Eh? Beauty and the Beast? Why the Iger concept, will fail....

[englanddg]

 

[englanddg]

So, we are in late Eisner era here, with these live action remakes.

 

[englanddg]

And, I haven't even brought up how Iger didn't secure the rights for Star Wars streaming from Turner.

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

Eisner - "Hey let's make unessesary sequels to our animated films!"
Iger - "Hey let's make unessesary remakes of our animated films!

 

[Karakasa]

Lindsay does great work. Very good video. Overall I agree with most of her critique. Especially the movie's need to try and explain away so-called "plot holes" in a frickin' fairy tale. The whole Lefou thing bothers me too. At first I liked it, but now that I think about it... well, I appreciate him turning good, but making him- a guy literally named "the fool"- our first gay representation in a Disney film, especially when we had Lumiere and/or Cogsworth right there feels kindaaaa.... eeeeehhhh.

However, I disagree that the general, well, mediocrity of the BatB remake is something that condemns the upcoming ones. The Jungle Book, Cinderella, and even Maleficent to an extent were excellent- and in the former two's case, superior to their animated version. I'd be surprised if the Lion King and Aladdin are bad, since there.... really aren't many if any criticisms of those films that couldn't be addressed without undermining the original story. Like, with the Lion King, there's the whole hyena thing, but... you could just have Simba integrate them into Pride Lands society after they kill Scar. I will admit I'm worried about Mulan given how much they're changing for no apparent reason, though. It's not even as if they're making it more accurate to the original story, they're just.... changing it.

 

[TwilightZone]

I watched this video before it was cool. (Joking)
Anyways, as someone who never seen this movie, she makes a lot of good arguments with good evidence to back it up.
If you're wondering why I haven't seen it:
1. General disinterest
2. When I saw the trailer, I laughed way too hard at "Belle's" acting, specifically the papa scene.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

So, we are in late Eisner era here, with these live action remakes.

I can't remember where I read it, but I think at one point Eisner wanted to remake all the Disney animated features into CGI, which Iger has basically done with these remakes.

 

[TwilightZone]

I can't remember where I read it, but I think at one point Eisner wanted to remake all the Disney animated features into CGI, which Iger has basically done with these remakes.

And he did some of the first live action remakes too.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

And he did some of the first live action remakes too.

Everything old is new again.

 

[DonaldDoleWhip]

Love Lindsay's videos, and she nails it yet again here.

I was very excited about this remake; it's only the second one I've seen (after Maleficent). The final trailer absolutely sold me on it, although that's largely because of the music (and I'm still irritated that the trailer cut of the song wasn't released).

This movie didn't live up to its predecessor, and it never strived to be art. It was the most derivative but also updated awkwardly. Most of us still went to see it, and the global box office was everything Disney could've wanted.

I'm not sure that's guaranteed for the other live action remakes, barring the Renaissance masterpieces (Lion King, Aladdin, Mermaid). And once those movies–along with way too many others–have been remade, will 'brand integrity' still have been maintained? I'm not so sure. Because "Disney's Beauty and the Beast" alone now refers to the 1991 masterpiece and this forgettable popcorn flick, featuring a distractingly auto-tuned Emma Watson, CGI that will age horribly, and all the incongruities Lindsay addressed.

 

[fractal]

excellent.

 

[erasure fan1]

Eisner wanted to remake all the Disney animated features into CGI

You see, thats phase 3. Once they have re-done all of them in live action, we will get CG pixar style remakes. It will be awesome! Trust me.