This is going to be another entirely pointless “remake”. Mostly still animation except this time it’s hideous, lacking in artistry or whimsy. Much like The Lion King - and at least that gave us Black Is King/The Gift!
Disney
- Thread starter Charley
- Start date
Why are they doing these live action remakes? Is it actually to renew copyright stuff?
I mean, they do make a metric fuckton of money.
It's cheaper to develop than new ideas. It's also just a very overt continuation of the Disney Vault concept in terms of giving these things long tails money wise over many years.
Plus Lion King and Beauty and the Beast both pulled in over a billion despite being dog shit so why wouldn't they be lazy I guess
It’s been said a million times but I’m sooooo bored of these remakes. I think they would be cute if we had one like every five years, but them being such a large percentage of Disney releases is so fucking dull.
He/him
I actually quite like the live action remakes. When I'm watching an animation, I tend to imagine what it would look like in "real life", so I enjoy them. It's similar to reading a book and having it pictured in your head and then seeing it all brought to life in movies. They're not all perfect movies and I do prefer the animated versions overall, but I don't mind them giving it a go.
Give me a Sword In The Stone live action Merlin and Mim battle please.
Give me a Sword In The Stone live action Merlin and Mim battle please.
I think it's a good idea to give slightly lesser known animated films a new life. For example doing the Jungle Book in live action was a great idea because it looked great and the movie deserved a slightly more grounded reimagining. But movies like Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin that are already iconic and are so fantastical they look like crap in live action are pointless moneymaking exercises.
Im not a huge fan of the remakes but absolutely yes to this. There are some films, especially lesser known ones, that could have superb live versions done and Sword in the Stone is absolutely one of them.
Oh, wait, they are thinking of this apparently. Well there you go.
They/Them
The live action remakes only really work when it's a mainly "human" cast. Lion King, Lady & The Tramp and Dumbo were all pretty bad movies because you just don't need "live action" animals who are pretty much all CGI anyway.
Cinderella, Beauty & The Beast and Mulan were all pretty solid I thought. Aladdin had some good moments but the thing with that movie is that the heart and soul of it was Robin Williams and nobody could ever do genie justice, certainly not Will Smith anyway. It just felt wrong without Robin.
Cinderella, Beauty & The Beast and Mulan were all pretty solid I thought. Aladdin had some good moments but the thing with that movie is that the heart and soul of it was Robin Williams and nobody could ever do genie justice, certainly not Will Smith anyway. It just felt wrong without Robin.
He/him
Totally agree with that. I like Beauty and the Beast and have watched the live action version a few times now. Aside from Emma's horrendously auto-tuned singing, it's really good.
I also enjoyed Mulan very much and parts of Aladdin, but that was one I feel like they could have just left alone. The original is pure magic.
While I appreciated The Lion King from a purely technical point of view, and it really was astonishingly well done, I won't ever watch that one again. That just sucked the life out of the original.
I liked a lot of what was in the Maleficent movies, but probably mostly because of Angelina, who was the perfect choice for that.
I'm very curious for the first looks at The Little Mermaid though. That one feels like it could go either way to be honest.
I also enjoyed Mulan very much and parts of Aladdin, but that was one I feel like they could have just left alone. The original is pure magic.
While I appreciated The Lion King from a purely technical point of view, and it really was astonishingly well done, I won't ever watch that one again. That just sucked the life out of the original.
I liked a lot of what was in the Maleficent movies, but probably mostly because of Angelina, who was the perfect choice for that.
I'm very curious for the first looks at The Little Mermaid though. That one feels like it could go either way to be honest.
Mulan was so bad, oh man. Certainly one of the worst of the bunch.
The remakes are pretty pointless for the most part (Dumbo) and often outright bad (Alice in Wonderland, Lion King).
But they have gotten it right a couple of times with Jungle Book and Cinderella both of which somehow just worked, so it would be good to see them do something a bit more outside the box.
For what it's worth, I thought Aladdin was pretty decent too despite them butchering they final act.
But they have gotten it right a couple of times with Jungle Book and Cinderella both of which somehow just worked, so it would be good to see them do something a bit more outside the box.
For what it's worth, I thought Aladdin was pretty decent too despite them butchering they final act.
They totally should, but they would never given how mired in controversy the production was. It's easily the darkest Disney movie. They touch on it a bit here before switching over to discussing the attraction
