For the most part, the film is a faithful adaptation of the musical. Director Rob Marshall said that you were much more in favor of stepping away from the source material when it came to adapting Into the Woods, and that he had to talk you into staying faithful.

James Lapine: That may be a misrepresentation. I wouldn't have had a problem of trying different things with it, but I wasn't into turning it inside out, because somebody had already done it.

Did you look at any of those earlier attempts at film adaptations just to see what they had done?

JL: I didn't. In fact when that first movie project came out, I started reading it, and I just closed it, because it was really different. And I thought, Why? If I'm not involved, what's the point in looking at it? So I was happy to have this chance to try my hand at it and make it more faithful, I guess you'd say ... It was something that when the opportunity came, I offered my services. And it did sort of come out of the blue. I had a feeling eventually somebody would do it, because the show's popularity has also grown through the years.

You did so many different drafts of the show, which changed a lot as you were developing it. Did you consider bringing back to the film any elements that you had abandoned in the musical?

JL: When you're trying out on Broadway, it's very hectic and you're making changes night after night. There's a lot of pressures from producers to make some changes, and you're writing for actors who are in it, and sometimes the limitations of actors who are in it. So, 10 years later when we did a revival of it, I thought, Oh, great, I'm gonna go back and do all these things I wish I had done and tried. Of course, I went back and I tried a lot of them, and it turned out that actually none of them were improvements, so no, I didn't have any agenda that there was something I wanted to fix or add that wasn't in the original.

I know early on a lot of fans of the musical were concerned that the movie would be a lot lighter than the original. What were those conversations like in terms of figuring out how to balance those heavy themes with making a Disney movie?

JL: Well, first of all, it's really tricky. It's a tricky piece. It does have a sort of floating tone that begins fairly light and goes dark. I'd like to just say that there's nothing darker than Old Yeller and Bambi and some of the early Disney stuff. You know, it's funny that Disney has this rep, maybe it's more contemporary, of doing really light stuff. But those early Disney movies were actually quite dark. I think one of the real challenges of it was just literal, because if somebody dies on stage, we know they're on stage. If there is blood, it's fake. What we did when I directed it, I used to say to the actors, in the first act we have to find the drama in the comedy, and in the second act you have to find the comedy in the drama. Rapunzel would get stepped on and people in the audience would laugh, but that was actually the first turning point of going dark, structurally in the stage show with Rapunzel's death. She was sort of the first one to go. And then it got darker and darker and darker.

I think Disney was interested in just how these things could be portrayed on film because it's a literal medium and I think it felt that way to Rob as much as to me as the writer. I think they were concerned. Oh my God, it might be a blood bath. And I think all of us agreed, "No, we don't want it to be that." In terms of a lot of the things that are like, Are we gonna see the Prince [Chris Pine] shtup Cinderella [Anna Kendrick]? Which, no. That's not the movie we wanted to do. That was pretty much the discussions, but I think that was kind of just a lot of internet chat taking something innocently said by Steve [Sondheim] out of context, and suddenly everybody was getting hot and bothered about it. But the irony is, it's our show, meaning Steve's and mine. If we're not worried about it and are happy with it, it seems kind of weird that people are getting all up in arms.