[5.8/10] When I cued this up, I had no idea that Disney released this movie. In some ways, it makes sense, since Disney’s done iconic adaptations of many of the stories at the center of the film. The studio has been subverting its own classics for years, so even the more deconstructive bent of the story isn’t necessarily a bad fit for The Mouse.

But in others, it’s a strange choice, one that hints toward some of the film’s real problems. Because the stage show of *Into the Woods* contains some genuine bite. Without making this review one long comparison, the critique of and introspection over fairy tale stories is much sharper and more cutting in the play. There’s death and infidelity and genuine moral gray areas that make Sondheim’s musical a strange bird for Disney to try to cage and sell.

The result is a movie that feels like it has its edges sanded down. You can’t fully neutralize the deconstruction within *Into the Woods*, even in a glossy Hollywood production. Questions of what’s truly right and wrong, notions of the distance between fantasy and reality, and the impact of the stories we tell to children all permeate the subtext (and often the text) of the film, even as it’s been rubberized.

And yet, blindings are glanced over, deaths are taken in stride, and the truly subversive parts of the movie are, if not elided, then certainly presented much more gently. There is, of course, an action scene in the climax, because why not? Some songs are cut. Others seem more chipper. Disney and director Rob Marshall don’t necessarily neuter the film, but they do take a great deal of the fight out of it.

More damagingly, everything in the film seems flat and sterile. While deaths still happen, the reactions to them tend to be muted. Betrayals and narrative turns still take place, but the whole film is so emotionally uninvolving that they leave you waiting for the next indiscriminate scene to pop up rather than feeling the moment. The entire movie seems like it’s holding the audience at a distance, enjoying the narrative’s themes in theory but never really engaging with the truth of them in a more visceral way.

That extends to the look of the thing. *Into the Woods* isn’t quite at the heart of the studio’s live action remake frenzy, but it follows the same visual trends of a sort of unreal, soulless CGI projection onto everything. Nothing you see here feels genuine, which is an approach that can work for a fairy tale story, even a subversive one. The problem is that the whole thing comes off as so cold, with omnipresent gray color grading and samey backdrops that drain the life out of a dark but still vibrant tale.

It also extends to the performers. Very little of the acting here is memorable or effective. The bulk of the cast is forgettable in their roles, which is a major hindrance to an ensemble picture like this. It’s particularly true for James Corden as The Baker, whose everyman schtick leaves him practically fading into the background. Even the unimpeachable Meryl Streep basically does some generic witch vamping and calls it a day, given little in the way of means to elevate the material that Marshall’s made a hash of.

The two exceptions are Emily Blunt as The Baker’s Wife and Chris Pine as The Crown Prince. The former carries the satirical edge of the source material in her performance, reflecting both light and darkness in moments big and small. She handles the musical material well, presaging her later turn as Mary Poppins, and there’s a dimensionality to her acting here that’s missing elsewhere.

The same can’t be said for Pine exactly, but he expertly plays the empty veneer of a prince, channeling more than a little of the Shatnerian blowhard persona that tastefully eschews in other roles. He overacts to an extent, but in a way that’s calibrated to the character he plays -- someone textually charming but not sincere.

Unfortunately, the rest of *Into the Woods* can’t seem to manage either. The film’s music becomes exhausting at some point. The singing is clearly ADR’d in, which gives it an anodyne quality like so much else in the movie. Beyond that, while the musical’s best songs still stand out, without more breaks in the action, Sondheim’s trademark patter-y style begins to grate and his tunes fade together.

Frankly, the same goes for the storylines. While *Into the Woods* was a fairytale mosaic from the beginning, the stage play has more of a structure and sense of momentum among the different plothreads. Here, by contrast, the intersecting tales of the Baker family, Jack and the Beanstalk, Little Red Riding Hood, Cinderella, and others are just sort of smashed together in what feels like one long scene in the same general location. That leaves the movie playing like a hodgepodge of different moments haphazardly stitched together rather than the intricate weave it’s meant to be.

That too saps the film of power. In addition to hints of bowdlerization, it’s hard to connect with anyone or anything in this adaptation. The characters are thinly sketched and just when one of their stories is getting going, Marshall and company jump to somebody else’s, leaving the whole thing feeling threadbare.

*Into the Woods* remains a story worth telling. Deconstructing the fairy tales that have permeated western culture for centuries, and which Disney itself has repackaged and reimagined for generations, is a worthy project. Sondheim’s original, somewhat out of date though it may be, still has a force in the way it looks at the distance between our real lives and our cultural myths, and what values those myths subtly or not-so-subtly convey.

But this movie botches the exchange in most respects. The end result is a workmanlike, boring but competent rendition of the original work. And yet, under Marshall’s direction and Disney’s aegis, the parts of the presentation that shock or engross or challenge the audience are all watered down to a dull, gentle suggestion.

I have never seen the stage production of "Into The Woods", so I'm reviewing this movie simply on it's own merits. The story is fairly straight forward. A baker is trying to reverse a curse the friendly neighborhood witch placed on his family after his father stole from her garden. In order to lift the curse he must retrieve four fairy tale related items: a cow (Jack and the Beanstalk), a cape (Little Red Riding Hood), hair (Rapunzal) and a gold shoe (Cinderella). The witch needs these items in order to reverse the curse placed on her for allowing the magic beans to be taken by the baker's father. Each of the fairy tale characters also have their own side stories, although none of them are very well fleshed out other than Cinderella. One of the most frustrating parts of this movie, is how indecisive Cinderella is about the prince. It's like she is somehow clarevoyant that her and the prince are destined to be together, but she doesn't know if she wants to be with the prince. It honestly just got on my nerves. Another sticking point is they show no other elements of the fairy tales. You don't see what happens when Jack climbs the Beanstalk, and you don't see what happens at the festival between the prince and Cinderella. You do see what happens to Little Red Riding hood, but it's poorly done. After hearing a scream in the woods, the Baker for some reason decides to kill the wolf and somehow Little Red Riding Hood and her grandmother are still alive in the wolf's stomach. It's really hard for me to extend my disbelief that far. One of the fairy tale touches I did appreciate they had in the movie was the dark demise of the Step Sisters in Cinderella. They actually showed the cutting of of the feet in order to fit the slipper and the pecking out of their eyes by the birds. I appreciate that Disney actually tried to keep the dark tone of the original fairy tales. While I liked the baker story line, the rest of the fairy tales seem watered down in order to keep the focus on the main storyline. I wouldn't mind this but you almost lose the movitation behind the characters without knowing the stories. That said, there are also elements of the story line that are so over explained, it leaves nothing to the imagination for the audience. There are some really comedic moments but overall this definitely isn't a comedy. That brings me to my next point. The tone is very uneven. The switching between dramatic parts and comedic parts are jolting and sudden. It tries to be dark but family friendly at the same time. Along with the tone, the pacing also seems a better fit for a stage production than for a movie, especially with the transition from the first to the second act. There almost seems like there should have been an intermission placed right there. At 120 minutes running time, it could be too long for some people to sit through. You have to be really invested in order to make it all the way through. The musical numbers are definitely the true star of this movie. With all of it done by Stephen Sondheim the composer and lyricist of the original musical. It's just a shame that the music wasn't as memorable as I'd hoped. There's not one song that really sticks in your head. In fact there was one musical number that came a little eerily too close to a number from Sweeny Todd (also composed and written by Stephen Sondheim). That said, none of the musical numbers felt really out of place or forced and they all fit the story well. Meryl Streep gave a wonderful performance as the witch, although her singing chops may not have been the best. James Corden did alright as the baker, and same for Emily Blunt as the baker's wife. Anna Kendrick was fine as Cinderella, and I don't blame her for the poor writing of her character. Chris Pine was one of my least favorite performances as the Prince (Cinderella's, not Rapunzal's). He was over the top and annoying and gave no subtlety to the performance. Johnny Depp as the wolf was another one of my least favorite performances. It was actually a really present surprise to see Tracey Ullman as Jack's mother and she did a great job in the role. Another shining performance was from Christine Baranski as Cinderella's stepmother. She played the comedy very naturally and was truely a joy to watch. If you're a big fan of the musical (or musicals in general), I would suggest watching this, just to see what they changed and adapted. Otherwise, there isn't enough here for me to recommend, to a general audience, to watch this. It's just too awkwardly paced and the music isn't strong enough to save it. I would instead suggest checking out the 1991 version which was filmed live on broadway.

Too drawn out, 90 minutes might've been perfect.

I like the idea of 'Into the Woods', with its mash-up of numerous fairy tales from 'Cinderella' to 'Little Red Riding Hood' to 'Jack and the Beanstalk' to 'Rapunzel'. I'd also say the musical pieces are enjoyable across the opening 20-30 minutes, which are nice and energetic.

However, from the midway point things start chugging down to a snail's pace. The novelty of the premise begins to wear thin, as it becomes clear that there isn't much more to tell - despite a load of the 125 minute run time still remaining. I will say, though, the look of the film is pleasant.

I do also rate the casting. James Corden seems to split opinion online, but I've always liked him; having watched and enjoyed him since his career took off with UK TV's 'Gavin & Stacey'. Emily Blunt and Johnny Depp are two of my favourite actors, while Meryl Streep and Anna Kendrick are strong casts. I like Chris Pine too, but he's iffy in this.

In conclusion, I almost found entertainment with this but overall it disappoints due to its poor pacing and gappy plot.