BEAUTY AND THE BEAST WEEKEND THREAD | Late Sunday Numbers (Asgard) - 48-49M | Official Weekend Estimate: 170M; OS OW: 180M; WW OW: 350M

[franfar]

Just now, TelemAAchos said:

 

Changing your actress' natural hair color is changing things for the sake of change.  

No it's about being recognizable to the original

[aabattery]

Hair as red as Ariel's would look goofy as hell in real life. It's not change for the sake of change, it's change for the sake of not looking silly. It's such an inconsequential thing, anyway. Get the best actress for the job, not the one who looks exactly like the film. 

Edited March 19, 2017 by aabattery

[Ocho]

No red hair????

 

I guess she doesn't need a tail either...

[Jake Gittes]

6 minutes ago, Cmasterclay said:

Beauty and the Beast was fine. It was a mostly technically accomplished, entertaining while it lasts rendition that I have forgotten about after the five minute drive home. It was just creatively vapid. Sure, it's fine to have one or two a year. But if we get to the point where every movie is either a technically well-made remake or an expanded universe jaunt designed to introduce a new orb for characters to fight over, eventually alot of people are gonna start throwing up their hands. I know that if you dare say that you'll get 100 responses calling you a "snob" and pointing to releases like this to prove how stupid I am. There's been alot of good movies this year, when studios are still willing to take risks because it isn't their big main blockbusters, but I'm already kinda dreading everything from now until September with the exception of a couple movies. IDK. It just feels creatively bankrupt. If you think movies are just supposed to be a bunch of fun scenes that entertain people for an hour and then make money, then great. That's a fine way to look at it. That's not how I see it. I think they can be really truly terrific stuff and still entertain plenty of people and make lots of money. You just need to try. That's why even though that Valerian movie looks completely vapid to me I'm still rooting for it. 

 

There's just a certain honesty about something like Valerian. It may well end up being a creative failure but no one will be able to accuse Besson of not throwing everything he had behind it. It comes from a place of real enthusiasm.

 

And hell I for one have absolutely nothing against the notion that a movie can just be a bunch of fun scenes that entertain people for an hour. A lot of movies try but can't even manage that. But can people at least come up with those scenes on their own? Is that too much to ask now?

[Plain Old Tele]

Just now, franfar said:

No it's about being recognizable to the original

 

1- It's not the original 

 

2- the '89 version is animated, you have to "change" her regardless

 

3- claiming hair color is somehow some key defining trait to her character is absurd

 

4- it's a decision based out of fear

[Rthmessiah]

[MrPink]

Just now, Rth and the Beast said:

 

So...52?

[angeldelmito]

12 minutes ago, CJohn said:

Zendaya can be my mermaid every day of the week 

mhm lol

 

[CJohn]

3 minutes ago, TelemAAchos said:

 

1- It's not the original 

 

2- the '89 version is animated, you have to "change" her regardless

 

3- claiming hair color is somehow some key defining trait to her character is absurd

 

4- it's a decision based out of fear

This might the most Tele thing I have ever read.  

[eddyxx]

God damn. Me and my friends had to check 3 theaters around us to find a showing where BnB wasnt sold out.

[angeldelmito]

6 minutes ago, Rth and the Beast said:

is this cut off for anybody else? what this say bitch i cannot read

Edited March 19, 2017 by angeldelmito

[franfar]

7 minutes ago, TelemAAchos said:

 

1- It's not the original 

 

2- the '89 version is animated, you have to "change" her regardless

 

3- claiming hair color is somehow some key defining trait to her character is absurd

 

4- it's a decision based out of fear

1 - no kidding

 

2 - ok sure, you can make it less red. But the suggestions seem to be making it NOT red.

 

3 - not saying that it's "key defining," just that it's more recognizable to audiences and doesn't need to be changed

 

4 - What? I'm not afraid 

Edited March 19, 2017 by franfar

[Eevin]

4 minutes ago, Rth and the Beast said:

700-10

 

$69m Sunday 

[Yandereprime101189]

1 hour ago, angeldelmito said:

queen latifah, get on it hollywood

 

 

Yes, that would be perfect!

 

For Sebastian, get James Monroe Iglehart, who played Genie in the Broadway Aladdin. Hell, he's already sung Under the Sea

 

[robertman2]

I want redhead Ariel because redheads are hot

[Jason]

5 minutes ago, angeldelmito said:

is this cut off for anybody else, what this say bitch i cannot read

 

Ten ppl a year die of shark attacks

 

While falling off chairs kills 700 ppl a year

[grey ghost]

29 minutes ago, TelemAAchos said:

 

Yes, it's shallow, craven, and driven off financial decisions, not creative ones... but at least they could put some basic effort into it. 

 

 

If we're talking a remake to Robocop then I'm right there with you.

 

Why do a shot for shot remake when you can watch the perfectly executed original, right?

 

But these live action remakes are different. People want pretty much want to re-live the magic of the original but in live action.

 

The novelty comes from the animation being translated into something more "real" and relatable. 

 

Outside of that people expect those magical moments to be on full on display. 

 

I promise you Tele's brash and original Beauty and the Beast revamp isn't making 170 m OW. 

 

People want nostalgia, that's 100% what they're paying for.

[Cmasterclay]

7 minutes ago, Jake Gittes said:

 

There's just a certain honesty about something like Valerian. It may well end up being a creative failure but no one will be able to accuse Besson of not throwing everything he had behind it. It comes from a place of real enthusiasm.

 

And hell I for one have absolutely nothing against the notion that a movie can just be a bunch of fun scenes that entertain people for an hour. A lot of movies try but can't even manage that. But can people at least come up with those scenes on their own? Is that too much to ask now?

Right, I guess I phrased that wrong. I'm fine with movies just being fun disposable entertainment- I like plenty of those! I just don't think movies should be a bunch of technically accomplished, remade deriative scenes that have absolutely zero artistic merit that people excuse because they make money. Terminator 2 is probably my favorite blockbuster ever, but I'll be damned if I want to make a direct, barely changed remake of it, even with a great cast and solid scenes.

[Yandereprime101189]

14 minutes ago, TelemAAchos said:

 

3- claiming hair color is somehow some key defining trait to her character is absurd

 

Not so much a personal trait, it is more of a key visual trait. Her red hair is ALL OVER HER MARKETING AND MERCHANDISE

 

Making Ariel a blonde (which to be fair, was her original hair color before Splash came around) or brunette in the remake would be like remaking Jaws with a tiger shark or bull shark.

 

Look at this

 

 

It's wrong, all wrong!!!!!

Edited March 19, 2017 by Yandereprime101189

[Plain Old Tele]

1 minute ago, franfar said:

1 - no kidding

 

2 - ok sure, you can make it less red. But the suggestions seem to be making it NOT red.

 

3 - not saying that it's "key defining," just that it's more recognizable to audiences and doesn't need to be changed

 

4 - What?

 

If she was cast and shown on-screen with her natural hair color (with mermaid tail, etc) do you think people wouldn't know and accept her? Would the movie make less money because outraged people refuse to see it, since her hair wasn't red? (A precious few might, probably far fewer than those who refused to see BATB cuz of the gay component.)

 

Switching from animation to live action requires so many real world changes that something like forcing a real-life hair color change is incredibly minor. If they chose to do so, there's no real creative decision behind the choice, it's a sheerly corporate decision based on fear that your audience is so unbelievably dumb that they wouldn't see your movie because the heroine had a slightly different color of hair.