Into the Woods

athtrasna

It's been out for a few days now, what's the verdict?

Without spoiling anything I'll say that there was too much Disney and not enough Sondheim for my liking, can't believe they cut one of the versions of Agony when the one they included was the highlight of the film.

Meryl Streep was phenomenal, she totally blew me away.

I prefer the show to the film but think that if I hadn't seen the show I would have enjoyed the film more than I did.

greenfrogs

athtrasna wrote: »

It's been out for a few days now, what's the verdict?

Without spoiling anything I'll say that there was too much Disney and not enough Sondheim for my liking, can't believe they cut one of the versions of Agony when the one they included was the highlight of the film.

Meryl Streep was phenomenal, she totally blew me away.

I prefer the show to the film but think that if I hadn't seen the show I would have enjoyed the film more than I did.

I saw this yesterday and I was very disappointed. Maybe my hopes were too high. I had never heard of this show before so I wasn't familiar with it at all. I thought most of the songs were poor and the story-line kind of boring. I thought the singing was very good but the songs were not appealing to me. The only part I enjoyed was the final 5 minutes.
I actually wouldn't recommend this film at all and usually I am a lover of musicals.

Aisling(",)

I've just finished watching it.

I've never had the chance of seeing the stage show so I cant compare but as a stand alone I quite enjoyed it.

Meryl Streep was excellent as always and I quite enjoyed Emily Blunt's performance which is unusual because I don't usually rate her.

Took me a while to realise that Jack is the same lad that played Gavroche in the Les Mis film adaption.I couldn't shake the idea I knew him from something for the whole film.

From what I've read an awful lot has been left out though.

The_Morrigan

I've just re-watched the 1991 stage version with Bernadette Peters to give myself a reminder of the original version - I'm going to watch the film tonight.

AndrewJD

It's a bit rich to say "a lot" has been missed out, it's one of the more faithful musical adaptations. If anything I felt like certain moments should have been changed more than they were because they felt a bit out of place on the screen. I really enjoyed it, they rightly kept in all the songs that speak to the core message of the story. Johnny Depp was atrocious, but everyone else was fantastic.

The_Morrigan

They cut my favourite song. I'm so not impressed. They even teed up the feckin scene and played the melody under the dialogue.

The_Morrigan

I should also say I missed the company songs. I always found them funny.
I would have thought putting a stage production to film is easier to do as you've more technical scope and the lack of constraint on a stage would mean nothing needs to be amended or cut. Obviously Disney don't agree.

Oryx

I hated it, probably because I didn't know any of the songs and generally found them repetitive and irritating. The back and forth singing between characters drove me mad. The only bits I liked were Cinderella singing about her sticky shoes and Streep's parting song which was amazing. Both child actors were beyond precocious and annoying.

Closest I've ever come to walking out of a film. I stuck it out hoping it would improve. It didn't.

The_Morrigan

Oryx wrote: »

I hated it, probably because I didn't know any of the songs and generally found them repetitive and irritating. The back and forth singing between characters drove me mad. The only bits I liked were Cinderella singing about her sticky shoes and Streep's parting song which was amazing. Both child actors were beyond precocious and annoying.

Closest I've ever come to walking out of a film. I stuck it out hoping it would improve. It didn't.

Definitely isn't a normal musical to be honest, it is repetitive and in the stage version there are songs that link some parts together. They were taken from the film.
Also the singing between characters works on stage as the whole cast is present on stage so the back and forth isn't as choppy, it's an ensemble piece really which is hard to do on film.

I can understand the frustration if you didn't know the show, I think it would wreck my head. I had to watch the stage version a few times to 'get it'.

Schnook

I did enjoy the film. And I was in a stage production of it, lol.

Dan_Solo

The worst thing I've seen in ages TBH. Didn't know any of the songs and I don't rate them much. Most of the singing seemed to be pretty good except for (Mr Over-rated) Johnny Depp who really should've had a speaking part or been axed. He was awful.
Plus, a Disney movie with

people really actually having extra-marital affairs and dying by falling off a cliff? Hello? Tone consistency anybody?

I'd give it a 6/10 if it had ended when they lifted the curse on the baker. 2/10 as it stands.

The_Morrigan

Dan_Solo wrote: »

The worst thing I've seen in ages TBH. Didn't know any of the songs and I don't rate them much. Most of the singing seemed to be pretty good except for (Mr Over-rated) Johnny Depp who really should've had a speaking part or been axed. He was awful.
Plus, a Disney movie with

people really actually having extra-marital affairs and dying by falling off a cliff? Hello? Tone consistency anybody?

I'd give it a 6/10 if it had ended when they lifted the curse on the baker. 2/10 as it stands.

From your statement that you didn't know any of the songs I have to assume that you are not coming at this from a musical theatre fan viewpoint?

The songs were not adapted - some of them were cut out completely however.
As for the Disney remark - this wasn't written for Disney, it was written by the same man who did Sweeney Todd - it was never going to be Disney princesses and happy ever afters (that in itself is one of the storylines of the show). If I'm honest, it's nice to see Disney being less 'nice' and 'family friendly'.

Dan_Solo

The_Morrigan wrote: »

From your statement that you didn't know any of the songs I have to assume that you are not coming at this from a musical theatre fan viewpoint?

The songs were not adapted - some of them were cut out completely however.
As for the Disney remark - this wasn't written for Disney, it was written by the same man who did Sweeney Todd - it was never going to be Disney princesses and happy ever afters (that in itself is one of the storylines of the show). If I'm honest, it's nice to see Disney being less 'nice' and 'family friendly'.

Apologies, I thought I was in the movie forum TBH! Oops!

Posy

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Plus, a Disney movie with

people really actually having extra-marital affairs and dying by falling off a cliff? Hello? Tone consistency anybody?

Doesn't that exact thing happen in the Disney movie

The Lion King

??!

Dan_Solo

Posy wrote: »

Doesn't that exact thing happen in the Disney movie

The Lion King

??!

Indeed it does, but that's a pretty central part of the story.

Emily Blunt's character is previously a good woman desperate for a baby, even lying to save Cinderella, then she has a quickie with a prince and falls off a cliff? I'm just not sure what the point of it was.

The_Morrigan

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Indeed it does, but that's a pretty central part of the story.

Emily Blunt's character is previously a good woman desperate for a baby, even lying to save Cinderella, then she has a quickie with a prince and falls off a cliff? I'm just not sure what the point of it was.

The entire plot of the show centres on the 'I wish' and the 'ever after' theme. The stage show has two distinct parts....the characters wishing for their happiness in Act One and then the ever after in Act Two where what they wished for as happiness wasn't quite what it seems.