The Overall Disney Thread

The B&B live action reboot will have LGBT character.

If this was an original movie, then I wouldn't mind. But putting it in a reboot of a beloved Disney classic, no thanks. I wasn't fond of this and now I'm hoping it underperforms.

The sad thing, it IS going to perform like crazy, it would take toxic word of mouth to take the wind out of the film's sails. Its certainly not going to stop the conveyor belt of Disney remakes. But worse still, making LeFou gay is that appalling attitude of thinking they're "better than the source material", which always pisses me off. It might not be as bad as Maleficent but this is not the Beauty and the Beast I had hoped for, and I got on the hype wave.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

The sad thing, it IS going to perform like crazy, it would take toxic word of mouth to take the wind out of the film's sails. Its certainly not going to stop the conveyor belt of Disney remakes. But worse still, making LeFou gay is that appalling attitude of thinking they're "better than the source material", which always pisses me off. It might not be as bad as Maleficent but this is not the Beauty and the Beast I had hoped for, and I got on the hype wave.

I'd rather see Maleficent then see this trash. At least that movie didn't shove any SJW down anybodies throat. I honestly hope that they don't pull off this crap with the live action reboot of 'The Lion King'. If there is one good thing about all this, it's that they will all be forgotten or if they are remembered, they will be so as worthless as pieces of crap while the originals will look even better. A lot like the Dr. Seuss movies are.

Holy sh*t. I don't remember seeing this much vitriol last week. Dr Seuss movies, lets not kid ourselves, are either bad or flat out terrible.

Maleficent actually WAS SJW AND misandry propaganda and then some, so it would be remarkable if Beauty and the Beast manages to top it for obnoxiousness.

And to give the Devil his due, The Jungle Book and Pete's Dragon were really good films, in the case of The Jungle Book it walked the fine line between homage and rip-off of it's animated source material, and creating their own identities. I have to admit, Cinderella in both live action or animation isn't my favourite of the Disney canon, so the new one was just another version, but there have been many live action iterations of the Cinderella fairy tale, so there isn't any real damage done to the source material.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Holy sh*t. I don't remember seeing this much vitriol last week. Dr Seuss movies, lets not kid ourselves, are either bad or flat out terrible.

I guess I'm just one of those old-school traditionalists that's not a big fan of rebooting all the Disney classics with live action. TBF, I didn't see Sleeping Beauty that much, and even then I only saw the whole movie just once and I was just "Meh" with it. That and I was 14 at the time.

In other news. Tron 3 still isn't dead, but is in hibernation.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

I guess I'm just one of those old-school traditionalists that's not a big fan of rebooting all the Disney classics with live action.

I would normally put myself in the traditionalist crowd, since I'm not usually gushing about the upcoming Disney reboots. But as a kid, I was opened to the idea somewhat of live action counterparts when I saw the 90s live action version of One Hundred and One Dalmations and the Stephen Sommers version of The Jungle Book with Jason Scott Lee. As different as that Jungle Book was, I still basically enjoyed it for what it was and felt that it didn't take away from my enjoyment of the original.

I actually thought more of these live action adaptations would be coming in the early 2000s, fortunately that didn't come to pass since most of them are suited best to animation. But these days, given how much these filmmakers seem to be desperate to try and compare themselves to the animated films, and sometimes be disparaging of them, it leaves a sour taste in my mouth

Spotlight’s Tom McCarthy to Re-Write Disney’s Christopher Robin Film
Read more at http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/820677-spotlights-tom-mccarthy-to-re-write-disneys-christopher-robin-film#HQsMRE2vue6jeDdU.99

Man, Disney really thinks this live action Christopher Robin movie has potential. Also their timing could not be more on the nose, Moonlight wins best picture and they nab that film's screenwriter to .

This new Pirates trailer showed a lot, including some cool bits and some of it stuff I hoped it wouldn't include; quite a few of the jokes just fell flat for me, especially with the joke involving Jack's pants and him falling a sleep standing up. It looks way too digitized to even compare to the first three. I mean, people get on Jurassic World's case for being too CGI heavy, but that film looks like a moderate walk in the park compared to this! I enjoyed the previous trailer, and was overall looking forward to a throwback to one of my favourite franchises (plus the fact that Pirate movies pretty much live or die with this franchise), and I'm still going to see it to review it if nothing else, but this kinda did douse my excitement.

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20170303-whats-the-point-of-remaking-beauty-and-the-beast
But while the new film isn’t terrible, it’s difficult to see what the point of it is as long as the cartoon exists. Beauty and the Beast is simply a cover version of a chart-topping song, played with such anonymous competence that Condon’s motto must have been, “It ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Another motto might have been better: “If it ain’t broke, don’t remake it.”

Money is the only reason almost any reboot/remake ever exists. And yes this film is totally pointless, but then again most of them are.

It looks like Russia won't show the Beauty and the Beast reboot due to LeFou being gay.

Not really surprising. Russia was never a homosexual friendly country anyway. Lenin tried to break it, but it was never popular and Stalin reversed that decision. I wouldn't be surprised if China follows since their culture considers be so to be a temporary behavior and anything beyond that is heavily frowned upon.

Mistral wrote:

http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20170303-whats-the-point-of-remaking-beauty-and-the-beast
But while the new film isn’t terrible, it’s difficult to see what the point of it is as long as the cartoon exists. Beauty and the Beast is simply a cover version of a chart-topping song, played with such anonymous competence that Condon’s motto must have been, “It ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Another motto might have been better: “If it ain’t broke, don’t remake it.”

Money is the only reason almost any reboot/remake ever exists. And yes this film is totally pointless, but then again most of them are.

I believe the original Beauty and the Beast showed a punny variation of that phrase, "If it's not Baroque, don't fix it!"

Clearly such advice was not followed, and if nothing else their dismissive and condescending attitude towards the original will cause it to be reevaluated and reappraised as the classic that it is. It certainly makes one wonder if they can get away with The Lion King remake before its too late for them.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

I believe the original Beauty and the Beast showed a punny variation of that phrase, "If it's not Baroque, don't fix it!"

Clearly such advice was not followed, and if nothing else their dismissive and condescending attitude towards the original will cause it to be reevaluated and reappraised as the classic that it is. It certainly makes one wonder if they can get away with The Lion King remake before its too late for them.

Hate to say I told ya so, but...I did.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

I honestly hope that they don't pull off this crap with the live action reboot of 'The Lion King'. If there is one good thing about all this, it's that they will all be forgotten or if they are remembered, they will be so as worthless as pieces of crap while the originals will look even better. A lot like the Dr. Seuss movies are.

Fair enough, but I do think calling them "Dr Seuss Movies" is crossing the line. And far be it for me to throw The Jungle Book under the bus to make the entire endeavour look bad (that I can do just fine by myself). We will observe how this all pans out.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Fair enough, but I do think calling them "Dr Seuss Movies" is crossing the line. And far be it for me to throw The Jungle Book under the bus to make the entire endeavour look bad (that I can do just fine by myself). We will observe how this all pans out.

My intent was to make a comparison and that was the best I could think of of the top of my head. That said, I guess I should have had a better comparison then the Dr. Seuss movies. I guess I'm just an old school Disney person who just reluctant to have any reboots of the movies I saw growing up. Even more so with how Disney is trying to add in SJW crap into it. I will give The Jungle Book reboot credit for not having that, but if the B&B reboot is something to go by...Yeah, hopefully the controversy is enough to make them reconsider that in the future.

Russia will let the Beauty and the Beast reboot be shown, but with a 16+ rating. Which is basically an R-rating.

Danny DeVito is in talks to star in the live action Dumbo movie.

I honestly thought he retired some time ago.

Well, he is short enough for the main role.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Russia will let the Beauty and the Beast reboot be shown, but with a 16+ rating. Which is basically an R-rating.

This is tremendous.

Speaking of BatB, I think this may be my favorite song from the new movie:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPcxqpMbcSg

One of the best things about Disney would have to be the music. I mean, who doesn't love a classic Disney song? My personal favourites are as follows:


1. "Be Prepared"
2. "The Siamese Cat Song"
3. "Part of That World"
4. "Poor Unfortunate Souls"
5. "I Just Can't Wait to be King"
6. "I'll Make a Man Out of You"

The live-action Mulan movie won't be a musical but a a big, girly martial arts epic".

Rhedosaurus wrote:

The live-action Mulan movie won't be a musical but a a big, girly martial arts epic".

Last time I read something to do with the live action Mulan, they said they were looking to Ridley Scott for inspiration. Admirable choice, his work on Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven speak for themselves, and the new Mulan could be a stirring fantasy epic. But the choice of words as a "big, girly martial arts epic" doesn't gel with what they said they were looking for on a creative level.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

The live-action Mulan movie won't be a musical but a a big, girly martial arts epic".

Last time I read something to do with the live action Mulan, they said they were looking to Ridley Scott for inspiration. Admirable choice, his work on Gladiator and Kingdom of Heaven speak for themselves, and the new Mulan could be a stirring fantasy epic. But the choice of words as a "big, girly martial arts epic" doesn't gel with what they said they were looking for on a creative level.

I just hope it's a legit female empowerment movie that also treats men with respect and not a cross of Mulan meets GB2016.

So far the B&B live action reboot made $357 million dollars.

I saw the review that Brad Jones did and he said that while it was a well made movie he also thought that it was a cash grab, but without actually saying those words.

Disney Not Planning Beauty and the Beast Sequel

Disney CEO Bob Igor will stay at Disney for at least 2 more years.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Disney CEO Bob Igor will stay at Disney for at least 2 more years.

It can truly be said that Bob Iger's term at Disney has been one of extraordinary success, from the acquisition of Marvel Studios and Lucasfilm to the rejuvenation of the Walt Disney Animation division. Despite my gripes with the company's insistence on live action remakes over original material, there is no doubting that that strategy has worked in their favour because they now rank high above old rivals like Warner Bros and Universal. Certainly makes sense for them to keep Iger on board for a few more years, but I do wonder who will be successor and whether they will be able to maintain Disney's current position in the Hollywood food chain or take more creative risks.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Disney CEO Bob Igor will stay at Disney for at least 2 more years.

It can truly be said that Bob Iger's term at Disney has been one of extraordinary success, from the acquisition of Marvel Studios and Lucasfilm to the rejuvenation of the Walt Disney Animation division. Despite my gripes with the company's insistence on live action remakes over original material, there is no doubting that that strategy has worked in their favour because they now rank high above old rivals like Warner Bros and Universal. Certainly makes sense for them to keep Iger on board for a few more years, but I do wonder who will be successor and whether they will be able to maintain Disney's current position in the Hollywood food chain or take more creative risks.

From what I've been seeing, they're mainly doing this because they really don't have a successor. This must be a play for more time to find somebody to continue Igor's work.

The Wreck It Ralph sequel will be named 'Ralph Brakes The Internet'.

I'm a little surprised this movie took so long to make considering how well the first movie was received.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

The Wreck It Ralph sequel will be named 'Ralph Brakes The Internet'.

I'm a little surprised this movie took so long to make considering how well the first movie was received.

I think when it comes to Disney Animated sequels, they tend to be more hesitant when it comes to the ones that are cinematically released. The Rescuers Down Under bombed and 2011's Winnie the Pooh also under-performed (you could say that was a sequel, of sorts, to the original Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh). Plus animated Disney sequels do tend to have a negative stigma thanks to the DTV market.

With that said, I'm sure the Wreck It Ralph sequel will be well done and well received (provided something really wrong hasn't happened behind the scenes), I just have a hunch that they want to put serious enough effort and space it out from the original and not oversaturate the market. Even Toy Story 2 had a sizeable gap of 4 years from the first film.