Posted on 07/19/2023 5:11:16 AM PDT by DallasBiff
A live-action version of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs has been in development since at least 2016, but production didn’t kick off in earnest until 2021. In June of that year, Deadline reported that Rachel Zegler had landed the role of the titular princess, who made her Disney debut in 1937. (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was Disney’s first full-length animated film.)
“People are making these jokes about ours being the PC Snow White, where it’s like, yeah, it is — because it needed that,” Zegler, who is of Colombian and Polish descent, told Vanity Fair in October 2022. “It’s an 85-year-old cartoon, and our version is a refreshing story about a young woman who has a function beyond ‘Someday My Prince Will Come.’”
Uh, no it doesn't soy boy,Ziegler.
Also if Disney is doing so well, why is their stock price at a low, and it looks like they are going to sell off assets.
Sorry Disney and Ziegler, the "Someday my Transgendered Princess will come" narrative, is not going to work.
Short answer, they are racists. Sarc.
It would not be offensive to me if the studios did a Snow White that was Latino, if it was a Latino interpretation of the story. Let them create the storyline and sets that are based on whatever civilization existed in Central and South America and have at her.
People aren’t complaining simply because the studios are inserting minority characters.
Snow White isn’t a woman purported to have skin hite as snow.
There are no dwarves, instead, they are magic beings.
There is no prince Charming, no kiss to awaken from sleep.
How is this actually called Snow White again?
Disney has outdone themselves in the cr** category.
Her name isn’t Snow Mexican.
Then call "your version" something else. Maybe "Hispanic Woman and Six Diverse Adults and a Little Person."
People are complaining, not of a latina or taco as Jill Biden would say, but the left wants to remake movies that brought everyone together, into their own divisive commentary.
The writer must not know the meaning of the word success.
You have to ask why is it necessary to take an old property that sold well but is past its prime and remake it? Because it’s necessary to prove the reason the property did so well was invalid. It’s similar to destroying statues dedicated to the memory of the Civil War or White people’s accomplishments. That history must be undone...rewritten. That undoing and rewriting must be to the modern feminist/communist narrative. It’s the same reason the CCP is rewriting the bible.
The regular people, who at least today, outnumber the new socialists, don’t like it. Not even the socialists like it. The best reviews of the new Indy movie were along the lines of, “well, it’s not as boring as I expected.”
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Sorry, couldn't make it past that...I think I just broke something...
Spot on. Spot on.
It isn’t at all about creation. It is about destruction.
Destroying something in order to create a cultural replacement that suits their needs.
$140 million in advertising only goes so far.
Yeah, the article is ridiculous, the whole idea of what they’re doing is ridiculous -just as ridiculous as remaking movies like “The Color Purple” with an all-white cast.
I really don’t care about the controversy. All I know is that I’m glad that Hollyweird, full of perverts and pedophiles, is collapsing in on itself.
I will continue to encourage them to make the crappiest films they can in order for them to be no more.
Because I’m against cultural appropriation and colonization of white culture. Duh.
I dont care if disney makes a full black version. Its none of anyone's business how disney spends their money unless it is immoral.
a black purple, green, blue, or orange snow white with 10 dillon tootie fruities drinking bud light following her. Its disneys money.
Someone made an xxx version in the 70's and no one batted an eye.
stop letting the msm tell you what to be mad about and figurre it out for your own self
And it's a version that movie-goers will skip in droves.
IMHO, film makers would be far better served by strictly adhering to their stories than by distorting or altering them. Disney sweetened them up in their classic animations, but they originally had a tinge of darkness and often moral lessons, both of which I think contemporary audiences would enjoy (and pay for.)
Along those same lines, it's like Tim Burton's abominable retelling of "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow." I guess Burton wouldn't concede that Washington Irving's original work was near perfect as is. The 1980 TV version was far better and a young Jeff Goldblum as Ichabod Crane was by far one of the most perfect casting decisions ever made by any studio...
“After the success of 2023’s The Little Mermaid”
BWAHAHAHAHA. Can’t even read past that whopper.
“It would not be offensive to me if the studios did a Snow White that was Latino, if it was a Latino interpretation of the story.”
Even then it would be offensive. She’s got “white” in her name, and it’s explicit in the story that this is because of her skin color. The only explanation for changing that is if you think white people can’t be allowed to have even one folktale of their own, which means basically, white people don’t deserve to exist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.