Snow White Re-release Platinum Discussion & Cover Art Th

[CornyCollins]

I don't understand that either - they are releasing the same exact package with two different covers? Is this a way to get people to buy two of the same thing just so that we can have both covers?

Are there actually people who are stupid enough to do that?

Yes, there are. They do it CD's, DVD's, Books, ect. I don't know if it's "stupid" to the collector, but they do it - most definitely.

[Goliath]

Yes, there are. They do it CD's, DVD's, Books, ect. I don't know if it's "stupid" to the collector, but they do it - most definitely.

Yes, it's stupid. You could just as well throw your money in the trash.

[Flanger-Hanger]

I like the purdy red box, myself.

[CornyCollins]

Yes, there are. They do it CD's, DVD's, Books, ect. I don't know if it's "stupid" to the collector, but they do it - most definitely.

Yes, it's stupid. You could just as well throw your money in the trash.

I'm not saying I personally do this...but tell that to the hard core collector who needs everything.

[Goliath]

I'm not saying I personally do this...but tell that to the hard core collector who needs everything.

Oh, I didn't mean to imply I thought you were doing it...

"Hardcore collectors"... Do they even have any love for the product they're purchasing anyway? Often, it seems like just getting the latest/a different version of a particular product is all that matters. Now what has that got to do with appreciating it?

[Escapay]

I've never seen so many options for ONE movie....

On the plus side, each version offers something different (beyond the DVD and cover), as opposed to earlier DVD releases of Reservoir Dogs and Heathers. They had SE DVDs where consumers could pick which cover they wanted (there were 5 different covers they could pick from). Reservoir Dogs also had a boxset of all five (so basically you're getting the two-disc set FIVE TIMES just to get the different covers), and Heathers had a limited edition Lunchbox tin.

Now I'm afraid Disney's going to have like, 10 different covers for Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs now, each cover showcasing a different character.

albert

[CampbellzSoup]

That Blu Ray in the DVD case has to be bullshit, can I get confrimation on that?

[Disneykid]

That Blu Ray in the DVD case has to be bullshit, can I get confrimation on that?

Here you go. Compare the description at the top to the one found here.

[zackisthewalrus]

I still dislike the cover art, but that box set looks awesome (but not worth $250). Hopefully there's more to it than what's in the picture.

[ajmrowland]

Y'know this sounds crazy, but it feels as if the DVD-sized case could be a 4-disc combo-pack(2 Disc Blu-ray+2Disc DVD) retailing for $50. I know it's highly unikely, but it's too weird to just change the size of the case.

[Linguini]

the box set looks really great, i think it's great that Disney makes something special for this special disney movie release, the price is of course really high.

In an other thread someone asked if disney movies are only for children, i guess with this box set and the price they definitely not target the children.

[Pluto Region1]

Thanks for the clear up.

No problem.

That is extremely odd and lame. Why would anyone care if it's in DVD or Bluray packaging.

Perhaps because the Blu-Ray packaging doesn't match up well on a DVD shelf, and there are some anal-retentive fans out there who want the cases to be uniform. The DVD packaging could help with that.
albert

Escapay, thanks for clearing up the mess on the options. I couldn't figure it out either! I suppose when they started selling Blu-Ray, they felt it wise to differentiate the 2 products by offering them in different packaging. And by now offering to sell us Blu-Ray in DVD packaging - perhaps you're right in that they are trying to appease those who want things to look uniform on the shelf. I certainly would have been happier if they had just kept DVD-style packaging for the Blu-Rays, so that everything would have matched on my credenza, but oh well, it is too late for that now. At this point, I will probably continue buying Blu-Rays in Blu-Ray cases. But I agree with most here - there's just way too many options for this release.

As for the $250 Collector's set, what does that tell you: SW is OBVIOUSLY the biggest most important princess!!!! (ducks for cover from all the "other" princess fans).

Looking at it from a cost basis, the box is nothing more than a glorified cigar box, really. How much can a cigar box cost them to make ($3? $5?). However I'm a sucker for anything put in a box, and a beautiful box it is. (I even have a Cars box that I paid $5 for at Target, that I have no idea what to put in it.) I think they will justify the price based on the old "limited edition" argument, for the pins that come with it. The only problem is no way I can justify spending $250 for a DVD/Blu-Ray. I'll be buying the 'budget' version for $40 ($25 hopefully on sale the 1st week ).

As for the cover art, why don't you guys write or call Disney and voice your complaints? Maybe they keep changing the cover art because they are reading this thread (we can hope)? so far from what I've seen posted in this thread, I vote for the "apple" DVD cover. I think in general, all their covers are way too busy and the apple is the simplest thus far. I don't care if the Queen appears anywhere on the cover at all. She can rot in hell. For me, it is all about Snow White!

[Disney Duster]

there's is something wrong with snow whites's dress. it's too long, too fluffy, too yellow. and there's a piece of yellow fabric on top of another piece of yellow fabric, like there is a yellow dress on top of the yellow dress, which is weird. they must be mistaken with cinderella's dress. they even added pixie dust, like it's a magical dress. but there is zero pixie dust in this film.

Fabric folds over itself, so the same color fabric folds over the same color fabric...though I do admit it looks weird. Cinderella's dress actually does fold over itself just like that in her film's "So This is Love". Lots of Disney DVD's have Disney dust on the covers when it's not in the film. It's Disney's trademark. Not that I agree with them putting it on movies that don't have it in the films, but I kind of like it because I love sparkly magical Disney dust so much!

and those ugly primary colors! the blue of the backround, the red of the apple and the bright yellow of the dress. this is terribly untasteful. this is not a circus!

Did you realize Snow White's dress in the film is only blue, red, and yellow? All the colors used on Snow White herself in the film are blue, red, yellow, black, and whiter-than-average european skin color. So is the fairest one of all ugly?

The cover: I think I get why the witch covers herself with the apple! It's to cover the surprise of seeing her in that very effective form, and to have the apple on the cover, fairly big.

I would like the box set more if it matched the covers we've been getting for the film. All the past box sets matched their DVD covers in look.

Why was Luke saying Disney was hoping consumers would not notice they were missing the second disc of the DVD? Disney has already had two releases of the 2-disc Blu-ray with 1 disc DVD, why are they suddenly shady now?

[The_Iceflash]

The cover: I think I get why the witch covers herself with the apple! It's to cover the surprise of seeing her in that very effective form, and to have the apple on the cover, fairly big.

I would like the box set more if it matched the covers we've been getting for the film. All the past box sets matched their DVD covers in look.

Why was Luke saying Disney was hoping consumers would not notice they were missing the second disc of the DVD? Disney has already had two releases of the 2-disc Blu-ray with 1 disc DVD, why are they suddenly shady now?

I think Luke said that because of the different release dates. Many many people are going to expect to get the 2-Disc DVD on Oct. 6.

This has to be the worst home video marketing ever. I hope it fails so Disney will learn to never do that again. Even with endless commercials, this is still all too confusing to the average consumer. The average consumer is hardly going to be interested in combos and deluxe editions. Having all these multiple versions and different release dates on top of it is ridiculous.

[tttt]

Lots of Disney DVD's have Disney dust on the covers when it's not in the film. It's Disney's trademark.

I know it's Disney's trademark. But it has a history. It didn't started with Snow White, it started with Cinderella I think or around the Cinderella era. And it stopped at some point. There's no magic dust in modern Disney films, except maybe Beauty and the Beast. They try to find specific alternatives now, like in Aladdin and Pocahontas. I just thought the cover should acknowledge that. I think it cheapens the product to put this generic magic dust everywhere. But I concede I'm too obsessive.

Did you realize Snow White's dress in the film is only blue, red, and yellow?

Yes, thank you , I realized that long ago. And it always bothered be. She shares this with Pinocchio, whose colors are exactly the same (clothes and hair). We know they couldn't set their mind on the color of her dress until very late into production. It's like they choosed primary colors to satisfy everyone. In that way, I always thought of these two characters as primitive ones. But to apply that color scheme to the whole cover… me no like.

So is the fairest one of all ugly?

Let's be honest, by today's canons, the fairest one of all isn't the most attractive character. Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of the film. I just wish they came up with something a little bit classier with this DVD/BD cover.

[Escapay]

I suppose when they started selling Blu-Ray, they felt it wise to differentiate the 2 products by offering them in different packaging.

Yeah, it reminds me of when DVD first came out. I remember some of the early releases by a few companies (I think Polygram and Universal were the major ones) actually released the DVDs in the jewel cases that CDs usually use. Made for some confusing visits to my local music/movie store, and I remember complaining to my brother Kram "Look at all this wasted space for DVDs. No one's going to buy it!" (this was circa 1997, when DVD really was in its infancy).

As for the $250 Collector's set, what does that tell you: SW is OBVIOUSLY the biggest most important princess!!!! (ducks for cover from all the "other" princess fans).

albert

[Disney Duster]

Thanks IceFlash.

tttt (what does your name mean?), I know a lot about Disney dust, even that it got that name after Walt asked for more of it in the first film to have it, you guessed it, Cinderella (though Snow White was the first to have sparkle effect, used on the diamonds, and apparently Fantasia has effects very much like the magic dust, but not the same).

I consider the dust to be put on the cover to...Disneyfy it. It's not saying the dust is part of the film, but rather, Disney magic, shown here in the form of the dust, is in the film.

But you might be like me and prefer the dust to stay on the border, or not be on the packaging at all. It annoyed me when the first DVD of Snow White used magic sparkles to make things happen and appear "magically' in the DVD menu. I imagined it would be better using lightning, fire, and smoke, that the film actually had, like in the mirror. You like that at all?

I think Snow White's colors are perfect. The black hair, red lips, and white skin are faithful to the original tale. The blue on the dress could represent snow, the red obviously the blood or rose red, and the yellow her bright, happy personality, possibly part of why she's the fairest one of all. The blue could also be for her demureness, gentleness, and also considered a prettier, unsexual color for girls.

But my gosh you're right, she and Pinocchio are colored almost completely the same! One reviewer back in the original release said Pinocchio looked like Mickey Mouse. Colorwise...they do!

I read in The Encylopedia of Disney Characters that it was interesting Disney went for "girl next door beauty" for Snow White instead of "out-and-out beauty". I wondered if this was just the author's opinion, but the queen looks prettier than Snow White, though it could be just her maturity, her more developed, possibly sexier look. What I'm getting at is maybe Snow White wasn't intended to be that pretty. Either to say beauty really is only opinion, or it's her purely good nature that makes her fairest. Or it was just to make her look like the prettiest stars popular at the time, whatever. But I'm sure there were hotter girls than her popular that day.

[tttt]

I'm certain Snow White was intended to be pretty, but not sexy. There are two things to consider, I think. First, the canon of american beauty in the 1930's. I don't know much about that, but I can see a difference between the actress who played Scarlett O'Hara, for instance, who would still be considered very attractive today, and girls in vintage adds and fashion magazines of that time, which would not. I guess you must be right, Disney Duster, with that "girl next door" beauty explaination.

Second, Snow White's age. There's always been some confusion here. In Grimms' tale, she's only 7. a child! I guess it wasn't acceptable for Hollywood to tell the story of a seven year old who finds her prince charming. so Disney made her older, but not too older. they're not explicit about this but notes on original drawings indicates Disney's Snow White is 14. but 14 is still too young too have a full adult body. still, she's dressed as a grown up, with heels. that's why she looks a bit odd. feminine gestures and almost no breast. I think the studio was very precautionary about how little girls would relate to the character.

my name doesn't mean anything. at that time I was bored picking names on forums. sorry.

[Disney Duster]

Nothing about the smoke, fire, and lightning idea? That might not look good on the cover...no wait, smoke or lightning would!

Anyway, I know Snow White kind of looks like the girls called flappers, which actually started in the 20's, hence Betty Boop who also kind of looks like Snow White. Flappers actually tried to look like boys by having short bob cuts and flattening their breasts! They also had secret sexual parties, so that's either very unlike Snow White or the idea was that Snow White only looked like a virigin on the surface but was secretly not virginal, just like the purposely desexualized but secretly sexual flappers! Yea.

EDIT: Actually Flappers did lots of things in public that were tabbo, even things that were thought to be only for males, like sports, smoking, and drinking. But there sexual stuff was surely more secretive.

Oooh: "Perhaps most scandalously, flappers also took to wearing make-up, previously restricted to actresses and prostitutes. Popular flapper make-up styles made the skin pale, the lips red, and the eyes black-ringed." Well, the eyes were just thickly outlined in black in the film, but it sill sounds just like it looks like Disney's Snow White!

In the Grimm's tale, it can be assumed, or maybe it's actually mentioned in the tale, that Snow White escaped to the cottage when she was little (prepubescent), but grew up over time (blossomed) in the cottage. It took a while for the queen to find out she still wasn't the fairiest, walk all the way to the cottage to try to kill Snow White, come back to her castle, and do that again three times! Or Snow White maybe died as a child but was "dead" long enough to have passed into puberty by the time the prince found her. But then the dwarfs would probably have known she wasn't dead...yea.

But Walt Disney very wisely had the main action of the story happen in like three days, and maybe take half a year till the prince brought about the ending.

I actually think I like your name more now!

[CampbellzSoup]

What is this Disney dust? Do you mean like Tinker Bell dust?