 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 24, 2025 - 4:28 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
joan hue
(Member)
|
Again, I'm not condemning the original, nor embracing the new one (which is clearly not made for me), but the world was different in 1937, just as it will be in 2113 (88 years from now). It's not disrespectful to acknowledge that inevitability. And it would be as silly to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a movie that reflects the norms of a time long gone as it would be to start an airline in 2025 with a smoking section.
Thank you, Schiffy.
well, no one loves the score, it has a heavy Broadway musical quality to this film, so, there it is, that is not that popular
WHAT? Saying “no one” is a huge generality. I love Broadway musicals and film musicals as do MANY on this board. WICKED did well at the movies.
just saw the film. I went in with an open mind. I was pleasantly surprised. It’s a very good film until she bites the apple then it slows down. The dwarfs are well done and adult funny at times. In one scene Grumpy is describing Dopey and Happy. “ he’s dopey, you’re always happy, me…. I’m misunderstood” The dwarfs are actors listed in the end credits. The animal animation in the forest is well done. Ziegler’s the perfect Snow White. The queen should have been more menacing like the witch in Oz. There wasn’t a sense of danger around her. She killed Snow White’s father, needed a little more pathos for the ending to be more satisfying. Prince Charming escapes too easily and then kisses a sleeping Snow White. He just pulls his chains loose. If he had escaped from being put to death it would have been more exciting. It’s a touching story. I don’t get the woke stuff. Other than some people of color in the village which as it should be in movies today. The end credits are great! They run them like they’re scanning over an illuminated manuscript with characters from the movie around each name. The letters are blue over the color of parchment paper. A work of art by itself. A young girl of about 5 was captivated by it as she was leaving the theatre. The songs are good too but they could have cut 10 to 15 minutes from the film. A film for all ages.
Thank you, Chris. I agree with a lot of your comments. Now I will add my own.
For Jason, I thought Morrow’s music was great. Not sure I heard themes, but his orchestrations were wonderful, and his music synced well with all the visuals. Did he orchestrate the songs? I’m not sure, but the songs had GRAND orchestrations, especially Heigh-Ho which was wonderful. Those dwarves could sing! I liked some of the new songs and disliked other songs. Gal Gadot can’t sing but she was okay in her part. Zeigler was perfect as Snow White. She can sing beautifully and did a decent job of acting.
I agree with Chris that I didn’t see woke stuff other than a lot of people of color like our real world. That would not have been allowed in 1937. Snow White was a bit of a fighter and problem solver which was fine given that starting in the 60’s and in this current world women are working, raising children, cooking, cleaning, and doing it all. I also thought the animation was very well done as well as the cinematography and costumes.
Sorry that this movie may fail because people think it is woke or because Zeigler said a few dumb things, but it really is a fine movie. Thumbs up for me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To answer Joan's question, the songs were orchestrated by the brilliant Dave Metzger, and fortunately Disney has released the instrumental versions of the songs on the "Deluxe" album. They are quite wonderful, with "Heigh Ho" definitely a standout, along with "Good Things Grow" and "Waiting on a Wish."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Mar 25, 2025 - 6:11 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
The film was saddled with an enormous cost outlay, some of which was Covid related production complications, and the onset fire, and then the controversies of the two lead actresses personal statements. Aside from all that, the public really has no craving for live action reboots of animated classics. I suppose you can say it turned out well for Disney on a couple of these projects, the audience turned out for a couple of them in huge numbers. But the success of Beauty and the Beast has as much to do with the much more recent original and the strong feelings for it as anything else. I love the original Snow White, it is historic, legendary, one of the most important films ever made, animated or not. But I do not think that there are that many around that were really wanting ANY new Snow White, animated or live action, CGI reboot that cost $300 million.
To your points, Schiff, yes, films fail all the time, but at least two of those you cited were really vanity self financed director projects, Horizon and Megalopolis. I imagine both of these guys had a pretty good idea that these were not going to be box office successes, though Costner was probably hoping for something better than the total wipeout it turned out to be. As for the Joker film, well, yeah, it was a terrible script, from the start it never should have been greenlit, and apparently the director was set free to do whatever he wanted and the studio stood back and watch the disaster unfold. As for Argyle, yes, terrible idea from the start again, an enormous waste of $200 million. In some sense you could cut some slack to this one, at least it is 'original', though poorly made without any real reason to justify itself in terms of the script.
The issue with Disney is that they have this enormous and highly regarded library of legendary films, and they stuck themselves in this mindset for 10 years now ' lets redo that in 'live action, ( at least 50% CGI) and modernize the story for a new audience". It might be reasonable if these projects cost $100 million and marketing, but these things are $250 million and marketing. Snow White will be a huge money loser, and really, in the end, tarnish the legacy. The mass audience does not want it at all, and they do not want it 'modernized' either.
In the end, Joan, it will not fail because of that 'woke stuff' the ticket analysis shows that it had almost no impact at all. It will be because there is not an enormous demand for this reboot in live action stuff. I think it is amusing though, people are like, 'it is good though', I mean, we could do reboots of every classic film ever made, but what would be the point really? In the end, why? Disney and every other studio should be doing what everyone 'says' they want, investing that giant stack of cash in original films, live action and animated, rather than recycling the catalog.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This whole "woke" canard is code for a certain type of aging reactionaries who resent the fact that black women are included in the "appeal spectrum" of any given project.
I'll skip Snow White simply because I dislike obvious greenscreen projects.
I'd suggest, joan hue, that you also make room on your viewing calender for the funny, vicious Black Bag, which has some of the best work all-around I've seen this year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think you phrased that just right, Ado, when you said, "The new Variety story makes it sound pretty bad"
It's clearly a hit piece on Zegler, with the writer's political leanings clearly in evidence. I could break it down thoroughly here, but that would be against board rules I suspect. But she is clearly being cast as the problem, while Gal Gadot is being cast as a victim (with the ridiculous implication that Zegler's Twitter comment put Gal Gadot and her four children at risk of bodily harm!) and problematic things she has said completely overlooked or minimized!
And it was a clear choice to omit any real context for Zegler's later two political comments on Instagram, only saying "Three months later, following the presidential election" rather than mentioning WHAT ACTIONS she was making those comments about!
My respect for Variety has certainly taken another hit, reading that biased piece of trash article.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 25, 2025 - 12:08 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
SchiffyM
(Member)
|
Taking this out of the political realm (but sorry, not into the film music realm)…
I had a conversation last night with a friend who's a very prominent entertainment attorney in LA, and we were both asking the same thing: Who was the audience for this movie supposed to be?
With rare exceptions, adults without kids won't see it. Boys won't see it. College students won't see it. Teens won't see it, young adults won't see it. It's a movie for young girls and families with young girls. Now there's nothing wrong with making a movie for that audience, of course. But spending close to $300M dollars on a movie like that seems… ill-advised, no?
Especially when every parent knows the movie will be available on Disney+ in a couple of months.
I understand how these things happen. Nobody expected to spend this kind of money on it. But then they wound up with all sorts of sunk costs so they just kept spending more. It happens.
Ultimately, I think the financial failure (barring a stunning turnaround) of this movie has much less to do with a rejection of remakes, or of CG dwarfs, or of anything Rachel Zegler said, or any of the things people with predisposed objections want it to be about, and much more to do with the wisdom of spending that kind of money on a movie with very little appeal to most of the possible viewing audience.
(See also: Red One)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with all of your individual points Schiffy, but didn't this trend of live-action Disney remakes really get launched by the success (both critically and commercially) of Kenneth Branagh's Cinderella in 2015? Do you think Cinderella has wider appeal than Snow White? (And if so, why?)
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 25, 2025 - 12:29 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
Taking this out of the political realm (but sorry, not into the film music realm)…
I had a conversation last night with a friend who's a very prominent entertainment attorney in LA, and we were both asking the same thing: Who was the audience for this movie supposed to be?
With rare exceptions, adults without kids won't see it. Boys won't see it. College students won't see it. Teens won't see it, young adults won't see it. It's a movie for young girls and families with young girls. Now there's nothing wrong with making a movie for that audience, of course. But spending close to $300M dollars on a movie like that seems… ill-advised, no?
Especially when every parent knows the movie will be available on Disney+ in a couple of months.
I understand how these things happen. Nobody expected to spend this kind of money on it. But then they wound up with all sorts of sunk costs so they just kept spending more. It happens.
Ultimately, I think the financial failure (barring a stunning turnaround) of this movie has much less to do with a rejection of remakes, or of CG dwarfs, or of anything Rachel Zegler said, or any of the things people with predisposed objections want it to be about, and much more to do with the wisdom of spending that kind of money on a movie with very little appeal to most of the possible viewing audience.
(See also: Red One)
spot on Schiff, exactly- who the heck did they make this for? Really, no one. And 250+100 million cost, like it is a superhero movie or something, the whole things is really just nuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 25, 2025 - 12:32 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
I agree with all of your individual points Schiffy, but didn't this trend of live-action Disney remakes really get launched by the success (both critically and commercially) of Kenneth Branagh's Cinderella in 2015? Do you think Cinderella has wider appeal than Snow White? (And if so, why?)
Yavar
totally different thing, aside from be a reboot, that was a cheap film $90 million budget and it made $540 million, which is extremely profitable. But it was a restrained film, not nearly as much CGI, used more locations and sets, and a more experienced director. The years since have worn the audience thin on this stuff. And Snow White, at this costs, and a less popular title, it is just crazy stuff, they made this film like it is Superman or Batman for massive audiences, and it really for, like so very few people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 25, 2025 - 12:56 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
SchiffyM
(Member)
|
I agree with Ado – Cinderella was relatively inexpensive, came from a prestige director (that's not a knock on Webb, but Branagh probably made some adults take notice), and from the trailer just appeared to be a modern take on the well-known story, not a slavish recreation of an animated predecessor. Yes, there are CG mice, but the not the full artificial environment of Snow White. It also wasn't a musical. I also feel – this is purely my gut feeling – that the Cinderella fairy tale is fairly well known outside of the Disney film, whereas Snow White is mostly known today from that film.
I just watched both trailers, and while the Cinderella trailer definitely trades on familiarity with (and a sly wink at) the very well known source material, the entire point of the Snow White trailer seems to be "You know this exact thing, but never with live actors" (right down to the umpteenth "haunting" version of a well-known musical touchstone, in this case "Whistle While You Work"). Again, some here enjoyed the film, which I am not qualified to judge, but one trailer sells a fun romp through well-trod territory, while the other just feels like a recreation.
You can see Cinderella being a date movie from the trailer. Snow White is anything but.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I also feel – this is purely my gut feeling – that the Cinderella fairy tale is fairly well known outside of the Disney film, whereas Snow White is mostly known today from that film.
You have a good point, Schiffy. While there have been a few other adaptations of the fairy tale (two in 2012), Snow White remains synonymous with Disney’s adaptation, whereas Cinderella has enjoyed a bevy of adaptations and variations in multiple media forms apart from the animated film for Branagh to draw from (I must confess that in childhood, I actually preferred the Rodgers and Hammerstein Cinderella (in particular, the 1965 production with Lesley Ann Warren) to the animated film).
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I buy that Cinderella is more well known or broadly appealing, as a fairy tale story, compared with Snow White. Let's not forget that the non-Disney live action Snow White and the Huntsman (2012) was popular/successful enough to get a sequel/prequel in 2016. (I think Mirror Mirror from that same year with Lily Collins and Julia Roberts just broke even, but I mention it because it's possible that Snow White and the Huntsman may have been even more successful if it hadn't been competing with another live action adaptation of Snow White within the same year.)
That said, I readily acknowledge that the Branagh Cinderella was a different beast, budget wise, and that Disney obviously should have budgeted a live action Snow White similarly. (That may have been taken out of their hands, to some degree, but not fully.)
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Mar 25, 2025 - 3:05 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
I'm not sure I buy that Cinderella is more well known or broadly appealing, as a fairy tale story, compared with Snow White. Let's not forget that the non-Disney live action Snow White and the Huntsman (2012) was popular/successful enough to get a sequel/prequel in 2016. (I think Mirror Mirror from that same year with Lily Collins and Julia Roberts just broke even, but I mention it because it's possible that Snow White and the Huntsman may have been even more successful if it hadn't been competing with another live action adaptation of Snow White within the same year.)
That said, I readily acknowledge that the Branagh Cinderella was a different beast, budget wise, and that Disney obviously should have budgeted a live action Snow White similarly. (That may have been taken out of their hands, to some degree, but not fully.)
Yavar
You are giving it a good effort Yavar. I think for most people that Huntsman version has as much to do with Snow White of popular fairy tales as a cheeseburger, and it cost $170 million to make, and it was really only marginally successful, and not well reviewed. The breakaway point here is also, Huntsman had no connection to the most culturally powerful version of Snow White, the original Disney film, it was not a reboot, re-imagine, whereas this one is specifically that, at enormous cost, and really, hardly anyone wanted this film.
Webb is fine as a action director but the wrong choice for this one, Branagh could have easily nailed this picture nicely, and likely at less than half the cost, and he would have likely cut out at least half the effects and cast actual people instead of CGI treatments. All around, in so many ways, this project had a lot of bad decisions. If it was made at all, it should have been totally different from the start.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
