• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

Live-Action reimagining of Moana

Eric Graham

Well-Known Member
You didn't quote me in your post, rather quoting another poster, but no I'm not from Ireland. I'm Californian of Irish descent.
That's pretty neat...my wife's family originates from there...where I went in Scotland years ago had Celtic origins, very similar to Ireland I believe...not sure about that though...
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
5035565724299406149.jpg
1098186280256911514.jpg
 

Ghost93

Well-Known Member
I
Here's the first teaser for Moana, in theaters July 10, 2026:



New poster:

Ugh, I hate it and hope it flops. Iger needs to get out of the company ASAP. The first film is less than 10 years old and this seems like it's a straight up copy of it. And visually, it's not really any more impressive? It's still CGI water!

This is just so depressing and bad for art and the future of cinema.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
Yes because real water can be controlled so it could twisted up and made into shapes at will in real life. :rolleyes:
I don’t think that was what he was getting at. The point is that this film seems entirely superfluous—not only is it barely any newer than the original, but it offers nothing that is visually superior or notable. I’m normally OK with the remakes, but this one is just absurd all round.
 

Ghost93

Well-Known Member
Yes because real water can be controlled so it could twisted up and made into shapes at will in real life. :rolleyes:
My point is that there isn't much of a visual difference between the animated CGI water and the CGI water in the remake. It's less of a stark difference than doing a live action remake of a traditionally animated film.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
My point is that there isn't much of a visual difference between the animated CGI water and the CGI water in the remake. It's less of a stark difference than doing a live action remake of a traditionally animated film.
There is only some much you can do to "better" the CG of water. Look at even Avatar 2 just a couple years ago, which was praised for its visuals especially the CG water physics, the CG water physics in that film look pretty similar to what they are doing here. I would imagine they are using the same techniques if not the same software for the CG water here that they did for Avatar 2.

I'm not saying I'm for this movie, in fact I think I'm on record as saying its probably too new of a movie to have a remake done, but to me the idea that the CG water physics was going to be any different than the animated movie is silly in my opinion.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I don’t think that was what he was getting at. The point is that this film seems entirely superfluous—not only is it barely any newer than the original, but it offers nothing that is visually superior or notable. I’m normally OK with the remakes, but this one is just absurd all round.
I'm not saying its not superfluous, most of the live action remakes are. It was just that this idea that somehow the CG water was going to be visually different was silly. Its water, you can only do so much to make it visually different between this and the animated movie.
 

DKampy

Well-Known Member
The issue is audiences don’t want artistry anymore… it is proven to me again and again… with people complaining on this very site that movies need to turn a profit in theatrical…if any live action remake is destined to become blockbuster it is this one…. Frozen excluded….I wish it was’t the case but what are you gonna do

I
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom