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 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. 😂
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'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 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.
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.
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!!!!
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 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.
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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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
+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.
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 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
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.
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.
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'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.
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.
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 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.
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!
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 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 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.
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.
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.
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".
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.
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.)
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.
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 :)
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 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.
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 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.
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 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 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
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.
My mom and I watch the movie last year and I think this movie is okay. Not the best but its not the worse, we did laugh at one of the moments like the Princes brothers are singing and just ripping their shirts off and my personal favorite 'I'm in the wrong story'. I would watch this film again when its one tv. Also Johnny Depp is a Pimp Wolf...that pop in my head when he appeared in the movie.
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.
When i had watched it for the first time when it came out to blu ray, my overall take on this movie was "Good god, i'll never watch this but once in a blue moon". It was ridiculously long & i heard that it didn't do well in the theater once people got wind that it was a terribly long & drawn out movie. The only people i knew who went to see it were Broadway play lovers like my mom & friend. Not my favorite but i thought it was a clever take on the fairy tail stories & i like the cast.
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 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 loved this movie, and I'm pretty meh about musicals. But then again, I have the viewpoint of someone who didn't even know there was a Broadway version in the first place. Though if movie theaters could implement the intermission so i could go pee without missing anything, that'd be great.
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.
When I first heard about it, I was intrigued, but after seeing the trailer, I was turned off by it. Didn't seem my style. Then I watched the EWW and concluded that it was best I hadn't seen it, haha.
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.
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบรองชนะเลิศ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zPm8ClLVhoE/mqdefault.jpg)
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 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
I really liked the song between the two princes, I thought it was really funny.
oh
On broadway there’s a hilarious reprise!
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'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 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.
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.
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.
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!!!!
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
My thoughts on this movie...
"If this were a play, I'd definitely like it... Oh, it probably is one! That makes sense."
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.
In the words of JeremyJahns, "the movie did something that it should not have done........kept going."
I liked how respectful you were to this project.
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.
Still waiting on Ella Enchanted
nexr year maybe
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
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.
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.
"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.
This is my guilty pleasure
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.
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.
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.
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 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 love that this was based on the brothers Grimm books instead of Disney's movies
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.
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
This movie is... AGOOONNNNYYYYYYY!!! xD
lol
really
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'
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 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
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 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."
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.
I enjoy this movie as much as I enjoyed Sweeney Todd. Believe me, that's not a bad thing
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'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.
I wish movies brought intermissions back
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
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 never saw the play but I loved the film so.much!
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.
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!
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 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 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 ????
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.
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.
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".
I like the Sondheim music as well. You should do a review of Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.
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 saw a childrens' play of this.
I saw a stage version that my high school did about 6 years ago and it was pretty good
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 remember seeing this movie and about to leave the theater and it kept going on
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.
This is my absolute favorite movie!
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.)
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.
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 :)
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 wanna see him do a nostalgia critic of this movie.
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.
The original Broadway show is on DVD. Just get that. This wasn't terribly bad but see the original if you can.
i remember seeing this movie in theaters on new years eve a few years ago
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 loved this movie. It's not quite stage version but good in its own Disney way.
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 desperately missed the song "No more"... but then they probably would have cut out "Lat midnight" which would have been sacrileage.
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.
The British version of the original play is brilliant! It's 3 hours but it's worth it.
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 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
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 thought the second half was kind of a mess. I love the princes’ song and Johnny Depp as the wolf
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.
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!
My mom and I watch the movie last year and I think this movie is okay.
Not the best but its not the worse, we did laugh at one of the moments like the Princes brothers are singing and just ripping their shirts off and my personal favorite 'I'm in the wrong story'.
I would watch this film again when its one tv.
Also Johnny Depp is a Pimp Wolf...that pop in my head when he appeared in the movie.
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.
Anna Kendrick's on the steps of the palace was divine.
They really should have done the first half and then the second half. I think it would have been better. It would also have less tone issues.
HEY! THIS IS MY FAVORITE MOVIE!
The full version with Bernadette Peters is on Amazon!!! (This one drove me mad. Such good performances and potential...)
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.
When i had watched it for the first time when it came out to blu ray, my overall take on this movie was "Good god, i'll never watch this but once in a blue moon". It was ridiculously long & i heard that it didn't do well in the theater once people got wind that it was a terribly long & drawn out movie. The only people i knew who went to see it were Broadway play lovers like my mom & friend. Not my favorite but i thought it was a clever take on the fairy tail stories & i like the cast.
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.
I liked this movie as I love musicals
needed an intermission or needed to be 2 movies
john chu your wish is my command
The music got very annoying, in my opinion. But it was actually really good. And the ending. Damn, that was DARK!!!!
Okay, not great, but not bad. I enjoy the movie.
I'm not saying the music was bad. It was great. But it got annoying. There was just A LOT of music.
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 loved this movie, and I'm pretty meh about musicals. But then again, I have the viewpoint of someone who didn't even know there was a Broadway version in the first place. Though if movie theaters could implement the intermission so i could go pee without missing anything, that'd be great.
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.
When I first heard about it, I was intrigued, but after seeing the trailer, I was turned off by it. Didn't seem my style. Then I watched the EWW and concluded that it was best I hadn't seen it, haha.
his reaction best describes the new littlest pet shop series
i will take your word it got better in the second half because i was way past caring when we hit the half way mark
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.