In Disney’s new-found tradition of yanking iconic animated characters out of the vault and regurgitating them as live-action features, Snow White is the seventh Disney Princess to reenter the theaters. Adapted from Walt Disney’s first animated feature film Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, the studio arguably faced its biggest challenge yet by reimaging one of the most iconic films ever made. Like many of the Disney remake films before it, the studio’s 2025 version of Snow White is an underwhelming, poorly written, CGI fright fest that disrespects its iconic character and the artists who first imagined the fairytale in 1937.
Riddled with controversies and a delay, the film was fighting an uphill battle from the start; however, for the sake of being fair, this review focuses solely on the question we ask ourselves every time a film is reimagined as a live-action: Does the adaptation have any value? In our podcast discussion of the studio’s recent live-action endeavors, we looked at the adaptations that were more successful than others, ultimately concluding that the adaptations that made changes to the story in an effort to expand upon the ideas first introduced in the animated films were the most successful(I’m looking at you, 2015 Cinderella. So let’s start there: the changes to Snow White.
In all of the princess adaptations, Disney has made it clear that they are trying to update the princess to be less of a “damsel in distress” and more of a hero in her own story. In Snow White, Rachel Zegler embodies an innocent, almost naive princess who, after losing everything, is fighting for the confidence to save her kingdom. Notably, there is no prince in this story. Rather, a Robin Hood-esque bad boy named Jonathan (Andrew Burnap) replaces the prince as the stand-in love interest, offering little character development or chemistry with the leading lady.
In the same breath, the Dwarfs also lacked any chemistry with the leading princess – really, they lacked any substance at all. Similar to the original film, they offered comedic relief with their distinct personalities, but none of the personalities were explored like something one may hope for in an adaptation expanding the original film. In an odd decision, some of their agency was actually taken away, as their role in the downfall of the Evil Queen was nonexistent compared to the original film. Not only were the Dwarfs dumbed down caricatures of the originals, but they were disgustingly CGIed to the lowest quality, painfully reminding me of 2004’s The Polar Express.
In truth, the Dwarfs were the most distracting part of the film. Disney’s choice to not cast real actors in the role and offer well-developed characters is exactly why someone like Peter Dinklage would call this film “fucking backwards.” They were useless. Disney’s attempt to utilize Dopey in what I imagine was supposed to be a heartfelt arch, ended up undercut by the fact that the entire group was mediocrely written and Dopey looked like Alfred E. Neuman from Mad Magazine.
Rounding off the cast of characters was Gal Gadot’s Evil Queen, who was nothing less than a total disappointment. Gadot’s acting is painfully forced and without a shred of heart or — dare I say — talent. Her rendition of the Evil Queen lacks even the slightest sense of fear, making Cate Blanchett’s performance as Lady Tremaine or even Melissa McCarthy as Ursula look Oscar-worthy. Gadot’s singing makes matters worse with her two-part “All is Fair,” an additional song penned by songwriting duo Benj Pasek and Justin Paul.
Pasek and Paul’s songs were another distinction from the original film, expanding the soundtrack from three to nine tracks (and reprises). This is where small moments shined through. Zegler is, if nothing else, a true Broadway performer. Her rendition of “Waiting on a Wish” offered a glimpse of hope for this lost princess film. Unfortunately, most songs were forgettable with okay singing, less-than-catchy beats, and forced plot points or character arcs. If Zegler wasn’t singing, the song wasn’t worth holding onto.
And so when adapting an animated film to live-action, despite potential writing shortcomings or wrong casting choices, we hope that the visuals, the assumed reason why we are all here, at least look good.
Alas, this is no fairytale. The set was grey, the costumes looked cheap, and the editing was confusing and mismatched. The abomination that is the Dwarfs aside, the CGI forest animals were ridiculous. Each creature was created with soft color and doe eyes, and they toed the line between realism and fantasy, making everything look off. If the filmmakers and artists aren’t going to commit to looking as real as possible, then what’s the point of adapting an animated film in the first place? And with the subpar writing, the questionable casting, and the less-than-memorable songs, what are we left with?
I use the words underwhelming and disappointing a lot, but in reality, there is nothing more to say about this film. Disney completely mangled one of its most iconic films, disrespecting the animators who made the studio the success it is. In a way, I pity Zegler, who was given the chance to embody such a beloved character and offer young Latina girls a chance to see a princess who looked like them on screen. Instead of inspiring young girls, though, Zegler had to battle poor writing, maneuver scenes with nothing but green screens, and carry the weight of a film that was under-acted and overly edited.
If anything, we must demand justice for Snow White. Whether she’s the 1937 or 2025 version, she didn’t deserve what this film did to her.
And so I return to the original question asked: Does the adaptation have any value? The short answer is no. Snow White did nothing to develop or expand the characters or stories first introduced almost 90 years ago. It’s a hodgepodge of half-baked ideas that results in a film that was just as lost as its princess. And since Disney doesn’t seem to want to slow down or reconsider it mutilation of its most iconic 2-D films, I fear I have no choice but to embody Grumpy and remain a pessimist as to what’s to come.
Review Courtesy of Sara Ciplickas
Feature Image Credit to Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures via The Hollywood Reporter