this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2025
41 points (93.6% liked)

movies

3133 readers
968 users here now

Matrix room: https://matrix.to/#/#fediversefilms:matrix.org

Warning: If the community is empty, make sure you have "English" selected in your languages in your account settings.

🔎 Find discussion threads

A community focused on discussions on movies. Besides usual movie news, the following threads are welcome

Related communities:

Show communities:

Discussion communities:

RULES

Spoilers are strictly forbidden in post titles.

Posts soliciting spoilers (endings, plot elements, twists, etc.) should contain [spoilers] in their title. Comments in these posts do not need to be hidden in spoiler MarkDown if they pertain to the title’s subject matter.

Otherwise, spoilers but must be contained in MarkDown.

2024 discussion threads

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
orangeNgreen
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
41
Online Wars Aside, 'Snow White' Simply Isn't Getting Moviegoers to Buy In (www.thewrap.com)
submitted 1 day ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
16 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Non-paywalled link.

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Well, why the hell would I drag my ass to a theater to see a retread of a movie made by the same studio, when the studio already has a bad track record with remakes?

Like maybe beauty and the beast was a solid enough standalone movie to merit a theater trip. Maybe. But even that wasn't necessary, it was still just a retread made to keep their finger in the pie. It didn't offer anything more than the original, unless you're a hard core Watson fan.

The rest? Tepid at best.

Why would anyone think that this movie, with trailers that already show the cgi brings nothing interesting to the table, spend money on it?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 21 hours ago

I mostly agree though I didn't really like Beauty and the Beast enough to watch it more than once. I think Cinderella was the better of the live action remakes that they've made. I also didn't see the appeal of the LA Jungle Book.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat -4 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

What if.... gasp, what if you're not the target audience?!

Everyone complaining about the poor quality of Disney's live action remakes is overlooking the main reason why Disney is making them. They're profitable.

With the relatively low cost compared to a traditional animated movie, the ability to lean on existing IP's, and the fact that the main audience (children) don't typically give a shit about quality, Disney has been raking in the money with these remakes. I don't believe they've had a true "flop" (where they lost money) since they started.

The Disney that made original films and stories is long dead. And why wouldn't it be? For all the complaints about the lack of originality in Hollywood, when a studio actually risks making one, it tends to be a bust. Going to a theater is an event, and people don't want to risk their money on an unknown story. Money talks, and unfortunately it says that remakes and bland superhero movies are what the people want.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 45 minutes ago)

If these types of movies were profitable, there wouldn't be these kind of articles saying oh my god they're losing money

[–] qevlarr 5 points 5 hours ago

I know why they do it, that doesn't make their movies suck any less

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 day ago (6 children)

People want original stories. The recycled IP scheme is burnt out.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 minutes ago

Eh. Ever since i saw these mentally ill people who started crying during the lion king remake, i don't belive that anymore. There are enough people who just watch everything with a disney logo on it.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago (2 children)

People want original stories.

People often say that, but box office grosses tell a different story.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

There's a difference between original story and original IP

[–] CallateCoyote 4 points 5 hours ago

Yeah, that’s not the reason this one is failing. I think it’s much simpler… it looks terrible and the CG dwarves are disgusting.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 22 hours ago

Of the top 10 box office movies last year 9 were sequels, prequels or remakes. The exception was Wicked, as an adaptation of a very established IP.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

I wish that were true but people go bonkers over copy pastes.

  • Marvel films
  • Ubisoft games
  • Call of duties
  • sports games
  • Nintendo games
  • Souls games
  • Battlefields
  • star wars -bethesda games

None of them are original, all of them are at best small iterations upon previous few. Majority of the people don't seem to want something great and different. They want something safe and good-enough.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I haven't cared about any of their live-action remakes so far, but I have to admit I'm looking forward to the Lilo & Stitch one.

EDIT: And I just looked it up and apparently Jumba and Pleakley will appear human most of the time. Never mind!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 hours ago

The only one I enjoyed was Branagh's Cinderella. Good visuals, no weird messing with the story, just a straight up retelling, just with good acting and direction.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

They're reselling the IP to the next generation of kids.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 day ago

They've been recycling the same thing since 1937, nobody gives a shit