StunnaKrypto Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Lancoor A very feeble attempt at affirmatie action

Kodie Bird True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Ymbryne I was actually surprised by how well they wove together different fairy tales. It was very innovative (I have not seen the play, so this was new to me). All the performances were good - Emily Blunt, Anna Kendrick and the children were particularly impressive. James Corden who normally annoys the hell out of me on his talk show was actually fine here! His acting wasn't at all bad. His other role as the narrator was unnecessary, the story is not his point of view. On a side note, why is Disney picking people with annoying voices as narrators?? This film, then there was the Cinderella remake with dreadful narration by Helena Bonham carter...Back to this film, it was good in parts but not without major flaws. The dark parts were good but confusing on many occasions.-1. References to pedophilia: Children of today need to be warned about these things and in very clear terms. Just telling them about some big bad wolf is not going to cut it. That is why Johnny Depp's character comes across as a creepy man after the little girl and not an actual wolf. They did tone it down and just showed the wolf-man gobbling up the girl and her grandmother. Anyway, it was OK - they got across the message they intended to. But the really confusing bit was the little girl singing "excited but scared" or something similar when she is around the 'wolf'. I mean he did give off an incredibly creepy vibe and she very smartly senses it and is absolutely sure he is going to harm her and tries her best to be calm and get away before the situation escalates. So these lyrics made no sense to me.-2. Adultery: The baker's wife does mention some discontent with him much much before she kisses the prince. She is married to him for many years and it's been a bit of a rut BUT she JUST had a BABY that she has craved for so long! Maybe you can forgive her for a moment of lapse in judgement (considering the handsome, persuasive prince and all) BUT she carries on with it until he makes some excuse and leaves. After that, her singing about "AND" not "OR" if she can be "clever about it" was out of character. She certainly did not seem that stupid at the beginning of the film or the type to have affairs with married men while being married herself! Again, very confusing.-3. Abandonment: There are various tales of abandonment in this film, all well done. -4. No happily ever after: I particularly liked Cinderella's story in this film. She marries a prince but he is unfaithful! She is disappointed by his betrayal and selfishness but gathers the courage to leave him and asks him what he will do as a king if he is upto no good as a prince. The parts I found most unsatisfactory: 1. The whole story with the lady giant was very unconvincing and frankly, stupid. 2. Lyrics seemed forced on several occasions and confusing on others as I mentioned earlier.3. Why did the baker never try to meet his sister even though he knew that the witch had hidden her somewhere? Did they forget to tie that loose end? 4. The whole thing with Cinderella's step family was a little over the top, especially the birds picking those girls' eyes - was that necessary? 5. The ending was a total cop-out in an attempt to sort of tie everything up in a feel-good way.Overall, the film could have been better if a bit more attention was paid to the characters and their motivations.

MJB784 Visually it was very cool with terrific visuals and production design...but didn't anyone realize that all the songs sounded exactly the same in both lyrics and high pitched voices? That all the songs were basically the same tone and speech pattern where all the lyrics except the chorus were in one ear and out the other and sometimes different songs were playing at the same time sounding the same because every character and actor gave high pitched voices? Here's an example: "DAH DA DAH DA DAH DA DAH DA..INTO THE WOODS!!!..DAH DA DAH DA...INTO THE WOODS!"

Leofwine_draca I'd previously watched and love another adaptation of a Stephen Sondheim musical, SWEENEY TODD, so I had high hopes for this fairy tale-based follow-up. Sadly, INTO THE WOODS is a hopeless effort that stalls more often than it succeeds, and much of the failure lies in the poor choice of casting. When two of the leads in your movie are Emily Blunt and James Corden you know you're in trouble, as both are average singers at best and Corden remains an intensely irritating screen presence. Meryl Streep headlines the cast as a goofy witch but seems to be channeling her MAMMA MIA! role a bit too much. The rest of the film strives to mix up elements of various fairy stories including Cinderella, Little Red Riding Hood and Rapunzel, but the effect is slapdash and the story all over the place. Anna Kendrick is bland and her singing voice irritating, although not as much as the brash kid playing Red Riding Hood. Some of the CGI is okay but overall this is a huge missed opportunity for me.

joshjkeys I am one of those who saw the theatre version after the movie. I think this is where the hate for the movie comes because the theatre version is amazing and the movie seem like about 70% of the glory of this.Also the movie suggest some of the worst moral guidance to children. as well as some thing that seemed very perverted.However the movie is Good and a musical masterpiece.if you did not watch the theatre version before you will enjoy the movie very much. but if you have seen it before then it is a worse experience