4,224 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by anthony40 on Apr 16, 2016 6:55:03 GMT
This is clearly a growing trend with Cinderella in the bag and The Jungle Book. 101 Dalmatians has also already been done quite some time ago. Beauty & The Beast is in post-production and they have just released images from the new Pete's Dragon film. The can be seen here. www.slashfilm.com/new-petes-dragon-image/Apparently Dumbo is next (Tim Burton) and I read only the other day that The Sword and the Stone is also happening. As is Pinocchio, Mulan, Winnie the Pooh and (yet another) version on Alice In Wonderland. Also heard about Pocahantes. Not to mention spin off films based purely on Disney characters- Maleficent, Tinkerbell, Cruella DeVile |
|
|
|
Post by d'James on Apr 16, 2016 7:19:40 GMT
The next Alice one (by Tim Burton) is the sequel to the last (one by Tim Burton) isn't it?
I liked Maleficent, but they really seem to be running out of ideas.
I don't know what they should change but rehashing old classics is already becoming boring.
If you must, Disney, re-animate them with today's weirdo wide-eyed look, but keep the iconic voices.
|
|
4,369 posts
|
Post by Michael on Apr 16, 2016 8:10:26 GMT
[...]and I read only the other day that The Sword and the Stone is also happening.[...] I had to look this one up*) only to realise that it's my all-time favourite Disney movie. Disney, don't screw this one up... *) The German title is "Die Hexe und der Zauberer", lit. "The Witch and the Wizard". I have no idea why they went for a completely different title. |
|
4,224 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by anthony40 on Apr 16, 2016 17:28:16 GMT
So I went to Hampstead Everyman (lost my Oyster Card along the way; Grrr!) and caught a screening of The Jungle Book today and I gotta say it's excellent; nay outstanding.
Despite having the DVD its been years since I've watched it but with a few exceptions, it's pretty close to the original. (Again, from memory) it may not all be in the same order, but it's still all there. Before anyone asks 'The Bare Necessities", 'Trust In Me' and 'I Want To Be Like You" are all there, however the others are not.
As expected, there's lots of CGI however I was completely sold.
The animals talking was not out of place at all and the attention to detail is truly outstanding! Muscle definition, shadows, animal patters/markings from the smallest animals such as ants, mice, bees and frogs to the elephants. And the use of light adds such an effect.
The vultures are seen, however there is no dialogue.
Unlike the original time, the ending does differ.
The whole King Louie with all of the monkeys, Gibbons and apes sequence is so well done.
Bill Murray as Baloo-excellent as is Idris Elba as Shere Khan and Christopher Walken as King Louie.
There's also a back story explaining why Mowgli (the ManCub) came to be in the jungle.
To Disney's credit, when they do something they do so well and this is no exception. Loved it!
BTW, they showed a preview of the new Alice In Wonderland film- Alice Through the Looking Glass.
|
|
7,251 posts
|
Post by Jon on Apr 16, 2016 17:32:12 GMT
I assume the reason why Disney are remaking their animated films into live action films is that they want to exploit the backcatalogue since a successful remake will drive merchandise and sales of the original and also most of the fairytales and novels are in the public domain so they don't need for pay for royalties.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 17:52:12 GMT
So I went to Hampstead Everyman (lost my Oyster Card along the way; Grrr!) and caught a screening of The Jungle Book today and I gotta say it's excellent; nay outstanding. Despite having the DVD its been years since I've watched it but with a few exceptions, it's pretty close to the original. (Again, from memory) it may not all be in the same order, but it's still all there. Before anyone asks 'The Bare Necessities", 'Trust In Me' and 'I Want To Be Like You" are all there, however the others are not. A pity Colonel Hathi's March and My Own Home are cut... Looking forward to seeing this. |
|
4,224 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by anthony40 on Apr 16, 2016 18:03:39 GMT
So I went to Hampstead Everyman (lost my Oyster Card along the way; Grrr!) and caught a screening of The Jungle Book today and I gotta say it's excellent; nay outstanding. Despite having the DVD its been years since I've watched it but with a few exceptions, it's pretty close to the original. (Again, from memory) it may not all be in the same order, but it's still all there. Before anyone asks 'The Bare Necessities", 'Trust In Me' and 'I Want To Be Like You" are all there, however the others are not. A pity Colonel Hathi's March and My Own Home are cut... Looking forward to seeing this. Yep, cut however the elephants, including the baby elephant and the eye contact made are defiantly there. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 18:38:42 GMT
It'll be interesting if they did a Lion King remake like The Jungle Book but I don't think they will as they don't want to ruin it maybe ?
|
|
4,224 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by anthony40 on Apr 16, 2016 18:52:35 GMT
It'll be interesting if they did a Lion King remake like The Jungle Book but I don't think they will as they don't want to ruin it maybe ? Actually, as there was a stampede in this film (trust me I'm giving nothing away here) and a scene of varying animals of different shapes and sizes near a waterhole The Lion King did come to mind. |
|
7,251 posts
|
Post by Jon on Apr 16, 2016 20:02:58 GMT
The Lion King wouldn't really work because it has no humans, it wouldn't be a live action remake as a realistic CGI remake.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2016 21:04:27 GMT
Besides, don't we have ENOUGH filmed versions of Hamlet by now?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2016 5:21:27 GMT
The Lion King wouldn't really work because it has no humans, it wouldn't be a live action remake as a realistic CGI remake. They could do a film about a group of people putting on a musical of The Lion King. Oh, wait… I'm generally not keen on films that mix live action and CGI. Either do live action or animation. When a film relies heavily on both I find myself trying to spot the joins. I'm going to give The Jungle Book a try, though, because it's things like CGI explosions that put me off rather than just the use of CGI characters and I can't imagine there are that many things in the jungle that are made from pure explodium. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2016 6:37:23 GMT
Got to see The Jungle Book last night. Beautiful piece of film, breathtaking in many places! The kid playing Mowgli was incredible! But... couldn't work out a) why they decided to cut (some of) the songs really and b) include/replace them with the far, far inferior versions they decided to keep in, as they didn't work at all. Felt it would have been better to scrap them altogether. Didn't spoil my overall enjoyment at all, although the poor behaviour of many audience members did. Worst of all were the Leaning Lovers directly in front of me who kept leaning towards each-other, lovvie-dovvie, and whispering into each-other's ears. In fact, they spoke more than all of the characters in the film put together. Then she got up half way through (well it was a very long film at nearly two hours, you know) presumably to "powder her nose" and then come back in... I *accidentally* kicked their seats towards the last bit of the film which had the miraculous effect of calming them a little...
|
|
2,065 posts
|
Post by Marwood on Apr 20, 2016 6:48:49 GMT
Cinderella, Alice In Wonderland, the Jungle Book - hmmm,OK, but Pete's Dragon? Exactly WHO was waiting for a remake of that?
|
|
1,591 posts
|
Post by anita on Apr 20, 2016 9:12:48 GMT
Really don't see the point as they can't better the originals. But of course it's all about Disney making as much money as they can from children.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2016 9:52:12 GMT
Really don't see the point as they can't better the originals. But of course it's all about Disney making as much money as they can from children. Because of course, historically, Disney has been all about art, pure and simple, without a single consideration for profit, and their works have been aimed solely at adults, as those able to appreciate the artistry, and never children.  |
|
2,711 posts
|
Post by viserys on Apr 20, 2016 10:37:51 GMT
Well of course Disney has always been about making money and I don't blame them for that. I could also see the attraction of remaking -SOME- older movies with the help of modern technology, such as Jungle Book now. But it does seem to me that Disney is becoming lazy with the constant plundering of its own back catalogue with stuff like Pete's Dragon being remade. That does seem to cash in on the hope that nostalgic parents want to see a new version of a beloved childhood movie and take their kiddies along to discover these. And for those who are new to the old stuff to now also buy the DVDs/souvenirs of the older stuff.
During it's rush of creativity in the late 80's, early 90's, Disney came out with a bunch of interesting new movies that brought little-known stories like Pocahontas or Mulan into the public conscience, breathed fresh life into old fairy tales like The Little Mermaid and Aladdin and came up with something create like a Hamlet set among lions in Africa.
I'd rather Disney unearthed a couple of similar half-forgotten old fairy tales or little-known stories and gave us something new and fresh in a time when it seems that the same dozen tired old stories get revived, remade, recycled time and again, such as Alice in Wonderland, never mind the endless flood of superhero-nonsense from Hollywood. But these days it seems to be Pixar only that comes up with FRESH material once in a while like Inside Out.
|
|
1,591 posts
|
Post by anita on Apr 20, 2016 13:29:46 GMT
My mother told me when I was a child how she got thrown out of the cinema when watching "Dumbo". It was way back when it was first released. Her crime was laughing when everyone else was sobbing when Dumbo's mother died.
|
|
7,251 posts
|
Post by Jon on Apr 20, 2016 13:37:12 GMT
While the live action side of Disney is a bit lazy with the live action fairytales, Marvel and Star Wars. Animation is very strong as evident with Zootropolis
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2016 14:01:42 GMT
Dumbo's mother didn't die. She was locked away for being a dangerous elephant (awful boys had been teasing Dumbo and she got cross  ), but they were reunited in the end. |
|
1,591 posts
|
Post by anita on Apr 20, 2016 14:04:12 GMT
Dumbo's mother didn't die. She was locked away for being a dangerous elephant (awful boys had been teasing Dumbo and she got cross ), but they were reunited in the end. It has been along time since I saw it.! Anyway she laughed. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2016 14:06:31 GMT
(At some point it's going to become a little too noticeable that I am an adult who is still extremely keen on Disney, please don't shun me when this comes to light, just accept that it means I'm still a child on the inside.)
EDIT: ((actually I just remembered my username and avatar. Never mind.))
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2016 15:39:38 GMT
Most of the animation from Disney's main studio is essentially child-accessible adult-level entertainment. I generally prefer the Disney animated films over more ostensibly adult films because the former don't use fighting and explosions as a substitute for complex characterisation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2016 16:47:03 GMT
Just saw The Jungle Book & really enjoyed it. Would've liked to have had all of the songs kept in it though, I thought Scarlett Johannson was great as Kaa but the role could've been longer and her song should've been included!
I'd love to see Disney do The Lion King next, Idris Eldba would be great as Scar!
|
|
527 posts
|
Post by Hamilton Addict on Apr 30, 2016 18:13:51 GMT
I loved the Jungle Book, it was great! I don't remember the animated film that much, but from what I can remember I preferred this, mainly because of a few edits to the storyline. One thing that did surprise me was it seemed it would be quite scary for young kids, even I jumped at a few bits! Apparently they're doing a sequel, curious as to what kind of storyline the sequel would have.
|
|
), but they were reunited in the end.