DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:13 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 105  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:57 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 1:00 pm
Posts: 1229
Location: Everywhere
I don't really see how they could make a live action movie out of B&B. I mean, a live musical is one thing, but a live action movie is another. If they made the characters in B&B look like they do in the live musical in the live action movie, it would look absolutely ridiculous. The only way I see they could make it a live action movie is if all of the enchanted characters were computer animated or something. Haha.

_________________
"No day but today."
My YouTube Channel


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:58 pm 
Offline
Collector's Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:44 pm
Posts: 586
Location: dfs
zackisthewalrus wrote:
I don't really see how they could make a live action movie out of B&B. I mean, a live musical is one thing, but a live action movie is another. If they made the characters in B&B look like they do in the live musical in the live action movie, it would look absolutely ridiculous. The only way I see they could make it a live action movie is if all of the enchanted characters were computer animated or something. Haha.


i'm sure that is how it would be. they'd probably incorporate motion capture in there somehow.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:35 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:02 pm
Posts: 12521
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
I'm all for a live-action version of Beauty and the Beast.

For the servants-becoming-enchanted-objects, the Broadway version had it so they gradually change over time, showing that they're losing more and more of their humanity. It could likely be done the same way it was done in Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, with the crew of the Flying Dutchman looking more and more fish-like and sea-ish, but when Will became captain (in At World's End), they became human again.

Anyway, I remember I wrote about a live-action Beauty and the Beast last year, so I searched and found the posts and am repeating portions of them (as well as editing a bit) here as I still feel the same about what I wrote...

    As much as I love Beauty and the Beast and dual-rank it #1 with Aladdin so many times as my favourite from the DAC canon, sometimes the film just bores me. And sometimes I fall out of love with Belle. And sometimes I wish it was 60 minutes longer, shot in live-action, had less songs, and provide more character-building moments. I seriously think Beauty and the Beast as told by Disney would be so much better as a live-action drama. Not necessarily like Cocteau's classic, but something on par with Random Harvest in terms of providing believable/realistic but still "idealized" characters (based on otherwise two-dimensional character archetypes), and Moulin Rouge in terms of a unique-but-true-to-the-period visual splendour.

    The basic story that Disney has created would be great as a live-action feature to "complement" the animated version rather than try and remake/imitate/follow it. After all, the 1996 101 Dalmatians was partly successful because it offered a more fleshed-out (or more padded-out, depending on who you ask) version of the story, while not trying to say, "1961 was then, we want you to think of Glenn Close when you see the word Dalmatians". The sequel (which a lot of people hate, unfortunately) further advanced the "complementing" idea by offering more character develpment regarding Cruella, while also presenting a familiar type of love story, with the help of dogs and a bird. Plus, Ioan Gruffudd one of my favorite actors, so I'll like 102 Dalmatians regardless.

    With Beauty and the Beast, the animated version is perhaps one of my favorite interpretations I've seen of the story (others include the aforementioned Cocteau film, as well as the 1987-1990 CBS series), and I feel Disney could continue to build on what they've already developed, and create a truly spectacular live-action film. They're about halfway there as they added more material to the Broadway version. I haven't seen it (which I'm so upset about, as it closed, dammit), nor have I read what's new (I really don't want to be spoiled, or let it affect my own treatment of the story), but I'm sure there's enough material (along with more dramatic and character building elements to cut down on the songs) that would help Disney to make a live-action movie.

    I love musicals, but I usually prefer if its story benefits from the songs, and not the other way around (a bunch of songs that have to be connected via a story...like Newsies). There are usually two schools of musical, the first is "when you've got nothing left to say, sing a song", and the second is "when you've got a lot to say, sing a song". I usually prefer the second, where the mere dialogue is not enough to convey a person's thoughts, and so they break out into song.

    I guess it comes from my preference to dialogue over music, as I love dialogue-heavy scenes in both film and TV (and love writing dialogue as well). I like a healthy and even balance between songs and dialogue, though I tend to lean more towards dialogue. Like how in Enchanted there's about 5 songs in the entire movie, but each one is placed appropriately enough in an area where dialogue wouldn't have done the scene/emotions justice.

    With Beauty and the Beast, I felt that for the animated version, the amount of songs they had was fine, as it was balanced out with dialogue, and all within a reasonable running time. For live-action musicals, having it be song after song with only a few instances of dialogue to string them together, it rarely ever succeeds (at least to me). That's why I said for more dramatic/character building moments to cut down on the songs. Some parts of the story I feel are better expressed through a well-written scene, while others will shine as a song.

    I've heard a couple songs from the Broadway version (since they're in the Classic Disney CDs), "Home" and "If I Can't Love Her". While I love the arrangement for both (especially how some notes in the latter echo the opening notes of the animated film), I felt that both are pretty much there for padding, and if I had to pick only one of them to keep, it'd probably be "Home".

    Then again, I haven't heard the other songs yet, or seen the musical (dammit...) so there may be more padding to come and those two may turn out to be the most essential new songs. I wouldn't want new songs written to outright replace the established songs (the ones from the film), but it may be better if Menken rewrote some of the lyrics to any songs to avoid repetitive and dragging lyrics. He can either cut them down or have new lyrics written in order to better convey the scene and not just let it be a person standing around singing to the audience (or in a movie's case, the camera).


albert

_________________
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p

WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:53 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
In all fairness, a fair amount of the songs in the stage show are close to filler, and I enjoy the show. Especially when they shoved "A Change In Me" back in. So if it were going to be a live action film, 1) I would be apprehensive if it could be done well and 2) some stuff is gonna have to go. And if you were to cut either "Home" or "If I Can't Love Her", cut "Home". "If I Can't Love Her" has a greater dramatic function and at the very least pushes the Beast's emotions forward.

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 10:20 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2003 3:30 pm
Posts: 2950
Location: Walt Disney World
I am a big fan of the animated film and the Broadway show and I would LOVE a live action movie. It is obvious that it won't be identical to the Broadway show or the animated movie. They are free to do what they want with it and the fact that they have asked Alan Menken and Glenn Slater to work on some new songs is a good sign that it is significantly different from the Broadway show and that some songs no longer fit in the story they have in mind. I think that as long as they are able to keep all of the songs from the film and the really iconic songs from the show ("Home," "If I Can't Love Her," "Human Again," and "A Change in Me"), it will be a great film. While the rest of the new songs from the show are mostly good (except for Mason De Lunes), the rest are sort of unmemorable and don't move the story in ways that the film couldn't by just talking. For example, "Me," a song by Gaston, doesn't reveal anything new about the character or the story. It leads up to Gaston's proposal to Belle and the song is funny, but it's not one of the tunes you walk away from the show singing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:44 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 1:09 pm
Posts: 1156
Honestly, I would LOVE a live action remake of Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid (hey, if they can do Harry Potter Transformers, LOTR, 2012, etc, then why not a film where half of it takes place under water?), Cinderella, etc.

All you gotta do is have a great creative team and flesh out the story. I don't see it as a remake per se, but a re-imagining. I'm sure there will be lots of people that will be against such a film, but I don't see a problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:31 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:47 am
Posts: 4648
Location: UK
I don't know what to think about this. To be honest, a film based on the stage musical could be a bit make or break. It could end up as a fairly direct remake of the 1991 film, and would thus seem a waste of time.

What I would love to see (not necessarily from Disney) is a straight adaptation of the story, without songs or talking teapots, rather filmed on location in France (perhaps in Burgundy, the Loire Valley or even Alsace or Provence for a more unique spin), yet, like as Scaps has put it (in a somewhat different context), having a style like that of "Moulin Rouge in terms of a unique-but-true-to-the-period visual splendour." I hate to say it guys, but as wonderful as Disney's version is, I think that Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast is still better (having said that, Cocteau's version is one of the best adaptations of a fairy-tale or fantasy story on celluloid). It would be nice to see a new version of Beauty and the Beast which feels more Cocteau than Disney (albeit not a remake or plagiariser of both, like how the Faerie Tale Theatre version of the story is of Cocteau's).

_________________
-Joe

Blog | Deviantart


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:32 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:55 pm
Posts: 1048
If Hairspray can successfully go from film to Broadway back to film again, why can't B&TB? That's my view on it. A well-made, well-cast live-action adaptation of the stage show could be perfect.

_________________
Image
-Joey


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:38 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
my chicken is infected wrote:
If Hairspray can successfully go from film to Broadway back to film again, why can't B&TB? That's my view on it. A well-made, well-cast live-action adaptation of the stage show could be perfect.


"Hairspray" was substantially altered from the original movie to the stage show, not to mention the fact that "Beauty and the Beast" was already a musical to begin with.

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 2:49 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:02 pm
Posts: 12521
Location: Somewhere in Time and Space
Brenders wrote:
In all fairness, a fair amount of the songs in the stage show are close to filler

Ah, okay. So it bodes well for my hopes of "less songs, more character development"

Brenders wrote:
And if you were to cut either "Home" or "If I Can't Love Her", cut "Home". "If I Can't Love Her" has a greater dramatic function and at the very least pushes the Beast's emotions forward.

Aoww. I like "Home" more than "If I Can't Love Her'.

goofystitch wrote:
I think that as long as they are able to keep all of the songs from the film and the really iconic songs from the show ("Home," "If I Can't Love Her," "Human Again," and "A Change in Me"), it will be a great film. While the rest of the new songs from the show are mostly good (except for Mason De Lunes), the rest are sort of unmemorable and don't move the story in ways that the film couldn't by just talking.

I'll have to give "A Change In Me" a listen so I know what it's about, but I agree with most everything else.

Wondy wrote:
What I would love to see (not necessarily from Disney) is a straight adaptation of the story, without songs or talking teapots, rather filmed on location in France (perhaps in Burgundy, the Loire Valley or even Alsace or Provence for a more unique spin), yet, like as Scaps has put it (in a somewhat different context), having a style like that of "Moulin Rouge in terms of a unique-but-true-to-the-period visual splendour."

No love for Random Harvest, Wondy?

But I agree too. I"d love a straightforward adaptation, be it Disney or another studio.

Wondy wrote:
I hate to say it guys, but as wonderful as Disney's version is, I think that Jean Cocteau's Beauty and the Beast is still better (having said that, Cocteau's version is one of the best adaptations of a fairy-tale or fantasy story on celluloid).

Agreed.

albert

_________________
WIST #60:
AwallaceUNC: Would you prefer Substi-Blu-tiary Locomotion? :p

WIST #61:
TheSequelOfDisney: Damn, did Lin-Manuel Miranda go and murder all your families?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:19 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:47 am
Posts: 4648
Location: UK
Escapizzle wrote:
No love for Random Harvest, Wondy?


A little confession...I haven't actually seen it. Now excuse me whilst I go bump a thread. ;)

_________________
-Joe

Blog | Deviantart


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:25 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
Alby-Wan Kenobi wrote:
Brenders wrote:
And if you were to cut either "Home" or "If I Can't Love Her", cut "Home". "If I Can't Love Her" has a greater dramatic function and at the very least pushes the Beast's emotions forward.

Aoww. I like "Home" more than "If I Can't Love Her'.


I see. We can no longer be friends.

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:35 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2003 3:30 pm
Posts: 2950
Location: Walt Disney World
Escapay wrote:
Quote:
I'll have to give "A Change In Me" a listen so I know what it's about, but I agree with most everything else.


The song was originally cut from the show because producers felt that Belle didn't need another big number. It was added back in when Toni Braxton did a short run as Belle on Broadway. It takes place when Belle goes to see her father and realizes she is in love with the Beast. It is quite the show stopper.

A short version of it was in the show "On The Record" and is found on that soundtrack and Susan Egan, the original Belle on Broadway, recorded a pop version for one of her albums. However, there is a great live recording on YouTube by Ashley Brown, who played Belle on Broadway and is currently on tour as Mary Poppins. It can be heard by clicking here.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 4:55 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
goofystitch wrote:
producers felt that Belle didn't need another big number


Further proof that your first instinct is always correct. Every time I've seen "Beauty and the Beast", it stopped the show, and not in a good way.

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 6:59 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 1:09 pm
Posts: 1156
my chicken is infected wrote:
If Hairspray can successfully go from film to Broadway back to film again, why can't B&TB? That's my view on it. A well-made, well-cast live-action adaptation of the stage show could be perfect.


Amen! That's what I think too. I know the original Hairspray wasn't a musical, but it's still the exact same story, characters, etc. The upcoming Nine is the same thing (screen to stage then back again). Same with The Producers. Then you have the classics like My Fair Lady. If you watch the 1938 version of Pygmalion, then you'll see how similar it is to MFL, except that MFL is a musical. Most of the dialogue is the same. Even the ending is the exact same, although the original Pygmalion had a very different ending.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:20 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
tsom wrote:
I know the original Hairspray wasn't a musical, but it's still the exact same story, characters, etc.


I repeat- there's several differences. There's many characters cut, plot points changed (act three of the film is almost entirely different from the end of the stage show). Amber's father is gone, Tracy doesn't hide with a beatnik, Velma doesn't attempt to use a bomb hidden in Amber's hair, no scenes at an amusement park, etc.

And as you said and I said, it was never a musical. It just begs the question why? I know there are small differences between the stage show and the animated movie, and a few things are nicely touched upon, but seriously, having the Maison des Lunes scenes stretched into a three minute song only just works on stage, let along on film. With the amount of material they'd have to cut in the adaptation process, they'd essentially be filming the animated movie in live action with a few more songs. So why do it? Sure, it would look pretty, but why would you try to do a carbon copy of an iconic original movie?

And yes, both "My Fair Lady" and "The Producers" lift liberally from their source, but again, neither was originally a musical. "The Producers" had a musical sequence, but added a lot more. And "My Fair Lady" had a brilliant score written for it. There is not one extraneous song in that score, and it is easily the equal of Shaw's original play. I like "Beauty and the Beast", but none of the songs written for the stage show are as good or memorable as the original movie songs. And as much as I love Menken and Ashman, the score to "Beauty and the Beast" is not parallel to Lerner and Loewe's "My Fair Lady".

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:08 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 12:07 pm
Posts: 1219
Location: Dubai
Glenn Close ?!
No Way, Malefecint was a c*nt... but she was an undeniably sexy c*nt.

I'd say cast Dita Von Tesse :
<a href="http://photobucket.com/images/dita%20von%20teese" target="_blank"><img src="http://i568.photobucket.com/albums/ss123/tifftuff87/39310.jpg" border="0" alt="dita von teese Pictures, Images and Photos"/></a>

Or Eva Green :
<a href="http://photobucket.com/images/eva%20green" target="_blank"><img src="http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg202/r_s1188/Eva%20Green/l_8d97386f5a56f91bf4c234bc5ce0e612.jpg" border="0" alt="Eva Green Pictures, Images and Photos"/></a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 11:24 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 22, 2003 3:30 pm
Posts: 2950
Location: Walt Disney World
SpringHeelJack wrote:
Quote:
Further proof that your first instinct is always correct. Every time I've seen "Beauty and the Beast", it stopped the show, and not in a good way.


But in movie musicals, numbers don't "bring the house down" like they do in live theater. Nobody applauds after every number, so the story doesn't need to be halted. Aside from the fact that "A Change In Me" swells to a belt, it is a very emotional song that really conveys the journey that Belle has taken. Especially if "Home" is included in the rumored film, "A Change In Me" is sort of the anti-"Home." She first sings a song about how she can never belong there, even though she never belonged where she was before. By the time we got to "A Change In Me," Belle has found where she belongs. She has found her "Home." For these reasons, I think it would be wrong to not include it in a live action film based on the Broadway show. I also feel that the presence of "A Change In Me" intensifies what is at stake during the following number, "The Mob Song."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:09 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
goofystitch wrote:
But in movie musicals, numbers don't "bring the house down" like they do in live theater. Nobody applauds after every number, so the story doesn't need to be halted.


In all honesty, I've been at showings of the "Rent" and "Dreamgirls" movies where people applauded during the film. It's not unheard of.

Anyhow, that's not my point. When I said it stopped the show, I mean the advancing of the plot stopped because Belle sat down to reiterate everything we just saw, not that the audience clapped for a long time. My point is that the story IS halted if the heroine sings for three minutes about everything we already saw. We know she's had a change. She's left a place she's clearly attached to and a man she's begun to love to find her father. I don't think at any point during the movie itself anyone was thinking "But gee, Belle isn't missing out on anything by returning to her village." It's pretty well conveyed. Again, there was clearly a reason why they didn't feel the need to include it in the show when it first opened, and I doubt anyone really felt that something was horribly missing from that scene.

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 8:34 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 12317
You know, just thinking about it, I wouldn’t mind a live-action version of Beauty and the Beast, as long as it’s a lot different from the film and the show—especially the show. I would personally be happy if most of the new songs from the stage version weren’t included at all.

And I don’t know how they could fit Mrs. Potts, Cogsworth and Lumiere into a live-action movie. Those kind of comical side-characters don’t seem like they would work well (or as well) in live-action.

On a side-note, although I know you were talking about the Maleficent movie, I actually think a live-action version of Sleeping Beauty wouldn’t be that bad. It would have to be different from the Disney movie just to be interesting.

_________________
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Diana Ross ~ "I'm Coming Out"
The Weather Girls ~ "It's Raining Men"
Christina Aguilera ~ "Beautiful"
LeAnn Rimes ~ "Love Is Love Is Love"
Gloria Gaynor ~ "I Am What I Am"


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2100 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 105  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JeanGreyForever, thedisneyspirit and 64 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group