You seem to have the notion that character need to be either all good or all bad, and the material makes it quite clear that people in real life aren't that way. The witch is not the antagonist of the first half. She's the closest we come to a "bad guy," but she's not a villain. It's shown that the way she treats Rapunzel is out of fear of losing her, which doesn't excuse her actions, but makes her at least a little sympathetic. There's no "turn," as you put it. There's nothing to show us that she's actually a good person or that she becomes a good person. She says it herself. "You're so nice. You're not good, you're not bad. You're just nice. I'm not good, I'm not nice. I'm just right." She's a much more complex character than simply a good guy or a bad guy or a bad guy turned good.
As far as Jack's relation with his mother... I don't see how you felt that he was more upset over the death of Milky White. The death of his mother got a song, the death of the cow got a few lines. The song reinforces the idea that people try to do the right thing and sometimes mess up. People make mistakes."Witches can be right, giants can be good. You decide what's right. You decide what's good." Jack's Mother is always trying to do the right thing under difficult circumstances, and she doesn't always succeed, but she tries. Similarly, the Steward does what he thinks is right when he pushes Jack's mother down, though in the stage play he actually silences her by whacking her on the head with his staff. He doesn't mean to kill her, but it's a tense moment and he feels the need to act fast in the best interest of the group..
The Baker' Wife's dalliance with Cinderella's Prince falls into a similar theme. She messes up and she realizes it. Cinderella's Prince from the beginning is more concerned with the chase than with the conquest. The film did not cover the time span that the play covers to allow us to see that all the characters become dissatisfied or disillusioned by their "happily ever after," but it's still in line with Cinderella's Prince and the thrill of the chase, as seen during the song "Agony." As for the Baker's Wife, she's always shown to be fascinated and a little titillated by royalty, so she's swept off her feet. Once it's over she knows she's messed up and at first tries to justify it ("Was that him? Yes it was. Was that me? No it wasn't."), but ultimately realizes that what's done is done and she has to take stock of what's really important ("Just remembering you've had an 'and' when you're back to 'or' makes the 'or' mean more than it did before. Now I understand, and it's time to leave the woods.") and go back to reality. Her tragedy is that as soon as she realizes her mistake and starts to head back to what's really important to her, she's killed.
These are all themes that are carefully woven throughout the piece, both the film and the stage play. You seemed to want either a traditional fairy tale or a fairy tale that simply showed another side. What you got instead was a fairy tale that forsook all fairy tale tropes and showed the characters instead as complex and flawed human beings. What you took as lack of character development (characters being neither fully good nor fully evil, making mistakes that don't seem to make sense in the moment, trying their hardest and still failing) is actually what makes them incredibly strong and developed characters.
I'm sorry you didn't like it, but this is a story that has been dissected for its complexity for approximately thirty years. It's not perfect and some things were condensed in the film that are explained in more detail in the play. But many devotees of the play feel that the movie did great justice to the property.
reply
share
opheophe
9 years ago
What makes you think that I object to characters being both good and bad?
I very clearly wrote this about the witch: "Witches can be good, all that have seen Maleficent realize that a witch can have depth; she can turn good or turn bad. Turning is fine; because turning, if done properly, means character development, and character development drives the story."
According to wikipedia the word protagonist (from Ancient Greek πρωταγωνιστής (protagonistes), meaning "player of the first part, chief actor"); in this case without any doubt the baker and his wife (and perhaps Little red, Jack and so on). The antagonist is the character opposing or acting against the protagonist. Sure, often the antagonist is evil; but it's not required by any means.
The important thing with turning isn't "into what" but rather how. And as you say, she doesn't turn - prett much none of the characters change the slightest. Jacks mother dies and he merely reacts over it for a few seconds. A proper reaction would have been a tantrum having to be physically prevented from going after the steward and so on, but Jacks reaction only lasts for a few moments then it's all forgotten. Little Red has the same lack of reaction, the baker fails to react. The princes remain pretty much the same as do the the princesses. Characters disappear and die; but there is no character deveopment; nothing has a lasting impact on any of them.
Messing up is one thing; but it didn't develop the character. She does something that goes against all the songs and all the screentime she had had with the baker; which can be fine and drive the story, but it wasn't allowed to drive the story. In the next scene we learn that she was killed off-screen and nothing is ever mentioned about it again. Betrayal like that can be fine in a movie; but it has to be done with feeling; most commonly remourse, regret, anger, shame... but in order for feelings to work there has to be reasons for her character to do it. There is no buildup of romance; she isn't forced, she isn't roofied; she just decides to go against everything her character has done up till that point without any reason whatsoever. The same goes for the prince. He already had a song about his true love and so on; but he goes against everything we know about him to be unfaithful (and somehow Cinderella knows about this when they talk later because of... magic... because there are no shown reasons as to why she would know about it)
Continuing the story after the happy ending is a nice touch; but the story is flat. The witch is now an extra; Cinderella runs away from true love because... reasons... and all other characters in the realm dies. Oh, yes, and the giantess dies after an anticlimatic struggle.
I want a coherent story. It could be a story with a proper *beep* (Shutter Island, Hypercybe, etc.) The characters should act in accordance with their personalities and their experiences; this could also mean acting in an unpredictable way, betray others etc as long as it's woven into the story. The problem isn't the characters being flawed, the problem is the characters lacking any depth at all. The witch was pretty much the only one that actually did some changing throughout the story; and well, to bad she left the story as an active character 30 min before the ending.
If you dissect something for 30 years you can be fairly certain it's dead by now - which would be a fairly accurate description of the plot near the end of the movie. The problem with devotees is that they are devoted. If I wanted a sound review I'd rather listen to someone who isn't devoted to the movie being reviewed; I'd rather listen to someone who has watched a lot of movies and speaks with an open mind unclouded by devotion.
reply
share
BestOfAllPossible
9 years ago
How does the Witch act against the Baker and his Wife? She's the one who sent them on the quest in the first place. She wants them to succeed.
I mentioned in my post how both the Baker's Wife and Cinderella's Prince have foreshadowing in the early half. Cinderella's Prince doesn't have a song about true love, he has a song about the thrill of the chase, as I'd mentioned above. The Baker's Wife has a song about her fascination with royalty. The dalliance with the Prince develops themes that are being explored throughout the piece, including what we think "happily ever after" ought to be and how frequently its not as pretty and perfect as fairy tales make it out to be. And if you think she didn't feel remorse, regret, shame, and even confusion, then you weren't listening to the song she sang immediately after. (And Cinderella is told by her birds that the Prince has been unfaithful.)
As far as unbiased critiques, how would Stephen Holden's NY Times review do: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/25/movies/into-the-woods-disneys-take-on-the-sondheim-lapine-classic.html?_r=0
I'm not saying that you have to like it, though I am sorry you didn't. However, your claim that certain things were not carefully plotted out in the material is simply not true, as I have pointed out a few times. It's an extremely complex plot that first follows individuals working separately for their own selfish desires, which results in a chaos that can only be resolved when they learn to work together for the good of the group. It follows different types of parent/child relationships. And it tears down our expectations of fairy tales and happily-ever-after to a more realistic and human level.
reply
share
opheophe
9 years ago
Ok, there seems to be some confusion concerning words like "protagonist", "antagonist" and "act against". I'll try to explain them to you: The protagonist is the main person in the story, the most central one (could be more than one person, like for example the baker and his wife). The protagonist acts against the antagonist, or vice versa. Acting against, in this case, means that "one actor acts towards another actor" (or group of actors etc). (This is of course simplified, but when explaining it's often best to keep things simple)
Though, in this case I would argue that the witch was the bad one who forced the characters to do certain things - and that it's irrelevant whether she wants them to succeed or not.
At 44:03 the prince starts singing of how Cinderella won his heart.
1:08:03 the prince says: "I would recognice these beautiful eyes anywhere. You. You are my true bride"
The next scene we see the prince is at the wedding sharing a happy kiss with his bride. The next scene the bakers wife runs into him. They speak a bit about the giant on the loose, then he starts singing "anything can happen in the woods. May I kiss you?".
So no, the prince doesn't work himself up to it; it's completely out of character for someone whose heart have been won, someone whose true bride has been found, someome who shared a loving kiss with his new wife. And yes, she was a bit confused afterwards; then she died. Had she come back to the story and actually acted in accordance to what she did it would be different, but she was killed off for no reason and noone really cared about her demise.
It would seem you have a point about Cinderella and the birds; and that makes sense but it still doesn't explain the random making out session.
I really don't know who Stephen Holden is, and I don't quite see what relevance he would have. You said "Many devotees feel that..."; a statement which could be true for anything. Let's give it a try "Many Scientologists believe their religion is the true one".
I don't think the plot is very complex. Each characters seems to have a single motivation; and once the goal of a character is fulfilled they pretty much disappear from the story. Though, I am curious, what gets solved by them working together? The giant walks up to the tree and gets a pebble in its head... if Jack had been alone in that tree he could still have fired the pebble at the giant, so I wouldn't say that them working together achieves anything; or are you referring to when the baker and his wife takes 173 steps in different directions and has out of character making out sessions with married men whose heart is won by his "true bride"?
From what you write I take it that you haven't read the stories written by Grimm (the originals, not the fluffy disney-adaptations). They are not fluffy and happy; a lot of the classic stories have morals like "if you don't obey your parents you will die", "if you are greedy you will suffer", "if you are dumb you will suffer" and so on. Though I have to give it that this is the first adaptation I've seen of Cinderella where the sisters actually cut their toes and heels off and are detected due to the dripping blood; so I would guess that the writer of Into the Woods actually read the original stories. As for tearing down the happily ever after... there are lots and lots of movies around that theme.
If you want a proper twist on the stories, with lots of singing and so on I suggest you watch Hoodwinked; in that you have several twists; and the characters at least have some depth.
reply
share
ilahilda
9 years ago
I was doing chores and missed parts of the movie, how did Jack's mom and the baker's wife die? Did the prince die as well?
reply
share
tnsprin-2
9 years ago
Jack's Motherwas accidentally killed by the stewart for trying to keep them from giving the giantess info about Jack
Baker's wife killed by Giantess right after her song following her encounter with the prince.
reply
share