Upcoming "Into the Woods" Revival...- Page 4

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 7/17/14 at 1:44pm

Dear Everything,

Only be how I want you!

Thanks!

ME!!




Can someone who's actually seen it and hated it weigh in, please?

[SonofRobbieJ]

Posted: 7/17/14 at 2:01pm

I don't know anyone who saw it and hated it, growl. And I know nearly everyone!

I understand not wanting to spend your money on something you don't think you'll enjoy. But to rail against its existence just seems odd. Theater artists delve into these works as they do Shakespeare. Textually, there's just so much to explore. Even if it's not your cup of tea (as the Doyle SWEENEY was not my cup of tea), it's still something to celebrate.

[trevytoe]

Posted: 7/17/14 at 2:02pm

I just saw it at Old Globe on Sunday and thought it was fantastic; the production really elevates the material in every way. Yes, there was "just" a piano for the most part, but there were lots of additional instruments at times to fill the score and, honestly, I didn't miss a full orchestra in the slightest because the performances and staging were completely on point. For instance, there was guitar during Jack's scenes and songs (to be honest, this had a very Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson feel in the staging). I was surprised how full the piano sounded (this was probably helped by being in an intimate space - I don't think it would work in a 1,000+ seat theater).

In regards to people saying the set looks cheesy/low budget/cheap, I completely disagree. The set is quite remarkable and imaginative.

But mostly, this is a must-see production for any Into the Woods fan because of the new take on the show and terrific performances. For instance, Emily Young as Rapunzel and Little Red is killing it! I've never cared for Rapunzel, but she was hilarious and had the audience laughing consistently throughout her Rapunzel scenes. The production is a true ensemble piece and no particular character feels more important than another. That was a highlight as well.

If anyone has any particular questions, then let me know. Everything is still very fresh in my mind.


Updated On: 7/17/14 at 02:02 PM

[Wildcard]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 1:37pm

I saw this over the weekend and in the 30+ years I have been going to the theater, it was the first time I have ever left a show at intermission (almost left at Lestat but I somehow finished that show). I had even previously made it through an Into The Woods production played in an open air theater near the airport where performances were interrupted mid-sentence by planes overhead. But not this! I wanted to leave earlier but I was right in the middle of the auditorium and it would have been rude to just walk out then. It was such a disservice to Sondheim for it to be directed and performed this way. I went in to the show with an open mind and was gravely disappointed by it.

I usually don't mind minimalist staging. I liked "Company," "The Woman in Black" and "The 39 Steps" though I disliked "Peter and the Starcatcher." Yes, there was one piano but that wasn't even played well (interestingly by someone who was also in that "Company" company). There were so many bad notes and added orchestration, it made it difficult to listen to the show. Whenever it was supplemented by the cast playing other instruments, it was painfully obvious that they were not musicians either. Sadly, that was only accentuated by the BAD singing. I do not doubt that the Fiasco theater people are good actors but they were definitely NOT singers, except perhaps for the witch. Yes, they reached some of the higher notes but they surely struggled.

The show was performed with an annoying smugness. They might as well have said "Look at us! Aren't we clever!" Yes, there were clever moments in the staging particularly in the moment when the Baker was comparing the ear of corn to the stepsister's hair, after which the actor also portrays Milky White being pulled by the Baker. However, these moments were few and far between and the rest was just filled with hipster arrogance. The performances were so broad and over-the-top and of course, the rest of the audience ate that up.

The best part of the production were the sets and the lighting. Derek McLane created something beautiful but unfortunately, it was not Into The Woods. It could have been used for any of those minimalist productions I mentioned earlier and it wouldn't have made a difference. The actors were all dressed in costumes in shades of white and cream which made it difficult to discern one character from another. They were accentuated with hats or jackets whenever they take on a different persona but they were all so interchangeable (particularly the women) that it was difficult to tell which character was which (other than LRRH who obviously had the red cape). If you weren't familiar with the story already, it gets confusing trying to figure out whether you're looking at Cinderella's stepmother, the Baker's wife or Jack's mom. Beautiful set aside, the whole show felt so amateurish. In terms of acting, the only thing right was their timing. When most of the seats in the theater were in the $80-90 range, it felt like robbery. If you had an intense desire to see this production, I wouldn't pay more than $20-30. Quite a few people left at intermission the night at watched it. Clearly, this was not a tale they wanted to hear.

[g.d.e.l.g.i.]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 3:04pm

^ So what you're saying is retain the basic staging, hire John Doyle to work some miracles with the rough spots (credited, uncredited, depends on how egregious it is), get some new costumes, and pick a new cast who can sing and play their respective instruments?

[Showface]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 3:32pm

"The show was performed with an annoying smugness. They might as well have said 'Look at us! Aren't we clever!'"

I feel this happens a lot nowadays, I'd rather shows just do the musicals like they were intended in the first place UNLESS it is a REALLY cool approach.


This is a REALLY Cool approach....I would want to see THIS on Broadway Updated On: 7/28/14 at 03:32 PM

[Wildcard]

Posted: 7/28/14 at 3:38pm

"So what you're saying is retain the basic staging, hire John Doyle to work some miracles with the rough spots (credited, uncredited, depends on how egregious it is), get some new costumes, and pick a new cast who can sing and play their respective instruments?"

Just having a cast that can sing, isn't too self-aware and perhaps even more diverse plus music that is played beautifully would make a huge difference. It is a musical you're paying to see after all.

[aces25]

Posted: 8/13/14 at 11:10pm

How did they do the beanstalk in this production?

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 8/13/14 at 11:21pm

A can of Del-Monte.

[Jordan Catalano]

Posted: 8/13/14 at 11:27pm

A Pringles can is taller.