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

[dudalb]

4 minutes ago, JGAR4LIFE said:

Because these films are not films, they’re products. Fast food-like entertainment.

My problem with the live action reamkes is simply the chances of them being better in any significant way then the original is small, the chances that they will screw it up pretty good. I also don't like the way these film eat up resources that could go to more original and interesting projects.

Yeah, I don't like a lot about what Disney does nowdays. Where I break with the Disney haters, though is that the other big studios are not much betters, and the Disney haters have to make crap up like the stupid "Disney buys the critics" conspiracy crap.

Only difference between Disney and the other big studios is Disney is more successful at what they do.I guess you have give them credit from a business point of view..the main reason a business is to make profits for the shareholders, and as a free market advocate I see nothing wrong with that.....but from an artistic point of view. I am unhappy with the way The Mouse seems to be going.

[filmlover]

4 minutes ago, DAJK said:

I have no doubt this will be a crowd-pleaser, regardless of a loud vocal minority on the internet, but we'll see I guess. 

You already know this is getting an A CS grade.

[YM!]

Just now, filmlover said:

You already know this is getting an A CS grade.

Think there's a good chance for A+ tbh

[JB33]

1 minute ago, dudalb said:

My problem with the live action reamkes is simply the chances of them being better in any significant way then the original is small, the chances that they will screw it up pretty good. I also don't like the way these film eat up resources that could go to more original and interesting projects.

Yeah, I don't like a lot about what Disney does nowdays. Where I break with the Disney haters, though is that the other big studios are not much betters, and the Disney haters have to make crap up like the stupid "Disney buys the critics" conspiracy crap.

Only difference between Disney and the other big studios is Disney is more successful at what they do.I guess you have give them credit from a business point of view..the main reason a business is to make profits for the shareholders, and as a free market advocate I see nothing wrong with that.....but from an artistic point of view. I am unhappy with the way The Mouse seems to be going.

This is absolutely the best take on this particular situation I've seen on this board. Bravo, and I agree completely.

[Julianjunja]

34 minutes ago, OncomingStorm93 said:

I remember similar comments about Solo...

Nobody asked for Solo though. The same could be argued about another live action remake but Aladdin is a beloved classic and it has the benefit of nostalgia and an iconic soundtrack 

[dudalb]

38 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

I hate the way people freak out about RT scores. Aladdin will get like 300-400 reviews. Wait until 150 reviews at least to see where it's reviews end up. This message is for both haters and lovers. 

Not to mention that RT scores do not handle mixed reviews very well.

[OncomingStorm93]

1 minute ago, Julianjunja said:

Nobody asked for Solo though. The same could be argued about another live action remake but Aladdin is a beloved classic and it has the benefit of nostalgia and an iconic soundtrack 

No one asked for Aladdin either. And Han Solo is/was certainly a beloved character that also had the benefit of nostalgia.

[lorddemaxus]

7 minutes ago, Julianjunja said:

Nobody asked for Solo though. The same could be argued about another live action remake but Aladdin is a beloved classic and it has the benefit of nostalgia and an iconic soundtrack 

I would say it is similar to Solo actually. Nobody asked for Solo but they could have wanted Solo with Harrison Ford still playing the character. Just like that people could have wanted Aladdin but with Robin Williams still as the Genie. Unlike other Disney classic animated movies, Aladdin wouldn't have been the same film if it weren't for Robin William.

Edited May 22, 2019 by lorddemaxus

[I Am]

20 minutes ago, dudalb said:

I agree, but we are in a small minority here. You have people here who think the remakes are better then the originals simply because they have "cool" CGI effects and they are newer and newer is always better.

As for Disney animatation in general here, I am amazedhow little love the Golden Age Disney animated films get..."SNow White" "Pinnochio" "Fantasia". Probably because a lot of people here, sadly have never seen them.

The folks who are going to accept whatever Disney mushes in their face don't realize the long-term effect of enabling their behavior and the quality of films in the future will suffer for it. As far as I remember, "Brave," "Tangled," "Wreck It Ralph," "Frozen," and "Moana" were all "original" films that were well-received by audiences and critics alike. There is literally no need for them to forcefeed us these unwanted, not well-received remakes. If Disney has to go back to putting out one or two of their own extremely well done films a year, as opposed to serving us "fast-food entertainment," as excellently termed by @JGAR4LIFE, that will produce better long-term results for their bottom-line and for audience satisfaction.

 

But then again, when Disney announces the "Zootopia" live action remake for 2026, we'll just be deemed "toxic" "haters" for not wanting to hold the company we pay up to $22 a movie ticket to to the standards (Golden Age, Silver Age, Renaissance Era) we know they are capable of performing at. 🙄

Edited May 22, 2019 by I Am

[jedijake]

25 minutes ago, JGAR4LIFE said:

Because these films are not films, they’re products. Fast food-like entertainment.

That's actually not a bad analogy. Although I'd say that TLK looks more like an experiment than fast food production.

 

If you look at Disney's movies pre-Marvel and pre-SW (really pre-remake) the movies were low budget, small scale films that had absolutely nothing to do with the Disney brand. They were not associated with parks or merchandise. Even films like Lion, Witch and Wardrobe had no connection to the parks and merchandise. POTC started that BUT it was a fresh franchise. The remakes, in retrospect, have become ways to promote parks rather than their own thing. Prior to that, they seemed to just put out films without worrying about box office draw. I mean-National Treasure was decent but not something you associate with Disney. Their films were independent from their other entities and now it seems they are forcing a connection between all of it.

 

And now they're at a point of no return. They really cannot go back to making smaller budget films without mass marketing. Things are too expensive for that. They either have to continue doing remakes or ONLY put out animations, SW (which will continue to wane if not with TROS) and Marvel. Seems to be why they want to put so much into Disney plus. They can do whatever they want and not worry about reviews or mass social media.

 

If anyone thinks that something "new" and "creative" is going to come along that has wide mass appeal, they're nuts. At least not in the near future. Same as music. When was the last time we saw a musical trend? I don't mean a popular artist but a new style? 15 years? 20 years? I mean revolutions like grunge, alternative, disco, new wave, or even hip hop?

Edited May 22, 2019 by jedijake

[CaptainJackSparrow]

I have figured out why I keep on becoming disappointed with these remakes. It is because A-they are more realistic, animals have no human emotion to their face, and movements are not zany like the originals. Not having Timothy the mouse play a crucial part or the storks delivering babies sequence in Dumbo left me disappointed, as I don’t care if they are realistic or not, or King Louie and Baloo not dancing together in Jungle Book, I want to have fun, screw realism. 

B-The songs are much slower than the original films, From “I wanna Be Like You” to “Friend Like Me”. My favorite so far, Christopher Robin, was never really zany to begin with. (Plus was an original story) 

Edited May 22, 2019 by CaptainJackSparrow

[sabrecmc]

I liked Cinderella and TJB remakes, so I'm not totally against them, but I do wish Disney would take the foot off the gas a bit and let the idea of them breathe.  One a year, maybe. 

[filmlover]

Aladdin is definitely more of a time capsule than the other Disney Big 3 of that era. Watching it today, you can clearly tell a lot of the humor had a much stronger impact in 1992. One of the reasons why even if this makes a ton of money, it will still easily be the lowest grossing of the 4 remakes in all likelihood.

[Jay Beezy]

2 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Aladdin is definitely more of a time capsule than the other Disney Big 3 of that era. Watching it today, you can clearly tell a lot of the humor had a much stronger impact in 1992. One of the reasons why even if this makes a ton of money, it will still easily be the lowest grossing of the 4 remakes in all likelihood.

EDIT: Never mind.

Edited May 22, 2019 by Jay Beezy

[lorddemaxus]

 

 

 

1 minute ago, filmlover said:

Aladdin is definitely more of a time capsule than the other Disney Big 3 of that era. Watching it today, you can clearly tell a lot of the humor had a much stronger impact in 1992. One of the reasons why even if this makes a ton of money, it will still easily be the lowest grossing of the 4 remakes in all likelihood.

Also helped that the original had Robin Williams. Will Smith might be charismatic as hell but he sure as hell can't do comedy as well as Robin Wiliams. Most of the humour in Aladdin was based around Robin Williams's own skills as a comedian.

[Jay Beezy]

9 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

Also helped that the original had Robin Williams. Will Smith might be charismatic as hell but he sure as hell can't do comedy as well as Robin Wiliams. Most of the humour in Aladdin was based around Robin Williams's own skills as a comedian.

Plus, in animated form, they could get away with a lot more with Robin Williams' type of humor than in a live action setting. I've read some people suggest that if Robin Williams were still alive, he'd be the one doing the Genie again like James Earl Jones is doing Mufasa again for Lion King. I don't think a Robin Williams Genie would translate well to live action. In that regard, I would buy that a Will Smith Genie is better suited to live action, but that doesn't really hold a candle to an animated Robin Williams Genie.

Edited May 22, 2019 by Jay Beezy

[cookie]

Some parts are just kinda eh, Jafar is pretty weak (Kenzari’s costume has more screen precense than him) but I think what works works - and while it follows many of the same plot beats as the original, it’s not to the Beauty and the Beasy level where it feels like a complete copy. Not as different as say Jungle Book but some things did surprise me - and others left me a bit disappointed, but not crushingly so.

 

Will Smith is pretty fun (although more when he’s doing his own thing and less when he’s trying to imitate some of Robin Williams’s schtick) and Massoud is better than you’d expect, even if his singing is hit and miss. Naomi Scott’s the MVP though - her number is a bit out of place compared to everything else but she gives it her all and unlike a certain Hermione actually can sing, plus she and Massoud are cute together.

 

Overall I’d say I had a decent time. Not all the charm of the original is there but there’s some of it. Granted, I was pretty forgiving towards BATB but I’d say I enjoyed this one more. Kinda has that Pirates vibe with some action and adventure scenes but not in tired way like that series has become.

Edited May 22, 2019 by cookie

[OncomingStorm93]

BREAKING NEWS:

 

Back to Rotten

[dudalb]

16 minutes ago, CaptainJackSparrow said:

I have figured out why I keep on becoming disappointed with these remakes. It is because A-they are more realistic, animals have no human emotion to their face, and movements are not zany like the originals. Not having Timothy the mouse play a crucial part or the storks delivering babies sequence in Dumbo left me disappointed, as I don’t care if they are realistic or not, or King Louie and Baloo not dancing together in Jungle Book, I want to have fun, screw realism. 

B-The songs are much slower than the original films, From “I wanna Be Like You” to “Friend Like Me”. My favorite so far, Christopher Robin, was never really zany to begin with. (Plus was an original story) 

One of concerns about the TLK remake is that alive action photo realistic Timon and Poomba are not going to be nearly as funny as the animated versions in the original. The way they were animated is a major reason why they were so funny.

And that is not the only example. A lot of the little touches that make the Disney animated films so good simply don't work with live action or photo realisitic CGI.

[Alli]

Will Smith has not been in a fresh movie in a while. I just saw a post on reddit that's quite concerning: he has not been in a movie rated 70% in twenty years. I know RT is not the ultimate barometer for movie criticism, but it shows his lack of luck in picking even mediocre movies.

Edited May 22, 2019 by Alli