An Old Musical Takes On The Big Screen

Inside Into the Woods's A-List Cast

1. "One of the great things about the piece is that it's a huge cast, so there's a big ensemble and wonderful parts to fill. It was exciting to put the whole team together." 
2. " "What was great is that even though it was a period piece, Rob really embraced modern sensibility and allowed me to be neurotic and modern and logical[.]" 

On Christmas Day, a beloved musical hit the big screen. Into the Woods was debutted on stage in 1986 and has just recently been adapted into a movie musical released at the end of 2014. In order to give the 28 year old musical the proper hype it needed, Director Rob Marshall turned to big names to get the viewers interested. This modern twist of beloved fairy tales had viewers racing to theaters near them.

Meryl Streep was one of the first actors casted into this movie musical. Her high ratings in the film world was used strategically in order to get other actors interested in auditioning for the musical as well. The large cast includes many A-list names such as Johnny Depp, Emily Blunt and recently popular, Anna Kendrick who played a lead role in Pitch Perfect. The cast list was one of the most marketable aspects of the film.

Although this film has a fantastic cast, there was many layers to be considered when judging the quality of this film. The viewer should also consider the visuals, focusing on the set design in every scene. Taking the musical from stage to the big screen creates a very tough job the set design crew. Much of the preparation of this film focused on the creation of sets, this is a very different task when adapting a film from a musical because the viewers have already seen the stories apear before their eyes.

The cast and crew can agree that it was a pleasure working on this film and they hope that they viewers can see all the "love" and hard work put into the creation of this film.

Why Stay True to the Book?

Adaptation: From Novel to Film

1. "the filmmaker is an independent artist, 'not a translator for an established author, but a new author in his own right.'... the filmmaker has to refashion the spirit of the story with his or her own vision and tools."

2. "Sometimes filmmakers make changes to highlight new themes, emphasize different traits in a character, or even try to solve problems they perceive in the original work."

When critiquing a visual adaptation of a novel it is important that the viewer understands that a book and a movie are two different forms of expression. This means that the movie will not always stay true to the book, and sometimes that is for the better. As you delve into a book of choice you are analyzing it based off of your own experiences. In other words, the same book can be seen in many, many different ways. A screenwriter must take this into consideration when they decide to take on the very tricky task of writing a film adaptation.

Many people get upset when they see a movie that does not identically resemble the book, I know this because I am at fault as well, but once you take a step back and try to understand the director's point of view you might appreciate the film for a different reason. Yes, film adaptations are usually a hit or miss but they can be appreciated because the director has full creative freedom. The problem with creating a film adaptation based off a personal analysis is that the audience expects the movie to stay true to the book, thus creating expectations and causing the viewer to not appreciate anything but an identical movie (which rarely occurs).


This puts directors and screenwriters under an extensive amount of pressure because even when they have a different view of the novel they need to focus on what the viewer wants. Film adaptations are an art form based off a group of people's perceptions of the book, sometimes this is a good thing, but when too many perspectives come to life, the story line may change dramatically. Many times they try to mix their own analysis with what they think the viewer wants and it turns out to be a huge fail. Therefore, I believe that the creators of film adaptations must commit to one end of the spectrum.

A movie is more likely to succeed when it correctly resembles the book because the book already captured its audience. This means that the director knows that there are people out there who already like the characters, plot, and storyline. Keeping the movie the same as the book allows for the director to know that the audience is already there and if the film is created well, the audience will enjoy the movie just as much as the book.

Contrastingly, the viewer must take into consideration the different tools used in different mediums to express a narrative. The storytelling techniques used in a movie are different than the storytelling techniques used in a piece of written literature. Although, viewers may be disappointed when a movie does not reflect the book exactly, they must understand the changes are a form of art as much as the book was a form of art.

With that, it is important to understand that a film adaptation is a form of art which people are going to judge however they feel fit.

50 Shades of Grey: Is No Nudity The Right Way To Go?

Fifty Shades of Grey May Not Be Living Up To Audience Expectation

 1. "Director Sam Taylor-Johnson has  the right to make whatever kind  of Fifty Shades of Grey movie she  wants to make. If she decides for  whatever artistic reason to make one  so tame that I can take my seven-year  old to the press screening, that’s her  choice and her prerogative."

 2. "Making a Fifty Shades of  Grey without male nudity and/or few graphic sex acts isn’t going to help the film play better in stereotypical fly-over country. It’s not going to help the film play better as a conventional date night movie pick over Valentine’s Day weekend. It won’t stem any would-be controversies regarding the subject matter that will arise once the film drops into theaters. All it will do is cause conversations about sexual double-standards (“Why would Jamie Dornan’s penis gross out viewers while a Dakota Johnson’s vagina and/or breasts would not?”) " 

The biggest concern when creating a film adaptation is that the fans (those who read the book) won't like the movie because it does not stay true to the novel. Although, directors and screenwriters are free to write new ideas because they have artist freedom when working on an adaptation, if they movie is changed too much they are losing an audience.

Fifty Shades of Grey, which is coming out this Valentine's Day, is based off a novel that is known for its nudity and sexuality. After the main character released in an interview that there will, in fact, be no "front male nudity" critics like Scott Mandelson have said that this may not be good for box offices. Many people that were not planning to see the film would have come just to see the bottom half of main character, Christian Grey. Now, there is nothing to get those audiences interesting.

Jamie Dornan stated that they wanted to appeal to a broader audience and try not to scare them away with something a little too risque. Although the director decided to a create a tamer version of the book I do not think that is what audiences were looking for. Those who read this book are expecting to see something a little pornographic even for an R-Rated film. For those who wanted to see their favorite S&M book on the big screen, the movie is not living up to the expectations of the book.

The book is known for being erotic and focusing on the sexual acts performed by two people. Those who were interested in the movie are looking to see exactly that. Since Director Sam Taylor-Johnson has censored the movie there will be less of a reason to go see the movie.

The novel is directed mostly to woman who expect to see some graphic sexual content. Why is it okay for the audience to see a woman's private parts but not a man's. The decision to take out all male nudity was a risky one that is simply going to cause more controversy. In fact, this decision even makes the film seem unfaithful to the book.

The Hunger Games Video Game

How A 'Hunger Games' Video Game Could Be Incredible

1. "I can’t help but believe that The Hunger Games won’t try to leverage its brand elsewhere once the films wrap, and I think that could include a very interesting type of video game."

2. "I think The Hunger Games is in a unique position to succeed, mostly because I’m already playing some form of it." 

In a world where the media beast decide to indulge in a 5-course meal, it was only a matter of time before the "Hunger Games" series makes its way to the video game market. With only one more movie to be released, critics are already talking about the "soon to come" video game.

Paul Tassi discusses how they would go about creating a successful "Hunger Games" video game to correspond with the movie. Many movies have previously tried to create a video game and have failed but Tassi believes that the great successes of the first three films are just foreshadowing the success of a video game.

When designing a game from a movie you must focus on one attribute of the film. In this case the game would be a replica of the actual Hunger Games that takes place within the movie. Just as they do in the movie, the player must create strategies and form alliances that will help them live. The movie is already a game, they will just need to replicate that into an interactive forum and use the same rules that the Capitol uses within the movie. The player would be living in an interactive Capitol that they will be able to create themselves.

In my opinion, I think that creation of this game would be a success and help raise revenue for Lionsgate and it would fix nicely next to the soundtracks, posters and movie "swag" that has already been created.