The Good Dinosaur AKA the saddest Disney movie ever

So a Disney movie about dinosaurs, safe bet for a cute film full of laughs right? WRONG!
So very wrong. This film is not for...well to be perfectly honest I'm entirely sure who it's for.
I entered the cinema charmed by the typically Pixar-esque short that preluded the film and then had my heart unceasingly ripped from my chest for an hour and a half and handed to me on a platter by the bizarreness of the actual film that was everything other than expected.
Now I'm no stranger to the tear inducing emotional trauma that Disney and Pixar craft so wonderfully (I've willingly watched Up more times than I can count) however I believe it's fair to claim that the token this-parent-child-relationship-is-flawed-but-uplifting storyline has become a clique that almost automatically triggers a feeling of Oh my gosh this parental figure is about to die tragically and this film was no exception. So, despite going against my basic nature and releasing a spoiler into the world, I think I can safely say that anyone accustomed to Disney's penchant for killing off parents and breaking the tiny fragile hearts of children and adults alike could predict the death of the Daddy Dinosaur from the get go.
However what made this predictably sad death actually hit hard was Arlo, the small, clumsy and evidently so relatable underdog, who was unable to process the passing of his father properly. Arguable this was worsened by him, for some unknown reason, having to take on the tasks of his late father instead of his clearly more capable, fully grown, brutish and what I can only describe as animated version of Butch (the douchebag brother from Home Alone) sibling Buck.

Now what initially seemed intriguing about this plot was its play with Dinosaurs surviving and eventually evolving, despite the apparent necessity for opposable thumbs, into...farmers (yeah I'm not sure either). Meanwhile humanity remains in the ME MAN. ME BEAT THINGS WITH STICKS. OHH AHH FIRE! stage. As a consequence of this a hop, skip and a jump into the plot line Arlo adopts a small rabid human in place of a puppy which he names Spot.
This is were it gets weird, Arlo and Spot the human puppy get washed up by the same river that killed Arlo's Dad (not at all traumatic then) and end up stranded miles from home. They run into a mentally unstable styracosaurus who seeks safety through the protection of small adorable woodland creatures with names such as Destructor, DreamCrusher (who stops him from setting unrealistic goals apparently- told you this film was weird) and Debbie.
Now at this point I have no real memory of where the story went because it had no cohesive plot...or script really. However they did have a drug scene! Yeah I shit you not, one minute our two underage protagonists are strolling along on their way home and then- oh look berries!-cue weird trippy scene in which faces puff up, the animation gets hazy and body parts are swapped. What sort of children's movie is this?!
So I promised you tears and now I'm getting to the part that had adults in the cinema clutching their hearts whilst small children struggled to comprehend the concept of loss. As Spot lacked the ability of speech Arlo the evolved dinosaur began to try and demonstrate to him a sense of family by placing five conveniently dinosaur shaped twigs in the ground and then drawing a circle around it. Once Spot had grasped this concept and set up his own three person family unit he then heartbreakingly buried the two twig representation of his parents in the ground. Excuse me whilst I weep silently into my popcorn. Arlo then buries his stick father as well whilst the whole audience scream internally for him to pick up the stick symbolising Spot and put it in his Goddamn family circle! The scene continues with tears of both dinosaur and human variety whilst- PUT TWIG SPOT IN YOUR FAMILY CIRCLE YOU WANKER! No nothing? What is this film?!
As if children weren't traumatized enough, Arlo and Spot run into three nasty looks dinosaurs with wings that I couldn't spell the species of if you put a gun to my head. The three villains appeared to be a weird parody of extremist evangelicals following a storm that's shown them the light and preaching how it provides for them. This isn't dwelled on for too long though because eventually they prove themselves to be foe but doing their upmost to eat Spot the dinosaur movie equivalent of a chubby big-eyed pug and thus the wandering journey home gains some fast paced incentive.
Other than an all too familiar quest to get home this film appeared to be merely several offbeat inside jokes that made the creators chuckle and had no distinctive cast other than Anna Paquin who played Dino Suki Stackhouse. I'm not sure I could say I enjoyed this film, most the time it had me alternating somewhere between oh gosh what the hell am I watching and wanting to sob quietly into my coat whilst simultaneously cuddle a dinosaur and cavebaby. However what I can say for this film is that it was highly ascetically pleasing with regard to background and that the bizarre script displayed a new format for Disney movies in which the story lines are somewhat less predictable and grown men will require a packet of tissue to make it through (yes I'm referring to you Man who sat next to me on his phone for every part bar the twig scene and still looked heartbroken).

Into the Woods

I'd find it hard to imagine that anyone could have managed to make it through the last few months without hearing at least one excited statement about the new winter film phenomenon that is Into the Woods. I have not seen such a build up of eagerness and anticipation for a film in quite sometime but then again I guess such delirium is to be expected when a film has been in the pipelines for over twenty years. Yes that's right, the rights for Sondheim's musical fairy-tale mash up were first requested in the early 90's but after numerous attempts, by numerous directors, to take this tale to screen it seemed that the adaptation was going nowhere.
Thus, when in 2013 it was announced that Rob Marshall (Director of Chicago) had been given the green-light to direct a screen adaptation, backed by Disney, fans went mental. The feverish nature of these musical-theatre nerds only intensified as the dazzling cast was revealed with such names as Meryl Streep, James Corden, Anna Kendrick and Johnny Depp, it seemed like the film was already destined for it's own happily ever after.
I must say I felt a near hipster level of protectiveness towards the musical when I walked into the cinema on it's opening UK release date. I'd already listened to the full soundtrack at least twenty times and had kept myself fully up to date on all the Into the Woods info that the internet had to offer but I was more than excited, I was dubious. It had been announced sometime ago that Disney were changing some of the major plot lines to make it more of a child-friendly film, and frankly where's the fun it in that!
With that said I eased back in my seat as the film began, realising that not quite as much as I had feared had actually been axed from the film, with the except of the Narrator and his gruesome demise. Although I'd already prepped myself  for the worst AND the best, I was quite content to just sit through  the two hours of just good musicalish fun that I was given.
There were some genuine moments where the acting of Emily Blunt as the Baker's wife seemed so real and starkly tender that she completely stole the show and everyone in the cinema seemed to forget about the rest of the star-studded cast singing their little hearts out. Two other close contenders as far as stealing the show goes, were the two young actors Daniel Huttlestone and Lilla Crawford who seem to have baffled most with their stupendous vocal abilities and offbeat delivery of lines.
But at the end of the day we all know who takes home the prize for entrancing the audience whether you heard on the news or online or haven't been told at all, it goes without saying that Meryl Streep was, as always, spellbinding. Despite spending the first half of the film dressed in what literally appeared to be a Halloween witch costume, complete with a backcombed blue wig, Streep flawlessly filled her role as the not-good-the-not-nice-the-just-right witch. And to be perfectly honest once they ran a brush through the wig...I mean once she transformed back to her beautiful self, blue hair really suited her.
While we are on the topic of actors worthy of a mention shall I bring up Chris Pine. Phwoar who'd have thought seeing the rugged Mr Pine mince around singing of his o-so tragic love life could be as startlingly attractive as it indeed was. To put this into context Pine played the role of Cinderella's Prince who was "raised to be charming, not sincere" and spent a vast majority of the movie seducing women in a surprisingly camp manner. Then in the song Agony, sung by the two princes, Pine proceeded to jump into a waterfall and rip his shirt open with frustration this was then followed by Rapunzel's Prince doing the same in a wittier but mildly lacklustre manner. Needless to say that in a cinema that seemed to be 80% female, this went down exceedingly well indeed. The excessive nature of this spoofery could have easily made any other musical unwatchable but for some inexplicable reason it simple made this one more gripping.
Although all the actors fulfilled their roles and seemed to please the wide fan base of musical nerds, it simply wasn't enough. And that's not to say I didn't find it a thoroughly enjoyable two hours, that's just the only way to express how unnecessary it was to make this stage-show a film. The only moment where I felt the plot benefitted from being on screen as opposed to stage was the volatile scene where the Baker's wife talks her self back into reality right before her untimely death. As I have previously mentioned Blunt's performance was beyond empathetic, it evoked pity which wouldn't have been nearly as effective without the aid of a close-up but that's about it. Even the angles at which the film was shot and the costumes of the character's felt sort of theatresque, it had no real impact on screen. In fact it sort of had no intended audience either, it was evidently too dark for most children which begs the question why did they take out the more risqué moments of the original script. For example the brutal death of Rapunzel or the illicit inmate exchange between the Baker's wife and Cinderella's Prince or even the additional subplot where the two princes explain their affairs with Snow White and Sleeping Beauty. Each and everyone of those subplots was put into the stage script for a intended purpose and that was to clarify that this was not a children's tale which is where I think Marshall and Disney have gone horrible wrong.
Although I loved this screen adaptation of Into the Woods, it was dreadfully misadvised and let both new audiences and old fans down. That being said I can still assure you that I will be watching this film over and over again but this with an idea of what to expect.