Those of us that actually follow movies knew, and it was discussed here in this very thread briefly last year.
I've actually also seen it (actually went to the theater for it and everything) and its pretty good. Its a campy 90s nostalgia filled horror/thriller/comedy. As someone who worked in IT during the Y2K panic it was a fun romp through the memories of the fears of the day.
Yes, the X Games happen in multiple locations across the country every year.
You need to take into consideration the additional money Disney had to pay for security for Gal Gadot thanks to miss Zegler and add it to the film's budget.Really? It doesn't ring a bell for me as I reflect back on this fabulolus thread. According to Google, it was apparently made for "a budget less than $15 Million" (so I just put it as $10 Million in her career tally) and it made $4.4 Million at the box office.
At $15 per ticket, that means roughly 290,000 Americans saw her in Y2K, or roughly the population of Anchorage, Alaska (Anchorage city limits only, and not those uppity suburbs of Chugiak and Eklutna).
Something tells me Snow White is going to be Miss Zegler's last movie for awhile. Sorry, Anchorage.![]()
It doesn't matter how many tickets it sold. The point was it was known and was discussed here in this thread where you remember it or not.Really? It doesn't ring a bell for me as I reflect back on this fabulolus thread. According to Google, it was apparently made for "a budget less than $15 Million" (so I just put it as $10 Million in her career tally) and it made $4.4 Million at the box office.
At $15 per ticket, that means roughly 290,000 Americans saw her in Y2K, or roughly the population of Anchorage, Alaska (Anchorage city limits only, and not those uppity suburbs of Chugiak and Eklutna).
Something tells me Snow White is going to be Miss Zegler's last movie for awhile. Sorry, Anchorage.![]()
That is so minuscule comparatively, its a rounding error, ie not enough to truly affect the budget.You need to take into consideration the additional money Disney had to pay for security for Gal Gadot thanks to miss Zegler and add it to the film's budget.
The difference is his suggestion was obviously intended as a joke, whereas your assertion was meant to be serious and is unintentionally funny.That is so minuscule comparatively, its a rounding error, ie not enough to truly affect the budget.
And as some tried to push on me regarding my recent comments of the budget, please provide actual documentation that shows how much that added to the films budget. I doubt you'll find any, but please do if you can. If its more than $100K (and that seems high) I'd be surprised.
Fair or not, she is going to be saddled with the stink of this failure and is likely viewed as a headache actor to deal with in terms of marketing and PR. Those are two big hurdles to overcome for studios.It doesn't matter how many tickets it sold. The point was it was known and was discussed here in this thread where you remember it or not.
As for her future prospects, only her agent and management team know what lies ahead for her beyond the announced West End revival of Evita in June. But there are MANY MANY MANY projects in Hollywood, from huge budget franchise movies to streaming movies to small indy projects that only cinephiles know and talk about. So I'm fairly certain that she'll be cast in another role soon enough even if its not a huge budget Disney film that we talk about here.
The original movie came out in 1937 and evidently so. HahahahaThe central mistake in the production of Snow White seems obvious to me - the Dwarfs are the focus of the original film. Snow and the Prince are ciphers. The meat of the film is the antics of the Dwarfs. They are also the only characters with an arc. And yet the Dwarfs seem not even to have been included in the film as originally shot. Imagine the press from casting seven well-known comedians in the key roles.
Absolutely no one needs “a faithful live-action version of Snow White.”I said this when the Seven United Hobos of Benetton photo was leaked, but this film should have been used as a tax write-off like Batgirl. That would have allowed them to immediately put a faithful live-action version of Snow White into production.
The trailer and advertising made this remake seem pretty faithful. I realise it isn’t, but in terms of attracting viewers, the marketing has leaned heavily into nostalgia. It seems unlikely to me that closeness (or otherwise) to the original is the determining factor here in why the film isn’t doing well.I said this when the Seven United Hobos of Benetton photo was leaked, but this film should have been used as a tax write-off like Batgirl. That would have allowed them to immediately put a faithful live-action version of Snow White into production.
Not me. I think the live-action remakes are perfectly fine (and a smart business decision) ... as long as they adhere as closely as possible to the originals.Absolutely no one needs “a faithful live-action version of Snow White.”
Posters rightfully denigrate the existence of the live-action remakes and then turn around and get mad that they aren’t faithful enough. Almost like the point is just to get mad.
I think it was almost impossible to hide what they did with false marketing. People are too online now; the story was how much of a screwup this film was (and how awful Zegler is), not how close it was to the original.The trailer and advertising made this remake seem pretty faithful. I realise it isn’t, but in terms of attracting viewers, the marketing has leaned heavily into nostalgia. It seems unlikely to me that closeness (or otherwise) to the original is the determining factor here in why the film isn’t doing well.
Meanwhile, twenty years ago, Peter Jackson made this and everyone thought it was great (and it printed money).The dwarfs are the only interesting characters in the original and Disney made them look weird.
The Tolkien books told an exceptional story. The fact that Peter Jackson could bring that world to life the way he did was genius.Meanwhile, twenty years ago, Peter Jackson made this and everyone thought it was great (and it printed money).
![]()
It strikes me as highly unlikely that the wider world knows nearly as much as we do about all the circumstances surrounding the project. Perhaps I’m wrong and the various controversies we’ve been discussing are well known to millions and millions of potential movie-goers across the world, but based on what I’ve seen among my own friends and family (none of whom follow any of this stuff), I very much doubt it.I think it was almost impossible to hide what they did with false marketing. People are too online now; the story was how much of a screwup this film was (and how awful Zegler is), not how close it was to the original.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.