Jump to content
grim22

Aladdin live action movie | 24 MAY 2019 | Disney | Reviews straddling the fresh-rotten line

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, MattW said:
1 Beauty and the Beast (2017) BV $1,263.5 $504.0 39.9% $759.5 60.1% 2017
2 Alice in Wonderland (2010) BV $1,025.5 $334.2 32.6% $691.3 67.4% 2010
3 The Jungle Book (2016) BV $966.6 $364.0 37.7% $602.5 62.3% 2016
4 Maleficent BV $758.5 $241.4 31.8% $517.1 68.2% 2014
5 Cinderella (2015) BV $543.5 $201.2 37% $342.4 63% 2015
6 Oz The Great and Powerful BV $493.3 $234.9 47.6% $258.4 52.4% 2013
7 101 Dalmatians (1996) BV $320.7 $136.2 42.5% $184.5 57.5% 1996
8 Alice Through the Looking Glass BV $299.5 $77.0 25.7% $222.4 74.3% 2016
9 Pete's Dragon (2016) BV $143.7 $76.2 53.1% $67.5 46.9% 2016
                 
TOTAL: $5,814.7 $2,169.1 37.3% $3,645.6 62.7% -
AVERAGE: $646.1 $241.0 37.3% $405.1 62.7% -

 

Seems like Dumbo will land in the Cinderella neighborhood while Aladdin should be closer to Jungle Book on the domestic side.  That's about how they're priced on HSX as well.

I would push them up 1 step, Dumbo on Maleficent level (700M), Aladdin in Alice level (1B) and The Lion King on TFA level (around 2B)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zakiyyah6 said:

 

Like Solo made tons of money this year like everybody assumed? This movie is in Disney's death slot and was directed by Guy Ritchie. "Loads of money"? I doubt it. It should do better than Solo but I believe that it will be almost as overpredicted as Solo was. 

Unless its perfect, people will maybe watch this once...instead of repeat viewings they will save their money for Lion King which they will watch 8 times

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unimpressed by that teaser, but this will be big. Beauty and the Beast BIG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Hades said:

Unless its perfect, people will maybe watch this once...instead of repeat viewings they will save their money for Lion King which they will watch 8 times

If definitely won't be another Beauty and the Beast,  that's for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how the giant successes of Beauty & the Beast & Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey contradict 50 years of post modern feminism, #Metoo included.

  • Like 1
  • Not Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Teasers like this for BatB and Cinderella were shown 9-10 months prior to the film. With reshoots for this one, 7 months is not surprising.

 

However, the full trailers for BatB and Cinderella were shown 4-5 months before their releases. Poppins Returns saw it 3 months prior. That would mean that we could likely see a full trailer in January or maybe February at the latest. By then ET will be featuring previews for 2019 films so Disney will be all over that. I suppose if we get something for Lion King this year it will be on the same caliber-VERY short and a quick tease to get the word out there.

 

But Dumbo may see a full trailer by December.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it wasn't bad, but I wouldn't say it was good either.  It's just kind of there.

 

I'll wait for an actual full trailer before I can make any decisions about this film

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was fine but if your're going to do a first look trailer launch during a sports event you need a little more than that to get huge buzz. Feels less hyped than Dumbo right now. Should've just released in the morning/afternoon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It did its job as a teaser. It's not meant to be a full trailer. I'm liking what I'm seeing so far

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already not a fan of the visuals, they are too muted and dark in typical Ritchie fashion. I don’t think this compares well to the BatB teaser where the castle looked gorgeous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Movie definitely looks too “clean” and “shiny”  like a lot of modern movies

Edited by John Marston

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was just a teaser and I'm sorry to say but it focused on the wrong things. Why is that CGI bird about 90% of the teaser? And who gives a fuck about Aladdin? They should have teased Genie considering Will Smith's top billing at the end of the teaser. That Stargate voice (what did he say?) was not enough. 

 

Still, it's a teaser. It's job is to announce the movie to the world. I'm sure trailer will be better. 

 

The world does look fake af including that puma cave/Imhotep's face. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, meriodejaneiro said:

I would push them up 1 step, Dumbo on Maleficent level (700M), Aladdin in Alice level (1B) and The Lion King on TFA level (around 2B)

Really doubt all 3 of them will do that well, especially if they all stay with their current release dates.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disney burning through the animated remakes like a gambling addict at the slots.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Hades said:

 

Disney being despicable as ever..

saw about this on twitter that they won't be credited because the WGA doesn't cover animated movies? that's kinda messed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CoolioD1 said:

saw about this on twitter that they won't be credited because the WGA doesn't cover animated movies? that's kinda messed up.

Animated movies and shows, with a few exceptions like Simpsons or Family Guy, fall under their own separate union called the Animation Guild, meaning they don't have to adhere to rules from WGA or whatever.

 

But that also means that when it comes to live-action adaptations of animated works, writers for animated productions, I assume, don't get compensated or any writing credits, because they were from two different unions. Linda Woolverton was the original screenwriter for BatB '91, but when '17 came around, the only credit she got was a "based on" mention.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.