- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Into the Woods ( the story behind the story)
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:18 pm
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:18 pm
I came away from this movie scratching my head. It just seemed like there was a lot more to the songs. My wife says that I'm reading to much into it but this movie isn't really for kids IMO. I thought there was a ton of suggestive stuff in the lyrics. This movie has got my mind working. Here is a post that I read from an individual review of hidden meanings.
quote:
Yes, yes, of course. This is how I take it, based on my knowledge of the fairy tales themselves (we disected them in my college English course last year) Wolf wants to consume Little Red sexually. Her cape being red is for a reason. It signifies lust. End of story. She strays on her path looking for flowers. Flowers symbolize virginity/sexuality. She wants to explore her sexuality. In fact, one can even say the entire phrase "straying from the path" explains the fact Little Red goes from a virgin to an infidel. Actually, to support this, the Witch says to Little Red in "The Last Midnight", "Broke a little vow". This is NOT directed towards the B. Wife I dont think either, because she's not present, and the end of the line is, "Did you?" She's clearly talkng to Little Red there. And we all know about the vow of chastity. Now, moving on, about your claim with the princes. Although it's not exactly what you're thinking, it's close. Rapunzel's tower IS a phallic symbol, and in a way I guess symbolizes her prince's... member, shall we say? Rapunzel was placed in that tower so she would never be touched by a man sexually (as the witch was when she was young, but that's another story). It's the entire irony of the story. She's put in a phallic-like tower, which is suppose to protect her from a man, and her prince comes to claim her (possessing a phallice of his own). It's actually kind of funny when you think about it. Oh, and there's way more stuff you haven't even picked up on yet. I'll just briefly mention them. The song "I Know Things Now" by Little Red. All about discovering her sexuality. Just listen to the lyrics. It's pure symbolic genius. "Giants in the Sky". All about Jack...becoming a... man, anatomically at least. Remember people, like the tower, the beanstalk is a phallic symbol! And also like the beanstalk... Jack "grew and grew" as well haha. And I ain't talking about how tall he was either. The Witch's Rap in "The Prologue". It's completely sexual. Her beans represented her virginity and how she lost it, thus causing her mother to become angry with her and transform her, and therefore causing no man to ever touch her again. This is why she won't let her daughter fall into the same trap she did, and imprisons her out of fear. In fact, one can argue that the Baker's father "taking the Witch's beans" can symbolize him actually raping her. After all, she says, "He was robbing me.. raping me". Symbolism, or literal? Ugh, Sondheim is such a genius. I believe there is more too, I just can't think right now. I hope this helps. Sorry if I rambled.
This post was edited on 12/28/14 at 10:23 pm
Posted on 12/28/14 at 10:21 pm to toughcrittercrumb
You make a great point
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:26 pm to toughcrittercrumb
That movie sucked.
I was fighting to stay awake the last 30 minutes. Should have just left.
I was fighting to stay awake the last 30 minutes. Should have just left.
This post was edited on 12/28/14 at 11:28 pm
Posted on 12/28/14 at 11:46 pm to toughcrittercrumb
quote:
My wife says that I'm reading to much into it but this movie isn't really for kids IMO.
No shite. IT was never meant for kids. It's a Sondheim Musical. I guarantee you he has never written for kids. Not even West Side Story. I sort of laughed though because you weren't the only one confused. There were plenty in the theatre with me who brought their kids.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 12:16 am to SoGaFan
Damn, I didn't even know it was a musical. After the first 5 minutes, I looked over at my son and just shook my head - sorry son.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 12:18 am to SG_Geaux
quote:
That movie sucked.
I was fighting to stay awake the last 30 minutes. Should have just left.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 9:12 am to toughcrittercrumb
Disclaimer: ITW has been my all time favorite musical since I saw it 20 years ago, but I'm still not certain how I felt about the movie. This is probably going to be TL;DR for most here.
There's definitely a deeper meaning to the songs, but that explanation may be getting a little too freudian. Before Avenue Q, Book of Mormon, and the like, ITW was really one of the first Broadway musicals to have a subversive undertone. It was released in the late 80's, and IMO spoke to everything the country had gone through the 30 years before. You went from the (seemingly) happy promise of the post WW2 era, into Vietnam, the sexual revolution, the AIDS epidemic, and the war on drugs. I think Sondheim captured the feeling of disillusionment and loss of innocence the country was feeling by delving into what happens after the "happily ever after."
While the movie was pretty faithful to the musical (aside from one character non-death and leaving out one of my favorite songs), I'm just not certain it captured the heart of the original production. Or maybe I'm just more cynical now than I was 20 years ago. It's definitely NOT a young kids movie, and I don't think Disney made that clear enough from in advertising - probably because they wanted the extra revenue from all the parents bringing their kids to a "princess" movie.
There's definitely a deeper meaning to the songs, but that explanation may be getting a little too freudian. Before Avenue Q, Book of Mormon, and the like, ITW was really one of the first Broadway musicals to have a subversive undertone. It was released in the late 80's, and IMO spoke to everything the country had gone through the 30 years before. You went from the (seemingly) happy promise of the post WW2 era, into Vietnam, the sexual revolution, the AIDS epidemic, and the war on drugs. I think Sondheim captured the feeling of disillusionment and loss of innocence the country was feeling by delving into what happens after the "happily ever after."
While the movie was pretty faithful to the musical (aside from one character non-death and leaving out one of my favorite songs), I'm just not certain it captured the heart of the original production. Or maybe I'm just more cynical now than I was 20 years ago. It's definitely NOT a young kids movie, and I don't think Disney made that clear enough from in advertising - probably because they wanted the extra revenue from all the parents bringing their kids to a "princess" movie.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 10:24 am to Miz Piggy
Yeah, I took my 7 year old daughter to see it yesterday and she was pretty bored with it. She liked all the singing, and thankfully most of the themes went over her head, but it wasn't a movie for 7 year old girls. My fault on that one as I didn't do my homework on it. It was a rainy Sunday and she was stir crazy, and wife told me I couldn't take her to see Annie because she was taking her later this week.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 11:17 am to toughcrittercrumb
The ending definitely dragged, but I enjoyed it overall and it's not exactly my cup of tea. Meryl and Emily Blunt were the best IMO, but everyone did a good job.
B-
B-
Posted on 12/29/14 at 11:50 am to jackwoods4
The problem with the last half isn't just the movie. The musical doesn't do a great job of sewing things up in the second half. I am sorry they didn't put in the ending song though I understand why they didn't. I love Children Will Listen/Into the Woods.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 12:19 pm to toughcrittercrumb
I don't know about all the phallic motifs, but Johnny Depp was basically a pedophile and I was really surprised with that whole dynamic. There really was no other way to construe his song sung to her other than he wanted her sexually.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 12:33 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
I don't know about all the phallic motifs, but Johnny Depp was basically a pedophile and I was really surprised with that whole dynamic. There really was no other way to construe his song sung to her other than he wanted her sexually.
OH most definitely. In the original musical, the guy was in a full wolf cosume with his erect penis front and center.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 12:39 pm to SoGaFan
Yeah, there's no misunderstanding that one!
I did miss the Agony reprise too - "Ah well, back to my wife" is probably my favorite line of the entire musical.

I did miss the Agony reprise too - "Ah well, back to my wife" is probably my favorite line of the entire musical.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 12:51 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
I don't know about all the phallic motifs, but Johnny Depp was basically a pedophile and I was really surprised with that whole dynamic. There really was no other way to construe his song sung to her other than he wanted her sexually.
Yep. All I was thinking was that Acreboy was playing the Wolf
This post was edited on 12/29/14 at 12:52 pm
Posted on 12/29/14 at 3:01 pm to toughcrittercrumb
The actual musical version is overtly suggestive. In fact, that's kind of the point (and where a lot of the humor of the musical lies). When I heard Disney was doing the movie version, I immediately wrote it off figuring that it'd be white-washed and awful. Apparently I wasn't far off.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 3:14 pm to tylerdurden24
It was neither white washed, nor awful.
People in the theatre were truly shocked when Cinderella's Prince seduced the Baker's Wife.
People in the theatre were truly shocked when Cinderella's Prince seduced the Baker's Wife.
Posted on 12/29/14 at 3:43 pm to SoGaFan
Then my parents are just overly harsh and don't pick up on a whole lot. They said Depp as the Wolf was obviously suggestive but that the movie was just kind of ok overall. I enjoyed the musical so I wasn't going to bother with a disney version.
Posted on 12/31/14 at 11:26 pm to tylerdurden24
This was a shite movie. My worst movie experience of the year, and I saw Tusk.
It felt like it went on for four fricking hours.
It felt like it went on for four fricking hours.
Popular
Back to top
