Live-Action ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’

[Farerb]

I think everything surrounding Rachel Zegler was blown out of proportion, whether it's her interviews or her casting.

With that being said, I find it disheartening that she and many others who claim to be Disney fans are so irreverent of its past and legacy, especially when it comes to an important landmark in cinema history like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

 

[Casper Gutman]

I think everything surrounding Rachel Zegler was blown out of proportion, whether it's her interviews or her casting.

With that being said, I find it disheartening that she and many others who claim to be Disney fans are so irreverent of its past and legacy, especially when it comes to an important landmark in cinema history like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.

If “revering” means refusing to critically engage with a classic film, NO ONE should be reverential to classic cinema - and I say this as someone with an immense knowledge of, background in, and love for Hollywood films of the studio era.

Quite frankly, if you aren’t willing to be honest about historic films (and historic figures), I question the depth of your respect and love for them. It seems much more likely you love the IDEA of them or you love the way saying you love them makes you look. If something or someone is truly great, honesty only makes its genuine greatness more clear. We owe honesty both to historic art and people and to ourselves.

 

[GimpYancIent]

And here's another one, in which she interrupts Zegler to declare, "She's not gonna be saved by the prince!" Indeed, Zegler repeats Gadot's words before continuing in the same vein.

A couple of brief obligatory sound bites and a smile. Gadot has stepped back and all that is heard are crickets.

 

[Casper Gutman]

A couple of brief obligatory sound bites and a smile. Gadot has stepped back and all that is heard are crickets.

Except for recent interviews with People and USA Today. But yes, except for all the things she has said she hasn’t said anything, and certainly we can interpret this imagined silence to reinforce our ideological priors.

By the way, Zeglers’ unforgivable utterances are from last year. What has she said recently that stands in such stark contrast to Gadot’s imagined silence?

 

[LittleBuford]

A couple of brief obligatory sound bites and a smile. Gadot has stepped back and all that is heard are crickets.

Again, that just isn’t true.

Gal Gadot Had to Audition for Disney’s ‘Snow White’: ‘They Needed to Make Sure I Could Sing’ (Video)

The actress said it's the first time she's had to try out for a role "in a while."

www.thewrap.com

Gal Gadot | Fanning Those Flames of Disruption

Via Issue 188, The Eternal Flame Issue!

flaunt.com

Gal Gadot Practiced 'Snow White' Song for a Month Before Audition: 'They Needed to Make Sure I Can Sing'

Gal Gadot, who plays the Evil Queen in Disney's upcoming live-action 'Snow White' musical, said this was the 'first time I had to kind of audition for a project in a while'

people.com

 

[TsWade2]

We’ll, I like the original better. And there’s no way Disney is going to replace it.

 

[Chi84]

We’ll, I like the original better. And there’s no way Disney is going to replace it.

Does Disney plan to replace it?

 

[Californian Elitist]

We’ll, I like the original better. And there’s no way Disney is going to replace it.

Literally none of the animated films have been replaced.

You haven’t seen the live-action version because it hasn’t been released. Therefore, you have no way of knowing whether you personally prefer the animated version or not.

 

[LittleBuford]

We’ll, I like the original better. And there’s no way Disney is going to replace it.

Thus far, none of the remakes have replaced the originals: the animated versions continue to dominate representations in the parks and on merchandise.

As for liking the original better, none of us has yet seen the new film to make that call! Having always preferred the originals to the remakes, I can say with some confidence that the same will hold true this time around, but I’ll have to actually watch Snow White first before being able to definitively say I like it less.

 

[GimpYancIent]

Again, that just isn’t true.

Gal Gadot Had to Audition for Disney’s ‘Snow White’: ‘They Needed to Make Sure I Could Sing’ (Video)

The actress said it's the first time she's had to try out for a role "in a while."

www.thewrap.com

Gal Gadot | Fanning Those Flames of Disruption

Via Issue 188, The Eternal Flame Issue!

flaunt.com

Gal Gadot Practiced 'Snow White' Song for a Month Before Audition: 'They Needed to Make Sure I Can Sing'

Gal Gadot, who plays the Evil Queen in Disney's upcoming live-action 'Snow White' musical, said this was the 'first time I had to kind of audition for a project in a while'

people.com

Sound bites that's a take! aaaaand now the crickets.

 

[DKampy]

This should be the mantra of the thread.

I feel like it should be the mantra of every Disney film thread lately

 

[LittleBuford]

Sound bites that's a take! aaaaand now the crickets.View attachment 739426

It's very telling that "She's not gonna be saved by the prince" is a mere soundbite when said by Gadot but an insult to classic Disney when said (more accurately repeated) by Zegler.

When even video evidence fails, I'm not sure what options one is left with to continue a reasonable, fact-based discussion.

 

[doctornick]

Relax.

Don’t watch the film.

But that’s kind of the point. A lot of people aren’t going to watch the film for various reasons and there’s a potential for a poor box office and more pressure from investors on Disney to “fix” things (and cut investments in the parks, etc).

I’d rather they make and promote movies that have wide appeal, don’t turn off a portion of the potential customer base, and do awesome financially.

 

[Chi84]

It's very telling that "She's not gonna be saved by the prince" is a mere soundbite when said by Gadot but an insult to classic Disney when said (more accurately repeated) by Zegler.

When even video evidence fails, I'm not sure what options are left to continue a reasonable, fact-based discussion.

I guess it depends on who you're talking to; there are some who are not interested in facts and others who just want to talk about themselves. I'm not sure there's much else to say on these threads, as evidenced by the fact that only a handful of people are left participating.

 

[Chi84]

But that’s kind of the point. A lot of people aren’t going to watch the film for various reasons and there’s a potential for a poor box office and more pressure from investors on Disney to “fix” things (and cut investments in the parks, etc).

I’d rather they make and promote movies that have wide appeal, don’t turn off a portion of the potential customer base, and do awesome financially.

What kind of movies do you want them to make that will have wide appeal, won't turn off a portion of the potential customer base and will do awesome financially?

 

[doctornick]

Indeed. Many of those criticising her have also faulted the film for straying too far from the original. It’s a strange sort of fatigue that wants the remakes to be less original rather than more.

The main reason for Disney to make these lazy remakes is to use nostalgia from the original films to entice people to go to the new films. The more you deviate from the source material, the less the nostalgia factor sells the film for you.

So yes I think sticking as close to the source move as possible makes the most sense since they goal just seems to be cynically make money. The Lion King remake was trash but made a crapload of money.

(Maleficent and Cruella aren’t counter examples BTW as they are totally different films than the animated films they are subverting.)

 

[Californian Elitist]

But that’s kind of the point. A lot of people aren’t going to watch the film for various reasons and there’s a potential for a poor box office and more pressure from investors on Disney to “fix” things (and cut investments in the parks, etc).

I’d rather they make and promote movies that have wide appeal, don’t turn off a portion of the potential customer base, and do awesome financially.

There are always going to be films that people won’t see, even the popular ones. Some people didn’t see Barbie.

That portion that’s “turned off” is likely tiny. Again, for the most part, people probably aren’t even aware, let alone care. Box office numbers haven’t been the same in general since the start of the pandemic.

They are making films with wide appeal, though. They have never, and will never, please everyone. The people who are complaining are a small group. If you want the movies to make money, then I would assume that you will be supporting them and purchasing tickets to see them in theaters.

 

[LittleBuford]

The main reason for Disney to make these lazy remakes is to use nostalgia from the original films to entice people to go to the new films. The more you deviate from the source material, the less the nostalgia factor sells the film for you.

So yes I think sticking as close to the source move as possible makes the most sense since they goal just seems to be cynically make money. The Lion King remake was trash but made a crapload of money.

As I've noted before, this strategy didn't work for The Little Mermaid, which was a more faithful adaptation than Aladdin but didn't do nearly as well.

(Maleficent and Cruella aren’t counter examples BTW as they are totally different films than the animated films they are subverting.)

It seems that Snow White, too, is going for the subversive approach.

 

[GimpYancIent]

But that’s kind of the point. A lot of people aren’t going to watch the film for various reasons and there’s a potential for a poor box office and more pressure from investors on Disney to “fix” things (and cut investments in the parks, etc).

I’d rather they make and promote movies that have wide appeal, don’t turn off a portion of the potential customer base, and do awesome financially.

Absolutely! Know your audience, do what you are in business to do (as in provide entertainment), do a quality job and be consistent with what got the business to the highest level. If money is the objective, then give the customers what they want.

 

[Chi84]

The main reason for Disney to make these lazy remakes is to use nostalgia from the original films to entice people to go to the new films. The more you deviate from the source material, the less the nostalgia factor sells the film for you.

So yes I think sticking as close to the source move as possible makes the most sense since they goal just seems to be cynically make money. The Lion King remake was trash but made a crapload of money.

(Maleficent and Cruella aren’t counter examples BTW as they are totally different films than the animated films they are subverting.)

What was different in The Little Mermaid remake? It was very faithful to the original, wasn't it?