Walt Disney Co.’s low-budget fairytale film “Into the Woods” will soon deliver a happy-ever-after ending for the studio. The reason: The movie appears headed into the black.
The star-studded musical was made for far less money than recent musical movies after studio bosses minimized their risk on a genre that can prove a poison apple at the box office.
“Radical caution is the current trend in the industry, and Disney’s cost consciousness over this movie is a perfect example of how Hollywood does things differently now,” said veteran publicist Michael Levine.
The film was budgeted at just $50 million – a quarter of what the same studio paid for other recent family-friendly movies such as “Maleficent” and “Oz the Great and Powerful,” neither of which are musicals.
That tight budget meant Cinderella couldn’t go the ball – as there was insufficient funding for a lavish party scene – and a string of other creative cash-saving cuts had to be made, including shooting amid real trees instead of computer-generated forests.
But after “Into the Woods” made $46.1 million in its first four days of release in the United States – the highest-grossing opening ever of a movie adapted from a Broadway show and more than the total gross of both Broadway productions in 1987 and 2002 – studio chiefs are singing a happy tune about their prudent policy paying off.
The key to getting the film made for $50 million came in persuading stars Meryl Streep, Johnny Depp, Emily Blunt and Chris Pine to take big pay cuts – which they apparently did out of a desire to do the project, including the opportunity to appear in a prestige musical from acclaimed director Rob Marshall, and a passionate plea from the producer.
Pay sacrifice
The film’s producer, Marc Platt, said that talking the principals into taking less than their usual fees in order to get the movie made was a key factor.
“There’s some skill to that, but it makes it easier to approach people if you can raise your hand and say, ‘I’m the first one in,’” he said. “These actors worked for very little money compared to their usual fees. We all did. Yes there is some back-end in certain deals, where people share in the money if it’s a giant success, but it’s not huge and it’s tiered because different people gave up different amounts.”
Levine, founder of Beverly Hills firm Levine Communications Office, has represented a total of 58 Academy Award winners, including Barbra Streisand, Charlton Heston and Jon Voight, and suggested the prospect of awards nominations for “Into the Woods” might have persuaded the actors to work for less than their quoted rate. The film received three Golden Globe nominations and has been getting Oscar buzz.
“Human beings make decisions predicated on a combination of logic and emotion, and actors tend to have a disproportionate amount of emotion,” he said. “Peer approval is very important to them, as is critical acclaim and passion.”
The Hollywood insider can also see why the film’s budget was low, given its genre. While the likes of “Mamma Mia” and “Les Miserables” were hits, there were many more musical movies that have flopped: “Rent”; “Burlesque”; “Sparkle”; “Glitter”; “Rock of Ages”; and “Nine,” the latter made by “Into the Woods” director Marshall.
“Disney will have looked at the box-office figures of the last 10 movie musicals and seen an uneven trend line. There is no clear economic model to follow, like there is with sequels. And without such a precedent, such a movie can be considered a risk,” Levine added.
Radical change
“Whenever there is radical change in the industry, people become cost conscious and this is one of those times because of radical changes in the delivery of movies,” Levine said. “Our parents used to go to the movie theater and buy a ticket to watch a film, but that model has changed with people watching films on the likes of Netflix and other sources. When studios become cautious, they look for actors to take on some of the risk and that’s exactly what happened when Disney put together this film.”
Marshall reintroduced the idea of musicals as mainstream hits when he directed 2002 stage adaptation “Chicago” to six Oscar wins and worldwide box-office earnings of $300 million.
He may have done it again with the screen adaptation of composer Stephen Sondheim’s “Into the Woods,” which is already close to $100 million in domestic box office. The studio gets only a portion of that money, but it appears close to getting its investment paid off – and that’s before the film opens in major international markets next week.
The movie also has seen award nominations mount.
Depp, in a statement issued by the studio, said the chance to reteam with Marshall – who directed him in 2011 hit “Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides” – made him sign up for a supporting role at a fraction of his normal fee, which hit a reported $55.5 million for the “Pirates” film.
“I’d shoot the phone book with Rob if he asked. He’s the real thing,” said Depp, who reportedly got $1 million for playing a supporting role as the predatory Wolf in “Into the Woods.”
Streep, who has a lot more screen time as the Witch, was also keen to put art ahead of commerce by signing on for a reported $1.5 million – her lowest upfront salary in many years.
“I went to see the musical when it was on Broadway, and I thought it was fantastic. I was really happy to have the chance to work on the film,” said Streep in a statement.
Kevin Huvane, the agent at Creative Artists Agency who represents Marshall, Streep and co-stars Chris Pine and James Corden, declined to comment on their financial agreements.
Money on trees
As money doesn’t grow on trees, Disney had to use mostly real ones rather than make expensive computer-generated foliage.
The majority of the film takes place in woodland and, for those exterior shots, movie makers used Windsor Great Park, on the outskirts of London, which includes oak trees that are more than 800 years old. Then at nearby Shepperton Studios, they built woodland sets that were blended in with the exterior footage.
“The reasons we did that weren’t just aesthetic, but budgetary, too,” explained Platt. “It made for a more efficient shooting schedule so we could film indoors when it got dark outside.”
There is a rampaging giant in the film, but in another cost-saving move its kingdom is never seen. And instead of having a costly computer-generated creature, actress Frances de la Tour landed the role, running havoc through a miniature forest with miniature trees.
“We embraced the resources available to us and made a strength of what we had available,” said producer Platt. “It doesn’t detract from the movie that you don’t see Cinderella at the ball and only get glimpses of the giant. The audience’s imagination fills in the gaps.”
