Snow White and the Huntsman (2012)

Discussion of non-Disney entertainment.
User avatar
Disney's Divinity
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 15773
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:26 am
Gender: Male

Post by Disney's Divinity »

I've seen several trailers for this during Once Upon a Time. I believe they showed several previews for it when one of the Twilight sequels was in theaters, because my mother was telling me about it and how she thought I would like to see it. I had no interest, because I don't really like Charlize Theron and obviously don't care for Kristen Stewart.

That said, the trailer looked pretty amazing and I wouldn't mind seeing it. I just wonder if it's one of those trailers that pimp all the special effects, when in reality the film itself sucks. I can imagine it might be one of those cases where so many alterations/additions to the story are made that it becomes craptastic. Still, I wouldn't mind seeing it.
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Ariana Grande ~ "we can't be friends (wait for your love)"
Ariana Grande ~ "imperfect for you"
Kacey Musgraves ~ "The Architect"
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13334
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

Yea, after seeing the trailers on TV, I got very excited for Snow White and the Huntsman. I mean, I'm kind of amazed and floored by the trailers. I haven't been this is excited about a movie in a long time I'd say. Okay I'm not that excited and in the end I may be dissapointed like Divinity said, but I hope it lives up to those trailers. I think this will be a lot better than Mirror Mirror, too, when I previously thought the opposite would be the case.

Mooky, well, I actually hate it when people compare things to other things so much. I hate it when people seem to not see things for the unique things they are that nothing else can be. And of course, Disney is extra special to me.
Image
User avatar
Dr Frankenollie
In The Vaults
Posts: 2704
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:19 am

Post by Dr Frankenollie »

dvdjunkie wrote:Dr. Frankenollie would not know a good movie if it jumped up and bit him on the arse.
Says the guy who thinks Avatar is one of the top five movies of all time.
dvdjunkie wrote:I stand with my post and if you can retort without claiming to be the 'all-knowing' film expert, then I would suggest you PM me with your reply.

You do know how to PM people here? Don't you?
What are you talking about? We've spoken through PMs before. :roll:
dvdjunkie wrote:I have read some of your reviews and that is why I have to say what I said.
:? My recent reviews have been generally positive...
User avatar
Mooky
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3043
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 2:44 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Post by Mooky »

ajmrowland wrote:
Mooky wrote:I've explained my words literally three times before (in this very same thread), and you're still asking me for clarification. So here's one more time: no, I don't think that Disney would have made Mirror Mirror exactly the same, and yes, I think they might have made something similar.

Duster, why are you so against a notion that another studio can make a film with a Disney-esque sensibility?
Because he's so against even a Disney film having a Disney-esque sensibility. Well, no, he's all for that, he just wants the nostalgia of a 20 yr old film.
I sincerely hope that's not the case. Films are practically living organisms, they change with and adapt to times, and it'd be foolish to expect a film made in 2012 to feel like a movie made in 1962 (deliberate attempts like The Artist notwithstanding).
Disney Duster wrote:Mooky, well, I actually hate it when people compare things to other things so much. I hate it when people seem to not see things for the unique things they are that nothing else can be. And of course, Disney is extra special to me.
Well, I think you'll just have to get used to it. I actually agree with you on your whole 'Disney Essence' thing (though I'm not as ardent about it as you seem to be), in the sense that there is a specific thing (or things) that makes Disney 'Disney', but that doesn't mean other studios are not able to replicate or imitate it, or vice versa. So for that reason only, I wouldn't be thinking in absolutes if I were you. For example, I think Chicken Little is an extremely anti-Disney film and yet it's part of the DAC canon. Similarly, Bluth's Anastasia feels more like a 'Disney-type' film than Hercules which was released the same year.
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13334
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

Well I'm glad you believe in the Disney Essence (I actually think everyone does even if some don't realize it, otherwise why would anyone expect anything from/be excited for a new Disney picture which if there was no essence could turn out like anything?). If by absolutes you mean I need to know that when people say something can be like Disney and not mean the exact same, I would agree. But if you think anyone could ever exactly replicate Disney, I cannot believe that. And I actually think I have good reason to think it's not possible. It takes people to intend to make something Disney for it to be Disney, and to make a full blown new Disney property it takes the right people to come together to work on it, too.

Most filmakers just mean to be like Disney anyway, never exactly the same.
Image
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13334
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

Nobody else saw or wanted to talk about this?

Well it was really awesome...as like a ride, and some care for the queen's character, but aside from that, as expected, no, it wasn't really a good movie, that I or most people would say.

Awesome, awesome, excellent designs though. The terrain, the castle, the costumes, the special effects, all amazingly great. Except when the queen changed from the guy back into herself, they made the face disappear for a second while transforming for really no good reason except to look creepy. It looked creepily cool but made no sense if you thought about it.

Charlize Theron was great. Best part of the thing. Chris Hemsworth was bland and lackluster, and so was Kristen Stewart accept with an added bit of that's annoying and you really can't act girl. But really both of these actors could have really emoted and developed themselves more, did more. But I will hand it to Kristen Stewart for sounding like a true princess with her accent at least. She had a good voice, just didn't have the rest of the acting down. But the accents were weird anyway, a mix of English and Celtic. The film was filmed in Ireland and there looked like Celtic symbols on the doors of the castle and other things looked Irish so maybe this was set near or in between or in both English and Irish places I dunno.

The film didn't really have a great story with great plot or character development. The best development was of the queen, which I wanted to see more of and know more about. They should have gone more into that, and also created and gone further for Snow and the huntsman as well. Snow White was like some girl who was somehow magic and could heal things, perhaps because of her mother's wish for a daughter of beauty and strength and white skin, etc. But it didn't make much sense unless the rose she pricked her finger on was magic or something. A lot of the film didn't make sense or just sounded too far-fetched.

It was better than Mirror Mirror though, and it had so many similarities to Mirror Mirror it was very much just like darker Mirror Mirror.

The Disney version with it's superiorly memorable characters and character devlopment and emotion and care is truly the fairest one of all, and it was made like 75 years before any of these new ones.
Image
User avatar
Jay
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1509
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:03 pm
Location: US

Post by Jay »

Cinemtography and special effects were awesome. Charlize Theron stole the show. Chris Hemsworth was ok, Kristen Stewart really didn't do much. I really liked the guy who played the Prince he could have been a bland character but I thought he did really good.


Overall I'd give it a 6.5/10.
TheSequelOfDisney
Signature Collection
Posts: 5263
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 3:30 pm
Location: Ohio, United States of America

Post by TheSequelOfDisney »

The best part of the whole film was Florence + the Machine's Breath of Life that played over the credits :P
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/
DancingCrab
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:20 pm

Post by DancingCrab »

TheSequelOfDisney wrote:The best part of the whole film was Florence + the Machine's Breath of Life that played over the credits :P
YES. Love Florence!

Though I did enjoy the hell out of Charlize as well.
User avatar
Dr Frankenollie
In The Vaults
Posts: 2704
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:19 am

Post by Dr Frankenollie »

Watched it, detested it. This is a perfect example of Hollywood's unoriginality nowadays - it's nothing more than a stereotypical 'gritty remake/reboot' with attempts at a darker, more modern style. However, it's an awfully childish and laughably predictable film; the moment you see there are eight dwarves, you know one is going to die. When one tries to befriend Snow White and is shown to be the friendliest of the bunch, you know it's going to be him. It goes without saying that Kristen Stewart and Chris Hemsworth were awful, and Charlize Theron was too melodramatic. Bob Hoskins' talent was wasted in the film, and he only had a rather pointless, one-dimensional role. There's also far too much focus on the visuals, with sequences like the milk bath scene only existing to show that this garbage is 100% style-over-substance. The portrayal of the dark forest was surprisingly lacklustre; the 1937 Disney version forest scene is still best of them all. Perhaps the film's worst crime is how nauseatingly boring it is, yet in all fairness I was surprised when it turned out that the Queen was disguised as the prince.

Like Duster said, the original Disney version is still fairest of them all all these decades later. Don't waste your money on this forgettable trite.
Christopher_TCUIH
Special Edition
Posts: 633
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2011 3:40 am
Location: California

Post by Christopher_TCUIH »

So it's just like Avatar? What a shame. And i heard there is already buzz for a sequel.
dvdjunkie
Signature Collection
Posts: 5613
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 10:05 am
Location: Wichita, Kansas

Post by dvdjunkie »

Dr. Frankenollie, I have a question. Did you actually go see the movie or are you just babbling about a review that you read and decided to interpret the way you feel?

I have said it before and I will say it again - You wouldn't know a good movie if you ever saw one.

Why are all the comparisons to Disney? Why all the negatives about a story that is more original than a "cartoon"? The story of Snow White and the Huntsman is from a story of the same title, and if you had read the story you would see how wrong you were about your criticisms of the movie.

Chris Hemsworth was perfect as the Huntsman, and Charlize Theron stood out with her interpretation of the Queen. And no matter what anyone says about Kristen Stewart, she is a fine actress and can play most any role handed to her. She is not asked to do too much in the "Twilight" flicks, and that is where she get some of the harsh criticisms, but personally I liked her as Snow White and I think she carried it off really well.

You cannot compare a non-Disney film to a Disney film, because they would both suffer in the translation. Let Snow White and the Huntsman stand on its own and it is a terrific motion picture. Is it a classic? I would strongly say NO!!! Is an entertaining film, not made for children? YES!!

Why people here on UD compare one movie to another is beyond me. I go to each and every movie I choose to see with a total open mind and let it do what it is supposed to do - ENTERTAIN ME!!! If I am spending my money on a film, then I choose to be very selective and watch only those films that I want to see. I will not pay for crappy 'remakes' or television shows brought to the screen like "21 Jump Street", or "Dark Shadows" or what we have coming to theaters this year like "Dirty Dancing", "Red Dawn" and what looks to be a god-awful movie "The Lone Ranger".

"Snow White and the Huntsman" deserves to have a sequel, if they choose to do so, but I think it stands on its own as a good film that will be in my collection when it comes to Blu-ray.
The only way to watch movies - Original Aspect Ratio!!!!
I LOVE my Blu-Ray Disc Player!
DancingCrab
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1030
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2010 3:20 pm

Post by DancingCrab »

Wow, dvdjunkie, I don't agree with the Drs' review either, but his opinion is his opinion. Lighten up, dude. It's JUST A MOVIE! You act like he insulted your first born child or something. :roll:
User avatar
Dr Frankenollie
In The Vaults
Posts: 2704
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:19 am

Post by Dr Frankenollie »

dvdjunkie wrote:Dr. Frankenollie, I have a question. Did you actually go see the movie or are you just babbling about a review that you read and decided to interpret the way you feel?
Yes, I actually have seen the movie. What, just because someone has a different opinion about a movie than you means that they haven't seen it?!
dvdjunkie wrote:I have said it before and I will say it again - You wouldn't know a good movie if you ever saw one.
In that case, as I love Fargo, Taxi Driver, North by Northwest, Mary Poppins, Psycho, Hugo, One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Amadeus, the Godfather, the Wizard of Oz, Sunset Boulevard, All About Eve, On the Waterfront, A Streetcar Named Desire, The Artist, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, quite a few DACs and many other films considered great, then you must hate all of them.
dvdjunkie wrote:Why are all the comparisons to Disney? Why all the negatives about a story that is more original than a "cartoon"? The story of Snow White and the Huntsman is from a story of the same title, and if you had read the story you would see how wrong you were about your criticisms of the movie.
The reason all the comparisons are to Disney is because it's the adaptation of the story I'm most familiar with (I've seen another but I can't remember much about it). I don't understand what you mean by the second question; I never said it was original than the Disney version, and I would be surprised if you did. When you say the story of Snow White and the Huntsman is from a story of the same title, do you mean that there is a book which it's based on? If I read the book version of Snow White and the Huntsman, will it really show me that I'm wrong about my criticisms? :? If it explains something like plot holes, that doesn't mean I'll still see that I'm 'wrong' about the film, because the film and book are separate things. And how can I be wrong in my criticisms anyway, as they're all subjective?
dvdjunkie wrote:Chris Hemsworth was perfect as the Huntsman, and Charlize Theron stood out with her interpretation of the Queen. And no matter what anyone says about Kristen Stewart, she is a fine actress and can play most any role handed to her. She is not asked to do too much in the "Twilight" flicks, and that is where she get some of the harsh criticisms, but personally I liked her as Snow White and I think she carried it off really well.
Hemsworth only did one thing as the Huntsman, and that was the 'grizzled, sarcastic old pessimist' cliche. That is not a good performance, that's a flat, uninspired one. Theron might've stood out to you because she was so melodramatic, and Stewart is an awful actress. Weren't you cringing when she shrieked the line "Who is my brother?" Yes, the writing was bad, but she made it a lot worse.
dvdjunkie wrote:Why people here on UD compare one movie to another is beyond me. I go to each and every movie I choose to see with a total open mind and let it do what it is supposed to do - ENTERTAIN ME!!! If I am spending my money on a film, then I choose to be very selective and watch only those films that I want to see. I will not pay for crappy 'remakes' or television shows brought to the screen like "21 Jump Street", or "Dark Shadows" or what we have coming to theaters this year like "Dirty Dancing", "Red Dawn" and what looks to be a god-awful movie "The Lone Ranger".
If you won't pay for crappy remakes, then why did you pay to see Snow White and the Huntsman? The reasoning behind comparing one movie to another (which doesn't happen only on UD, by the way) is that it can be helpful in getting your point across. Is that really such a crime?
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13334
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

dvdjunkie, Dr. Frankenollie and me and some others partly write about the entertainment value of films, but we also measure them on other qualities. We try to go above just how entertaining a film is and write about how much quality there is other than in entertainment, like in message, structure, writing, how artistic, certain emotions that you'd say are more than just entertainment. We just try to go above and be beyond and though sometimes we over do it and get to pointlessly negative on movies, we are trying to strive for beyond just entertainment value so, if you ever wondered why we talk about more than just if a film can entertain us, that's it, because, well, a juggling dog can also be very entertaining but not deep or anything, you know? I know you get entertained in deep ways, I'm sure, but hopefully now you get why some of us talk about movies the way we do.
Dr Frankenollie wrote:...However, it's an awfully childish and laughably predictable film; the moment you see there are eight dwarves, you know one is going to die. When one tries to befriend Snow White and is shown to be the friendliest of the bunch, you know it's going to be him...

...Perhaps the film's worst crime is how nauseatingly boring it is, yet in all fairness I was surprised when it turned out that the Queen was disguised as the prince.]
What is the proper way to show you snipped parts of a person's quote? Anyway, I wanted to say I didn't expect the dwarf thing but did catch on to the prince being the Queen thing fairly early, so, I wanted to say, I don't think you can use predictable to say whether a film is good or bad. I think when you can really tell is when you see a film again, when you know all the surprises but it still is all told well.
Image
User avatar
Dr Frankenollie
In The Vaults
Posts: 2704
Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:19 am

Post by Dr Frankenollie »

Disney Duster wrote:What is the proper way to show you snipped parts of a person's quote? Anyway, I wanted to say I didn't expect the dwarf thing but did catch on to the prince being the Queen thing fairly early, so, I wanted to say, I don't think you can use predictable to say whether a film is good or bad. I think when you can really tell is when you see a film again, when you know all the surprises but it still is all told well.
I do agree with this; I suppose that I disliked it not just because it was predictable (because so many movies are predictable), but because it used the same plot cliches and devices yet didn't do anything fresh with them. There are certain films which take conventional ideas and concepts, but are still enjoyable because they put something of a new twist on them, or because the characters are likable and backgrounds elements such as music and visuals are good. Snow White and the Huntsman used the exact same ideas, yet didn't do anything new with them, and I never connected with either Snow White and the Huntsman; moreover, the visuals aren't that good and the score very forgettable. There are predictable yet enjoyable movies, but the weakness in script, acting and production values meant that Snow White isn't one of them.
User avatar
Atlantica
Signature Collection
Posts: 5445
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 3:33 am
Location: UK

Post by Atlantica »

I thought this was an absolutely wicked film, and well worth the anticipation and hype that I had for it. Seen it a few times at the cinema, and it just gets better.

I do have to question though.....where would a sequel go ? Not that I wouldnt love one, but just questioning where the story would go ?
User avatar
ajmrowland
Signature Collection
Posts: 8177
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
Location: Appleton, WI

Post by ajmrowland »

DancingCrab wrote:Wow, dvdjunkie, I don't agree with the Drs' review either, but his opinion is his opinion. Lighten up, dude. It's JUST A MOVIE! You act like he insulted your first born child or something. :roll:
I myself kinda stopped reading his posts, but I agree. He's entitled to his opinion.

I'm gonna keep an open mind when I see this. And frankly, since many of the most classic movies are adaptations/reboots/remakes, I dont buy all this "Hollywood used to be original" crap. Cuz that's all it seems like. Unless somebody can give me a list of every movie ever made.
Image
User avatar
Disney Duster
Ultimate Collector's Edition
Posts: 13334
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
Gender: Male
Location: America

Post by Disney Duster »

I guess most things really did start with being books or plays, huh? But they did make original things. Citizen Kane was original. I mean it was kinda based on another guy's life, but...Close Encounters of the Third Kind is original! So is Star Wars! There's definately more.
atlanticaunderthesea wrote:I do have to question though.....where would a sequel go ? Not that I wouldnt love one, but just questioning where the story would go ?
I wanted to see how Snow White was really going to make the kingdom better...but that should have been in the first film...
Image
PatrickvD
Signature Collection
Posts: 5166
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:34 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by PatrickvD »

Boy did I hate this film.

There was just no point to anything that happened on screen.
Post Reply