erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
I get that, but you should tease that this won't just be a straight rehash of the original. Of course why put a spin on something as good as the original. And that's my dilemma with these remakes.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
"Aladdin" live action movie remake
- Thread starter Brer Panther
- Start date
Genie_naughty_whispers
Well-Known Member
Way too much cgi. Go on location in Jordan, Tunisia or even Arizona, or Mexico.
Stripes
Premium Member
Princess Leia
Well-Known Member
CJR
Well-Known Member
FettFan
Well-Known Member
I'm not impressed by it. This version of the Cave of Wonders is just plain lame. It would work in an Indiana Jones movie, but not for Aladdin.
Look at the sheer SIZE of the original.
And then look at the live action version.
It looks like it would belong in an Indiana Jones movie.
And why did they change it from a tiger to a lion? Is it meant to be the face of Live Action Mufasa?
Look at the sheer SIZE of the original.
And then look at the live action version.
It looks like it would belong in an Indiana Jones movie.
And why did they change it from a tiger to a lion? Is it meant to be the face of Live Action Mufasa?
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
I'm not impressed by it. This version of the Cave of Wonders is just plain lame. It would work in an Indiana Jones movie, but not for Aladdin.
Look at the sheer SIZE of the original.
And then look at the live action version.
It looks like it would belong in an Indiana Jones movie.
And why did they change it from a tiger to a lion? Is it meant to be the face of Live Action Mufasa?
It's like where you get in line for the roller coaster at Marineland:
Tony the Tigger
Well-Known Member
I have no reason to be pessimistic.
KBLovedDisney
Well-Known Member
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
I especially like the steely-eyed look Jasmine is attacking us with. Letting us know that she's all WOKE and stuff. I smell another Elizabeth Swann here. A woman who excels at all things because I AM WOMAN HEAR ME ROAR, no other reason or logic needed. A sheltered, pampered princess who will no doubt out-street-rat the street rat and who can grant her OWN wishes, thank you!
Yech and PASS.
KBLovedDisney
Well-Known Member
Gawd, call me old fashion or what not, but seeing a plethora of movies with this kind of woman-ness distinction is getting to me. Yes, I am a woman, but I miss the times when the guy was the hero (knight in shining armor kind of deal). No, I am not against females being heroes (excuse me, heroins) rescuing the guy in distress and yes we were repressed way back when and yadda yadda yadda. But, lately it has been non stop with the woman being the hero. I don't want to always have to rescue myself (did that for 20 something years already...). It was nice the day a knight came to my rescue and I let him have more say. I have come to the point that if I want that kind of story, I have to find them in older romance novels.
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
You must hate her character in the original cartoon. There’s no difference.
God forbid a woman want to do things on her own. Why would there need to be “reason” or “logic” for that? Would a man need “logic” or “reason” to be independent?
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Gawd, call me old fashion or what not, but seeing a plethora of movies with this kind of woman-ness distinction is getting to me. Yes, I am a woman, but I miss the times when the guy was the hero (knight in shining armor kind of deal). No, I am not against females being heroes (excuse me, heroins) rescuing the guy in distress and yes we were repressed way back when and yadda yadda yadda. But, lately it has been non stop with the woman being the hero. I don't want to always have to rescue myself (did that for 20 something years already...). It was nice the day a knight came to my rescue and I let him have more say. I have come to the point that if I want that kind of story, I have to find them in older romance novels.
I call you sensible. Now, Jasmine in the animated Aladdin was perfect IMO. Sure, she did that pole-vault-over-a-roof thing when she first met Aladdin, but that's believable. It's not like she ran all over the roof tops like Aladdin and Abu did earlier in the film. And her assertiveness was also believable. She was neither vain nor stupid. I liked her a lot. I'm all for strong female characters, but they, like the male characters, have to earn my affections. I don't give any character a pass because of political correctness. Maybe I'm wrong about the live-action Jasmine. I hope I am. We'll see...
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
How can one tell what a film character will behave, think, etc. from a magazine cover?
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
See my reply to KBLoveDisney. Also, I don't like pandering or posing. The only reason Swann could do what she did in Pirates - wield a sword and know how to sail a ship - was entirely doe to pandering. She was a governor's daughter for crying out loud. When did she learn to use a sword? How was that believable? It wasn't. It was PC, and it damn near ruined the first Pirates film IMO. I couldn't stand her. Give me believable strong female Disney characters like Belle any day. And let the men rescue them if it serves the story! What's wrong with that?
Californian Elitist
Well-Known Member
I read your reply. It’s irrelevant, since you’re judging a fictional character and already said you were going to pass on the film because of the way she comes off on the magazine cover.
Elizabeth Swann has nothing to do with the magazine cover and the vision you got from it. Neither does Belle.