I think this ties into my theory about Disney execs being ashamed of their own company; they're the types who think animation is for babies. Warner Bros is even worse, because they've said girls and women don't even *like* animation, so that gives us some idea into the types of people running these companies. Thank god for Guillermo Del Toro's Oscar speech, I hope that made certain people very nervous.
I can't stand idiots who think animation is for babies which only comes out of the words of the stupidest people in the world that should not be allowed to run in any animation studio ever again. Why can't they ever grow the hell up and listen to what fans want?
@hambone fakenamington I don't get it myself especially since one of the people who said it is a woman herself, but I think that's just the general attitude of the people running the studios now. There is space for great American animation again, but art and creativity are often too expensive and too inconvenient for people whose only goal is to make a profit. Compare Roger Rabbit with the more recent Rescue Rangers movie, you can tell just by the trailers which production had more love of the craft in it and more respect for the characters. People like Spielberg and Zemeckis should be standing next to Guillermo Del Toro as he defends the medium (which is the other problem I think, executives see animation as a genre and not a medium for expressing things)
This is why I respect the anime so much. Japanese animation studios know how powerful animation as a storytelling medium can be and as a result have made extraordinary things with it. In my opinion, there is no Western animation studio (no, not even Disney) that would be able to make an animated movie on par with the likes of Spirited Away or Ninja Scroll or even The End of Evangelion. I cannot think of a single Western animated movie that has made me feel the same way those three movies have made me feel. I really cannot.
I appreciate you calling out the race-swapping for what it really is. Just more shielding for them from any criticism of their mediocre/garbage love action movies. As a black person, I cannot tell you how insulting it is to see studios use blatant tokenism like that and call it "diversity"
@@l.0_quin397 so you think that by them race-swapping characters in poorly written garbage movies and attributing any criticism to racism, that they are not using race as a shield?
@@l.0_quin397 it’s often, but not always, a distraction from telling a story, because knows that the actor will catch hate matter what. Hate baiting. And I’m not against race swapping, just against using it a sheild? Hate baiting (sometimes) or as a distraction from how (generally) soulless the product is.
@@Dave102693 Soul was one of my favorite movies of all time. Amazing that Disney did not have confidence in that film and just dumped it on Disney+ (the main character was a black man). Why was that? Racism? Maybe they're not ACTUALLY progressive!
@@emhullum4120I don't know what you was expecting from them Disneyland has pride events but in China Disney act like the LGBTQ,+ community don't exist. It often find my self asking which is it. They should not have allowed to have it both ways
The reason these don't work is because they look dull. They don't have enough vibrant colors, and look like a general landscape. Yes, they are supposed to be "realistic", which doesn't make sense when trying to tell an imaginative fairy tale.
Which may be why Cinderella is the only one of these to really be great. That's the only one I can think of that was just as vibrant and bright as the original. It still felt like a fairy tale world.
Even tho I am not a fan of Avatar, I can at least say Pandora looks great. You would think Disney would realize people want to see colors and lights and sparkles. And realistic doesn't mean it can't take creative liberties. Titanic 1997 has a lot of well lit scenes that are inaccurate, but if they were realistic, we would not be able to see anything happening in the movie. I'd rather a well lit ocean bottom for a live action than a dark abyss that I can't see even at night without a sun glare.
Agreed I don't know why everything is so anti colour, everything looks so washed out and desaturated. Like they smeared mud on the lenses before filming
@@blinkowarner3117 Not only that, but the Cinderella live-action actually builds the characters rather than decimating their arcs. Cinderella is the perfect combination of being feminine and strong, and the prince has proper characterization. (Granted, Charming was much better in Cinderella 3)
@@blinkowarner3117 for real, thr creators of that live-action really said "wanna watch your favourite princess movie but with lots of magic sparkles and butterflies?" My 13 year old self was like YEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!! The fairy godmother was a big change too lmao
At least Maleficent and Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland tried different themes and takes on their respective properties. I respect that than just blatantly copying scene by scene of the originals. It is like what is even the point of telling the same story again.
The 90’s live action 101 Dalmatians movie is worth that same respect, in my opinion. Sure, it definitely borrowed the structure of the original (Roger and Anita meet via Pongo, they marry, puppies are born, Pongo and Perdita find them, they go back home), but it played around with many things. For one thing, those live action dogs were given far more CGI expression, despite the technology being in its infancy (literally meaning there was no excuse for the lack of expression in the remake of Lion King). They also played around with the human roles too. While Roger was better suited as a fledgling musician than a video game developer, I see why they went with it. Video games were becoming more mainstream in the 90’s, so it gave the story a modern twist that many out there could relate to. They went with Anita being pregnant alongside Perdita, which was cute. They also cleverly tied Anita and Cruella together instead of using the throwaway line that they were “dearly devoted old schoolmates.” Using Anita as the vessel for Cruella’s desire to craft a coat of Dalmatian fur was more realistic. Cruella asked integral questions about the quality of the fur instead of deciding that she liked the coats on a whim. The adventure Pongo, Perdita, and all of the puppies went on was delightful too. I prefer the old trek better, but you can tell the producers of the live action film had so much fun with each scene! Glenn Close nailed the role of Cruella too, and those dogs and barnyard animals put her through the wringer! The one major thing that was lacking in the live action film was the choice to make the animals voiceless. It, to me, is the number one reason why the original film was better (number two being that the original is animated). However, that was a handicap for the live action film’s writers and directors. They had to tell the dogs’ side of the story without putting their thoughts and actions into words. That was very hard to do, but I think they pulled it off. The film is one of the very best in the Disney live action lineup. My number one favorite is Homeward Bound: the Incredible Journey. Why can’t Disney make movies like that anymore? I’m probably in the minority when I say that I’ve never seen Tim Burton’s Alice In Wonderland! Alice In Wonderland was never my favorite Disney movie to begin with, but with all the Disney controversy, seeing a good remake would be very refreshing! I also found the Maleficent movies very enjoyable. They were unique for their time, giving Maleficent more character than her simply being evil for evil’s sake. Unfortunately, I think the success of this series is why we ended up with the ridiculous Cruella origin story. Both were stories about sympathizing somewhat with the villains, though it’s insanely obvious which one did it right and which one didn’t…
2:32 - they actually DID cast a lightskinned Indian actress to play dark-skinned Middle Eastern Jasmine and nobody said ANYTHING. How can they be so holier than thou about making Ariel black when they race lifted the first major nonwhite Disney Princess. Heck, Aladdin was the first major Disney animated feature to attract a huge black audience (I think TLM and BatB Disney sensed it but Aladdin and TLK made it clear that blacks and Latinos go to see Disney films too).
I did feel that it was weird that Jasmine was lighter. But I thought "Well, there are other Middle Eastern people who have lighter skin" and didn't know Naomi has a whole different heritage☠️. The thing is, at least it wasn't on the nose. It's wrong, but at least it obviously isn't being shoved in your face.
Y’know, I was going to make my own video where I reviewed the newest Snow White remake, but after reading this comment, I realize I’d be contributing to the problem if I did. I strongly discourage anyone from watching this movies!
Exactly. My Mom wants to watch the live action remakes. And so do a little bit of my friends. I try to tell them don't watch them, because the originals are better, and if you keep watching the live-action remakes that's going to fuel the fire for Disney to make those soulless live action remakes. But they never, EVER listen.
''It's not even out yet. Why are you hating it already? You HAVE to watch it first!'' No, I don't! Every single one of those remakes ranged from meh to terrible pieces of shit! The only ones I liked were the 101 Dalmatians movies from the 90s and early 2000s, before the dark times. All those remakes encouraged me to do is get myself physical copies of the original movies before the Chinese puppet censures them all. ''Stop comparing them to the originals! They're their own think.'' No, they're not! If they're supposed to be their own thing why do they go almost exactly the same as the original plot, why do they use the iconic imagery and music instead of creating their own (Why not change Belle's dress from golden to blue?)? Just the idea of turning these beloved classics into live-action is an insult to animation and creativity. Imagine in place of every lazy remake there was an original animated movie. Not all of them would've been good. But people wouldn't hate them just for existing. ''But what about kids now? They deserve to see those classic stories.'' Yes, they do! So show them the originals, they still hold up! Are you worried about outdated stuff like language, stereotypes, smoking, etc? Then maybe explain this stuff. Or watch other live-action or animated versions. Disney isn't the only company that makes movies.
About the outdated stuff, I think Warner Bros. put a disclaimer on some of the old Looney Tunes explaining how some of the actions did not reflect current world viewpoints. Disney should seriously do the same.
"Stop comparing them to the originals! They're their own thing!" Okay, then why was the 2019 Lion King literally beat for beat, shot for shot identical to the 90s animated movie? Like, they even reused some of Mufasa's lines from the original in the realistically animated version. I don't get it. Movies get compared to each other all the time. People are allowed to compare them. The other thing that saddens me is the, "Oh, well these are meant for kids. They don't have to be good." Kids deserve to have good quality movies to watch. And on top of that, kids aren't limited to the media that came out after they were born. I can show my cousin's kids movies that came out around the time I was born. There's no limitations to that.
@@nerdoftheatre "These are meant for kids. They don't need to be good". Man, I hate that mindset too. Poor taste motherfuckers think that kids are stupid and are going to consume any shit that you throw at them and make money out of it...
Doesn’t it seem hypocritical when Hollywood constantly disrespects animation as a medium and tool for storytelling when they CONSTANTLY abuse the hell of using CGI in live action films which is another form of animation?
I'll take low-budget sequels over high-budget remakes any day. Even when they went through the same story beats as the original, at least DisneyToon Studios made _some_ effort to do something new with them.
Honestly, well said. You're literally the first youtuber I saw that actually addressed every wrong aspect about Disney's content in the past few years, including how people eat this shit up and, with that, encourages Disney to keep doing this over and over again. Kudos for making that visible!
AH A stupid person! Couldn't you be more original instead of copying people? By copying people you don't need to think! "But people do it, so why can't I do it?" You will surely tell me! And I will answer you "You can have your own personality instead of being a follower without any personality"! All that to say that I'm tired of seeing stupid comments like this that don't mean anything!
Totally agree. It’s the only film that took what was beautiful on the animated version and gave depth by keeping it fantastic, magical and COLOURFUL… even the mice are cuter than any other live action attempt . Cinderella is my favourite ❤
@@BroZilla-vh3tuI agree (😉). Though, as controversial as this may sound, I would say the 1994 live-action “Jungle Book” film is the stronger of the two live-action Disney films, but that’s just me.
I think part of it is also that Disney completely doesn't respect animation as a medium that can appeal to adults. They're trying to turn all of their already perfectly good movies into adult-oriented content for money, and the worst part is that it's working.
Which is horrifyingly sad since that is exactly what Disney (as in the actual man, Walt Disney) started out doing: Making genuinely adult-oriented short movies for theaters.
I am actually surprised that you didn't bring up Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio. That Movie felt to many as a labor of love while Disney's own remake felt sanitized and soulless. These 2 came out around the same time and exposes what's so wrong with Disney right now.
When I first heard that Mulan was getting a live action I got so excited. Mulan was really my favorite movie growing up alongside Shrek 2. Sometimes, when I had trouble sleeping as a kid I'd awaken one of my parents to play the Mulan CD for me in the CD player, and I'd watch it until I sleep. It was the very definition of a comfort movie. When the news first came about the live action I was nothing short of ecstatic, even more because it was rumored to release on 27th of march, MY FUCKING BIRTHDAY. Anyways imagine my shock
An acclaimed Critic once said "I prefer animation to Live Action because it has more freedom when it comes to presentation. If I want a tree to look like a person, I can. If I want visually stunning magic, I can, If I want a beautiful shot of a scene, I can make one. Live Action can Never Achieve this because it is"Realistic"
My favorite Peter Pan is the live-action 2003 Peter Pan. The blond Peter Pan. Everything about that movie was great especially the costuming and sets. It would be an absolute miracle if Disney could ever reach that level of love to a movie
I agree! But the movie was not just a remake of the old movie, it explored interesting new aspects of the Wendy-Hook-Peter dynamic. It was actually quite a mature movie.
Disney could’ve used the money to resurrect some cancelled animated projects like Gigantic, Mort (Discworld), Wild Life and King of the Elves, but NNNNOOOO! They use the money instead to make more unnecessary, bland and lifeless live-action remakes like this!
you know what I think Disney SHOULD HAVE DONE? [they could keep the black actress as Ariel.] Re-animate their iconic Disney princess movies with better animations. It seems so simple, and plus you keep the films looking good. Their live action CGI is already shit. making an updated animation of their older films, while not changing anything is free money. I just cannot wait for when Disney is so dead that they start begging and groveling for money.
I will never....ever watch any live action remake, those are just insults to the incredible work the animators did in the original....if they wanted a new little Mermaid....why not make an adatation more faithful to the actual Tale of Hans Christian Andersen....like I read Sofia Coppola wanted once to do, with different characters and names.....I remember reading that long ago and that sounded so much interesting than see the crappy remake Disney are doing now.......as long WE pay them money for these abominations, DISNEY WILL NEVER STOP....so nope I can't care less to support this crap, and I hope more people start realizing this as well they stop supporting the Disney in destroying the animated classics, the MCU, star wars and all the things they keep just hammering with bad stories.
According to my dull Lion King 2019 retrospective is pretty problematic as I fear that anthro=animals in the Robinhood remake will be devoted of emotions- highlights- -The visuals look decent with realistic animation -Adults should enjoy cartoons for Pete's sake so I can compare Lion King 2019 to a cartoon -songs are copy paste -replace movements with agile running -Background animals feel more like the main characters with their emotional rhythms -Lions have no emotions so why do I even care more than the expressive background animals -Simba looks too deadpan -It should be about Pumbaa's friends with their attics
It's honestly bizarre that Disney seems to outright refuse to create new and iconic villains into their animated movies when they know of the brand power of their classic Disney Renaissance villains. They gave them their own live-action remakes!
I don't see why Dsney can't just re-release the original films in theaters like they did many years ago and I'd bet they'd make just as much if not more money than their live action remakes.
My distaste for live action superhero films falls along the same lines tbh. Its another medium where live action very often just can't duplicate the grandness of the imagination required to read the books, and the medium is more and more devalued in the same way (animators and comic book artists both have in some cases literally thrown out theirhands creating this art onlyto have said feats duplicated in 1/2 the timewith CGI and deemed "better" or an "improvement"). Yes, occasionally you get the Sam Raimi Spiderman or Bryan Singer's X-Men or Avengers (which I don't even personally care for) that are genuinely good, but part of the problem with said immense popularity is that it brings in a huge part of the fanbase only familiar with the movies and really looking down on the comics themselves as somehow illegitimate or not important beyond what they bring to the film adaptations - while all the while claiming they know the books better than anybody. I might be young, but I'm old enough to remember being dismissed as nerdy (at people's most charitable) for still being into comic books and feeling genuinely lonely that the only people I could share this interest with was other fans online - usually people on Reddit or a Comic Forum; who I didn't even know in real life and was unlikely to ever meet and would never even try to for obvious reasons (being a kid after all). I remember last year when George Perez, probably the greatest artist to ever draw the Avengers and the JLA at their most grand and epic scale imaginable (actually my favorite was his Teen Titans books) died from a prolonged terminal illness, I got emotional, because I had literally grown up clinging to these comics that he had drawn for dear life. And I shared that feeling with multiple people I knew who identified as diehard MCU fans - and they didn't know who the hell this guy was. And when I told them who he was and said that they surely would remember him because they SAID they read the books and I was told by one of them in the most snide way possible "I didn't read the books for the artists I read them for the CHARACTERS" in which case I pretty much flatly understood in the moment "no. you. didn't."
I always say it's a terrible missed opportunity not to just adapt the Lion King stage show with real actors and costumes and get Terry Gilliam or someone to direct.
Disney seems to be creatively bankrupt a lot lately. there are no fresh or new themes anymore. they've gotten comfortable, now we only have to wait for a worthy competitor to overtake them
DIsney thinks it's a '' good! '' to do a prequel about Mufasa's childhood EXACTLY like the first remake. I can't wait to see Scar and Mufasa as cubs with no emotions, this doesn't sound stupid and boring at all 😂Same with Bambi and Robin hood, the compagny wants to remake them. Lilo and Stitch too! I'm scared, Stitch might look like Sonic first's design for his live-action movie. Just imagine a blue Koala with humans teeth, eeeew!
These started out as new takes on classic stories, and now they've devolved into anvils to smash over the viewer's head. I liked the approach 2015's Cinderella took to the story. The only other remake I've watched since was Aladdin, and that was a family outing. Disney's gotten so drunk on the power of CGI and special effects that they've decided to regurgitate their most iconic stories into soulless cash-grabs. Do they even realize how bad TLM looks?! Hard to tell, but either way, I don't think they care, because they know people will pay money to go see it because of nostalgia. Poor Walt's rolling in his grave at what his namesake has become.
I have forgotten his name, but a TH-camr who created a video on this exact same topic said in his video that one of the biggest reasons these live-action remakes are they way they are is because the producers of the movies are afraid of trying out new ideas because they fear alienating their audience, and make the movies as barebones as possible as a result. And from what I have seen after watching every live-action remake up to the upcoming _Little Mermaid_ live-action remake, I agree with that.
The original Tinker Bell was a ball of light that was projected onto the stage wall by mirrors, and Barrier never described in detail Tinker Bell's appearance in the later novelization of the play other than that she is a fairy and very small and turns into a red light when she gets angry. And based on the trailer, the live action movie will be one film adaptation among dozens of others and not a remake as it is marketed as such in the media although according to Disney, the film has nothing to do with the 1953 animated film (which is why the 2023 movie is called Peter and Wendy and the upcoming sequel is titled Peter Pan in Scarlet like the 2006 book). And while I don't like the visual color scheme of the new film (whose atmosphere seems to be a direct copy of the 2020 live action film Wendy), I'm not afraid of Yara Shahidi's interpretation of the fairy character created by Barrier, and based on the trailer alone, Shahid seems to have the right chemistry and energy for the role. However, I hope that the Tinker Bell can talk like in the original book and many other live action adaptations and not be mute like in Disney's 1953 animated film. However, one of the best world-building interpretations of the Newerland that I have ever seen was the 1991 live action adaptation Hook where Robin Williams played Peter Pan, which is, in my opinion, slightly better world-building interpretations of the Newerland than the 2003 live-action Peter Pan.
It's a live action of Disney's movie. Disney made her white in the animated, so she ought to be in the live action. They already failed the live action and it has but even come out yet.
@@thecensoredmuscle563 In 2015, it was in the news that Disney bought the rights to make a completely new adaptation of the Peter and Wendy play, and in 2016 they announced that they were making Peter Pan Live Action, which would be closer to the play than the previously made animated film. At the beginning of 2023, Disney announced that the name of the film is Peter and Wendy, which confirms that it is not a remake of the Peter Pan animated film, but a re-adaptation, as previously stated, however, the film takes more artistic liberties than was originally said. Of course, I understand that the word "Dismey remake" also has a looser use and people call, for example, the Hook (1991), Peter Pan (2003) and Pan (2015) as Disney remakes and they have criticized, for example, the Hook for making Peter Pan (Robin Williams) an adult while in the book, play and Dismey animation Peter is an young child.
2:32 actually they also race swapped Mowgli in the 1994 live action version of Jungle Book by casting a Chinese Hawaiian (Jason Scott Lee) in the part and again no one even commented on it. *shrug*
I heard somewhere that the reason was they tried getting actors from Bollywood but they were all committed to other projects? If not for that one aspect it was a genuine good movie for real...
@@lindindotson1992 Jason may as well have just taken a marker and drawn two eyes and a mouth on both of his giant pecs and then make them move so it looked like they were talking. Dude was jungle SWOLE lmao
But I do feel bad for the animators or cgi artist of live action movies bcs they did great job. The animals looked absolutely real. It's amazing to see how far technology has come.
There's no need for realism. There's no need to wash out the bright colors and go for dull colors. It's literally a fairytale. It doesn't exist. Look at Sonic. When he was teased, the studio went to the "realism" route by giving him a "real" face. Thankfully, the fans realized how terrible he looked and the studio completely changed his face and gave him back his cartoon face and this decision completely saved the movie.
After watching the soulless Lion King remake, I was done with Disney live-action remakes. James Earl-Jones sounded like he was only there for a paycheck, Emma Watson was miscast as Belle, I nearly walked out of Dumbo (wish I had. Tim Burton has since redeemed himself a bit with Wednesday), and had zero interest in Mulan when characters like Mushu weren't in it. The new Little Mermaid film looks awful. The effects look bad, Triton losing his temper with Ariel in her cave in the original is pretty intense, here he sounds like he's not that bothered and Sebastian and the other sea creatures will not be able to give off the same expressions as their cartoon counterparts because of realism.
This new Little mermaid movie looks like a Disney Channel original. And isn't Sebastian supposed to be a hermit crab without the shell? Or at least the size of a hermit crab?
I have never watched any of the live-action adaptations and I doubt I ever will especially after the mess that was Mulan 2020. How people could keep support these types of movies especially since Mulan was filmed where genocide was taking place is beyond me, but hey I guess reliving your childhood and getting that nostalgic serotonin is important :/ I especially hate these live-action because it feels like they're undermining the capabilities of animation. As if animation versions are lesser than their live-action versions because they're "not real", furthering the narrative that animation is just ONLY for kids/is a genre. That's such a dismissive mindset to have honestly. I'm so glad that Guillermo's Pinocchio and DreamWorks Puss In Boots have shown that animation is just as, actually even better, than live-action because of the freedom it gives the artists and writers to express their stories without being limited to reality. Guillermo's Oscar speech was such cleansing to my ears especially after 2021 animation intro speech at the Oscars. Also love that "Toxic" by Britney was playing in the background. A man of culture I see👌
The live action stuff isn’t real either! That’s just people in costumes, green screens and an abundance of CGI, which I remind you is another form is animation!
Although this has nothing to do with Disney, there is a live action How to Train Your Dragon project and a live action Avatar the Last Airbender series in the works for DreamWorks and Netflix. When will this stop? Live action and photorealistic CGI is replacing animation, and it's only getting worse...
@@zorgnaxthis one originally had the creators of the cartoon working on it…but they’ve since left the project, which could be good or bad. We’ll have to wait to find out.
These movies piss me off every time I think about them. Using poc race swaps and lgbt or neurodivergent swaps as shields for how soulless they are pisses me off even more…,and I actually want diversity representation too.
Im just wondering how they are going to be able to make the main staple songs " Under the Sea" and " Kiss the girl" look as good as they did, with that abberration of design they did for Sebastian. And its not like they could do much better, frankly thats the best design they could logically apply, but that proves why this film could not and should not be made live action as, the only other possibility would have been to make Sebastian another mermaid, rather than a crab.
Few Disney Live Actions that i can still handle is Cinderella , Alladin , Beauty and the Beast and Alice in Wonderland But For Villain-centric side such as Maleficent and Cruella , Surprisingly it got better budget and better casting and better costume than the Hero side one Since the failure of Mulan 2020 and Pinnochio , i lose my faith to Live Action Remakes
Those are literally the only ones I can stomach, the rest was literal ass lmao💀 I'm so scared to imagine what they are going to do to Tiana from princess and the frog, Are they gonna make her a simp? Lazy?.. ... 💀💀💀 I'm terrified💀💀💀
I Would Applaud Disney for taking the criminally underrated one such as the Black Cauldron for the live action adaptation but i think i would go skeptic for that Because Disney thinks its less marketable for them
I’m almost certain The Little Mermaid is gonna be awful 😩 I want it to be good, I really do. I don’t mind remakes at all, I actually like Cinderella despite all its flaws. The remakes overall are just bad though 😅
The ending of live action aldaddin is kinda reunited because instead if a giant snake its a giant parrot. Which isn't scary or threatening. Can't it be a giant vulture or giant roc (from Arabian mythology) or a giant wasp or something.
On the bright side the more they push their agenders the more people are going to dislike them. Even people who like the new little mermaid and such will eventually hit a point where they realise what's going on.
Well, yes. They made Mary Poppins, The Parent Trap, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and several other succesful live-action movies. The only difference is that they had real talent and skilled production staff and good stories with no agenda or identity politics. Disney of today is none of that, so they cannot make great products until they get back to what they were.
Ariel for the live action movie looks really pretty, and I love that her tail is iridescent. You can tell that a lot of thought went into that. But my god, I hate how dark the under water scenes look. Like, we get it, they want realism; but I really hate how dark the film looks. In fact, one thing I hate about live action is that it seems like the past 15+ years zero budget exist when it comes to lightning. Also, Mr. Krabs, the Nickelodeon studios is two doors down to your...wait what do you mean you're Sebastian!?
I regret going to theatres to watch Lion Kong and Beauty and the Beast Live Action. I remember just feeling nothing while watching Lion King, I left the theatre sad and disappointed. With Beauty and the Beast, I legit fell asleep in the movie theatre. Nothing interesting was happening and I wasn’t engaged with the story line. (Also the chairs were very soft and comfortable) The love actions suck, and yet they keep releasing the bs
About Emma Watson, I do not understand why they casted her for Belle. She can't sing. She does NOT understand Belle's character at all. Isn't Belle literally French?Has she watched the original movie at least? Have any of them watched the original? I'm a little bit optimistic about Halle's Ariel. At least she can sing and has a wonderful voice. The only thing that can fuck up the movie is bad cgi, a terrible plot and dull colors **copium**
Cinderella is definitely the best live action, they actually committed to the task and gave a good film, Alice in Wonderland (2010) and Maleficent also deserve a little respect, considering they tried to serve something unique. The rest of these Live Actions are pure shit and they should not exist.
Thank u!! This is what I have been saying, especially changing race instead of creating a new story!! I'm black & I don't like the little mermaid being black when she is white. They could have made a new character & a new story with a black character...smh. This is just wrong.
I see your points on Lion King, but as a someone who haven't seen Lion King as a child I've enjoyed the remake in cinema. I have some skills in 3D graphics and I was constantly shocked by visual wonders they was able to create. The light going through bugs wings, the dust etc. I mean I was probably biased by my small but still expirance in 3D and fact that I loved BBC documentaries about animals especially African animals as a child.
Very good. That's exactly it. Both of those, actually. They've no real ideas besides what they've already created, and they're too afraid to try new ideas because they fear they won't make money or end up alienating whole aspects of their audience.
Notably absent in Cinderella live action were the talking animals. Seems that was a good choice because the animals would never be able to be as expressive or do outlandish motions. Cinema is supposed to suspend belief and animation is a form in which we can pretty much throw out things that would be completely unrealistic in live action (unless it’s sci fi or fantasy live action)
I kinda loved animated Maleficent more, she was evil for the LOLz and that was hilarious. Angelina Jolie's Maleficent is not my cup of tea. Too much of "it's okay for women to be evil cus patriarchy"
@@ralcolfwolfcoon8207 Really? That is legit her villain origin story. They specifically wrote the scene where she finds her wings gone to mirror a aftermath of r**e. They wanted people to like her not because she's a cool villain, but because she was a woman abused by a man so her hate/anger is justified and her curse of a baby an reasonable action.
@@ralcolfwolfcoon8207 Me, entitled? Because I have an opinion that differs from yours? No, thank you, I will be entitled. You have no right to tell me what to say, do or think. Maleficent is a not a good movie.
Their list for remakes includes The Hunchback of Notr Dame, Moana, Lilo and Sritch, Hercules, Bambi and many more. By the end of it they'll have ruined ALL of their classics, but I don't think audiences will be going along with it, we already see backlash and lack of interest for them. At one point Disney's pocketbook is gonna suffer and this nonsense will have to stop...
I noticed this trend when the DIsney Channel started churning out child stars while cancelling all the animated shows. They wanna be "hip with the cool kids" and animation is "for babies". I hate how upper management thinks "gritty realism" is what we need in disney. Ah yes grey backgrounds and edgy tiktok jokes that's timeless right.
These remakes taught me that realism is not always going to be appropriate for every style of film. Animation is one of those areas where it should be kept away from.
They’ve been treating it as the redheaded stepchild for so long that eventually the division’s second-class status became a self-fulfilling prophecy. Even *Gus* isn’t as bad as this crap.
I wouldn't have an issue with these films if they were decent films, but for the most part they just aren't. When they try to tell the stories in the same way the originals did it just doesn't work since those stories were told specifically through the medium of animation. Not only that though but when they do try and do something new like with Mulan they just butcher everything and give us sub-par films at best. I am really tired of this and I haven't paid to see any of these films in years now. Use the money to make original films instead Disney before your entire legacy is nothing but shallowness.
They some Disney's making decent re-roots: 101 duration Cinderella (1997) Cinderella _2015) the Prince having character, the king😢😢😢, sword farther (delete the scenes for the Prince)he's good 😊
I have a feeling that the Little Mermaid remake won't make money. I feel ppl are understanding that these movies are just trash and are there to gain from ur nostalgia. Plus I've heard little no no talk abt it and it seems no one is interested
I can see your point on the live action remakes, but what about Broadway adaptations? Do you feel the same way or does the medium of stage theater work?
It would be one thing if they tried a different version of the stories they’re making. No one cared that Del Toro made another Pinocchio because he did his own spin and take on it. No one was mad at the Disney Cinderella remake because Branaugh was doing his own thing with it. Yeah there were definitely Easter eggs here and there to the original but I can’t call it a remake of the original Disney Cinderella because it never feels like it’s trying to capture the original movie. Whereas every SINGLE live action remake is a carbon copy of the original and it’s not trying to do or say anything different. Maybe they could have tried a Little Mermaid with the original ending. Maybe they could have actually done a Mulan more accurate to the Chinese legend. Maybe they could have tried doing a Pinocchio that was a lot darker than the 1940’s one and where Pinocchio is more of a jerk like he is in the book. The possibilities were endless. If the need for live actions was necessary, they should have done what Branaugh’s Cinderella did and try to make their own movie. I have my problems with that Cinderella movie but I cannot call it a soulless cash grab which is what I would call the others. Now it’s just no imagination, no good effects, no good directing, and no point.
Yeah thank you for pointing this out the problem with live action remakes they tell same story but add unnecessary new add ones the worst ones in my opinion is Lion King and Beauty and the beast. I won't be supporting Disney anymore with their soulless films the little mermaid looks one of worst I miss when Disney did original classic films It saddens me how bad it fallen.
I think you should talk about the case *OUTSIDE* the remakes, and you have a lot of non-remake Disney live-action films to talk about. They're often unsuccessful in the box office and even more hated the remakes, with _Artemis Fowl_ and _The Nutcracker and the Four Realms_ being considered some of the worst films of their respective years of release.
This is why I’m convinced that Disney is being intentionally destroyed. These current employees hate Walt and everything he stood for (American Dream, American exceptionalism, capitalism, etc). They can’t bring down the man himself, since he’s dead, so they’re going after the next best thing-his company.
1) the america dream is dead. we are living in neo-feudal times. 2) americans are not exceptional. they are below average at this point. 3) capitalism is killing us all. 4) which classic disney films exactly talked about any of these things in a positive way ever?
Awesome point regarding the central idiocy of these remakes: if the characters are going to appear "real" -- especially if they're inanimate objects or animals -- they're just not going to have any of the powers of expression of the cartoon versions. Lumiere (now a photorealistic & boring candlestick), Sebastian (now a photorealistic & disgusting crab), plus everything in Lion King are obvious examples of this. Gross! : - )
TBH, I was turned off by these Disney live action remakes. I wanted something different, something creative, something new. The Renaissance and Experimental movies were different and innovative, whether two different genres slapped together (Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet, Atlantis: the Lost Empire, Emperor’s New Groove) or classic stories (Tarzan, Little Mermaid, Hercules) were all so good because they were different and innovative, the fact that a new year meant a new Disney movie that was so different from last year’s and you were excited. The more live action remakes, the less I am excited
When I heard Ariel was going to be black, I got excited cause I thought there was a chance they were going to move the story's location to the Caribbean, rather than the Mediterranean. I give Disney too much credit, I should know better
I think this ties into my theory about Disney execs being ashamed of their own company; they're the types who think animation is for babies. Warner Bros is even worse, because they've said girls and women don't even *like* animation, so that gives us some idea into the types of people running these companies. Thank god for Guillermo Del Toro's Oscar speech, I hope that made certain people very nervous.
We can also thank Puss In Boots: The Last Wish for making more people appreciate animation.
I can't stand idiots who think animation is for babies which only comes out of the words of the stupidest people in the world that should not be allowed to run in any animation studio ever again. Why can't they ever grow the hell up and listen to what fans want?
I wanna hear the logic behind why one would think women dont like animation 😂
@hambone fakenamington I don't get it myself especially since one of the people who said it is a woman herself, but I think that's just the general attitude of the people running the studios now. There is space for great American animation again, but art and creativity are often too expensive and too inconvenient for people whose only goal is to make a profit.
Compare Roger Rabbit with the more recent Rescue Rangers movie, you can tell just by the trailers which production had more love of the craft in it and more respect for the characters. People like Spielberg and Zemeckis should be standing next to Guillermo Del Toro as he defends the medium (which is the other problem I think, executives see animation as a genre and not a medium for expressing things)
This is why I respect the anime so much. Japanese animation studios know how powerful animation as a storytelling medium can be and as a result have made extraordinary things with it. In my opinion, there is no Western animation studio (no, not even Disney) that would be able to make an animated movie on par with the likes of Spirited Away or Ninja Scroll or even The End of Evangelion.
I cannot think of a single Western animated movie that has made me feel the same way those three movies have made me feel. I really cannot.
I appreciate you calling out the race-swapping for what it really is. Just more shielding for them from any criticism of their mediocre/garbage love action movies. As a black person, I cannot tell you how insulting it is to see studios use blatant tokenism like that and call it "diversity"
@@l.0_quin397 so you think that by them race-swapping characters in poorly written garbage movies and attributing any criticism to racism, that they are not using race as a shield?
@@l.0_quin397 it’s often, but not always, a distraction from telling a story, because knows that the actor will catch hate matter what. Hate baiting.
And I’m not against race swapping, just against using it a sheild? Hate baiting (sometimes) or as a distraction from how (generally) soulless the product is.
@@Dave102693 Soul was one of my favorite movies of all time. Amazing that Disney did not have confidence in that film and just dumped it on Disney+ (the main character was a black man). Why was that? Racism? Maybe they're not ACTUALLY progressive!
@@Dave102693 So I guess you're fine with ANY type of raceswapping,right?
@@emhullum4120I don't know what you was expecting from them Disneyland has pride events but in China Disney act like the LGBTQ,+ community don't exist. It often find my self asking which is it. They should not have allowed to have it both ways
The reason these don't work is because they look dull. They don't have enough vibrant colors, and look like a general landscape. Yes, they are supposed to be "realistic", which doesn't make sense when trying to tell an imaginative fairy tale.
Which may be why Cinderella is the only one of these to really be great. That's the only one I can think of that was just as vibrant and bright as the original. It still felt like a fairy tale world.
Even tho I am not a fan of Avatar, I can at least say Pandora looks great. You would think Disney would realize people want to see colors and lights and sparkles. And realistic doesn't mean it can't take creative liberties. Titanic 1997 has a lot of well lit scenes that are inaccurate, but if they were realistic, we would not be able to see anything happening in the movie. I'd rather a well lit ocean bottom for a live action than a dark abyss that I can't see even at night without a sun glare.
Agreed I don't know why everything is so anti colour, everything looks so washed out and desaturated. Like they smeared mud on the lenses before filming
@@blinkowarner3117 Not only that, but the Cinderella live-action actually builds the characters rather than decimating their arcs. Cinderella is the perfect combination of being feminine and strong, and the prince has proper characterization. (Granted, Charming was much better in Cinderella 3)
@@blinkowarner3117 for real, thr creators of that live-action really said "wanna watch your favourite princess movie but with lots of magic sparkles and butterflies?"
My 13 year old self was like YEEEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!!
The fairy godmother was a big change too lmao
At least Maleficent and Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland tried different themes and takes on their respective properties. I respect that than just blatantly copying scene by scene of the originals. It is like what is even the point of telling the same story again.
The 90’s live action 101 Dalmatians movie is worth that same respect, in my opinion. Sure, it definitely borrowed the structure of the original (Roger and Anita meet via Pongo, they marry, puppies are born, Pongo and Perdita find them, they go back home), but it played around with many things. For one thing, those live action dogs were given far more CGI expression, despite the technology being in its infancy (literally meaning there was no excuse for the lack of expression in the remake of Lion King). They also played around with the human roles too. While Roger was better suited as a fledgling musician than a video game developer, I see why they went with it. Video games were becoming more mainstream in the 90’s, so it gave the story a modern twist that many out there could relate to. They went with Anita being pregnant alongside Perdita, which was cute. They also cleverly tied Anita and Cruella together instead of using the throwaway line that they were “dearly devoted old schoolmates.” Using Anita as the vessel for Cruella’s desire to craft a coat of Dalmatian fur was more realistic. Cruella asked integral questions about the quality of the fur instead of deciding that she liked the coats on a whim. The adventure Pongo, Perdita, and all of the puppies went on was delightful too. I prefer the old trek better, but you can tell the producers of the live action film had so much fun with each scene! Glenn Close nailed the role of Cruella too, and those dogs and barnyard animals put her through the wringer!
The one major thing that was lacking in the live action film was the choice to make the animals voiceless. It, to me, is the number one reason why the original film was better (number two being that the original is animated). However, that was a handicap for the live action film’s writers and directors. They had to tell the dogs’ side of the story without putting their thoughts and actions into words. That was very hard to do, but I think they pulled it off. The film is one of the very best in the Disney live action lineup. My number one favorite is Homeward Bound: the Incredible Journey. Why can’t Disney make movies like that anymore?
I’m probably in the minority when I say that I’ve never seen Tim Burton’s Alice In Wonderland! Alice In Wonderland was never my favorite Disney movie to begin with, but with all the Disney controversy, seeing a good remake would be very refreshing! I also found the Maleficent movies very enjoyable. They were unique for their time, giving Maleficent more character than her simply being evil for evil’s sake. Unfortunately, I think the success of this series is why we ended up with the ridiculous Cruella origin story. Both were stories about sympathizing somewhat with the villains, though it’s insanely obvious which one did it right and which one didn’t…
2:32 - they actually DID cast a lightskinned Indian actress to play dark-skinned Middle Eastern Jasmine and nobody said ANYTHING. How can they be so holier than thou about making Ariel black when they race lifted the first major nonwhite Disney Princess. Heck, Aladdin was the first major Disney animated feature to attract a huge black audience (I think TLM and BatB Disney sensed it but Aladdin and TLK made it clear that blacks and Latinos go to see Disney films too).
I literally read some reviews or commenters at the time go "Indian Middle Eastern? Close enough" or "what's the difference?" 😞😒
I did feel that it was weird that Jasmine was lighter. But I thought "Well, there are other Middle Eastern people who have lighter skin" and didn't know Naomi has a whole different heritage☠️. The thing is, at least it wasn't on the nose. It's wrong, but at least it obviously isn't being shoved in your face.
I think live action Jasmine (naomi scott) was american? Correct me if I'm wrong
@@belledraws1331 no, she's British
There were complaints Naomi Scott was too light.
“I’m sick of this, but I’ll watch it” is a big part of the problem. As long as people will watch it disney has no reason to stop producing them.
Y’know, I was going to make my own video where I reviewed the newest Snow White remake, but after reading this comment, I realize I’d be contributing to the problem if I did. I strongly discourage anyone from watching this movies!
@@evanbarth7173 well hot damn, I made a difference in the world! Thanks for commenting you made my day
Exactly. My Mom wants to watch the live action remakes. And so do a little bit of my friends. I try to tell them don't watch them, because the originals are better, and if you keep watching the live-action remakes that's going to fuel the fire for Disney to make those soulless live action remakes. But they never, EVER listen.
''It's not even out yet. Why are you hating it already? You HAVE to watch it first!''
No, I don't! Every single one of those remakes ranged from meh to terrible pieces of shit! The only ones I liked were the 101 Dalmatians movies from the 90s and early 2000s, before the dark times. All those remakes encouraged me to do is get myself physical copies of the original movies before the Chinese puppet censures them all.
''Stop comparing them to the originals! They're their own think.''
No, they're not! If they're supposed to be their own thing why do they go almost exactly the same as the original plot, why do they use the iconic imagery and music instead of creating their own (Why not change Belle's dress from golden to blue?)?
Just the idea of turning these beloved classics into live-action is an insult to animation and creativity. Imagine in place of every lazy remake there was an original animated movie. Not all of them would've been good. But people wouldn't hate them just for existing.
''But what about kids now? They deserve to see those classic stories.''
Yes, they do! So show them the originals, they still hold up! Are you worried about outdated stuff like language, stereotypes, smoking, etc? Then maybe explain this stuff. Or watch other live-action or animated versions. Disney isn't the only company that makes movies.
About the outdated stuff, I think Warner Bros. put a disclaimer on some of the old Looney Tunes explaining how some of the actions did not reflect current world viewpoints. Disney should seriously do the same.
"Stop comparing them to the originals! They're their own thing!" Okay, then why was the 2019 Lion King literally beat for beat, shot for shot identical to the 90s animated movie? Like, they even reused some of Mufasa's lines from the original in the realistically animated version.
I don't get it. Movies get compared to each other all the time. People are allowed to compare them.
The other thing that saddens me is the, "Oh, well these are meant for kids. They don't have to be good." Kids deserve to have good quality movies to watch. And on top of that, kids aren't limited to the media that came out after they were born. I can show my cousin's kids movies that came out around the time I was born. There's no limitations to that.
@@nerdoftheatre "These are meant for kids. They don't need to be good". Man, I hate that mindset too. Poor taste motherfuckers think that kids are stupid and are going to consume any shit that you throw at them and make money out of it...
Aaaaaaaall of this! Well said!
@Lilly Cat Cinderella is easily the best out of all of them.
Doesn’t it seem hypocritical when Hollywood constantly disrespects animation as a medium and tool for storytelling when they CONSTANTLY abuse the hell of using CGI in live action films which is another form of animation?
Life action lion king. Cool Lions can talk now.
I feel like these remakes and sequels releasing only on Disney+ is the equivalent to their older (really bad) sequels going straight to VCR/DVD.
I'll take low-budget sequels over high-budget remakes any day. Even when they went through the same story beats as the original, at least DisneyToon Studios made _some_ effort to do something new with them.
@@SparkpadArt oh, I completely agree on that, both are just low quality attempts to make money. One is just significantly worse which are the remakes
Honestly, well said. You're literally the first youtuber I saw that actually addressed every wrong aspect about Disney's content in the past few years, including how people eat this shit up and, with that, encourages Disney to keep doing this over and over again. Kudos for making that visible!
everybody gangsta until they make a cars 2 live action film
AH A stupid person! Couldn't you be more original instead of copying people? By copying people you don't need to think! "But people do it, so why can't I do it?" You will surely tell me! And I will answer you "You can have your own personality instead of being a follower without any personality"! All that to say that I'm tired of seeing stupid comments like this that don't mean anything!
That would be nightmare fuel
Cinderella is the only life action film done right. This movie is so underrated and deserves more love.
Totally agree. It’s the only film that took what was beautiful on the animated version and gave depth by keeping it fantastic, magical and COLOURFUL… even the mice are cuter than any other live action attempt . Cinderella is my favourite ❤
What about The Jungle Book?
I don’t think Jungle book and Aladdin was that bad but Beauty and the beast had some problems
Jungle Book was good
@@BroZilla-vh3tuI agree (😉). Though, as controversial as this may sound, I would say the 1994 live-action “Jungle Book” film is the stronger of the two live-action Disney films, but that’s just me.
I think part of it is also that Disney completely doesn't respect animation as a medium that can appeal to adults. They're trying to turn all of their already perfectly good movies into adult-oriented content for money, and the worst part is that it's working.
Which is horrifyingly sad since that is exactly what Disney (as in the actual man, Walt Disney) started out doing: Making genuinely adult-oriented short movies for theaters.
My least favorite part of it is that it isn't even live-action. It's cheap CGI knockoff where only about 10% of the whole thing is real.
I am actually surprised that you didn't bring up Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio.
That Movie felt to many as a labor of love while Disney's own remake felt sanitized and soulless.
These 2 came out around the same time and exposes what's so wrong with Disney right now.
Im convinced that disney doesn’t know how to produce movies anymore. Once they finish all the live actions, they will make sequels.
Aladdin sequel is already announced.
i bet they'll just remake the straight to dvd sequels they already made😂😂
When I first heard that Mulan was getting a live action I got so excited. Mulan was really my favorite movie growing up alongside Shrek 2. Sometimes, when I had trouble sleeping as a kid I'd awaken one of my parents to play the Mulan CD for me in the CD player, and I'd watch it until I sleep. It was the very definition of a comfort movie. When the news first came about the live action I was nothing short of ecstatic, even more because it was rumored to release on 27th of march, MY FUCKING BIRTHDAY.
Anyways imagine my shock
Aww Faye I'm so sorry 😢 they did Mulan ESPECIALLY dirty
Live-action Mulan broke my heart. She is my favorite princess.
Oof... cant think of anything worse than that...
An acclaimed Critic once said
"I prefer animation to Live Action because it has more freedom when it comes to presentation. If I want a tree to look like a person, I can. If I want visually stunning magic, I can, If I want a beautiful shot of a scene, I can make one. Live Action can Never Achieve this because it is"Realistic"
My favorite Peter Pan is the live-action 2003 Peter Pan. The blond Peter Pan.
Everything about that movie was great especially the costuming and sets.
It would be an absolute miracle if Disney could ever reach that level of love to a movie
The one with Jason Isaacs as Capt. Hook? Damn, I loved that movie.
I agree! But the movie was not just a remake of the old movie, it explored interesting new aspects of the Wendy-Hook-Peter dynamic. It was actually quite a mature movie.
The one made by universal pictures? Yes that one was beautiful and is probably one of my favorite movies
Yeah, that's my favorite too
Disney could’ve used the money to resurrect some cancelled animated projects like Gigantic, Mort (Discworld), Wild Life and King of the Elves, but NNNNOOOO! They use the money instead to make more unnecessary, bland and lifeless live-action remakes like this!
(Sigh) What the greedy desire for the golden touch will make people do these days.
If they make a live action Toy Story I will propably die!
Repunzul…
They already did. It’s called Lost Ollie
@@ilikepointlessinternetargument shhhhshsh.... Don't give them ideas, they're gonna jump on that and make it crap💀😂
There’s already a live action Toy Story by JP and Beyond and it’s actually good.
you know what I think Disney SHOULD HAVE DONE? [they could keep the black actress as Ariel.] Re-animate their iconic Disney princess movies with better animations. It seems so simple, and plus you keep the films looking good. Their live action CGI is already shit. making an updated animation of their older films, while not changing anything is free money. I just cannot wait for when Disney is so dead that they start begging and groveling for money.
I will never....ever watch any live action remake, those are just insults to the incredible work the animators did in the original....if they wanted a new little Mermaid....why not make an adatation more faithful to the actual Tale of Hans Christian Andersen....like I read Sofia Coppola wanted once to do, with different characters and names.....I remember reading that long ago and that sounded so much interesting than see the crappy remake Disney are doing now.......as long WE pay them money for these abominations, DISNEY WILL NEVER STOP....so nope I can't care less to support this crap, and I hope more people start realizing this as well they stop supporting the Disney in destroying the animated classics, the MCU, star wars and all the things they keep just hammering with bad stories.
According to my dull Lion King 2019 retrospective is pretty problematic as I fear that anthro=animals in the Robinhood remake will be devoted of emotions-
highlights-
-The visuals look decent with realistic animation
-Adults should enjoy cartoons for Pete's sake so I can compare Lion King 2019 to a cartoon
-songs are copy paste
-replace movements with agile running
-Background animals feel more like the main characters with their emotional rhythms
-Lions have no emotions so why do I even care more than the expressive background animals
-Simba looks too deadpan
-It should be about Pumbaa's friends with their attics
Disney made a perfectly good Aslan but couldn't do Simba justice? Boi I oughta
It's honestly bizarre that Disney seems to outright refuse to create new and iconic villains into their animated movies when they know of the brand power of their classic Disney Renaissance villains. They gave them their own live-action remakes!
I don't see why Dsney can't just re-release the original films in theaters like they did many years ago and I'd bet they'd make just as much if not more money than their live action remakes.
My distaste for live action superhero films falls along the same lines tbh. Its another medium where live action very often just can't duplicate the grandness of the imagination required to read the books, and the medium is more and more devalued in the same way (animators and comic book artists both have in some cases literally thrown out theirhands creating this art onlyto have said feats duplicated in 1/2 the timewith CGI and deemed "better" or an "improvement"). Yes, occasionally you get the Sam Raimi Spiderman or Bryan Singer's X-Men or Avengers (which I don't even personally care for) that are genuinely good, but part of the problem with said immense popularity is that it brings in a huge part of the fanbase only familiar with the movies and really looking down on the comics themselves as somehow illegitimate or not important beyond what they bring to the film adaptations - while all the while claiming they know the books better than anybody. I might be young, but I'm old enough to remember being dismissed as nerdy (at people's most charitable) for still being into comic books and feeling genuinely lonely that the only people I could share this interest with was other fans online - usually people on Reddit or a Comic Forum; who I didn't even know in real life and was unlikely to ever meet and would never even try to for obvious reasons (being a kid after all). I remember last year when George Perez, probably the greatest artist to ever draw the Avengers and the JLA at their most grand and epic scale imaginable (actually my favorite was his Teen Titans books) died from a prolonged terminal illness, I got emotional, because I had literally grown up clinging to these comics that he had drawn for dear life. And I shared that feeling with multiple people I knew who identified as diehard MCU fans - and they didn't know who the hell this guy was. And when I told them who he was and said that they surely would remember him because they SAID they read the books and I was told by one of them in the most snide way possible "I didn't read the books for the artists I read them for the CHARACTERS" in which case I pretty much flatly understood in the moment "no. you. didn't."
I always say it's a terrible missed opportunity not to just adapt the Lion King stage show with real actors and costumes and get Terry Gilliam or someone to direct.
Disney seems to be creatively bankrupt a lot lately. there are no fresh or new themes anymore. they've gotten comfortable, now we only have to wait for a worthy competitor to overtake them
DIsney thinks it's a '' good! '' to do a prequel about Mufasa's childhood EXACTLY like the first remake. I can't wait to see Scar and Mufasa as cubs with no emotions, this doesn't sound stupid and boring at all 😂Same with Bambi and Robin hood, the compagny wants to remake them. Lilo and Stitch too! I'm scared, Stitch might look like Sonic first's design for his live-action movie. Just imagine a blue Koala with humans teeth, eeeew!
You mentioned thee hunchback.
Picture Disney instead of Paris burning and the choir singing: Kyrie eleison! Kyrie eleison!
These started out as new takes on classic stories, and now they've devolved into anvils to smash over the viewer's head. I liked the approach 2015's Cinderella took to the story. The only other remake I've watched since was Aladdin, and that was a family outing. Disney's gotten so drunk on the power of CGI and special effects that they've decided to regurgitate their most iconic stories into soulless cash-grabs. Do they even realize how bad TLM looks?! Hard to tell, but either way, I don't think they care, because they know people will pay money to go see it because of nostalgia.
Poor Walt's rolling in his grave at what his namesake has become.
His racist ass should be rolling in his grave 😊
@@luvinlyricsshut up and go cry in your acid filled bathtub!
I have forgotten his name, but a TH-camr who created a video on this exact same topic said in his video that one of the biggest reasons these live-action remakes are they way they are is because the producers of the movies are afraid of trying out new ideas because they fear alienating their audience, and make the movies as barebones as possible as a result. And from what I have seen after watching every live-action remake up to the upcoming _Little Mermaid_ live-action remake, I agree with that.
The original Tinker Bell was a ball of light that was projected onto the stage wall by mirrors, and Barrier never described in detail Tinker Bell's appearance in the later novelization of the play other than that she is a fairy and very small and turns into a red light when she gets angry. And based on the trailer, the live action movie will be one film adaptation among dozens of others and not a remake as it is marketed as such in the media although according to Disney, the film has nothing to do with the 1953 animated film (which is why the 2023 movie is called Peter and Wendy and the upcoming sequel is titled Peter Pan in Scarlet like the 2006 book). And while I don't like the visual color scheme of the new film (whose atmosphere seems to be a direct copy of the 2020 live action film Wendy), I'm not afraid of Yara Shahidi's interpretation of the fairy character created by Barrier, and based on the trailer alone, Shahid seems to have the right chemistry and energy for the role. However, I hope that the Tinker Bell can talk like in the original book and many other live action adaptations and not be mute like in Disney's 1953 animated film. However, one of the best world-building interpretations of the Newerland that I have ever seen was the 1991 live action adaptation Hook where Robin Williams played Peter Pan, which is, in my opinion, slightly better world-building interpretations of the Newerland than the 2003 live-action Peter Pan.
It's a live action of Disney's movie. Disney made her white in the animated, so she ought to be in the live action. They already failed the live action and it has but even come out yet.
@@thecensoredmuscle563 In 2015, it was in the news that Disney bought the rights to make a completely new adaptation of the Peter and Wendy play, and in 2016 they announced that they were making Peter Pan Live Action, which would be closer to the play than the previously made animated film. At the beginning of 2023, Disney announced that the name of the film is Peter and Wendy, which confirms that it is not a remake of the Peter Pan animated film, but a re-adaptation, as previously stated, however, the film takes more artistic liberties than was originally said. Of course, I understand that the word "Dismey remake" also has a looser use and people call, for example, the Hook (1991), Peter Pan (2003) and Pan (2015) as Disney remakes and they have criticized, for example, the Hook for making Peter Pan (Robin Williams) an adult while in the book, play and Dismey animation Peter is an young child.
2:32 actually they also race swapped Mowgli in the 1994 live action version of Jungle Book by casting a Chinese Hawaiian (Jason Scott Lee) in the part and again no one even commented on it. *shrug*
True it was horrible. But I didn't care. I just *loved* looking at him 😍🤩😘
I heard somewhere that the reason was they tried getting actors from Bollywood but they were all committed to other projects? If not for that one aspect it was a genuine good movie for real...
@@lindindotson1992 Jason may as well have just taken a marker and drawn two eyes and a mouth on both of his giant pecs and then make them move so it looked like they were talking. Dude was jungle SWOLE lmao
But I do feel bad for the animators or cgi artist of live action movies bcs they did great job. The animals looked absolutely real. It's amazing to see how far technology has come.
There's no need for realism. There's no need to wash out the bright colors and go for dull colors. It's literally a fairytale. It doesn't exist. Look at Sonic. When he was teased, the studio went to the "realism" route by giving him a "real" face. Thankfully, the fans realized how terrible he looked and the studio completely changed his face and gave him back his cartoon face and this decision completely saved the movie.
After watching the soulless Lion King remake, I was done with Disney live-action remakes. James Earl-Jones sounded like he was only there for a paycheck, Emma Watson was miscast as Belle, I nearly walked out of Dumbo (wish I had. Tim Burton has since redeemed himself a bit with Wednesday), and had zero interest in Mulan when characters like Mushu weren't in it. The new Little Mermaid film looks awful. The effects look bad, Triton losing his temper with Ariel in her cave in the original is pretty intense, here he sounds like he's not that bothered and Sebastian and the other sea creatures will not be able to give off the same expressions as their cartoon counterparts because of realism.
Any time Disney makes a live action remake I just watch the original instead
This new Little mermaid movie looks like a Disney Channel original. And isn't Sebastian supposed to be a hermit crab without the shell? Or at least the size of a hermit crab?
Is Toxic playing in the background ?!😂 If it’s not just me hearing this masterpiece we have to applaud 👏🏻 good choices
Yeah i just noticed that! Lol
I have never watched any of the live-action adaptations and I doubt I ever will especially after the mess that was Mulan 2020. How people could keep support these types of movies especially since Mulan was filmed where genocide was taking place is beyond me, but hey I guess reliving your childhood and getting that nostalgic serotonin is important :/
I especially hate these live-action because it feels like they're undermining the capabilities of animation. As if animation versions are lesser than their live-action versions because they're "not real", furthering the narrative that animation is just ONLY for kids/is a genre. That's such a dismissive mindset to have honestly. I'm so glad that Guillermo's Pinocchio and DreamWorks Puss In Boots have shown that animation is just as, actually even better, than live-action because of the freedom it gives the artists and writers to express their stories without being limited to reality. Guillermo's Oscar speech was such cleansing to my ears especially after 2021 animation intro speech at the Oscars.
Also love that "Toxic" by Britney was playing in the background. A man of culture I see👌
The live action stuff isn’t real either! That’s just people in costumes, green screens and an abundance of CGI, which I remind you is another form is animation!
Although this has nothing to do with Disney, there is a live action How to Train Your Dragon project and a live action Avatar the Last Airbender series in the works for DreamWorks and Netflix. When will this stop? Live action and photorealistic CGI is replacing animation, and it's only getting worse...
Oh dear god!!! Did they not learn their lesson after the live action Avatar TLA movie?!?
@@zorgnaxthis one originally had the creators of the cartoon working on it…but they’ve since left the project, which could be good or bad. We’ll have to wait to find out.
Thank you for addressing so many of my problems with what Disney is doing.
These movies piss me off every time I think about them.
Using poc race swaps and lgbt or neurodivergent swaps as shields for how soulless they are pisses me off even more…,and I actually want diversity representation too.
Using the only two a fairy and a mermaid can be play by any race
I really miss those years when Disney used to make good movies and not just live action remakes or "trying" to be more woke.
Maleficent and cruella were gems in a pile of trash. Well never see great stories like that again from Disney.
The animated genius was that it was…ANIMATED. All the magic you can do with animation, you can’t really with real people. It just doesn’t work.
Literally Dove Cameron would have been perfect as Tinkerbell
Almost like modern Disney is allergic to finding new stories to steal
"To steal"? What do you mean?
Well they used to steal stories
Im just wondering how they are going to be able to make the main staple songs " Under the Sea" and " Kiss the girl" look as good as they did, with that abberration of design they did for Sebastian.
And its not like they could do much better, frankly thats the best design they could logically apply, but that proves why this film could not and should not be made live action as, the only other possibility would have been to make Sebastian another mermaid, rather than a crab.
Few Disney Live Actions that i can still handle is Cinderella , Alladin , Beauty and the Beast and Alice in Wonderland
But For Villain-centric side such as Maleficent and Cruella , Surprisingly it got better budget and better casting and better costume than the Hero side one
Since the failure of Mulan 2020 and Pinnochio , i lose my faith to Live Action Remakes
Those are literally the only ones I can stomach, the rest was literal ass lmao💀 I'm so scared to imagine what they are going to do to Tiana from princess and the frog,
Are they gonna make her a simp? Lazy?..
...
💀💀💀 I'm terrified💀💀💀
I Would Applaud Disney for taking the criminally underrated one such as the Black Cauldron for the live action adaptation but i think i would go skeptic for that
Because Disney thinks its less marketable for them
I’m almost certain The Little Mermaid is gonna be awful 😩 I want it to be good, I really do. I don’t mind remakes at all, I actually like Cinderella despite all its flaws. The remakes overall are just bad though 😅
The ending of live action aldaddin is kinda reunited because instead if a giant snake its a giant parrot. Which isn't scary or threatening. Can't it be a giant vulture or giant roc (from Arabian mythology) or a giant wasp or something.
Nailed it and I appreciate the subtle background music.
This live-action direction would make good Abandoned By Disney horror material.
On the bright side the more they push their agenders the more people are going to dislike them. Even people who like the new little mermaid and such will eventually hit a point where they realise what's going on.
The oppression and erasure of ginger characters continues...
My friend said peter pan was a redhead based on a book. Why did they make him have a black hair and shorter than wendy?
You seriously expect Disney to ever make another original live action movie after John Carter and the Lone Ranger
Well, yes. They made Mary Poppins, The Parent Trap, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, and several other succesful live-action movies. The only difference is that they had real talent and skilled production staff and good stories with no agenda or identity politics. Disney of today is none of that, so they cannot make great products until they get back to what they were.
I kinda blame Tim Burton for this live action situation. He opened Pandora’s box with his remake of Dumbo and now we’re suffering through this mess.
Ariel for the live action movie looks really pretty, and I love that her tail is iridescent. You can tell that a lot of thought went into that. But my god, I hate how dark the under water scenes look. Like, we get it, they want realism; but I really hate how dark the film looks. In fact, one thing I hate about live action is that it seems like the past 15+ years zero budget exist when it comes to lightning.
Also, Mr. Krabs, the Nickelodeon studios is two doors down to your...wait what do you mean you're Sebastian!?
I regret going to theatres to watch Lion Kong and Beauty and the Beast Live Action.
I remember just feeling nothing while watching Lion King, I left the theatre sad and disappointed.
With Beauty and the Beast, I legit fell asleep in the movie theatre. Nothing interesting was happening and I wasn’t engaged with the story line. (Also the chairs were very soft and comfortable)
The love actions suck, and yet they keep releasing the bs
About Emma Watson, I do not understand why they casted her for Belle. She can't sing. She does NOT understand Belle's character at all. Isn't Belle literally French?Has she watched the original movie at least? Have any of them watched the original?
I'm a little bit optimistic about Halle's Ariel. At least she can sing and has a wonderful voice. The only thing that can fuck up the movie is bad cgi, a terrible plot and dull colors **copium**
Cinderella is definitely the best live action, they actually committed to the task and gave a good film, Alice in Wonderland (2010) and Maleficent also deserve a little respect, considering they tried to serve something unique. The rest of these Live Actions are pure shit and they should not exist.
Thank u!! This is what I have been saying, especially changing race instead of creating a new story!! I'm black & I don't like the little mermaid being black when she is white. They could have made a new character & a new story with a black character...smh. This is just wrong.
I see your points on Lion King, but as a someone who haven't seen Lion King as a child I've enjoyed the remake in cinema. I have some skills in 3D graphics and I was constantly shocked by visual wonders they was able to create. The light going through bugs wings, the dust etc. I mean I was probably biased by my small but still expirance in 3D and fact that I loved BBC documentaries about animals especially African animals as a child.
Me theory is simple they have probably just run out of ideas or they don't want to takes risks
Very good. That's exactly it. Both of those, actually. They've no real ideas besides what they've already created, and they're too afraid to try new ideas because they fear they won't make money or end up alienating whole aspects of their audience.
"real life" Sebastian can't hurt you, "real life" Sebastian isn't "real"
"real life" Sebastian: 0:23
I didn't mind them at first, but when the Mulan movie came, it was the straw that broke the camel's back. I never look back.
So true 🤗
Notably absent in Cinderella live action were the talking animals. Seems that was a good choice because the animals would never be able to be as expressive or do outlandish motions. Cinema is supposed to suspend belief and animation is a form in which we can pretty much throw out things that would be completely unrealistic in live action (unless it’s sci fi or fantasy live action)
Disney really hasn't got the message with umpteen remakes and sequels coming up instead of anything original. We need more movies like Encanto!
Thanks for leaving Maleficent out of this. That was a good movie series
I kinda loved animated Maleficent more, she was evil for the LOLz and that was hilarious. Angelina Jolie's Maleficent is not my cup of tea. Too much of "it's okay for women to be evil cus patriarchy"
I don't think that was what it was about. But whatever
@@ralcolfwolfcoon8207 Really? That is legit her villain origin story. They specifically wrote the scene where she finds her wings gone to mirror a aftermath of r**e. They wanted people to like her not because she's a cool villain, but because she was a woman abused by a man so her hate/anger is justified and her curse of a baby an reasonable action.
So what? Whatever. It's a good movie. Don't be entitled.
@@ralcolfwolfcoon8207 Me, entitled? Because I have an opinion that differs from yours? No, thank you, I will be entitled. You have no right to tell me what to say, do or think. Maleficent is a not a good movie.
Their list for remakes includes The Hunchback of Notr Dame, Moana, Lilo and Sritch, Hercules, Bambi and many more. By the end of it they'll have ruined ALL of their classics, but I don't think audiences will be going along with it, we already see backlash and lack of interest for them. At one point Disney's pocketbook is gonna suffer and this nonsense will have to stop...
I will not be watching the live-action Little Mermaid. I'm fed up with live-action remakes and them disrespecting the art and magic of animation.
Can’t imagine live action Steamboat Willie.
I noticed this trend when the DIsney Channel started churning out child stars while cancelling all the animated shows. They wanna be "hip with the cool kids" and animation is "for babies". I hate how upper management thinks "gritty realism" is what we need in disney. Ah yes grey backgrounds and edgy tiktok jokes that's timeless right.
Disney: I Made Ariel Black!
Me: What?!
These remakes taught me that realism is not always going to be appropriate for every style of film. Animation is one of those areas where it should be kept away from.
I don't mind the remakes if they're like Cinderella: the original came out a long time ago and the remake fleshes out the characters more.
Current Disney is shallow and insincere.
What the hell happened..
Why do they keep making these remakes that no one asked for?
I'm not wasting any money on any new live action remakes of nothing
Man I hate the look of the cg characters in the beauty and the beast remake. So overly complicated and muddy looking.
They’ve been treating it as the redheaded stepchild for so long that eventually the division’s second-class status became a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Even *Gus* isn’t as bad as this crap.
I wouldn't have an issue with these films if they were decent films, but for the most part they just aren't. When they try to tell the stories in the same way the originals did it just doesn't work since those stories were told specifically through the medium of animation. Not only that though but when they do try and do something new like with Mulan they just butcher everything and give us sub-par films at best. I am really tired of this and I haven't paid to see any of these films in years now. Use the money to make original films instead Disney before your entire legacy is nothing but shallowness.
They some Disney's making decent re-roots: 101 duration
Cinderella (1997)
Cinderella _2015) the Prince having character, the king😢😢😢, sword farther (delete the scenes for the Prince)he's good 😊
I was listening to the commentary and I noticed 'toxic' playing in the background. Nice touch lol
I have a feeling that the Little Mermaid remake won't make money. I feel ppl are understanding that these movies are just trash and are there to gain from ur nostalgia. Plus I've heard little no no talk abt it and it seems no one is interested
I can see your point on the live action remakes, but what about Broadway adaptations? Do you feel the same way or does the medium of stage theater work?
It would be one thing if they tried a different version of the stories they’re making. No one cared that Del Toro made another Pinocchio because he did his own spin and take on it. No one was mad at the Disney Cinderella remake because Branaugh was doing his own thing with it. Yeah there were definitely Easter eggs here and there to the original but I can’t call it a remake of the original Disney Cinderella because it never feels like it’s trying to capture the original movie.
Whereas every SINGLE live action remake is a carbon copy of the original and it’s not trying to do or say anything different. Maybe they could have tried a Little Mermaid with the original ending. Maybe they could have actually done a Mulan more accurate to the Chinese legend. Maybe they could have tried doing a Pinocchio that was a lot darker than the 1940’s one and where Pinocchio is more of a jerk like he is in the book. The possibilities were endless. If the need for live actions was necessary, they should have done what Branaugh’s Cinderella did and try to make their own movie. I have my problems with that Cinderella movie but I cannot call it a soulless cash grab which is what I would call the others.
Now it’s just no imagination, no good effects, no good directing, and no point.
Yeah thank you for pointing this out the problem with live action remakes they tell same story but add unnecessary new add ones the worst ones in my opinion is Lion King and Beauty and the beast.
I won't be supporting Disney anymore with their soulless films the little mermaid looks one of worst I miss when Disney did original classic films It saddens me how bad it fallen.
I think you should talk about the case *OUTSIDE* the remakes, and you have a lot of non-remake Disney live-action films to talk about. They're often unsuccessful in the box office and even more hated the remakes, with _Artemis Fowl_ and _The Nutcracker and the Four Realms_ being considered some of the worst films of their respective years of release.
This is why I’m convinced that Disney is being intentionally destroyed. These current employees hate Walt and everything he stood for (American Dream, American exceptionalism, capitalism, etc). They can’t bring down the man himself, since he’s dead, so they’re going after the next best thing-his company.
capitalism is the reason why these movies are being made bro, what twitter disney employees says doesn't really reflect their business practices
1) the america dream is dead. we are living in neo-feudal times. 2) americans are not exceptional. they are below average at this point. 3) capitalism is killing us all. 4) which classic disney films exactly talked about any of these things in a positive way ever?
Awesome point regarding the central idiocy of these remakes: if the characters are going to appear "real" -- especially if they're inanimate objects or animals -- they're just not going to have any of the powers of expression of the cartoon versions. Lumiere (now a photorealistic & boring candlestick), Sebastian (now a photorealistic & disgusting crab), plus everything in Lion King are obvious examples of this. Gross! : - )
Netflix make live action of my fav anime i hate this live action
TBH, I was turned off by these Disney live action remakes. I wanted something different, something creative, something new. The Renaissance and Experimental movies were different and innovative, whether two different genres slapped together (Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet, Atlantis: the Lost Empire, Emperor’s New Groove) or classic stories (Tarzan, Little Mermaid, Hercules) were all so good because they were different and innovative, the fact that a new year meant a new Disney movie that was so different from last year’s and you were excited. The more live action remakes, the less I am excited
The best live action stories versions of Disney movies is once upon a time on Disney plus.
When I heard Ariel was going to be black, I got excited cause I thought there was a chance they were going to move the story's location to the Caribbean, rather than the Mediterranean. I give Disney too much credit, I should know better
Here in the future: have you heard of the super Mario bros movie?!
Disney: oh shit......