By Govindini Murty. Regular Libertas readers know that I’m fascinated by films that take on literary and mythological classics. It’s always interesting to watch the process of adaptation and reinvention that our enduring myths and stories undergo when they’re made into films. My hope is always that the inner core of truth that made the classic story or myth resonate with generations of readers and that forms a bridge to the past will be maintained even as the outward form of the story may change to keep up with the present. In this way a story may be updated, yet remain a classic. That’s why I don’t mind it when the Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, or Harry Potter films take myths and adapt them in different ways, because I feel that the core of truth of the myth – about humanity, about the world, about the nature of love, life, heroism, or sacrifice – is maintained.
If someone wants to take Shakespeare’s The Tempest and set it in outer space, as MGM did with the 1956 sci-fi film Forbidden Planet, I think that’s terrific. If Marcel Camus wants to take the ancient Greek myth of Orpheus and film it in Rio de Janeiro during Carnival, as he did with Black Orpheus, I’m all for it. The resulting cinematic creations add fascinating new layers of meaning to the original works. I had high hopes that the recent Cowboys and Aliens might be a similarly imaginative reinvention of the Western genre, but as Jason pointed out in his review, the film was more derivative than visionary. It’s a delicate balancing act to adapt a classic myth and yet retain its core insights and emotions. (And in another post, I will take on what exactly makes a story or myth ‘classic’ in the first place).
It was with great interest therefore that I read that there are not one but two live-action films about the story of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs due to be released in 2012. Universal’s version, titled Snow White and the Huntsman has an all-star cast of Kristen Stewart (Twilight) as Snow White, Charlize Theron as the Evil Queen, Chris Hemsworth (Thor) as the Huntsman, Sam Claflin as Prince Charming, and a number of fine character actors as the dwarves, including Ian McShane, Bob Hoskins and Ray Winstone. It will be produced by Joe Roth and helmed by first-time film director Rupert Sanders (whose prior experience was directing live-action ads for the video games Halo 3 and Call of Duty). The film is due to be released on June 1, 2012, a date that was moved up from December of 2012 in hopes of preempting the other Snow White project.
That competing Snow White project is being produced by Relativity Media. Titled The Brothers Grimm: Snow White on IMDB, but according to other reports simply titled Snow White, it was originally slated for a June 29, 2012 release, but has now been moved up to March 16, 2012 in response to Universal’s moving up of its own release date. Relativity’s Snow White stars Lily Collins (The Blind Side, also daughter of Phil Collins) as Snow White, Julia Roberts as the Evil Queen, Sean Bean as the King, and Armie Hammer (The Social Network) as Prince Andrew Alcott. Other cast members include Mare Winningham and model Lily Cole. The film will be directed by Tarsem Singh (Immortals) and the producers include Brett Ratner.
Both films claim that they will be “dark” and “edgy” retellings of the story of Snow White. In both versions, Snow White won’t be the sweet and feminine heroine of Disney’s classic film, but will be a female warrior who dons armor and engages in extended action scenes as she battles the forces of the Evil Queen.
From the photos that have been released of Universal’s Snow White and the Huntsman, their version looks like it will be dark and serious, with a morose looking Kristen Stewart in grey armor doing battle with a black-gowned Charlize Theron. From hints about the script and the photo of Prince Charming in black, sinister looking armor, I’m guessing that he’s not the good guy in the film, and that Chris Hemsworth as the rugged, earthy-looking Huntsman in brown, will actually be the hero. According to Cinema Blend, producer Joe Roth states “our movie I like to think is on the scale of Lord of the Rings in terms of size and scope.” From this comment and from these photos, I imagine that Snow White and the Huntsman will indeed have the desaturated color palette of Lord of the Rings or of Ridley Scott’s 2010 Robin Hood. It’s not a look I’m a fan of because I feel it’s been overdone, but perhaps Snow White and the Huntsman will bring a new take to it.
From the Tarsem Singh "Snow White."
By contrast, Relativity’s Snow White looks to be bright and colorful. From the one photo Relativity has released of Lily Collins as Snow White, it appears that director Tarsem Singh is going for a candy-colored, glossy, archly-ironic re-envisioning of Snow White akin to the pop art/surrealist style of fashion photographer David LaChapelle. That would be keeping with the tone of the film, which Relativity’s press release (via Deadline) promises will be “a spirited adventure comedy.” (And yet the film’s IMDB page states it will be “a dark twist on the classic fairy tale,” so I’m a little confused – will it be dark or will it be colorful and comic?)
Coming Soon.net sheds further light on the visual style of the Relativity Snow White by reporting on some of its early concept art:
“Though no photos were allowed, we are pleased to report that fans of Singh’s distinctive visuals will not be disappointed. While many of the classic Snow White elements show through in the film’s design — particularly in the look of the forest — the artwork seems to draw from a wide range of inspiration, including a very Indian-looking palace and several masquerade designs reminiscent of Mardi Gras and old storybook illustrations.
Multiple costume parties are said to play a role in the film and promise to be extremely bright and colorful. … Snow White herself (Lilly Collins) is the biggest departure from the original story and will be portrayed as a bit of a fighter, allowing for multiple action sequences. Exiled from her kingdom, she’s actively trying to win back her rightful throne and combines a blue dress with black, leather armor. …
The Evil Queen (Julia Roberts) takes the cake for costume changes. Her character had pages and pages of different elaborate dresses in various colors and shapes, including an impressive ice-inspired design.”
So much for the externals. Now for the heart of the matter: how will these filmmakers treat the central themes of love, jealousy, betrayal, and redemption in the classic Grimms Brothers’ fairy tale of Snow White? And what will the filmmakers’ attitudes be toward Walt Disney’s original Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, which has been enormously popular for the past seventy plus years and is one of the Top Ten Grossing Films of All Time (domestic, adjusted for inflation)? Will they be respectful in discussing it, or will the filmmakers be unable to make their own films without trashing in public the classic version that predated theirs? According to their public comments, the latter seems likely, which is very disappointing.
The Universal Snow White and the Huntsman is being described as a “dark reimagining of the classic fairytale”. Huffington Post reports:
“The story, according to Entertainment Weekly, features Snow White, having escaped from the Evil Queen’s imprisonment, off in the woods, being chased down by the Huntsman. He’s charged with returning just her heart, but when he can’t bring himself to kill her for it, they become partners in the fight against the queen.
Indeed, this Snow White will be a much more action-packed affair, with Stewart and the gang to be featured in some major stunt work. “It’s not a little girl sitting by a well with tweety birds telling her what’s going on,” director Rupert Sanders said (via Cinema Blend).
Theron, who just met Stewart, gave voice to that new attitude, saying, “I know she’s going to give me a run for her money. And I’m ready for it bitch, let’s go!”
According to Entertainment Weekly, producer Joe Roth has stated that the film will be the first in a trilogy, and that Snow White “starts out not a damsel in distress, but innocent, and after 11 years of imprisonment by the Evil Queen, she escapes and learns the ways of a warrior in the woods.” To underscore the idea that this will not be the sweet and charming heroine of the classic tale, director Rupert Sanders gives as his reasons for casting the perennially glum Kristen Stewart:
“[It] just became evident to me that Kristen occupies a space in the universe where she’s a terrific actress only known for one part. I hope this is a movie that will appeal to those who find Twilight appealing, but also [Stewart] is someone who has some piss and vinegar in her.”
As for the Evil Queen herself, Joe Roth states that ”She’ll be larger than life” and characterized by “evil without any burden of guilt.” And according to Cinema Blend, Charlize Theron at Comic-Con described her character as a “serial killer.”
The Relativity Snow White’s IMDB page describes its story as a: “A dark twist on the classic fairy tale, in which Snow White and the seven dwarfs look to reclaim their destroyed kingdom.” However, Relativity’s press release states:
“In Relativity’s Snow White, a spectacular reimagining of the classic fairy tale, an evil queen steals control of a kingdom, and an exiled princess enlists the help of seven resourceful rebels to win back her birthright in a spirited adventure comedy filled with jealousy, romance, and betrayal that will capture the imagination of audiences the world over.”
And Slash Film reports producer Brett Ratner saying about the production:
“This is not your grandfather’s Snow White. [Screenwriter] Melissa [Wallack] went back to the 500 year old folk tale and put in some of the things that were missing from Walt Disney’s film. His dwarves were miners, and here they are robbers. There is also a dragon that was in the original folk tale. Walt made one of the great movies of all time, but ours is edgy and there is more comedy. The original, made for its time, was soft compared to what we’re going to do.”
As I noted before in my articles on the ‘dark,’ ‘edgy’ remake of Wonder Woman and the ‘dark,’ ‘edgy’ upcoming Noah’s Ark film, it’s actually more difficult to tell the classic stories – whether they are classics from thirty years ago or classics from three thousand years ago – with a light, confident touch. It’s easy to go dark – that’s why everyone is going dark with their films and TV shows today. It’s more heroic to be ‘light’ – and by light I don’t mean falsely cheerful or superficial – I mean ‘light’ as in joyfully and heroically taking on life’s challenges and overcoming them. Going ‘dark’ in a film is an easy way out – just as treating all female heroines as action figures is an easy way out. It means that the filmmakers don’t want to delve into the complexities of real human behavior and psychology, so they reduce everything to external action and external cliché.
From the original "Snow White" (1937).
All these recent ‘dark’ and ‘edgy’ adaptations of classic stories simply kill the joy out of the original myths. Look at the ‘dark’ Robin Hood and the ‘dark’ Clash of the Titans (which obnoxiously derided the gloriously humanistic 1981 original) and the ‘dark’ Red Riding Hood that we’ve seen in the past year. Does anyone truly care about these films the way they did about the originals? We’re also apparently going to be getting a ‘dark’ Beauty and the Beast starring Emma Watson and directed by Guillermo del Toro, and other ‘dark’ adaptations of classic stories are no doubt in the works. And the condescension of these films’ producers and directors toward the prior classic films is really obnoxious. Does Rupert Sanders of Snow White and the Huntsman really have to be so condescending toward Walt Disney’s Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs? Does Brett Ratner have to complain that Disney’s Snow White is “soft” and “made for its time”? Disney’s version of Snow White has actually proven to be a timeless classic, with an appealing vision of femininity that is still what most people are drawn to in their entertainment around the world.
Consider the context in which Walt Disney made Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) or in which Michael Curtiz made The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938). The artists who made these classic films had lived through the Depression and were about to fight the Nazis in WWII. They had known struggle, poverty, disaster and heartbreak, and were about to face one of the most evil and nihilistic regimes on the planet. It’s incredible that they were able to make the joyful, life-affirming films that they did – full of beauty and artistry, compelling characters, intelligent writing, and noble ideals. Not only that, but Disney’s Snow White was one of the most innovative films of its time – the first animated feature film, and a film that Disney risked his entire career and company to create when most people told him that nobody would sit through an animated feature film. Of course, Disney proved them wrong. The film earned an astounding $868,730,000 at the domestic box office (figures adjusted for inflation) and a Special Oscar for “significant screen innovation which has charmed millions and pioneered a great new entertainment field.” The film has since been named by the AFI the greatest animated film of all time. Even Soviet director Sergei Eisenstein said Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was the greatest film ever made. Disney’s work isn’t ’soft’ or ’simplistic’ filmmaking. Rather, it is challenging and heroic, for it looks life squarely in the eye and decides that it will recreate it as better than it is, rather than worse.
From the original "Snow White" (1937).
Today, the average American/Westerner lives a life of unparalleled stability and abundance. And what kind of films do we produce? All too often our ’serious’ cinematic output is dark, depressing, neurotic, and transient. The desire to go ‘dark’ is a decadent fixation brought on by boredom and a lack of ideas. The desire to be ‘dark’ actually creates a monotone effect that ultimately is not very dark at all. To truly go dark, one actually has to have a sense of contrast – one has to include some light. A few filmmakers, Alfred Hitchcock, F.W. Murnau, Tim Burton, have such wild imaginations that they can fill that dark with vivid and original fantasy. Most of these newer filmmakers can’t – they just fill it with violence and too often, political ideology.
And finally, let me just address the issue of every classical heroine now having to be a virago in a suit of armor. Is it possible to have historical or mythological heroines who are normal young woman who are interesting for their intelligence and psychology, and not just for their ability to wield a broadsword? It’s really hard to believe that a girl like Kristen Stewart who barely weighs 110 pounds would be running around in armor wielding a sword. Why does Hollywood only consider women to be ‘empowered’ if they can mow someone down with a weapon? I’m empowered, but I don’t need to wave a sword around at people to prove it. My empowerment comes through my daily aspiration to ideals of knowledge, innovation, and creativity.
Hollywood used to know how to create fascinating characters out of women who were inspired by a broad variety of motivations. Look at historical and literary films like Cleopatra, Gone With the Wind, Salome, and Elizabeth and Essex with dazzling actresses like Elizabeth Taylor, Vivien Leigh, Rita Hayworth, and Bette Davis. These women triumphed through their strength of character – not their ability to impose violence. Even in Queen Christina, in which Greta Garbo plays a queen who spends much of her time in men’s garb, the film emphasizes that her authority comes from her intelligence and nobility – not her dueling abilities.
I hope that as the various adaptations of Snow White move forward that their filmmakers are cognizant of these more traditional modes of empowered femininity as they seek to reinvent this beloved fairy tale classic.
Posted on August 3rd, 2011 at 10:41am.
Perceptive insights and good questions. I can understand wanting to make a version of the story that reflects some of the ways in which our world and culture differ from those of the late 1930s but I can’t figure out why that update has to be “dark.” Actually, I mean I can’t figure out a logical reason for it; I know that the real reason is that “dark” is a lazy shortcut for “relevant” or “meaningful” or some other word that shallow thought uses to pretend it’s not shallow.
I have to say that when I read Mr. Sanders’ quote about Ms. Stewart being a terrific actress known for only one role I scratched my head some — she’s best known is Bella Swan in the “Twilight” movies, and judging by the thirty minutes of that performance I’ve seen she’s dreadful, although she’s light years better than Robert Pattinson. Her best-reviewed work seems to have been in some less ubiquitous roles.
Brett – what you say is quite true. Updating a classic story to fit in with modern times does not automatically mean that one has to go ‘dark.’ I wish they would find other, more interesting ways to modernize these tales while keeping the core insights true.
As for Kristen Stewart, yes, I really agree with you on her “Twilight” performance, though I actually thought Robert Pattinson’s acting was much better than hers. He’s supposed to be a cold, neurotic vampire, and I thought he portrayed that well, but she’s supposed to be a warm emotional girl, and instead she comes across as sullen and one-note. She also mumbles all the time and can’t seem to get out a line straight without all sorts of hemming and hawing. Nobody I know in real life has as much trouble getting a line out as she does – and she’s paid millions to do it.
I agree with you both. I find Kristen Stewart as basically mute emotionally. Seriously do these people take acting lessons anymore? As far as the modern day portrayal of women, I date that change to the movie Alien. I LOVE Alien and Aliens but ever since women are either portrayed as trapped neurotic housewives, trapped neurotic singles, lesbians or Rambo.
I am familiar with Stewart only from “Adventureland” (which is a marvelous film which should be seen by everyone), in which she played an intelligent, loving, but flawed character. She was great.
Kishke – Thanks, I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt and check the film out.
The 1946 “Beauty and the Beast” is still the best fairy tale movie ever, and it’s _definitely_ dark, mysterious, sensual and not for young kids. Remember that Grimm’s original fairy tales are awfully harsh to begin with–the Disney versions we know and love have been lightened up considerably from even the milder versions popular in Victorian times. (Sondheim’s “Into The Woods” relates the endings of the true tales–including plucked out eyes and lopped off toes–to hilarious stage effect) Same with Disney’s Pinocchio–while the movie is indeed a moral masterpiece, read Collodi’s original book and you will have your mind blown with the violence and death of main characters. (spoilers: the Blue Fairy dies, Pinocchio kills the (Jiminy) cricket with a hammer when he scolds him too much about skipping school, and he later gets his feet burned off when he falls asleep too close to a fire.) I agree, there is probably no need for Snow White to wear armor and kick ass (although in history it sure worked for Joan of Arc), but it helps to remember that the purpose of the tales was as much to frighten children into obedience, as entertain. I have no idea how these new efforts will turn out, and while I skipped the recent Snow White I have no problem on principal to updating fairy tales. But then I’m one of those people who jumped from fairy tales to fantasy and sic fi as I grew up.
The NRA might take exception to you wondering why it’s wrong for women to be empowered by wielding weapons, btw.
Wish you had an edit function. Premature posting. Last sentence should read I skipped the recent Red Riding Hoods, but that was because the consensus was it was a crap movie, subject matter aside.
Maatkare – thanks for your comments. Yes, the original fairy tales were certainly dark and full of uncanny and violent occurrences. (And I agree this was very likely in order to frighten children into behaving!) However, they also allowed in light – especially in their themes of love, integrity, faith, and courage. It was the contrast between the dark and the light that made these stories fascinating. My concern is that nowadays when the focus is so much on making the films ‘dark’ they just become monotonous. Look at what Ridley Scott did to “Robin Hood” – he made it dingy, cheerless, and depressing by taking all the joy, adventure, and high ideals out of it.
As for women in armor, yes that’s true about Joan of Arc (I was actually thinking about her while writing the article), but I’d add that what made Joan special was not just that she wore armor and commanded an army, but that she had an extraordinary spiritual connection to God that imbued her actions with nobility and integrity. It was her indomitable faith that inspired the French army to win victories under her – not just her battle skills, which were probably quite modest.
And you’ve got me interested in taking another look at “Beauty and the Beast”! I love Jean Cocteau’s surreal, mysterious “Beauty and the Beast” from the late 1940s – I will have to take another look at the Disney version as well.
Govindini, Criterion just released an updated blu-ray edition!! Woohoo! Yes, I think historians agree that Joan never hacked anyone to death personally, but nonetheless she’s one of the most remarkable and inspiring women in history. I’d rather get a good version of her story than 100 rebooted Snow Whites. (Well, I’d actually rather have a really good Hatshepsut movie, but I digress…)
Maatkare – A Hatshepsut movie – now we’re talking! This simply confirms that here at Libertas we have the best readers on the planet. I would love to see a movie about Hatshepsut. Jason gave me an excellent book about Hatshepsut by Joyce Tyldesley a few years ago. It made for fascinating reading and would make an even more fantastic movie, if the right people could be found to do it.
And an updated Criterion “Beauty and the Beast” sounds fabulous – I will have to check it out. You have excellent taste Maatkare! (By the way, your nom de plume has an ancient Egyptian sound to it, some day you’ll have to tell me what it means…)
*ahem* “Maatkare” was one of Hatshepsut’s throne names–she is often referred to on her monuments as “Maatkare Hatshepsut.” maatkare=truth is the soul of Re; hatshepsut=”first among noblewomen”
In both versions, Snow White won’t be the sweet and feminine heroine of Disney’s classic film, but will be a female warrior who dons armor and engages in extended action scenes as she battles the forces of the Evil Queen.
BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!! ha ha ha ha ha ha ha !!!
Yeah, I can see why you’re concerned with maintaining the core myths. Obviously this is someone re-imagining Grim as Dom fetishist. My guess where this came from? Somebody pitched Snow White ala the odious “Wicked” book. I suspect you can kiss your classic myths good bye.
K – Cheer up. It isn’t all doom and gloom. Maybe some of these adaptations will actually be good.
Another excellent essay on film, especially the tiresome “dark” reimagining of everything. Of course, I enjoyed the recent Robin movie, but Red Riding Hood was a mess (a nice looking mess) and Clash of the Titans was simply terrible, lacking the sense of adventure and excitement that made the original such fun. I knew it was going to be bad when the robotic owl Bubo was casually thrown away, as if the film was revelling in its contempt for the original. Ultimately, Disney’s “Snow White” will be long treasured and remembered while these remakes are very likely to be forgotten in a year
Thanks so much Sean – I appreciate it. Libertas contributor Patricia Ducey wrote a funny review of “Red Riding Hood” for us – here’s the link:
http://www.libertasfilmmagazine.com/lfm-review-red-riding-hood/
As for the 2010 remake of “Clash of the Titans,” I thought it was one of the most offensive remakes I’d seen in years. I was appalled by the anti-Hindu stereotypes in the film, and by the rude dismissal of the original, infinitely better “Clash of the Titans” from 1981.
We personally know Ray Harryhausen, and I can tell you that his silence on the remake speaks volumes about how appalled he was behind the scenes by what they’d done to his classic film. That scene in the remake where Sam Worthington contemptuously tosses away Bubo is very telling. A truly confident filmmaker does not need to trash the classic original that went before him. He instead acknowledges it, pays respect to it, and then builds on it. Wasn’t it Sir Isaac Newton who said that his own discoveries only occurred because he was standing “on the shoulders of giants”? It would be nice if today’s contemporary filmmakers could show a similar level of respect and humility toward their talented and accomplished predecessors.
Here’s my original essay from last year where I address “Robin Hood” and remake of “The Clash of the Titans.”:
http://www.libertasfilmmagazine.com/robin-hood-clash-of-the-titans-and-the-undermining-of-the-western-hero/
Thanks for the links, I especially enjoyed the clever analysis of discussing the original Robin Hood and Clash of the Titans during very tense periods during the conflicts with fascism and communism.
As for the great Ray Harryhausen, I read that the producers of Clash of the Titans showed him the Star Wars films and asked him to create a character like R2D2. Bubo was the result. Another problem with the remake of Clash of the Titans was the painfully obvious slumming of Liam Neeson and Ray Fiennes. At least Laurence Olivier never made it that clear he was just collecting a paycheck
The best modernization of Snow White is Howard Hawks’ Ball of Fire (1941). This will never be topped for exuberance, humor, and critical mass of genius character actors. Not “dark” in the least.
{Slaps forehead in realization} Of course!!
David – that’s hilarious – and absolutely right! Here’s the Wikipedia link that describes exactly how “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” did indeed inspire Billy Wilder and Charles Brackett in writing the film. Thanks for the pickup on that!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ball_of_fire
I’ll quote here from Wikipedia (by the way, I love Wilder and Brackett’s funny digs at politics):
“The script was written by Charles Brackett, Thomas Monroe, and Billy Wilder from a short story written by Wilder while he was still in Europe, and based in part on the fairy tale Snow White. The professors themselves were based on the dwarfs from Walt Disney’s animated film Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Although Ball of Fire was directed ably by Howard Hawks, Wilder had already decided that he needed to direct his screenplays to protect them from studio and other director’s interference. Hawks was happy to let Wilder study his directing on the set and Wilder thereafter directed his own films. The film was the second feature of 1941 to pair Cooper and Stanwyck, following Meet John Doe.
Wilder reveled in poking fun at those who took politics too seriously. At one point, ‘Sugarpuss’ points to her sore throat and complains “Slight rosiness? It’s as red as the Daily Worker and just as sore.” Later, she gives the overbearing and unsmiling housekeeper the name ‘Franco’.”
I find it interesting that “Cowboys and Aliens” can even enter into this conversation. It works because the western and sci-fi are obviously genres, but they’re also mythology (metaphorical language, as Joseph Campbell put it). So much of our psyche is imprinted all over them, that you can literally trace where we — especially as Americans — have come from and where we’re going throughout their history.
So it’s sad that “Cowboys and Aliens” failed to really build on that, even though I could reach and make a case that there was a sliver of modern mythology in the film … if I squint hard enough.
As for these Snow White films, I just don’t see them contributing to the language of the human condition (if I have to use that phrase).
I love your work on this topic, Govindini. Your lead is beautiful, and the rest lives up to it. Thanks
Vince – thanks so much for your kind praise and for your own insightful comments. As I said to Maatkare above, the conversations we are able to have here about art, myth, philosophy, and cinema prove once again that we have the best readers on the planet here at Libertas!
Yes, the Western and sci-fi genres have certainly become two of our most important American forms of myth generation. I believe the musical is another important modern myth form, for it elevates through song and dance performers into the realm of inspired Maenads and Bacchantes.
It would be nice if these various fairy tale adaptations could have that kind of lighter than air effect on the spirits, but they seem to prefer plodding about on the ground of dull literalism.
Thanks for the compliment, Govindini. You and Jason have simply created an awesome experience here.
Interesting in light of this discussion: Over at Pajiba.com, lead reviewer Dustin Rowles praises “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” as the “best — and darkest — blockbuster of the summer.” But the “darkness equals meaning and/or intelligence” meme that’s been noted here is a regular feature of a number of that site’s reviews.