www.forbes.com
IMHO “live action” The Jungle Book is superior to the animated film.
This is more or less my take. If you going to do a live action Snow White, you should be using actual Little People actors in the roles not uncanny valley CGI. I actually think it’s the right call to follow closely to the original (if they want the film to succeed) but I think the execution leaves much to be desired.
Thanks. I wasn't aware of this.Disney's Little Mermaid Plunges To $5 Million Loss
Disney's live action version of The Little Mermaid lost an estimated $4.9m at the box office as the movie's "cost exceeded the production budget" as spending surged to $355.1m.
I was referring to the quality of the artistry. Perhaps you would still deem the remake superior in that regard, but I've not seen anything that comes close to rivalling what the hand-drawn films achieved.
When the rumor was that there would be no dwarfs, people objected. Now that we are seeing the dwarfs, people are not happy with their appearance. IMO, both are reasonable objections that are directly related to the actual movie.
Add in the people who objected to a live-action version and those who objected to an updated animated version and we’re getting closer.
Sorry but TMZ is not some beacon of truth, also their article is based on the original Daily Mail article, both are tabloids. So I wouldn't take anything what either publications publish as some true reporting of events. Its sensationalized reporting specifically designed to stoke the flames of discontent that was happening at the time, ie its clickbate.Not speculation at all:
Live-Action 'Snow White' Swaps Most 'Dwarfs' for Ordinary Randoms
New photos from the 'Snow White' movie have been released, and most of the "seven dwarfs" have grown quite a bit.www.tmz.com
Disney initially denied these as being real then confirmed they were in fact real.
Snow White wrapped filming in July 2022.
This was originally supposed to be out holiday 2023. The poor test screenings and public backlash had them doing reshoots the last 2 years and replacing actors with CGI dwarves. Disney doesn't know what to do with the film.
As for Disney CGI, it is all outsourced (no in house CGI studio besides ILM which primarily does work for other clients (not Disney)). The Marvel and SW shows have been criticized in recent years for bad CGI as Disney is awarding contracts to the lowest bidding studios. This could be unfinished but the Little Mermaid remake also had cheap CGI.
Have some respect. Disney fired the star and re-shot the entire movie based on that clickbait. Don't you know that's how the new Disney does its audience research?
Which means it did turn profitable post-theaterical, something that many at the time claimed would never happen.Disney's Little Mermaid Plunges To $5 Million Loss
Disney's live action version of The Little Mermaid lost an estimated $4.9m at the box office as the movie's "cost exceeded the production budget" as spending surged to $355.1m.
I'm still waiting to hear the spin from those that claimed she was fired when the movie releases and she is still Snow.Have some respect. Disney fired the star and re-shot the entire movie based on that clickbait. Don't you know that's how the new Disney does its audience research?
We'll have to agree to disagree. I personally love the sketchier style that characterises Disney animated films of that era.
Closer to what? Those still strike me as complaints related to storytelling - what movies Disney should be making and how. Whether one agrees with them or not, I don't think they're objections that, "have nothing to do with the actual movie." Until we see the final product, discussion can really only focus on background elements, news, trailers, etc.
As much as I appreciate a good Christopher Walken performance, you just can't beat Louis Prima in the original. I'll also take Phil Harris over Bill Murray in his "I-showed-up-now-give-me-my-paycheck" stage.
They've been working on this film for a while, delayed it a year, so if it wasn't ready to show, don't show it. The dwarfs look terrible, of course it's going to get mocked. This film was always going to be a tough sell in my opinion. It's arguably, no matter what anyone thinks of the film, the most important film in Disney history. Anything that appears to be less than the original was never going to not cause a stink.
The objections are absolutely about the movie in my opinion. The dwarfs the casting, the look of the film, the one song we have heard... It's all in the film. As I said, it's definitely a rock and a hard place kinda film. If they make it exactly the same, it's, well what was the point of that! If they stray way off the original, it's, why are you butchering such a historic film! Even people who have supported the live action remakes are going after this one.
According to the article, the numbers do not account for marketing costs. Where are the posters who disagree about the best way to do those calculations to figure out if movies are profitable or not? I think we need them to weigh in before making a final determination
I know you're trying to be funny, but this was debated ad nauseam in both TLM thread and the Box Office thread for almost a year. So lets not clog up this thread for something which has nothing to do with the topic with another useless debate.According to the article, the numbers do not account for marketing costs. Where are the posters who disagree about the best way to do those calculations to figure out if movies are profitable or not? I think we need them to weigh in before making a final determination
Yes, I was just being silly.
