I seriously could not take the pure agony of listening to this song. Two pretty-boy princes singing about how they wish they could see their loves. Ugh.
I'm a huge Broadway fan and Into The Woods is my all time favorite show. My grandmother taped the PBS airing of it when I was a kid and I watched it so many times I lost count. When I got to the end of the film version, I cried, like seriously, I was bawling, not just because of the emotion of the film (although that got to me too), but mostly out of relief. There were so many ways they could have ruined it but they nailed it perfectly. There were one or two things I wish they hadn't cut but they got so much completely right and it was pretty much the perfect adaptation I'd always dreamed of but never in a million years thought we'd get. A lot of that comes down to the director. There was A LOT that the executives wanted to change and he fought them tooth and nail to the very end to preserve what made the original show so wonderful, even to the point of convincing them to let him shoot additional scenes after filming had wrapped. Rob Marshall is a hero and I honestly don't think the general audience really appreciated just how much he did to preserve Stephen Sondheim's vision. It truly is one of the best Broadway adaptations ever made.
I actually loved this movie a lot. But that might be because I love musicals, and I was pleasantly surprised to go into the theater and find it to be a full on musical
I actually liked the message of this movie. We have all grown up watching these classic fairy tales where the characters get their happily ever after, but I thought it was clever how this movie deliberately paints this picture of how each of the characters are wishing for something but we learn as the stories unfold that sometimes what we wish for and what will make us truly happy is not necessarily the same thing. The characters in the story all share a common bond in that they each desire something and they are willing to go to extraordinary lengths to find their dreams. The heartbreaking irony comes when each of the characters discover that the happiness they so desperately yearned for is not there to meet them at the end of their journey. Instead, what the characters realize is that although the journey they embark on does not always end where they expect it to, they can take comfort in knowing that in the darkest moments of the journey they are never truly alone. They will always have someone to guide them back into the safe and comfortable light of home.
I don't understand why everyone hates it so much. I'm a great fairytale fan and a great musical fan, and I enjoyed it. This movie did what Frozen and Maleficent didn't - it actually put the characters to tough questions and adult choises, and made them deal with the darkness, and I loved it! I loved how the first part was all fairytail-y, and then, all of a sudden, we see what follows the "happily ever after", which is great! I had absolutely no problem with the lenght of the movie. I don't understand why most people hate long movies just because they're long. This one at least was filled with something diffrent all the time. It was OK. For example, the second Hobbit movie? The fight inside the mountain was fun for the first 10 minutes, then I fell asleep, it lasted forever, you could cut half of it - nothing would've changed in terms of the story. Music was great, story was unusual, it was filled with dark notes, actors did a great job - I liked this movie very much, I rewatched it few times, I think this is a good one. I didn't know it was based on a Broadway musical, perhaps the Broadway version is better, haven't seen it. But for what it is, Into The Woods is a good film, IMO.
+Kate Sirko Same. I did research on the Broadway version though. Lots of great performances (Bernadette Peters's scream at the end of The Last Midnight is WICKED AWESOME), but I still prefer the movie.
I prefer the movie because I’m a sucker for darker themes. The broadway show is just way too silly and exaggerated it’s frankly almost unbearable to watch. I also love the cast of the movie but that’s besides the point. 😂
This movie is a really awesome movie this is how you make a musical!!!! Anna Kendrick and Chris Pine and Meryl Streep everyone in the cast killed it with their singing!!!!
Hey, at least there's no horrendous "Russell Crowe as Javert"-level miscasting in this one. All of the actors do at least a decent job, acting and vocally, on what is an EXTREMELY difficult score to sing, particularly "Giants in the Sky" and "On the Steps of the Palace". Those songs are incredibly difficult to sing.
I disagree with you there but even if I agreed with you, Depp has one scene, relatively early on in Act One. Honestly, by the end of the movie, nearly 2 hours later, I almost forgot he was in it, at all. That's why that role, in the stage production, is usually doubled by one of the Princes--it's too short to waste casting another actor just for that one scene. Crowe ruined the musical antagonist role to end all musical antagonist roles. Honestly, to musical theatre loves, Les Mis is almost sacred. It's on Broadway right now in yet another revival. How many other shows (other then Phantom which, I frankly don't get. It was okay once or twice--do we really still need it? 35 or so years later) from the 80s does the theatre community refuse to let go?
+Douglas Rau But what's remarkable about Depp's performance to me is that it's a small role but he remains the single lowest point in the film, even with the screentime. The character is supposed to have some life into his singing but Depp sounds so damn bored and dull. He also tries way too hard to be creepy that it doesn't come across at all. Steve Martin was originally going to play the Wolf in a previous version. THAT would have been so much better.
Oh, I don't think it's a stretch for Depp to be creepy. It's not something he has to try too hard to achieve--did you see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? What a horrible remake.
i loved this movie. i didnt see it in theaters, but at home alone. my sister said it was a terrible movie, that she really didnt like it.. after i saw it, i had to watch it again the next day, and then just a couple of specific scenes the following days. i loved the music and the songs, and the acting was fine too. dont understand why so many people hated it :p i'm still listening to songs from this movie, and watching a few scenes now and then
+Andrew Weinstein i didn't see the original, but what does that matter if the movie is good or not. besides, i absolutely loathe the music and if the musical has the same rythem i will loathe that too.
+theMRsome12 the music was written by Stephen Sondheim, who happens to be the most celebrated stage composer in America. The point of the music isn't to have pretty melodies because that's no what musicals are about. The lyrics are genius and the music mimics the tone. Songs like Your Fault have rhythms that are all over the place and no distinct melody because it creates a hectic, totally chaotic tone. A song like It Takes Two is very slow and kinda boring, except for one section, which has great harmonies and a great melody. This is because that's what the Baker and his Wife's relationship is like. Slow and comfortable, but a bit boring, with occasional beautiful moments. Regardless of how it sounds, it all has a purpose and it sounds that way for a reason, and the way Sondheim uses the music to develop the characters and story so well is what makes him one of the greatest creative geniuses in the music world who ever lived.
+Colin Borden well my whole problem with the music is that it was all one song, the music looped back too much to itself and the same rythem. the lyrics were fine, they were great actually. but the whole deal is that it sounded like a 2 hour song, it wasn't chaotic at all it was all the same. some small alterations sure but it weren't reminders of a last piece, it was an exact copy. my problem wasn't how it sounded either, that would have been great for about 4 minutes. all the songs consisted of the standard into the woods part and the slow bappad part, wich repeated over and over and over. so in my eyes it did not develop the story or the characters, it was kept too general for every personage to differ them from the rest. and the story did not seem to advance because it kept bringing it back to the start of the story. there was never a mayor cresendo, only two moods you could feel and nothing personal. that's what made the songs(or well song) a bore. a movie from the same year did it way better while that was ment to be one song only, birdman. and since you called him one of the greatest creative geniouses in the music world who ever lived, lets go to a real composer. bach. take toccata and fugue in D minor. that's how you build up a mood. from the first note to the last it tells a story. the moods change radically in the second minute. you can actually feel the sensation there, you can feel the emotion. and there isn't even a character there it should reprisent. no visual aid to help the music out. a perfect piece, with room to breathe but grabs your attention anyhow. a dark atmosphere that surrounds you. that is what music is able to do, and it's only one single instrument. That is one of the greatest creative geniouses in the music world who ever lived. there is a big difference between a composer for a musical and a true composer. do not get cocky and compare someone like that to a true master.
Colin Borden just because the music is written by someone talented doesn't mean it's automatically good. personally i found the music to be meh. other than the main theme the songs all sounded the same.
I don't really have very many friends who are as big a musical theater nerd as I am, so I missed this when it was in theaters, and ended up buying the DVD just to see it. I liked it, honestly. Sondheim in general is pretty tough to adapt, so I didn't expect the movie to be perfect, but I still felt like they did a decent job. I can't imagine how anyone could do it better without earning an R rating, honestly.
The performance of "Agony" had me laughing so hard--they play it up to such hammy effects and you can tell the actors are having a great time with it (while I imagine the director was saying, "Oh god, PLEASE don't slip and fall on those wet stones!") but (spoilers for the movie and the show, beyond this point) I was really disappointed that they cut out the Narrator character and the song, "No More", between him and the Baker. It looked like they were going to have it in: the Baker, lost in grief over the death of his wife, pushes his child, who cries every time he holds him, off onto Cinderella and walks away, only to be confronted by his own father, who left him as a child. The Baker sits down, starts to cry, the music swells.....and then nothing. The next shot is him walking back to the Cinderella, Jack and Little Red Riding Hood. He seemed to have a complete change of heart for no reason. I honestly thought that they had filmed the song and cut it from the film in post production but I don't think it's included on the movie version of the soundtrack either. It doesn't really work without it.
When I first saw it, I didn't knew it was a Broadway musical, I just thought it was a Disney thing like Maleficent and the others, so I was shocked by the way it ended. Disney is not known for giving you a slice of reality or a "Not-Happily-Ever-After", so I actually saw it as something fresh and different and I liked it because of that. For me it is a passable movie worth watching at least once.
Meryl Streep killed it as the Witch IMO. By that, I mean she did a fantastic job. Seriously, the emotion she puts into "The Last Midnight" is so good that the second time I watched, I replayed it about five times.
"Into the Woods" is not that bad. I actually enjoy the musical film with wonderful background, a nice comfortable orchestration, and lots of actors did their effort to sing their melody throughout the movie. It's connected all over the fairy tale stories that you already know about and turn into a whacking adventure that it suppose to be a Happily Ever After, but the story continues in a new fairy tale way than the first half. I would say they're some creative scenes that make me want to keep on going, the celebrities did great in their roles, and songs were pretty catchy. Overall, not bad for a longer fairy tale story, but I found myself entertaining.
I loved this play, and the movie did a great job adapting many of its themes. This was the only movie to reeeeaally make me cry too. Like ugly cry hard
I was in this play in 8th grade (of course we only did the first half and had to tone even that down a bit), and I loved it! We watched the full play as well, and I adored the second half! I was so excited for the movie, especially as the Baker is also in one of my favorite TV shows, Doctor Who. It was... Good, even great, but didn't quite stand out for me. I really just loved hearing the songs my friends and I sang in middle school on the big screen... XD
I didn't really like the 2nd half of the movie, not because it was sad and dark, but because I thought it was confusing and thought they should've explained some things more. I haven't seen the play, but from what you say, it looks better.
I was in a theater class as a kid, and we performed Into the Woods, but only the first half of it. I never knew there was a second half to the story after it looked like everyone got their happily ever afters. Years later, I went to see this in theaters and holy shit was that a surprise!
Since watching this film, I remember looking up that the last we see of Rapunzel when she rides off with her prince on his horse following a last encounter with the Witch was added to replace the original scene from the Broadway musical where she is killed by the giant's wife as she went to go and look for Jack (which I think was left out for good reason), while it is left to the imagination in the film version to what happened to her.
I feel the same. If you want to see a good musical with dark humor, just watch the recordings of the theater versions, or go see a production. Don't let this movie be your introduction of Into the Woods.
Yea. It's another one of those situations where the source material is almost required before seeing and in order to appreciate the film. Kinda like Hunger Games. I too saw the play first and understood what it was trying to be, so I was naturally curious to see the film and was not disappointed.
TEC1 Those situations don't exist. If the adaptation can't be judged on its own then the movie just doesn't work. I love this movie and I never saw the play.
The one and only time i watched this in the theater ah was like "Wow... Here's a movie that you can keep your eyes closed from beginning to end and still figure out what's going on simply by listening to it" Lets face it: this movie was pure-and-simple Disney *orgasm !!*
I'd never heard of Into the Woods (the play) before seeing this and I loved the movie. It was creative, fun, and had a lot of dark under tones on top of having a sort of sad ending. I went in not expecting anything and came out more or less satisfied. I'm actually interested in seeing the original play now because of the movie.
Last year on my birthday, my best friend and I went to go see this movie, and one thing that always stuck with me, is we made this joke about Johnny Depp. See, Johnny Depp, as many would remember, was very hyped up with this movie, he was in the trailer, he's listed with all the other big names on the poster, we all expected him to be a big part; and then we go to the movie, and he's on screen for 5 min.... and that's it. So when ever we talk about this movie, we always say "Hellooooo, Johnny Depp; Good byyyye Johnny Depp".
Actually for many years Hollywood tried to do an adaption of into the woods and Robin Williams and Danny DeVitto were supposed to be in it in the 90s it never got picked up off the ground til years later .
I think that the version of the play that he saw was censored, I don't think that Johnny Depp's version is more pedophilic than the version with an erection added.
The wolf is definitely SUPPOSED to be making sexual tones (only sliiiiightly disguised) and it's intentionally done because... well, he's basically a predator. They further emphasize this in the broadway version by having the same actor who plays Cinderella's Prince also play the wolf so the two characters and their plots/intentions mirror each other since the Prince, too, is a predator. This was lost in the film version when they inexplicably decided to use two different actors.
What you fail to comment on is Broadway released this earlier on DVD with Bernadett Peters turning in a phenominal role as the witch. It has an Intermission and is quite good - being a play god enough to be on Broadway :)
My mom actually KNOWS Stephen Sondheim because she used to live in NYC, and when she was little she wrote him a letter, and he actually responded. So, I have a bit of a prejudice against people who don't like it, but not as big a prejudice as my mom.
From what I can gather of the plot, this could've been something that Disney's traditional animation team could've made in their own way. (If they were still working there, of course.) I could see Cinderella, The Big Bad Wolf, and Willie The Giant, in there, as will as Rupunzle, but since she was CG, you would have to decide which animation style to go with. This could be something different that Disney's own animated 'fairy tale' characters could appear in, but that idea never crossed their minds. Now there's a missed opportunity.
+Kyros Vulk-Oliver Yeah, that's what I thought too. It would make a great theater costume, but it looked weird in the movie. I wondered why they didn't do a motion-capture bi-pedal wolf in a zoot suit.
Predictions for the Disneycember 2016: Finding Dory, The Finest Hours, Petes Dragon, Zootopia, Alice Through the Looking Glass, The BFG, Captain America: Civil War, The Jungle Book, Doctor Strange
My main issue with this movie is the length combined with the songs. In that respect, I suppose it is meant to be viewed as a musical play. If we had had that intermission at the halfway point to take a breather, the overall experience would have been better. By the time the credits rolled, I was so grated by the constant singing, I felt glad it was over.
I never saw the stage version i only knew of Into the Woods by this film. But these days, i watch some full stage recordings from schools, colleges, and even the 1991 recording by PBS, and it is pretty good. I love both versions, and sometimes I wish I could make a stage production of Into the Woods that combines both the original concepts and the film version and with some of the characters in their Disney attires. O, and with some Disney characters as different narrators.
Into the Woods is one of my favorite musicals, I knew they would mess it up. It took itself wayyyyy to seriously. The play is funny and light hearted for the most part in the first act and draws you in, then the contrast of the darkness of the second act is more drastic. When they try to make the entire thing dark and serious they totally ruin the entire thing. Oh and the play is directed at adults, not children. This should not be a family film at all.
Beth G. I don't mind it being a family film. One of the themes of the film is the relationship between adults and children. Besides, it's a Disney film, so of course it's going to be pg. And if there's anyone we can count when it comes to reworking fairy tales, it's Disney.
I have to admit, I liked this movie; and like you, I was floored by Red's post-rescue song. Holy bejeebus, they threw out all concept of subtlety here when most adaptations of Red Riding Hood will at most keep just enough subtle hints of the original story to just barely qualify as a moral about stranger danger; for this movie, it felt like the only bit they didn't try to keep from the old tales was having the wolf force Red to strip (which for those who haven't done so, please research the original story; at least some versions did have that element).
When I saw this movie, I had no idea it was based on a Broadway - which I did realize about a minute or so in. But I really enjoyed it. I liked the characters, I liked the twists, I thought it was shot beautifully. I just enjoyed the overall tone.
As someone who has never seen the Broadway show, I loved this movie, the songs are incredible, most of the actors manage to portray them well, although Streep and a few others do have trouble with some of the notes. The visuals, I found impressive, kind of like a mesh of stage and film. And although I haven't seen the Broadway show, the second half did feel a bit rushed and the deaths were almost brushed off, I thought they did the rest pretty well. All in all, I would recommend it, and a bonus it made me really want to see the stage version.
It's nice seeing a review that is done by someone who is familiar with and appreciates the musical. I really enjoyed this movie because I LOVE the musical and have studied the themes and music in school. But being objective, the movie has a lot of flaws. A lot of reviewers who don't care about the music really disliked the movie and didn't appreciate that even though it has a lot wrong with it, the musical is still a classic. And so much of the reason it's remembered is because of Sondheim's music.
I know that people hate when they split book adaptions and trilogies into two parts, but this movie, as well as many broadways plays, should be split into a part one and part two.
When this movie came out, my school was doing a production of it and I had the part of the Wolf. The teacher directing it told me to play the character just like Johnny Depp. I was eleven years old, and singing this to a nine year old. Safe to say, no, I did not perform the role like Johnny Depp, but the fact my teacher didn't see how uncomfortable and frankly disgusting that would have been disturbs me to this very day.
I think that the bigger problem of the movie is that they have cut out from the play a lot of important scenes functional to character development, such as *SPOILER* *FROM* *THE* *PLAY* Rapunzel's death. That was a crucial part of the story, because it actually show how much the Witch cared about Rapunzel, even though she was a terrible mother. Without this scene, the movie not only lose part of the moral of the play, but also make the Witch seem "the witch" stereotype, and not the complex character that she is. It may seem stupid, but without only a few scenes the entire point of a story can be lost, and this is one of the cases.
I am the only one in the house of 7 that LOVES the movie. I heard that the Broadway was darker, yes. Maybe if they made the movie into a 2 parter or television mini series it would have been played out better
Predictions for Disneycember 2030: The Lion King (animated remake), The Lion King 2 (animated remake), The Jungle Book (animated remake) (All three films are rated R by the way.)
You know, I adore this movie so much... But this is definitely the kind of movie that's REALLY not for everybody. It has a very specific audience it's aiming for, that being theatre fans who would enjoy this kind of story. Average moviegoers would probably find a lot of it kind of strange but if you're a theatre lover who likes that sort of style like me this is definitely something you will love.
I saw the stage play maybe two years before they decided to make the film. I liked it a good amount, but I also really liked the theater group that did it. The person who saw it with me likes theater even more and they couldn't stand something about it, and so they were never going to see the movie. I was a little tempted to see "Agony" performed, because that was probably the funniest part of the play for me. But yeah, the sad things that happen and are so easily overcome really bothered me towards the end. One character just seems to suffer the whole story and it stuck with me in a way that bothers me for the whole play looking back.
I love hearing this review from someone who saw the play first because of someone who only saw the movie I am now intensely interested in seeing you play because on its own with no background absolutely adore movie for all the points that he said while it was kind of confusing the music is what drew me in and I still listen to it all the time
I actually liked the movie, despite not having seen the play at all. I thought it was put together fairly well and I enjoyed the songs. Was it the best movie I've ever seen? No, not by a long shot, but I was entertained and in the end, that's what a movie should do.
I was going to say Finally Reunited on 1M1, but I don't think that's quite it. Sorry, man! (Doug used the same music at the end of his TMNT crossover review with the Nerd. Try checking in that comment section.)
I tend to think this movie does get a very unfair reputation. While yes there were flaws in the film and it's a bit toned down. I think they still captured the spirit of the show. And to me that was my biggest worry when they made it a movie. And at least with that. I think the film still works. Also the cast is fantastic and I loved the orchestration of Sondheim's score. I just wish people would at least give another look. And just look at the themes the musical is telling.
I did like this movie but I fully admit that it was because Into The Woods is my favorite musical. If I had not experienced it beforehand I would have thought this was terrible. The songs are very good and I can't think of anyone who stands out as a terrible singer and I still listen to them on Spotify occasionally.
I am a big fan of the original musical now (obviously), but when I saw the movie I had only seen into the woods Jr before, so I was pretty pleasantly surprised with the movie when I first watched it. I still really like the casting (aside from Anna Kendrick for whatever reason), its beautifully shot, and I felt like they did a good job of making it feel more like a musical rather than a movie where they sing, if that makes any sense... the movies definitely worth a watch.
They incorporated the narrator into the Series of Unfortunate Events movie excellently. I don't see how this movie would have a hard time with something similar.
I'm glad you saw the play. Most critics didn't and they don't know why the movie isn't good. I really hate that the bad directing and editing just sucked the wit out of the dialogue.
I feel that Doug kind of missed the point with the Little Red Riding Hood/Wolf scenes. They're SUPPOSED to be uncomfortable, like the whole point is that the songs are really about rape and pedophilia. The movie was simply highlighting that dark layer that was already present in the original stage version. Granted, it doesn't help that Johnny Depp looks less like a wolf and more like a human with wolf claws - that's the one thing that bothered me about this movie.
I wasn't aware of the musical when I watched this film and I liked it okay but even I felt that the second half of the film was somewhat underwhelming, particularly with Cinderella and the prince divorcing and several characters disappearing and we never see them again. The one other thing that subverted my expectations was that a few parts from these fairy tale stories were somehow skipped in this film like Cinderella dancing with the prince, Rapunzel meeting HER prince and Jack's adventures up the beanstalk, but because Red Riding Hood's story is probably shorter, those parts probably didn't need to be that important to the main story, even though her story finished before the other three stories took their time. Also aside from Johnny Depp's minimal screen time, I also think his wolf character was killed off too soon because I was somehow thinking about he could've been in the film a bit more whilst I was watching the rest of it.
I like your review even though I am definitely one of those "you disliked a Sondheim adaptation? Shun! Shun! Shun!" types. Even though you sound like musicals aren't your thing, you at least you sounded like you had a grasp of how to approach one. I remember back when the film premiered, I seemed to come across two types of reviews. The music theater geeks of youtube all amounted to "Well XXX actress could have done it better." Most of the others came across like, "I don't get it. Why are they singing? Is this a concert or something?" Although, E-Rod did make a good point in saying that it was very "tell, don't show," which pretty much sums up why it's so hard to adapt. Into the Woods' star is the music and the lyrics, which are mostly mini-narratives unto themselves.
They feed the Narrator to the Giant's Wife in the show? I haven't seen the show in more then a few years (spoilers ahead, for the stage version) but I seem to remember a point in the show where they're discussing feeding the Narrator to the Giant's Wife (the Giant having been killed when Jack cuts down the bean stalk) but then the Narrator points out, "How do you intend to be able to finish the show without me?" and THAT, I found really funny. Besides, one of the great songs comes near the end of the show between the Baker and the Narrator, whom, it is revealed, is the Baker's father. Or maybe that's the role of the "Mysterious Man" and those two roles (MM and Narrator) are just traditionally played by the same actor. I forget.
No, the best Cinderella is Drew Barrymore. She interesting, she's tough, she's independent like she should be in the live action remake 😠. But we got Drew Barrymore so, that's pretty good.
I think the reason people hated this movie so much, was because it was marketed wrong. When I went to see it, I had no idea it was a musical, and neither did a lot of others who went to see it aswell. It was marketed to the broad Disney audience as a comical family movie, and it really isn’t. It’s actually quite heavy, and I found myself confused with how much they just crammed in at once in the second half. There was also so many characters I couldn’t feel for any of the deaths, or issues the characters were going through. Btw I saw this movie when I was like 13-14 so if I see it now I’m sure I’ll understand it way better, it’s just the movie wasn’t what most expected, so it received a lot of hate.
I will say that Chris Pine during "Agony" had me *rolling* and nearly falling out of my seat.
Try watching it with two friends who are a.) also anime/musical fans and b.)just as tipsy as you. I nearly ripped my sides
celestinegaming That like the only thing I like more than the play, Agony was HILARIOUS
I seriously could not take the pure agony of listening to this song. Two pretty-boy princes singing about how they wish they could see their loves. Ugh.
They hit Agony on the noise it's a shame the didn't put the reprise in because imo it's even better then first.
Same
I'm a huge Broadway fan and Into The Woods is my all time favorite show. My grandmother taped the PBS airing of it when I was a kid and I watched it so many times I lost count. When I got to the end of the film version, I cried, like seriously, I was bawling, not just because of the emotion of the film (although that got to me too), but mostly out of relief. There were so many ways they could have ruined it but they nailed it perfectly. There were one or two things I wish they hadn't cut but they got so much completely right and it was pretty much the perfect adaptation I'd always dreamed of but never in a million years thought we'd get. A lot of that comes down to the director. There was A LOT that the executives wanted to change and he fought them tooth and nail to the very end to preserve what made the original show so wonderful, even to the point of convincing them to let him shoot additional scenes after filming had wrapped. Rob Marshall is a hero and I honestly don't think the general audience really appreciated just how much he did to preserve Stephen Sondheim's vision. It truly is one of the best Broadway adaptations ever made.
I think best is kind of pushing it
I actually loved this movie a lot. But that might be because I love musicals, and I was pleasantly surprised to go into the theater and find it to be a full on musical
I actually liked the message of this movie. We have all grown up watching these classic fairy tales where the characters get their happily ever after, but I thought it was clever how this movie deliberately paints this picture of how each of the characters are wishing for something but we learn as the stories unfold that sometimes what we wish for and what will make us truly happy is not necessarily the same thing. The characters in the story all share a common bond in that they each desire something and they are willing to go to extraordinary lengths to find their dreams. The heartbreaking irony comes when each of the characters discover that the happiness they so desperately yearned for is not there to meet them at the end of their journey. Instead, what the characters realize is that although the journey they embark on does not always end where they expect it to, they can take comfort in knowing that in the darkest moments of the journey they are never truly alone. They will always have someone to guide them back into the safe and comfortable light of home.
I don't understand why everyone hates it so much.
I'm a great fairytale fan and a great musical fan, and I enjoyed it. This movie did what Frozen and Maleficent didn't - it actually put the characters to tough questions and adult choises, and made them deal with the darkness, and I loved it! I loved how the first part was all fairytail-y, and then, all of a sudden, we see what follows the "happily ever after", which is great!
I had absolutely no problem with the lenght of the movie. I don't understand why most people hate long movies just because they're long. This one at least was filled with something diffrent all the time. It was OK. For example, the second Hobbit movie? The fight inside the mountain was fun for the first 10 minutes, then I fell asleep, it lasted forever, you could cut half of it - nothing would've changed in terms of the story.
Music was great, story was unusual, it was filled with dark notes, actors did a great job - I liked this movie very much, I rewatched it few times, I think this is a good one.
I didn't know it was based on a Broadway musical, perhaps the Broadway version is better, haven't seen it. But for what it is, Into The Woods is a good film, IMO.
+Kate Sirko Same. I did research on the Broadway version though. Lots of great performances (Bernadette Peters's scream at the end of The Last Midnight is WICKED AWESOME), but I still prefer the movie.
I prefer the movie because I’m a sucker for darker themes. The broadway show is just way too silly and exaggerated it’s frankly almost unbearable to watch. I also love the cast of the movie but that’s besides the point. 😂
Find the musical on TH-cam
This movie is a really awesome movie this is how you make a musical!!!! Anna Kendrick and Chris Pine and Meryl Streep everyone in the cast killed it with their singing!!!!
I really liked the song between the two princes, I thought it was really funny.
oh
On broadway there’s a hilarious reprise!
Hey, at least there's no horrendous "Russell Crowe as Javert"-level miscasting in this one. All of the actors do at least a decent job, acting and vocally, on what is an EXTREMELY difficult score to sing, particularly "Giants in the Sky" and "On the Steps of the Palace". Those songs are incredibly difficult to sing.
Russell Crowe is nowhere near as bad as Johnny Depp's tone deal singing in this. He should be arrested for ever attempting to sing.
I disagree with you there but even if I agreed with you, Depp has one scene, relatively early on in Act One. Honestly, by the end of the movie, nearly 2 hours later, I almost forgot he was in it, at all. That's why that role, in the stage production, is usually doubled by one of the Princes--it's too short to waste casting another actor just for that one scene. Crowe ruined the musical antagonist role to end all musical antagonist roles. Honestly, to musical theatre loves, Les Mis is almost sacred. It's on Broadway right now in yet another revival. How many other shows (other then Phantom which, I frankly don't get. It was okay once or twice--do we really still need it? 35 or so years later) from the 80s does the theatre community refuse to let go?
+Douglas Rau But what's remarkable about Depp's performance to me is that it's a small role but he remains the single lowest point in the film, even with the screentime. The character is supposed to have some life into his singing but Depp sounds so damn bored and dull. He also tries way too hard to be creepy that it doesn't come across at all. Steve Martin was originally going to play the Wolf in a previous version. THAT would have been so much better.
Oh, I don't think it's a stretch for Depp to be creepy. It's not something he has to try too hard to achieve--did you see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory? What a horrible remake.
+Douglas Rau Exactly. He did a great job being (unintentionally) creepy in that film but couldn't do that for this film.
i loved this movie. i didnt see it in theaters, but at home alone. my sister said it was a terrible movie, that she really didnt like it.. after i saw it, i had to watch it again the next day, and then just a couple of specific scenes the following days. i loved the music and the songs, and the acting was fine too. dont understand why so many people hated it :p i'm still listening to songs from this movie, and watching a few scenes now and then
I thought the second act was kind of boring. The first act was awesome though :D
This movie sucks
i turn it off after the 1st act ends. It could have been its own complete movie.
It didnt translate to well from Broadway to Big Screen
I loved it from beginning to end too.
this film has the tone of a hideo kojima game on a see saw
I don't even know what that means, but I love it.
+EVO6reviews ha (still love metal gear )
lol
If you read everything in David Hayter's Snake voice, life is so much better.
ok
If you aren't happy, watch the original production on TH-cam or DVD.
+Andrew Weinstein
he did watch the original production. so hes pretty well informed
+Andrew Weinstein i didn't see the original, but what does that matter if the movie is good or not. besides, i absolutely loathe the music and if the musical has the same rythem i will loathe that too.
+theMRsome12 the music was written by Stephen Sondheim, who happens to be the most celebrated stage composer in America. The point of the music isn't to have pretty melodies because that's no what musicals are about. The lyrics are genius and the music mimics the tone. Songs like Your Fault have rhythms that are all over the place and no distinct melody because it creates a hectic, totally chaotic tone. A song like It Takes Two is very slow and kinda boring, except for one section, which has great harmonies and a great melody. This is because that's what the Baker and his Wife's relationship is like. Slow and comfortable, but a bit boring, with occasional beautiful moments. Regardless of how it sounds, it all has a purpose and it sounds that way for a reason, and the way Sondheim uses the music to develop the characters and story so well is what makes him one of the greatest creative geniuses in the music world who ever lived.
+Colin Borden well my whole problem with the music is that it was all one song, the music looped back too much to itself and the same rythem. the lyrics were fine, they were great actually. but the whole deal is that it sounded like a 2 hour song, it wasn't chaotic at all it was all the same. some small alterations sure but it weren't reminders of a last piece, it was an exact copy. my problem wasn't how it sounded either, that would have been great for about 4 minutes. all the songs consisted of the standard into the woods part and the slow bappad part, wich repeated over and over and over. so in my eyes it did not develop the story or the characters, it was kept too general for every personage to differ them from the rest. and the story did not seem to advance because it kept bringing it back to the start of the story. there was never a mayor cresendo, only two moods you could feel and nothing personal. that's what made the songs(or well song) a bore.
a movie from the same year did it way better while that was ment to be one song only, birdman.
and since you called him one of the greatest creative geniouses in the music world who ever lived, lets go to a real composer. bach.
take toccata and fugue in D minor. that's how you build up a mood. from the first note to the last it tells a story. the moods change radically in the second minute. you can actually feel the sensation there, you can feel the emotion. and there isn't even a character there it should reprisent. no visual aid to help the music out. a perfect piece, with room to breathe but grabs your attention anyhow. a dark atmosphere that surrounds you. that is what music is able to do, and it's only one single instrument.
That is one of the greatest creative geniouses in the music world who ever lived.
there is a big difference between a composer for a musical and a true composer. do not get cocky and compare someone like that to a true master.
Colin Borden just because the music is written by someone talented doesn't mean it's automatically good. personally i found the music to be meh. other than the main theme the songs all sounded the same.
I don't really have very many friends who are as big a musical theater nerd as I am, so I missed this when it was in theaters, and ended up buying the DVD just to see it. I liked it, honestly. Sondheim in general is pretty tough to adapt, so I didn't expect the movie to be perfect, but I still felt like they did a decent job. I can't imagine how anyone could do it better without earning an R rating, honestly.
It could be argued is that a story this dark *did* deserve an R rating.
The performance of "Agony" had me laughing so hard--they play it up to such hammy effects and you can tell the actors are having a great time with it (while I imagine the director was saying, "Oh god, PLEASE don't slip and fall on those wet stones!") but (spoilers for the movie and the show, beyond this point) I was really disappointed that they cut out the Narrator character and the song, "No More", between him and the Baker. It looked like they were going to have it in: the Baker, lost in grief over the death of his wife, pushes his child, who cries every time he holds him, off onto Cinderella and walks away, only to be confronted by his own father, who left him as a child. The Baker sits down, starts to cry, the music swells.....and then nothing. The next shot is him walking back to the Cinderella, Jack and Little Red Riding Hood. He seemed to have a complete change of heart for no reason. I honestly thought that they had filmed the song and cut it from the film in post production but I don't think it's included on the movie version of the soundtrack either. It doesn't really work without it.
I liked how respectful you were to this project.
When I first saw it, I didn't knew it was a Broadway musical, I just thought it was a Disney thing like Maleficent and the others, so I was shocked by the way it ended. Disney is not known for giving you a slice of reality or a "Not-Happily-Ever-After", so I actually saw it as something fresh and different and I liked it because of that. For me it is a passable movie worth watching at least once.
Meryl Streep killed it as the Witch IMO. By that, I mean she did a fantastic job. Seriously, the emotion she puts into "The Last Midnight" is so good that the second time I watched, I replayed it about five times.
Aimee Molina Oh yeah, nothing beats the original, but I can't help but love how much energy both ladies put into their performances. Very admirable.
My thoughts on this movie...
"If this were a play, I'd definitely like it... Oh, it probably is one! That makes sense."
In the words of JeremyJahns, "the movie did something that it should not have done........kept going."
Still waiting on Ella Enchanted
nexr year maybe
"Into the Woods" is not that bad. I actually enjoy the musical film with wonderful background, a nice comfortable orchestration, and lots of actors did their effort to sing their melody throughout the movie. It's connected all over the fairy tale stories that you already know about and turn into a whacking adventure that it suppose to be a Happily Ever After, but the story continues in a new fairy tale way than the first half. I would say they're some creative scenes that make me want to keep on going, the celebrities did great in their roles, and songs were pretty catchy. Overall, not bad for a longer fairy tale story, but I found myself entertaining.
I loved this play, and the movie did a great job adapting many of its themes. This was the only movie to reeeeaally make me cry too. Like ugly cry hard
I love that this was based on the brothers Grimm books instead of Disney's movies
This is my guilty pleasure
I was in this play in 8th grade (of course we only did the first half and had to tone even that down a bit), and I loved it! We watched the full play as well, and I adored the second half! I was so excited for the movie, especially as the Baker is also in one of my favorite TV shows, Doctor Who. It was... Good, even great, but didn't quite stand out for me. I really just loved hearing the songs my friends and I sang in middle school on the big screen... XD
I didn't really like the 2nd half of the movie, not because it was sad and dark, but because I thought it was confusing and thought they should've explained some things more. I haven't seen the play, but from what you say, it looks better.
I was in a theater class as a kid, and we performed Into the Woods, but only the first half of it. I never knew there was a second half to the story after it looked like everyone got their happily ever afters. Years later, I went to see this in theaters and holy shit was that a surprise!
Since watching this film, I remember looking up that the last we see of Rapunzel when she rides off with her prince on his horse following a last encounter with the Witch was added to replace the original scene from the Broadway musical where she is killed by the giant's wife as she went to go and look for Jack (which I think was left out for good reason), while it is left to the imagination in the film version to what happened to her.
I feel the same. If you want to see a good musical with dark humor, just watch the recordings of the theater versions, or go see a production. Don't let this movie be your introduction of Into the Woods.
I happened to love it, but I saw the play first and it might be necessary to see the play as a primer before the film.
Yea. It's another one of those situations where the source material is almost required before seeing and in order to appreciate the film. Kinda like Hunger Games. I too saw the play first and understood what it was trying to be, so I was naturally curious to see the film and was not disappointed.
TEC1 Those situations don't exist. If the adaptation can't be judged on its own then the movie just doesn't work. I love this movie and I never saw the play.
The one and only time i watched this in the theater ah was like "Wow... Here's a movie that you can keep your eyes closed from beginning to end and still figure out what's going on simply by listening to it" Lets face it: this movie was pure-and-simple Disney *orgasm !!*
I'd never heard of Into the Woods (the play) before seeing this and I loved the movie. It was creative, fun, and had a lot of dark under tones on top of having a sort of sad ending. I went in not expecting anything and came out more or less satisfied. I'm actually interested in seeing the original play now because of the movie.
He should watch Once Upon a Time
i wouldn't wish that upon Doug. at least not later seasons.
Xpler779 I keep trying to figure out if he does, mentioning it often enough for me to wonder
Xpler779 he does watch Once upon a time. He does a pod cast with Beth from Shark jumping.
Rob is a fan(kind of) of Once Upon a Time, you can hear that in Shark jumping podcast!
me too! but just season 1. I SERiOUSLY want to hear his thought about the Beauty and the Beast arc. I thought it was a masterpiece
Last year on my birthday, my best friend and I went to go see this movie, and one thing that always stuck with me, is we made this joke about Johnny Depp. See, Johnny Depp, as many would remember, was very hyped up with this movie, he was in the trailer, he's listed with all the other big names on the poster, we all expected him to be a big part; and then we go to the movie, and he's on screen for 5 min.... and that's it. So when ever we talk about this movie, we always say "Hellooooo, Johnny Depp; Good byyyye Johnny Depp".
Actually for many years Hollywood tried to do an adaption of into the woods and Robin Williams and Danny DeVitto were supposed to be in it in the 90s it never got picked up off the ground til years later
.
I think that the version of the play that he saw was censored, I don't think that Johnny Depp's version is more pedophilic than the version with an erection added.
Lol I know right I’ve seen a clip of the stage show and the wolf LITERALLY has a giant dick just there on his costume like ????
The wolf is definitely SUPPOSED to be making sexual tones (only sliiiiightly disguised) and it's intentionally done because... well, he's basically a predator. They further emphasize this in the broadway version by having the same actor who plays Cinderella's Prince also play the wolf so the two characters and their plots/intentions mirror each other since the Prince, too, is a predator. This was lost in the film version when they inexplicably decided to use two different actors.
What you fail to comment on is Broadway released this earlier on DVD with Bernadett Peters turning in a phenominal role as the witch. It has an Intermission and is quite good - being a play god enough to be on Broadway :)
This movie is... AGOOONNNNYYYYYYY!!! xD
lol
really
My mom actually KNOWS Stephen Sondheim because she used to live in NYC, and when she was little she wrote him a letter, and he actually responded. So, I have a bit of a prejudice against people who don't like it, but not as big a prejudice as my mom.
no shit, I found this movie to be longer than transformers 4
+EVO6reviews To be fair Into the Words is actually 45 minutes shorter
+Anim1013
I know but to me it just felt longer because it was distinctily like 2 movies stapled together
From what I can gather of the plot, this could've been something that Disney's traditional animation team could've made in their own way. (If they were still working there, of course.) I could see Cinderella, The Big Bad Wolf, and Willie The Giant, in there, as will as Rupunzle, but since she was CG, you would have to decide which animation style to go with. This could be something different that Disney's own animated 'fairy tale' characters could appear in, but that idea never crossed their minds. Now there's a missed opportunity.
Not if you compare this to The Phantom of the Opera movie/musical
Johnny depp dressed as a furry... I can see that working on Broadway, but in a big budget movie?
+Kyros Vulk-Oliver Yeah, that's what I thought too. It would make a great theater costume, but it looked weird in the movie. I wondered why they didn't do a motion-capture bi-pedal wolf in a zoot suit.
harrietamidala1691
They probably thought a cheap looking wolf suit would be more 'quirky'
Predictions for the Disneycember 2016: Finding Dory, The Finest Hours, Petes Dragon, Zootopia, Alice Through the Looking Glass, The BFG, Captain America: Civil War, The Jungle Book, Doctor Strange
Hasn't he already done Pete's Dragon? Maybe I'm just thinking of CinemaSins.
There was a remake a couple of months back.
Will Common Oh yeah! How weird...I'd forgotten about that already.
So has everyone else lol! XD
you are
My main issue with this movie is the length combined with the songs. In that respect, I suppose it is meant to be viewed as a musical play. If we had had that intermission at the halfway point to take a breather, the overall experience would have been better. By the time the credits rolled, I was so grated by the constant singing, I felt glad it was over.
I never saw the stage version i only knew of Into the Woods by this film. But these days, i watch some full stage recordings from schools, colleges, and even the 1991 recording by PBS, and it is pretty good. I love both versions, and sometimes I wish I could make a stage production of Into the Woods that combines both the original concepts and the film version and with some of the characters in their Disney attires. O, and with some Disney characters as different narrators.
Into the Woods is one of my favorite musicals, I knew they would mess it up. It took itself wayyyyy to seriously. The play is funny and light hearted for the most part in the first act and draws you in, then the contrast of the darkness of the second act is more drastic. When they try to make the entire thing dark and serious they totally ruin the entire thing. Oh and the play is directed at adults, not children. This should not be a family film at all.
Beth G. I don't mind it being a family film. One of the themes of the film is the relationship between adults and children. Besides, it's a Disney film, so of course it's going to be pg. And if there's anyone we can count when it comes to reworking fairy tales, it's Disney.
Anyone remember the song where they all just argue and don’t know who to blame because that’s just theatre kids arguing about what musical’s the best
I kinda like these short reviews. Once a week of these would be nice
They're really a December (sometimes a few into January) thing. That's why its called "Disneycember."
I have to admit, I liked this movie; and like you, I was floored by Red's post-rescue song. Holy bejeebus, they threw out all concept of subtlety here when most adaptations of Red Riding Hood will at most keep just enough subtle hints of the original story to just barely qualify as a moral about stranger danger; for this movie, it felt like the only bit they didn't try to keep from the old tales was having the wolf force Red to strip (which for those who haven't done so, please research the original story; at least some versions did have that element).
I wish movies brought intermissions back
I never saw the play but I loved the film so.much!
When I saw this movie, I had no idea it was based on a Broadway - which I did realize about a minute or so in. But I really enjoyed it. I liked the characters, I liked the twists, I thought it was shot beautifully. I just enjoyed the overall tone.
As someone who has never seen the Broadway show, I loved this movie, the songs are incredible, most of the actors manage to portray them well, although Streep and a few others do have trouble with some of the notes. The visuals, I found impressive, kind of like a mesh of stage and film. And although I haven't seen the Broadway show, the second half did feel a bit rushed and the deaths were almost brushed off, I thought they did the rest pretty well. All in all, I would recommend it, and a bonus it made me really want to see the stage version.
It's nice seeing a review that is done by someone who is familiar with and appreciates the musical. I really enjoyed this movie because I LOVE the musical and have studied the themes and music in school. But being objective, the movie has a lot of flaws. A lot of reviewers who don't care about the music really disliked the movie and didn't appreciate that even though it has a lot wrong with it, the musical is still a classic. And so much of the reason it's remembered is because of Sondheim's music.
I watched this with my little sister ( she's 6 ) I didn't mind it , it felt a bit long but I still enjoyed it .
I know that people hate when they split book adaptions and trilogies into two parts, but this movie, as well as many broadways plays, should be split into a part one and part two.
I like the Sondheim music as well. You should do a review of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.
I saw a stage version that my high school did about 6 years ago and it was pretty good
Whats the music playing in the background here? Its awesome.
The British version of the original play is brilliant! It's 3 hours but it's worth it.
When this movie came out, my school was doing a production of it and I had the part of the Wolf. The teacher directing it told me to play the character just like Johnny Depp. I was eleven years old, and singing this to a nine year old. Safe to say, no, I did not perform the role like Johnny Depp, but the fact my teacher didn't see how uncomfortable and frankly disgusting that would have been disturbs me to this very day.
I think that the bigger problem of the movie is that they have cut out from the play a lot of important scenes functional to character development, such as
*SPOILER* *FROM* *THE* *PLAY*
Rapunzel's death. That was a crucial part of the story, because it actually show how much the Witch cared about Rapunzel, even though she was a terrible mother. Without this scene, the movie not only lose part of the moral of the play, but also make the Witch seem "the witch" stereotype, and not the complex character that she is. It may seem stupid, but without only a few scenes the entire point of a story can be lost, and this is one of the cases.
I am the only one in the house of 7 that LOVES the movie. I heard that the Broadway was darker, yes. Maybe if they made the movie into a 2 parter or television mini series it would have been played out better
I enjoy this movie as much as I enjoyed Sweeney Todd. Believe me, that's not a bad thing
I remember seeing this movie and about to leave the theater and it kept going on
Depp as the Big Bad Wolf was by far the best part of this film
Predictions for Disneycember 2030: The Lion King (animated remake), The Lion King 2 (animated remake), The Jungle Book (animated remake)
(All three films are rated R by the way.)
You know, I adore this movie so much... But this is definitely the kind of movie that's REALLY not for everybody. It has a very specific audience it's aiming for, that being theatre fans who would enjoy this kind of story. Average moviegoers would probably find a lot of it kind of strange but if you're a theatre lover who likes that sort of style like me this is definitely something you will love.
I saw the stage play maybe two years before they decided to make the film. I liked it a good amount, but I also really liked the theater group that did it. The person who saw it with me likes theater even more and they couldn't stand something about it, and so they were never going to see the movie. I was a little tempted to see "Agony" performed, because that was probably the funniest part of the play for me.
But yeah, the sad things that happen and are so easily overcome really bothered me towards the end. One character just seems to suffer the whole story and it stuck with me in a way that bothers me for the whole play looking back.
I love hearing this review from someone who saw the play first because of someone who only saw the movie I am now intensely interested in seeing you play because on its own with no background absolutely adore movie for all the points that he said while it was kind of confusing the music is what drew me in and I still listen to it all the time
i wanna see him do a nostalgia critic of this movie.
What's the background song
This is my absolute favorite movie!
I actually liked the movie, despite not having seen the play at all. I thought it was put together fairly well and I enjoyed the songs. Was it the best movie I've ever seen? No, not by a long shot, but I was entertained and in the end, that's what a movie should do.
whats the music used in the video
I was going to say Finally Reunited on 1M1, but I don't think that's quite it. Sorry, man! (Doug used the same music at the end of his TMNT crossover review with the Nerd. Try checking in that comment section.)
+Mackenzie mcdaniel-paul I was thinking that too ._.
Days are long by silent partner
I tend to think this movie does get a very unfair reputation. While yes there were flaws in the film and it's a bit toned down. I think they still captured the spirit of the show. And to me that was my biggest worry when they made it a movie. And at least with that. I think the film still works. Also the cast is fantastic and I loved the orchestration of Sondheim's score. I just wish people would at least give another look. And just look at the themes the musical is telling.
whats the name of the background music you used? It was gorgeous
I saw a childrens' play of this.
I desperately missed the song "No more"... but then they probably would have cut out "Lat midnight" which would have been sacrileage.
I did like this movie but I fully admit that it was because Into The Woods is my favorite musical. If I had not experienced it beforehand I would have thought this was terrible. The songs are very good and I can't think of anyone who stands out as a terrible singer and I still listen to them on Spotify occasionally.
What's the music being used in the background ?
I am a big fan of the original musical now (obviously), but when I saw the movie I had only seen into the woods Jr before, so I was pretty pleasantly surprised with the movie when I first watched it. I still really like the casting (aside from Anna Kendrick for whatever reason), its beautifully shot, and I felt like they did a good job of making it feel more like a musical rather than a movie where they sing, if that makes any sense... the movies definitely worth a watch.
what's that song playing in the background ?
They incorporated the narrator into the Series of Unfortunate Events movie excellently. I don't see how this movie would have a hard time with something similar.
I'm glad you saw the play. Most critics didn't and they don't know why the movie isn't good. I really hate that the bad directing and editing just sucked the wit out of the dialogue.
i remember seeing this movie in theaters on new years eve a few years ago
I loved this movie. It's not quite stage version but good in its own Disney way.
What is the song in the backround
The full version with Bernadette Peters is on Amazon!!! (This one drove me mad. Such good performances and potential...)
Hey Doug! I'd love to see your opinion on... (laughs) Planes!
If he didn't like Cars, he won't survive Planes.
MegaSoulhero
True, but I LOVE watching Doug tear into movies!
When will we finally get a musical that is given two films for each act? That would've really given this movie more breathing room.
If that were to happen, Romeo and Juliet would have MULTIPLE sequels.
I miss the mysterious old man :(
Like "No More" was one of the best songs in this movie, but I understand, it needed to be shortened
I feel that Doug kind of missed the point with the Little Red Riding Hood/Wolf scenes. They're SUPPOSED to be uncomfortable, like the whole point is that the songs are really about rape and pedophilia. The movie was simply highlighting that dark layer that was already present in the original stage version.
Granted, it doesn't help that Johnny Depp looks less like a wolf and more like a human with wolf claws - that's the one thing that bothered me about this movie.
The original Broadway show is on DVD. Just get that. This wasn't terribly bad but see the original if you can.
what's the background song?
I wasn't aware of the musical when I watched this film and I liked it okay but even I felt that the second half of the film was somewhat underwhelming, particularly with Cinderella and the prince divorcing and several characters disappearing and we never see them again. The one other thing that subverted my expectations was that a few parts from these fairy tale stories were somehow skipped in this film like Cinderella dancing with the prince, Rapunzel meeting HER prince and Jack's adventures up the beanstalk, but because Red Riding Hood's story is probably shorter, those parts probably didn't need to be that important to the main story, even though her story finished before the other three stories took their time. Also aside from Johnny Depp's minimal screen time, I also think his wolf character was killed off too soon because I was somehow thinking about he could've been in the film a bit more whilst I was watching the rest of it.
I like your review even though I am definitely one of those "you disliked a Sondheim adaptation? Shun! Shun! Shun!" types. Even though you sound like musicals aren't your thing, you at least you sounded like you had a grasp of how to approach one. I remember back when the film premiered, I seemed to come across two types of reviews. The music theater geeks of youtube all amounted to "Well XXX actress could have done it better." Most of the others came across like, "I don't get it. Why are they singing? Is this a concert or something?" Although, E-Rod did make a good point in saying that it was very "tell, don't show," which pretty much sums up why it's so hard to adapt. Into the Woods' star is the music and the lyrics, which are mostly mini-narratives unto themselves.
I thought the second half was kind of a mess. I love the princes’ song and Johnny Depp as the wolf
They feed the Narrator to the Giant's Wife in the show? I haven't seen the show in more then a few years (spoilers ahead, for the stage version) but I seem to remember a point in the show where they're discussing feeding the Narrator to the Giant's Wife (the Giant having been killed when Jack cuts down the bean stalk) but then the Narrator points out, "How do you intend to be able to finish the show without me?" and THAT, I found really funny. Besides, one of the great songs comes near the end of the show between the Baker and the Narrator, whom, it is revealed, is the Baker's father. Or maybe that's the role of the "Mysterious Man" and those two roles (MM and Narrator) are just traditionally played by the same actor. I forget.
Douglas Rau You’re right they are played by the same actor usually
Anna Kendrick's Cinderella > Lily James' Cinderella.
This movie sucks😭
Agreed gosh Anna Kendrick should have played Cinderella in the Live Action Cinderella movie
Me, I'd preffer the Brothers Grimm version of Cinderella, other than the gorey ending but the protagonist is more proactive
No, the best Cinderella is Drew Barrymore. She interesting, she's tough, she's independent like she should be in the live action remake 😠. But we got Drew Barrymore so, that's pretty good.
Give me Kim Crosby any day.
Anna Kendrick's on the steps of the palace was divine.
I think the reason people hated this movie so much, was because it was marketed wrong. When I went to see it, I had no idea it was a musical, and neither did a lot of others who went to see it aswell. It was marketed to the broad Disney audience as a comical family movie, and it really isn’t. It’s actually quite heavy, and I found myself confused with how much they just crammed in at once in the second half. There was also so many characters I couldn’t feel for any of the deaths, or issues the characters were going through. Btw I saw this movie when I was like 13-14 so if I see it now I’m sure I’ll understand it way better, it’s just the movie wasn’t what most expected, so it received a lot of hate.