| |
| Author |
Message |
|
| bartist |
 Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:04 pm |
 |
|
|
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 6961
Location: Black Hills
|
"The big problems: James Cordon is a terrific Baker but a tone-deaf singer and should have been dubbed; we don't see Cinderella at the ball, so we have no idea what's making her run--is she just intimidated, does she not like being an object under examination, does she want to be pursued rather than the pursuer, does she sense the Prince's shallow nature, all of this, none of this? The Mysterious Man character is totally shredded, and one of the most poignant songs Sondheim ever wrote ("No More") is lost. Portions of the most poignant song he ever wrote ("You Are Not Alone") are cut."
- joe
Agree with most of your review, but really, isn't Cinderella a fairy tale in which she fears losing the magic at midnight and reverting to rags and a rotting gourd carriage? I didn't mind a little ambiguity there. Who needs deep motivation to enjoy this lighthearted mishmash of fairy tales? |
_________________
He was wise beyond his years, but only by a few days. |
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| Syd |
| Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2015 7:23 pm |
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 12929
Location: Norman, Oklahoma
|
bartist wrote: Also looked up Joan Clarke, turns out much of the Knightly version IS fictional....she was a respected cryptologist and mathematician, didn't have to be snuck into service in the secretary pool, was indeed placed in Hut 8, with the Enigma team, and looked nothing like a Chanel model. But the scriptwriter had to take a whack at sexism somehow, I suppose. Feed that melodrama.
Agree with BW that Tyldum's previous, Headhunters, is just terrific, so if he wants to oscillate between masterful and mediocre, can't complain.
The temporary engagement, however, was real, including that she was quite willing to marry him even after she found out he was gay. Probably for the reasons she gives in the movie. |
_________________
Rocky Laocoon foretold of Troy's doom, only to find snaky water. They pulled him in and Rocky can't swim. Now Rocky wishes he were an otter! |
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:39 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
bartist wrote: "The big problems: James Cordon is a terrific Baker but a tone-deaf singer and should have been dubbed; we don't see Cinderella at the ball, so we have no idea what's making her run--is she just intimidated, does she not like being an object under examination, does she want to be pursued rather than the pursuer, does she sense the Prince's shallow nature, all of this, none of this? The Mysterious Man character is totally shredded, and one of the most poignant songs Sondheim ever wrote ("No More") is lost. Portions of the most poignant song he ever wrote ("You Are Not Alone") are cut."
- joe
Agree with most of your review, but really, isn't Cinderella a fairy tale in which she fears losing the magic at midnight and reverting to rags and a rotting gourd carriage? I didn't mind a little ambiguity there. Who needs deep motivation to enjoy this lighthearted mishmash of fairy tales?
I can almost answer for Joe. People who admire Into the Woods (I'm not one of them) like the fact that it is a "dark" vision of fairy tales. Therefore Cinderella in this context needs "motivation" for leaving the ball prematurely. We are not in the realm of "lighthearted" here. This is important, existential shit...oops, I meant "stuff." |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| bartist |
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 10:21 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 27 Apr 2010
Posts: 6961
Location: Black Hills
|
| I guess am not getting Sondheim, then. From a folkloric standpoint, fairy tales were meant to have a dark aspect and be cautionary. So, for me, when you tinker with them and have characters use modern speech and mix in lots of humorous collisions of different folk metaphors, then you are in fact, taking it all in a lighter and shallower direction. For me, asking Cinderella's motivation is like demanding forensic analysis of that pea a princess dfound in her mattress. |
_________________
He was wise beyond his years, but only by a few days. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| carrobin |
| Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:07 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 7795
Location: NYC
|
| Agree that nobody in the Western Culture, at least, would be unaware of Cinderella's fear of the clock. And I'm relieved to hear that I'm not the only one not charmed by "Into the Woods," which I saw onstage and found a bit boring. I can't even tell my best friend this, because he's a Sondheim fanatic. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 3:50 am |
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
billyweeds wrote: bartist wrote: "The big problems: James Cordon is a terrific Baker but a tone-deaf singer and should have been dubbed; we don't see Cinderella at the ball, so we have no idea what's making her run--is she just intimidated, does she not like being an object under examination, does she want to be pursued rather than the pursuer, does she sense the Prince's shallow nature, all of this, none of this? The Mysterious Man character is totally shredded, and one of the most poignant songs Sondheim ever wrote ("No More") is lost. Portions of the most poignant song he ever wrote ("You Are Not Alone") are cut."
- joe
Agree with most of your review, but really, isn't Cinderella a fairy tale in which she fears losing the magic at midnight and reverting to rags and a rotting gourd carriage? I didn't mind a little ambiguity there. Who needs deep motivation to enjoy this lighthearted mishmash of fairy tales?
I can almost answer for Joe. People who admire Into the Woods (I'm not one of them) like the fact that it is a "dark" vision of fairy tales. Therefore Cinderella in this context needs "motivation" for leaving the ball prematurely. We are not in the realm of "lighthearted" here. This is important, existential shit...oops, I meant "stuff."
Seriously, Billy, that was the most condescending shit you've ever peddled around here. Why be such an asshole?
Bart, she's never told in this version that she must leave by midnight, so, yes, the moment requires more than just the fairy tale motivation. The lyrics to "On the Steps of the Palace" suggest other things, and it would help to see what she's responding to, not just hear about it. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 8:13 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Joe Vitus wrote:
Seriously, Billy, that was the most condescending shit you've ever peddled around here. Why be such an asshole?
Bart, she's never told in this version that she must leave by midnight, so, yes, the moment requires more than just the fairy tale motivation. The lyrics to "On the Steps of the Palace" suggest other things, and it would help to see what she's responding to, not just hear about it.
Sorry, Joe. I honestly didn't mean to be condescending or dismissive of you, just slightly snarky about the fanboys and fangirls who think Into the Woods is the greatest thing since cream cheese, and slightly dismissive of the pretensions of the musical. Don't take it so personally.
As for Cinderella not being told she must leave by midnight, isn't that sort of understood as a given when one is talking about Cinderella? It's like...well, do we have to be told, for instance, that Jesus Christ's mother was Mary? Cinderella is universally famous as the girl who had to leave the party by midnight. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 5:08 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
The musical doesn't conform to the strict rules of the standard story. There is no rule about the magic wearing off at midnight, nor does her gown turn to rags after midnight. Nor does she magically transform back into her gown when the slipper is placed on her feet.
They make a big deal in the musical that Cinderella has both an inferiority complex and ultimately feels stifled by court life. It would be interesting to see whether she was already seeing the Prince's true colors (attractive but narcissistic) or simply overwhelmed by the grandeur of the place. It's a problem several numbers in the movie have that describe off-stage events. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 8:21 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
| In any case, I don't think I deserve to be called an asshole for my comment. That's something I've never called anyone on this forum and I don't particularly like being the recipient of that kind of slam. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 9:30 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
"Those dumb fans who think Into the Woods is sooo deep and soooo dark, and the characters need all that heavvvy psychological motivation because they read the text of this play as if it were Camus or Cocteau." That's taking about as big a shit in the punch bowl as one can do.
As it happens, the musical does have a darker take on the stories, the characters are motivated psychologically, and none of that means the show or its fans are pretentious or award the work any greater depth than it deserves.
Your comments were condescending, elitist and judgmental. Even terms like "fanboys" and "fangirls" are offensive put-downs (why not just call them fans, the way you'd describe people who like something you like, as well?). Writing a post like that is pretty assholish behavior. You may not that description, but you wrote a post that merited it. Maybe you've never been described that way before because it's out of character for you. But in this instance, it's apt.
All of this is a good reminder why I don't check in here very often. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Sat Jan 03, 2015 10:13 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
Joe Vitus wrote: All of this is a good reminder why I don't check in here very often.
Many a time I felt that way but continued to check in for the positives. If you can't take it, then I guess you're right to stay away. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Joe Vitus |
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2015 3:27 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 14498
Location: Houston
|
| Perhaps so. |
_________________
You've got a great brain. You should keep it in your head.
-Topher |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2015 7:17 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
For the record, I did not coin the term "fanboy." It is generally used to describe someone who is loyal to a star, company, comic book producer, or (in this case) writer whether the work is great or not. A "fan" (and I can be described as a Sondheim fan) is able to distinguish great work (Gypsy, West Side Story, Forum, Follies, Company, Sweeney Todd) from mediocre (Into the Woods).
I have my personal tastes which go against the majority view. Although I acknowledge that A Little Night Music and Sunday in the Park with George are in some ways masterful works, yet I am meh about Night Music and actively loathe George. And although Anyone Can Whistle lasted only a few performances on Broadway (and has its pretentious side) I adore it. About Whistle, I am...wait for it, Joe...a fanboy. |
Last edited by billyweeds on Sun Jan 04, 2015 12:07 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:04 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 30 Oct 2014
Posts: 278
Location: Winnipeg: It's a dry cold.
|
No, you are a fanman!  |
_________________
Big bang, shmig bang; still doesn't explain how anything starts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| billyweeds |
| Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2015 7:18 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 20 May 2004
Posts: 20618
Location: New York City
|
The Theory of Everything is the film about Stephen Hawking that has Eddie Redmayne and Felicity Jones in the running for Best Actor and Actress honors. It's a perfectiy respectable movie, Jones and particularly Redmayne do stalwart work, and the direction is competent and professional, but the movie--despite dealing with the most inspiring story imaginable--is somewhat less than inspired. It tells the story in pretty much exactly the way you would expect it to be told, with no surprises in the direction or acting. Compared with movies that rock my world, this one just sorta lays there.
Redmayne's transformation from physically fit to almost totally disabled is remarkable, and though it might have been a more interesting movie had it concentrated less on the love story between Hawking and his wife Jane and more on Hawking's achievements, the love story is told nicely. But overall, this is not a great movie--and probably could have been with a little more ingenuity. Still, worth seeing. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
