The Witches [Robert Zemeckis|HBO Max]

pixelburp

Hadn't realised there was another stab being made at Roald Dahl's famous book, but here's the first trailer. Looks fairly faithful, going against what I remember from the last adaptation anyway

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nlhmJF5FNI

johnny_ultimate

The Roeg version had a quirky, grotesque vibe to it that always unnerved me as a kid. This all looks a bit too clean and sanded-down in comparison. But we’ll see what the final product looks like.

Tazzimus

Original please.

pixelburp

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The Roeg version had a quirky, grotesque vibe to it that always unnerved me as a kid. This all looks a bit too clean and sanded-down in comparison. But we’ll see what the final product looks like.

The original adaptation was like a lot of British films of the era, being made during Thatchers Britain when there were strong Gilliam'esque flights of fantasy mixed into sometimes anarchic pushbacks against the dreariness of suburban British life.

Given Zemeckis' career trajectory in the last decade or so, I wouldn't even begin to expect that same level of quirk or surreality. The trailer suggests the whole thing will play like a cartoon, the cast seem to be at that level.

Eduard Khil

The original film scared the hell out of me The Grand High Witch was so twisted and evil compared to Morticia Addams.

TiGeR KiNgS

Yikes this looks bad

branie2

Woke as well

Full_Circle_81

Makes me want to watch Mousehunt....

Mark Hamill

branie2 wrote: »

Woke as well

Jeez, what a pathetic observation.
I'd hate to live my life being so triggered at seeing women or LGBT people (or whatever it is in the movie that set you off, I can't actually tell).

p to the e

A lot of unnecessary CGI just ruins it. For example the cat sitting on Anne Hathaway's arm is obviously CGI. Why couldn't she carry a cat? Stanley Tucci is always worth a watch though.

dan1895

branie2 wrote: »

Woke as well

What was woke about it? What am I missing?

p to the e

dan1895 wrote: »

What was woke about it? What am I missing?

pixelburp

Presumably just making the lead granny-grandson unit black (looks like the time period remains approximately the same) is enough to be "woke" now. It's just a meaningless, lazy reductive phrase if it gets trotted out *gosh* 'cos they made the leads black. And sure enough, as usual veers the conversation off into another tedious broken record about woke this and that...

I mean, the film doesn't actually look great and I live in hope Zemeckis rediscovers a pulse in his films again. I actually thought the shift to (what I guess to be) the American South was a neat choice but so what? Woke woke woke woke. The word has lost all meaning.

p to the e

pixelburp wrote: »

Presumably just making the lead granny-grandson unit black (looks like the time period remains approximately the same) is enough to be "woke" now. It's just a meaningless, lazy reductive phrase if it gets trotted out *gosh* 'cos they made the leads black. And sure enough, as usual veers the conversation off into another tedious broken record about woke this and that...

I mean, the film doesn't actually look great and I live in hope Zemeckis rediscovers a pulse in his films again. I actually thought the shift to (what I guess to be) the American South was a neat choice but so what? Woke woke woke woke. The word has lost all meaning.

I mean he's attached to the live adaptation of Pinocchio so that should be, um, something.

pixelburp

p to the e wrote: »

I mean he's attached to the live adaptation of Pinocchio so that should be, um, something.

Sigh. I wouldn't overstate the man's prowess, but he was a fabulous entertainer and movie-maker once upon a time, until the Polar Express seemingly broke him.

Patrick H Willems did a great retrospective on his career and how effectively, Zemeckis got lost in his love of technology:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKe8qCzPdkI

WomanSkirtFan8

Just watched that trailer a few days ago. It looks very interesting but I do agree with the majority here that the original movie was fantastic and looked a lot more realistic. Personally, I think that putting this particular version in the 1960s actually makes a little bit of sense if you really think about it. Zemeckis is a proven talent and he can make movies like this. He's obviously
Anyway, as to whether the movie is good or not let's just wait and see.

MonkstownHoop

Looks terrible, I'll rewatch the original instead

Shelga

Agree with the poster who said this just looks like a cartoonish kids' movie. Ask yourself- what would Roald think? I think he would hate it.

The original movie was great in that the Grand High Witch scared the **** out of most children, including myself. However, it was spoiled somewhat by them

having him turn back into a boy at the end :rolleyes:

The book was the best.

branie2

Shelga wrote: »

Agree with the poster who said this just looks like a cartoonish kids' movie. Ask yourself- what would Roald think? I think he would hate it.

The original movie was great in that the Grand High Witch scared the **** out of most children, including myself. However, it was spoiled somewhat by them

having him turn back into a boy at the end :rolleyes:

The book was the best.

He'd be turning in his grave!

MisterAnarchy

The reviews are out, its a stinker as expected.
Hathaway needs to stop doing over the top comedic performances.

Dontfadeaway

Finished it there. Not good. Kids might enjoy it but it took everything good away from the story. Witches not scary. The first had dark vibe and didn’t try to water it down for kids but this is as cheesy and watered down as you can get. I liked the ending of the original but it’s different here and it’s not good either.

Busi_Girl08

Just finished it.

First of all i was starving after all of Anne Hathaway's scenery chewing. And how she ended up as a combination of Gollum and Eartha Kitt's Catwoman I'll never understand.

Overall I wasn't mad about it. Way too watered down from the original material, even more so than the first move. The villain was too cartoonish and and the kids running around and repeating everything as it happened drove me nuts.

I did like the ending though.

RobAMerc

hi folks,

Any idea where we can get this to watch ?

I have Amazon prime but it doesnt seem to be on there !

Thanks

mikhail

https://play.google.com/store/movies/details/Roald_Dahl_s_The_Witches?id=iaN5_i0PXeA.P

JP Liz V1

RobAMerc wrote: »

hi folks,

Any idea where we can get this to watch ?

I have Amazon prime but it doesnt seem to be on there !

Thanks

I think it is now on Sky Store

MisterAnarchy

mikhail wrote: »

https://play.google.com/store/movies/details/Roald_Dahl_s_The_Witches?id=iaN5_i0PXeA.P

17.99 to rent a film , thats very saucy.

Zhane

MisterAnarchy wrote: »

17.99 to rent a film , thats very saucy.

Well without cinemas they have to try recoup some of the money invested in it.

Seen the movie, it was alright. Original is better ðŸ‘ðŸ»

mikhail

I presume they're targeting couples and families, who might argue that it's still cheaper than multiple cinema tickets. It's more than a little off-putting to those living/watching alone though.

Juliet799

I also prefer the original movie.

Agent Coulson

I don't understand this world anymore.


Anne Hathaway apologizes to disability community amid 'The Witches' backlash

Anne Hathaway is apologizing after her new movie, "The Witches," received backlash from the disability community.

The actress took to Instagram with a statement saying: "I have recently learned that many people with limb differences, especially children, are in pain because of the portrayal of the Grand High Witch in The Witches."

She continued: "Let me begin by saying I do my best to be sensitive to the feelings and experiences of others not out of some scrambling PC fear, but because not hurting others seems like a basic level of decency we should all be striving for."
Hathaway said she owes the community an apology and was sorry to see that she had caused anyone pain.
"As someone who really believes in inclusivity and really, really detests cruelty, I owe you all an apology for the pain caused," she continued. "I am sorry. I did not connect limb difference with the GHW when the look of the character was brought to me; if I had, I assure you this never would have happened."

Hathaway's character in the movie has three fingers on each hand, a condition that's similar to ectrodactyly, a limb disability.
A Warner Bros. spokesperson had issued a statement earlier this week addressing the backlash, saying the company was "deeply saddened to learn that our depiction of the fictional characters in The Witches could upset people with disabilities."
Hathaway added that she will do better going forward.

"I particularly want to say I'm sorry to kids with limb differences: now that I know better I promise I'll do better," she wrote. "And I owe a special apology to everyone who loves you as fiercely as I love my own kids: I'm sorry I let your family down."
She concluded her statement by directing followers to the Lucky Fin Project, a nonprofit organization that helps children with limb differences.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/11/06/entertainment/anne-hathaway-apologizes-witches-trnd/index.html

Optimalprimerib

Agent Coulson wrote: »

I don't understand this world anymore.


Anne Hathaway apologizes to disability community amid 'The Witches' backlash

I don't get this, this is the trait of the character she is playing. Why did she need to apologise?

MisterAnarchy

Optimalprimerib wrote: »

I don't get this, this is the trait of the character she is playing. Why did she need to apologise?

Because of political correctness gone mad .