DVDizzy.com

Yes, I know that.

_________________


If you're a fan of Disney animation, like my Facebook fanpage

um, yeah..really didnt like this show.

Id love to know how the CGI team are gonna pull off an elephant flying without it looking completely ridiculous...especially if they use that semi-realistic style like in Chipmunks...

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo

I can't believe any of you are taking this seriously. The original is an untouchable masterpiece. How are they going to match it and it's charm and make realistic elephants, mice and crows emote? None of you think this idea is beyond bad?

And why were the railroad working African Americans racist? I don't even think the crows were that racist.

_________________

Well, I agree. It is pretty unnecessary.

_________________


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

What?!

I mean, really! How do you say "Do not want!" in literally every language?!

Well, I think it's unnecessary, but I don't think it's bad, that's a bit too harsh, innit?

_________________


If you're a fan of Disney animation, like my Facebook fanpage

So people are looking forward to live action Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast but for Dumbo and Jungle Book they want to burn Disney headquarters to the ground?

Typical princess bias And this is even after Maleficent turned out to be a steaming pile of shit.

_________________
LADY CLUCK

Weren't you also decrying Maleficent prior to its release and then ended up loving it? You never know.

_________________
"There are two wolves and they are always fighting. One is darkness and despair. The other is light and hope. Which wolf wins? Whichever one you feed." - Casey Newton, Tomorrowland

I never thought this day would come, but I fully agree with you on something!

This is all making it seem like Disney is cannibalising itself; nothing new launching in the live action division, but just live action retellings of what was beautiful in the first place.

At least with Maleficent it wasn't just Sleeping Beauty again, it was a different view / perspective. I can't quite get my head around Cinderella; is it a remake ? Is it just a Cinderella film happening to be done by Disney ?

Though I suppose you could argue John Carter and Lone Ranger have made them stop and go back to what they know; their own stories.

And what was 'Alice in Wonderland'? Aren't they all reimaginings?

Alice in Wonderland was basically Alice In Wonderland II: Return to Underland. But the film couldn't be pitched or titled that way I guess, so it was just generically called 'Alice In Wonderland'. Some may call that a re-imagining but I pretty much regard the live action Alice as a sequel, as it takes place after events in the Disney Classic version.

But there are countless differences between the 1951 film and the 2010 film. It would even be easier to connect 'Maleficent' to 'Sleeping Beauty'...

I agree with Atlantica. The live-action Alice in Wonderland film was pretty much a sequel to the Disney animated movies (or at least to the books). Yes, the animated movie and the live-action movie don't completely merge, but story-wise it's definitely not a remake of the animated movie, like the Dumbo movie seems to be.



So far it seems the only recent live action Disney fantasy movie that's actually supposed to be a remake of the animated movie is Cinderella. As far as I can tell it's heavily influenced by the animated movie (the names of the stepfamily, the mice and Lucifer, the dress ripping scene etc.) and retells the original story, rather than tell what happened next or retell it from another character's POV.

_________________

It's not that we have a princess bias. It's more so that Jungle Book and Dumbo's cast is made up of mainly animals.

They should get Terry Gilliam to direct that sequence like Fear and Loathing.

Does this mean that Andy Serkis is now studying the movements of elephants?

How do you know that it'll have all those influences?

This is exactly the difference.

The way they use animals in these kinds of movies just never works. Either you have the animals act normal and either a character or the narrator tells you what they said, or they awkwardly try to sync vocals to their mouths and/or actions (or not, like Homeward Bound). Or you get something truly awful like those Beverly Hill Chihuahua movies where they use computer to movie the mouths.

_________________

Listening to most often lately:
Beyonce ~ "I Was Here"
Whitney Houston ~ "Count On Me"
Celine Dion ~ "Ashes"

I think Homeward Bound worked because of the concept of hearing their thoughts and dialogue without the mouth movements made it feel a bit less awkward unlike Babe.

_________________
Disney, Pixar, Rodgers and Hammerstein, and Film fan since 1999

I knew Maleficent would be better than this idea sounds, but if this thing works and I have to admit I was wrong, I will.


Like supertalies said, it is definitely not just a Cinderella movie done by Disney. It is a new form of the 1950 Disney animated version. Otherwise the stepmother wouldn't be called Lady Tremaine, and so on. You could call it a remake, but I would use the word re-imagining instead, because they are applying new imagination to the old story and characters and designs.


Disney sent out a photo and a press release description of the movie mentioning the names of the stepfamily and the story points like the dress ripping scene. And there's more in the thread about the live-action Cinderella! Here it is! You'll have to read through lots of pages to know all the inlfuences.

_________________