Meh… this seems very “Mad Magazine-ish” , circa about 1965 . Maybe it was cutting edge and “daring” in a naughty way back then, now it just seems trite.

Does no one have any original ideas ? Yawn.

Lookin’ like Pinocchio on the far left !

I’m surprised the legal departments of both the agency and the brewer let this fly. It is unusual for an ad like this to get through unless the intent was to get publicity in the news. However, Disney is so swift at dealing with copyright and trademark infringements that the agency and brewer won’t get much out of the campaign.

You would think they would have been smarter than that especially with the dwindling advertising budgets world wide.

I think the art is hilarious and pretty characteristic of Australian irreverence.

However, yeah… their lawyers really didn’t think this one through. You can already smell the Cease and Desist coming.

Still, Aussies, grab ‘em while you can before they’re pulled off shelves!

How does that sell beer?

Is it that after she drank one of their beers her beer goggles were bad enough to even do these guys?

I also like the British paper’s attempt at prudery. A drawing of fully-covered cartoon characters is “x-rated”.

X rated or possibly R rated if this happens, either way I just died laughing at this.

Lol, today I saw an ice cream truck that had Disney’s Snow White character’s painted on it, the funny part was that it said “mind that dwarf” on the back.

Also anyone remember Snow White The Sequel being posted here? it was a dirtier version of Snow White by the director of Tarzoon Shame Of The Jungle.

Of course Disney is going to sue, what with them having exclusive control over an old fairy tale that has been in the public domain for centuries.

They didn’t even make the first animated version.

At least according to Wikipedia, the only aspect of this which is even remotely infringing on Disney’s IP is the fact that the dwarves have names.

This is exactly why Satan gave us lawyers.

Boy, talk about BAD drawings, composition, and color. The hack airbrush job looks like one of the lesser van exteriors from 1978. How unappealing. Sure doesn’t make me want to buy that beer.

Fluffy, it’s not because of the fairy tale itself, it’s the characteristics of the seven dwafs as well as Snow White’s that they are infringing upon.

Yeah, how the hell does that horrific image sell beer? Of course, some people drink to forget…

I know it seems like stretch to use Snow White to sell beer but the idea was to convey that the company’s Raspberry beer is not as sweet as some think. It is indeed very Mad Magazine-ish but I don’t think that’s a bad thing, they are poking fun after all.

What’s the opposite of wit?

Looks like an old Wacky Packages painting.

Casting Snow White as a whore and the dwarfs as her johns is too familiar to be interesting, and too obvious to be shocking.

sorry, I’m slow.. How is this X-rated exactly (I don’t even see nipple outlines), how exactly does this sell beer (get so drunk you’d do the dwarfs?) and… since when does Disney own the fairy tale of SnowWhite in every shape and form?

Disney fails to realize, that them making a stink over this advertisement is just going to bring that much attention to the company and product.

I see no evidence of any so-called “negligee” in this illustration.

Right on Fluffy, surprised it took that long for someone to bring up what these people obviously know - Jerry, Maybe describing it by default as “Disney’s” Snow White in this context is a bit much. It’s not that this ad doesn’t trade on the Disney version/interpretation and satirise it’s designs, but it’s a bit dangerous to give the impression that Snow White “belongs” to Disney.

It’s not like when an Aussie Brewery made “Duff beer” for real (and an idiot journo proudly told Groening in an interview - of course the lawyers were out days later)…

P.S. Tried to cleverly work Coal Black in there, but failed…

The only funny thing to me, is how we have been taught this is so funny.

As far as composition, the image here was cropped …

dont’ know if this his the original image, but it’s definately larger:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/10/16/ho_white/

There’s still Snow White The Sequel.

Reminds me of when Disney said that as far as they were concerned Father Christmas was a Disney character. So cheeky.

Snow White ain’t public domain (yet) and Disney’s friend$ in Congress are keeping it that way.

This beer company better have a good legal department. Disney has gone after day care centers for less!

Snowwhite is not a walt disney invention! may be the designs and the film but not the story it self!

That’s clever and funny!!

Who cares what Disney thinks!!

A simple test would be: would this ad have any meaning, would these characters even be identifiable if Disney had not made the movie they did in 1937?

Borrrrrring.

Ignore it and it will go away.

Disney can be as displeased as it wants. The story, like most fairy tales, is not theirs. The imagery is even in a different style. They’re pretty much hosed.

gdo pretty much nailed it.

seems finally a x rated snow white is inevitable, borrrrring and inevitable, then feed the majority’s nasty and naughty mind anyway

@THE GUYS

I have no issue if you consider this funny - humor is subjective, after all, but “clever?” Really? Turning fairy-tales on their heads in an adult fashion is about as worn-out a concept as possible. It’s something a high-school student would create thinking that they’re being really original and daring while not realizing its been done MANY times before.

Nothing clever about this at all.

Maybe if they drew Ho White with long hair and with something other than the red bow, then Disney lawyers wouldn’t be able to even start.

It’s not brilliant satire, it’s just a beer ad.

That White Ho —White Ho! White Ho! LOL— looks like Megan Fox :-P

The problem here is that they tried to satirize the story with very similar character designs to the disney version. The black short hair with the bow, the dwarves with names and colored hats. If they have used originals designs for this there wouldn’t have been a cease and desist… but of course all the intention would be miss. Still a bad marketing move.