Board 8 > Snow White Remake

(+) Yeah! (+)

LinkMarioSamus posted...

This movie has the lowest Cinemascore for a Disney live-action remake at B+.

This "Cinemascore" sounds like it's got a major grade-inflation problem
Oh, I see. It's exit-polling moviegoers on opening weekend, including asking them for a letter grade.

Hence why I outlined it was a tool for those who want to analyze prospective box office more than an indicator of quality. Big blockbuster movies disproportionately have higher Cinemascores than other movies, so this movie having a relatively low one seems like an indicator that there just wasn't much hype for it.

has LMS showed up

paperwarior posted...

This "Cinemascore" sounds like it's got a major grade-inflation problem
Oh, I see. It's exit-polling moviegoers on opening weekend, including asking them for a letter grade.

Yeah, Cinemascore is a terrible benchmark because it skews towards people who were already more likely to enjoy the film anyway.

Tangentially-related, I watched Moana 2 for the first time last night and... what was that? I already think the first one is pretty mid-tier Disney (in fact, right after it came out, I ranked the Disney Canon on another board and had it dead-center), and this was much, much worse. Too much modern-speak from non-Maui characters, the plot meandered all over the place, the songs were REALLY sub-par (with one exception), the pacing was atrocious, and somehow, despite the film seemingly like it had severe ADHD, it was also very boring. There was ONE very clever fourth-wall joke that I actually laughed at but I already can't remember what it was, and otherwise my favorite part of the film was Matangi, but even she carried her caveat. In addition to having a fantastic design, some good dialogue, a perfect voice and by far the best song in the film, they did a fantastic job building her up through each appearance, being just a disembodied voice in her first scene, mostly obscured by shadows in her second, and then finally being fully-visible fittingly when Moana herself first encounters her. And then she disappears for the second half of the film. This could have been a fantastic villain and then they just dropped her. Like, I get why she couldn't be in the second half but it still felt so abrupt to end her arc halfway through the story after all that build-up.

Long story shot - Disney, STOP DOING SEQUELS AND REMAKES. GET SOME ORIGINAL IDEAS.

Underleveled posted...

Yeah, Cinemascore is a terrible benchmark because it skews towards people who were already more likely to enjoy the film anyway.

Tangentially-related, I watched Moana 2 for the first time last night and... what was that? I already think the first one is pretty mid-tier Disney (in fact, right after it came out, I ranked the Disney Canon on another board and had it dead-center), and this was much, much worse. Too much modern-speak from non-Maui characters, the plot meandered all over the place, the songs were REALLY sub-par (with one exception), the pacing was atrocious, and somehow, despite the film seemingly like it had severe ADHD, it was also very boring. There was ONE very clever fourth-wall joke that I actually laughed at but I already can't remember what it was, and otherwise my favorite part of the film was Matangi, but even she carried her caveat. In addition to having a fantastic design, some good dialogue, a perfect voice and by far the best song in the film, they did a fantastic job building her up through each appearance, being just a disembodied voice in her first scene, mostly obscured by shadows in her second, and then finally being fully-visible fittingly when Moana herself first encounters her. And then she disappears for the second half of the film. This could have been a fantastic villain and then they just dropped her. Like, I get why she couldn't be in the second half but it still felt so abrupt to end her arc halfway through the story after all that build-up.

Long story shot - Disney, STOP DOING SEQUELS AND REMAKES. GET SOME ORIGINAL IDEAS.

Moana 2 was originally created to be a disney+ series before they took it and made it a sequel for theaters

it shows

It was a reworked Disney+ series, right? No wonder it feels disjointed.

The music would have been acceptable for a tv series follow-up, but was a big step down for a proper sequel.

But it had an amazing box office so you know that nothing was learned.

Box office was due to how much Moana was liked so people probably didnt know about the downgrade in music quality and stuff

Moana 3 will just be a series of TikToks with the Moana-fy filter superimposed on them.

swordz9 posted...

Box office was due to how much Moana was liked so people probably didnt know about the downgrade in music quality and stuff

Hence why they would be leaving so much money on the table by not doing sequels. It does hurt their brand long term but that's someone else's problem.

Also Disney has had sequels forever and they are always a step down, straight to VHS or whatever. It's weird to expect modern sequels to actually be better than the originals. I would blame Toy Story 3 for that unrealistic expectation.

foolm0r0n posted...

Also Disney has had sequels forever and they are always a step down, straight to VHS or whatever. It's weird to expect modern sequels to actually be better than the originals. I would blame Toy Story 3 for that unrealistic expectation.

If Moana 2 was a straight to VHS movie (as its quality indicates), nobody would care or complain. It's the fact that they acted like this was a big budget sequel by giving it a theatrical release.

But Disney doesn't have an option for straight to Bluray or whatever anymore. It's either straight to Disney+, or try for theathers. I think they've found that Disney+ exclusive content doesn't actually make them money, so the only option is theaters, or cancel the movie entirely.

They could do a VOD rental-only period similar to prime.

But if they are going to make a billion dollars at the box office for a panned sequel, why would they?

foolm0r0n posted...

Hence why they would be leaving so much money on the table by not doing sequels. It does hurt their brand long term but that's someone else's problem.

Thats a fourth quarter problem!

Forceful_Dragon posted...

My wife and I enjoyed it, but one change that she didn't care for was when Dopey spoke.

My wife is an aide in a special education classroom (Kindergarten through 2nd grade) and Dopey from the original cartoon is not explicitly stated to be autistic, but displays several strong indicators of autism. Many of her students are either completely nonverbal or have a lot of difficulty communicating. Dopey in the new movie is essentially retconned as someone who is just really shy and choosing not to speak, at which point he finally does and has no more issues. As a result she feels this change represents a loss of representation for the neurodivergent. They could have just as easily given Dopey an important moment in the movie where is skill at whistling or some other talent was important if they wanted him to have a positive moment but retaining his attribute of not being capable of "normal" communication.

But other than that I personally had no problems with the movie and thought many of the changes were good. The fact that the original is from 90 years ago meant that there was a lot of room to improve and flesh out the thinner parts and perhaps most importantly give Snow White character traits that elevate her beyond a simple damsel in distress. Definitely worth watching, as remakes go.

Why should anyone care about the lack of neurodivergent representation, given LGBT+ have it much worse than neurodivergent people. Just having a fully fleshed out character who just so happens to be LGBT+ has bigots crying woke, something that doesn't happen concerning neurodivergent/other disabilities representation.

Besides, people don't get killed for being neurodivergent like it happens to LGBT+ people.

In short: I think LGBT+ representation and defending them is infinitely more important than neurodivergent/disability representation or fighting for the rights of people with disabilities, cause LGBT+ are more oppressed than people with disabilities.

I mean yes they're going to do the thing they think will make them a lot of money right now

But it's also not difficult to understand why people aren't fond of them passing off a straight-to-video release as a big budget sequel

And that's how you become the MCU

The bottom line is if your shitty sequel movie makes $1bil at the box office, then it deserved to be a big budget movie and not a kids' stocking stuffer

Correct, a legit Moana 2 could've made even more

It's failing upward

foolm0r0n posted...

I would blame Toy Story 3 for that unrealistic expectation.

one of the only sequels that should have been made

Leonhart4 posted...

Correct, a legit Moana 2 could've made even more

It's failing upward

I feel like I've said this about something before...

Forceful_Dragon posted...

They could do a VOD rental-only period similar to prime.

But if they are going to make a billion dollars at the box office for a panned sequel, why would they?

I believe they did this for the live-action Mulan. The fact that they haven't done it again since is probably an indicator that it failed (though that probably has more to do with the film than the model but they'd never admit that).

MegaWentEvil posted...

In short: I think LGBT+ representation and defending them is infinitely more important than neurodivergent/disability representation or fighting for the rights of people with disabilities, cause LGBT+ are more oppressed than people with disabilities.

Here's a novel thought: Don't corner the market on representation. It's not a competition to see who can get rights and respect; everyone deserves that.

Underleveled posted...

I believe they did this for the live-action Mulan. The fact that they haven't done it again since is probably an indicator that it failed (though that probably has more to do with the film than the model but they'd never admit that).

This was most likely exclusively the fault of COVID, not anything else. The movie was released in mid-2020, of course it didn't go to theaters.

Well that's why they released it VOD, yeah. But the fact that they didn't do it for Soul, which came out just a few months later (also skipping its intended theatrical release), is a pretty good indicator that it wasn't as financially-successful as they were expecting it to be.

I think people underestimate just how much revenue movie tickets generate. A family of 4 is $60. A kid's party would be $300-400. Disney gets about half of that, so you'd need a Disney+ VOD situation to be valued between $30 and $200 to make it worth it over the equivalent movie theater release. I remember Mulan was around $30 for the VOD so they probably did this exact calculation for that.

And that's not even considering the other half of ticket revenue that funds the rest of the movie theater industry, who are heavily coupled with Disney and want to maintain the symbiotic relationship.

MegaWentEvil posted...

Besides, people don't get killed for being neurodivergent like it happens to LGBT+ people.

This is definitely not true btw.

Meanwhile Looney Tunes just did the same thing, releasing a movie that was originally planned for streaming to theaters, and nobody cared. And THAT one was good!

Grand_Kirby posted...

Meanwhile Looney Tunes just did the same thing, releasing a movie that was originally planned for streaming to theaters, and nobody cared. And THAT one was good!

Oh, The Day the Earth Blew Up finally got released? And it's as good as they said it would be? Neat! Upon looking into this I discovered that the company that distributed that is now in talks to distribute Coyote vs. Acme and plan to give it a theatrical release, and I PRAY that deal goes through.

Well, it sounds like box office numbers have not been great so far for Snow White, or at least are below the projected outlook for how it should have fared.

I did some catching up on everything about this movie and the various controversies. Aside from the typical anti-woke pushback, I do think they really messed up the whole dwarves thing.

MegaWentEvil posted...

Why should anyone care about the lack of neurodivergent representation, given LGBT+ have it much worse than neurodivergent people. Just having a fully fleshed out character who just so happens to be LGBT+ has bigots crying woke, something that doesn't happen concerning neurodivergent/other disabilities representation.

Besides, people don't get killed for being neurodivergent like it happens to LGBT+ people.

In short: I think LGBT+ representation and defending them is infinitely more important than neurodivergent/disability representation or fighting for the rights of people with disabilities, cause LGBT+ are more oppressed than people with disabilities.

Bro this is such a fucking bizarre and heartless take man.

Pretending like people with disabilities aren't discriminated against is absolutely wild. They're treated like they don't even exist a lot of times, and not even human.

I'm not even touching the comment about them not being killed because it's so wildly off base and depressing.

Extremely awful take. Educate yourself.

guffguy89 posted...

I did some catching up on everything about this movie and the various controversies. Aside from the typical anti-woke pushback, I do think they really messed up the whole dwarves thing.

I felt this way too, but I did touch upon this because it's slight spoilers but the dwarves here are more akin to forest sprites because they're revealed to be hundreds of years old. Their proportions aren't human and it would be difficult to portray them without CGI, even with actors that are little people. Plus, they did cast an actual actor to play an unrelated character that has actual dwarfism I think to make up for their decision to use CGI.

Underleveled posted...

Oh, The Day the Earth Blew Up finally got released? And it's as good as they said it would be? Neat! Upon looking into this I discovered that the company that distributed that is now in talks to distribute Coyote vs. Acme and plan to give it a theatrical release, and I PRAY that deal goes through.

I thought that movie was completely destroyed, at least officially?

ah ok, I guess that makes some sense then.

I was confused as to what was supposed to be "so horrible" about that ending clip that keeps being shared, and it turns out (one of) the explanation(s) is even more unhinged than I thought!

Apparently people have convinced themselves it's supposed to be a reference to Diddy's white parties!

You're welcome!

I stand by that this is the worst timeline.