• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

First images from Disney remake of Snow White and the Seven "Dwarves"

jason10mm

Gold Member
The mirror is sentient. The Queen talks to the mirror and the mirror answers with a voice. It's not JUST the reflection.
Sure, but the mirror as a metaphor only really works if it's superficial appearances in question.

If it were a talking book and a play on "don't judge a book by its cover" then you'd have a point, but as a mirror I just can't stretch it to anything other than physical beauty.

Maybe revisions wanting to change this should make it a talking CT scanner or xray machine?
 

DeafTourette

Perpetually Offended
Sure, but the mirror as a metaphor only really works if it's superficial appearances in question.

If it were a talking book and a play on "don't judge a book by its cover" then you'd have a point, but as a mirror I just can't stretch it to anything other than physical beauty.

Maybe revisions wanting to change this should make it a talking CT scanner or xray machine?

This is why I like our conversations here. You know how to inject humor with logic... No flaws in your argument.
 

Kraz

Member
The mirror is sentient. The Queen talks to the mirror and the mirror answers with a voice. It's not JUST the reflection.
Magic mirrors are notoriously cryptic.

According to wikipedia:
The Magic Mirror appeared in Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs voiced by Moroni Olsen. The Magic Mirror contained an imprisoned spirit resembling a drama mask who is referred to as the Slave in the Magic Mirror. In his first appearance in the film, the Evil Queen would consult with the Magic Mirror to ask who the fairest one of all was. The Magic Mirror always told the Evil Queen that she was the fairest one of all. When asked who the fairest of all is, the spirit replies that, while the Queen is beautiful, a fairer being exists.

In the opening scene the mirror equates 'gentle grace' that can't be hidden by rags with the fairer. The Queen, while evil, does have a regal grace. The skin as white as snow comes right after when the Queen asks to know the name and the mirror answers cryptically with physical qualities using adjectives without directly saying the name. Maybe to get under the Queen's skin, maybe to give her room to congratulate herself. The simple wordplay let's kids easily follow how similes work.

Occupation also provided surnames. It would be funny if she's a launderer in this adaptation. Pure as driven snow can describe virtue, can be extended to unblemished.

It'll be interesting to see how they handle dialogue. They don't need to change much. Other stories can take inspiration for more commentary.

This subject and season got me thinking about similarities with the witch and Susan Delgado from Wizard and Glass.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
This is why I like our conversations here. You know how to inject humor with logic... No flaws in your argument.
I get your point, in a modern context "fairest of them all" means a lot and we have drastically expanded what "take a mirror to yourself and look inward" could mean, but I'm a stickler for purity in the old fairy tales because I think there is a more raw and primal truth to them. Taking Snow White and all the language it uses out of context would be considered cultural appropriation, colonization, or whatever nonsense if it were anything other than a white person germanic tale. But I do feel these stories have a human resonance and SHOULD be adapted widely as the lessons within apply to all. But you gotta admit its a bit odd to have a character called "Snow White" who isn't pretty pale and if you are gonna pit her against the queen then you gotta stop casting uber hotties for the queen and 7s for Snow White.
 

TransTrender

Gold Member
giphy.gif
Aww..
 

DeafTourette

Perpetually Offended
I get your point, in a modern context "fairest of them all" means a lot and we have drastically expanded what "take a mirror to yourself and look inward" could mean, but I'm a stickler for purity in the old fairy tales because I think there is a more raw and primal truth to them. Taking Snow White and all the language it uses out of context would be considered cultural appropriation, colonization, or whatever nonsense if it were anything other than a white person germanic tale. But I do feel these stories have a human resonance and SHOULD be adapted widely as the lessons within apply to all. But you gotta admit its a bit odd to have a character called "Snow White" who isn't pretty pale and if you are gonna pit her against the queen then you gotta stop casting uber hotties for the queen and 7s for Snow White.

A 7 for the Queen has to be the standard. I agree.

But bro... There's other Brothers Grimm tales they SHOULD be looking at that they haven't adapted yet ... Some stories don't need to be retold over and over when there's MORE stories than this... There's been a TON of Snow White movies and shows.... I get it, it's a classic but ... Damn!

Edit: I have no problem with this or any other movie that's been made... Just want another story to be made.
 
Last edited:

Dacvak

No one shall be brought before our LORD David Bowie without the true and secret knowledge of the Photoshop. For in that time, so shall He appear.
pmXDoJp.jpg


Looks like they replaced the previous “dwarfs” with CGI dwarfs after all the backlash. I thought part of the reason people were mad was because of the lack of representation of actors with dwarfism, though? I don’t get modern Disney at all.
 
The actress is godawful irl but interested in seeing that new Hunger Games movie next week. Lets see if she can out Jlaw at her prime. (Not a chance).
 

Banjo64

cumsessed
pmXDoJp.jpg


Looks like they replaced the previous “dwarfs” with CGI dwarfs after all the backlash. I thought part of the reason people were mad was because of the lack of representation of actors with dwarfism, though? I don’t get modern Disney at all.
Folded like a crisp packet :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 

NeoIkaruGAF

Gold Member
That pic is hilarious when you realize that the 4 dwarves behind her would just see her back and hair. What are they even looking at standing there and smiling like idiots? There’s a reason in the original animated film they were all lined in front of her when they see her for the first time.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
pmXDoJp.jpg


Looks like they replaced the previous “dwarfs” with CGI dwarfs after all the backlash. I thought part of the reason people were mad was because of the lack of representation of actors with dwarfism, though? I don’t get modern Disney at all.
Soooooo, rather than hire 7 working actors who happen to be dwarves (or even just do a LOTR with perspective shots) they committed to 100 MILLION in CGI to achieve largely the same end result?
 

Kraz

Member
Aladdin is actually one of the only good live action remakes. They didn’t just do a shot for shot remake and made it different enough that it wasn’t a bore like Lion King.
I tried again and still found it unlikable. Changes aren't bothersome, I like what Ritchie did with Arthur and enjoy changes to other Disney classics. It's also a story that could be vastly improved upon modernized. Lion King I didn't care for either.
 

Eiknarf

Banned
Heads up everyone;
Disney is aware that their social agenda is divisive.

This is directly from their last SEC filing.

“Further, consumers’ perceptions of our position on matters of public interest, including our efforts to achieve certain of our environmental and social goals, often differ widely and present risks to our reputation and brands”

(This is a warning to investors that things will not change).
 
Last edited:
While it will be fun to watch Disney lose millions
what's even funnier is to watch the upcoming battle of the Snow Whites (Disney vs Daily Wire).
Especially considering how opposite are their creator's & cast's views about respecting the original story.
 

Big Baller

Al Pachinko, Konami President
pmXDoJp.jpg


Looks like they replaced the previous “dwarfs” with CGI dwarfs after all the backlash. I thought part of the reason people were mad was because of the lack of representation of actors with dwarfism, though? I don’t get modern Disney at all.

Why are the cgi little people white
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
Bet the main character Riley is gay now. I honestly would be shocked if not. "Inside Out 2: Coming Out"
Trans maybe. Which narratively could be interesting if she goes on hormone blockers and T supp and all the emotions suddenly switch sex as well and have different personalities. Wonder what the "roid rage" emotion looks like :p She was a hockey player in the first film, right? Seems appropriate :p

About all I remember from IO was that polka dot elephant thing fading away, for some reason I'm always cutting onions during that scene....

They could go reeeeeaaallllll subversive and have a social media created "mind virus" attack her brain and lock away some of the emotions, driving the girl crazy with an eating disorder or joining a cult. Would Pixar do that (or find a clever way to hint at it)? Could todays Pixar under the thumb of Disney? I'm struggling to think of what teenage girl issue they could tackle in a film being marketed to children. Didn't they try that already with the Panda/period one and it tank?
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
I think there are two take-aways from the statement. One is that it doesn't benefit companies to make strong political statements as corporate positions, particularly things that focus on 1-2% of your workforce. If Disney was saying "kids should stay in school till 12th grade and we make media that supports that idea", that is a pretty generally applicable and benign thing. But saying "we think the core family concept of a father, a mother, and children is outdated and needs to be replaced with alternative models of broken homes, blended families, single parent households as the norm and totally acceptable and should be pushed to kids" is pandering to a very small demographic and ignores that virtually everyone and all the data thinks the classic nuclear family is the optimal path, broken, blended, or single parent homes are not the ideal and shouldn't be pushed as if they were. Doesn't mean that stuff can't be shown, as lots of kids live in those situations, but its the "ideal" part that gets Disney in trouble I think.

Second is just missing the target audience for their IPs because they foolishly think the original target audience will stick around. Marvel and Lucasarts are two great examples. They were bought to bring boys back to Disney, and it works REALLY WELL until they decided to turn those IPs towards girls. It would be like taking Frozen or Beauty and the Beast and making them into mecha war films with a lot of singing and pastel colors, then wondering why boys didn't really show up but neither did the girls.

So Disney needs to just stop preaching from their corporate offices and start making films that are properly aligned with the audiences.
 

jason10mm

Gold Member
Deadpool 3 might be good... unless they change it to a more formulaic PG-13 Marvel movie.
Eh, I dunno. I feel like everything Deadpool could say as meta commentary on superhero films was done in DP1. I didn't really care for the "story" in DP2 and the shock value was already wearing thin. I've got faith in Hugh but I'm not sure there are any new ideas and the schtick may already be dull.
 

NickFire

Member
Eh, I dunno. I feel like everything Deadpool could say as meta commentary on superhero films was done in DP1. I didn't really care for the "story" in DP2 and the shock value was already wearing thin. I've got faith in Hugh but I'm not sure there are any new ideas and the schtick may already be dull.
I won't complain if its essentially fan service mashed up with Hugh's swan song playing Wolverine. It's ok for a movie to be fun without much of a message.
 

Haint

Member
I think there are two take-aways from the statement. One is that it doesn't benefit companies to make strong political statements as corporate positions, particularly things that focus on 1-2% of your workforce. If Disney was saying "kids should stay in school till 12th grade and we make media that supports that idea", that is a pretty generally applicable and benign thing. But saying "we think the core family concept of a father, a mother, and children is outdated and needs to be replaced with alternative models of broken homes, blended families, single parent households as the norm and totally acceptable and should be pushed to kids" is pandering to a very small demographic and ignores that virtually everyone and all the data thinks the classic nuclear family is the optimal path, broken, blended, or single parent homes are not the ideal and shouldn't be pushed as if they were. Doesn't mean that stuff can't be shown, as lots of kids live in those situations, but its the "ideal" part that gets Disney in trouble I think.

Second is just missing the target audience for their IPs because they foolishly think the original target audience will stick around. Marvel and Lucasarts are two great examples. They were bought to bring boys back to Disney, and it works REALLY WELL until they decided to turn those IPs towards girls. It would be like taking Frozen or Beauty and the Beast and making them into mecha war films with a lot of singing and pastel colors, then wondering why boys didn't really show up but neither did the girls.

So Disney needs to just stop preaching from their corporate offices and start making films that are properly aligned with the audiences.
LOL good luck with that. 95% of their work force, 95% of their industry, 95% of their HQ's city, and 95% of their HQ's state are far left activists, they couldn't make a non-pandering work if their life depended on it. They quite literally have no idea how to make characters and IP like they use to, all the guys that did are long gone to retirement, or fired for being problematic or poor fits for the new culture.
 
Last edited:

jason10mm

Gold Member
LOL good luck with that. 95% of their work force, 95% of their industry, 95% of their HQ's city, and 95% of their HQ's state are far left activists, they couldn't make a non-pandering work if their life depended on it. They quite literally have no idea how to make characters and IP like they use to, all the guys that did are long gone to retirement, or fired for being problematic or poor fits for the new culture.
I don't think this is true. Folks are still putting in hard work on these films and typically folks that are actually good at their job and worked to get there aren't wokeivists. It's really just execs who think this is what "the audience" wants who don't really believe any of it themselves, and the marketing/writing teams that need to go. It isn't that hard to write traditional audience media, hell, they churned them out by the dozen back in the day and there are legions of books about it. But you DO need folks with passion and creativity, and quite frankly you can smell the loonies when they enter the room, if the execs just stop hiring those folks and go back to hiring all the standard guys that were pushed aside and make a culture that is safe for them to get back to work (plenty of articles about the "old guard" that were disposed of or at least made to feel very uncomfortable if they didn't parrot a specific ideology), then the money comes rolling back in.

Disney has a deep hole to dig themselves out of though, they have wrecked their classic goodwill for a generation at least and it would take a lot to win it back as folks hackles are up and any misstep is blown out of proportion now. They could make Pugh dress super sexy in the Thunderbolts and put Iron Heart in a steel bodysuit in an attempt to get the boys interested again but it isn't likely to work, they have crushed all the good male characters and there are no charismatic leads in the new batch to pass the torch.
 

GloveSlap

Member
LOL good luck with that. 95% of their work force, 95% of their industry, 95% of their HQ's city, and 95% of their HQ's state are far left activists, they couldn't make a non-pandering work if their life depended on it. They quite literally have no idea how to make characters and IP like they use to, all the guys that did are long gone to retirement, or fired for being problematic or poor fits for the new culture.
Agreed. All of the agenda stuff in the movies are just symptoms of a deeper sickness. I would argue that there is a competency crisis in a lot of industries when it comes to workforce replacement. If you're not hiring the best of already slim pickings and pushing good people out you are going to be in a world of shit.

Look at the few decent things that still come out of Hollywood. Tarantino, Nolan, Villeneuve, etc. Not exactly spring chickens.
 
Top Bottom