Snow White and the Huntsman - Chick Flick in disguise?

[mgwriter]

Snow White is pre-existing material and in public domain.

So wouldn't that mean the studio would get all the benefits of pre-existing instant recognition material without having to pay for the copyright? (aside from paying the writer for his script). It's not like buying the rights to Spiderman, which took many many years to finally become a movie, and not because no one thought it would make a good film.

If so, seems like such a good deal to studio, who cares if the story's actually good?

maybe writing a new version of a public domain property is something studios are financially attracted to? Or, maybe not, but it's something to think about.

[stainjm]

It's good to watch movies like this to learn what NOT to do (great concept, cool Thor actor, great camera work - and everything else we can learn from)

[stainjm]

I was so annoyed about the rip off, Pipe (Of Princess Mononoke) - anyone who even thinks they can claim it's not is full of complete crap, come one.


- It's great how many people are making money off of Japanese rip-offs nowdays (Aheh, Hunger Games)... I have a few in mind I am looking at (was Japan major for undergrad and grad).

[cap7]

Everytime someone says that somebody ripped off something I can't help but think "how do you know that?". It is possible that someone just came up with similar idea, you know? I can completely buy that Suzanne Collins never watched or even heard of Battle Royale. I remember when Inception came out people were comparing it to Japanese film called Paprika. Is that a rip-off too? There are tons of creative people out there that constantly think about new stories. To assume that just because something is similar (or even very similar) to something else HAS to mean that people are deliberately ripping each other off... I don't know. It's going way too far for me.

[Fortean]

Was the scene with the giant troll, (in which the huntsman is defeated and Snow White manages to survive), adapted from some other recent story or film?

I thought that it was one of the most ridiculous and unnecessary scenes, and the film's commentary gave no clue as to what the filmmaker's were trying to achieve with this scene, (other than introducing yet another "special effect" to a bloated "epic").

I did watch a DVD, (a "free" rental), to learn a bit about the CGI used, and now wonder how many other good films, (which told a better story, without Hollywood stars and CGI effects), might have been made with its huge budget.

[stainjm]

My wife and I agreed with the Troll scene - what did it bring to the film? It showed a monster wouldn't attack her because she was 'beautiful' and that she didn't run, therefore saving the Huntsman - but emotionally it was silly, and the fact that the troll never reappears was a let down (that was one of the coolest looking pieces of the film).

As for copying - I can buy The Hunger Games, because yeah, there are other stories also like that (Stephen King had one, I believe). But watch Princess Mononoke, then the scene from Snow White, there is no doubt - the only difference is the thing kept its head.

[ChadStrohl]

This was a problem for me. With my "writer" hat on, I immediately expected - when they were storming the castle and the gate was locked - for the troll to make an appearance and blow that gate to splinters. Alas. Did not happen. Instead we get slapstick comedy to open the gate. Oh well.

[finalact4]

Originally Posted by Fortean

Was the scene with the giant troll, (in which the huntsman is defeated and Snow White manages to survive), adapted from some other recent story or film?

I thought that it was one of the most ridiculous and unnecessary scenes, and the film's commentary gave no clue as to what the filmmaker's were trying to achieve with this scene, (other than introducing yet another "special effect" to a bloated "epic").

I did watch a DVD, (a "free" rental), to learn a bit about the CGI used, and now wonder how many other good films, (which told a better story, without Hollywood stars and CGI effects), might have been made with its huge budget.

It was to show her 'connection' to the life/wildlife/land which is present in several 'King Arthur/Hero's journey's type metaphors-- the king is the land, and the land is the king.

She's special didn't you know? A little too Bella for me, my only complaint.

Otherwise, I thought they did a good job humanizing the witch.

FA4
My opinions are just that... opinions.

[scripto80]

I was very much looking forward to this one. It had such a great cast (yes, I even find Stewart to be amazing -- see her indie work), and the trailers were some of the most exciting I'd seen in awhile. Everything about it seemed so very epic and beautiful and well directed.

Then when I finally saw it, I found it quite boring. The action scenes were a tremendous let down, and at times the writing felt like...well, it was just missing something. The special effects weren't very impressive either, and sorry but wtf was up with the fairies? They were like a cross between Na'vi and some silly todler morning show. This was one of those films where not only did the trailer show the best footage, but there were even cool things in the trailer that were not actually in the film itself, so ultimately I felt jipped.

One of the only interesting things about this film, in my opinion, was the relationship between Snow and the Huntsman. Afterall, the movie is called this for a reason, and it worked. The two had chemistry and by the end I was interested in seeing where they would take this tale of a young Queen and her troubled Huntsman. Alas, Universal has chickened due to the Kristen Stewart scandal, and made a knee-jerk decision to not include her in the next film, and I think this will be a huge mistake. They can easily bring her back and continue that love story and beef up the action, but it seems they'd rather keep the adulterous newbie director who didn't even do that great of a job, and drop the uber popular young leading lady. Sexism at its best, ladies and gentlemen!