I Never Thought I'd Be So Happy (With This Film)

Movie Review: Into the Woods

James Cordon as the Baker and Meryl Streep as the Witch in Disney's Into the Woods.

After what seems like an eternity, Disney's highly anticipated film adaptation of Stephen Sondheim's Into the Woods has finally arrived in theatres. The good news is that the internet's concerns about the film's fidelity to the source material are almost entirely unfounded; this is an incredibly faithful and respectful adaptation of the beloved stage show. Even better news is that the movie is a very good and at times even great film in its own right, featuring an excellent cast and a suitable dose of movie magic to make this fractured fairy tale truly sing on the big screen. Purists will no doubt have their complaints, but for most fans and the uninitiated this is an excellent representation of a contemporary classic from one of musical theatre's undisputed masters.

For those who don't know, Into the Woods weaves the well-known fairy tales of Cinderella, Jack and the Beanstalk, Little Red Riding Hood, and Rapunzel together with an original tale about a childless Baker and his Wife. Early in the film, the Baker discovers that his family has been cursed by the village's resident Witch, and the only way to lift the spell is to collect four magical objects before the impending blue moon. What follows is a series of misadventures that ultimately subverts the notion of "happily ever after" while also exploring what happens when you get exactly what you want, only to find that it wasn't at all like you expected.

The musical's original librettist James Lapine adapts his own script into a very smart condensation of the stage show. Into the Woods has always been a marvel of tight pacing, so the fact that Lapine managed to trim things in way that doesn't sacrifice plot is truly impressive. Cut musical numbers are replaced with scenes that cover the same story beats, and the bridging of the musical's two distinct acts is handled about as well as conceivably possible. Sondheim has tweaked some lyrics where necessary, and listening to Jonathan Tunick's symphonic arrangements is like hearing this score afresh. Even the musical numbers that didn't make the film are represented via underscore in their same approximate locations, and truly sharp-eared fans will catch a surprising reference to one of Sondheim's other Tony-winning musicals.

Speaking of the fans, those afraid Disney would sanitize the musical's darker edges can rest easy. Pretty much everything that happens onstage happens in the movie, with the difference being the film tends to only imply things the stage version made more explicit. There's even a surprisingly sexual "Hello, Little Girl" that somehow slipped past the censors, proving that director Rob Marshall and company weren't lying when they insisted they were doing a very faithful adaptation.

Rob Marshall's direction is somewhere between his Oscar-nominated work on Chicago and his more questionable choices on the underwhelming Nine. His kinetic camerawork certainly keeps things interesting, although the constantly revolving camera sometimes distracts from the storytelling rather than enhances it. Marshall smartly limits his use of special effects to some key moments, which keeps the magic feeling magical without overwhelming the characters. His production team has lovingly designed the film with lavish sets and costumes, although the film tends so dark it can be difficult to make out the details.

One thing Marshall and his team have absolutely nailed is the casting, with nary a weak link among the story's dozen or so principal and secondary characters. Oscar-winner Meryl Streep is clearly having a blast as the Witch, making a veritable feast out of the "Witch's Rap" and chewing the scenery in the best possible way. Streep also sings like a dream, ranging from breathy intimacy to full throttle belting over the course of her musical numbers. Her tour de force performance of "Last Midnight" meets even the loftiest expectations and definitely proves that whether or not he intended to, Sondheim wrote a genuine showstopper when he added the song after the musical's out of town tryout.

The always enjoyable Emily Blunt is excellent as the Baker's Wife, a natural comedienne with a surprisingly strong voice and effortlessly natural line delivery. Her chemistry with James Corden's Baker is palpable, with the latter also doing a fine job with his character's more emotional scenes during the movie's second half. Anna Kendrick continues to prove adept at just about anything she sets her mind to, even if the more intimate medium of film highlights that some key points of Cinderella's emotional growth occur off screen. Her "Steps of a Palace" is a knockout, aided by Marshall's brilliant decision to play the entire song as a split second decision that occurs while Cinderella is being chased by the Prince.

Speaking of the Prince, Chris Pine isn't quite as at home in a movie musical as many of his costars, but that doesn't stop him from being a perfectly aloof foil to Kendrick's introspective Cinderella. Pine and Billy Magnussen's gloriously campy "Agony" is nearly perfect in its beefcake-skewering brilliance, second only to Streep's "Last Midnight" on the list of the film's standout moments. Lilla Crawford makes for a hilariously deadpan Little Red, and Daniel Huttlestone brings a genuine boyish glee to the role of Jack. Tracey Ullman, Christine Baranski, and Johnny Depp all make strong impressions despite limited screentime, and the uniformly excellent cast is one of the movie's strongest assets.

Into the Woods is ultimately about as good an adaptation as one could hope for. Purists will certainly find things to nitpick, and fans will no doubt miss some of the cut songs (I'm particularly sorry we lost the Witch's "A bear?/Bears are sweet..." segment from the Act II opening), but overall this is an incredibly faithful adaptation in spirit, tone, and execution. The plot and themes remain virtually unchanged from the stage version, with Marshall and his game cast embracing the opportunities offered by the big screen without abandoning what has made this such an enduringly popular property in the first place. It won't replace the invaluable recording of the original Broadway production, but it is an excellent companion piece and definitely worth seeking out.

Why the Internet Needs to Calm Down About "Into the Woods"

Meryl Streep will play the Witch in Disney's film adaptation of Into the Woods, and regardless of how much they change the material she will still be Meryl Streep.

At a recent event for high school educators, Broadway legend Stephen Sondheim let slip some of the planned changes for the upcoming film version of his beloved musical Into the Woods.  The Powers That Be at Disney, which is financing and releasing the film, have made several changes that soften the musical's darker edges, such as desexualizing the relationship between Little Red and the Wolf, sparing Rapunzel from her death at the hands (feet) of the Giant, and removing the Baker's Wife affair with Cinderella's Prince.  (Ironically, Sondheim revealed these changes at an event about censorship of the arts, specifically in high schools, when a teacher shared that he was hesitant to produce the show at his school due to potential backlash over the same issues.)  The Internet promptly went insane, declaring their hatred of Disney and how they were boycotting the movie and how Disney has "ruined Christmas" (which is when the movie is scheduled to be released).

If you ask me - and by clicking on the link to this blog entry, you kind of did - everyone needs to calm the hell down.  The fact that anyone can legitimately be surprised and/or upset by this news is baffling, and shows they have a complete lack of understanding of how these things work.

First and foremost, theatre and film are entirely different mediums, with different strengths.  In order to take advantage of the new medium, you almost have to make changes (which also helps justify why you're changing mediums at all).  Just about every film adaptation of a stage show features alterations and cuts, some of them major departures from the original.  The Sound of Music reorders a large chunk of the musical numbers, cuts pretty much any music involving Elsa and Max, and adds new songs like "I Have Confidence."  Dreamgirls rewrites the majority of the show's second act in order to flesh out the characters, provide more closure for Jimmy (who just sort of disappears in the stage version), and give Beyoncé an 11 o'clock number because she's Beyoncé (and also because Deena Jones can come across as an underwritten puppet onstage).  Cabaret, often cited as one of the last great movie musicals, completely recalibrates the original stage version to focus more exclusively on Sally (Fraulein Schneider and Herr Schultz are barely in the film at all) and adds so many new songs that when Sam Mendes and Rob Marshall revived the show for Roundabout they changed it into a hybrid between the original and the film.  Even West Side Story, one of the most lauded movie musicals of all time and generally considered a pretty faithful adaptation of the stage show, swaps the placement of "Officer Krumpke" and "Cool" in a way that totally changes the tone and meaning of both.

The common thread shared by those movies is that most theatre fans consider them to be pretty damn good.  In fact, I would argue that both The Sound of Music and Dreamgirls are substantial improvements on the originals, and if Bob Fosse had just filmed the stage version of Cabaret we wouldn't have the Kander and Ebb classics "Mein Herr" and "Maybe This Time."  And while both versions of West Side Story are pretty close to perfect, I personally prefer having "Cool" take place after the rumble rather than before it.  While there are plenty of examples where the changes for the movie don't work out so well (*cough*Rent*cough*), we don't really have any way of knowing where Into the Woods will fall until the finished film is released.  If someone just listed the changes for the movies I mentioned without anyone having seen the finished films, people would be just as upset as they are about Sondheim's fairy tale.

Also, the fact that Disney is releasing Into the Woods should have been a major tipoff that the darker edges would be softened.  Disney is one of the most image conscious, carefully designed and maintained brands on the planet; it is a major part of their enduring, basically unprecedented success.  They care very much about their reputation as a family friendly company, so there was no way they would put out a fairy tale film (fairy tales being closely tied with their brand and image) as dark as the stage Into the Woods.  Sondheim is certainly aware of this, and is quoted as saying, "If I were a Disney executive I probably would say the same thing." As soon as we heard that this would have the Disney name on it, rather than one of their subsidiaries, we all should have been prepared for the inevitable changes.

And if that hadn't clued people in, casting sure as hell should have.  Little Red was originally cast as an 8-year-old girl (although later replaced by the slightly older but still prepubescent 12-year-old).  Did people honestly think they were going to keep the sexual undertones of "Hello, Little Girl" and "I Know Things Now" with an actual child playing the part?  If they did, they are frankly stupid and/or twisted.  It is one thing to see that subtext played out using an adult playing a child; it is another when Little Red is actually a kid acting opposite a Wolf who is in his 40s.  That is gross.  I argue that even purists wouldn't really want to see the story played as written with that particular age dynamic, and even if you think how uncomfortable that would be is the point you can't have really thought Disney of all companies would go there.

At the end of the day, besides the fact that everyone should have seen this coming, my real point here is that it doesn't matter because we haven't even seen the finished product yet.  The changes could be brilliant, or at the very least bring out a different take on the story than the stage version.  The fact that Sondheim and James Lapine are involved with the film and have helped with the rewrites means we have a better chance of preserving some artistic integrity than if an outside screenwriter had made the changes (it also means we get new Sondheim songs).  And if the changes end up being bad, and "destroy the show" as some people are already claiming, we always have the stage version.  Not only is it one of Sondheim's most performed works, but we also have the video of the original stage production, with the incomparable original cast reprising their roles, readily available on Netflix for you to watch whenever you want.

Personally, I'm expecting the film to be a mixed bag.  I think Meryl Streep will be a fascinating Witch, and Anna Kendrick is pitch perfect casting as Cinderella (see what I did there?).  But the changes will definitely affect the overall meaning of the story, and I've never been convinced that the sharp delineation between Act I and Act II will work in a medium without an intermission.  The commonly accepted reading of the show is that it is a deconstruction/dismissal of the idea of "happily ever after," but if that was all there was to Into the Woods it wouldn't be so enduringly popular and meaningful to so many different people.  And no one is forcing me or you or anyone else to watch the movie, and it's existence does nothing to negate or change everything you love about the stage version.

The Best Shows of 2012 Countdown

The tree is up at Rockefeller Center, the number of tourists in Times Square is steadily multiplying, and every store in the city seems to be playing holiday music.  Yes, we are fast approaching the end of 2012, and just like last year I’m going to use the upcoming month to look back at the best and worst shows of the past 12 months.  Which show will succeed The Book of Mormon as the best show of the year?  And what show will follow in Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark’s dubious footsteps and be crowned the absolute worst the New York theatre scene has to offer? 

Over the next few weeks, I’ll be counting down to my top picks, and I hope you’ll join me for this look back at the year on Broadway and beyond.  This is by no means meant to be an exhaustive or definitive list of the best and worst shows of the year.  I simply don’t have the time or money to go see everything, and so this list will be confined to productions I have actually attended, be they on Broadway or beyond.  If you disagree with me, I welcome you to make your case in the comments.  And now, without further ado, let the Best of 2012 Countdown begin!

 

Best of 2012

#10 – Into the Woods

 

Stephen Sondheim’s deconstructed fairy tale is one of the composer’s most beloved works, leading to a nearly unprecedented level of anticipation for last summer’s star-studded Shakespeare in the Park production.  The open-air staging by director Timothy Sheader proved to be especially divisive, with audiences loving and loathing it in equal measure.  While far from perfect, I personally loved this new take on the familiar musical, and appreciated the fact that Sheader and company dared to try something different with the piece.

 

The contemporary update of the show, coupled with the addition of a framing device involving a child Narrator who tells the tale to keep himself entertained after running away from home, made this staging feel fresh and unexpected.  While some complained the sprawling, multi-tiered set made the action hard to follow, I felt it added a layer of visual interest the show sorely needed, while simultaneously providing a sense of continual movement to this musical quest.  The reimagined Witch and the marauding Giant are two of the more vivid images from the past twelve months, and whether or not you agreed with all the directorial choices it was nice to see such bold ones being made on such a high-profile production.

 

Even more divisive than the staging was the cast, which admittedly was something a mixed bag, although in my opinion the good outweighed the bad.  Seeing Donna Murphy tackle the Witch proved to be one of the most thrilling performances of the year, and her show-stopping “Last Midnight” was a transcendent example of musical theatre acting at its finest.  The naysayers who complain Murphy’s performance hewed too close to Bernadette Peters’ original would have been equally offended if she had strayed too far from her predecessor’s blueprint.  Far more deserving of scorn would be the horribly miscast Dennis O’Hare as the Baker or the slightly awkward Baker’s Wife of Amy Adams.

 

Ultimately, it’s probably for the best that this production’s rumored Broadway transfer has yet to materialize.  Although the show would have benefited from some tweaking and more rehearsal time, moving the production indoors would have robbed it of a vital component of what made this Into the Woods special.  As an entertaining diversion for a balmy summer’s night, the production was hard to fault, and that is why I’ve named it one of the Best Shows of 2012.

 

For my full review of Into the Woods, click here.

She Knows Things Now

Hi, I'm Broadway's Morgan James, and I apparently have no idea how the internet works.

I had another topic in mind for this blog entry, but then I saw this story about the uproar Broadway actress Morgan James caused by tweeting her negative reaction to Shakespeare in the Park’s Into the Woods and felt compelled to write about that instead.

If you’re too lazy to read the linked article, just know that Ms. James attended last night’s first public preview and was decidedly unimpressed.  She said as much via Twitter, criticizing the acting and musicians, and the rest of the Broadway community jumped down her throat for saying such negative things in a public forum.  James has since deleted the offending tweets and half-heartedly apologized, but maintains she is entitled to express her opinion. 

This is a subject that is close to my heart, as I am a theatre professional (or at least semi-professional with professional friends) who has a blog full of show reviews, and not all of them are complimentary.  I agree that James is entitled her opinion and that no one can force her to like a particular show, but I also agree with most people that she is in the wrong for tweet her displeasure.  Why?  In the spirit of the show, I have listed her offenses in the form of fairy tale morals.

1)      The difference between a thought and a tweet is a tweet can cause a commotion

Twitter is a social landmine.  The website’s format encourages users to tweet whatever thought pops into their head immediately, and then keeps a record of that thought forever (or at least until you go back and intentionally delete it).  This causes many users to forgo the mental filter they would use during face to face conversation, and the text format means you can’t claim you were misheard or pretend you didn’t say something.  This has been the bane of many celebrities’ existence, and yet after countless instances of people being taken to task for ill-considered tweets James seems surprised the same thing happened to her.

Also, being limited to 140 characters makes it very difficult to back up any assertions with examples.  If James had been having a face to face conversation (or just posting to something that allowed her more words to express herself), she could have provided some concrete examples of the flaws she was talking about.  But without examples, it comes across as if James is just being catty, especially since most performers give negative critiques in a way that seems to imply they would have done a better job. 

2)      A first preview is not opening night

The entire point of having a preview period is that it gives cast and crew time to work out the production’s kinks.  As a veteran of several Broadway shows, which often have three or four weeks of previews, James should have understood that what she saw last night was not meant to be the final product.  By choosing to attend the first preview, James essentially agreed to see a work in progress, and should have tempered her expectations accordingly.

3)      The harsher the words, the quieter you speak them (especially during previews).

Because elements of the show are still in flux during previews, being too harsh on them is generally frowned upon.  There is still time for things to improve, so speaking out against the show before it is finished makes James appear immature and rude.  This is why critics don’t see shows until the week before opening, and even then they hold off on publishing their judgments until after the production opens out of respect for all the hard working individuals involved.  Yes, theatre professionals love to gossip about troubled musicals, but most have enough tact to engage in those types of conversations in the privacy of their own homes (or a nearby bar) rather than on the very public internet.

4)      The younger the critic, the less people care

This entry could also be entitle, “Respect your elders.”  Simply put, Morgan James hasn’t earned the right to publically bash her fellow artists.  She may have Broadway credits, but you know what they are?  Ensemble in The Addams Family (a bad show), Wonderland (a worse show), and Soloist in Godspell (a decent show).  Nothing about her resume or body of work gives her any kind of industry clout or respect, especially when she is saying Tony winners and Oscar nominees don’t know how to act.  You have to earn the right to speak out against your peers, and James is a long way from being able to insult the abilities of other artists. 

When Stephen Sondheim decided to trash the Porgy and Bess revival before it had even started its out of town tryout, he did so with 60 years’ experience, multiple Tony Awards, a Pulitzer Prize, and a body of acclaimed work that demonstrates he knows a thing or two about what constitutes good musical theatre.  And even with all that expertise, a lot of people still felt he was out of line (although they promptly forgave him, as he’s still Stephen-freaking-Sondheim).  James’ dubious career doesn’t afford her the type of leeway given to the writer of acknowledged masterpieces like Sweeney Todd, Company, and yes, Into the Woods.

Hopefully this incident has taught James (and other performers) that there is a time and a place for peer criticism, and Twitter is not it.  The only acceptable public forum for such criticism is a review, which exists expressly for that purpose and has a format that allows you enough space to back up your assertions with examples.  Other than that, negative critiques should be reserved for private conversation among peers, preferably after the show is opened and therefore “finished.”  Otherwise, keep your damn mouth shut.