Walt Disney Company

Subterms

    Latest story

    100 Shares104 Views

    Inside the Controversy Surrounding Disney’s ‘Snow White’ Remake

    by

    Disney knew that remaking “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” as a live-action musical would be treacherous.But the studio was feeling cocky.It was 2019, and Disney was minting money at the box office by “reimagining” animated classics like “Aladdin,” “Beauty and the Beast” and “The Jungle Book” as movies with real actors. The remakes also made bedrock characters like Cinderella newly relevant. Heroines defined by ideas from another era — be pretty, and things might work out! — were empowered. Casting emphasized diversity.Why not tackle Snow White?Over the decades, Disney had tried to modernize her story — to make her more than a damsel in distress, one prized as “the fairest of them all” because of her “white as snow” skin. Twice, starting in the early 2000s, screenwriters had been unable to crack it, at least not to the satisfaction of an image-conscious Disney.“Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs,” which premiered in 1937, posed other remake challenges, including how to sensitively handle Happy, Sneezy, Sleepy, Dopey, Bashful, Grumpy and Doc. (One stalled Disney reboot had reimagined the dwarfs as kung fu fighters in China.)Still, Disney executives were determined to figure it out. They had some new ideas. More important, the remake gravy train needed to keep running.“It’s going to be amazing, another big win,” Bob Chapek, then Disney’s chief executive, said of a live-action “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” at a 2022 fan convention.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    More stories

    • 75 Shares93 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Snow White’ Review: A Princess’s Progress

      by

      The new live-action version of Disney’s 1937 animated fairy tale has drawn (maddening) criticism for its casting and an updated story. But liberation only goes so far.Disney’s new “Snow White” is perfectly adequate, though the scene when our heroine stands alongside Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez chanting “no justice, no peace” did admittedly give me pause. Yes, this live-action redo of its 1937 feature-length animated film has been called out as woke, but by the end, the overall damage from Snow White’s liberation struggle proves minimal. She still smiles and sings, whistles and works, rejects evil and rescues seven potential incels. Snow White no longer trills about a prince, true, but heteronormativity still has its happy ending. Huzzah!If somehow you’ve missed the most maddening of the nitwit controversies that have been swirling around Disney’s latest remake, good for you for having a life. It is — and has been — a dispiritingly familiar spectacle of bigotry and rank nonsense, with the ugliest twittering centered on the casting of the young Latina actress Rachel Zegler (“West Side Story”), who wasn’t deemed pale enough by trolls to play the title role. Of course the 1937 character is animated and she doesn’t look white as snow, either, because people don’t unless they’re in whiteface.Criticisms of Disney aren’t new, of course, and have reliably come from film critics as well as pundits from both sides of the political spectrum. Disney’s “Aladdin” (1992) ushered in a new age of princess diversity with an Arabian royal named Jasmine, but the film itself fumbled representationally. Critics slammed some of its images as well as song lyrics that were excised from later editions of the movie. As Disney expanded its princess portfolio, it continued to generate praise and criticism for both avoiding and sometimes reinforcing stereotypes, including in “The Princess and the Frog” (2009), which showcased its first Black princess.The Snow White in the new movie isn’t coded as anything other than sweet and spunky. Like her predecessors, she comes with the usual princess prerequisites: a royal patrimony, a dead mother, a killer stepmom and a guy waiting, at times riding in from the wings on a white horse. As in the original film — the studio’s first full-length animated feature — this Snow White is born to a King and Queen who are expediently sidelined. The Evil Queen (as she’s called), who’s played by Gal Gadot with less animation than the typical cartoon royal, talks into a mirror and doesn’t like what she hears. She subsequently makes life miserable for Snow White, who remains spirited enough to sing while mopping.Zegler has enough charm and lung power to hold the center of this busy, overproduced movie with its mix of memorable old and unmemorable new songs. Directed by Marc Webb and written by Erin Cressida Wilson, Snow White 2.0 dusts off Disney’s take on the Grimm fairy tale, modernizes it with girl empowerment and tosses in a bit of “Les Mis”-style storm-the-barricades uplift. Oddly, while the prince in the first film shows up only near the start and end, Zegler’s Snow White has to deal more forcefully with her insipid love interest, presumably to pad the story. He’s a smiler, Jonathan (Andrew Burnap), who’s been demoted to a commoner and leads a merry band of dancing-and-singing thieves.One of the more striking things about the 1937 film is that as the title “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” suggests, the story largely concerns her relationship with the seven miners. Some friendly critters guide Snow White to the miners’ storybook cottage where she bustles about, cleaning and cooking for Doc, Sneezy and the rest. In effect, before she can have her happily ever after, she continues practicing the housekeeping skills she honed under her stepmother to become a mother-wife to some unthreatening male companions. Shortly after the original Doc says to “search every cook and nanny,” the old Snow White cheerfully steps into those roles. The new Snow White, not so much.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares117 Views

      in Theater

      A ‘Greatest Showman’ Musical Is Coming to the Stage, in Britain

      by

      The show, developed by Disney with a Tony-winning creative team, will have an initial production in Bristol, England in the spring of 2026.“The Greatest Showman,” a hit 2017 film about the circus impresario P.T. Barnum, is being adapted for the stage by Disney Theatrical Group and will have an initial production in early 2026 in Bristol, England.The project is Disney’s first stage adaptation of a 20th Century Fox film since the Walt Disney Company acquired Fox’s assets in 2019.The musical has a credentialed creative team. The songs — a combination of those featured in the film and new ones written for the stage — are by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul, the duo behind “Dear Evan Hansen” who last year became EGOT winners — meaning they have won Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony awards.The director and choreographer is Casey Nicholaw, a prolific Broadway theatermaker who won Tony Awards for directing “The Book of Mormon” and for choreographing “Some Like It Hot.” Nicholaw has become a favorite Disney collaborator — he also directed and choreographed the long-running “Aladdin” as well as the company’s most recent show, “Hercules,” which will have a West End production in June.The book is by Tim Federle, best known for television’s “High School Musical: The Musical: The Series.”The film had a starry cast, led by Hugh Jackman; the stage musical does not yet have a cast, and Disney said it would hold open auditions in Britain and Ireland. The show will be staged at the Bristol Hippodrome in the spring of 2026; if all goes well, Disney will then determine whether to transfer it to London, and, eventually, New York. More

    • 75 Shares189 Views

      in Movies

      Who Makes the Red Carpet? Steve.

      by

      On a recent weekday morning in La Mirada, a suburb outside Los Angeles, Steve Olive, 58, walked among hundreds of carpet rolls in red, green and lavender in a white, sun-drenched, 36,000-square-foot warehouse.Laid out on the floor was a 150-foot stretch of rug, delivered by truck from Georgia a few days before, in the custom shade of Academy Red that is only available for the Oscars.Mr. Olive himself may not be famous, but celebrities have strolled the plush craftsmanship of his carpet for nearly three decades.His company, Event Carpet Pros, has supplied carpets for the Oscars, Golden Globes, Grammys and Emmys, as well as for Disney, Marvel and Warner Bros. movie premieres and the Super Bowl.And, at a moment when carpets have moved beyond the classic red and become splashier and more intricate, his handiwork has become more prominent. He has crafted custom designs like a shimmering, sunlit pool carpet for the 2023 “Barbie” world premiere and a green-and-black ectoplasm drip carpet for the “Ghostbusters” world premiere in 2016 that took a month to create.“I haven’t come across anything that we couldn’t do,” Mr. Olive, who founded the company with his brother-in-law, Walter Clyne, in 1992, said in an interview.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Television

      “Shogun” Emmy Win Lifts FX Past Bigger Rivals

      by

      The network has been a darling among critics for years. But it hit a new high on Sunday, with “Shogun” winning best drama and “The Bear” picking up several awards as well.When the “Shogun” writer and producer Justin Marks stormed the Emmys stage after his show won best drama on Sunday night, his first order of business was to pay tribute to the people who helped bring him there: the executive team at FX.How, he wondered aloud, did the network approve a show that was extremely expensive, and would be mostly subtitled in Japanese?“I have no idea why you did that, but thank you for your faith in this incredible team,” he said.For roughly two decades, that team at FX has been a darling to television critics with series like “American Horror Story,” “The Americans,” “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia” and “Atlanta.” But the network, with less money at its disposal than rivals such as Netflix and HBO, had never won television’s most prestigious prize, best drama, until Sunday.And that’s not all it won.“Shogun,” an adaptation from a 1975 best-selling book centered on 17th century feudal Japan on the brink of civil war, had a dominant night at the Emmys. It set a record for most Emmys won by a show in a single year, winning 18 in all. It was also the first time a foreign language show (roughly 70 percent of the show was in Japanese) had taken the best drama award that is normally the domain of shows that take place in the United States, the United Kingdom or Westeros.Hiroyuki Sanada in a scene from “Shogun.”Katie Yu/FX, via Associated PressAnother FX show, “The Bear,” won several major Emmys on Sunday night, including three acting awards. But in an upset, Max’s “Hacks” defeated “The Bear” in best comedy series.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in Television

      Judge Blocks Joint Streaming Service from Disney, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery

      by

      The planned service from Disney, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery was slated to cost $42.99 a month and aimed at fans who had abandoned cable TV.A judge issued a preliminary injunction against Disney, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery on Friday over a planned sports-focused streaming service from the companies, saying the joint venture would most likely make the market for sports viewership less competitive.The 69-page ruling from a federal judge in New York’s Southern District effectively halts — at least for the moment — the companies’ ambitious plans for the service, called Venu, which was aimed at sports fans who had abandoned cable television.The service, which had been expected to become available this fall and cost $42.99 a month, promised to offer marquee games from the National Football League, the National Basketball Association and Major League Baseball.But the idea raised alarms with rivals, most notably a sports streaming service called Fubo, which sued to block the new service’s formation after it was announced this year. In a statement accompanying its complaint, filed on Feb. 20, Fubo alleged that Disney, Fox and Warner Bros. Discovery had “engaged in a long-running pattern” of trying to stymie its business through anticompetitive tactics.The complaint led to a hearing this month that focused on whether Fubo should be able to obtain a preliminary injunction against Venu, essentially stopping the sports-media venture from proceeding.In her ruling, Judge Margaret Garnett said Fubo was likely to prevail in its claim that the new service would “substantially lessen competition and restrain trade.” She added that refusing to grant the injunction could limit the effectiveness of any court order reached after a trial.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 175 Shares169 Views

      in Movies

      ‘Deadpool & Wolverine’ Is the Type of of Superhero Movie the Franchise Once Mocked

      by

      Making fun of schlocky, overwrought superhero movies used to be the Deadpool signature. But with “Deadpool & Wolverine,” and Disney’s push into the Marvel Universe, that thread is lost.Deadpool movies might as well begin with a fun qualifier for audiences: This isn’t a typical superhero movie; in fact, all genres and tropes are ripe for mocking by this foul-mouthed mercenary hero.In the first “Deadpool,” in the midst of a fight that includes decapitation and maiming, Ryan Reynolds’s Deadpool says, “I may be super, but I am no hero. And yeah, technically this is a murder. But some of the best love stories start with a murder. And that’s exactly what this is: a love story.” In the sequel, Deadpool says, “Believe it or not, ‘Deadpool 2’ is a family film. True story,” as he creatively murders a whole warehouse of Russian criminals. Dolly Parton’s “9 to 5” plays in the background.We’ve got a violent superhero movie that’s also a low-key sendup of tender rom-coms, then another violent superhero movie that pokes fun at the loving family film. So what’s “Deadpool & Wolverine”? Nothing as exciting — just another formulaic Marvel Cinematic Universe movie with a saucier rating.This third installment of the Deadpool franchise fails to deliver on that same knowing play with genre. The jokes are mostly about leaning heavily into the rules and standards of the superhero genre as orchestrated by Marvel — a bad omen for the Deadpool brand, formerly of 20th Century Fox before Disney acquired it in 2019.The new movie picks up a thread from the previous one when Deadpool uses a time-travel device to save the love of his life, Vanessa (Morena Baccarin). It’s a blatant deus ex machina, and the film casually undercuts its own emotional arc in order to make meta jokes about whether time travel could have changed the trajectory of Reynolds’s career.“Deadpool & Wolverine” seems to have forgotten its own joke about the earnest use of cheap plot devices like that — it dives headfirst into the commercial wholesomeness, overextended plotlines and shameless fan service that have come to define the majority of the Marvel Cinematic Universe in the last few years. In the latest film, Wolverine’s back from the dead (see the end of “Logan” to catch up), thanks to the multiverse, and he and Deadpool team up to keep Deadpool’s timeline from being decimated by the Time Variance Authority (see “Loki” to catch up).We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in Movies

      Hollywood’s Message to Red States: Our Movies Are for You

      by

      After a period of openly using movies to display progressive values, studios seem to be heeding a message from many ticket buyers: Just entertain us.For nearly two decades, Hollywood has seemingly missed no opportunity to sound the alarm about climate change.There have been cri de coeur documentaries, most notably “An Inconvenient Truth.” Superheroes have been concerned, with Batman bemoaning mankind’s treatment of the planet in “Justice League.” Nary an award show goes by without a star or several begging viewers to take environment-saving action.So it was startling when the weather-focused “Twisters” arrived from Universal Pictures this month with no mention of climate change at all. If ever there was a perfect vehicle to carry Hollywood’s progressive climate change messaging — a big-budget movie about people caught in worsening storm patterns — wasn’t this it?Apparently not. Movies should not be about “preaching a message,” Lee Isaac Chung, who directed “Twisters,” said in a prerelease interview that served as a dog whistle to conservative ticket buyers.Trend spotting in cinema is a hazardous pursuit. Sometimes a movie is just a movie. “Twisters,” however, is emblematic of a clear shift in Hollywood: After a period of openly using movies to display progressive values, sometimes with success at the box office (“Barbie”) and often not (“Strange World,” “The Marvels,” “The Color Purple,” “Dark Waters”), studios seem to be heeding a message that many ticket buyers — especially in the center of the country — have been sending for a long time: We just want to be entertained, no homework attached.Put bluntly, it amounts to an attempt by Hollywood to bend to red state audiences.“It’s a reflection of economics and the desperation of the film industry,” said Corby Pons, a movie marketer who focuses on the faith community and is based in Nashville. “We want you to attend our movies. We need you to attend our movies.”We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Television

      N.B.A. Announces Lucrative Rights Deals With Disney, Comcast and Amazon

      by

      The league rejected a bid by Warner Bros. Discovery to match Amazon’s offer.The National Basketball Association announced new rights agreements with Disney, Comcast and Amazon on Wednesday after rejecting a rival bid by Warner Bros. Discovery that would have kept games on its TNT network, which has broadcast the N.B.A. since the 1980s.The companies will collectively pay more than $76 billion over 11 years, according to four people familiar with the negotiations who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the financial details. That will substantially increase the league’s annual revenue and reflects the continued importance of live sports programming even as streaming has reconfigured the entertainment industry.In making the announcement, the league said it had rejected Warner Bros. Discovery’s bid this week to match Amazon’s offer for its share of the package.“Throughout these negotiations, our primary objective has been to maximize the reach and accessibility of our games for our fans,” the league said in a statement. “Our new arrangement with Amazon supports this goal by complementing the broadcast, cable and streaming packages that are already part of our new Disney and NBCUniversal arrangements.” (NBCUniversal is owned by Comcast.)“All three partners have also committed substantial resources to promote the league and enhance the fan experience,” the statement added.The new deals, which include N.B.A. and some W.N.B.A. games, will take effect with the 2025-26 season and are more than two and a half times the average annual value of the league’s current rights agreements.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More