Disney's Into The Woods - How NOT To Adapt a Movie

once upon a time this is in the

woods

a musical that debuted in 1987 written and directed by stephen sondheim and james laplante respectively in the world of musical theater this is one of the most iconic shows thanks to its accessibility to be performed on regional stages and theaters in Secondary, as well as a brilliant professional recording of the original cast by PBS, the plot is unique with multiple fairy tales woven into a single story, these include Little Red Riding Hood, Cinderella, Jack and the Beanstalk, Rapunzel and the childless couple from the story. Danish Thumbelina Now at this point in Sondheim's career he had already written all of this, so he certainly knew how to write a good show.

What resulted in an explosive explosion of creativity fueled by unlimited artistic achievement drawn from a cast and team of creators with no limits to their potential or in other words, a very good show in the

woods

was very successful at the tony awards, which It is the equivalent of the Academy Awards for New York's Broadway Theatre. It won in three categories: Best Original Score, Best Book of a Musical, and Best Performance by a Leading Actress in a Musical. It lost most of the other awards. before a little show called The Phantom of the Opera, plus In the Woods got a healthy two-year run on Broadway and its penmanship by the legendary Stephen Sondheim meant the show would be leaving a mark in the industry, so with all this success with all these iconic performances, musical pieces and iconography invented by the show, it was inevitable that a film

adapt

ation would be made in the late '80s;

It was already a popular process to take a successful Broadway show and turn it into a

movie

in 2014 Disney released their

adapt

ation of Into the Woods titled In the Woods Now there are ways to make a good musical adaptation and ways not to make a good film adaptation and where is Disney's Enter the Woods located? on a completely different planet oh boy where do I start with this

movie

? This movie has completely baffled me since I first saw it on every level. It's just a complete misinterpretation of the original, but why will I explain it to you?

Oh and a quick warning, there will be a lot of spoilers, so if you're interested in this kind of stuff, basically go watch the original, it's much better and of course it goes without saying, but this is all my opinion on the casting for any movie program. or anything in between is really important for a show like In the Woods, it's pretty crucial that the show is central and that the whole is peaceful, and while you could argue that one or two characters have more to do than others, in the end of the day, everyone has an important key role to play in the story, let's do a quick recap, there's the baker and his wife, a childless couple who wish to have a child, the evil witch next door, obsessed with her garden, Cinderella, a sweet girl who is trapped between two extreme worlds, Jack, a silly boy, and his mother, who is a little severe, but it is understandable, when she has an idiot for a son and then Little Red Riding Hood, who She is an unpleasant and gluttonous young woman, all of these actors bring such a great interpretation to their roles, really relying on an almost perotic caricature of these characters but full of so much heart.

Zion is iconic in this role and Joanna Gleason won the Tony for best actress because of this role, these two have a beautiful intimate relationship that is pushed and pulled through thick and thin the witch played by bernadette peters is perhaps one of the most iconic stage performances of all time for those who don't know bernadette peters is very much like the equivalent of jesus apparently she just did this show as a favor and she left just this gigantic presence like whoa, then there are all these other performances that are also beautifully drawn like a master along the lines of being funny and over the top and then also having these beautiful moments from the heart, basically, this cast is more or less perfect and the show relies on these actors bringing the lines and music to life through their acting and brilliant comic timing on movie celebrities.

There is this terrible trend in Hollywood where they cast musicals with big names to attract more viewers. Yes, they do it. in its financial aid appeal, but nine times out of ten it reduces the overall quality of the product just to attract more viewers to be an actor in the theater, you have to sing for years and years and years to get a voice that can do things like Think of it like an athlete in the Olympics, imagine you train for years and years to run the relay and you train and train every day and you go through ups and downs and finally you're there at the Olympics and that's amazing, but then you overtake.

You are James Corden because everyone knows James Corden from the late night show with James Cornyn. This, of course, does not mean that these actors are incapable of giving a good performance in this film. Most of these actors are good, great, I even mean Anna Kendrick. o streep emily blunt johnny depp james gordon these actors do the best they can with what they have i think a lot of the blame in this movie can be attributed to the director's choices this is such a colorful and charming musical and yet, Rob Marshall takes these characters and gives them realism and forces them to adapt a naturalistic acting style that, of course, clashes so harshly with the material.

Really quick dramatic lesson. When you're performing on stage, you have to perform in the rows farthest from the house so they can understand. What you are expressing while you are in front of the camera you have to condense only on your face, since your audience is less than a meter away. So how do you make the transition? You can make the movie aware of the fact that it's a musical and make its rules support that or you can make it seem like it was never supposed to have songs in the first place and that's what In The Woods feels like. music will take a backseat, but it's like one of those big cars that have two small seats in the back.

That's where the music is quiet, you know, whereas in the original the music is so tightly intertwined with the show that you have your hand on the wheel when the characters sing, it never feels like an organic moment driven by the inability to express your feelings through the words, it just feels like oh, it's time to do a song again, okay, cool, cool, in the woods has some of the most beautifully written songs that are also very complex, that's what What Sondheim does best is writing these absolutely meticulously complicated rhythms and melodies that are so rooted in the emotional rhythm of every scene and character, but even the music in this movie had a bit of an impact first with the instrumentation.

The original show had a 15-piece pit orchestra for those who don't know that the musicians are crammed into a small room under the stage called the pit and have to make the most wonderful music without being able to see anything above despite this limitation, listen up how wonderfully big and bright the music now sounds in the film with no size limitation and with most of the songs being pre-recorded, they had an orchestra of between 30 and 40 musicians to accommodate the additional musicians and, since it is a film, They change the instrumentation to make it a little more symphonic.

Listen to that same part again, ah, I don't know. In my opinion, it just feels murkier and more understated. I think it's fair to say that most of the cast aren't great vocally. There are a few standouts, but nothing mind-blowing. In fact, Rob Marshall looked for actors rather than singers for these roles. The complexity of the performance was very important to him, making sure his cast could perform a tune was almost secondary and incidental, he was noticing us here. What we have, of course, is the beautiful Hollywood automatic melody, I mean, okay, I guess, and the solos, but artificial harmonies. between two singers makes me want to cut my ears off listening to these original harmonies done live and then listening to these monstrosities created in the studio just giving the actors singing lessons before filming and making them practice because these guys aren't up to the task, they They have it too. change the music by lowering the keys so they are not so difficult to sing, plus the speed of the songs is also reduced, is this a big problem for me?

Yes, it makes the songs drag and feel much less impressive and at some points it can also ruin the established tone take an example your fault listen to the incredibly quick way these characters defend themselves from guilt I no yes I did no no it's because I gave it to my wife wait a minute now listen to the movie version you kept the other baby I didn't yes I did it's not your fault no it's not because I gave it to my wife wait a minute it drags it doesn't hit the same beats It's oh, now, of course, this is all subjective things that personally bother me a little bit, but what I won't excuse is the blatant demystification of the original show.

I've said it before, it's brilliant and charming but also quirky and fun, and many of the decisions in this translation go against that. That idea I mentioned solidity and realism, but also the color palette is very boring and uninspired and the actors bore many of their performances to be serious. The biggest culprit is Jack and his mother. The whole joke in the original is that Jack is a bit stupid and even though he's a boy, he's obviously a big boy, like a teenager, early adult mother, I'm a man now, we're still a little boy in your mother's eyes. , he thinks that the cow he milks is his only friends are his pets and he does not understand the seriousness of the world.

Jack's mother is audibly frustrated with him, but in a way that's understandable, she just wants to survive on what little money she has so the two of them can live. the movie however instead of doing the idiot kid joke they hired a real kid okay this could work and then instead of Jack's mom being loving but having to constantly comfort Jack , she is just a wish that my son was not a fool, the serious one. Jack's mother's nervousness in this serious and grounded world, mixed with the fact that he is a child, just vilifies her instead of thinking, oh, I get it, you think, oh my God, this woman is so horrible. and rude who later stabs the film in the back when Jack's mother is around. killed, we don't care anymore, honestly, it just makes you feel like, oh, goodbye, and before he dies, when he plays defensively with the giant, it doesn't feel earned, but in the original he faces the giant like he faced everyone. character in the show and she feels sweet and then she dies and it's really like oh my god, but again there's another difference in the show: she is killed in plain sight by the butler princess who is selfish and wants to protect herself from the giant. in the movie they push her against a log or something and then she dies lol and that's another problem, people were very worried that with Disney making this movie everything would be fired by Disney and a lot of darkness would be lost in the original because while The Show original was definitely quirky and fun, it has sexual undertones, why does the wolf have a penis? and the second act is completely dark and scary to completely contradict the first act.

In fact, many schools only do a production of the first act because it ends happily ever after, although to be fair the film isn't actually that clean, the few censorship bits you see are just weird, like the death of Jack and the death of the baker's wife in the original, the giant crushes her, but here she just walks clumsily towards a cliff and then falls like in the original, both princes cheat on their wives, whereas in the movie he only He plays Cinderella's prince, in fact, in the movie they give Rapunzel and her prince a happy ending, which she doesn't do. she has in the original in the og she has twins and then the prince leaves her because she is too emotional and then she loses the twins and then she is killed by the giant.

Another big change is the alteration of this beautiful conversation about what is right. and bad in the middle of the song no one is alone that butler will pay for this after we kill the giant I will kill him he won't do any of that he shouldn't have killed my mother right no, I guess not, then he must die no, for No, that would be wrong, but he did what was wrong and should be punished. In some ways he will be. I don't know, he stops asking me questions I can't answer. I'm going to kill him, then kill him.

No no no. don't kill him it's complicated life is complicated no one knows the answer and after a moment of struggle the baker consoles jack in the movie the student will pay for this no jack after we kill the giant I will kill him you won't do anything kind, what he did was wrong, you should be punished, it's not as easy as the subtlety and complication gone away, it's a big deal, thoughI guess not, it just seems so strange and honestly inorganic, the second act of the show is about community responsibility and being selfless over selfish and that doesn't really come across in the movie, as the characters who act greedily aren't punished or They're just off screen.

It's just strange that Disney, of all companies, took this movie and put a band-aid on it, but then didn't. Don't lean into the madness of it all, why is it so serious and monotonous on the surface but then childish and light on the inside? It's like the opposite of the original. You know sometimes the movie can be funny, like when Little Red Riding Hood gets eaten. by the wolf it becomes fantastic and I really like the same when the witch dies. I like that too, but why are you trying to be so serious? Why is Cinderella's dress reveal so boring?

Why is the bean stem so boring? Why is everything so unfantastic? Can I tell you a little secret and not tell anyone? I told you this, but "Into the Woods" is super funny, I mean, really hilarious. the audience can't stop laughing, it almost seems like a comedy, she is dead, we thought you would prefer a live broadcast because I prefer a live one, so bring me the dead one and I will bring him back to life. You can do it, no, these beans have magic, what kind of magic, tell a giant? Maybe we should tell someone that Are you going to tell the audience that they can't stop laughing?

It almost feels like a sitcom. The film loses a lot of humor by not leaning into the craziness of the material. It's just not that fun. Of course, some jokes work and translate well. these beans have magic, what kind of magic they call them, but the added humor made me cringe, are you okay? The idea of ​​the original show is to take these fairy tales and weave them together, they are also a parody of fairy tale conventions and tropes mixed with a bit of adult humor because the baker had lost his father and mother in a baking accident, well at least that's what he believed, everything is repaired.

You're probably wondering who those last two were. The characters were the narrator of the show and the mysterious man who turns out to be the father of the escaped baker, father, how could it be you? I thought you died in a baking accident. Where are these two characters in the movie? The main themes of the show are parenting and family, and the big moral dilemma for the baker is that his life is cursed by his father's mistake and he tries to fix it without relapsing into those same mistakes, in my opinion, the crutch of the show the dunuma if you want is the song titled no more after fleeing from the group and giving up, the baker meets his father, who tells him that he is only repeating to his son what he did to him and you get this beautiful moment where the Baker grows up and learns that you have to take responsibility and take charge and running away leaves nothing but an endless cycle of despair.

This is perhaps the most important part of the entire show. Now you may be wondering if the mystery man is Not in the movie, how do they serve this important piece of the show? Well, son, they don't do it right. James Corden's sister cries. They had the audacity to play the instrumental just as an underlining, simply waving a carrot in front of their ears. The people who knew the song are here, but they didn't think we would do the song. This is the perfect time for a song. James Corden is so overcome with emotion and this would be the perfect time to express his feelings through music and his crying doesn't even solve the failed dilemma they tried to add into the movie with james occasionally saying oh I can't be a father and the elimination of the mystery man and the narrator eliminates two of my favorite jokes from the show, it's interesting to examine the moral question involved here now, the purpose of stories like these dictates what no, no, come on, they feed the narrator to the giant who just makes it so meta that there must always be an outside observer to convey the story, some of us don't.

I don't like the way you've been telling it, but of course we have to stick to the two-hour time frame. It is normal that in any translation from any medium to another things are cut and changed, you cannot. I put a triangular block in a circular hole I tried but the forest cuts too far here's a little summary of what ended up on the cutting room floor I guess this is goodbye old man is what really matters is this what midnight until midnight for always of course something about these cuts makes sense, the first and second midnight were very comical and a good tension breaker in the play would definitely have slowed down the pace of the film and didn't make much sense, the repetition of the agony is also ok to be cut in my opinion because although it's fun and adds the element of both princes being horrible and loyal, it always seemed to me to freeze the second act because the rest, come on, these are all lovely set pieces that are driven so beautifully by the characters and their interactions with each other and the setting they find themselves in are very important to the story, especially the repetition of the prologue that rhymes with the first but with a darker undertone that reflects the light and shadow signs of the coin that is the happy, fairytale act 1. and the darkest and most consequence-filled second act of the original show, the second act of the film is so desperate to end that it is practically screaming at the audience to kill me, kill me, one of the best songs from the show, maybe one by Sondheim.

The best pieces of all time are the beautiful quartet. Nobody is alone. Rob Marshall heard Barack Obama quote the song during a speech on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and that was part of what convinced him to make the film. He then he cut out half of the song. I'm not making this up, okay, yes, I've been in this movie, but before I finish, is there anything I enjoy? Yes, quite a few things, as I mentioned before. I love when the film dips slightly into the world of the fantastic. like little red riding hood being devoured or the witch's magic when it's not slathered in terrible cgi and I love the full steps of the song, time in the palace slows down as Cinderella makes her decision on what to do, it's just brilliant as I hit or miss performances, I think I love Meryl Streep more.

She takes the character in a completely different direction than she's ever been and I really like it. The chemistry between her and Rapunzel is truly amazing. I think she is even stronger than she was. in the original and the song Stay with Me is absolutely beautiful, easily the best performed in the film. Well, I was hesitant at first, I think the inclusion of lines and letters explaining why they have a three day deadline and why the witch can't. Touching on the ingredients is helpful because it never seemed that clear in the original, but overall this translation just doesn't work for me.

Despite being limited to a small stage and having all the actors crammed in at once, the original production feels infinitely more big. magical and more inspired than the movie, which feels like a hollow shell imitation of the show I love so much. Am I biased? Of course, I've seen this show a million times. I know it backwards. I love it so much. It pains me to watch this movie, pick up the show and just not fully understand it and just do this fusion and go boom, here we go. In fact, I called Steve Sondheim and James Lapine the day after it opened.

It opened on Christmas Day and I was able to tell them. each of them that on that day more people saw the movie in the woods than experienced it in its two Broadway performances combined, so many people who have only seen the movie think it's average and claim that, of course , putting together ten different stories won. It doesn't make for a good movie or not being clear about what the subject is, so if you don't make it for people who haven't seen the original and you don't make it to maintain the spirit of the people who love the original and who This for Is In the Woods a bad movie?

No, is it a bad adaptation? One of the best musical theater shows of all time. Yes I believe. Hey guys, thanks for checking out something a little different. I know I've jumped between movies and games. and now theater, but I hope you enjoyed it. I'll continue to go between the three mediums because they're three things I'm really passionate about anyway. Tell me what you think. Have you seen the movie or the original? Am I right or not? Always let me know in the comments below where I went wrong and how, as always, exude great virgin energy, stay comfortable, see you around.