DVDizzy Forum

You certainly like to reunite with directors that you’ve worked with in the past. What was it like to reunite with Kenneth Branagh for Cinderella, and work in that fairy tale world?

SKARSGARD: To me, all of Lars von Trier’s films are fairy tales, so I’m pretty used to it. Lars von Trier is a very good storyteller. He’s like an H.C. Andersen for adults. None of his films are especially realistic, like this film. I think he started writing as if it was in England, but it doesn’t play as England. People have different accents and everything. It’s a fantasy world. People, like my character, are an idea. Both my character and the character of Joe are two different sides of Lars von Trier. It’s all in his head. But, Cinderella was fun. I like working with Kenneth Branagh. That film will turn out very, very well, I think. They’re not trying to make a dark version or a modern version. They’re actually telling the story of a really nice girl, which is a story that has worked for humanity for 2,500 years.

Old Fish Tale wrote:Do you think they'll use CGI on Lucifer? I expect the mice to look at least as good as Mallymkun in 'Alice in Wonderland'...

Old Fish Tale wrote:But I hope they don't make it look so cartoonish... God, I'm dying to see Cate as the stepmother!

I got to go to a screening of this, and while the animation parts weren't complete the more important parts were. The acting, story and costumes were truly amazing! This is one people NEED to see...and no i don't work for or know anyone who worked on the film, I'm just another huge Disney fan

Q: Tell me how was Richard Madden? I bet he was amazing!
A: He was fine, suited the typical Disney prince role well.

Q: A screening this early? Wow! Did they have the audience critique the movie and stuff, or did they just show it?
A: Yeah it's still rather early on in the process, but the main stuff was all there. Yes it was audience critique at the end, and I could tell from audience reaction that we all enjoyed it. Strong applause at the end.

Q: Was it very faithful to the Disney animation, does it have elements of the original fairytale/what's the tone, and does it evoke other loose adaptations?
A: Yes to all questions. You could clearly see parts from the original animation, especially with the mice and Lucifer, but there were some elements, ones I won't give away, that went beyond the original BUT is an even better way. And it kinda made joking references to the Grimm version of the tale, and I did get a bit of the feeling of the 90s Disney live action with Brandy and Whitney Houston.
And the screening was in Los Angeles County.

Q: Like the mice, is Lucifer CGI too? Do the animals have as much screentime as they did in the 1950 film? What did you think of the stepmother, Anastasia and Drizella? They're my favourite characters from the 1950 film.
A: Lucifer I think was a mix of real, animatronic (think Jim Henson creations) and a bit of CGI. But not the animals don't have the same amount of screentime, but for VERY good reason.
I think that with the two sisters they felt the closest to the original animation. The Lady was similar, but I felt Blanchett did a more realistic job with that character. You actually find out soo much more of why she's the way she is. I loved her as much as I hated her... if that makes sense.

Q: Did the stepfamily really rip Cinderella's dress before the ball in the film? And were there scenes between Lucifer and the mice? If so, they seem like they really are sticking to the Disney film.
A: Yes they do rip it, though not as badly as in the animation, which I feel would've looked fake if they had, the amount done was properly believable. There was like two TINY bits between the mice and Lucifer, nothing like in the animation. I'll put it this way, in the animation, the mice with the supporting roles and everyone else like the step family and such were secondary character. In the live action, it's the other way around.