Rob Marshall Directing Into the Woods Film For Disney — Page 7

With all the stuff floating around in people's heads over this, Rob Marshall should clearly direct a film adaptation of this thread.

Honestly, I have found life so much easier since I accepted the fact that any film adaptation of a musical I like will never be the way I want. And there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. What will be, will be. Kay Sarah Sarah.

---

Well said, Matt! There is a very small chance that this movie is going to be the way you expect or want it to be, so if you just try to drop some expectations, you'll be alot happier at the outcome.

It's a minor (fringing on major) pet peeve of mine that people classify pixar movies as Disney movies. As someone said on the first page, Disney has extremely little to do with the development and creation of a Pixar film. All Disney does is tag their brand on at the beginning of the film, and distribute it. It just feels like Pixar is being cheapened when people give credit to Disney for the creation of WALL-E, Up, and others.

here's my fantasy cast. I'm not sure if EVERYONE on this list can actually sing, but it's fantasy, so we can all pretend they can.

Baker: Jim Parsons or Rick Moranis

Baker's wife: Lea Thompson

Jack: Eddie Redmayne

Cinderella: Emma Watson

Cinderella's prince: James Marsden

Rapunzel: Amy Adams

Rapunzel's prince: Neil Patrick Harris

The Witch: Glenn Close

Jack's Mom: Merly Streep

The stepsisters: Kristen Wiig and Emma Stone

Cinderella's Stepmother: Jane Curtin

Cinderella's Stepfather: Steve Martin

The Narrator: Richard Kind or Michael Caine

Red Riding Hood: Abigail Breslin

Grandmother: Betty White

Steward: Paul Giamotti

voice of the Giant: Ian McKellen

---

Some of these suggestions are hilarious.

Not only has Rick Moranis retired from acting, he's about 20 years too old for it.

With Rob Marshall directing? It means that every song that remains from the score (which means about 17% of it) will have approximately 412 edits from 37 angles in both color and B/W with nonstop camera moves inducing motion sickness and choreography that is cut-off at the knees.

Sounds like my kind of musical.

Theatrefan, sorry I'm confused by "'in your head' songs aren't necessary." The songs we mentioned are in the character's heads.

The songs can and probably will be eliminated as they are not really moving the story along. Plus what is song about it really compelling (in the case of Steps of the Palace/Giants in the Sky)

I wouldn't be surprised if the got Broderick and SJP for those parts.

Say, what's Chip Zien doing these days, anyway?

I'm still partial to Steve Carrell and Kate Winslet as the Baker and his Wife.

And I really really think we should have Chloe Moretz play Red Ridinghood. Please. Please. Please.

I don't about the mothers part if they get a name like roseanne, who apparently has been studing voice now, they could keep it. Maybe there magic i don't think so it's a brillant piece and tells her philosphy for the rest of the show, marshalls not an idiot. A very nice prince could be but we'll see. And yes patricia heaton is a horrible choice for the bakers wife. Ten or fifteen years ago she would have been great, even perfect, but now she looks way to old, even though she's fifty three in HD she look fifty eight.

Liza for the Witch.

Yes, but you see i'm not entirly sure disney will want to go the family route noHSM, they know that right now the moneys in the revionist tellings, ala shrek, and their own tangled. They also know that it's a chance to beat rival dreamworks at their own game, and what better than into the woods. Second, with a product like woods i can see it attracting familys without a HUGE amount of changes. Third, sondheim didn't write anything new for the sweeney movie and lets face it you can't improve on perfection. As for the guys and dolls movie, now it's fallen into relative obscurity and 'bushel and a peck' is an iconic song. Lastly, it lets pretty much the crux of act one out in one song, lying to get your way, and helps illustrate with the second how horrible a mistake that always ends up being.

Updated On: 1/14/12 at 09:40 PM

Because no more could actualy work as a scene, and still work beautifully, a well acted scene that is. Plus at this time in the movie the scene will have that beauty and resonance. As for the sweeney movie i'm not saying it was perfection, i actively detest it. I meant the score and plot to woods being perfection, not sweeney. As for new songs, i don't know i actively detest rainbows, the opening number he wrote could work though, plus where do we really NEED a new or adding song. I mean just for promotional purposes cause that wouldn't make senes as so few people know who stephen is. Or does sondheim need a oscar to egot? The reason they can't do it to maybe, is exactly that it explains and puts forth the whole purpose of act one, and sets up act two. And if they just her say something along that songs lines, it won't work, the audience will forget it since it's so early in the movie. But have her sing and they'll 'listen' just like the children

Midnights kinda need the cut, they will seem redundant and tiresome to a movie audience, who will have already implied their messasges, and will hate them so so much. Plus with the movie able to show the passage of time in the woods...

Updated On: 1/14/12 at 10:05 PM