DVDizzy.com

source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... ers-717074

My sentiments exactly. Also, I love how movies that are 90% CGI nowadays are considered live-action.

If they were really 90% CGI, the majority of the human cast would be CG characters with only a small number of them being real actors (which is kind of what WALL-E was to be honest). I think the thing with live-action special effects movies now is just that they're so much more CG heavy than they used to be. The actors are still real, but everything around them feels less real when it's CGI and not real sets or practical effects.

Anyway, I'm not sure how I feel about Disney wanting to remake so many of their 2D classics in live-action. I mean, at least they aren't wanting to remake them as CG movies, but can not even their classic animated films stand on their own 2D merits without the need to be remade? Arguably, the live-action movies for 101 Dalmatians were fine cause that movie could work as a movie with real dogs, but they just didn't have the same charm of cartoony talking animals that the animated version had. A live-action Dumbo is probably going to be similar, only now they're going to rely more on characters like Timothy being remade as another realistic CG creature (or a real elephant with CG enhanced ears). But as far as having the same animated charm as the original, I think even that canceled Dumbo II sequel would have been better in that regard, even if the story might not have ended up as good.

_________________


Love traditional Disney animation? Send your art to: http://2disney4ever.deviantart.com/

2Disney, with all respect: Do you really have to bring up CGI vs 2D in every single topic here?

Well technically my thoughts this time were on live-action vs 2D, but there's no mistaking that CGI has a lot of involvement in today's live-action films as well. But I've always been perfectly fine with CGI being used in special effects movies like Star Wars and Jurassic Park, so in all fairness it's really one of the areas where CGI is not so much of an issue to me. I do miss all the older practical effects in movies, though.

_________________


Love traditional Disney animation? Send your art to: http://2disney4ever.deviantart.com/

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo

Yeah, like I said: 101 Dalmatians was fine, and I suppose Alice in Wonderland had that Tim Burton-esque take to it (though I greatly prefer Walt's version), but Disney having to remake all of their own animated classics as live-action movies doesn't seem necessary. It actually seems less necessary than having sequels.

_________________


Love traditional Disney animation? Send your art to: http://2disney4ever.deviantart.com/

that and theyll scrub out every ounce of innocence & grace from the original to appeal to today's kids.

a Transformers writer is working on this...

related: have you seen the Paddington remake trailer!?

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo

We were all so occupied with trying to save Disney's animation studio years ago.... That fight was won, and now look what happened. Disney is just desperate to keep finding ways to mutilate its own legacy.

When will they learn? Why not just do a Frozen live action remake. I mean for God's it's been out for 8 months, what are they waiting for?!?!

What i Don't get is why Disney when doing live action remakes choses the animal movies for the dirty deed. 101 Dalmatians, Jungle Book, and now Dumbo...

The magic of those movies in animation is that the animals can talk, can do and act like a human. When you put them in a live-action setting people want it to be "realistic" so they mute them, and all the charm of the original animated film is gone. Like imagine a live-action Lion King with "realistic" mute lions lol.

They should look more at the human movies, at least the characters would be consistent. Heck with the effects nowadays films like Hercules or Mulan or even Hunchback would look amazing as live actions.

_________________
Awaiting for the Beatles of DVDIzzy: Disneyjedi , disneyphilip, TsWade2, and 2DDisney4Ever

And Goliath and Duster were Sonny and Cher.

It's because theoretically animal movies lend themselves well to live-action, but it depends. The animals in 101 Dalmatians work better as real animals than something like Chip 'n Dale Rescue Rangers where the characters would need to be CGI like Alvin and the Chipmunks and lose their animated charm just as Alvin did. But yes, even if it does work in live-action, the animated versions will still often be the most appealing because of the kind of strengths that animation has over live-action.

As for The Lion King, that's one animal movie that I could never see working in live-action. At all.



I'd answer you, but for once I'm getting through a topic without the need to have to bring up my complaints about Frozen.

_________________


Love traditional Disney animation? Send your art to: http://2disney4ever.deviantart.com/

Who's gonna voice Jim Crow & the other crows? Kevin Hart would be great

Well, he wrote 'Arlington Road', 'The Ring' and the very misunderstood 'The Skeleton Key' too... I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.


You better stay away from 'Once Upon a Time'...

I think what I'd really like to know the most about this movie is: how are they going to do that trippy "Elephants on Parade" sequence? Not that I really care about the movie being remade, but still...

_________________


Love traditional Disney animation? Send your art to: http://2disney4ever.deviantart.com/

I hope they keep all the not so subtle racism [/sarcasm]

Wasn't Dumbo already mute to begin with?

_________________
"Maybe you live in a golden cage, but a golden cage is still a cage."
~Juan Carlos Bodoque, 31 Minutos: La Película

Funny enough I don't think I've seen any of them. The one exception being the Dalmatians movies. But that was when I was younger and would watch pretty much anything. It was never that I was dead set against them either. A lot of times I'll watch the trailers and think to myself "I'll probably give that a shot at some point" but in the end none of them get amazing reviews, so I forget they even exist after a while.

If they ever end up doing Aladdin, the Lion King, or Beauty and the Beast I would probably have to see it. Just to see how bad it is.

Edit: just remembered they are doing B&TB. So I guess that'll be the first one I see in a while.

No. Just no.

Forgive me everyone, but

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6cDPk4tpS8Q