As a whole, how do you feel about live action Disney remakes?

[FredWolfLeonardo]

I know we have individual threads for the live action Disney movie releases, but I was wanting to see people's overall thoughts in one place.

First of all, let me get this out of the way: I absolutely love the OG Live Action remakes from the 90s (1994 Jungle Book and 101 Dalmations from 1996).

Ok, now moving on.

For me personally, I will be honest when I admit that I really, really don't like these remakes and how many of them have continued to make so much money for Disney.

The main reason for this is that they are just inferior in nearly every way to the originals, which had the landslide advantage of being animated.
In animation, you can capture wonder and fantasy so much better and make everything so expressive and exaggerrated.
So I really don't understand whats the point of making these films photo-realistic when it takes away from makes the originals so attractive in the first place.

What I've also noticed with these films is that while trying to be realistic, Disney ends up giving most of them this dull and greyish colour palette which once again, I don't understand what part of it appeals to pepple.
A lot of the human actors in these films were mediocre,with some I'd argue even being terrible when compared to the originals (looking at you, Emma Watson as Belle).
I'd say that the CG animals have a similar problem due to not being expressive beyond what a real animal is, which really sucks me out when I'm supposed to believe that these characters talk and are supposed to have human like personalities.

That being said, I don't hate CG animation at in live action films as a whole, seeing as how when used right, you can absolutely capture the same sort of expressions made by hand drawn characters.
An example of this would be in "Mowgli" by Andy Serkis from 2018, which used heavy mocap on their CG animals, and the result are characters which while not looking the most realistic, are widely expressive and instantly memorable.

I don't hate the concept of remaking films either, since many great films have been remakes which have added something new that wasn't in the original (my personal favourite being the Ten Commandments).
With these Disney films, I feel like these films are hardly adding anything new, mostly just telling the story using much worse acting, presentation and a tone which is all over the place, often because of trying to be "mature" while still catering to nostalgia.

In terms of positives however, I would say that I do like the few changes that these remakes do make from time to time, such as making King Louie a mafia boss in the Jungle Book voiced by Christopher Walken.

Since these remakes are also made on such a high budget, being able to get well respected and big name voice actors on board such as Idris Elba and Ben Kingsley is also admirable.

Some human performances I thought were pretty nice as well, such as Belle's father from Beauty and the Beast, as well as LeFou who admittedly had way better chemistry with Gaston than Belle and the beast lol.

I also thought that in the recent Aladdin trailer, Genie looked pretty good which is an unpopular opinion, but Will Smith really does have those exaggeratted expressions which reminds me of a hand drawn character.

But all in all, those handful of reasons aren't enough to make me check out what is at its core, a repackaged and inferior product.
So I have decided in the end, that everytime a Live Action Disney remake comes out, I won't throw my money at them, and I really hope that other people do the same and boycott these films, so Disney is forced to stop making them and focus on the original stuff they've always been so loved for over the years.

Pointless Internet rant to get attention over.

[Candy Kappa]

Eh, they could have been better. I enjoyed Malificent, and The Jungle Book despite completely missing the point with the ending.

But the Lion King, should have been a cgi marvel, but it looks a bit boring with the lack of "acting" in the characters. Beauty and the Beast was baaaaad, and Aladdin looks... eh. Didn't bother to watch Cinderella. Dumbo looks really cute, the character, I'm not sold on the movie.

I feel they're more of a IP flex from Disney then actual movie production, so anything genuinely good is almost accidental.

[Original TMNT Cartoon Fan]

In animation, you can capture wonder and fantasy so much better and make everything so expressive and exaggerrated.

I agree. If you want to see realistic lions, you can always watch a documentary about animal life in South Africa.

I had never cared much even for the TMNT live-action films. The comics and cartoons are better mediums when it comes to make talking turtles believeable.

[ABrown]

cDGlN6mluGA

[Autbot_Benz]

Why would i go see these ****** remakes when I have the classic animated movies at my disposal.

[Leo656]

I thought Beauty and the Beast was okay, but aside from one brief scene (which the original screenwriter argues actually breaks the entire movie) it was the same exact thing we've already seen.

There's nothing creative about tracing over someone else's work. That's why Rob Liefeld is such a goddamn hack; his original artwork is trash, and anything "good" he draws was simply traced over from something a much better artist drew. That's how these live-action films feel, to me, like a simple trace-over job.

They're functional. They do what they aim to do, which is re-do the exact same movie with a new "filter", so to speak. But it's not like that's a difficult job; people are already in romantic love with most of the originals (I'm not surprised that Dumbo didn't do great, because the original wasn't a huge hit either), so as long as they tell the same story, they're guaranteed a built-in audience.

If people wanna like them, that's fine. They're not "bad" per se - because the originals weren't bad, and it's the same exact movie - but it IS the most lazy and creatively bankrupt thing I've ever seen, and if anyone but Disney tried this they'd be catching all kinds of hell for it.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

While it's really, really cool to see these old animated movies brought more realistically to life with live-action CGI...

It's also incredibly, horribly cynical. Cash in with the same story, beat for beat, and give it a CGI makeover with a big star-studded cast.

This should not work. It's creatively bankrupt. But hey, Emma Watson as Belle! And (still not sure it's not an elaborate prank) Tim Burton directing Dumbo!

Profit.

[Leo656]

I adore how they made the Dumbo movie a meta-commentary on crass corporate greed and consumerism, and big corporations swallowing up the smaller ones on their way to making everything sh*tty. At the same time as the Fox merger was going through, no less! :lol:

That took serious balls. And it proved that Disney does indeed have self-awareness, and are completely aware of how people perceive them. They just have more money than God so they simply don't give a f*ck.

That was the moral of Dumbo: "Whine about us all you like, you stupid rubes. You're still gonna buy these plush dolls and blow two months' rent on trips to our theme parks no matter what we do." I just can't believe that they went ahead and used one of these things as a vehicle for that message. Very ballsy move. But they can pull it off, so I guess it's not too surprising after all.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

If its the exact same story, I have no problem with it.

I just don't think live action is suitable for telling these stories which were designed with animation in mind.

If anything, I would prefer classic Disney films being re-made in the cartoony CG style like Wreck it Ralph.

[Leo656]

I'd argue that's equally creatively bankrupt, just from a different direction.

Someone did an article last week or the week before, can't remember where, but they made an excellent point: The problem with remakes of any kind, is that Hollywood generally only remakes movies that people already love. That makes it a "safe investment", but there's almost no room for improvement. Best case, you make something bland and inoffensive, but you're not going to blow anyone away or eclipse the original. Worst case, you taint the brand for many years to come and waste a ton of money and a lot of people's time.

They'd be much better served in trying to remake movies that didn't get it right the first time, but they won't do that because such properties are considered "risky".

Like, I'm not really too invested in The Lion King remake because The Lion King was already a really good movie, the new coat of paint only serves to entice the easily amused. But how about, say, The Black Cauldron? Lots of room for improvement, there. Even Sword in the Stone; not bad, but not a lot of people saw it and nobody remembers it. THOSE kinds of things, I could see myself getting a little bit more interested in, because there's at least a small chance that the remake could do some things better than the original, perhaps even becoming the superior film. These other remakes have zero chance of that, because the originals were nearly-perfect, and thus, it's all rather pointless.

I'm pretty sure I heard they're working on those, so we'll have to wait and see.

[sdp]

101 Dalmatians was good, then again I was a kid. Cinderella was pretty good. Only 2 I've seen so far.

[newfan]

So far as the vote, my opinion doesn't fall into either of them. The trailers seem to make the movies look better than they turn out to be from what I have seen, Cinderella was okay , though it didn't wow me.

I don't count Maleficent as it was a different story but I did enjoy that for a good part anyway when I watched it.

[drgon78]

They need to stop.

The fact we have 3 of these things coming out this year alone is very disturbing.

Also even if they do manage to do a good job on any of them it doesn't matter we have the originals and I prefer animation.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

I'll pick the 3rd option of 'I have no interest in seeing them, and I'll never see them for as long as I live'

[neatoman]

Out of the ones I've seen, they're not very interesting. I know they're technically remaking the Black Cauldron, which I am interested but mostly because they intend to adapt the full series of books this time, not so much because I'm all that fond of the original.

[Andrew NDB]

There should be a third option. I'm apathetic to them. I mean, I haven't cared about any of the ones so far (Lion King was aight, I guess), but something like a totally realistic, live-action Little Mermaid? I'd see that.

But hey, Emma Watson as Belle!

Horrible choice. Should have been, like, a "young Jennifer Connelly" type.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Horrible choice. Should have been, like, a "young Jennifer Connelly" type.

I'd have to agree with you. :tsad:

[Skinrash]

Completely uninterested. Nothing appealing or interesting about them to me. Disney really need to show some restraint, I don't think even Platinum Dunes cranked out remakes at this speed and quantity.

[Utrommaniac]

The only good thing to come out of these for me was the "Evermore" scene in Beauty and the Beast.

Other than that, it really feels like they're trying to grab the "Cinderella is too antifeminist, she was dumb doormat and needed a man to save her!/Belle has Stockholm Syndrome/Ariel traded her legs for d!ck" crowd. It's why the Mulan remake keeps getting increasingly more awful the more detail gets revealed. It's why they stopped designing Elsa as a villain and turned it into what it is now (and why I'm far more of a Tangled person).


They're remakes for people who have missed the point or don't care to analyze the finer details.

Cinderella's bravery was in her kindness and optimism in the face of abuse.
Belle may have been trapped, but she was never made out to be or treated like a prisoner; she never, ever took the Beast's sh!t lying down.
Ariel's problems were more with her father being terrible and disrespecting her passions; the story is about him realizing he's put his daughter in a situation where she has to hide parts of herself from him.

[Leofan26]

Garbage in my opinion, I hate it. Me being a 90s person myself and loved everything Aladdin animated series related is just bleh. Iago was my favorite character of that entire series, I dread what they've done to the poor bird in the live action version. Not to mention whoever played Jafar is doing a horrible job, again my opinion. Not seeing that pile of crap live action version of Aladdin, I hope it bombs in the box office too bleh.

[ranger_scout]

Here are my thoughts on all of them.


Maleficent - I actually kind of enjoyed this film. When I first heard about it I thought it was going to be extremely dark and spooky, but I actually had some fun and humorous moments. Plus, Aurora got some much needed character development from the original film. They are also working on a sequel, but I see any need to expand the story.


Cinderella - This was one of the most gorgeous films I've ever seen. Out of all the fairy tales that have received the live-action treatment, this was easily the best one. The cast was just perfect and it was very faithful to the source material as well. I even thought it was better than the animated film, which I never actually loved as a kid.


The Jungle Book - Visually it was outstanding. Plus, I really liked the characters and the little twists that were made to the story. It was great to escape to such an imaginative world like that one, especially because I had a lousy first quarter of 2016.


Pete's Dragon - I'm might be cheating on this one, but the original film featured animated moments. I think this was probably the most underrated film of 2016. It was so heart-warming and had a beautiful message as well. I also liked a lot of the performances in This is something I could watch countless times and never get bored of it.


Beauty and the Beast - It's very hard to redo a masterpiece like the original. However, it mostly stayed true to the story it was based upon. Hearing the classic songs really did make feel like a kid again. Overall, I thought it was a solid adaptation and it was worth seeing in theaters. Plus, the movie and the original's 25th anniversary re-release on home media gave Belle a much needed boost in popularity. She made about less than $7,000 in merchandise on Ebay in 2013. Also, Emma Watson's portrayal was far better than the one Emilie de Davin played on Once Upon a Time.


Christopher Robin - I absolutely loved hearing Jim Cummings as Pooh and Tigger again. The man is a genius and I am astounded that Disney hasn't named him a Disney Legend for the numerous voices he's done for their projects for nearly 30 years now. Also, this movie really takes me back to their childhood. It was also nice to have Pooh and his friends return to the big screen after the underwhelming box-office performance of their animated film from 2011, which had to compete against Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows -Part 2 and The Smurfs.


Dumbo - I honestly don't know why this was given the live-action treatment. Tim Burton's work is either hit-or-miss for me. I did like the twist of seeing humans actually treating the sweet little outcast with respect before and after he flies. However, the script reallly could've been better.


Aladdin - The original will always be one my family's all-time favorite films, but I was having a good time watching it. I was so nice hearing that music I grew up with along with Pasek and Paul's new song. Will Smith has VERY BIG SHOES to fill when he plays the Genie, but I think he made it his own and did just fine. Naomi Scott was fantastic as Jasmine and Mena Massoud was a likable and believable Aladdin.


Some people consider Tim Burton's 2010 film Alice in Wonderland to be a remake or some kind of re-imagining of the 1951 animated film. However, Burton didn't even consider that to be a live-action adaptation at all. People either loved it or hated it. I personally enjoyed the movir, but I really didn't like its sequel Alice Through the Looking Glass at all.

[TheBlueTurtle1]

They stink, just cash grabs, no heart and soul to them and they add nothing. If anything they harm the and diminish the originals:x

[TurtleTitan97]

The only ones that have interested me were Jungle Book and Christopher Robin.

[Shark_Blade]

2D animation movies are dead today anyway so it’s good that they remake them for the younger generations to continue the legacy.

They’re mostly great retelling and make tonnes of money. Can’t wait for Cruella and Little Mermaid live action.

[IndigoErth]

Don't mind it overall, IF it was just now and then, but it seems to be a serious focus for them right now and too many in a rather short span of time. Is Disney running low on ideas at the moment? Because new (and non-sequel) original films seem to have taken a backseat for the most part.

Also, as much as I was always into 3D animation and support the advancement of CGI in film and watching how far it has come over the years... I'm actually also starting to miss Disney's traditional 2D like it was back in the day. Never wanted to see it replaced, just have it and 3D coexist as different animation art forms. But with Pixar seeming to take over much of that particular area of Disney entertainment...

[ranger_scout]

2D animation movies are dead today anyway so it’s good that they remake them for the younger generations to continue the legacy.

They’re mostly great retelling and make tonnes of money. Can’t wait for Cruella and Little Mermaid live action.

For a lot of people, including myself, who were born around the time where the VHS was HUGE, it was amazing to find out when the classic movies were first released in theaters. It blew my mind that films like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Dumbo and Bambi were made in the 1930's through 1940's. Then you've got the Gold Age of films from the 1950's and 1960's that include Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, Lady and the Tramp, Sleeping Beauty, One Hundred and One Dalmatians and The Jungle Book. I also didn't know at first that The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh and The Rescuers hit theaters in the 1970's. That just shows how well they have stood the test of time.

The Disney Renaissance masterpieces like The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King are still considered beloved by audiences today. The titular heroines of Pocahontas and Mulan brought diversity to the Disney Princess brand just like Jasmine did. It was also nice to see Tiana from The Princess and the Frog, a slightly flawed but underrated movie, also join that group of characters.

[Egon1982]

Don't just boycott the new Little Mermaid film. Boycott all of Disney's live action remakes. That includes The Lion King and Lady and the Tramp.

Because if you contribute to The Lion King being hit, you are not showing Disney anything other than you want more of this horseshit. Bad reviews won't mean a thing. Disney cares only about the bottom line and pure profit.

Can't we just re-issue the original films Aladdin and Lion King with some updated remastered animation because they still hold up really good to this day, both Aladdin and Lion King and two of them in my opinion are the best animated films of the 90s among others. We don't need an update, we don't need a live-action remake of Lion King which isn't even live-action, it's CGI, don't need a live-action remake of Aladdin as it's already been made.

I hope the people who saw the trailers to Lion King and didn't like what they saw then speak with your wallet, and if your tired of Disney's lazy halfassed cashgrab remakes of their classics, don't pay to see them and that's how your gonna send your message. So if you are sick of this lazy crap as much as I am, do not pay to see any of their live action remakes and just contribute to diminishing returns. I have yet to give them a single cent for these casghrab efforts and I will continue to do so. That is the only way they will consider stopping. Because if they keep making money, no matter how bad the word of mouth and reviews are, Disney will not give a damn and keep making them. And if any film of live-action bombs which has happened to Dumbo then Disney will be like "oh wow, i guess people are tired of this! i guess audiences doesn't want this!" and that's how your gonna send your message.


I mean your gonna get live-action remakes of Pinocchio and all. it's going to happen, i guarantee it and all but eventually the bottom will completely fall out and they are just gonna get diminishing returns, because they are no longer about the ideals that Walt Disney built his company around. They are about greed, power and manipulation of your nostalgia.

If not? That what is the point? There is no need for lazy live action Disney remakes and it is a shame that films like this get the pass and make millions. Like i said, eventually your just gonna get diminishing returns and soon the bottom will eventually fall.

I want the Disney that made the original and was a genuine trendsetter back in the good old days. Not the current version which is just pumping out reheated left overs from the past, bad Pirates sequels with a upcoming reboot, sequels to Cars and failed adaptations of parts of their park like Tomorrowland. I want them to do creative things like Zootopia and some others.

The biggest problem with film today if you ask me boils down to the audiences themselves.

I would argue it's not audiences getting dumber that's the problem. It's audiences lowering their expectations that is. So much of the mass audience nowadays that sees films have standards that are so low that all that matters is that the film was entertaining or had a few scenes they liked. And it's a good if not great movie.

They are also lacking respect for elder cinema (1990 and above), and don't have the necessary knowledge of what makes a film good, great or even truly terrible. They lack appreciation for every aspect of filmmaking and don't really know what is truly good, bad or even mediocre because their standards are so low.

And Hollywood studios know this. This is why they pump out formulaic lazy sequels, remakes, prequels and reboots because they know the audiences eat it up and does not ask that much of them anymore.

Yes. There are exceptions. But they are clearly outnumbered by the mass amount of people who have lowered expectations and let their viewing habits and opinions on films be skewed by youtube videos (despite Ocpcommunications is one of my favorite reviewers with such high standards like myself and honest opinions as he's not afraid) and rotten tomatoes scores. Further spreading this cancerous disease of little to no standards for filmmaking or storytelling. And the death of the individual opinion amongst the hordes of audience members. The people who say "just watch a movie" or "don't judge it, it's just entertainment."

Need to shut the hell up when it comes to critiquing any review of a movie. Your standards are so low that no one should ever come to you for advice or recommendations of films or take you seriously.

I get pissed at watching a ****** movie, because I actually care. That's why. I care about the filmmaking process and films are more than just strictly entertainment to me. That's only part of it. A considerable part of the effectiveness of any film, but not the only part.

If a film wastes my time, is boring, and has next to no redeeming qualities, I should be upset and so should you. If you aren't that's another problem all together. We have ourselves to blame! eventually the returns are going to diminish and when they do? We have no one to blame but ourselves.

Or more importantly, do you? And if you don't want to see this? Then don't pay for it. Speak with your wallet. Wait to rent those films on blu ray or dvd. Don't just pay for a ticket just because of name recognition.

I have no desire to see it but slavishly praising the live action Beauty and the Beast and not realizing it for the shameless cash grab that it is? hate that they are doing this. There's a reason why adapting classic fairytales into animation works best. These live action films have been mediocre to disastrous. Although Jungle Book wasn't quite a direct remake of the 1967 film but there were some homages to it and more of another adaptation of Kipling's novel unlike a direct shot to shot remake of Beauty and the Beast.

Is the reason why we get so many halfassed remakes made and released in theaters. That exact mindset. Disney truly does feel that they are too big to fail. Which is why I am going to tell that mouse to suck it and ban his furry ass in 2019.

I have come to the sobering reality that in essence the audiences going to movies today are to blame for the chain of unoriginality being unbroken. For the countless streams of sequels, reboots, and remakes. No. They are rolling in your cash. They have no reason to stop rehashing the same plotlines and using the same formula over and over again. And is that really what you want? You can't keep doing the same thing again, and again, and again, and keep expecting the same result. Eventually the returns are going to diminish and when they do? We have no one to blame but ourselves.

Also have you heard they have now officially axed X-force due to the Fox Merger!? This right here proves that Disney does not give a flying **** about the property nor what it has achieved when the first film came out. I've been on the hard edge against Disney in the past few months but im honestly at the point where im now officially throwing in the towel and kick the Mouse ciao and goodbye for good. They screwed up star wars (proof you can't strike lightning in a bottle of the original trilogy twice) as luckily Solo flopped and so did the Star Wars land in Disneyland, they are greedy as hell and power hungry, they wanna constantly silence fans and push agendas, their Marvel films needs a serious break and screw all those lazy piece of garbage live action in name only rip off remakes. But i will give Disney chance if it's something new like Zootopia or the Wreck it Ralph franchise or Pixar's new projects. I've been feeling this for a long time but the recent X-force cancellation is the absolute final nail for me.

I am done with Disney period unless there's something new/fresh like Zootopia and Wreck it Ralph. They are a monopoly and something needs to be done to make them at least change their course a bit. I know it hurts, but it's the honest truth and comes from my heart. Not getting a cent from me for either of these movies. Stop supporting Disney's monopoly on entertainment and hollywood. They do not give a flying damn about you or storytelling anymore. All they care about is money. Even more so than ever before.

The blind love and catering to Disney's every whim lately is a deadly mistake. Don't be surprised if Disney continues to dominate screens with their product in years to come if this keeps up and prevent other projects from ever seeing the light of day.

But be my guest if you want to keep feeding the mouse. I am not giving it any more cheese. Disney is not getting a dime from me. Something has to be done to stop them or at least make them think about changing directions with this monopoly thing they have going on and milking franchises. I am going to at least do my part and not give the mouse any more cheese. He's fat enough and soon the remakes will get diminishing returns and send them the message.


The truth hurts.

[Shark_Blade]

Your boycott isn't gonna work considering the remakes of Mulan & Lion king are among the top most watched movie trailers of all time in 24 hours. People are hyped for this and it brings money to Disney. Expect more remakes in the future.

https://i.imgur.com/0tMrPNT.jpg

[Egon1982]

Your boycott isn't gonna work considering the remakes of Mulan & Lion king are among the top most watched movie trailers of all time in 24 hours. People are hyped for this and it brings money to Disney. Expect more remakes in the future.

https://i.imgur.com/0tMrPNT.jpg

It's sad and very disappointing.

I have to say it. Too many people have lowered expectations or vague semblances of standards. Especially when it comes to films. The idea that any film is good if it entertained someone, and it provides jobs is to me personally a giant load of steaming ********.

First off, I have no issue if people are entertained by any film. Second, I also appreciate the hard work that gets put into making a film by multiple different people. But for me, the fact that a film was entertaining or that it provided work for someone is not enough of a reason for me to give a film a pass, or to lower my standards or to erase them completely.

Every film should not be a success. Just like every film should not be a failure. Whether it's financially or critically every film should have some kind of barometer for quality. If the barometer is nonexistent or is centered around vague concepts, then there are no heights for a film to climb to, no rewards, and nothing is ever at stake.

And film to me personally is more than just a source of entertainment. It's an art form. It's storytelling. And it is also a product. And as a form of storytelling and art, I want it to be able to continually evolve and to improve. And it will not be able to do that if people adopt the mindset that every film no matter how bad it is or how worthless its value is to cinema as a whole is good, let alone acceptable. Nothing ever gets better that way.

Constructive criticism is vital for improvement and sustained success. Patting every film on the back is not going to produce much improvement let alone success. It has to be held accountable sometimes for failure. Without that accountability, nothing will ever change. The quality of cinema will stay stagnant because the audience has placed their standards to such a low point that the quality never rises. It just stays mired in mediocrity or total ****.

And as a product, I expect the film to be of as high quality as it can be. If the film has a budget of hundreds of millions of dollars, I expect great effects and production values. If it has a low budget I expect the filmmakers to use what little they have to great effect. I also expect the stories to be somewhat original and spins on old ideas. Not lazy retreads of popular stories, characters, and franchises that I already know about and have seen plenty of already.

And the fact that films create jobs is not enough of a reason for me to have lowered standards or none at all. It's great that they provide work opportunities for people. But do you think every pizza you order with delivery is good, let alone great just because it provided a job for the person who made it? I sincerely doubt that you feel that way. I know I don't.

It's the same with films. Just like the pizza, whether or not it provided work for people is completely irrelevant to the overall quality of the product. And if someone enjoys that slice of low effort burnt pizza that doesn't make that pizza worth being made and served to the masses. The same applies to films. If an incompetent, poorly written film gets made and is universally reviled it should not be considered a success just because it got made and one person on the internet kinda of liked it.

If you adopt the mindset that every film is worth being made because it provided work or entertainment? That's fine. But keep in mind that this mindset is devastating for the form of entertainment you enjoy and consume. It essentially gives every film no matter how critics or audiences perceive it a gold star. And if critics and audiences as a whole took that mindset? Studios would crank out low effort films that were mediocre at best until they ran out of money or till the end of time. If you want film studios and filmmakers to strive for above average let alone great? You have to have higher standards than this.

Cause i'm telling you, at some point these blasphemous live-action remakes of animated Disney classics are going to hit diminishing returns, right? People are bound to stop going to these at some point, right? They should be aware that with every remake greenlit, a fairy in Neverland dies.

[Leo656]

I like the cut o'yer gib, mate, but I feel compelled to warn you that the next 27 posts in a row are gonna be nothing but the following:

- "Clever" memes of Robert Downey Jr. rolling his eyes
- People not bothering to read what you wrote, but deciding they hate you anyway because "wall of text blah blah blah"
- Jokes about the above
- At least 47 uses of terms like "joyless", "hater", "elitist", etc. etc. Possibly "pretentious", as well, but most of the people here can't spell it, so... we'll see.
- Reminders that your opinion means absolutely nothing because you are "outvoted" (and Consensus is automatically correct in all matters of Pop Culture debate, naturally)

Just FYI.

I mean, it's not that I don't agree with just about everything you say. It's just that this forum, in particular, isn't a place that welcomes dissent. Especially against The Almighty Mouse.

You're a marked man. Best of luck.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

I like the cut o'yer gib, mate, but I feel compelled to warn you that the next 27 posts in a row are gonna be nothing but the following.

Actually, my next post was gonna be making a joke that Ergon1982 is your alternate account.

[Wildcat]

That user was doing the same on BluRay.com forums. Long rants about why most new things suck and pretty much writing off all updates to stuff.

I can guess what they said about Disney’s remakes. In general it is just the same old argument that comes down to the “back in the day” mentality.

Having been born in the 80s and basically grow up in the 90s...I’m so glad I did not turn into that, like so many others have.

Thinking that era was some golden age or that movies started declining after I became an adult. What are the odds? :lol:

[Leo656]

Actually, my next post was gonna be making a joke that Ergon1982 is your alternate account.

That's almost funny. If Cylons made that joke, it would actually be funny.

For one thing, this dude abides by the swear filter, his paragraphs are too short by comparison, and he repeats himself quite a bit. There's also a few spelling and capitalization errors (whereas I've been known to actually Edit posts from years ago, that nobody's ever going to even see again, just because I can't abide any imperfections in my "work"). But there's also no emojis, "Random Words Capitalized For Emphasis Because I've Arbitrarily Decided They're Important", or gallows humor. No, "I hope every Disney executive is in the same plane when it crash-lands on Cannibal Island", or anything like that. Those things are very important qualifiers.

Being long-winded, though, is indeed a trait we share. I don't see any point in calling "gimmick infringement" over it, though. If he wants my "spot", by all means, he can have it. I just felt like forewarning him what a thankless job that is.

He didn't even bother calling anyone a "c*nt". He didn't even tell anyone to kill themselves. C'mon. Pay more attention, Sally.

EDIT: In all seriousness, though, I do think it's neat that you'd think a man who still has AIM and MSM Messenger icons under his avatar, despite not using either of those services in at least 15 years, is computer-savvy enough to create an alternate account. :lol:

Suuuure, I'll do that; and then I'll do a bunch of other stuff that's way beyond my capacity, like "change brake pads", or, "speak to women like they're people". :lol: You're good, You.

[Egon1982]

That user was doing the same on BluRay.com forums. Long rants about why most new things suck and pretty much writing off all updates to stuff.

I can guess what they said about Disney’s remakes. In general it is just the same old argument that comes down to the “back in the day” mentality.

Having been born in the 80s and basically grow up in the 90s...I’m so glad I did not turn into that, like so many others have.

Thinking that era was some golden age or that movies started declining after I became an adult. What are the odds? :lol:

I'm a REAL person just like Ocpcommunications and Ramboraph4life who are excellent youtube critics and with a passion for movies and filmmaking just like them who can see through the errors of Hollywood sometimes just like them unlike everyone else can.

There are gems in the last decade and this decade even quality sequels like Blade Runner 2049, Mission Impossible 5 and 6 etc. Disney gems like Wreck it Ralph and Zootopia and some Pixar films to fresh new franchises i love like John Wick and some remake diamond in the roughs like Child's Play or Maniac or Crazies to new gems like Searching, Mandy, Shape of Water and all. But it's just that these live action remakes of Disney animated classics like Lion King are pointless soulless passionless moneygrab and i'm facing reality to see them for what they are and no desire to see any of them as i have yet to give Disney a dime and will not ever. But I will fight against the rising tide of audiences who have this "everything is awesome!" mentality towards some remakes of Disney. Because that will not make films considerably not awesome in the long run.

I'm just telling you, the returns are gonna diminish on these remakes and when that happens, it will send Disney the message and let studios make other projects. I just want quality Disney like Wreck it Ralph, Tangled and Zootopia and Pixar (some of them) and some of that and not halfassed moneygrab nostalgia leftover remakes which i'm boycotting and lousy Star Wars which i'm boycotting as luckily the boycott to Disney Star Wars has began since Solo bombed and Star Wars land in Disneyland flopped. Maybe it will make Disney see the bottomline once the remakes start flopping and Star Wars episode 8 does less box office and all.

We all need to be like Jay Sherman from The Critic and his amazing speech which is so timeless:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSWj5_-F9Q4

[ranger_scout]

Today Entertainment Weekly published an article about why the majority of these remakes like Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Jungle Book have all been successes. They also gave reasons why Dumbo didn't do to well at the box-office.

How Disney is succeeding with its live-action remakes (https://ew.com/movies/2019/07/18/how-disney-is-succeeding-with-its-live-action-remakes/)

[raph27]

Early word of mouth isn't great about Lion King. It will be interesting to watch the box office numbers and see if it turns out more like Aladdin or Dumbo in terms of tickets sold. I keep forgetting as well that Maleficent's sequel is set for this year, which means we're basically seeing 4 live-action (don't get snarky with me about Lion King) remakes in the span of one year, a big jump over releasing one every year or so that used to be the pattern.

Personally, I don't have a huge problem with these remakes themselves. I just see them as reimaginings, similar to how so many video games are getting HD remasters this generation. The original is still there, but these

a) bring it back into the spotlight to rope in new fans that have never experienced the story before, especially kids, and

b) play on nostalgia from people that loved the original to begin with and would be interested in a reinterpretation.

But the big thing I've noticed this year, which parallels the increase in remakes released, is internet buzz about them, mostly negative. I think Beauty and the Beast was the first to really push it for some, and now with so many in a quicker timeframe it has become more of a talking point, and this is where I take issue. For these remakes and some of Disney's other recent stuff (MCU, some of Star Wars, etc.) where a lot of criticism has been laid that they "don't take risks/aren't original enough" the irony shows through when each little thing with these movies becomes some massive issue with thousands of tweets and articles and whatnot. A lot of them are saying the same comments over and over about how Disney has no originality in making these, while their arguments are exactly that, repeated over and over.

So I do somewhat agree with a boycott of these movies, not personally but in principle. I'm tired of all the same discussions and snippy comments about "no creativity" thrown around every time there's a development on one of these movies. Let the box office judge, because that's really the only deciding factor in how many of these continue to be made.

[ranger_scout]

After I see The Lion King tomorrow I think I'm probably going to take a short break about talking about these remakes. I might just wait till the full cast of The Little Mermaid is announced at D23 Expo, which is likely to happen, to start discussing them again. Hollywood Reporter had this to say about originality and the backlash that the remakes are getting.

'Lion King', Originality and the Backlash Against Remakes (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/why-lion-king-remakes-face-backlash-fans-critics-1224741)

These people are also right that as long as these films keep making money, they will continue to happen.

Disney Won't Stop Making Live-Action Remakes Until They Stop Making Money (https://www.cinemablend.com/news/2476383/disney-wont-stop-making-live-action-remakes-until-it-stops-making-money)

[Egon1982]

Early word of mouth isn't great about Lion King. It will be interesting to watch the box office numbers and see if it turns out more like Aladdin or Dumbo in terms of tickets sold. I keep forgetting as well that Maleficent's sequel is set for this year, which means we're basically seeing 4 live-action (don't get snarky with me about Lion King) remakes in the span of one year, a big jump over releasing one every year or so that used to be the pattern.

Personally, I don't have a huge problem with these remakes themselves. I just see them as reimaginings, similar to how so many video games are getting HD remasters this generation. The original is still there, but these

a) bring it back into the spotlight to rope in new fans that have never experienced the story before, especially kids, and

b) play on nostalgia from people that loved the original to begin with and would be interested in a reinterpretation.

But the big thing I've noticed this year, which parallels the increase in remakes released, is internet buzz about them, mostly negative. I think Beauty and the Beast was the first to really push it for some, and now with so many in a quicker timeframe it has become more of a talking point, and this is where I take issue. For these remakes and some of Disney's other recent stuff (MCU, some of Star Wars, etc.) where a lot of criticism has been laid that they "don't take risks/aren't original enough" the irony shows through when each little thing with these movies becomes some massive issue with thousands of tweets and articles and whatnot. A lot of them are saying the same comments over and over about how Disney has no originality in making these, while their arguments are exactly that, repeated over and over.

So I do somewhat agree with a boycott of these movies, not personally but in principle. I'm tired of all the same discussions and snippy comments about "no creativity" thrown around every time there's a development on one of these movies. Let the box office judge, because that's really the only deciding factor in how many of these continue to be made.

The problem is that some of today's filmgoers lack respect for their elder cinema (1990s and above) and should learn to respect/appreciate cinema when it was creative. In 20 years the remakes (even with creepy CGI) will not be considered classics and will be generally forgotten and the originals remembered better.

Well, the kids who see it might think that way.

Please parents show your kids the originals at least. Sorry Disney your not gonna get me with your nostalgia manipulation strings on these remakes, if i want to experience the wonder and magic of Aladdin, Lion King, Beauty and the Beast etc. i'll just watch the original animated movies on blu, i don't need to pay to see watered down weak live action version of them that don't have the same grandeour and wonder as sometimes you can't strike lightning in a bottle twice.

We just want new things like me for Disney as i support WDSA and Pixar as they do creative things which are better than these halfassed lazy remakes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=KTbOiqDRl2I

This is such a great video. It absolutely nails it. And it savagely smacks Disney where it hurts.

I am not going to give Disney a single cent this year except Toy Story 4 which earned my money and saw it again on Lion King's opening day out to prove i'm tired of these lazy remakes.. I haven't once this entire year. No ticket for Dumbo. No ticket for Aladdin and no ticket for Lion King. and no ticket for Star Wars episode 9.

I am putting my money where my mouth is. If more people did the same Disney might actually stop making these lazy live action remakes. But mark my words, the returns WILL diminish eventually once they bomb and will make Disney look at the bottomline and be like "oh wow i guess they are tired of this" and will cancel other remakes and do new projects.

[ranger_scout]

According to Disney Studios' chief Alan Horn, at some point the remakes will stop or they will try some new ideas with these adaptations.

“There is no question that we, at some point, are going to run out of the kinds of films like Aladdin or Lion King. We have taken a step past that now, so Maleficent is a step away from Sleeping Beauty, and Cruella (2021) is a step away from 101 Dalmatians. But there is no question it’s a finite universe.”

https://collider.com/disney-live-action-remakes-finite-admits-alan-horn/

[CyberCubed]

I've seen 3 of them:

Beauty and the Beast = pretty good for what it was, probably the best of the live action ones

Alladdin = decent, it wasn't a trainwreck like I thought it'd be. I didn't like they didn't have Jafar turn into a snake and his actor was the worst part

Lion King = surprisingly good. I thought this would be the worst because of how ridiculous CG lions would be passed off as "live-action" but I really enjoyed it. Keeping all the songs helped.

[ranger_scout]

Leah Greenblatt of Entertainment Weekly ranked Dumbo, Aladdin, and The Lion King in a tie for the 5th worst film of 2019. I can't believe that she didn't include Dark Phoenix. Despite the flaws of the three movies she did rank, I still enjoyed all three of them way more entertaining than Dark Phoenix. I was bored to death watching that film and the talents of the entire cast being wasted.

https://ew.com/movies/best-and-worst-movies-2019/?slide=6578320#6578320

[Leo656]

I don't think anyone even remembers that movie even came out, is probably why.

It's hard to hate on something you forgot even existed, nah'mean? That movie had all the cultural impact of a popcorn fart.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

I was on a flight about a week ago and had the option to check out The Lion King 2019.

I couldn't get past the 45 minute mark, it was just that jarring to watch.

The technology is admittedly impressive, but it just ends up looking dead and empty due to how expressionless the animals are and how lifeless the landscapes look.

I mean, this is supposed to be Africa, which looks absolutely stunning and beautiful if you watch National Geographic documentaries (the real life animals of which ironically look way more emotional than what you see in this film).

Its baffling, considering how another Jon Faverau directed Disney remake (The Jungle Book) has so much better looking landscapes, and the animals in that film actually emote pretty well when you look back on it.

The voice acting was awkward in places (especially from James Earl Jones, but I don't blame him since he is so old now), but overall thats one part of the film that was passable (I liked the choices of Zazu and Scar, while Timon and Pumbaa also sound good in clips despite me never watching the film that far).

The hyenas aren't that funny at all, which is a major step backwards, and Be Prepared was also completely butchered.

[Leofan26]

Well, at first I was ok with it with such films as Beauty and the Beast but now its getting out of hand. Look at what the flipping live action Aladdin film did to my favorite bird, why you do that Disney? He was my favorite character of the trilogy/series.

Hell, what took them so long with that live action snow white film? That would have been the less expensive of the bunch they choose from.

[DarkFell]

Don't mind it overall, IF it was just now and then, but it seems to be a serious focus for them right now and too many in a rather short span of time.
This, I agree on. Disney is flexing their CGI skill muscles, but, those skills can be polished more so into new ideas.

However, it would appear that the Nostalgia Train still rides on within the Mansion of the Mouse.

[sdp]

When are they getting to Atlantis?

[ranger_scout]

The people who created these videos actually did a really good job here.

G9INytNRKE8

0BYJHLawTwg

[ranger_scout]

Tomorrow at Disney's investor day, it is expected to officially be announced that both Peter Pan & Wendy and Pinocchio will be going to Disney+. There is no word on Cruella. The Lion King follow-up will get a theatrical release.

Some big-budget Disney movies will continue to have exclusive runs in theaters. (The “Lion King” project, directed by Barry Jenkins and focused on Mufasa’s back story, is a good bet.) Others will debut online. (That is where “Pinocchio” is headed.)

Some titles on Disney’s theatrical slate will move to Disney+ at no extra cost. Expect “Peter Pan & Wendy,” like “Soul” and “Pinocchio,” to debut in this manner.



Disney to Reveal Plans to Turbocharge Streaming Offerings ('https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/business/media/disney-plus-new-movies.html?smid=tw-share')

[Shark_Blade]

Is Jungle Book 2 cancelled? I feel the boy is too old by now.

[Leo656]

I feel like - and Google/Wikipedia agrees with me - that Peter Pan and Pinocchio have both had way more remakes than either story deserves. :lol:

I keep forgetting to watch The Lion King. I really enjoyed the original but the remake, to me, felt like pointless nonsense so I had no real urgency to watch it. I finally saw Aladdin a few months ago and it was "okay", but I still didn't feel like they absolutely had to make it and I'd still rather watch the original any day of the week.

That's pretty much how I feel about the ones I've actually seen. They're "fine" but I'd never watch them over the originals.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Don't ever watch the Lion King remake, Leo.

Even if you're not giving money to Disney, you're still in for an experience that will suck your soul dry.

I made the mistake of watching it on an airplane flight once and I couldn't get through the first 45 minutes without feeling like puking.

Is Jungle Book 2 cancelled? I feel the boy is too old by now.

No word on it so far, although I imagine it's still planned for development due to how successful the first one was.

And I think the boy growing up would actually be a good thing for a Jungle Book sequel, since that would allow for telling a more mature story where Mowgli has grown.

[Leo656]

I mean, I bought it for my wife a while ago, may as well watch it eventually. :lol: We just keep forgetting.

[ranger_scout]

Pinocchio & Peter Pan & Wendy are officially heading to Disney+

‘Pinocchio’ With Tom Hanks, ‘Peter Pan and Wendy’ to Skip Theaters for Disney Plus (https://variety.com/2020/film/news/pinocchio-disney-plus-debut-1234850503/)

Cruella and The Little Mermaid will still be playing in theaters.

As Deadline first announced, Robert Zemeckis’ Pinocchio, with Tom Hanks, and Peter Pan and Wendy are going to Disney+. That was made official today. However, Walt Disney Production President Sean Bailey didn’t include the edgy Emma Stone Cruella in the same sentence, that movie sticking to its Memorial Day weekend theatrical release date.

Disney Investor Day Postmortem: Studio Has No Immediate Plans To Melt Down Bulk Of 2021 Theatrical Sked Into Streaming Like WarnerMedia (https://deadline.com/2020/12/disney-hbo-max-theatrical-streaming-disney-investor-day-bob-chapek-1234654716/)

Little Mermaid Cast, Plus Pinocchio & Peter Pan Films Go to Disney+ (https://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/1157889-little-mermaid-cast-plus-pinocchio-peter-pan-films-go-to-disney)

[IMJ]

Waste of time and resources. A live action Lion King is still a CGi cartoon.

[Leo656]

Waste of time and resources. A live action Lion King is still a CGi cartoon.

I feel the same way. Unfortunately, there is an audience for these things.

My wife's grandmother, for example. She loved that, and the other "live action remakes" she's seen. Why? Because she's pretentious. She's a nice old lady, but she's pretentious, in the sense of she's never seen the original animated movies, and would never, ever deign to watch them "Because they're cartoons and cartoons are for little kids." She would never watch the original Lion King. "That's silly." But she loved the remake because "It's 'real'. It's a 'real' movie." Quite a few people in her family are like that, honestly. When my wife's mother sees her watching the animated "Beauty and the Beast", she chastises her for still "wasting her time on stuff for little kids." The Emma Watson version, though? "What a great movie!"

It's unfortunate, and ignorant, but a LOT of people are like that.

That's one of the two groups these movies are for. Group 1 is people who loved the originals so much that they'd pay to see anything even tangentially connected to them. Group 2 is people who've never seen the originals because "They're not real movies" but would gladly sit and watch the exact same story in live-action... or "live action", as in the case of the Lion King remake. Just as long as it's not "a cartoon for little kids".

Add those two groups together, and it's a lot of people.

[IMJ]

I feel the same way. Unfortunately, there is an audience for these things.

My wife's grandmother, for example. She loved that, and the other "live action remakes" she's seen. Why? Because she's pretentious. She's a nice old lady, but she's pretentious, in the sense of she's never seen the original animated movies, and would never, ever deign to watch them "Because they're cartoons and cartoons are for little kids." She would never watch the original Lion King. "That's silly." But she loved the remake because "It's 'real'. It's a 'real' movie." Quite a few people in her family are like that, honestly. When my wife's mother sees her watching the animated "Beauty and the Beast", she chastises her for still "wasting her time on stuff for little kids." The Emma Watson version, though? "What a great movie!"

It's unfortunate, and ignorant, but a LOT of people are like that.

That's one of the two groups these movies are for. Group 1 is people who loved the originals so much that they'd pay to see anything even tangentially connected to them. Group 2 is people who've never seen the originals because "They're not real movies" but would gladly sit and watch the exact same story in live-action... or "live action", as in the case of the Lion King remake. Just as long as it's not "a cartoon for little kids".

Add those two groups together, and it's a lot of people.

Yup I see your point completely. There's an audience for stuff.

[ranger_scout]

Sean Bailey, the head of the live-action film studio at Disney is leaving this year when his contract expires. This article talks about the remakes he supervised, and what his departure means for the future of them as whole. Mufasa, Snow White, Lilo & Stitch, and Moana are of course still happening. However, it is not known if the Cruella sequel, Hercules, or The Aristocats are still moving forward. The live-action Bambi film already lost its director.

https://www.thewrap.com/sean-bailey-disney-legacy/

[ResidentEvil7]

I thought Mulan both versions were pretty good. I like Asian culture and it was represented well in Mulan.

As far as other live-action remakes go, I can do without, considering Disney is race-swapping white characters for minorities, which is woke bigotry.