Live-Action ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’

[LittleBuford]

I heard they want to change how the witch dies as well. So they can have Snow White do the dirty deed. .... Even though she is supposed to be asleep... or whatever she is in the movie.

I guess Charlie or whatever his name is doesn't kiss her.

Perhaps she awakens not from a kiss, but because she is such a good leader. God can't take someone who can lead like her.

In the original fairy tale, she is not awoken by a kiss, and she is not asleep when the queen dies. The 1937 film is itself a reimagining of an earlier story.

 

[LittleBuford]

Surely the same with those who hadn’t seen Sound of Freedom.

The film itself has received mixed reviews, and I don’t recall anyone here offering a negative assessment of its content, acting, etc. The complaints that have been voiced concern the motivations of some of those involved in the film. I myself would quite like to see it, but I’m reluctant to put money in the pockets of individuals who promote harmful conspiracy theories (a personal red line for me).

 

[TP2000]

I think to make this point you have to match a specific person to a specific criticism, though, and show where that specific person was hypocritical. Otherwise it gets into treating people as extremely vague blocs, and assuming someone like TP2000 is somehow obligated to agree with Ben Shapiro or else be a hypocrite. If TP2000 made a hypocritical comment? Ok. If Ben Shapiro made a comment though - that only reflects Ben Shapiro.

Beautifully said, better than I could have mustered, and spot on correct. Thank you.

 

[BuddyThomas]

I believe they’ve finished (the majority of the) filming, so unless Disney scraps the whole thing (which I know some here would like them to do), Zegler is going to be the new Snow White.

And before that, she will be in this potential November blockbuster, raising her profile even further.

 

[Andrew C]

And before that, she will be in this potential November blockbuster, raising her profile even further.

View attachment 741451

I hope she didn’t say “hunger games is so 2008”

 

[DisneyHead123]

I agree, but I don’t think any of Disney’s recent movies push the envelope all that much either.

I'd say yes and no on that front. On the one hand I think they stick to pretty vanilla territory, but on the other, they were one of the first to really have gay representation in animated movies (or any movies, for that matter). I'm sure not the absolute first, as film buffs could no doubt find counter examples, but one of the first major studios at least.

 

[LittleBuford]

I'd say yes and no on that front. On the one hand I think they stick to pretty vanilla territory, but on the other, they were one of the first to really have gay representation in animated movies (or any movies, for that matter). I'm sure not the absolute first, as film buffs could no doubt find counter examples, but one of the first major studios at least.

I’m not sure I’d call that pushing the envelope in 2023, years after the legalisation of gay marriage, though I certainly applaud and welcome it.

 

[BuddyThomas]

I'd say yes and no on that front. On the one hand I think they stick to pretty vanilla territory, but on the other, they were one of the first to really have gay representation in animated movies (or any movies, for that matter). I'm sure not the absolute first, as film buffs could no doubt find counter examples, but one of the first major studios at least.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_LGBT_characters_in_animation:_1990s#:~:text=The%20show's%20first%20episode%2C%20on,on%20a%20U.S.%20animated%20show.

 

[celluloid]

I also fail to see how Disney’s recent offerings are off-brand. Could you offer an example of what you mean?

They are lazy in quality and repetitive for one thing.
You really don't see how most of Disney's flops or low earnings are remakes or not original/fatigue?

If you fail to see that, than you are pixie blinded. You can even like those things and still see that.

That's not the Disney brand.
They literally remade a flop from less than 20 years ago hoping it would magically do well on its name alone.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

This is often repeated, yet never makes sense. How is it any less creative to write a gay couple as parents instead of a straight couple as parents? It isn’t. The end.

I don’t think any of the gay character have detracted from the stories, Strange World maybe slowed the film a bit but that’s a minor gripe. I’m talking about Disneys lack of creativity, they want more diversity but they are being lazy in the process, rather than giving us a new movie like Encanto they lazily change Ariel, rather than a new movie about female leadership they lazily change Snow, rather than a new ride for Tiana they lazily change Splash… Disney is lazy, they have no creativity anymore, I have no problem with them adding diversity, I just think they’re doing it in the worst way possible. Erasing and changing the stories that caused many of their fans to become fans is a horrible business strategy.

Soul was great, Encanto was great, Frozen was great… all add diversity, all add strong characters… give us more of that.

 

[LittleBuford]

They are lazy in quality and repetitive for one thing.
You really don't see how most of Disney's flops or low earnings are remakes or not original/fatigue?

Strange World and Lightyear, which are often presented as the beginning of Disney’s recent troubles, are not remakes, are not repetitive, and are not “lazy in quality” (if “quality” refers to the standard of animation). So no, I’m afraid I don’t quite understand what you’re referring to when you say that Disney has gone “off-brand”.

 

[BuddyThomas]

A movie cannot gross $600M+ domestically without it being an enormous success in every state, county, and town and with every political persuasion.

Barbie achieved this by appealing to everybody and also mocking everybody with a huge tongue in the cheek. This includes mocking the sad, preachy "woke" character of Sasha in the film (who then becomes happy, bonds with mom, sings, and pretty much has an instantly better life once she puts on a pretty sundress, make up, and a snappy hairdo).

"Political" or "divisive" movies cannot gross $600M+ at the domestic box office or nearly $1.4 billion globally.

Now the box office of "Strange World", "Bros", and "Bottoms" on the other hand....

That is not what happened in the plot of Barbie. AT ALL. And Bottoms happens to be a very well made, well reviewed sleeper hit, whether you like it or not. Facts matter.

 

[LittleBuford]

This includes mocking the sad, preachy "woke" character of Sasha in the film (who then becomes happy, bonds with mom, sings, and pretty much has an instantly better life once she puts on a pretty sundress, make up, and a snappy hairdo).

I really don’t think this was the intended takeaway.

 

[BuddyThomas]

I really don’t think this was the intended takeaway.

100% correct.

 

[LittleBuford]

I don’t think any of the gay character have detracted from the stories, Strange World maybe slowed the film a bit but that’s a minor gripe. I’m talking about Disneys lack of creativity, they want more diversity but they are being lazy in the process, rather than giving us a new movie like Encanto they lazily change Ariel, rather than a new movie about female leadership they lazily change Snow, rather than a new ride for Tiana they lazily change Splash… Disney is lazy, they have no creativity anymore, I have no problem with them adding diversity, I just think they’re doing it in the worst way possible. Erasing and changing the stories that caused many of their fans to become fans is a horrible business strategy.

Soul was great, Encanto was great, Frozen was great… all add diversity, all add strong characters… give us more of that.

The remakes are being made in tandem with original stories; this has been the case for about a decade now. Criticising the remakes for being lazy is a perfectly legitimate position, but conflating that criticism with the issue of diversity makes no sense to me. Would the remake of The Little Mermaid have been any less lazy if they’d cast a white actress as Ariel?

 

[celluloid]

Strange World and Lightyear, which are often presented as the beginning of Disney’s recent troubles, are not remakes, are not repetitive, and are not “lazy in quality” (if “quality” refers to the standard of animation). So no, I’m afraid I don’t quite understand what you’re referring to when you say that Disney has gone “off-brand”.

Lightyear is literally a spinoff of a four movie series that is based around the premise that this is the movie Àndy's Toy is based on. Let's not call it original. It tried to hit The Pixar beats, but did not have much to say.
Strange World was just a boring movie with not much to say.
Don't be so stuck on those two from two years ago, it continued to this year.
And next year with possibly Snow White remake, Inside Out 2 and maybe, if they trust to squeeze it in, Deadpool 3 as the big ones.

 

[LittleBuford]

Lightyear is literally a spinoff of a four movie series that is supposedly the movie Àndy's Toy os based on. Let's not call it original. It tried to hit The Pixar beats, but did not have much to say.

Lightyear was a boring film, and I didn’t like it, but it drew very little from the Toy Story movies. It would have been much more enjoyable if it had.

Don't be so stuck on those two from two years ago, it continued to this year.

From years ago?! They came out in 2022. How am I meant to overlook them when they represent such a significant chunk of the data set?

Your larger claim seems to be that what’s off-brand about today’s Disney is its focus on remakes. But Disney started down the remake path a decade ago, and most of the resultant films (including the dreadfully dull Lion King) have been profitable.

So again, I don’t quite understand what “off-brand” means to you.

 

[celluloid]

Lightyear was a boring film, and I didn’t like it, but it drew very little from the Toy Story movies. It would have been much more enjoyable if it had.


From years ago?! They came out in 2022. How am I meant to overlook them when they represent such a significant chunk of the data set?

Your larger claim seems to be that what’s off-brand about today’s Disney is its focus on remakes. But Disney started down the remake path a decade ago, and most of the resultant films (including the dreadfully dull Lion King) have been profitable.

So again, I don’t quite understand what “off-brand” means to you.

The fact remains that it has ties to the franchise name. That what was in question and why people did not give it much thought, and it being paired with lacking quality bummed ones who did. It is relevant to your question.

As for 2022 Sorry. Teacher brain. I think in school years and am talking about next year's line up as we all were with Snow White. You brought up the start of Disney's problems with that. It has been slowly going on before that. Those are just some of the lowest points. 2024 films produce continue this trend of fatigue and films no one is that interested in.
Your Lion King example and fact that they started on remake trend years ago continues the point. It is called Fatigue because it can't shake away. It is unoriginal because it started more than a decade ago. So you agree with my point. The last ten years have reached fatigue. It continued and now it's bottomed out for them.

If you don't understand it, that is fine.
No requirement to, but Wall Street and the box office does.

 

[LittleBuford]

If you don't understand it, that is fine.

It doesn’t exactly make for productive discussion when you can’t clearly explain what you mean by “off-brand”, but I agree it’s best to move on.

 

[celluloid]

It doesn’t exactly make for productive discussion when you can’t clearly explain what you mean by “off-brand”, but I agree it’s best to move on.

I did. For years now Disney has created oversaturation and fatigue. Not original or risk taking much at all anymore and when they do most find it boring, which is also not on brand.
You just don't like, or do not understand the answer.

Just because you don't understand the conversation, does not mean others have to move on.