Disney's Snow White 2025
#2
Posted: 8/14/24 at 10:31am
Thoughts: the YouTube comment section will be more entertaining than the movie.
#3
Posted: 8/14/24 at 10:31am
I’m cautiously hyped! Gal Gadot looks delish as the Evil Queen
#5
Posted: 8/14/24 at 10:50am
I think it looks miserably awful. The hyperdigitzed effects, the slavish devotion to the visual palate of the 1937 film, the alleged fears that ran through the Disney company after the right-wing "backlash" to leaked photos...
Marc Webb has never been an artful auteur director.
Pasek & Paul wrote new songs but who knows how many or what that will entail.
Gal Godot is an awful actress. What a shame they couldn't get anyone better.
I have no doubt that Zegler can be a good Snow White, but the production around her may be setting her up to fail.
Why bother making a "live-action" movie that looks that bad? Just do a CG-animated remake!
Would have loved to see a version of this directed by a real artist like Kenneth Branagh (who did a nice job with Cinderella), or Celine Sciamma, or Joe Wright, or David Lowery, or Autumn de Wilde, or even Bill Condon or Tom Hooper.
Updated On: 8/14/24 at 10:50 AM
#6
Posted: 8/14/24 at 10:50am
CGI dwarves are very upsetting.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
#7
Posted: 8/14/24 at 11:07am
In my opinion, Gal Gadot is the worst mainstream working actress in the biz, so everything she's involved in will always be questionable until I see the actual film.
#8
Posted: 8/14/24 at 11:17am
TaffyDavenport said: "In my opinion, Gal Gadot is the worst mainstream working actress in the biz, so everything she's involved in will always be questionable until I see the actual film."
I agree, although I don't think Rachel is all that great.
I thought the trailer looked OK, I liked the more fairytale look compared to more recent Snow Whites. But it has that very flat CGI heavy look that Wicked has.
This leaked clip looks even worse. Like if The Polar Express characters entered the real world.
https://x.com/nina7infinity/status/1822516786140524835?s=46
#9
Posted: 8/14/24 at 11:18am
TaffyDavenport said: "In my opinion, Gal Gadot is the worst mainstream working actress in the biz, so everything she's involved in will always be questionable until I see the actual film."
She's a really terrible actress. Patty Jenkins almost got a good performance out other in the first Wonder Woman but I've never really been impressed.
I'm sure all the "usual suspects" (Blunt, Hathaway, Kidman, Blanchett, etc) were offered the part before her and passed on it.
Lots of comments online about how uncomfortable she and Zegler looked together at D23 last weekend, as both have vastly different opinions about the current war (of which I have no comment, merely observing).
#10
Posted: 8/14/24 at 11:27am
Rachel tweeted this on Monday. I gotta say, I respect how she doesn't shy away from controversy, although I'm sure Disney feels otherwise:
#11
Posted: 8/14/24 at 1:09pm
Woah, just went thru the comments on YouTube and it’s full on across the board negative and Zegler better have tight security during her upcoming Broadway run. The masses do not like her whatsoever. Yikes. This film needs to be shelved or kept as a Disney+ exclusive.
#12
Posted: 8/14/24 at 1:29pm
The bad faith people (perhaps some of them bots) are REALLY awful towards Zegler online, and the MAGA crowd whipped them up even more.
As if there is one definition of "fair."
A shame she's never been able to have a normal press tour, between WSS (Ansel), Shazam 2 (Zach Levi & a terrible movie), and now this.
#13
Posted: 8/14/24 at 1:30pm
Harsh truth but the dwarves wouldn't be CGI if a Hollywood actor hadn't gotten involved. Call me crazy but all he did was ensure little people didn't get the jobs.
God help with the Disney PR team with Zegler. It's almost as if the girl wants to torpedo her own career.
#14
Posted: 8/14/24 at 1:37pm
ucjrdude902 said: "Harsh truth but the dwarves wouldn't be CGI if a Hollywood actor hadn't gotten involved. Call me crazy but all he did was ensure little people didn't get the jobs."
Do you know for a fact that no actors with Dwarfism were employed by the production, or are you simply making assumptions? It may be a motion capture situation, as multiple actors of short stature are credited on IMDB (though that's not an official source).
(The actor you're referring to is, I assume, Peter Dinklage based on his comments after the film began shooting; there were also right wing cries about the diversity of some of the body-doubles)
Updated On: 8/14/24 at 01:37 PM
#15
Posted: 8/14/24 at 1:56pm
ucjrdude902 said: "Harsh truth but the dwarves wouldn't be CGI if a Hollywood actor hadn't gotten involved. Call me crazy but all he did was ensure little people didn't get the jobs.
God help with the Disney PR team with Zegler. It's almost as if the girl wants to torpedo her own career."
Not a truth at all. Peter Dinklage didn't "get involved." He made a comment on a podcast about how they're "still making that f***ing backward story about seven dwarfs living in a cave." That's literally all he said. It's not his fault that Disney heard this, quaked in fear over the world's most famous person with dwarfism giving them bad PR, misunderstood the problem and made the movie even more offensive.
Updated On: 8/14/24 at 01:56 PM
#16
Posted: 8/14/24 at 5:21pm
I have a very miniscule grain of hope with this, only because Greta Gerwig is one of the 2 writers on the screenplay...but from the trailer and the visuals it looks just terrible.
I agreed with what Peter Dinklage said, but I also see that acting work for little people is rare and far between. I appreciated that Mirror, Mirror actually hired actors of stature to play the Dwarfs. As opposed to Snow White and the Huntsman where they shrunk down famous actors.
Like all these re-makes, I don't understand why this even needed to be made. It's kind of wild that when Walt was alive Disney was an incredibly forward thinking company. He was always on to the next thing. Now the company is just delving into IP, instead of investing in new art.
#17
Posted: 8/14/24 at 5:53pm
These recent live-action remakes typically make mountains of money for Disney, but they seem to disappear from the collective consciousness almost immediately. They're inferior versions of movies that already exist, often duplicating large portions of the originals almost exactly and bringing little new to the table. At least the Glenn Close 101 Dalmations in the 90s was a fundamentally very different movie from the original- these modern remakes just seem so bland, risk-averse, and boardroom-dictated. When Disney does offer something new, it can still be fun, magical, and something that gets woven into pop culture- movies like Frozen, Encanto, Zootopia, and Moana- but there's so much more disposable dreck being pushed out.
"...everyone finally shut up, and the audience could enjoy the beginning of the Anatevka Pogram in peace."
Updated On: 8/14/24 at 05:53 PM
#18
Posted: 8/14/24 at 6:16pm
There isn’t a single one of these remakes to date that I would choose to watch over the original animated version. This doesn’t look any better or worse than the rest of them to me, so it seems the intense animosity towards Zegler in particular is driving most of the negative reaction here. That said…her wig in the trailer is a crime.
#19
Posted: 8/14/24 at 7:07pm
I can live with Gal, but Rachel is sadly not very talented. She’s bland and that’s a crime worst than being bad.
Well I didn't want to get into it, but he's a Satanist.
Every full moon he sacrifices 4 puppies to the Dark Lord and smears their blood on his paino.
This should help you understand the score for Wicked a little bit more.
Tazber's: Reply to
Is Stephen Schwartz a Practicing Christian
#20
Posted: 8/14/24 at 7:23pm
MidWestTheater said: "I have a very miniscule grain of hope with this, only because Greta Gerwig is one of the 2 writers on the screenplay...but from the trailer and the visuals it looks just terrible."
Per Gerwig herself:
“I was hired for a couple of weeks. I did a ‘pass’ — I wrote some jokes.”
Which to me says don't get your hopes up :) Who knows if she'll even be credited on the final film. She might opt not to be. Or they may have hacked her work to bits after her draft was turned in.
Hollywood screenwriting is a weird thing and a lot of time people are credited for work they didn't do, aren't credited for work they did do, or come in for a bit to basically be a dramaturg & give ideas & then go away.
Updated On: 8/14/24 at 07:23 PM
#21
Posted: 8/14/24 at 7:31pm
MidWestTheater said: "I have a very miniscule grain of hope with this, only because Greta Gerwig is one of the 2 writers on the screenplay...but from the trailer and the visuals it looks just terrible.
I agreed with what Peter Dinklage said, but I also see that acting work for little people is rare and far between. I appreciated that Mirror, Mirror actually hired actors of stature to play the Dwarfs. As opposed to Snow White and the Huntsman where they shrunk down famous actors.
Like all these re-makes, I don't understand why this even needed to be made. It's kind of wild that when Walt was alive Disney was an incrediblyforward thinking company. He was always on to the next thing. Now the company is just delving into IP, instead of investing in new art."
I admit I haven’t been too thrilled with Disney in terms of their film input the last couple years. But I hope to live in a time where originality and IP can peacefully co exist.
#22
Posted: 8/14/24 at 8:55pm
I think there IS a way for these live-action remakes to be done artfully by the right people, this just ain't it.
There has to be a level of reimagining.
I just scrubbed through Disney+ and the original Disney movie is 83 minutes soaking wet. The woodsman tries to kill her at minute 8, she arrives at the Dwarves' house at minute 15. About half the songs are novelty numbers for the dwarfs. The leading character demonstrates a mental capacity of an eleven year old. Walt improved his formula on Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty.
There's a lot of room to expand!
#24
Posted: 8/14/24 at 9:31pm
ErmengardeStopSniveling said: "I think there IS a way for these live-action remakes to be done artfully by the right people, this just ain't it.
There has to be a level of reimagining.
I just scrubbed through Disney+ and the original Disney movie is 83 minutes soaking wet. The woodsman tries to kill her at minute 8, she arrives at the Dwarves' house at minute 15. About half the songsare novelty numbers for the dwarfs. The leading character demonstrates a mental capacity of an eleven year old. Walt improved his formula on Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty.
There's a lot of room to expand!"
And when Zegler pointed all of this out, she was met with vitriol. This does look objectively terrible, but I’m still at a loss for why Zegler is so reviled (well, I have some suspicions).
#25
Posted: 8/14/24 at 10:05pm
The trailer looks magical and enchanting! I’m pretty excited for the movie!
Not sure what people want from these Disney remakes. On one hand, if it strays too far from the animated version, people get mad. If it’s too close to the animated version, people still get mad. Can’t make everyone happy.
Rachel Zegler was going to be hated by a certain group no matter what she did or said simply because she is half Hispanic. Just like Halle got so much hate.
I hope this will end up like Cinderella. There’s so much room for plot expansion and character development. Plus, it’ll be a musical, so I’m excited to see how the new songs will mesh with the ones from 1937.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $89
Tickets From $72
Tickets From $65