The Little Mermaid (Live-Action)

[TomPilcher]

Lainie Kazan HAS to play Ursula. I've always thought she'd be a perfect fit if they ever did a live action film.

She looks perfect for the part, and also has a deep sultry voice just like Ursula's. As well as that she has plenty of Broadway and singing experience (she was the understudy to Barbra Streisand in Funny Girl). Her imdb characteristics are listed as "voluptuous figure" and "deep sultry voice" - perfectly describes Ursula.

I really really think she'd be perfect for it! What does everyone else think?


PICS: http://coralspringsmuseum.org/wp-conten ... CSJPEG.jpg
http://bit.ly/25pBVab

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDpZwShYI8w[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StxNw4TwyF8[/youtube]

[Vlad]

Yes, definitely yes!

[Disney's Divinity]

She would be great, too! I just wonder if she’d be able to do the more villainous side well or not. But she’d definitely be able to get the mannerisms and passive-aggressiveness perfectly.

Amanda Seyfried would be good. She is beautiful, looks the part, sings alright and could pull off Ariel well. But she might be too old. She is 30 and by the time they eventually get around to filming she would be older. Not that it's a problem because she does look younger but I don't know. If they made the film 5 or 6 years ago she would have been perfect.

Seyfried's age is something I thought about, too, but they often cast older actors to play teenagers. (Darren Criss is 28 and is playing Eric in the Hollywood show, for ex.) Plus, I have a feeling they'd age the character up in this movie anyway to 18-20ish? Who knows. They could always find someone unknown who's good for the role. Hopefully they'll find someone on-point for the character like they did with Emma Watson as Belle, and not someone bland like Lily James.

[tsom]

Hopefully they'll find someone on-point for the character like they did with Emma Watson as Belle, and not someone bland like Lily James.

To be fair, we haven't even seen Emma Watson as Belle besides those few seconds in the teaser and all she did was look at the rose and touch the bell jar...

Anyway, I hope this comes to fruition! It will be expensive AF to make, but I think it will be successful. Excited to attend the concert at the Hollywood Bowl next Friday!

[Disney's Divinity]

To be fair, we haven't even seen Emma Watson as Belle besides those few seconds in the teaser and all she did was look at the rose and touch the bell jar...

I guess what I mean is that Emma Watson is a perfect casting choice, and I find her to be a far superior actress in general.

[Mooky]

I keep seeing this kind of request (along with hopes that all of '90s DACs will be remade as live-action movies), and I'm just genuinely curious as to why you guys feel that way. The musical version already exists so what's the point in treading the same ground, especially since, a) the 1989 film is arguably the definitive version of the tale, b) it's pretty much given that a live-action version won't reach the quality and cultural impact of the animated one, and c) it kind of implies there was something wrong with the original one (and by extent, with hand-drawn animation) to warrant a full-on remake. To me, there's practically no difference between a live-action carbon copy of TLM '89 and Micheal Eisner's idea of remaking DACs in CGI.

It might be because these are being described and promoted as the "live action version of" the animated films, not the original source material. Moreover, any live-action version of Disney's TLM is going to rely even less on the original source material than Cinderella or TJB could considering it completely changes the ending/storyline. And imagining a new version of the animated film without "Part of Your World"/"UtS"/"KtG" is like B&tB without "Belle"/"B&tB"/"Be Our Guest" or TJB without "Bare Necessities." I don't expect exact dialogue to be carried over or no changes to be made; of course there will be. But I do hope the direction is similar for the most part.

Thank you for your response. But that's the whole thing -- what's the point in having two (nearly) identical versions of the same story, albeit done in different mediums? This wouldn't be the case of Hairspray '88 vs Hairspray '07, or Little Shop of Horrors '60 vs Little Shop of Horrors '86. I'd be fine with it if it were a completely new, Disneyfied take on the source material (similar to Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland), regardless of how off-the-mark it may turn out to be in the end. At least it'd be something new. Like the upcoming BatB, it feels like just a lazy cash grab, telling the same story told in 1991, with the same characters and same music/songs as in 1991.

[unprincess]

I want them to make it a beautiful tragic story like hans christian andersen's original story, while still using alan menken's music. I want them to use the sad version of part of your world which they originally had.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=345q0kk51U0[/youtube]

Nice. Feels like it was meant to play during the scene Ariel watches the wedding ship leave.

I just realized why Disney is so insistent in pushing all of these live action remakes so quickly(besides them being successful.) With most of their animated films based on public domain stories, if they dont do them, some other studio will, as we can see by the upcoming-Disney film versions of Little Mermaid and Jungle Book and past releases like The Hercules films, the Huntsman films, and Pan.

[Disney's Divinity]

^ It was meant to play where the reprise in the movie does. They decided it would be better if the moment showed Ariel as more determined than sad and depressed. And I agree. It's hard to imagine TLM without the epic moment at the end of the reprise.

Like the upcoming BatB, it feels like just a lazy cash grab, telling the same story told in 1991, with the same characters and same music/songs as in 1991.

To me, it's like the various versions of Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella. They may hew very closely to each other, but each has its own flavor/costumes, etc. The fact that they have the same songs/plotlines doesn't mean they'll be the same.

[Marce82]

I'm sorry... Lainie Kazan??? Seriously?? Maybe if she could undo all the plastic surgery to her face. For the last few years, whenever I see her, she had no expression on her face, and looks like a wax figure. Sorry. No no.

As for the drag queen thing... hmmm... might work for theater, but I don't it would work for film. I think it would kind pull you out of the moment. Suddenly you aren't thinking about Ursula, you are thinking "oh, that's really a guy".

To be honest, I think the whole idea for TLM to be live action is a bad idea. The underwater scenes will look weird with live actors (and how will they speak underwater??)... unless it's all CGI, in which case it will be animated... or worse: mocap. I have seen live action versions of TLM on TV and such... it doesn't work well.

[Atlantica]

I'm bored of having dark and gloomy adaptations of things .... Why can't the colour and warmth and light be celebrated from the movie instead ? Which is what I hope they end up doing.

I have no clue who I'd like to play Ariel though, that's a really tricky one ! Will have to give it some thought...

Though I'm honestly not sure TLM can translate into a live action movie. Unless I guess they come up with some fancy CGI for having the entire first half under water ?

[Disney's Divinity]

To be honest, I think the whole idea for TLM to be live action is a bad idea. The underwater scenes will look weird with live actors (and how will they speak underwater??)... unless it's all CGI, in which case it will be animated... or worse: mocap. I have seen live action versions of TLM on TV and such... it doesn't work well.

All CGI... like The Jungle Book in theaters right now? Where everything from the animals to the jungle itself is 3D? They aren't going to use mocap. The reason this isn't comparable to live-action versions seen on TV is I doubt they had a budget of 170+ million.

It'll be fine.

[DisneyFan09]

YES!!!

But are we sure this will be based on the Disney animated version or be an all new take on the original story? Of course it seems safe to assume it will be based on the Disney animated version, but it didn't specify.

You know, these live-action versions are not remakes, and certainly not like Michael Eisner's plans for shot-for-shot CGI versions of the DAC's. These films re-imagine the stories and characters (and sometimes, the music). The are re-tellings, not remakes. Cinderella and The Jungle Book had enough differences to make people like them either more or less than the originals, or like them as new and seperate versions, which they are. They are the same as the originals and yet not the same. They will have story differences, acting differences, singing differences, visual differences. They will be different experiences.

I felt The Jungle Book was much more of a remake than Cinderella was. The Cinderella Version was of course a new retelling by itself, but it followed the same story patterns of it's predecessor. Whereas The Jungle Book was actually more a New Version, With some touches of Walt's classic and Kiplings Version, it managed to be different on it's own.

[Marce82]

But see? That's exactly the problem. CGI humans don't work when attempting to be realistic... you end up with the "Uncanny valley" effect. Even worse, the latter half of the film would be real humans.

There s a reason why Mowgli wasn't computer generated...

[Disney's Divinity]

But see? That's exactly the problem. CGI humans don't work when attempting to be realistic... you end up with the "Uncanny valley" effect. Even worse, the latter half of the film would be real humans.

There s a reason why Mowgli wasn't computer generated...

I'm not sure what you're saying here. They wouldn't computer generate the characters here, just their lower halves....?

[Marce82]

Oh, I thought they meant the whole character.

But even if they were just the lower halves... what about the hair? What about moving under water in a way that looks believable? What about TALKING under water in a way that looks believable?

[Prince Edward]

Alan Menken should write a few new songs for this, like he did for Beauty and the Beast. Would love it if they were to include Beyond My Wildest Dreams and If Only from the Broadway musical as well.

They have to make this a musical and make a live action remake of the animated classic. Other studios might give us their take on the original Hans Christian Andersen fairytale, but only Disney might give us Ariel, Sebastian, Ursula, Under the Sea and Part of Your World. I will lose all interest in this movie if they do not include the classic songs.

[Disney Duster]

I felt The Jungle Book was much more of a remake than Cinderella was. The Cinderella Version was of course a new retelling by itself, but it followed the same story patterns of it's predecessor. Whereas The Jungle Book was actually more a New Version, With some touches of Walt's classic and Kiplings Version, it managed to be different on it's own.

I feel both Cinderella and The Jungle Book were both remakes and new retellings/versions at the same time. If I had to choose one type to call them, I would say they were both new retellings/versions.

[Disney's Divinity]

They have to make this a musical and make a live action remake of the animated classic. Other studios might give us their take on the original Hans Christian Andersen fairytale, but only Disney might give us Ariel, Sebastian, Ursula, Under the Sea and Part of Your World. I will lose all interest in this movie if they do not include the classic songs.

This is how I feel. Other studios can adapt the tale. Only Disney can adapt the animated film's story.

[disneyprincess11]

WOW WOW WOW

Lin-Manuel Miranda & Alan Menken to Co-Write Music for Live Action LITTLE MERMAID for Disney

http://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Li ... y-20160816

[Sotiris]

Miranda and Menken will write the music together.

Oh, hell no! Mermaid is Menken's baby. He's perfectly capable of writing new music on his own. He's doing just that for the live-action BatB as we speak! This is unacceptable! Miranda has like a gazillion projects in the works. Why does he need to force himself to an iconic musical and interfere with someone else's work? Ugh.