Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
And one of the most sympathetic and genuine disney films about a native population. The amount of commentary on the impact on Hawai'i, and specifically the native peoples, of the tourist industry that film managed to slip in was incredible. Hell, arguably the central emotional scene, of Nani singing to Lilo, is itself a commentary on the communal, generational trauma of the annexation of Hawai'i by a foreign power.
So yeah, I have no doubt that much of that spirit will have been lost in this remake.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2025/03/13 18:47:47
The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.
Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: If Snow White really does bomb, it means the core Disney audience is done,...
That seems like a leap. It's been poorly marketed, mired in controversy, and everything shown of it so far looks terrible. So if it bombs, all that really shows is that those things don't encourage people to go and see it.
Lilo and Stitch, on the other hand, looks more like one of their pointless 'make it as much like the cartoon as possible, but live action' affairs but does at least look well done, if rendered somewhat bland in the transition. So should do ok through nostalgia watching regardless of how poorly Snow White does.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: If Snow White really does bomb, it means the core Disney audience is done,...
That seems like a leap. It's been poorly marketed, mired in controversy, and everything shown of it so far looks terrible. So if it bombs, all that really shows is that those things don't encourage people to go and see it.
Lilo and Stitch, on the other hand, looks more like one of their pointless 'make it as much like the cartoon as possible, but live action' affairs but does at least look well done, if rendered somewhat bland in the transition. So should do ok through nostalgia watching regardless of how poorly Snow White does.
Granted, Snow White looks awful & I was never very likely to see it nor Stitch in the theater.
But having D+?
I've no reason to spend ticket price $ on either of them. All I have to do is wait patiently for 6 months or whatever. Then I'll get to see the cute alien & Gal Gadot as the Evil Queen while I build/paint Warhammer stuff. And if either is truly too terrible? I'll just click on something else to watch. Oh, and my Coke Zero won't cast me $12.
If it's a true train wreck, I'll wait for the Rifftrax commentary.
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
"Vulkan: There will be no Rad or Phosphex in my legion. We shall fight wars humanely. Some things should be left in the dark age." "Ferrus: Oh cool, when are you going to stop burning people to death?" "Vulkan: I do not understand the question."
– A conversation between the X and XVIII Primarchs
If it's a true train wreck, I'll wait for the Rifftrax commentary.
There are different types of bad and not all of them can be saved by mockery; dull and creatively bankrupt aren't nearly as entertaining as poorly made but earnest.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
BobtheInquisitor wrote: If Snow White really does bomb, it means the core Disney audience is done,...
That seems like a leap. It's been poorly marketed, mired in controversy, and everything shown of it so far looks terrible. So if it bombs, all that really shows is that those things don't encourage people to go and see it.
Lilo and Stitch, on the other hand, looks more like one of their pointless 'make it as much like the cartoon as possible, but live action' affairs but does at least look well done, if rendered somewhat bland in the transition. So should do ok through nostalgia watching regardless of how poorly Snow White does.
All of the live action remakes have looked terribad in advertisements. It’s a shame Mulan wasn’t a standard theatrical release to which we could compare Snow White. That’s why I have to use TLM, the next most controversial and badly-advertised movie in the franchise…which did well because the Disney core audience were immune to bad reviews and controversy.
I suspect Disney fans will be like MCU fans, or even Tesla fans: seemingly ride or die customers who suddenly hit their limits and turn on the company. Everyone else is gone already.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/03/15 16:31:44
Watched a review of the recent Mufasa (Lion King CGI version prequel) and it was noted how in the original animated films characters were regular people in extraordinary circumstances but in several of the "live action" remakes they are chosen ones with supernatural abilities.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/03/15 19:18:13
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
All of the live action remakes have looked terribad in advertisements.
I would strongly disagree there. Beauty and the Beast and Little Mermaid both looked fantastic in their previews. Cinderella looked considerably better than it actually turned out to be. Likewise with Aladdin. Dumbo looked ok.
Really, prior to Snow White, the only live action adaption I can recall looking 'terrible' in the previews was the Lion King.
Somewhat ironic to note that both of those titles are really pushing the definition of 'live action'...
It was all animated using CGI, not sure how it was labeled "live action."
Because it's photorealistic (ish) animation that was filmed to deliberately emulate the feel of a live action movie, and was released in amongst the stream of other live action remakes, so it just gets lumped into the same category. Yes, it's technically an animation, but that line is getting increasingly blurred.
Ahtman wrote: Watched a review of the recent Mufasa (Lion King CGI version prequel) and it was noted how in the original animated films characters were regular people in extraordinary circumstances but in several of the "live action" remakes they are chosen ones with supernatural abilities.
Its a growing trend in fiction. It is easy lazy writing as now you can skip a lot of stuff. It also oddly plays to fascists tropes, 'I was a hopeless worker but discovered I have elite skull shape! And can save society and usher in bright new age with awkward people liquidated!'.
And people like it. Compare Skywalker to Andor. The former has secret wizard powers he heroically uses. The latter is a bloke with a wide practical education who, well he isn't that heroic. I know what i prefer. But produce more secret space wizard stuff, people love it. I guess it is more escapism, dreaming if you had those powers you could change things. Removes agency as well which as Loki points out is really a burden that makes you miserable for not trying harder and risking more (with concurrent total risks to your wellbeing).
Honestly I think its less that and more that the USA has had generations growing up with DC and Marvel superheroes and is still going through a massive super-hero-film-spree where every other film is a super-hero film of some kind.
This basically means that the whole "extraordinary person" thing becomes so engrained that writers are creating it and producers are looking for it. So it creeps into everywhere you don't expect it too.
Chances are back in the days of Westerns it was likely western themes sneaking into everything else that people noted at the time was odd (or just didn't notice because it was everywhere)
I thought the move to ever more fantastical feats was industry-fueled by making things increasingly ridiculous as time goes on and assuming that audiences grow numb to normality. The longer the movie industry exists, the more grounded stuff is repeated over and over, and the best place to find novelty is in escalation.
Not sure I'd put the blame on poor 'Arry. Perhaps to a small degree.
After the success of the early MCU movies and J.J. Abrams injection of his brand of nonsense into Star Trek, I don't find it surprising for people to look at all the money made there and think that it's the ever more incredible that attracts people. Seems like what the Star Wars sequel trilogy suffered from. Or novelty Trek, which I've only heard of but haven't had any reason to subject myself to after the three Abrams movies.
With Harry Potter the basic rules of the world revolve around literal magic and for such a setting I found the main character to actually be somewhat restrained for a chosen one. Whereas a lot of the MCU's early success can be attributed to taking what would otherwise be a normal story, but with super powers on select characters completely shifting known dynamics. Similarly, Star Trek used to have a fairly grounded setting with select miracle technology (that constantly broke in order to have stakes again...). Along comes the Kelvin timeline and throws the rules of the setting out in favor of more better technological solutions MacGyvered out of scrap to reinvent competent characters into actual miracle workers.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
Rotten Tomatos has gifted the movie Snow White with a firmly Rotten 45% score with an average rating of 5.4 out of 10. Not counting sequels, this the third-worst Tomatometer score for a Disney live-action remake, only ahead of 2022's Pinocchio (27%) and 1996's 101 Dalmatians (39%).
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
"Vulkan: There will be no Rad or Phosphex in my legion. We shall fight wars humanely. Some things should be left in the dark age." "Ferrus: Oh cool, when are you going to stop burning people to death?" "Vulkan: I do not understand the question."
– A conversation between the X and XVIII Primarchs
Ahtman wrote: Watched a review of the recent Mufasa (Lion King CGI version prequel) and it was noted how in the original animated films characters were regular people in extraordinary circumstances but in several of the "live action" remakes they are chosen ones with supernatural abilities.
Its a growing trend in fiction. It is easy lazy writing as now you can skip a lot of stuff. It also oddly plays to fascists tropes, 'I was a hopeless worker but discovered I have elite skull shape! And can save society and usher in bright new age with awkward people liquidated!'.
And people like it. Compare Skywalker to Andor. The former has secret wizard powers he heroically uses. The latter is a bloke with a wide practical education who, well he isn't that heroic. I know what i prefer. But produce more secret space wizard stuff, people love it. I guess it is more escapism, dreaming if you had those powers you could change things. Removes agency as well which as Loki points out is really a burden that makes you miserable for not trying harder and risking more (with concurrent total risks to your wellbeing).
The worse half of this trend is the increasing demand that characters' powers are justified via some kind of secret lineage. It's not enough to have been born talented, those talents have to have come from your super special parents.
Looks like this will be a fun one, to say the least...
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2025/04/20 21:36:43
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
Jeremy Jahns told his viewers to just buy the cartoon version instead and gave the LA version a pretty harsh review. The Guardian gave LA L&S a 1/5 and called it a “ghastly misfire”.
I mean, it will probably still make a billion bucks, but with these kinds of reviews I doubt it could make LA Lion King money. Ne Zha 2 has nothing to worry about.
Reviews for these things are probably the most obvious example of the algorithm effect. Why they're bad and why you should be mad about them is basically an entire industry at this point with a separate audience that has nothing to do with the one that might actually see the movie. Who can have the most attention grabbing scathing review at this point is just trying to get YT clicks for cash.
That's not to say the movie's good. It's not going to be better than the original, but then again I'm old enough to remember when everyone hated the original before all the kids who grew up spinning the DVD until it melted made it a huge deal.
There's obviously an audience for these things. They keep making money. I'm not that audience and I don't care to give the films my money but I'm also just too aware now how much of a grift the hate is. Tired of being told not to enjoy things and to stay in and watch more rants about why I shouldn't enjoy things. I used to care about reviews because they helped me find things to enjoy, but that's just not where the profits are.
Jeremy Jahns told his viewers to just buy the cartoon version instead and gave the LA version a pretty harsh review. The Guardian gave LA L&S a 1/5 and called it a “ghastly misfire”.
I mean, it will probably still make a billion bucks, but with these kinds of reviews I doubt it could make LA Lion King money. Ne Zha 2 has nothing to worry about.
{Shrugs}
I'm not the audience this is thing is aimed at. And, at best, I'll just watch it on D+ eventually, maybe, while building/painting more WH stuff. I mean, it's not like I haven't watched stuff on Prime that I knew was going to be worse than however this turns out....
Now if I had kids? Or it was about 25 years ago when my cousins were kids?
Then yeah, I'd be seeing it opening weekend. Regardless of the reviews.
I only watch films that get positive reviews from the NY Times, are nominated for numerous Golden Globes, BAFTAs, Oscars, and get high marks from Rotten Tomatos.
BorderCountess wrote: Just because you're doing something right doesn't necessarily mean you know what you're doing...
"Vulkan: There will be no Rad or Phosphex in my legion. We shall fight wars humanely. Some things should be left in the dark age." "Ferrus: Oh cool, when are you going to stop burning people to death?" "Vulkan: I do not understand the question."
– A conversation between the X and XVIII Primarchs
LunarSol wrote: Reviews for these things are probably the most obvious example of the algorithm effect. Why they're bad and why you should be mad about them is basically an entire industry at this point with a separate audience that has nothing to do with the one that might actually see the movie. Who can have the most attention grabbing scathing review at this point is just trying to get YT clicks for cash.
That's not to say the movie's good. It's not going to be better than the original, but then again I'm old enough to remember when everyone hated the original before all the kids who grew up spinning the DVD until it melted made it a huge deal.
There's obviously an audience for these things. They keep making money. I'm not that audience and I don't care to give the films my money but I'm also just too aware now how much of a grift the hate is. Tired of being told not to enjoy things and to stay in and watch more rants about why I shouldn't enjoy things. I used to care about reviews because they helped me find things to enjoy, but that's just not where the profits are.
I never hated the original. Indeed, most of my group thought it was hilarious
Of course, part of that was how it reminded us of some of our old RPG moments...
Well then I guess I was taken in by the algorithm pumping negative reviews up front. I wonder why it was sent my way when I usually avoid clickbait and outrage reviews. Perhaps watching the Jeremy Jahns review juiced the algorithm? He seems to have been moving more towards constant negativity…
As for the original Lilo and Stitch—I’ve never heard anyone in real life hate that movie. Stitch is one of if not THE most beloved Disney character evidenced in merch, bumper stickers, memes and fan art. He’s practically Garfield for Disney.
