BadMoonRisin said:

---

jenn96 said:

---

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

Those of us who have passed through the young children phase can tell you horror stories of movies we've sat through for the sake of a couple of hours of peace.

---

This really can't be emphasized enough. The vast majority of the moviegoing public has paid no attention to any of the shenanigans about this movie and will simply see that there is a live action Snow White, it will probably occupy their kids, and it can't possibly be worse than Cocomelon.

Now, if it's genuinely abysmal, word-of-mouth will sink it in a week or two. But with no real competition, it does have a chance to do pretty well in the long-term.

---

Dogman and Minions are some of the worst that come to mind that I had to sit through.

Families want more films like Inside Out 2 and The Wild Robot.

---

Dogman was a major snoozer. Rockdog is my all-time low. I welcomed a 20-minute nap. Fortunately my kids saw the writing on the ball and chose not to go see Moana 2.

Parents want more films like those. Unless a movie is an absolute stinker of the worst kind, most kids don't really care.

Random RT review:

"I had high hopes that "Snow White" would make me happy. Instead, this dopey remake made me sleepy and grumpy."

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Random RT review:

"I had high hopes that "Snow White" would make me happy. Instead, this dopey remake made me sleepy and grumpy."

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

jenn96 said:

---

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

Those of us who have passed through the young children phase can tell you horror stories of movies we've sat through for the sake of a couple of hours of peace.

---

This really can't be emphasized enough. The vast majority of the moviegoing public has paid no attention to any of the shenanigans about this movie and will simply see that there is a live action Snow White, it will probably occupy their kids, and it can't possibly be worse than Cocomelon.

Now, if it's genuinely abysmal, word-of-mouth will sink it in a week or two. But with no real competition, it does have a chance to do pretty well in the long-term.

---

Dogman and Minions are some of the worst that come to mind that I had to sit through.

Families want more films like Inside Out 2 and The Wild Robot. Original content that is fresh and fun. Not Live Action Snow White with a hairy back and eyes 10 inches apart.

---

Then Disney probably shouldn't have gutted Pixar.

Quote:

---

'As Snow White flees into the woods she stumbles across a magical land called the Uncanny Valley…'

---

Maybe some very minor spoilers but we all kinda know the story of this one already…

jenn96 said:

---

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

Those of us who have passed through the young children phase can tell you horror stories of movies we've sat through for the sake of a couple of hours of peace.

---

This really can't be emphasized enough. The vast majority of the moviegoing public has paid no attention to any of the shenanigans about this movie and will simply see that there is a live action Snow White, it will probably occupy their kids, and it can't possibly be worse than Cocomelon.

Now, if it's genuinely abysmal, word-of-mouth will sink it in a week or two. But with no real competition, it does have a chance to do pretty well in the long-term.

---

I have two kids. I'm not spending $100 for the hassle of taking them out to a movie that I can stream on D+ in about 3 months just for a couple hours of peace. I can just stream a movie or let them binge Pokemon if I need them sitting still that long.

Read some of those RT reviews and good God they're brutal

Of course. But that logic applies to good movies as well as bad movies; the cost and hassle of going to the movies is there no matter what. But there are a lot of people that do like going to movies not just to watch them, but for the whole theater experience and there aren't all that many family movies in theaters anymore. Those are the folks I'm talking about. Based on the early RT reviews, they may not show up either. I guess we'll find out.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

jenn96 said:

---

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

Those of us who have passed through the young children phase can tell you horror stories of movies we've sat through for the sake of a couple of hours of peace.

---

This really can't be emphasized enough. The vast majority of the moviegoing public has paid no attention to any of the shenanigans about this movie and will simply see that there is a live action Snow White, it will probably occupy their kids, and it can't possibly be worse than Cocomelon.

Now, if it's genuinely abysmal, word-of-mouth will sink it in a week or two. But with no real competition, it does have a chance to do pretty well in the long-term.

---

I have two kids. I'm not spending $100 for the hassle of taking them out to a movie that I can stream on D+ in about 3 months just for a couple hours of peace. I can just stream a movie or let them binge Pokemon if I need them sitting still that long.

---

If you're spending $100 to take 2 kids to the movies, you need to plan better.
Load up your pockets or your purse with snacks from home, get them two cup of free water at the concession stand, and veg out.

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

jenn96 said:

---

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

Those of us who have passed through the young children phase can tell you horror stories of movies we've sat through for the sake of a couple of hours of peace.

---

This really can't be emphasized enough. The vast majority of the moviegoing public has paid no attention to any of the shenanigans about this movie and will simply see that there is a live action Snow White, it will probably occupy their kids, and it can't possibly be worse than Cocomelon.

Now, if it's genuinely abysmal, word-of-mouth will sink it in a week or two. But with no real competition, it does have a chance to do pretty well in the long-term.

---

I have two kids. I'm not spending $100 for the hassle of taking them out to a movie that I can stream on D+ in about 3 months just for a couple hours of peace. I can just stream a movie or let them binge Pokemon if I need them sitting still that long.

---

If you're spending $100 to take 2 kids to the movies, you need to plan better.
Load up your pockets or your purse with snacks from home, get them two cup of free water at the concession stand, and veg out.

---

4 tickets is about $70. Still not doing it. If I want some peace and quiet, I can hire a babysitter and get more bang for my buck.

Besides, we only go see a movie to see that movie, which is a rarity, and getting popcorn is part of their experience. My daughter is 8 and has been to a theater maybe 3-4 times. One of those was for a free afternoon showing of How to Train Your Dragon last summer. Our son is 3 and has been once. I'll sit through crappy movies to make them happy, but I'm not going to pay a lot of money to sit through crappy movies as some kind of getaway.

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

jenn96 said:

---

The Original Houston 1836 said:

---

Those of us who have passed through the young children phase can tell you horror stories of movies we've sat through for the sake of a couple of hours of peace.

---

This really can't be emphasized enough. The vast majority of the moviegoing public has paid no attention to any of the shenanigans about this movie and will simply see that there is a live action Snow White, it will probably occupy their kids, and it can't possibly be worse than Cocomelon.

Now, if it's genuinely abysmal, word-of-mouth will sink it in a week or two. But with no real competition, it does have a chance to do pretty well in the long-term.

---

I have two kids. I'm not spending $100 for the hassle of taking them out to a movie that I can stream on D+ in about 3 months just for a couple hours of peace. I can just stream a movie or let them binge Pokemon if I need them sitting still that long.

---

If you're spending $100 to take 2 kids to the movies, you need to plan better.
Load up your pockets or your purse with snacks from home, get them two cup of free water at the concession stand, and veg out.

---

pic.twitter.com/qZbB9QHzfk

— Canadian Patriot (@PPC4Liberty) March 20, 2025

My belief in these remakes hasn't changed since seeing the first couple of them.

A - Disney animation (cartoons) were very special movies for my kids and me, and there are a lot of magical aspects of animation that live action just doesn't capture so my kids' interest in seeing these has waned. I know a big part of that is their aging out of Disney movies, but they would still rather watch the cartoons for most of these types of movies. I'd like to know what kids prefer if they have seen the live action first followed by the cartoon version. Also, I'd like to know what gets replayed more frequently on the service-animated or live action (Mulan, Beauty and the Beast, LM, etc).

B - Disney movies still have a Disney+ problem. Since 2020, we all know that the movie will soon appear on Disney +, so we don't bother with the theater as we'll just wait. And for whatever reason, we don't use the same logic for kids' movies that are found on Peacock or Paramount+; I don't want to assume that the general population is like that, but I will assume that more families in the USA have Disney+ than they have Peacock or Paramount+, so I'm guessing that strategy is used more with other families

TCTTS said:

---

Ooof.

Now the real challenge begins. Will families even care? Will the audience score be higher?

Or does either even matter and, like jenn96 said, are families just looking for something to take the kids to?

I did just see weekend projections drop from $50M to $45M. Not great, but still not bomb territory either.

---

LOL

TCTTS said:

---

Ooof.

Now the real challenge begins. Will families even care? Will the audience score be higher?

Or does either even matter and, like jenn96 said, are families just looking for something to take the kids to?

I did just see weekend projections drop from $50M to $45M. Not great, but still not bomb territory either.

---

dude the Marvels opened at 46 million….

Sometimes I wonder if you guys actually read my posts.

But once again, for the cheap seats… I'm not rooting for this movie to succeed.

I've simply said, numerous times now, that even if it fails to meet opening weekend expectations it still has like eight weeks of runway to recoup with virtually no completion. It all depends on word of mouth from here on out. Not what critics are saying, what Thursday night box office returns look like, etc.

Posters like capkirk are trying to play gotcha games when there are no gotcha games to play.

I have no skin in this game.

I think this movie looks like trash.

I'm just saying, the gloating at this point could still very well prove premature.

Iowaggie said:

---

My belief in these remakes hasn't changed since seeing the first couple of them.

A - Disney animation (cartoons) were very special movies for my kids and me, and there are a lot of magical aspects of animation that live action just doesn't capture so my kids' interest in seeing these has waned. I know a big part of that is their aging out of Disney movies, but they would still rather watch the cartoons for most of these types of movies. I'd like to know what kids prefer if they have seen the live action first followed by the cartoon version. Also, I'd like to know what gets replayed more frequently on the service-animated or live action (Mulan, Beauty and the Beast, LM, etc).

B - Disney movies still have a Disney+ problem. Since 2020, we all know that the movie will soon appear on Disney +, so we don't bother with the theater as we'll just wait. And for whatever reason, we don't use the same logic for kids' movies that are found on Peacock or Paramount+; I don't want to assume that the general population is like that, but I will assume that more families in the USA have Disney+ than they have Peacock or Paramount+, so I'm guessing that strategy is used more with other families

---

Your point A aligns with my family's experience. When our kids were younger, the Disney animated movies were must watch, particularly for our youngest (daughter, so really into the Princess movies). As she got older, those movies started to hold less interest. We saw that borne out in our three Disney World trips - first trip at age 5, the character meets were awesome and we had to meet all of them; second trip at age 7, we skipped all the character meets in lieu of riding more rides; at age 13, she was free to do whatever she wanted in the parks within reason, and there were actually more character meets than I expected, but those still came in a distant second place to the rides. As for the live action movies, we did see Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast, The Jungle Book and The Lion King. My daughter enjoyed The Little Mermaid while I did not. She is now 19 and has said absolutely nothing about Snow White.

The definite preference is the animated features over the live action.

TCTTS said:

---

Sometimes I wonder if you guys actually read my posts.

But once again, for the cheap seats… I'm not rooting for this movie to succeed.

I've simply said, numerous times now, that even if it fails to meet opening weekend expectations it still has like eight weeks of runway with virtually no completion to recoup. It all depends on word of mouth from here on out. Not what critics are saying, what Thursday night box office returns look like, etc.

Posters like capkirk are trying to play gotcha games when there are no gotcha games to play.

I have no skin in this game.

I think this movie looks like trash.

I'm just saying, the gloating at this point could still very well prove premature.

---

You make great points about the open runway that "sucking" for an extended period of time can overall sum up to a success rather than sucking for a short period then falling off.

But you being the boards spokesperson about all things Hollywood with clear personal gains if Hollywood succeeds, it's disingenuous to say you have no skin in the game.

The simple fact is the animated versions are better, particularly for these kinds of stories. You can do things in animation that you can't do in live action and in some cases not being able to dramatically detracts from the film.

I have yet to see the "live action" Lion King (technically still primarily an animated film but you get my meaning) because by making these characters realistic they've taken away most of the charm that they had.

I saw this last night and it honestly wasn't that bad. If you hadn't heard of the drama behind it, I don't think you'd have noticed it.

-The CGI Dwarves were okay. It's obvious that they are CGI but it's not Episode I level bad. I would say it's a solid B+ to A-.

-The music was also solid but nothing that's going to be an ear worm level like Frozen. I liked the main number the best.

-Story wise it's a mix of snow white with some robin hood added in.

-I thought the use of color to signify the happy times vs the evil stepmother's rule was well done IMO.

-in general, the snow white haircut is dumb. It's especially dumb when it's on a human being and not a cartoon. The wig (I assume) was so bad it actually distracted me from the movie.

-also someone should have taken like 20 minutes to shape Zegler's eyebrows

-There were some shot for shot remakes of the cartoon that were a nice touch

-they also had a few jokes for the adults that would fly right over a kid's head in classic Disney style.

Overall I'd say it's a solid B-. Nothing super special or award worthy, but still enjoyable.

fig96 said:

---

The simple fact is the animated versions are better, particularly for these kinds of stories. You can do things in animation that you can't do in live action and in some cases not being able to dramatically detracts from the film.

I have yet to see the "live action" Lion King (technically still primarily an animated film but you get my meaning) because by making these characters realistic they've taken away most of the charm that they had.

---

But, a 7-year-old in today's world is not necessarily going to enjoy 30-year-old animation because it looks old and fake to them, no matter the charm of the story and the songs. Not to mention the casting. Disney isn't cranking out live-action versions for the benefit of parents who saw the movies 30 years ago but for the kids of today who are going pell-mell into the era of dolls and action figures for Christmas and every product under the sun.

When I was 7 years old, I was a lot more interested in watching the Transformers and He-Man than I was in watching the Flintstones, because it felt old and dated. The majority of kids of any generation are going to gravitate towards the stuff that they feel is "made for them", not something that their parents watched as kids.

I will stay that the live action Beauty and the Beast bucks the trend and is superior IMO to the animated version; but it is clearly very lovingly made and has a world-class cast of people in supporting roles. Getting the likes of Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci to basically do voice overs except for a couple of scenes, is the coup of all time, along with Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, and the scene-stealing Luke Evans as Gaston. Having Hermione - the most recognizable young actress as the lead role made it a slam dunk hit.

Quote:

---

I will stay that the live action Beauty and the Beast bucks the trend and is superior IMO to the animated version; but it is clearly very lovingly made and has a world-class cast of people in supporting roles. Getting the likes of Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci to basically do voice overs except for a couple of scenes, is the coup of all time, along with Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, and the scene-stealing Luke Evans as Gaston. Having Hermione - the most recognizable young actress as the lead role made it a slam dunk hit.

---

I enjoyed the live action BatB, as well as live action Cinderella, but I still prefer the animated versions. Beauty and the Beast (animated) runs neck-and-neck with Peter Pan as my all-time favorite Disney animated film. But you are definitely right about the cast of that live action version being superb.

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

---

Quote:

---

I will stay that the live action Beauty and the Beast bucks the trend and is superior IMO to the animated version; but it is clearly very lovingly made and has a world-class cast of people in supporting roles. Getting the likes of Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson, Stanley Tucci to basically do voice overs except for a couple of scenes, is the coup of all time, along with Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, and the scene-stealing Luke Evans as Gaston. Having Hermione - the most recognizable young actress as the lead role made it a slam dunk hit.

---

I enjoyed the live action BatB, as well as live action Cinderella, but I still prefer the animated versions. Beauty and the Beast (animated) runs neck-and-neck with Peter Pan as my all-time favorite Disney animated film. But you are definitely right about the cast of that live action version being superb.

---

Except for that no-good sonofa***** Dan Stevens. Screw you, Crawley. You think you're too good for Downton, buddy?

Tea Party said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

Sometimes I wonder if you guys actually read my posts.

But once again, for the cheap seats… I'm not rooting for this movie to succeed.

I've simply said, numerous times now, that even if it fails to meet opening weekend expectations it still has like eight weeks of runway with virtually no completion to recoup. It all depends on word of mouth from here on out. Not what critics are saying, what Thursday night box office returns look like, etc.

Posters like capkirk are trying to play gotcha games when there are no gotcha games to play.

I have no skin in this game.

I think this movie looks like trash.

I'm just saying, the gloating at this point could still very well prove premature.

---

You make great points about the open runway that "sucking" for an extended period of time can overall sum up to a success rather than sucking for a short period then falling off.

But you being the boards spokesperson about all things Hollywood with clear personal gains if Hollywood succeeds, it's disingenuous to say you have no skin in the game.

---

I should have said "I have no skin in this argument."

Spilner tried to get cute and start some **** by quoting a post of mine from seven months ago, when the release landscape was completely different and we knew less about this movie than we do now. I then responded, and now here we are.

But I'm as sick as these Disney live-action remakes as everyone else, and if this one bombing helps Disney to see the light in that regard and quit making them, that's a box office "sacrifice" I'm willing to conceded. Especially seeing as this year will be just fine - and in fact damn good - box-office-wise, regardless.

I'm just saying, I don't think it *is* going to bomb.

Case in point...

Industry’s hope for #SnowWhite walk ups gains momentum, after the live-action starring #RachelZegler & #GalGadot grossed 3.5M on THU Previews at US #BoxOffice, better than #Mufasa’s 3.3M despite trailing behind it during pre-sales period, & on par with #Wonka 3.5M, and over… pic.twitter.com/GEOlbUFZLB

— Luiz Fernando (@Luiz_Fernando_J) March 21, 2025

Quote:

---

Industry's hope for #SnowWhite walk ups gains momentum, after the live-action starring #RachelZegler & #GalGadot grossed 3.5M on THU Previews at US #BoxOffice, better than #Mufasa's 3.3M despite trailing behind it during pre-sales period, & on par with #Wonka 3.5M, and over #JungleCruise's 2.7M,
#MaleficentMistressOfEvil's 2.3M, #Dumbo's 2.6M, and not far from first #Maleficent's 4.2M).

Also worth noting SW previews are way below most successful live-actions' THU previews (vs #TheLionKing's 23M, #BeautyAndTheBeast's 16.3M, #TheLittleMermaid's 10.3M, #Aladdin's 7M.

Even so, with no recent release for families nor competition, a 45M-50M 3-day opening could be in the cards, obviously depending on how WOM works in favor or against this one. But have no doubt, industry will breathe a sigh of relief if it doesn't come with a 3 in front of it at this point.

---

https://deadline.com/2025/03/box-office-snow-white-1236346253/

Quote:

---

Disney's Thursday preview figure for Snow White came in at $3.5 million. Early PostTrak data shows 5 stars with kids under 12, and 84% of those kids who showed up were girls.

The film's general audience is 3 stars. However, definite recommend is low at 39%. In fact, Warner Bros' The Alto Knights has a higher definite recommend of 44%. Parents with Snow White are weathering the film at 2 stars, though their definite recommend is higher at 52%.

---

By contrast, those coming out of Mufasa gave a 5* rating and 75% definite recommend rate, so it may very well also open to a <$40 million opening but not have the word of mouth to give it legs.

I don't want films like this to fail to prove any kind of point other than I believe Disney as a whole has lost its creative compass -- across all three business units (Entertainment, ESPN and Experiences) -- and is in desperate need of a reset.

If it takes box office bombs to wake up Iger and his minions, then so be it.

And no, I don't think Disney is headed down the tubes financially or anything of the sort. But the stock has underperformed massively and I believe Iger has run out of big acquisitions to pad the bottom line.

But I'm reminded of that old saying about how organizations and institutions fail -- gradually at first, and then suddenly.

Iger is still stuck with Chapek's fallout. This movie entered development and started casting and shooting while he was still CEO. Now, whether Iger should have ****canned it is another question, but it was already going full steam ahead when he got there.

Exactly.

Broadly speaking, I feel like there are two "lessons" people want Disney to learn…

1) Whether one agrees with this sentiment or not, quit making kids movies so "woke," and…

2) Make more fun, original fare. Fewer ****ty sequels/soulless live-action remakes of beloved animated classics and more original, "old school" (in vibe) movies in their place.

I feel like Iger & co got the message loud and clear on #1, and are course correcting in that regard, but maybe haven't quite got the message yet on #2.

Forgot to add the only reason I saw this on an opening Thursday night is because I was on a week long Disney Cruise until this morning and it was showing on the ship's movie theater for free.

I still don't think I would strongly recommend this to anyone. If a parent was wondering if it was kid appropriate, sure. Beyond that it was fine.

TCTTS said:

---

Exactly.

Broadly speaking, I feel like there are two "lessons" people want Disney to learn…

1) Whether one agrees with this sentiment or not, quit making kids movies so "woke," and…

2) Make more fun, original fare. Fewer ****ty sequels/soulless live-action remakes of beloved animated classics and more original, "old school" (in vibe) movies in their place.

I feel like Iger & co got the message loud and clear on #1, and are course correcting in that regard, but maybe haven't quite got the message yet on #2.

---

Spot on. I've given you a hard time in the past but couldn't agree more with this post. You're 100% right that this would be a nice first step to bringing Disney back.

nai06 said:

---

I saw this last night and it honestly wasn't that bad. If you hadn't heard of the drama behind it, I don't think you'd have noticed it.

-The CGI Dwarves were okay. It's obvious that they are CGI but it's not Episode I level bad. I would say it's a solid B+ to A-.

-The music was also solid but nothing that's going to be an ear worm level like Frozen. I liked the main number the best.

-Story wise it's a mix of snow white with some robin hood added in.

-I thought the use of color to signify the happy times vs the evil stepmother's rule was well done IMO.

-in general, the snow white haircut is dumb. It's especially dumb when it's on a human being and not a cartoon. The wig (I assume) was so bad it actually distracted me from the movie.

-also someone should have taken like 20 minutes to shape Zegler's eyebrows

-There were some shot for shot remakes of the cartoon that were a nice touch

-they also had a few jokes for the adults that would fly right over a kid's head in classic Disney style.

Overall I'd say it's a solid B-. Nothing super special or award worthy, but still enjoyable.

---

Took the kids to a matinee and they liked it. I thought it was perfectly fine. Nothing particularly memorable, but also not offensive. Gal Gadot's acting might be the most offensive thing in this movie.

‘Snow White’ Opening Right Around ‘Dumbo’ In The Mid-$40Ms

Currently, Disney’s #SnowWhite is seeing $15.5 million today, which includes last night’s $3.5M, and will get the Rachel Zegler-Gal Gadot movie to the mid-$40Ms for a three-day total at the domestic box office… pic.twitter.com/PVgR8Cqqnr

— Deadline (@DEADLINE) March 21, 2025

That Dumbo movie was an all-time snoozer. Hard to waste Danny Devito and Michael Keaton but they managed it.