Showing posts sorted by date for query National Film Registry. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query National Film Registry. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Wednesday, December 31, 2025

"What Are You Looking At?" (New Year's Eve 2025)

Half a Blog is Better than None (Or is it?) 
 
Welcome to the Blogging By Cinema-light Annual Report for 2025.

I know for you investors out there, you'll want us to get to the bottom-line first, so here we go.

No. We did not make a profit this year. As a result, there will be no stock dividends. This will come as a disappointment to no one...as no one is an investor.
 
On the other hand, we didn't have any losses (despite a considerable down-turn in productivity), so we do not foresee any lay-offs. As I'm the only employee, this comes as a huge relief (and thank god, I do my own performance reviews...which are along the lines of "meh..."). But, as well, it comes as a bit of a disappointment, as my hands are getting a little "crampy".
 
So much for old business... 
 
  
Now....about the "elephant in the room." (Embarrassed throat clear) Yes, you are correct. There haven't been any "new" posts for awhile.* No, you are wrong, the blog is not shuttering, and new content is coming soon...(well, you're seeing one, so, yeah!)
 
Why the scarcity of posts? Several reasons:
 
1. Life gets in the way. Yeah, I'm not going to get into it, but my attention was needed elsewhere. 
 
2. The original purpose of the blog doesn't really apply right now. I started the "writing-about-film" thing because, after seeing a film, my mind would be pre-occupied with its details, dialogue, and mise en scene to the point of distraction, trying to unlock its "secrets." My mind would get cluttered with such details, and writing about them was the one way I had of "downloading" my thoughts. That made my mind open for...you know...life, and things like that (that is, if the time spent writing didn't deprive me of living it).

Well, these days, I'm seeing fewer films, and I'm certainly not cluttering my mind with their details. So, the original necessity to "download" isn't as imperative. 
 
3. Most movies I've been seeing lately have been, shall we say..."underwhelming." Despite the quote from Ratatouille at the bottom of the page, I do not like writing bad reviews. And, unless it's really funny, they're not much fun to read, either. On the other hand, if it's funny, then there will certainly be an element of cruelty to it (at least from this writer) and that's just not "fair." Movies are a collaborative art, and if you're gonna slag a movie, the shrapnel is bound to hit someone. There's enough of that going on in the world these days, and I don't like contributing to it. Oh...there are days...there are really days when I'd like to sink my teeth into the jugular of some hack-job sham of a movie and, through agitated neck-whips, rip it to pieces. But, I'm getting "up there" in age, and just writing that sentence put a "crick" in my neck.

Anyway, I have quite the list of underwhelming films, with no overwhelming need to praise or bury them.

So, I haven't been sweating over a keyboard lately, writing new content. Despite that, Blogging By Cinema-light still garners views--more than ever, it would seem. 1.31 million this year alone, in fact. Here, as we do every year is a screenshot of the most popular posts (or most viewed) from 2025:
Honorable Mentions:
Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps 221 views
The Greatest Show on Earth 121 views
 
A lot of shuffling here, from last year, but not a one of the posts from 2025 made it into the Top 10. Dominating were the "Outside Agitators" scene from The Graduate (presumably from people googling "outside agitators," a term that reared its ugly head again last year) and the "Furnace of Hell" scene from Toy Story 3 (it was the most popular post last year, as well...I chalk it up to "malaise"), but new additions include perennial favorite Hostiles (...don't ask me), two of those mammoth National Film Registry posts (more on that later **), The Way, Way Back (again, don't ask me...), Margin Call, the Kevin Costner "Scene" from Molly's Game, and a review of mine I didn't think was too shabby...for Casablanca. I like that.
 
And here are the most popular posts from since BxC-L was first launched:
Honorable Mentions: 
Black Panther 1.72k 
Ernie Pyle's Story of G.I. Joe 1.7k
 
The Batman stills reigns supreme (because he's Batman!), and the post about The Post is still at No.2. But, two "Don't Make a Scene" posts (The Graduate and Toy Story 3), knocked Black Panther and Ernie Pyle's Story of G.I. Joe out of the Top Ten, and one of the "Scene's" from American Graffiti knocked out Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri.
We celebrated two milestones last year (by "celebrated" I mean that I took note of it)—we reached the 2 million mark...and then the 3 million mark...in total views. That just makes me shake my head in wonder and bewilderment.
 
It took more than a decade for this blog to get its first million views. I got to the second million in a year and a half. The third, which just ticked over in the odometer last week, took 9 months. And (here's the interesting part) for half that time, there was no new content. At all. And the views kicked up just as fast.  That's just weird to me, but the internet has always been weird, especially in these AI Overlord day.

Speaking of which...I have already done one post on the deficiencies of the so-called "revolution" of artificial intelligence, and vowed to never use it again...ever. If I had, of course, there might have been more content this year...it just wouldn't have been mine.

But, you can't avoid this hallucinating crap anymore. Google, for instance, has an "AI mode" that encapsulates a summary on search subjects. Use it with caution.
 
For instance, I used it to see what information it provided about this blog. A lot, to my surprise. And a lot of it wrong, not to my surprise. Bear with me. If this post was dry before, it's going to get REALLY dry, and may be of interest to no one but me. But, it bothers me how messed-up this regurgitated garbage can be.
 
To wit:
 
"Blogging By Cinemalight" is a
movie review blog. The blog features film reviews and analysis, including a recurring series called "Don't Make a Scene," and is run by a writer named James Wilson. 
 
Content and Focus
The blog primarily focuses on film reviews and commentary, often discussing various cinematic techniques, directors, and the cultural impact of movies. It covers a wide range of films, from classic cinema like Casablanca and All About Eve to recent releases such as Past Lives and The Bikeriders. 
 
A notable feature is the "Don't Make a Scene" series, which sometimes involves multi-part entries that deconstruct specific aspects of a film or character. The blog's style is described as insightful, with a focus on genuine human interaction and storytelling rather than overt grandstanding or excessive technical jargon. 
 
Recognition
James Wilson, the writer behind the blog, has also contributed to other film-related platforms, such as the "MovieRob Minute" podcast/series, where he appeared as a guest. His work has been cited and linked to by other movie review blogs.
 
Where to Read
You can access the blog posts directly at its primary address:
It also maintains a social media presence: 
AI can make mistakes, so double-check responses 
 
Okay, that was the overview, and it wasn't bad (considering "AI can make mistakes"). It even got in a mention of my pal MovieRob, whose "Genre Grandeur" I try to contribute to. Cross-promotion is always nice.
 
But, Google gives you the opportunity to delve deeper into the subject with AI-generated questions, like "What is Blogging By Cinema-light about?"
 
"Blogging By Cinemalight" is
a movie review blog run by a writer named James Wilson. The blog, which can be found at bloggingbycinemalight.blogspot.com, features reviews, "Don't Make a Scene" entries, and other film-related commentary. 
 
Key information about the blog:
  • Content: The blog covers a wide range of films, from classic cinema to recent releases, and includes series such as "Don't Make a Scene" and "Anytime Movies Wrap-Up".
  • Author: The primary writer is James Wilson.
  • Platforms: In addition to the Blogger site, the blog has a presence on Facebook.
  • Collaborations: The author occasionally collaborates with other film reviewers, such as with the "MovieRob" blog. 
The blog is an ongoing project, with new posts appearing as recently as late 2025 in the search results provided. 
 
What topics or film genres does James Wilson focus on in Blogging By Cinemalight?

James Wilson's reviews on "Blogging By Cinemalight" cover a
vast and eclectic range of film genres and topics, demonstrating an appreciation for all types of cinema, rather than a specific focus on one. His reviews frequently analyze how a single film can cross or subvert typical genre expectations. 
 
The breadth of his coverage includes:
  • Classic and Vintage Films: He reviews a significant number of older films, spanning from early cinema (e.g., Hell's Angels from 1930) to classic Hollywood.
  • Horror and Thriller: The blog features a notable number of reviews for films within these genres, including classics like Psycho, Rosemary's Baby, and Sisters.
  • Science Fiction and Fantasy: Films such as Source Code and Everything Everywhere All at Once are reviewed, often with an emphasis on how they explore themes of humanity and inspiration.
  • Drama and Historical Narratives: Wilson covers a variety of dramatic films, including historical dramas and those focusing on social issues like inner-city poverty or police brutality.
  • Action and Espionage: He discusses action-packed films, including spy stories and police procedurals.
  • Animation: Animated features, including Pixar films like Up and Elemental, also receive attention.
  • Comedies and Musicals: He covers various forms of comedy and even delves into musical adaptations. 
Does he analyze film theory or just focus on plot and acting?

James Wilson's reviews in "Blogging By Cinemalight" go well beyond simple plot summaries and acting notes; they engage in deeper levels of analysis, including
themes, cultural context, and some aspects of filmmaking craft, which fall under the umbrella of academic film criticism and theory. 
His analytical approach includes:
  • Themes and Worldview: Wilson often steps back from the immediate details of a film to examine its "messages," worldview, and how it fits into larger cultural debates. He explores the "human condition" in films and how they present themes of love, family, and social issues.
  • Filmmaking Techniques: While prioritizing themes, he does incorporate discussion of how a film's composition, editing, music, and lighting contribute to the overall rhythm, mood, and narrative progression. This attention to aesthetic choices is a key aspect of film theory and criticism.
  • Character and Acting Analysis: He provides in-depth analysis of characters and acting performances, but these discussions are usually tied to the overall meaning and themes of the story, rather than just technical performance.
  • Genre and Narrative Structure: His reviews often discuss how films relate to or subvert their genres, touching on narrative conventions and how filmmakers manipulate structure to evoke specific responses from the audience. 
In essence, he uses elements of film theory and advanced analysis to enrich the discussion of a film's impact and meaning, making his reviews more than just a "book report" on a visual medium.  
 
It's funny it added that last line. Frequently, when writing these things I've felt like I was writing a book report...and they're not fun to write or to read. Ask any teacher.
 
What's the author's background?
 
The author of "Blogging By Cinemalight,"
James Wilson, appears to be a passionate and experienced writer with a background in English Literature and professional experience in content writing and digital media.
 
While his professional background is not explicitly in film production or academic film studies, his background in literature and professional writing contributes to his in-depth, analytical approach to film criticism. 
 
Key elements of his background relevant to his blogging are:
  • Education: He holds a bachelor's degree in English Literature.
  • Professional Experience: He is a seasoned content writer with a decade of experience, focusing on creative and technical copy across various B2B and B2C industries.
  • Personal Interest: He is an avid consumer of digital media and enjoys watching films in his free time.
Writing Philosophy: His literary background and experience in persuasive and analytical writing likely inform his blog's focus on narrative structure, symbolism, and directorial intent, rather than a technical industry perspective. 
 
His background suggests a strong foundation in analyzing stories and communication, which he applies to the medium of film in a rigorous and insightful way on his blog at bloggingbycinemalight.blogspot.com. 
 
Yeah. It shoulda stuck with "the background is black, edged with red curtains." Still, it could've been worse: a couple weeks before these appeared, I was just referred to as "Wilson" and had decades of experience in road construction and spent a year as a commercial fisherman. It must have gotten me confused with one of the other billion James Wilson's out there. 
 
I don't have a BA in English Literature.
 
I have no idea what that "Professional Experience" summary means...much less having a "decade of experience" doing it. 
 
What films does James Wilson consider essential viewing?
 
James Wilson does not have a single, formal list of "essential viewing" on his blog, but he has shared a personal list of his
top 30 favorite movies of all time in a Facebook group, which can be considered an indication of films he deems highly valuable or essential viewing. 
 
This list includes a variety of films from different genres and eras, such as Citizen Kane, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Psycho, The Godfather, Blade Runner, and Jaws. It also includes comedies like The Producers and animated films such as The Incredibles. The full list can be found in the referenced document. Wilson also considers films like Ordinary People essential, noting its strong cast and meaningful themes. 
 
 
What films or genres does James Wilson of Blogging By Cinemalight seem to favor?
 
James Wilson of "Blogging By Cinemalight" demonstrates a broad and eclectic taste in film, with a particular appreciation for
classic cinema (especially film noir) and movies that defy easy genre classification, often blending comedy with drama or suspense. He seems less focused on specific genres than on detailed analysis of narrative structure, character development, and thematic depth. 
 
Apparent Film Preferences
  • Classic Films and Film Noir: Wilson frequently reviews older films and has participated in "Genre Grandeur" events focusing on classics like Casablanca. He notes that many movies in the film noir genre fall into his favored "Incredible Mess" category of storytelling. The blog archives show reviews for numerous black-and-white films and older releases, such as The Big Sleep, Frankenstein, and Julius Caesar.
  •  
  • Genre-Blending Narratives: He appreciates films that blend genres or defy conventional categorization, such as the comedy-horror Ready or Not or the complex description of Risky Business as "teen comedy? sex comedy? coming of age? social satire?". He analyzes how films use and subvert genre tropes, even in modern Pixar rom-coms like Elemental.
  • Character-Driven Stories: His reviews often focus on character motivations, emotional impact, and personal journeys. He notes films that are "messy, awkward, wounded, sweetheart" movies like The Holdovers and those that provide "life-lessons in miniature".
  • Thematic and Social Commentary: Wilson shows an interest in films that engage social concerns or offer deeper thematic resonance. He describes Hairspray as a "moving plea for racial integration" and Past Lives as a "quietly subversive take on Western romantic sensibilities".
  • Diverse Range: The extensive blog archives show reviews of everything from Monty Python and the Holy Grail to Schindler's List, Star Wars, and Parasite, indicating a very wide-ranging interest that covers drama, comedy, sci-fi, horror, and international cinema. 
Overall, James Wilson favors films that are well-written, thematically rich, and offer a strong analytical hook, regardless of their specific studio, age, or primary genre classification.
 
Reading about yourself from something that knows only what it knows from the internet is a mixture of "Oh, that's nice" to "WTF?" I don't remember doing a 30 favorite films thing on Facebook, but I might have when I first joined. I don't like lists. I find them more interesting for what they leave out, than what they leave in. Mark this one as "sketchy." 
 
What’s James Wilson’s favorite film or genre?

James Wilson of the blog "Blogging By Cinemalight" has stated that his all-time favorite movie is
Harold and Maude (1971). He has expressed his deep affection for everything about the film, from its Cat Stevens soundtrack to its "enlightening messages". 
 
While he has not specified a single favorite genre, his blog posts and articles indicate an appreciation for a wide range of genres, including: 
  • Classic Cinema: He often features classic films and even puts up framed posters in his office for movies like Vertigo and Touch of Evil.
  • Dramas: He has written positively about intimate family dramas and films that handle serious, emotional themes, such as Ordinary People.
  • Crime/Comedy: A list from another source that seems to match his taste listed Raiders of the Lost Ark, Halloween, and Dredd as top favorites, suggesting an appreciation for action/adventure and horror genres as well
  •  Overall, his reviews suggest a broad and eclectic taste, focusing on films with strong narrative depth, character development, and emotional impact across various genres. 
I've never reviewed Harold and Maude. It is not my favorite film, nor have I stated that it is. I've seen it, but I've never reviewed it. I have never seen Dredd, although I've read the comic-book. The non-hallucinogenic answer to the question of my favorite movie is wildly apparent to any regular readers of the blog (I have five followers), so much so that I've declared a non-official moratorium on the subject.
 
So, that leads to the next question:
 
Why is Harold and Maude his favorite?
 
(I interrupt sarcastically: Oh, yes. Please, DO tell...) 
 
James Wilson's primary reason for
Harold and Maude being his favorite film is its powerful and enlightening message about embracing life to the fullest. 
Specific elements he highlights include:
  • The Message: He noted that the central message—that one should enjoy life and be oneself—"really resonates" with him. The film contrasts Harold's obsession with death and isolation with Maude's vibrant, free-spirited approach to life, offering a profound take on living authentically and finding joy in the moment.
  • The Soundtrack: Wilson is a big fan of the music, stating that the songs by legendary artist Cat Stevens are "beautiful" and that the film made Stevens one of his favorite artists.
  • The Characters: He appreciates the performances, specifically mentioning Ruth Gordon's portrayal of the "charming, sassy and rebellious Maude". 
 The film's ability to blend humor and pathos while inspiring viewers to appreciate the preciousness of life is what makes it a deeply personal and enduring favorite for him. 
 
The source for this mishegas is listed here.  If you clicked on it, you'll notice that I'm nowhere near it...not even in the comments.
 
So, in summary, I leave on a cautionary note. 
 
Readers, beware the beast "Artificial Intelligence." If you've had a negative view of the human race before, the good news is now there's something worse. And its cavalier respect for truth, makes its only true use to be...in government. Just think: it's being used right now to write bills, white papers, and even important documents that lay out philosophies and strategies that will have real-world consequences on real-life people. 
 
With a little luck, some judicious skepticism, informed voting, and a critical eye, we'll do another one of these next year.
 
Hope it's good for you. 
 


 
 
* Specifically, September 11th—which was a re-post from my earlier movie-blog. The last "newly-new" content was August 27th! 
 
** There will certainly be a 2025 edition of the yearly rundown of the new inductees of The National Film Registry. But, not for awhile...this time, through no fault of my own.

For some reason, instead of the new additions being announced in mid-December, and I say this tentatively, they will be released mid-January 2026. Why it has been delayed would be mere speculation on my part. Maybe it was due to the month-long government shut-down...the month delay certainly lines up with it. 

But, there might be another reason. The current resident of The White House likes to put his grubby little fingers into everything these days, legal, Constitutional, or not. The Film Registry is certainly not of national importance, but when did that ever distract the current Prez from actually doing his job (actually, come to think of it, that might be a good idea). One can only imagine what a Trump-list of films would be that are "culturally, historically, or aesthetically  important", but one can be sure it wouldn't lean so heavily on "DEI" content. Instead, you could expect Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, Ghosts Can't Do it, Zoolander, Celebrity, Two Weeks Notice, and Marmalade to be on the list as well as a smattering of McDonald's, Pizza Hut, Domino's Pizza and Macy's ads. Trump is so far up his own ass that only something involving him could be considered "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant." After all, the other day, he said he was "an aesthetic person."

Saturday, March 29, 2025

Snow White (2025)

What Do You Mean By "Fairest"?
or
Snow White (and the Height-Challenged, but Competently-Abled and Platonic POSSLQ's)—There, That "Woke" Enough For Ya?
 
The seven dwarfs were each on different little trips. Happy was into grass and grass alone … Happy, that's all he did. Sleepy was into reds. Grumpy, too much speed. Sneezy was a full blown coke freak. Doc was a connection. Dopey was into everything. Any old orifice will do for Dopey. He's always got his arm out and his leg up. And then, the one we always forget, because he was Bashful. Bashful didn't use drugs. He was paranoid on his own. Didn't need any help on that ladder.
George Carlin
 
Disney made the first Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs in the mid-1930's, and gosh, "not much has changed". I'm being sarcastic, of course. It premiered during The Great Depression, Hitler had not yet attacked Poland (but the Japanese had invaded China). And the world was about to evolve, rendering the tropes of "Snow White"—the biases, the weak role of women, the "princessy" thing, the deus ex machina of the necessity of a rescuing handsome prince—all of that would age as gracefully as an Evil Queen into a Crone. It's almost unfathomable that, at the time, Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was something of a revolution in the animated art-form. It was the first cel-animated feature film (the ads announced it "in multiplane technicolor"), and the first animated feature ever made in the United States. At the time, Disney was discouraged by business partners, other Hollywood moguls, and potential backers that a feature cartoon just couldn't "work," for diametrically opposed reasons: either it couldnt hold an audience's attention for longer than the accustomed 7 to 10 minute running time, or the length would simply exhaust them (and in fact, at the time, the young Disney company depended on the more robust RKO Studios to distribute the film to theaters—Disney is still very much around; RKO is not). It's release and success changed everything, and despite its calcified ideals, it remains a classic of the form, still topping recent 10 best lists for animated films. And, in fact, the United States Library of Congress deemed the film "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and selected it as one of the very first 25 films for preservation in the National Film Registry in its first year in existence in 1989.
So, why remake it? To make money, of course (one does have to go back to the mine...and the well). And maybe, aesthetically, as a way to "update" it for a new generation not born in the previous century. Then, also, there's the legal matter that the original 1937 film is going to become part of the public domain in 1933. There is that. Plus, there has been an awful lot of competition lately from other versions of the exact same story: Snow White and the Huntsman (2012) and its Snow White-less sequel (2014), 
Tarsem's Mirror, Mirror (2012), Snow White: A Tale of Terror (1997). Of the Grimm fairy tales, it is the most adapted for film. And Disney's version is iconic. Were it not for the 1937 film, one doubts the other versions would exist.
Now, the optimal movie-going experience is to go in without prejudices or expectations (I mean, if one is doing it "right"). However, as this is a remake, you can pretty much throw that out the window. This puts me on an even par with about every single movie reviewer or internet hack, as the grousing, bitching, and over-dramatic moaning about this release has reached new levels of "hair-on-fire." Me, I wanted to see what they could do to make it less of a dinosaur of the Depression-era (I mean, the first feature came out before Gone With the Wind!), how much of the classic songs were retained, and if the new film-makers—
Marc Webb, primarily, he of the Andrew Garfield Spider-mans, the films (500) Days of Summer and Gifted, and I'm something of a fan—could make their third act top the action scene of the dw...oh, let's call them "colliers", shall we? (nobody can argue with that unless they're being trenchantly snippy)...chasing the evil crone who poisoned Snow White to fall off a cliff. And if they could balance the light and dark as effectively as old Walt did back in the day (the thing that's always impressed me about Disney is that he could scare of the tar out of his intended audience of children, and in such a way that he'd gain the cynical respect of their parents).
So...how is it? Actually, quite good, better than I was anticipating.
To my points, it is still quite a dinosaur and of another time, but, this iteration of
Snow White (and Disney's Snow White, if there were any questions) still tries to be relevant to the times, even if it can't quite distance itself from the ghosts of the earlier version, rooted as it was in what was being done in films of the time, still taking cues from Broadway, vaudeville and musical theater. Even more than the first one, you can smell a song coming on, and there are far more of those song-breaks than previously.
How are those songs? Genuinely good...and smart. Yes, they trot out "Heigh-ho" (and damn if that song doesn't still work) and they've done a buff-and-polish on the lyrics, using it as an introduction to the various...colliers. "Whistle While You Work" is revived, also with new lyrics, some of them quite surprisingly funny.* Some of the lyrics make use of modern idioms, which is momentarily jarring, but it passes. "I'm Wishing" (the first of the now de rigeur Disney "I Wish" songs) is pitched, replaced with a new one "Waiting on a Wish", and "Some Day my Prince Will Come" has been been tossed for all sorts of reasons, the primary one being the story's lack of an actual prince, handsome or otherwise. Instead, there is a roguish thief (
Andrew Burnap), living with his band of cut-throats out in the forest, having been banished from the kingdom.
And there are a bunch of new ones. One song in particular stands out, as it makes a point of calling out the story's short-comings and considers the world at large (much more than the film's opening "world-building" number "Good Things Grow") and that there might be bigger fish to fry than Snow's deposition and loss of status, and that is the ingeniously titled "Princess Problems":
Self-aware and brings up a point that if you're living under an evil regime, there might be some people suffering worse than you. I found that refreshing—but, then, I've never been concerned with the "plights" of royalty.
How about that ending, which was visceral and exciting (if a little too much an easy fix)? Well, I can't say this one's that exciting, although it does work in a story-logic kind of way and I like how, metaphorically, the Queen (
Gal Gadot) is dispatched by her own narcissism. It just doesn't get the heart pumping as much, but then Disney animators have always had a penchant for making dramatically hysterical resolutions.
Okay, you want to know about the casting. Let's start with Snow White. As far back as my review of Spielberg's version of West Side Story, I've thought that Zegler seems to have been genetically engineered to be a Disney princess with eyes too big for her head just like she was animated that way (it's a Disney design trope to draw big eyes in order inspire warm feelings like you were looking at a baby). So, she looks preternaturally perfect for this. And the thing is, Snow is a tough sell—just as Maria in West Side Story is—where the character is just so cutesy—and not in a self-aware way—you want to sit her down on a tuffet and tell her to wise up and stop being such a victim. Snow in this has a bit more grit and certainly is more expressive than the plasticene-rotoscoping allowed in the 1937 version. And she's not a sap...or a simp. I like that. Plus, Zegler's singing voice has always been astounding and she belts out the songs the way every Disney princess should, full-throated but with enough character to make her more relatable when she drops the arias.
And Gal Gadot is great as the Evil Queen. I don't know what she's done to deserve this "bad-Kevin-Costner" phase of her career, But she trods the thin line between camp and making her Evil Queen a serious threat, which is what she should do. It's the same tactic Michelle Pfeiffer takes when playing villains: be evil but show you're enjoying it, like any good autocrat. There's one moment when Gadot's Queen snaps her head in fury at the huntsman (
Ansu Kabia) ordered to kill Snow White and I swear she did it in a mere film-frame of time that was jolting. And the theatricality she throws into her musical numbers threatens the set-rafters, CGI or not.
So...uh...how are the "colliers?" I must admit, I was a bit taken aback by them, but then they don't have the rubbery cartoonishness of their animated ancestors.  They're a lot more starchy and have a bizarre facial structure that makes them all-jaw—they look like hummel figurines you'd find in a some rural backyard in Ochsenwerder (Hey, why didn't we just call them "gnomes" in the first place?) and they're the same attribute-centric personalities they were in the 1937 version ( rejected contenders at the time were Hoppy, Jumpy, Baldy, Hickey, Stuffy, Burpy, Tubby and Dizzy). After awhile, you get used to them, although the character of Dopey kept reminding me of Alfred E. Neuman
of Mad Magazine fame.
Those are quibbles. I find the 2025 to be a fairly successful effort to make a problematic—if beloved—part of history a bit more "present". It's certainly nothing—nothing—to engender the vitriol I've been seeing online. Look. I'm as evil as they come when I see something bad and write something snarky. But, then, I don't have an "agenda" other than a critical one and I certainly don't make a living at it, amping up my outrage as a cottage industry). I don't know what they're "on" or "on about" but it's not there in the movie.
Children (as I witnessed) will be delighted by it. "Bro's" who haven't grown up...won't (Hence, the film's low IMDB score perpetrated by basement-dwellers who haven't actually seen it, as IMDB has no way of checking veracity). There's a big difference between having prejudices (as I had) and agendas.**

So, the new truncated Snow White is good, sometimes incrementally better in places and a good effort, but it is hardly revolutionary. And so nobody should treat it as if it is.
 
 
* Even if it can't quite shake the specter of how the song was satirized and mocked by—of all things—Disney's own Enchanted. Sometimes, you just have to hand it to the Mouse-house for being so smart, clever, and self-aware:

** Oh, one little piece of advice to the "bro's" out there who swamped IMDB with negative scores—don't do the job "too well" or the basic law of averages will point out the obviousness of the ploy.
Live by the aggregate, die by the aggregate.