disliked it as well.

But my opinion isn't threatened or undermined by Roscoe's, or anyone else posting who doesn't agree with me.

I should also say that while, so far, I really don't see any blatant missteps by the creative team for this movie, I have no idea if it's going to work.

I think it's equally wrong for anyone to say they "know" it isn't going to work.

Those are the extreme comments that make no sense. We don't "know" anything. We can agree with or disagree with the choices being made. We can even say, "I think this is going to be great," or "I have little hope that this will work."

Those are all opinions. But "I know this will be a big hit," or "I know this will flop big-time."

No, you don't.

(That comment is not directed at anybody in particular, by the way.)

I'm in the camp that is hoping for the best. I think the choices made so far could lead to a very successful film, both financially and artistically. Others here don't feel that way.

But none of us "know," one way or the other.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 6:01pm

FYG -- Wow. What a sad individual you are. So threatened by opposing viewpoints that you must attack those who hold them by characterizing those viewpoints as "pathetic nonsense" and "pitiful snarkiness."

Sad. Feel free to avoid reading my comments if they cause you such pain. And for the record, check over the posts above -- there are folks who have agreed with my negative comments about Mr. Marshall and his work, and I don't see you going after them with the vehemence with which you have attacked me. Think about why your sunny optimism just can't take any kind of opposition, why you find it necessary to launch personal attacks on those who disagree with you. I'd say that it is you who thinks that your attitude somehow makes you "better than."

You'd be wise, I think, to consider the great Mr. Best12bars' words: "For what it's worth, I don't feel antagonized by Roscoe's comments." If he can rise above disagreement, you might want to consider doing likewise.

However it works out, have a nice life. May your life be filled with only those who agree with you totally. May you never be moved to consider other people's opinions again, or ever be troubled with disagreement. Enjoy.

I'll not be reading your un-necessarily combative and offensive posts again.

Updated On: 8/13/13 at 06:01 PM

Posted: 8/13/13 at 6:23pm

Offensive? Please.

Yes, Roscoe. Why is it that I can read the posts of others in this thread who disagree with my views and leave then unanswered? Because they make their point in an adult manner and are content with stating their opinion once.

Not you. You incessantly post after anyone with a positive word and continue to add nothing but bitterness to the conversation.

There are many things I'm not so "sunny" about and I speak my mind about them. But I do so in a concise way and leave it at that.

You, on the other hand, cannot resist a chance to post in any thread that has anything to do with this topic and add your two cents.

We get it. You hate Marshall. You've said it time and time again. Everyone knows it. The horse is dead.

I can appreciate a conflicting viewpoint when it's stated in a mature fashion.

[Roscoe]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 6:27pm

Well, it isn't like you actually joined in the discussion or anything. I expressed my opinion in some posts above, and others joined in, agreeing and disagreeing, and nobody above resorted to calling anyone "a sad individual" or characterized anybody's opinions as "pathetic nonsense." It took YOU to resort to such bullying behavior.

Attacking movies and directors and writers and shows and stuff is the fun of being on a board like this. Trash away, praise away, they're all just opinions after all, and sometimes opposing viewpoints are valuable, as I've found in discussions with Taz and the invaluable Best12bars. Simply attacking others for holding opinions opposite to yours is just not cool, and that's what you wound up doing. It isn't like you tried to join in a discussion, or even state your disagreement -- you just launched a full out assault.

As you say, the horse is dead. In future, I'll thank you to please extend me the courtesy that you claim you extend to those others whose opinions you disagree with. I'll be glad to extend you the same courtesy.

Updated On: 8/13/13 at 06:27 PM

[kieranbec]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 7:03pm

Can you two do this over PMs, please?

[HBP]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 8:39pm

^ Agreed. Or not at all.

[darquegk]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 9:21pm

Isn't it nice to kvetch a lot?

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 8/13/13 at 10:44pm

And a little bit not.

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 1:04am

The thing about Little Red's age is that in the song "I Know Things Now" she herself is sexually awakening, so she has to be in an age when puberty would hit because A) She has to be awakening inside to her own sexual feelings (example: "excited and scared") and B) It's extra extra gross that she would be talking about knowing a man's sexuality when she is under age.

I think Disney is frankly ignorant of this and I wish someone would tell them. Or rather actually not tell them, because then they wouldn't do it because they don't want anything sexual in a film they make. So instead, just cast a teenager now.

Also, I think they should digitally de-age Meryl Streep when she becomes her beautiful self again, because the original script said she regained her youth and beauty. I also wouldn't mind if they digitally made her more beautiful too. I don't think she's beautiful and the Witch is supposed to be.

And the Wolf better not have once been a man. He's a talking wolf not a werewolf. Frankly I think the actor who plays Cinderella's Prince should also play the wolf like the original had. There was the idea that the princes were like hungry wolves in their pursuing of young girls. Even "Stay With Me" had the Witch say "Princes wait there in the world it's true. Princes, yes, but wolves and humans too" and the the princes are like wolves and humans.

And of course, Rapunzel should die because the Witch's "Children will/won't listen" only makes sense that way.

And it would be good if they de-aged the Baker and his Wife too. The Baker was only "a babe" when his sister was born so he would only be a little older than her, maybe like 27, and then the young people should all be like 20 and their parents just like 35-40 because back in those days people got married, had children, and died earlier. And yes, you can say "it's just a fairy tale" but when these fairy tales were told only the magic was unreal, the real-life society rules and laws of death still applied.

Updated On: 8/17/13 at 01:04 AM

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 1:18am

I think Disney is frankly ignorant of this and I wish someone would tell them. Or rather actually not tell them, becaue then they wouldn't do it because they don't want anything sexual in a film they make. So instead, just cast a teenager now.

Despite James Lapine writing it
"a small, plump, young girl in a red cape."

and every image of Red from the official story book of the show has her being a little girl.

Frankly I think the actor who plays Cinderella's Prince should also play the wolf like the original had.

Why? They only did that because it's the stage and paying one actor is better than paying two.

In Know Things Now doesn't have to be a sexual awakening. It could be the losing of naivety. That you shouldn't trust every person that crosses your path. It's only as sexual as you make it.

And it would be good if they de-aged the Baker and his Wife too. The Baker was only "a babe" when his sister was born so he would only be a little older than her, maybe like 27, and then the young people should all be like 20 and their parents just like 35-40 because back in those days people got married, had children, and died earlier. And yes, you can say "it's just a fairy tale" but when these fairy tales were told only the magic was unreal, the real-life society rules and laws of death still applied.

It's still a fairy tale. You want real world logic go watch a historical drama. Updated On: 8/17/13 at 01:18 AM

[Starship]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 2:30am

I always am amused when people can't grasp the concept of an opinion and why they feel the need to shove their opinions down their other people's throats. It's called an opinion. Every person has their own. Get over it. If you can't respect other people's opinions then you can leave.

Updated On: 8/17/13 at 02:30 AM

[justincharacter]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 11:56am

"I don't think she's beautiful"

What?

[Jungle Red]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 12:28pm

I'll disagree with you on that one.

[Joviedamian]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 5:21pm

"I think it's equally wrong for anyone to say they "know" it isn't going to work."

Bestbar12, basically what the posters are saying here, is that it's not going to be the way THEY want it to be or they WAY they want it directed or how THEY think it should be done...therefore it will never WORK!

Updated On: 8/17/13 at 05:21 PM

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 5:45pm

My poor nom de plume has been butchered so in this thread. I'm thinking of a name change to RALPH.

People will say and do what they want to say and do. Including me. Including you.

As far as the closed-mindedness of some posters here, that's their loss. They are doomed to have a miserable time watching this movie for all eternity. So be it.

I can tell you that the creative team here has already made several decisions that wouldn't have been my first choice (or second or third). Still, I don't see any major missteps, as I have said before. I have no reason to think the film will or won't work, based on the decisions so far.

Others here have damned it to an eternal Hell of "It's not exactly and precisely a mirror image of the stage show!"

They can cry into their popcorn for all I care. It's their loss.

The movie may suck, but I will wait to decide until after I see it. Not before. Call me crazy. I'm like that.

But just don't call me:

Best Bar 12
12 Bestes Bars
Bar12Best
12Barbesteses

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 5:53pm

Great post, Best Buy!!

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/17/13 at 5:57pm

Thanks, Jordache!

[MagicalMusical]

Posted: 8/18/13 at 9:29pm

Little Red in those official storybook illustrations could still be 13, when sexual awakening often begins.

How can you have the "excited and scared" lyrics if its not about the excitement of sexuality?

And like I said, fairy tales still had real world rules of age and society.

And maybe Meryl Streep is/was sorta beautiful but she's not what I would say is a beuaty. I still think they should digitally work on that.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 8/18/13 at 9:46pm

Sex is the only thing that you can be excited and scared about?

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/18/13 at 10:09pm

LOL

Apparently if you are both "excited and scared," it can only mean sexual arousal.

Nobody under the age of 13 has ever been "excited and scared" about anything, because that would mean they were horny.

How exactly did you decide that? Or better yet, WHY did you make that decision for her or for us?

Like I said before, I think this says more about your perception than it does her known actions.