The "Agony" is Over: A Movie Review of Disney's Into The Woods

Before Christmas, Into the Woods had bad reviews from it's initial premiere. Of course, there weren't musical theatre kids at that premiere. Heck, I'm willing to bet that there weren't kids at the premiere either. After Christmas, I read more positive than negative reviews. (example: http://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/why-into-the-woods-matters, or https://www.theproducersperspective.com/my_weblog/2014/12/5-reasons-why-i-loved-the-into-the-woods-movie.html)

My thoughts on the film and why it is fantastic:

Into the Woods Logo

1. James Lapine and Stephen Sondheim worked on the film. They both wrote the musical. Obviously they want the film to be extremely close to the show. 
2. Rob Marshall directed this as well as the film adaption of Chicago. That movie went onto win the Best Picture Oscar in 2003 (no movie musical had won since). Every choice that was made was clear and thought out. I really trusted him with this wonderful piece of musical theatre.
3. Rob Marshall stated that he wanted a Post 9/11 Fairy tale feel. His reasoning was because Fairy tales mean something depending on the time. I thought that the approach was intelligent and also very true.
4. It wasn't even Disney! So many people thought that it was going to be "Disney-fied" and everything would be more like Disney. That isn't true. In fact, this is the darkest Disney film I have seen (and possibly ever created). It stayed extremely true to the original show (even though there had to be some changes for timing reasons).
5. They cast singers, not just big name people! Sure, Anna Kendrick and Meryl Streep are the big name stars, but they cast the film based on their abilities. Jack was from the West End (remember Gavroche in Les Miserables two years ago? Same person). Little Red was Annie in the most recent revival of Annie. I could go on and on, but it would take hours to get through.

Emily Blunt as the Baker's Wife and James Cordan as the Baker

There are too many reasons why I loved the movie (as listed above). The only things I didn't hate, but also didn't love were:

• "Act 2" was jammed into the last 30 minutes of the movie. If they extended the run time to 2 hours 15 minutes, then it would have been perfect.
• Anna Kendrick had a complete 180 from Pitch Perfect. She had to embody a Classical Broadway sound for Cinderella. It is a challenge, and she managed to get that Broadway sound. There were hints of Classical in there, but not enough. She is too "modern Broadway" (as some of my friends called it), and that is why she'll be perfect in The Last Five Years. Cinderella wasn't the best fit for her, but she still did a pretty good job. 

Now what does Disney producing a musical so dark as INTO THE WOODS mean for other movie musicals? It means that many other musicals now have an opportunity to begin development. INTO THE WOODS grossed $13 Million on opening day. Disney took a chance on INTO THE WOODS, and it was a success. Could this mean that...

• Dreamworks could produce a movie version of Side Show?
• Nickelodeon could produce a movie version of Anything Goes? 
• Disney could produce a movie version of Hello, Dolly! ?

Who knows? The future looks bright for the movie musical world. I mean, as long as they continue to cast singers and not only big name stars, but also if they think of the future and giving the children the opportunity to experience culture. "Careful of the things you say, Children will listen".

"Anything can happen in the woods", and Disney proved that with Into the Woods, which is currently in theaters as of Christmas Day. I knew that the movie was going to be great, and my expectations were exceeded. They get a solid A from me. If they didn't cut down the second half of the story, it would have been a solid A+. 

Be careful what you wish for...

-Nathan Clift, 17, Trumbull High School

President of the Youth Board