@xFuriousMusicx Her being beautiful is not the point. It is not the reason why the Prince goes after her at all. He goes after because she adds to his "collection". She is something to have. The fact that she is married is the "forbidden fruit" which he longs for.
Wow, what's up with all the people hating on this production? In case you haven't noticed, Into the Woods is not all happy fairy-tales. Cinderella, Little Red Riding Hood, Jack and the Beanstalk, their all using the original versions, which are NOT like the Disney-ified ones. In doing this, they created a very unique atmosphere and have made it seem like they are literally in an illustration. And they have amazing voices on top of that.
This production is Directors theatre,typical brits spoiling a great production, the broadway version is magical, this is cold,sterile and lacks humanity. No wonder it didnt run.
I don't know what everyone is saying, I enjoyed this very much so. It's darkness gives it a whole new perspective. Yes the Broadway production was very good, but If London did the exact same show it wouldn't nearly be as much fun. I like the fact it was a different interpretation. It was meant to be dark. Just as the American was supposed to be a little funnier.
Well this is interesting. I'm more a fan of broadways version. This one I good for Britain but certainly not American humor. Plus Sondheim and Lapine actually directed the broadway so I'm sure it's closer to the intended thoughts behind the show.
It's sad that the internet has become a place where amateur critics come to voice their petty, uninformed opinions. I loved the original London production. Loved Broadway too but London had a darkness and quirkiness that was a lot closer to the European origins of fairy tales. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's "weird, bland, a failure..."
@makinstatements - I TOTALLY AGREE with you. I saw the US version in LA with Cleo Laine - I enjoyed that but the London version was how Sondheim wanted it!
The costume suck, the singing is bland, their faces are without emotion. Little red riding hood scares me and I'm sorry but what is with Cinderella's hair??? I think jack is the kid who played Peter in the 1980's version of the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. But I'm sorry this version just cannot compare to the Original
Well done for putting it here for all to see. We actually pre-recorded this with a live orchestra and all live singing, as there simply wasn't enough space in the studio for this special performance and the rest of the Arts Review programme!
I worked as a Sound Engineer on this actual recording!
It was from the South Bank Show Arts Review 1990 transmitted on ITV (LWT) and directed by Danny Wiles. It's mentioned as being from the Wogan show, but I think that's wrong unless they copied our sound and shots exactly! As comvic20 says, it was intended to have a darker more twisted style of production. Very English!
It was great fun to work on, especially as this particular scene was adapted for the TV studio.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a good analogy. The London production was made to be different, drier, less shtick, more twisted. I love the original Broadway, but this version is really interesting. There are so many ways to do things - and I think this works in its own way - Very Different.
HOW CAN THEY TAKE SUCH A WONDERFUL BROADWAY PRODUCTION, AND TURN IT INTO THIS!
its DISGRACEFUL! everything to the costumes and the singing and the acting and the props, TERRRIBLE!. My towns theatre compnay is doing this and im Little Red, and as a cast ages 14-18, we do a 245945604986039850239484684864059863583096890856978 better job then THIS. WHAT THE HECK WENT WRONG!?
well, first off, this is from the eighties, early ninties, so of course it looks weird, they don't have a lot of the things we have now. The people in this production worked just as hard on it as any other production anyone else would have worked on. Think of this play as a preliminary sketch to what the broadway production is today. I think they did pretty well for the original cast.
@corway73 , I am a huge fan of the BROADWAY version of this musical, and actual am playing Little Red in my towns production of this, anyone should know that a little giurl is supposed to be happy, or show somewhat epresiion, this actress is standing there looking like she is gonna pull out a knife if they dont let her take cookies! WHAT THE HECK IS WRONG!? THE WHOLE CAST is completely .... TERRIBLE
This is like Into the Woods meets Harry Potter and Tim Burton..Different, interesting. I like it but wish they did more with the sets....Go all out if youre gonna be bizarre.
I'm liking this. I mean you can't treat it and the OBC in the same way, because they aren't, pure and simple.
I prefer the costume design here I think. Well aside from Cinderella's hairstyle ;).
Both productions make efforts with sets and costume to look like illustrations in a storybook, but I think the limited use of colour and use of white (like a blank page), make the london production look incredibly illustration-like.
It's kinda weird because the woman who played the baker's wife in this production is Imelda Staunton, who plays Professor Umbrage in the 5th Harry Potter movie! Who knew she could sing?!
I have to say... it's a little weird and so it is quite startling. Something I do like, actually, is the mc escher-esq feel of the set. It's really cool.
True, but I think that they really lost sight of the fairytale feel. It plays more like a dark, Hans Christian Andersen style folktale; Jack's costume seems straight out of "Hansel and Gretel." The colors have been bleached from the set and costumes, just as emotion and magic seem to have been bleached from the production itself. And one more question-where in God's name did the witch go?
haha, I think it was an awards show... so I think they cut the witch part for the show.
I agree with you about the magic of it. I love the dark HCA feel of it... however, I don't think Into the Woods is meant to be shown that way exactly.
It's a hard topic to approach because really theatre is meant to be re-interpreted in many ways, so I can't discredit what they've done, though I prefer the OBC the most.
Do you know what? I actually quite like this. I wish there were a complete version available somewhere to do a full compare/contrast, but I do like it. I like the set, and I like that it's not a carbon-copy of the original.
I really would like to see Imelda Staunton's Moment in the Woods...
Uhh, yeah...CREEPY. Little Red is fugly, Jack's hat is weird, cinderella's creepy and when the baker and his wife first appear, they look like psychos. Haha.
They butchered this play. This can not possibly pass for professional theater! no one is acting or showing any emotion. Compared to the original cast this is just terrible and is a complete disgrace to British theater
wow this is like terrifying..... theyre all friggin zombies.... and lmao, isuander, she really is a girl harry potter! my towns middle school production of this play was better than this.
Not to be rude, but, the way i see it... money was short, so they combined sweeney todds set and direction, with the music from into the woods. That and disturbing cinderella and potter little red. I did like little red and jack's mom though
Personally, I like the London Cast recording best, but I'd agree, the costumes and the direction make it the characters seem too flat on stage. It's better if you just close your eyes and listen to the voices, which are good. And you haven't even heard Julia McKenzie's Witch. She's awesome.
THE WITCH DIDN'T EVEN COME TO THEIR HOUSE WHAT THE BALLS
meganruth17 1 month ago
Honestly, i love the Broadway version a million times better.
ps. did anyone else get freaked out by Cinderella?
brightjunebug 2 months ago
We're doing this (the Junior version) and I'm Little Red.
I'm scared now. I'm going to be a female Harry Potter.
littlecrimsoncloak 3 months ago
cinderella says festival very deep
NVMtheDARKNESS 3 months ago
look, a harry potter girl.
madinhatter 4 months ago
This was the first version I heard, it scared me away until I heard the original cast Everyone is so serious and they all look mad/crazy.
jessicatheginger 4 months ago
I like all of them except...Red. Ew.
missbunniswan 5 months ago
They actually managed to make the step sisters NOT FUNNY.
Nycinhollywood 5 months ago
The Baker's Wife is Dolores Umbridge..... O.o
ckf92wizard 6 months ago 4
Haha i like how this interpretation challenges peoples' perceptions/ understandings of the show.
123arry321 7 months ago
@HellaAverage what what?
123arry321 7 months ago
omigod, the baker's wife is Delores Umbridge... i don't know what prince would go after her.
wmst3 8 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
Everyone should come to my channel and see my performance of "Giants in The Sky" :) Feel free to comment!
EliasMedranoMusic 9 months ago
I thought the baker's wife was supposed to be attractive.... otherwise why the heck would the prince go for her in the second act?
xFuriousMusicx 9 months ago
@xFuriousMusicx Her being beautiful is not the point. It is not the reason why the Prince goes after her at all. He goes after because she adds to his "collection". She is something to have. The fact that she is married is the "forbidden fruit" which he longs for.
tazykat1 7 months ago
London casts are always somewhat... surreal... compared to the original. This looks like great fun, however! Ok it's awful but I fancy Jack.
autopolydidact 9 months ago
where is the WITCH?
ProcessedFood 9 months ago 2
Yeah, what's the deal? How can you mention the spell without having the witch?
bogiehead 9 months ago 2
harry potter?
MrJoelDuke 9 months ago
wtf.........
Hotaruzuki 10 months ago
There is no witch?
TheNewScreamTrilogy 10 months ago
i could shit a better version of a Sondheim
Repiv42 10 months ago
It looks like the costumes were designed by Helena Bonham Carter, ahaha.
BOomeek 10 months ago
little red riding hood was hilarious.
TheFirstClassedFreak 10 months ago
if there moments is good! i do like the singing!
Cin884eva 10 months ago
Fun Fact: The guy playing Jack is the guy who played Peter in the BBC Narnia serials.
Hethrin 10 months ago
@Hethrin I noticed that too. I was like "OMG! That's Peter!"...His name is Richard Dempsey, i believe.
StoliDassah 10 months ago
Wow, what's up with all the people hating on this production? In case you haven't noticed, Into the Woods is not all happy fairy-tales. Cinderella, Little Red Riding Hood, Jack and the Beanstalk, their all using the original versions, which are NOT like the Disney-ified ones. In doing this, they created a very unique atmosphere and have made it seem like they are literally in an illustration. And they have amazing voices on top of that.
PuppetTurtle 11 months ago
its not that this version is bad. it just seems a little too dark. too bland.
also, as "scary" as people say cinderella's face is, she is the only one who is showing emotion.
bonesboy5986 11 months ago
i know this is old but its the crappiest version ever :\
Red looks like she has pissed herself and trying to air her dress out...
also the rest of the cast look like some murderer is holding a gun behind the curtain, forcing them to sing
mattycraig2011 11 months ago
weird costumes and sets - too white and bland
HarmonyWheeler 11 months ago
cindy is cracked
Sligo1219 11 months ago
This production is Directors theatre,typical brits spoiling a great production, the broadway version is magical, this is cold,sterile and lacks humanity. No wonder it didnt run.
ribbaable 1 year ago
i dony like this at all! broadway was better but this is still funny The bow in the bakers wife head is hilarious
emiliocas96 1 year ago
Comment removed
emiliocas96 1 year ago
It looks like Daniel is lip syncing.
BROHMontana 1 year ago
MOANING MYRTLE!!!
how can no one else see that? haha
SuperJillpill 1 year ago
could you post some of the cast recording from this production please?
ChannelTin 1 year ago
Ooooh I like the set A LOT
wickedfeylady 1 year ago
Where's the witch?
frankcesca 1 year ago
I love Patsy Rowlands and Nicholas Parsons.
ukboomerfl 1 year ago
american version was better
NickBFilms 1 year ago
I don't know what everyone is saying, I enjoyed this very much so. It's darkness gives it a whole new perspective. Yes the Broadway production was very good, but If London did the exact same show it wouldn't nearly be as much fun. I like the fact it was a different interpretation. It was meant to be dark. Just as the American was supposed to be a little funnier.
LightsCameraCollier 1 year ago 2
this is weird i don't like it as much as the american version
iluvepink 1 year ago
I didn't know Harry Potter AND Dolores Umbridge were in this musical! :p
kayladancer17 1 year ago 10
I don't know why... this feels humourless in comparison to the OBC? Or maybe it's more subtle, Idk... the mood just feels darker and different.
asmileisspecial 1 year ago
this is scary... no offense
SirMusicalGerry 1 year ago
@SirMusicalGerry I know! Watch their version of "Hello Little Girl." It's even scarier!
performingfreak11 1 year ago
This is VERY dark and british xD I think I prefer the Broadway but I quite like this interpretation.
handy1994 1 year ago
Where's the witch!??
DustinHahnMusic 1 year ago 3
Well this is interesting. I'm more a fan of broadways version. This one I good for Britain but certainly not American humor. Plus Sondheim and Lapine actually directed the broadway so I'm sure it's closer to the intended thoughts behind the show.
zaviort 1 year ago
Little Red Riding Hood is especially British. Haha.
Silverfenix2456 1 year ago
The baker's wife is Umbridge from harry potter!
daFool4grommel 1 year ago 2
little red riding hood looks like harry potter!...what the heck..the whole cast looks weird...
jamaicarocks100 1 year ago
It's sad that the internet has become a place where amateur critics come to voice their petty, uninformed opinions. I loved the original London production. Loved Broadway too but London had a darkness and quirkiness that was a lot closer to the European origins of fairy tales. Just because it's different doesn't mean it's "weird, bland, a failure..."
makinstatements 1 year ago 15
@makinstatements well said.
filmsnob67 1 year ago
@makinstatements i love the internet. amateur or not people have opinions and they give honest insight on videos like this.
so what if it was uniformed, they dont like what they see. no need to to call them petty.
justapathy 1 year ago
@makinstatements - I TOTALLY AGREE with you. I saw the US version in LA with Cleo Laine - I enjoyed that but the London version was how Sondheim wanted it!
iancv 2 months ago
what the hell is wrong with Cinderella
brentislife 1 year ago
Cinderella is so wierd and red riding hood scares me lol
isabelisa89 1 year ago
Its bad when the plaster cow is the best part
smalltree23 2 years ago
@smalltree23 oooh burn hahahaha
justapathy 1 year ago
Little red riding hood is scary! lmao :L
1PrettyKiwii 2 years ago
The Choreography is So bad
jtco3 2 years ago
The costume suck, the singing is bland, their faces are without emotion. Little red riding hood scares me and I'm sorry but what is with Cinderella's hair??? I think jack is the kid who played Peter in the 1980's version of the Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. But I'm sorry this version just cannot compare to the Original
jtco3 2 years ago
he is
mylittelucy 1 year ago
they missed the witches part D':
ruri0san 2 years ago
this version is a total fail
ruri0san 2 years ago
Well done for putting it here for all to see. We actually pre-recorded this with a live orchestra and all live singing, as there simply wasn't enough space in the studio for this special performance and the rest of the Arts Review programme!
AnalogueFix 2 years ago
I worked as a Sound Engineer on this actual recording!
It was from the South Bank Show Arts Review 1990 transmitted on ITV (LWT) and directed by Danny Wiles. It's mentioned as being from the Wogan show, but I think that's wrong unless they copied our sound and shots exactly! As comvic20 says, it was intended to have a darker more twisted style of production. Very English!
It was great fun to work on, especially as this particular scene was adapted for the TV studio.
AnalogueFix 2 years ago 10
Yes, you're right of course - it was the Arts Review. The other clips I've posted from the London Into the Woods are from the Wogan Show.
AllanWo 2 years ago
@AnalogueFix Thankyou for that interesting story :) Is there any chance you could share a better quality version of this ??? Thankyou
HairsprayUK 1 year ago
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is a good analogy. The London production was made to be different, drier, less shtick, more twisted. I love the original Broadway, but this version is really interesting. There are so many ways to do things - and I think this works in its own way - Very Different.
comvic20 2 years ago
reminded me of charlie and the chocolate factory.
ruri0san 2 years ago
Oh god, it's so dry. Lol! :P
taikoshepherd 2 years ago 2
Little red looks like harry potter in drag
flicfan416 2 years ago 95
@flicfan416 haha omg ur so right
sluggerdude5 2 years ago
@flicfan416
SO RIGHTT!!!
xXTiTANGiRLxX 2 years ago
@flicfan416 I was gonna say that!
robertbaldwinxu 1 year ago
@flicfan416 You're right! What were they thinking?
ukboomerfl 1 year ago
hmm....kinda weird. all their singing voices are good....but its still kinda creepy....
heartlandcutie13 2 years ago
WHAT THE HECK!?
HOW CAN THEY TAKE SUCH A WONDERFUL BROADWAY PRODUCTION, AND TURN IT INTO THIS!
its DISGRACEFUL! everything to the costumes and the singing and the acting and the props, TERRRIBLE!. My towns theatre compnay is doing this and im Little Red, and as a cast ages 14-18, we do a 245945604986039850239484684864059863583096890856978 better job then THIS. WHAT THE HECK WENT WRONG!?
SamSkii14 2 years ago
well, first off, this is from the eighties, early ninties, so of course it looks weird, they don't have a lot of the things we have now. The people in this production worked just as hard on it as any other production anyone else would have worked on. Think of this play as a preliminary sketch to what the broadway production is today. I think they did pretty well for the original cast.
AnimeLovr4 2 years ago
This was just creepy!!! I only liked Jack and his mother!!!
Cinderella really was creepy, her "Into the woods to visit mother" line made me cringe!!! She looks and sounds like a hill billy killer!!!
And don't get me started on Red!!!
And the baker's wife looked too old!!!
Scary...just scary!!!
krazykittymatt 2 years ago 4
Little Red Ridinghood is definitely Harry Potter in this video...
corway73 2 years ago 6
@corway73 , I am a huge fan of the BROADWAY version of this musical, and actual am playing Little Red in my towns production of this, anyone should know that a little giurl is supposed to be happy, or show somewhat epresiion, this actress is standing there looking like she is gonna pull out a knife if they dont let her take cookies! WHAT THE HECK IS WRONG!? THE WHOLE CAST is completely .... TERRIBLE
SamSkii14 2 years ago
This is like Into the Woods meets Harry Potter and Tim Burton..Different, interesting. I like it but wish they did more with the sets....Go all out if youre gonna be bizarre.
blubfly8 2 years ago 2
wtf, scary
gabsterz0594 2 years ago 2
this is scary.
LegallyGilmore 2 years ago
I'm liking this. I mean you can't treat it and the OBC in the same way, because they aren't, pure and simple.
I prefer the costume design here I think. Well aside from Cinderella's hairstyle ;).
Both productions make efforts with sets and costume to look like illustrations in a storybook, but I think the limited use of colour and use of white (like a blank page), make the london production look incredibly illustration-like.
I like this a lot
BrerAndy 2 years ago
Amen to that! :)
yippedoodah 2 years ago
What was their aim, here? The original 1987 performance will always be my favorite <3
VikingMintyFresh 2 years ago 2
@VikingMintyFresh
I believe their aim was to stage the show on the West End.
BrerAndy 1 year ago
little red looks like harry potter
vampirelove75 2 years ago
I don't think I like this cast!!! There costumes are dull!!!
krazykittymatt 2 years ago
Dang, Little Red Riding Hood looks like Daniel Radcliffe
anniefofannie 2 years ago 7
HAHAHAHA!!! Dude that's exactly what I thought!!! She even sounds like him from the first movie!!!
krazykittymatt 2 years ago
she does! x) hah. she's a good singer at least...
haleygip 2 years ago
hahahaha she does
goldmolerat3 2 years ago
the whole thing is just a little bit scary.
PaniconBroadway 2 years ago
It's kinda weird because the woman who played the baker's wife in this production is Imelda Staunton, who plays Professor Umbrage in the 5th Harry Potter movie! Who knew she could sing?!
silentguh 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
EW this is retarded
itssjessicababe 2 years ago
I have to say... it's a little weird and so it is quite startling. Something I do like, actually, is the mc escher-esq feel of the set. It's really cool.
OBCBW 2 years ago
True, but I think that they really lost sight of the fairytale feel. It plays more like a dark, Hans Christian Andersen style folktale; Jack's costume seems straight out of "Hansel and Gretel." The colors have been bleached from the set and costumes, just as emotion and magic seem to have been bleached from the production itself. And one more question-where in God's name did the witch go?
mechamop 2 years ago
haha, I think it was an awards show... so I think they cut the witch part for the show.
I agree with you about the magic of it. I love the dark HCA feel of it... however, I don't think Into the Woods is meant to be shown that way exactly.
It's a hard topic to approach because really theatre is meant to be re-interpreted in many ways, so I can't discredit what they've done, though I prefer the OBC the most.
OBCBW 2 years ago
I couldn't agree more.
mechamop 2 years ago
Do you know what? I actually quite like this. I wish there were a complete version available somewhere to do a full compare/contrast, but I do like it. I like the set, and I like that it's not a carbon-copy of the original.
I really would like to see Imelda Staunton's Moment in the Woods...
zankokunasora 2 years ago
This is the original cast even before the cast that included Bernadette Peters. So this is the 'authentic' version of Into The Woods.
foonghaokai 2 years ago
Actually, no it's not. The original cast was the one with Bernadette. This is just the OLC.
yippedoodah 2 years ago 4
Oops. My bad... Thanks for clarifying.
foonghaokai 2 years ago
All the actors look like creepers. Other thanthat the singing is okay. But no will will meet the OBC.
drjax1994 2 years ago
T-e-r-r-i-b-l-e.
This is NOTHING comparing to the OBC version.
jor1220 2 years ago
Oh my God, it's Daniel Radcliffe. XD
TrChSpHa 2 years ago 3
hahahahah I thought of that too!
OBCBW 2 years ago
I don't like this version. It's really creepy!
Joolaay 2 years ago
Little Red looks like a beat-up version of Harry Potter
margretteleigh 2 years ago 2
Uhh, yeah...CREEPY. Little Red is fugly, Jack's hat is weird, cinderella's creepy and when the baker and his wife first appear, they look like psychos. Haha.
mrshackztor 2 years ago
they do!!!! omg!!! haha they look like horror movie psycho killers!!!
whappled 2 years ago
I would have to agree, haha. XD
mrshackztor 2 years ago 2
Vaya Sondheim, Vaya Stravinsky.
oddoledder 2 years ago
little red looks like harry potter.
purplemonkey39 2 years ago
they all seem really dark and scary
chad2CCC 2 years ago
D: The Cinderella scares the hell out of me.
jeishiikanzaki 2 years ago
Little Red looks like shes coming back from the dead. This is kinda a disgrace to the West End...
LarkinProductions 2 years ago
Little red is a clepto!
PhantomoftheMusical 2 years ago
They butchered this play. This can not possibly pass for professional theater! no one is acting or showing any emotion. Compared to the original cast this is just terrible and is a complete disgrace to British theater
funed1 2 years ago 2
I think Cinderella was the only character with the most emotion.
yippedoodah 2 years ago
it seems like they tried to mix sweeney todd with into the woods. this is very creepy
5934931 2 years ago
The guy who wrote this musical was the same one for Sweeny Todd! Unless you mean the setting....
yippedoodah 2 years ago
that was the joke, because stephen sondhiem wrote both musicals
5934931 2 years ago
lol 3:24 shes already dead lol
tiranatar8 2 years ago
I like how stylized this one is. It's more like "It's a Small World" than fairy tale :/ Jack has a cool costume.
yippedoodah 2 years ago
ya!!!! i actually like jacks costume alot!!! :D haha i would totally dress like that! ;) haha
whappled 2 years ago 12
Oh...Mon...Deau...
StarlightKay 2 years ago
red riding hood looks like harry potter lol
barisaxman2 2 years ago
haha!!! ur right!!!
GodIsLove2012wrshp 2 years ago
OMFG IS THAT ANGELA LANSBURY AS JACK'S MOTHER??
(Okay, I know it's not but wow that actress sounds like Angela!)
InsomniaCafe 2 years ago
EPIC! FAIL!
they butchered the play!
Jiraiya1313 2 years ago
This is Criminal!
Agree with Melensko about Harry Potter!
TheDonmar 2 years ago
I really like Into the Woods but this makes me cringe. I hate it so :(
AxisPowerz 2 years ago
omg I LUV LITTLE RED;S VOICE IT SOUNDS OS MAINLY AND I LUV THE BAKER AND JACK
meetmydag 2 years ago
I'm inclined to agree....I don't like this version very much. :( They're all very stiff.
saguaroangel 2 years ago
This is terrible.
Milkdudds92 2 years ago 2
These costumes... When Jack appeared on the screen I broke down laughing.
This production just seems to have lost the fantasy edge of Broadway and gone to a harder version.
Also, does anyone else see Red's snaggle tooth at 1:43 ?
anneflint 2 years ago
whats with harry potter playing little red?
Melensko 2 years ago 3
i dunno but dolores umbridge is playing the baker's wife...
ohsinnaman 2 years ago
i hate it they look so stiff and i just don't feel like they've embraced their charcter
sjsteveo 2 years ago
I don't think this is terrible but the Cinderella part needs a lot of work...and the Baker's Wife scares me...no offence
NearsBestToy 2 years ago
the 1987 broadway cast is alot better....well obviously, it had Bernadette Peter's for God's sake.
ycsdramaqueen 2 years ago
I dont think this was the show... I think this was just a TV special teaser thing!
clevm002 2 years ago
this is really badd... i hate all of their singing, especially everything involved with cinderella and cinderella!
michelle1122334455 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i like little red riding hood
twinprinces 2 years ago
this si dumb
i hate it.
theres no character work
its just peopole talking
im so bored
MCRmyINO 2 years ago
wow this is like terrifying..... theyre all friggin zombies.... and lmao, isuander, she really is a girl harry potter! my towns middle school production of this play was better than this.
blueberrypoptarts311 2 years ago
I actually thought this was pretty good.
airbear320 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is REALLY scary!
MAGGIEMOO52 2 years ago 2
ok... little red scares me. voices are goood. but the set is just not... well.... into the woods like
bressak 2 years ago
LOL -She looks like Little Red Riding hood from the Bugs BUnny Cartoon
jaypkatl 2 years ago
LOL ur so right! haha
bressak 2 years ago
This wasn't the actual set. They just used it for the TV spot. The actual set was very detailed and interesting.
ryanthemusical 2 years ago
these ppl are creepers!
sush1plaza 2 years ago
little red ridding hood is a female harry potter!!! HAIHAIUHAIUHAIUH
isaunder 2 years ago 5
The set design looks like it's one of those creepy German expressionist films
bluebettle 2 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh no, no...
barrbrat 2 years ago
Visually, this is extraordinarily strange.
penguin2688 2 years ago 6
leave it to harry potter to rhyme "am" with "mum"
phantomofhepiano 2 years ago
Not to be rude, but, the way i see it... money was short, so they combined sweeney todds set and direction, with the music from into the woods. That and disturbing cinderella and potter little red. I did like little red and jack's mom though
Choirgeek136 3 years ago 2
there's something wrong with cinderella's face...wow...
thatawkwardgirl 3 years ago 2
Personally, I like the London Cast recording best, but I'd agree, the costumes and the direction make it the characters seem too flat on stage. It's better if you just close your eyes and listen to the voices, which are good. And you haven't even heard Julia McKenzie's Witch. She's awesome.
WillScarlet16 3 years ago
god awful
zebop198 3 years ago
I think the problem is the British are so used to doing christmas "pantomimes" that they approached it this way.
dotsymae 3 years ago
was this the west end production?
this seems really unprofessional.
bwayfanatic94 3 years ago
this isn;t like the actual set, its a tv version!
fatbob666 3 years ago
Im sorry but Cinderella is just generally unattractive!
DavidJMcCarthy 3 years ago 4
LMAO hahaha
DaliSalvadorAde 2 years ago
this version sucks!!!
broadwaybound121492 3 years ago 2
Is that girl Little Red Riding Hood or Harry Potter?
mlitsonata 3 years ago 4
hahah deffinately harry potter lol
milkywaychallounge 3 years ago
This should have been a REALLY good production. I wish there was a recording
aldebussy 3 years ago
AGH! Little Red looks like she's going to eat somebody!
I'm not crazy about this production!
I think they're trying too hard to be weird.
It's like art for arts sake.
And I don't like that they interact with each other.
It doesn't work.
OBCBW 3 years ago 5