Aladdin live action movie | 24 MAY 2019 | Disney | 7th most profitable movie of 2019. Disney does it again!

[Lordmandeep]

1 hour ago, LouisianaArkansasGeorgia said:

Does a director's track record really matter to GA audiences? Unless your name is Spielberg, Cameron, or Scorcese, I have a hard time thinking that a director who is not a household name will sway audiences either way due to his or her track record. Condon has a track record that is spotty at best, and audiences paid over a billion dollars to watch BATB.

 

 

Michael Bay I think is well known but he has more become a meme. 

[jedijake]

Follow the same plot as the original=lack of originality, big or massive hit

 

Do something too different (Maleficent)=ruining a classic, decent sized hit

 

Do an original story, even if based on a book or work (Wrinkle in Time, Nutcracker)=suckfest and horrible movie, bomb

 

Try something completely new and different (Tomorrowland)=also suckfest and horrible movie, bomb

 

If you had the choice to do one of the above AND had to pay the bills, which one would YOU choose?

[Barnack]

5 minutes ago, jedijake said:

If you had the choice to do one of the above AND had to pay the bills, which one would YOU choose?

Must be extremely rare now a day to be the one paying the bill and making those decision at the same time.

 

I imagine those decision are made by Disney employee that finance %0 of the budget, no ?

[YM!]

55 minutes ago, jedijake said:

Follow the same plot as the original=lack of originality, big or massive hit

 

Do something too different (Maleficent)=ruining a classic, decent sized hit

 

Do an original story, even if based on a book or work (Wrinkle in Time, Nutcracker)=suckfest and horrible movie, bomb

 

Try something completely new and different (Tomorrowland)=also suckfest and horrible movie, bomb

 

If you had the choice to do one of the above AND had to pay the bills, which one would YOU choose?

Disney can afford flops. I’d take an Alita or why I’m rooting for PikaPika (though in hindsight both are over a live action Lion King. I’d rather them them do what they’re doing with Dumbo, Cinderella and The Jungle Book (the latter two were real recieved) or the upcoming Mulan than rather rehash the same “hey it’s your favorite childhood movie in live action but it’s now okay for grownups”. That said, it’s okay to enjoy them or love them, everyone has different tastes and I respect that.

 

I am not denying it sells but eventually you run out of classics. Apart for Stitch and Little Mermaid, none of the future remakes have the potential and Frozen would have to wait a good 30 years.

Edited March 13, 2019 by YourMother the Edgelord

[jedijake]

26 minutes ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Disney can afford flops. I’d take an Alita or why I’m rooting for PikaPika (though in hindsight both are over a live action Lion King. I’d rather them them do what they’re doing with Dumbo, Cinderella and The Jungle Book (the latter two were real recieved) or the upcoming Mulan than rather rehash the same “hey it’s your favorite childhood movie in live action but it’s now okay for grownups”. That said, it’s okay to enjoy them or love them, everyone has different tastes and I respect that.

 

I am not denying it sells but eventually you run out of classics. Apart for Stitch and Little Mermaid, none of the future remakes have the potential and Frozen would have to wait a good 30 years.

But why should they afford flops? And it's not like they don't get a few each year. And on the flip side, why should they pass up the chance to make something they know people will pay for? Isn't that pretty much the capitalistic way? Provide a product that people will pay for and keep making those products.

[Eric Duncan]

28 minutes ago, jedijake said:

But why should they afford flops? And it's not like they don't get a few each year. And on the flip side, why should they pass up the chance to make something they know people will pay for? Isn't that pretty much the capitalistic way? Provide a product that people will pay for and keep making those products.

Noam Chomsky would be ashamed of us

[CaptainJackSparrow]

2 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:

Noam Chomsky would be ashamed of us

I was thinking the same thing. I actually wish he was running the major film studios at this point. 

[Poseidon]

You have to give credit where credit is due. The second trailer was just a bad move by Disney. 

This one on the other hand contained the heart of the animation and scored big, time, when "A whole new World" in this great alternate version played.

That's professionalism, to just make it better next time. 

 

 

[cdsacken]

I mean I think it looks awesome. My daughter loved the Aladdin pantomime here in Cambridge and I hope to take her to see this. She loves movies with singing in it so it should be good to go. It looks awesome and I think Will Smith is going to absolute kill it.

[JGAR4LIFE]

This will only be #1 trending for like a couple more minutes \ hours since the Endgame trailer just dropped 

[ShouldIBeHere]

That new trailer is  good. When they start singing it was too much of a childhood-geek-moment to ignore. 

Edited March 14, 2019 by ShouldIBeHere

[Lordmandeep]

16 hours ago, CaptainJackSparrow said:

I was thinking the same thing. I actually wish he was running the major film studios at this point. 

 

 

They be bankrupt in a year

[MovieMan89]

21 hours ago, LouisianaArkansasGeorgia said:

Does a director's track record really matter to GA audiences? Unless your name is Spielberg, Cameron, or Scorcese, I have a hard time thinking that a director who is not a household name will sway audiences either way due to his or her track record. Condon has a track record that is spotty at best, and audiences paid over a billion dollars to watch BATB.

I would say it does, but not in an obvious way. As in no one in the GA is gonna say, "oh this is directed by Guy Ritchie, I haven't liked his other stuff." However it matters in the sense that director's have their style, and if it consistently doesn't go over with the GA, then yeah their track record matters because it's not likely to go over again. 

Edited March 14, 2019 by MovieMan89

[Joel M]

2 hours ago, MovieMan89 said:

I would say it does, but not in an obvious way. As in no one in the GA is gonna say, "oh this is directed by Guy Ritchie, I haven't liked his other stuff." However it matters in the sense that director's have their style, and if it consistently doesn't go over with the GA, then yeah their track record matters because it's not likely to go over again. 

 

Guy Ritchie might have a bit more of distinct style than Favreau or other journeymen directors but it's not like he is Tim Burton recognizable. Whatever distinct visual flair he has, could easily get lost in such a huge project. For example Sam Raimi is also dinstict enough but you couldn't tell he directed that wizard of oz movie without watching the credits. 

[MovieMan89]

30 minutes ago, Joel M said:

 

Guy Ritchie might have a bit more of distinct style than Favreau or other journeymen directors but it's not like he is Tim Burton recognizable. Whatever distinct visual flair he has, could easily get lost in such a huge project. For example Sam Raimi is also dinstict enough but you couldn't tell he directed that wizard of oz movie without watching the credits. 

Wait what? Ritchie's style is a million times more noticeable than someone like Burton. It's very Tarsem Singh esque in its lack of subtlety. 

[Goffe]

55 minutes ago, Joel M said:

For example Sam Raimi is also dinstict enough but you couldn't tell he directed that wizard of oz movie without watching the credits. 

Dude Sam Raimi's stamp is all over that film.

 

Pure, unadulterated Sam Raimi.

 

Of course, it's still a 200m Disney movie.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Goffe

[aabattery]

It's been six years since the last Raimi movie

[CoolioD1]

29 minutes ago, Goffe said:

 

Pure, unadulterated Sam Raimi.

i miss when words had meanings.

[ddddeeee]

7 minutes ago, aabattery said:

It's been six years since the last Raimi movie

He's admitted to not liking his last three movies. Can't help but wonder if he's lost his enthusiasm.

[Goffe]

10 minutes ago, aabattery said:

It's been six years since the last Raimi movie

yeah it's has been rough