Live-Action ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs’

[Disney Irish]

Not speculation at all:

Live-Action 'Snow White' Swaps Most 'Dwarfs' for Ordinary Randoms

New photos from the 'Snow White' movie have been released, and most of the "seven dwarfs" have grown quite a bit.

www.tmz.com

Disney initially denied these as being real then confirmed they were in fact real.

Snow White wrapped filming in July 2022.

This was originally supposed to be out holiday 2023. The poor test screenings and public backlash had them doing reshoots the last 2 years and replacing actors with CGI dwarves. Disney doesn't know what to do with the film.

As for Disney CGI, it is all outsourced (no in house CGI studio besides ILM which primarily does work for other clients (not Disney)). The Marvel and SW shows have been criticized in recent years for bad CGI as Disney is awarding contracts to the lowest bidding studios. This could be unfinished but the Little Mermaid remake also had cheap CGI.

Sorry but TMZ is not some beacon of truth, also their article is based on the original Daily Mail article, both are tabloids. So I wouldn't take anything what either publications publish as some true reporting of events. Its sensationalized reporting specifically designed to stoke the flames of discontent that was happening at the time, ie its clickbate.

 

[doctornick]

I was referring to the quality of the artistry. Perhaps you would still deem the remake superior in that regard, but I've not seen anything that comes close to rivalling what the hand-drawn films achieved.

I would still make the case. The visuals for live action The Jungle Book were pretty awesome and very effective (and it is odd how they dropped the ball so much with the live action The Lion King) and I don't think the original was exactly peak Disney animation quality. I mean, the original was a fine film, but not exceptional among Disney productions.

 

[Chi84]

Sorry but TMZ is not some beacon of truth, also their article is based on the original Daily Mail article, both are tabloids. So I wouldn't take anything what either publications publish as some true reporting of events. Its sensationalized reporting specifically designed to stoke the flames of discontent that was happening at the time, ie its clickbate.

Have some respect. Disney fired the star and re-shot the entire movie based on that clickbait. Don't you know that's how the new Disney does its audience research?

 

[Disney Irish]

Disney's Little Mermaid Plunges To $5 Million Loss

Disney's live action version of The Little Mermaid lost an estimated $4.9m at the box office as the movie's "cost exceeded the production budget" as spending surged to $355.1m.

www.forbes.com

Which means it did turn profitable post-theaterical, something that many at the time claimed would never happen.

Bringing this back to the original reason you posted about Mermaid, Snow White's budget is almost $100M less, so as long as it does respectable in theaters it too should be profitable.

 

[Disney Irish]

Have some respect. Disney fired the star and re-shot the entire movie based on that clickbait. Don't you know that's how the new Disney does its audience research?

I'm still waiting to hear the spin from those that claimed she was fired when the movie releases and she is still Snow.

 

[LittleBuford]

I would still make the case. The visuals for live action The Jungle Book were pretty awesome and very effective (and it is odd how they dropped the ball so much with the live action The Lion King) and I don't think the original was exactly peak Disney animation quality. I mean, the original was a fine film, but not exceptional among Disney productions.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I personally love the sketchier style that characterises Disney animated films of that era.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Add in the people who objected to a live-action version and those who objected to an updated animated version and we’re getting closer.

Closer to what? Those still strike me as complaints related to storytelling - what movies Disney should be making and how. Whether one agrees with them or not, I don't think they're objections that, "have nothing to do with the actual movie." Until we see the final product, discussion can really only focus on background elements, news, trailers, etc.

 

[Heppenheimer]

We'll have to agree to disagree. I personally love the sketchier style that characterises Disney animated films of that era.

As much as I appreciate a good Christopher Walken performance, you just can't beat Louis Prima in the original. I'll also take Phil Harris over Bill Murray in his "I-showed-up-now-give-me-my-paycheck" stage.

 

[erasure fan1]

Now the dwarfs don’t look close enough to the original ones, so Disney should have made a completely different movie.

They've been working on this film for a while, delayed it a year, so if it wasn't ready to show, don't show it. The dwarfs look terrible, of course it's going to get mocked. This film was always going to be a tough sell in my opinion. It's arguably, no matter what anyone thinks of the film, the most important film in Disney history. Anything that appears to be less than the original was never going to not cause a stink.

It’s almost as though the objections have nothing to do with the actual movie.

The objections are absolutely about the movie in my opinion. The dwarfs the casting, the look of the film, the one song we have heard... It's all in the film. As I said, it's definitely a rock and a hard place kinda film. If they make it exactly the same, it's, well what was the point of that! If they stray way off the original, it's, why are you butchering such a historic film! Even people who have supported the live action remakes are going after this one.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Which means it did turn profitable post-theaterical, something that many at the time claimed would never happen.

Bringing this back to the original reason you posted about Mermaid, Snow White's budget is almost $100M less, so as long as it does respectable in theaters it too should be profitable.

According to the article, the numbers do not account for marketing costs. Where are the posters who disagree about the best way to do those calculations to figure out if movies are profitable or not? I think we need them to weigh in before making a final determination

 

[Disney Irish]

According to the article, the numbers do not account for marketing costs. Where are the posters who disagree about the best way to do those calculations to figure out if movies are profitable or not? I think we need them to weigh in before making a final determination

I know you're trying to be funny, but this was debated ad nauseam in both TLM thread and the Box Office thread for almost a year. So lets not clog up this thread for something which has nothing to do with the topic with another useless debate.

The point should be that the budget of this film is almost $100M less than TLM (once the UK rebate was counted in for TLM), which means if it does respectable in theaters it should make a profit.

 

[easyrowrdw]

I know you're trying to be funny, but this was debated ad nauseam in both TLM thread and the Box Office thread for almost a year. So lets not clog up this thread for something which has nothing to do with the topic with another useless debate.

The point should be that the budget of this film is almost $100M less than TLM (once the UK rebate was counted in for TLM), which means if it does respectable in theaters it should make a profit.

Yes, I was just being silly.

Sounds like a step in the right direction for Disney movie budgets. Do we know if the Snow White budget accounts for the apparent reshoots? Or are those not actually confirmed? (I confess, I haven't read this entire thread)

 

[Disney Irish]

Yes, I was just being silly.

Sounds like a step in the right direction for Disney movie budgets. Do we know if the Snow White budget accounts for the apparent reshoots? Or are those not actually confirmed? (I confess, I haven't read this entire thread)

Its currently listed at $209M, I don't know if that is before or after its round of reshoots. I suspect we won't get that number until closer to release, if its changed.

 

[easyrowrdw]

Its currently listed at $209M, I don't know if that is before or after its round of reshoots. I suspect we won't get that number until closer to release, if its changed.

Thanks!

 

[CaptinEO]

Sorry but TMZ is not some beacon of truth, also their article is based on the original Daily Mail article, both are tabloids. So I wouldn't take anything what either publications publish as some true reporting of events. Its sensationalized reporting specifically designed to stoke the flames of discontent that was happening at the time, ie its clickbate.

TMZ is a trashy news site but it is very much accurate in its reporting. Believe it or not they are the most common truth source used for confirming celebrity deaths.

 

[Disney Irish]

TMZ is a trashy news site but it is very much accurate in its reporting. Believe it or not they are the most common truth source used for confirming celebrity deaths.

And if we were talking about a celebrity death I might be inclined to believe it. But they get this information straight from the Daily Mail, they don't even change much of any of the substance. There is no independent verification done, no quote from anyone, heck there is not even an author listed and they don't even have their own pictures, just using copies from a hosting site. It is a unadulterated tabloid clickbate article written to stoke the flames of discontent about Disney at the time, and you fell hook, line, and sinker for it.

Sorry but its not some evidence of anything. If you had something from a major news outlet that had independent verification done, and not just some copy of the Daily Mail, I might be willing to entertain such a claim. But until then throw this in the waste bin just like all other tabloid "news".

 

[Disstevefan1]

TLM lost money especially when you add the marketing costs and SW will for sure lose money.

We all must remember, in Disney's movie business, making money is not important, its all about their art and their message.

Disney uses their theme park business to pay for their money losing movies.

If they can make money on a movie here and there, like Inside out 2, that's gravy.

 

[CaptinEO]

And if we were talking about a celebrity death I might be inclined to believe it. But they get this information straight from the Daily Mail, they don't even change much of any of the substance. There is no independent verification done, no quote from anyone, heck there is not even an author listed and they don't even have their own pictures, just using copies from a hosting site. It is a unadulterated tabloid clickbate article written to stoke the flames of discontent about Disney at the time, and you fell hook, line, and sinker for it.

Sorry but its not some evidence of anything. If you had something from a major news outlet that had independent verification done, and not just some copy of the Daily Mail, I might be willing to entertain such a claim. But until then throw this in the waste bin just like all other tabloid "news".

Well stated and I agree.

 

[BasiltheBatLord]

I have full confidence that this film will be absolutely horrendous.

 

[Chi84]

I have full confidence that this film will be absolutely horrendous.

So you’re not planning to see it?