Live-Action ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’

Status
Not open for further replies.

Chi84

Premium Member
I don't disagree with what you're saying, choices are a great thing. If I were to make an adaptation of this movie, I would make changes myself. It's a healthy thing to do with any adaptation, I don't see the point of shot for shot remakes. Cinderella remains my favorite of the remakes so far and a great example of a well done adaption, in my opinion.

However, to take it back what the lead actress talked about, I don't think there is anything wrong with a young woman falling in love. Women still fall in love today and many today don't try to be a hero or care to be one, some do, some don't. BUT if you watch most of Disney's recent movies, you'd think no young women today would want to be a homemaker. That's just not true and there's nothing wrong with the idea that a woman would want to fall in love, settle down, have a family, and take care of them. Not all women want to explore the world, fight a foe, become an important leader, etc.

Not every story with a female lead needs that same narrative of the girl having big goals and saving the day at the end. While it's an OK story to tell, it's pretty much every single one (and not just in movies by Disney). What should be a good amount of choices (in story) is turning into a single repetitive story with different names for the characters.

From what I've heard from a few people (young women) regarding this matter, they feel like it's big corporations (think Disney and others) telling them what they should want. With them acting like it's a problem if they don't have big goals or don't aspire to save the day or the world. They happen to love men and enjoy when men get the opportunity to show their strength. That's not to say, that it's a one way ordeal, but that when you're being inclusive, you don't need to constantly push away what you've done before. There wasn't really anything wrong with it then (1937) and there's nothing wrong with it now. That's basically what I was told by them. And, I think they're right too. Some good perspective.

Now, what I find funny about the criticism is that while Rachel Zegler does not appear to like the Walt Disney version of the film, which is humorous to me personally since I think she should if she's taking the part in this specific adaptation; she isn't the one in charge of the film. She's playing a part established by producers, writers, and a director who decided this is the story that they wanted to tell. If people want to criticize this direction, that's one thing, but I don't like that seemingly all attention is put on her almost exclusively. Even if they fired her and reshot her scenes, it'd still be that same story with the same messages and themes. It's from something on the creative level, which most actors don't participate in.
TLM remake had a really sweet love story. It fleshed out the characters more and made it more realistic.
 

CJR

Well-Known Member
TLM remake had a really sweet love story. It fleshed out the characters more and made it more realistic.

It did, although Ariel played a bigger role in Ursula's demise, but I don't know if the people I talked to have seen TLM yet. They mentioned seeing Barbie, so they weren't necessarily talking about just Disney movies.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
It did, although Ariel played a bigger role in Ursula's demise, but I don't know if the people I talked to have seen TLM yet. They mentioned seeing Barbie, so they weren't necessarily talking about just Disney movies.
I thought it was more a combined effort the way it was presented, with the prince swimming down to save Ariel first, then her killing Ursula. Also, didn't it end with the prince fulfilling his lifelong dream of exploring the world to bring new cultures and trade to his kingdom with Ariel accompanying him and supporting him? I thought the entire movie treated both characters beautifully.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJR

CJR

Well-Known Member
I thought it was more a combined effort the way it was presented, with the prince swimming down to save Ariel first, then her killing Ursula. Also, didn't it end with the prince fulfilling his lifelong dream of exploring the world to bring new cultures and trade to his kingdom with Ariel accompanying him and supporting him? I thought the entire movie treated both characters beautifully.

I'm glad you enjoyed the film, I did as well.

The issue at hand is that there was nothing wrong with the way it was originally either. Both endings are acceptable, even today.

It's OK if a woman doesn't want or feel the need to be a hero. There's nothing wrong with the way TLM went about it, it's just collectively, something along those lines is being pushed into every film.

I do feel like how TLM handled Eric went very well and kept him looking heroic while giving Ariel a much stronger impression to the viewer (Rob Marshall did great), but if Eric had saved the day and rescued Ariel, followed by them simply moving into the palace, there'd be nothing wrong with that. The general feeling is that filmmakers are feeling the need to avoid that setup in ALL of their films, such as Jasmine eyeing Sultan in Aladdin. It's OK for women to have smaller, more simple dreams and goals too.

Now, in the case of TLM, sorry for any spoilers, I do believe them going on an adventure at the end was much more fun and came more from Eric's desire than Ariel's, although both were obviously on board with the idea.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
I'm glad you enjoyed the film, I did as well.

The issue at hand is that there was nothing wrong with the way it was originally either. Both endings are acceptable, even today.

It's OK if a woman doesn't want or feel the need to be a hero. There's nothing wrong with the way TLM went about it, it's just collectively, something along those lines is being pushed into every film.

I do feel like how TLM handled Eric went very well and kept him looking heroic while giving Ariel a much stronger impression to the viewer (Rob Marshall did great), but if Eric had saved the day and rescued Ariel, followed by them simply moving into the palace, there'd be nothing wrong with that. The general feeling is that filmmakers are feeling the need to avoid that setup in ALL of their films, such as Jasmine eyeing Sultan in Aladdin. It's OK for women to have smaller, more simple dreams and goals too.

Now, in the case of TLM, sorry for any spoilers, I do believe them going on an adventure at the end was much more fun and came more from Eric's desire than Ariel's, although both were obviously on board with the idea.
I don't suppose there would be anything wrong with it, but the ending was a heck of a lot better in the live-action remake, with Ariel's dad speeding them along their way. Wasn't it cool for them to go on a sea adventure with the king of the seas watching over them? They better incorporated Ariel's beautiful relationship with her father in my opinion. You have to admit that maybe the original ending was not chosen simply based on modern society and how it generally goes these days. There's nothing wrong with it; it's just not what Disney chose to portray.
 

CJR

Well-Known Member
I don't suppose there would be anything wrong with it, but the ending was a heck of a lot better in the live-action remake, with Ariel's dad speeding them along their way. Wasn't it cool for them to go on a sea adventure with the king of the seas watching over them? They better incorporated Ariel's beautiful relationship with her father in my opinion. You have to admit that maybe the original ending was not chosen simply based on modern society and how it generally goes these days. There's nothing wrong with it; it's just not what Disney chose to portray.

Completely agree with you. It was very well done.

I think it's less so about TLM and more about everything else and the need to change what's old in order to fit a corporate driven narrative. It's not a bad narrative, it's just at the point where it's a bit over done in the eyes of many.
 

Chi84

Premium Member
Completely agree with you. It was very well done.

I think it's less so about TLM and more about everything else and the need to change what's old in order to fit a corporate driven narrative. It's not a bad narrative, it's just at the point where it's a bit over done in the eyes of many.
I know what you mean about a corporate narrative, but I just don't see it in that particular movie. Ariel had a good life under the sea but her inquisitive nature drove her to want to learn everything she could about the human world. Price Eric's nature had him struggling against the queen's orders to stay home and rule his kingdom. He was desperate to get out and learn about different cultures and bring knowledge and expanded trade to his kingdom. It would be hard to imagine an ending where they both just decided to move into the palace.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CJR

Farerb

Well-Known Member
I read elsewhere there was a test screening for Snow White, and a particular scene to which the audience reacted badly was the scene where the Hag tempts Snow White with the poisoned apple. There's a song, in which the Hag basically pretends to be her friend. And then, instead of biting the apple, Snow White just touches it, and loses her will of becoming a leader. I don't know if it's true or not.
 

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
I read elsewhere there was a test screening for Snow White, and a particular scene to which the audience reacted badly was the scene where the Hag tempts Snow White with the poisoned apple. There's a song, in which the Hag basically pretends to be her friend. And then, instead of biting the apple, Snow White just touches it, and loses her will of becoming a leader. I don't know if it's true or not.
That sounds stupid enough to be today's Disney. Its probably true.

So in this new film, we know its not the prince kiss to help Snow White, what will it be?

Maybe it will be Snow White's own intestinal fortitude that will save her and bring her back to the leader her farther said she could be.
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
I read elsewhere there was a test screening for Snow White, and a particular scene to which the audience reacted badly was the scene where the Hag tempts Snow White with the poisoned apple. There's a song, in which the Hag basically pretends to be her friend. And then, instead of biting the apple, Snow White just touches it, and loses her will of becoming a leader. I don't know if it's true or not.
So she doesn’t die, but instead her GirlBoss powers are temporarily Nerf’ed?
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
But that's the rub - Snow White is a fairy tale that is hundreds of years old, and the 1937 film was based on that fairy tale. That movie helped establish Disney, and is an incredibly valuable IP that is used throughout the parks and the company.

If you don't like the fairy tale or the 1937 version, you are absolutely entitled to have that opinion, and you're absolutely entitled to tell a new story about new characters that fit what you're trying to do. But to "remake" Snow White into something it's not is just a cynical way to trade on the name of a fairy tale that is hundreds of years old.

I could write a movie starring a petite girl who loves unicorns and rainbows and spends her days in the fields playing with bunnies and call it Rambo, but that does not mean it will have any relation to the Stallone pics. And while that is an absurd example, what Disney appears to be doing here is more insidious - making a movie that can be marketed as being an "updated" Snow White to pull in the people who actually enjoy Snow White just to spring a subversive retelling upon them.

Make that movie, just don't call it "Snow White."

Except they have already made that movie. Over and over and over again the last 7 or so years. Now it’s just another version of that movie with “Snow Whites” likeness and name attached to it.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member
Are we doing the thing where we make up “test screenings” full of absurd nonsense to stoke our grievances? We just did that with Indiana Jones, but sure, let’s do it again.

I hear there’s a scene at the end where Snow White dyes her hair BLUE. Oh, and two tertiary characters are in a loving, stable same-sex relationship. Get the torches!
 

MisterPenguin

President of Animal Kingdom
Premium Member
To help Ms. White along on her "leadership journey"....
1692966353054.png
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Some interesting context, and further evidence of how the problem is less with Zegler's sentiments (which aren't that dissimilar to Watston's, even if more brashly expressed) than with the outrage that has been very deliberately manufactured around them.

“When I finished the film, it kind of felt like I had made that transition into being a woman on-screen,” she said, adding that Belle is “absolutely a Disney princess, but she’s not a passive character — she’s in charge of her own destiny.”​

The actress was instrumental in giving the Disney princess a more feminist edge, insisting that certain aspects be changed so she feels more modern. “I was like, ‘The first shot of the movie cannot be Belle walking out of this quiet little town carrying a basket with a white napkin in it,’ ” said Watson. “‘We need to rev things up!’”​

From the same article:

Director Bill Condon echoes his lead actress, saying that Belle is just a tad different than the other Disney princesses in that she’s not motivated by love. “She really is the first modern Disney princess who doesn’t want to be a princess,” he says. “Someone who’s more interested in figuring out who she is than finding a guy and getting married.”​

 
Status
Not open for further replies.

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

Back
Top Bottom