Poll of the Day > Do you like that disney is making live action remakes of most of their

(+) Yeah! (+)

animated hits?
---

I don't care... but I also don't care.







To elaborate, I think it's stupid and the quality of the live-action films is pretty much worse in every meaningful way, but on the other hand I'm also not watching them, and they're not aimed at me anyway, so I'm not sent into a frothing rage simply by their mere existence. My distaste is countered by my disinterest, and I'm left with nothing but apathy.


---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I don't care... but I also don't care.

This. I'm perfectly content with the original animated movies. I understand they're aimed at capturing the younger generations and reconnect with the older generations for the nostalgia appeal.

There's no replacing Robin Williams and Nathan Lane.

As long as Oliver and Company stays animated only, I'm fine with it. Heard rumors Mulan and Little Mermaid are next from an employee at the Disney store.
---

I don't care. I know it's about making money in the end. "What's old fashioned in new again" so Disney hopes it'll be a hit once more with a new generation.

I won't be watching, much like most people who didn't in the case of Dumbo
---

Yes, since even if they turn out to be awful, it's still something of interest. And, tbh, the new LA Jungle Book was pretty good and I loved the new Pete's Dragon remake (which, tbh, was mostly LA in the first place). Beauty and the Beast was okay, although Emma Watson was a drag.

Will Smith as Genie in Aladdin was also shit. Somebody like Jim Carrey would have been more in keeping with Robin Williams. Or they could have used a standup comedian.

Some of the films I dread the casting choices. I'm not sure they'll find an Ariel I don't hate, but Lin-Manuel Miranda is handling the music so that should be great. I'm also hoping that the Lady Gaga rumors are wrong, since she doesn't have the chops for Ursula. Somebody like Queen Latifa would do the role a greater justice

DiduXD posted...

As long as Oliver and Company stays animated only, I'm fine with it.

I'd be down with a live-action version.

DiduXD posted...

As long as Oliver and Company stays animated only, I'm fine with it. Heard rumors Mulan and Little Mermaid are next from an employee at the Disney store.

It's more than rumors, they announced Mulan ages ago and Mermaid is in development.
---

I probably won't watch any, but I don't mind.

DiduXD posted...

As long as Oliver and Company stays animated only, I'm fine with it. Heard rumors Mulan and Little Mermaid are next from an employee at the Disney store.

Mulan is more than a rumor. They have casted Mulan already.

Its whatever...
---

A LA version of Disney's The Sword in the Stone might be interesting.
---

Sure why not? I still have the animated films and the live action films introduce the films to a new audience. I've watched them all up to this point with the last been Dumbo with my Niece and Nephew. I enjoyed it.
---

Jungle book was good, for the most part Im not fond of them though

I think theyre mostly for the younger generation coming up that maybe doesnt just want to watch the same movies from so long ago
---

Haven't seen any so eh.
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

To elaborate, I think it's stupid and the quality of the live-action films is pretty much worse in every meaningful way, but on the other hand I'm also not watching them, and they're not aimed at me anyway, so I'm not sent into a frothing rage simply by their mere existence. My distaste is countered by my disinterest, and I'm left with nothing but apathy.

I felt that the remake of The Jungle Book was worth watching, but it differed from the animated movie and was significantly darker. It was a good candidate for a remake because it was recognizable, but definitely showed it's age and isn't held in the same high regard in modern times as some other Disney movies that are getting the LA remake treatment. I think the success it had sent Disney into full money-grab mode and we're gonna see them trotting out their most iconic films all over again (not that Disney wasn't ever about stuffing their vaults with money like Scrooge McDuck before this)
---

synth_real posted...

I felt that the remake of The Jungle Book was worth watching, but it differed from the animated movie and was significantly darker. It was a good candidate for a remake because it was recognizable, but definitely showed it's age and isn't held in the same high regard in modern times as some other Disney movies

It's also arguably one of the more literal adaptations. Yes, things like Cinderella, Snow White, Mulan, or Aladdin are based on existing stories or myths, or at most short stories - they're generally somewhat vague and Disney expands on them. Whereas The Jungle Book was literally a novel, with a lot more baked in narrative to work with.

The only other animated feature I can think of that's similar is The Black Cauldron. And that tanked.

Ironically, I'd probably be interested if they ever decided to do a Black Cauldron live-action remake. Though I know they never will.


---

I'd have to watch them to form an opinion. While I wouldn't care to see most of their animated movies in live-action format, the The Lion King one looks pretty swell - I might actually watch it someday.
---

No
---

ParanoidObsessive posted...

I don't care... but I also don't care.

To elaborate, I think it's stupid and the quality of the live-action films is pretty much worse in every meaningful way, but on the other hand I'm also not watching them, and they're not aimed at me anyway, so I'm not sent into a frothing rage simply by their mere existence. My distaste is countered by my disinterest, and I'm left with nothing but apathy.

Pretty much this. I MIGHT watch alladin down the road. But mostly because I dont think will Smith can come even close to robbin willaims and overall the movie will suffer for it. But a small part of me hopes he can still do a good job and make it entertaining.
---

haven't seen any of them. zero interest.

the lion king is a cgi remakie
---

they're basically disney exploiting loopholes in copyright law so that their films don't roll over into public domain, so it doesn't really matter if they're good or not
---

Krazy_Kirby posted...

the lion king is a cgi remakie

So was The Jungle Book for the most part. It's still classed as "live action".
---

I'd rather see them make new movies instead of just remaking old ones. I probably won't be seeing any of these new ones simply because I've already seen them.


---

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money. I'm not going to go watch them.

This entire decade has been the worst decade in this history of cinema, almost no original content outside of the truckloads of superhero movies.
---

faramir77 posted...

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money. I'm not going to go watch them.

This entire decade has been the worst decade in this history of cinema, almost no original content outside of the truckloads of superhero movies.

Morgana might be right about the PD thing. Also, are those really all that original?
---

faramir77 posted...

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money.

Well yes companies like to make money. Also they sell so why would they not continue to do them? Beauty and the Beast is probably the best one I've seen of them though.
---

LinkPizza posted...

faramir77 posted...

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money. I'm not going to go watch them.

This entire decade has been the worst decade in this history of cinema, almost no original content outside of the truckloads of superhero movies.

Morgana might be right about the PD thing. Also, are those really all that original?

As movies maybe but most of them at the very least loosely follow stories actually in comic books. Hell for as much as batman vs superman got wrong even I could tell it was mashing up the stories of dark knight returns and death of superman. Dark knight rises also borrowed from dark knight returns. Even outright copied one scene from the comic down to thr dialogue of the cops
---

faramir77 posted...

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money. I'm not going to go watch them.

This entire decade has been the worst decade in this history of cinema, almost no original content outside of the truckloads of superhero movies.

Technically it's not unless it's your opinion. Going by numbers "majority of films and the bulk of the industrys money are made from original material". From 1995-2106, original screenplays earned just over 46% of the market share alone

Tickets sold are down but box office revenues are the highest it's ever been in history

https://www.google.com/amp/s/contently.com/2016/04/18/sequel-paradox-11-charts/amp/

https://m.the-numbers.com/market/
---

Yes and no. The Jungle Book was well done, maintaining the spirit of the old while leading into something new. Beauty and the Beast was just so forgettable. I watched it yet every memory i try to think of is from the animated one. I recall not having good vibes beforehand too. Same with Aladdin; no good vibes (though I must admit whoever is playing Jasmine is extremely attractive lol). I like what i see of the Lion King though.

Its a mixed bag.
---

@CTLM posted...

faramir77 posted...

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money. I'm not going to go watch them.

This entire decade has been the worst decade in this history of cinema, almost no original content outside of the truckloads of superhero movies.

Technically it's not unless it's your opinion. Going by numbers "majority of films and the bulk of the industrys money are made from original material". From 1995-2106, original screenplays earned just over 46% of the market share alone

Tickets sold are down but box office revenues are the highest it's ever been in history

https://www.google.com/amp/s/contently.com/2016/04/18/sequel-paradox-11-charts/amp/

https://m.the-numbers.com/market/

if total ticket sale numbers are down that kinda means the majority agrees that the quality of film has gone down considerably.
way less people smoke cigarettes now but the companies are still making more than they ever have because they cost like $10-$15 a pack now.
---

I_Always_Die posted...

@CTLM posted...

faramir77 posted...

It's being done for literally no purpose aside from making money. I'm not going to go watch them.

This entire decade has been the worst decade in this history of cinema, almost no original content outside of the truckloads of superhero movies.

Technically it's not unless it's your opinion. Going by numbers "majority of films and the bulk of the industrys money are made from original material". From 1995-2106, original screenplays earned just over 46% of the market share alone

Tickets sold are down but box office revenues are the highest it's ever been in history

https://www.google.com/amp/s/contently.com/2016/04/18/sequel-paradox-11-charts/amp/

https://m.the-numbers.com/market/

if total ticket sale numbers are down that kinda means the majority agrees that the quality of film has gone down considerably.
way less people smoke cigarettes now but the companies are still making more than they ever have because they cost like $10-$15 a pack now.

Yeah thats not how that works
---

@mead

I meant to say if anything. the dude is arguing that because movies are making more than they ever have, they are getting better when in reality its increasing ticket costs.
---

I_Always_Die posted...

@mead

I meant to say if anything. the dude is arguing that because movies are making more than they ever have, they are getting better when in reality its increasing ticket costs.

No. One person says that last decade has been the worst in history of cinema (but they didn't clarify as to why). I brought up counterpoints. I brought up box office revenues and new/originals movies instead of sequels as some people believe most money is earned through sequels.

Quality is completely subjective. There's going to be great movies and terrible movies every year. People are still paying to see these movies in theaters.

Reasons why they're not going out as much as often as they may have last few years: tickets are too expensive, not as much disposable income, streaming services, piracy, etc.

I never said movies are making more money because they're getting better. Never once did I say that
---

hurr I didnt once say something i heavily insinuated. youre wrong bucko
---

I can't wait to see an actual kid flying on an actual eagle.

Ferngully would be great, but, it isn't Disney.
---

zebatov posted...

I can't wait to see an actual kid flying on an actual eagle.

Ferngully would be great, but, it isn't Disney.

James Cameron already did Fern Gully. It was called Avatar.