It's finally here, folks: the "Snow White" remake! What we've all been begging for since 1937! The excitement in the air is so thick, you can cut it with a knife! I'll need to BASE jump off a skyscraper to slow down my adrenaline enough to be able to enjoy the movie!
Sorry, had to get that outta my system. I feel better now.
Objectively speaking, the trailers aren't short enough to hide the fact that this movie is going to absolutely stink, and that's before the politics are thrown in. The movie looks like a broken kaleidoscope of computer-generated mess, the believability of which wouldn't have passed muster for "Howard the Duck."
And that's after Disney had to reshoot significant chunks of the movie, which ballooned their initial budget of $240 million to $269.4 million. Why, you might ask? Because lead actress Rachel Zegler shot her employer in the foot with a $29.4 million bullet by going full woke in various interviews before the movie's release.
She plunged her first knife into the back of Caesar Iger last year when she derided the original Snow White film as a "love story where the guy literally stalks her. Weird." Zegler continued, "She's not going to be saved by the prince and she's not going to be dreaming about true love. She's dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be…." Snore. Wake me up when she's off her soapbox.
After the public backlash, Zegler did what sheltered activist theater brats do best: hide and deflect. In her case, she hid behind her gender ("I've watched women get torn down my whole life") and deflected ("my mere existence has served as an education for people that don't have a basic sense of empathy").
Always wrong and never in doubt, she then displayed her own empathy by describing Trump's reelection as "another four years of hatred," indicative of a nation that harbors a "deep, deep sickness" and said that she hopes Trump and all his supporters never know peace. She also posted "free Palestine" remarks. I'd like to see her find it on a map.
Sit down and have another Tide Pod, Rachel. You're not getting "torn down" for being a woman, and your "mere existence" isn't a barometer to measure other people's empathy. You're being criticized because you consistently make idiotic comments about issues the nuanced depths of which you cannot comprehend. Either stand by your comments or don't, but stop pretending you're the victim here. Free speech goes both ways, and people with far less power, money, status, and influence than you get to make their voices heard as well. If you don't hear us, the box office will.
But even before Zegler, actor Peter Dinklage threw a public hissy fit at the idea of seven dwarfs being in the remake. I kid you not when I say that he criticized the remake as having a "problematic representation of dwarfs" and that it does "nothing to advance the cause" of the dwarf community. So Disney instantly caved to the woke as only Disney can. The dwarfs were replaced with seven "magical creatures" who looked like they'd be turned away at the entrance of a furry convention for dressing too outlandishly.
Dinklage, as you may remember, saw his career skyrocket after being cast as Tyrion in the Game of Thrones series on HBO. He seemed to have no qualms about playing the part of the unappreciated, ridiculed, and betrayed dwarf son of an intolerant royal family. Nor did he demand that HBO cut his role and replace it with a "magical creature" whose role wouldn't stereotype dwarfs. Funny how the values of certain activists take a back seat when those values would impede them from raking in millions.
But after wasting untold amounts of money filming the "magical creatures," the entirely foreseeable public backlash drove Disney to return them to the gimp box and use seven CGI dwarfs. So, Disney is once again using dwarfs, which will infuriate Peter Dinklage, but Disney won't even use real dwarfs, which will rightly infuriate dwarfs in the acting business who got passed up for the gig. And the CGI dwarfs come across not as endearing or likable, but somewhere in between unfunny, clumsy, and noise-in-the-closet nightmare.
Fans, already sick of the woke force-feeding they regularly endure from Hollywood, have seen enough of the movie before it's even released. Once marketing costs are accounted for, the film would need to gross roughly $625 million to break even. The most optimistic projections don't have it breaking $500 million.
If the CEO of Disney was a corporate spy tasked with making the worst decisions possible to wreck the company and its brand, would he do anything different?
Disney has been criticized for being anti-male, but I disagree. Their films of late have been decidedly anti-female, despite surface appearances to the contrary. Allow me to explain:
The Disney films I grew up with had a very necessary, very humbling, and, yes, very empowering message for boys. "Pinocchio" taught me that following a path of lies, hedonism, and mindless impulsive pleasure would turn me into a braying ass, capable of nothing but brute labor. "Mary Poppins" taught me that family is more important than career and that there is nothing "patriarchal" or "matriarchal" about wanting to be actively involved in your kids' upbringing. "The Lion King" taught me that if I wanted to be treated like a man, it was time to grow up and accept the responsibility of being a man rather than hanging out with my slothful, immature friends all day long.
The consistent message I received, as a boy, was clear: It's not always about me, what I want, or what makes me feel good. It's about the people around me, most importantly my family, whose lives are affected by my decisions. It's about what's expected of me — as a real boy, as a father, as a leader — in order to overcome adversity and strengthen myself to be a man worthy of the society and culture with which I've been gifted.
The message certainly did NOT tell me that I was flawless and that it was the duty of the world around me to open its eyes and appreciate just how wonderful I think I am.
Related: Adult Rights Require Adult Responsibilities
On the contrary, recent Disney films seem to be telling girls the exact opposite: There's nothing wrong with you, there's nothing you need to work on, and if you're unhappy with your lot in life, it's certainly not your fault. Rather, the culprit is most likely a tyrannical father, a deceptive suitor, or an intolerant society of provincial rubes that just don't "understand" you.
And the idea of a modern Disney princess falling in love with a competent, handsome, responsible prince? Pfft, she might as well don a "Handmaid's Tale" cosplay outfit and join the ranks of willing slaves.
Disney teaches boys to grow the hell up and act their age, and that they're not the victim, nobody owes them anything, and their own choices are the biggest determinant of their successes and failures. The girls and women in boys' lives are not only good, but they're indispensable in helping boys achieve their potential.
Disney teaches girls that they're perfect just the way they are, and any unhappiness they feel is the direct result of others in their lives who are either openly or surreptitiously working to oppress them. To the extent that the Gen Z Disney princesses finally do find happiness, it derives not from them growing and maturing as a person so much as the rest of the world learning to appreciate them.
The Beast from "Beauty and the Beast" teaches boys that wealth and power are no excuse for arrogance and indifference, and that a man's ugliness is in inverse proportion to his love and empathy. The Beast is flawed and must work on improving himself for the betterment of the world around him.
Isabela from "Encanto" teaches girls that even if they're beautiful, popular, and endowed with miraculous abilities, they can still somehow weave the narrative to frame themselves as victims. Isabela is perfect, and it's everyone around her (especially Abuela, the dreaded old generation) who is flawed with their unfair expectations of her.
The Blue Fairy in "Pinocchio" tells boys to be "brave, true, and unselfish." "Frozen"'s Queen Elsa tells girls, "No right, no wrong, no rules for me." Disney uses animated fantasy to teach boys about the real world. Disney uses animated wokeness to delude girls into actual fantasy.
So who is Disney really biased against? Who is Disney hurting by setting up an unrealistic sense of self and of how life functions?
The unfortunate Zegler and her Disney handlers represent the progressive mindset that pits groups against each other in a zero-sum game in which men and women don't work together to grow as people, as families, and as civilizations, but rather that they're forever stuck in an eternal power struggle where one can't succeed without the other being oppressed.
And as far as Dinklage is concerned, keep doing what you're doing, pal. Maybe you'll get your way, and dwarfs in film will go the way of Uncle Ben, Aunt Jemima, and the Land O' Lakes Indian.
In conclusion, the disastrous slow-motion train wreck that has been the two-year release of "Snow White" deserves all the scorn and more that has been heaped upon it. I don't care how much they've "fixed" the film with the constant reshoots. The entire exercise has been a textbook example of how to drive away legions of loyal fans through corporate, self-absorbed virtue signaling.
Don't give Disney a break. Don't let up the pressure. Don't go see "Snow White," and tell everybody you know to do the same. The harder it bombs, the more likely they'll finally learn from their mistakes.
That $625 million that Disney needs to break even is OUR money. They need US to give it to THEM. Our money is our vote, and it's our only veto power over Disney producing more trash like this. Every time the Zeglers and Dinklages of the industry open their maws to harangue us as to just how deplorable they think we are, make it cost them millions of dollars.
Boycott this movie, and whatever woke drivel they shovel our way. Don't give your money to people who despise you.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member