• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Disney (and others) at the Box Office - Current State of Affairs

Disney Irish

Premium Member
Well, the company has certainly chosen to go a different way. Let's see how it works out for them and then we'll be able to tell if my recommendation was better than their plan.

DIFFICULTY: I have yet to make a decision on behalf of the WDC that has cost them 100+ million dollars.
Well since none of us here are seemingly in a decision making position within TWDC, we're all just armchair quarterbacking without any real skin in the game. So its easy to just sit back and snipe from the cheap seats, its a lot harder to be in the game actually making the calls.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
Well since none of us here are seemingly in a decision making position within TWDC, we're all just armchair quarterbacking without any real skin in the game. So its easy to just sit back and snipe from the cheap seats, its a lot harder to be in the game actually making the calls.
It's really easy to snipe when they make decisions like replacing Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs with Snow White and the Seven Magical Creatures. Or turning Snow White into a resistance fighter.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Well, the company has certainly chosen to go a different way. Let's see how it works out for them and then we'll be able to tell if my recommendation was better than their plan.

DIFFICULTY: I have yet to make a decision on behalf of the WDC that has cost them 100+ million dollars.
How many decisions have you made on behalf of the WDC?

My recommendation would have been not to remake Snow White at all. The material is too outdated and slow-moving for a frame for frame remake and it’s just too old for anyone to be clamoring for any kind of remake.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
It's really easy to snipe when they make decisions like replacing Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs with Snow White and the Seven Magical Creatures.
Except that hasn't ever been confirmed to have been the real original plan for the story of the remake, just some rumor from a hack tabloid site. And even more isn't what is actually being released. So in this case the sniping is not even warranted.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
Except that hasn't ever been confirmed to have been the real original plan for the story, just some rumor from a hack tabloid site. And even more isn't what is actually being released. So in this case the sniping is not even warranted.
It set the release of the film back a year and undoubtedly caused the production budget to balloon (re-shoots). And it prevented them from using human actors in the lead roles.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
It set the release of the film back a year and undoubtedly caused the production budget to balloon (re-shoots). And it prevented them from using human actors in the lead roles.
But wouldn't that put more credence into your idea that a closer remake is better overall?

So even if the original idea was to have something other than the dwarfs, which there is no actual proof of other than some hack tabloid site, they obviously went in a different direction to be more faithful to the original. So what is your gripe here, you're getting a more closely faithful adaptation to the original.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
But wouldn't that put more credence into your idea that a closer remake is better overall?

So even if the original idea was to have something other than the dwarfs, which there is no actual proof of other than some hack tabloid site, they obviously went in a different direction to be more faithful to the original. So what is your gripe here, you're getting a more closely faithful adaptation to the original.

First, which hack tabloid site?

Second, while the decision to use CGI dwarfs is closer to a faithful adaptation, the adaptation does not appear to be faithful (based on everything we've been told about the film, including from its lead actress).
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
First, which hack tabloid site?
I mean you obviously know about the story, so you should know where it came from. I don't want to give them oxygen, so I rather not post its name here, but its easy to find if you look and really want to know the original source of the story.

Second, while the decision to use CGI dwarfs is closer to a faithful adaptation, the adaptation does not appear to be faithful (based on everything we've been told about the film, including from its lead actress).
The original was 83 minutes long, they obviously have to pad the story and update it a bit to make it a modern 2+ hour long movie. So yes its not going to be a shot-by-shot remake from start to finish, but enough of it should be that it'll be a fairly faithful adaptation based on just what we see in the trailers alone.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
First, which hack tabloid site?

Second, while the decision to use CGI dwarfs is closer to a faithful adaptation, the adaptation does not appear to be faithful (based on everything we've been told about the film, including from its lead actress).
This stuff got the Snow White thread shut down, so it's probably not a good idea to start rehashing it here.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
I mean you obviously know about the story, so you should know where it came from. I don't want to give them oxygen, so I rather not post its name here, but its easy to find if you look and really want to know the original source of the story.


The original was 83 minutes long, they obviously have to pad the story and update it a bit to make it a modern 2+ hour long movie. So yes its not going to be a shot-by-shot remake from start to finish, but enough of it should be that it'll be a fairly faithful adaptation based on just what we see in the trailers alone.
It doesn't need to be a 2 hour movie. They could make the movie an hour and a half and theater owners (and parents) would be thrilled because it means they'd get extra showings per day.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
This stuff got the Snow White thread shut down, so it's probably not a good idea to start rehashing it here.
*shrugs shoulders*

I wasn't aware the Snow White thread was shut down and I can't spend all day trying to figure out what discussion topics are verboten and which ones may grace the delicate eyeballs of the forum regulars.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
It doesn't need to be a 2 hour movie. They could make the movie an hour and a half and theater owners (and parents) would be thrilled because it means they'd get extra showings per day.
Would they be thrilled, either parents or theater owners, that is an assumption you're making without any proof. I don't see many if any theater owners actually complaining that they can't sell more showings because modern movies are now longer than in 1937.

Also even at 90 minutes that is still an extra 7 minutes that wasn't in the original that has to be added to the story, thereby still making its not a true shot-for-shot remake. But this movie will be, based on reports, 110 minutes just short of 2 hours, making it only 27 minutes longer than the original. So they aren't going to be adding too much more to the story anyways, so yeah will likely still be more of a faithful adaptation than what you're thinking.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom