Into the Woods Official Movie Thread- Page 86

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 12/24/13 at 3:25pm

^ Umm...show me exactly where Ms. Streep confirmed she is playing "Grizabella" in the film version of CATS.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 12/25/13 at 10:24am

365 days until the movie is released.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 1/3/14 at 7:02pm

Rob Marshall says that Chris Pine is amazing as Cinderella's Prince. His audition song was "Fly Me to the Moon."

"I never expected him to have that talent," Marshall says of being initially taken aback at Pine's heretofore unheard singing abilities.

"His look belies his talent in a funny kind of way," Marshall relates of the actor's apparent matinee idol appearance.

"He could coast on those amazing looks, but he's so much more than that," Marshall says.




Rob Marshall Comments On 'Amazing' Chris Pine In INTO THE WOODS

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 1/3/14 at 8:08pm

Okay.

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 1/3/14 at 9:45pm

Since when is Rob Marshall a "modern movie musical master?" He seems more like a mixed bag to me. One big screen hit, one big screen flop, and a handful of small screen musicals with mixed results. This makes someone a master of movie musicals? He is more of a movie musical gamble than a master of that craft.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 3:19am

Not even a handful of small screen musicals--one (which did do well, I guess.)

[rosscoe(au)]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 5:04am

"modern movie musical master?"

Funniest thing I have read all day

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 6:54am

How can anybody be this good looking?

It's like, shut up with your good looking-ness, Chris Pine.

Or spray it all over me. Or something.

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 7:19am

His dad used to be on the TV show "Chips," you know.

Robert Pine:

Updated On: 1/4/14 at 07:19 AM

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 7:22am

Yes, he gave me an early chubby, if I recall correctly.

[Joviedamian]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 3:25pm

Is it me, or usually when I read a random article about how someone is "Good" in their role---praised by the production company and or director, producers, then I start to think...ummm is he really that good or are they just trying to stop bad PR when we find out he is not that great? Fortunately, I think we all know that Chris can sing well...but I kind went "Wait, where did that come from?"

[jimmycurry01]

Posted: 1/4/14 at 7:43pm

I am sure the comment is taken out of context from a larger discussion or interview. Fortunately we have all see Chris sing before, so this isn't raising any red flags for me this time. I do agree that in some cases in the past,, your observation is quite valid.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 1/14/14 at 11:25pm

'Night at the Museum 3' will no longer open on the same weekend as this movie.


NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM 3 Moves Up; New Release Date Set for Dec 19, 2014 Read more about NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM 3 Moves Up; New Release Date Set for Dec 19, 2014

[best12bars]

Posted: 1/17/14 at 9:56am

Chris Pine was on Jimmy Kimmel recently and sang (!) a bit of his audition song that got him the part in "Into the Woods."

He's a good crooner! If someone ever does film "Guys and Dolls" for TV or the big screen, I would love to see him play Sky Masterson. He could handle the songs really well. He seems to have a naturally good singing voice. Nothing fancy, but certainly good enough for the Prince in "Into the Woods," and I could see him doing other musical roles as well, if he's interested.


Chris Pine sings on Jimmy Kimmel - direct link

Updated On: 1/17/14 at 09:56 AM

[MrMidwest]

Posted: 1/17/14 at 10:34am

Do you think James Marsden takes a look at Chris Pine and thinks, "I was born too early and started too late."?

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 1/19/14 at 1:36pm

More from Chris Pine.


Chris Pine Discusses INTO THE WOODS Cast & His Character: 'I Hope I Don't Ruin It'

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 2/14/14 at 9:08pm

The Hollywood Reporter revealed last week that the film's budget is $40 million. I guess they wanted to save money after some recent disappointing live-action movies.

"For instance, Johnny Depp slashed his $20 million quote to appear in Disney's upcoming musical Into the Woods. He was boarded in for a week on the London set and was paid $1 million, according to sources. Given the risky nature of musicals, the film needed to be made on a budget of about $40 million. Depp's move -- a favor to Disney and helmer Rob Marshall, who directed Depp in the studio's Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides -- allowed the film to be greenlighted. It also allows the actor's representatives to maintain that his quote is intact."




How Johnny Depp Made $1 Million in a Week Updated On: 2/15/14 at 09:08 PM

[bobs3]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 12:25am

There is NO DOUBT that Streep and Depp will be receiving a big percentage of the film's gross.

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 2:40am

It's typical that stars will take a pay cut to do a musical film, because the return is so risky, but also because the budget is usually higher elsewhere, prerecording all the songs, etc.

I'm not surprised about Depp's salary (or anybody else's). But the overall budget sounds very low for a film set in a fairytale world with special effects and sets and costumed extras. I would have expected $60 to $80 million, figuring in major post-production costs. I hope that economy doesn't show up on the screen. They really haven't given Marshall, Atwood, etc., a lot to work with.

As for the stars, they will also get royalties from soundtrack sales and merchandising (assuming Disney at least does some of that). So they should all make out well (enough) in the end.

I'm looking forward to seeing some finished production shots now. Let's hope the look of the film doesn't reflect the shallow pockets of the studio.

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 3:04am

That was exactly my reaction when I read the budget was $40 mil, that's next to nothing for what I had imagined this movie would require to make it a blockbuster. I figured that after the huge success PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN 4 turned out to be abroad, Disney would give Marshall a larger budget.

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 3:27am

The budget for Mamma Mia! (movie) was approx. $52 million.

And there were no growing beanstalks or fairytale sets and costumes or green-screen effects.

The budget for Oz the Great and Powerful was reportedly $200 million (which is insanely high, but use it as a frame of reference). Alice in Wonderland was $150-200 million.

Into the Woods is $40 million?

Updated On: 2/15/14 at 03:27 AM

[HBP]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 9:56am

I'm finding that number a little difficult to believe. I'm sure we'll get a more accurate budget in the coming months.

[Wildcard]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 10:22am

Most of the story is set in the woods between a few characters. You don't need lots of money for that. It seemed like they used existing houses for the village and an existing castle too. A beanstalk that only shows up for a few seconds wouldn't require a huge budget either.

[best12bars]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 11:07am

All I know is that if it doesn't have some "wow" factor visually (a growing beanstalk, a giant walking around, SFX for Cinderella and her birds, etc.), they aren't going to impress modern moviegoers with just stars in appropriate costumes scurrying around in the well-lit woods.

Yes, I agree that most of it isn't set in a fantasy world like Oz or Wonderland that needs to be generated almost entirely via visual effects and CGI, but it is a fairytale world, where magic is commonplace and part of the story on many occasions. Cinderella's mother "evolving" out of the tree is another instance of total CGI, written in the script (and the story).

Even if it isn't wall-to-wall "magic," these moments will need to be impressive visually. The witch transformation, her exit, etc., will all need the same "wow" factor.

These days, $40 million is your average studio movie set in the real world with half the star power appearing in Into the Woods.

If nothing else, since most of the budgetary concerns are in post-production, Disney might look at the rushes, and assuming they're impressed, cough up an extra $10 million or so in these next few months.

We can (hopefully) assume that at least it was shot well, with good cinematography, in good locations, etc.

I realize that Merchant-Ivory used to work miracles with very small budgets on Howards End, Remains of the Day, A Room With a Veiw, etc. They all had a much "richer" look than they should have, given their low costs.

So as long as they isolate the key "magic" moments and still put some money and time into them to make them impressive, it will work ... hopefully.

Otherwise, you're going to hear a lot of snickering in the audience, and it won't have anything to do with the singing or the fact that it's a musical.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 2/15/14 at 11:29am

'Les Miserables' had a budget of $61 million according to Box Office Mojo. I can't believe that in my original post I wrote they "did not want to save money". What I meant to say was that probably "wanted to save money" after disappointing live-action movies. 'Oz the Great & Powerful' was successful, but making $493 million against a $215 million budget is not really making a BIG profit and it was not a huge hit on DVD/Blu-Ray either. 'Lone Ranger' was one of the biggest box-office bombs of the all-time.

Updated On: 2/17/14 at 11:29 AM