Holiday Must-See Movie: 'Into the Woods'

Holiday Must-See Movie: 'Into the Woods'

  Intothewoods-merylpoints
“Go to the wood!” is Streep’s wish your command? 

BY NATHANIEL ROGERS 

Once upon a time Stephen Sondheim wrote a musical classic INTO THE WOODS. The first act brings together classic fairy tale characters into one comic misadventure and the second act debunks the “happily ever after” myth and transforms the whole play into a masterpiece about virtually all the Big Stuff: growing up, parenting, marriage, death, rebuilding after great loss.

Itw_CinderellaWhen it comes to lines we can repurpose to talk about the prospects of a film version, Little Red said it best:

It made me feel excited. well, excited and scared.

Isn’t that how devotees of the movie musical feel each time a new one arrives? A bit of background to justify the high-anxiety. The live-action movie musical died alongside Bob Fosse’s alter ego in All That Jazz (1979). The genre was six feet under for two full decades despite intermittent attempts at excavating its exquisite corpse (Annie, Little Shop of Horrors, Newsies). The Disney animation renaissance of the 1990s renewed interest and the genre was successfully reborn at the turn of the century by the one-two-three-four punch of Dancer in the Dark, Hedwig and the Angry Inch, Moulin Rouge! and Chicago. That’s a four consecutive high quality film run that this ancient-newborn genre has yet to match since. And why is that exactly? Some people blame the lack of strong directors who are skilled in the form, others the resistance to new blood (nearly all modern musicals are adaptations). Still more culprits are Hollywood’s frequent miscasting since musical skill is considered optional.

But The Witch (Meryl Streep) would like us to stop bitching and get on with this review.

No, of course what really matters is the blame
Somebody to blame.
Fine, if that’s the thing you enjoy, Placing the blame,
If that’s the aim, Give me the blame-

So back to Into the Woods . Does it survive the transfer? With so much baggage brought into the movie theater I’ll admit that a traditional review has been tough to write. So herewith a ranked list of the musical numbers (in their current form) as a sneaky way to coax out all those thorny blinding feelings.

Intowoods-redenters

The list, from worst to best, is AFTER THE JUMP…

 

360px-ITW-Rapunzel_and_Witch“Hello, Little Girl”

Johnny Depp is not so much the Demon Barber of the movie musical but the Devil Butcher. He can’t sing so he talks his way semi-rhythmically through Sondheim’s expressive melodies, gutting them of their beauty in the process. That they let this once essential now tiresomely repetitive star choose his costuming (an awful zoot-suit number that renders the Wolf less fantastical and more human pimp /pedophile) is the film’s most obvious eyesore and icky miscalculation.


“Witches Lament / Children Will Listen / Last Midnight”
[MINOR SPOILERS] Meryl Streep has been winning her customary raves for the showiest role and can probably expect an Oscar nomination in two weeks. It’s true that she sings the part with passion and nuance. But the smoothed Disney-fied edges of the adaptation which make Act Two much less dark (Rapunzel doesn’t die for one) dull the Witch’s motivations and her character arc becomes nearly inexplicable as a result. “Last Midnight” remains exciting and flashy as a song but good luck figuring out what the hell is going on in that visual fx muddle (is she committing suicide? is she being sucked into the earth? is she turning into a swamp? I have no idea! And I’ve seen it twice).

More problematic is “Witches Lament” which contains the line ‘Children won’t listen!’ a self-delusional moment that’s in direct opposition to the show’s actual message and closing number “Children Will Listen.” When that finale is glossed over in chorus and end credits form, it confuses the musical’s takeaway message. This all suggests that the filmmakers were too close to the material and assumed everyone would ‘get it’ while removing the parts that are there to be, uh, gotten.


“I Know Things Now”
Broadway’s recent Annie Lilla Crawford takes on Little Red and does solid work with the role, most amusingly in the opening prologue when her sweet tooth gets the best of her and she sings with her face stuffed. (As if Sondheim’s lyrics aren’t already a mouthful!) The filmmakers choose to stylize her big number (very wise) rather than literalizing it. That the number falls a little flat is possibly the lingering bad taste of The Wolf?


“It Takes Two”

James Corden and Emily Blunt have fine chemistry as the childless couple, The Baker and his wife, that are at the emotional center of the action. That this production cast only actors that can genuinely sing (with the lone wolf —haha- exception of Johnny Depp) is a huge blessing and possibly a note of glorious optimism for the future. Especially considering that the auto-tuned Annie is playing in some of the same theaters as a direct comparison point.

640px-Ewemily-blunt_444_276

“Your Fault Then”

The show’s super-fast mass blaming ritual retains its heated a-ha! revelations and sad/funny barbed power with these stellar singing actors. But the movie’s strange visual decisions – muddy color and cinematography which my friend has dubbed “baby poop palette” is especially problematic in the act two numbers when the film is not just emotionally but visually darker. 



“Giants in the Sky”

Gavroche from Les Miz plays Jack and belts this song with the kind of Broadway Baby gusto that you rarely see in movie musicals while he jumps around a giant tree. The only drawback here is the director’s literalism. Why waste that tight “musicals are risky!” budget on bad beanstalk and Giant effects when you could opt for a stylized flashback like the kind Little Red got?


“No One is Alone”

While it’s not the last ballad in the musical it becomes the defacto finale in this adaptation. What a powerhouse number it remains with clear eyed grieving beauty and generous subtext for the queer audience about creating your own families. The clipping of it’s final note is a marvel of precision in the sound editing and narrative thrust.


“Any Moment/Moments in the Woods”
Chris Pine as Cinderella’s Prince is the movie’s biggest surprise (“I was raised to be charming, not sincere.”) He’s pitch-perfect as this two-dimensional character that wants to rub up all over the three-dimensional ladies. Emily Blunt, who has great musical chops (hurrah) with a wonderful fluidity between comic flourishes and emotional truth, nails her big monologue solo “Moments in the Woods” … as she tries to regain her bearings from the Prince’s seduction. Unfortunately the film chickens out of the follow-through making the outer edge of this final scene blink and you’ll miss it confusing when it needs to be blunt and can’t miss it jaw-dropping.

Staywithme-meryl

“Stay With Me”
Streep’s finest moment in an otherwise manic performance is this slow build character song. She sings it in the cramped confines of Rapunzel’s tower (perhaps the tighter quarters reigned her in?) and she sings it perfectly, mixing a hypnotic brew of bossiness, neediness, loneliness, and pleading, with fire and nuance. The song remains a clever portrait of over-protective parenting.



 Tumblr_nh9hg9QsGk1u251cbo2_400“Prologue (Into the Woods)”

The 17 minute opening segment is just about as wonderful as movie kick-offs get, whirling all the characters into instant action with character bits that braid together until you’re looking at the whole blissful company embarking on a musical journey together. If you love the traditional movie musical, the effect is not unlike dying and waking up in show tune heaven.


“Agony”

Chris Pine and Billy Magnussen and Billy Magnussen’s ass (the unheralded star of this production in black leather pants continually mounting and dismounting horses) elevate this silly number from the stage show into the comic highlight of the movie. The duet finds the Prince Charmings attempting to one-up each other in their tales of romantic longing for their would be brides. We knew Billy Magnussen had this in him (thanks to his Tony nominated stage work) but who knew that the heretofore bland Chris Pine was this good at comedy?


“On the Steps of the Palace”

Cinderella’s big solo, as she flees the ball and her Prince Charming only to find herself outwitted and stuck on the steps of his palace has been brilliantly rethought as an in-the-moment soliloquy. Time freezes gorgeously, Chris Pine stands erect and out of focus in the background and Anna Kendrick, a thoroughly modern Cinderella with a voice from the gods, sings her indecisive little heart out. It’s the kind of number that can restore your faith in this continually uneven treacherous genre. On the Steps of the Palace should be played on loop to shame non-singing stars from signing on to singing roles whenever they’re considering it. May it inspire directors (even hit and miss Rob Marshall who is responsible for this one) to approach every scene with the same amount of care, invention, clear emotional intent, and singing actors who are more than up to the task.

Intowoods-stepsofshoes

And so we come to the end…of our list.

I wish. more than anything. more than the moon…

…that it were easier to enjoy modern movie musicals full stop. I think Cinderella said it best when she said

My father’s house was a nightmare. Yours was a dream. Now I want something inbetween.

Such is the curse of the movie musical fanatic, to forever balance on a knife’s edge between devastating disappointment and ecstatic pleasure. Into the Woods provides plenty of both but tilts far enough toward the latter to whet our appetites for another movie musical balancing act.

Next! 

  Tumblr_nf7fhroWF01u1irxvo1_r1_500

Nathaniel Rogers would live in the movie theater but for the poor internet reception. He blogs daily at the Film Experience. Follow him on Twitter @nathanielr.


Nathaniel_R

www.towleroad.com/2014/12/holiday-must-see-into-the-woods-1.html

Gay Coming-of-Age Aussie Drama 'Subject To Change' to Premiere Next Year: VIDEO

Gay Coming-of-Age Aussie Drama 'Subject To Change' to Premiere Next Year: VIDEO

Subject

A new Aussie drama pilot from Daniel Mercieca and Rory Delaney called Subject to Change featuring two gay leads is set to debut in festival screenings in 2015 with a chance for a TV pick-up by the end of the year. The show is a coming-of-age narrative set in the working class suburb of Hedley, Australia and focuses on three close friends (neat freak Ben, tomboy Karly and drama queen Evie) who must face complex and difficult emotions while growing up in suburbia.

Mercieca, producer and film director of the pilot, created the show to introduce new, positive role models who grew up in surbubia instead of major cities in Australia where pride flags and “wear purple” days are frequent. Mercieca personally funded 75 percent of the production costs of the film and is seeking further donations for the project.

Watch the teaser for Subject to Change, AFTER THE JUMP

Subject2

 


Anthony Costello

www.towleroad.com/2014/12/new-gay-aussie-drama-subject-to-change-pilot-premieres-in-2015-video.html

Supreme New Year's Resolution: Stop the Harm to Families of Denying the Freedom to Marry

Supreme New Year's Resolution: Stop the Harm to Families of Denying the Freedom to Marry
2014-12-26-courtstepscrowd.jpg
Photo by Jeffrey S. Trachtman

The Supreme Court will decide shortly whether to review and decide a marriage equality case before its current term ends in June. Many are praying for this, eager to wrap up an issue long past the tipping point that folks are sick of discussing.

But there is a more important reason the Court should act now: to halt the severe harm that continuing denial of the freedom to marry inflicts every day on countless same-sex couples, their children, and their extended families and friends. It matters whether this harm ends in June 2015 or lingers into the future.

The long-building national consensus for marriage equality reached critical mass after the Supreme Court’s 2013 Windsor decision held it unconstitutional for the federal government to refuse to recognize the lawful marriages of same-sex couples. A flood of state and federal court decisions over the last eighteen months has applied Windsor to invalidate the marriage bans of the majority of states.

The first batch of these cases reached the Supreme Court in September, in the form of requests for review by states whose laws had been struck down. But because all the decisions went in one direction, there was no legal conflict for the Court to resolve — the usual basis for granting “cert.”

The Court’s denial of review delayed the nationwide elimination of discrimination and its harms — but it also made all those favorable decisions final, allowing marriages to go forward in five more states (up from 19) and setting off a ripple effect that has now brought the freedom to marry to thirty-five states (with Florida coming on line in a few days as number 36), plus four with pro-equality rulings on appeal. In comparison, only thirty-four states permitted interracial couples to marry when Loving v. Virginia was decided in 1967.

More recently, a handful of courts have gone the other way — most significantly, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which in one fell swoop in November reversed pro-equality rulings in Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee. Marriage rights advocates are now asking the Supreme Court to review this decision and one issued by a federal district judge in Louisiana upholding that state’s marriage ban. Their chances are good, because the Sixth Circuit created a classic “circuit split,” though it is still possible the Court will opt to let litigation play out first in the remaining states.

Denial of review now would have no silver lining. It would simply entrench discrimination in five states, perpetuating needless injury to thousands of families. That’s why several organizations advocating for the rights of same-sex couples and their families (including Freedom to Marry, Family Equality Council, and PFLAG) filed a brief (prepared by my law firm) urging the Supreme Court to grant review and halt the ongoing harms of marriage discrimination.

In the 15 states without the freedom to marry, families suffer concrete harm every day, deprived of literally hundreds of government benefits and protections as well as private benefits awarded based on marital status.

2014-12-26-conditrains.png
Steven Rains and Don Condit courtesy of Freedom to Marry

For example, Steven Rains and Don Condit of Fort Worth, Texas, together for 31 years, married in California in 2008 but were treated as unmarried back home in Texas. When Don died unexpectedly, Steven was omitted from his death certificate, excluded from making decisions about his cremation, and is now deprived of surviving spouse benefits based on Dan’s military service and private pensions.

Another couple, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse of Hazel Park, Michigan, have been together more than eight years and are raising three adopted special needs children. Because Michigan bars same-sex couples from marrying and all unmarried couples from adopting together, Jayne adopted two of the children herself and April adopted the third — but neither is recognized as a parent of the other’s children. This deprives all three children of the protections and stability of having two legal parents.

Exclusion from marriage also inflicts severe dignitary injury — the impact of being treated as second-class citizens with second class relationships. These injuries can be quite tangible, particularly the psychological harm to children of being told by society that their families are less real and worthy of respect than those of different-sex parents. In Windsor, the Supreme Court recognized that failing to respect existing marriages “demeans” couples and “humiliates” their kids. Total exclusion from marriage is at least as demeaning and humiliating.

Even couples deemed married in their home states are harmed by continuing marriage discrimination in other states. Every time they travel to a non-recognition state they risk being treated as unmarried in the event of a medical or other emergency. They need to obtain second parent adoptions or create living wills and powers of attorney to try to replicate the rights they would have automatically if their marriages were respected. Couples who fail to anticipate these problems may face grievous results, such as exclusion from the hospital bedside of a dying spouse.

These harms happen every day and may be catastrophic — robbing a surviving spouse of a lifetime of earned retirement benefits or leaving a child parentless when the biological or adoptive parent dies and the state does not recognize the surviving partner as a parent.

There is simply no good reason to inflict these risks and harms on American families for another day, much less another year. The country is ready for full recognition of the freedom to marry. Let’s hope the Supreme Court is as well.

www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-s-trachtman/supreme-new-years-resolut_b_6378660.html?utm_hp_ref=gay-voices&ir=Gay+Voices

New Jersey Assemblyman Tim Eustace Introduces Bill to Ban 'Gay Panic' Defense

New Jersey Assemblyman Tim Eustace Introduces Bill to Ban 'Gay Panic' Defense

Openly gay New Jersey Assemblyman Tim Eustace has introduced a bill that would ban the use of the “gay panic” defense in court, NJ.com reports:

Eustace“I want to make sure that we’re paying attention to things before they happen,” said Eustace, who is the Legislature’s second openly gay member.

Under New Jersey law, a defendant can be charged with manslaughter – a lesser charge than murder – if, among other things, the crime “is committed in the heat of passion resulting from a reasonable provocation.”

Eustace’s bill states that that a provocation can not be interpreted as reasonable if it is based on “the discovery of, knowledge about, or potential disclosure of the homicide victim’s actual or perceived gender identity or expression,” including “circumstances in which the victim made an unwanted, non-forcible romantic or sexual advance toward the actor, or if the victim and actor dated or had a romantic or sexual relationship.”

Earlier this year, California became the first state to ban the “gay panic” defense. In 2013 the American Bar Association unanimously passed a resolution “urging federal, state, local and territorial governments to pass legislation curtailing the availability and effectiveness of the use of ‘gay panic’ and ‘trans panic’ defenses by criminal defendants.”

[h/t joe.my.god]


Kyler Geoffroy

www.towleroad.com/2014/12/new-jersey-assemblyman-tim-eustace-introduces-bill-to-ban-gay-panic-defense.html