Well maybe it’s more of a tepid take.

Starting with Aladdin. This trailer is  really underwhelming. There is no vitality in this movie. Not going to be too harsh since it’s a minute trailer but there isn’t anything blood-pumping, nothing exciting, nothing to get one hyped for a fun adventure. It’s more dream-like, like a soft lullaby maybe that is what they were going for, more mystery. I guess that could be a bold choice with an Aladdin remake.   

Then there is Will Smith’s Genie. First, it’s a no win scenario. People didn’t like him not blue when the first set of pictures released and they don’t like blue. But more than that it’s nearly impossible to adapt  the Genie from Aladdin since so much of the character was Robin Williams. Either the film needed to just find someone to outright copy Williams’ performance (like they did in the Aladdin cartoon) or they needed to make a whole new character. Instead they went for the middle. Again no win.  Personally, I would have gone for a whole new thing for Genie.

Then there is  the Frozen 2 trailer. This is a teaser trailer so there isn’t much of context for what is happening but it is definitely the opposite of the Aladdin trailer, it’s all hype.
Frozen has gone into the realm of serious action movie.  There training montage, Anna has weapon, Kristof is riding Sven maybe into battle, who knows. Has Frozen gone Skyrim? Maybe. I personally do not know how to feel about this one. More confused than anything.

Also it’s important to keep in mind that trailers are super misleading so this could all be just weird marketing.   

Simba 2019 The Lion King Remake picture image

Simba 2019 The Lion King Remake

Instead of being mad that this remake seems content to enjoy its false advertising or some how trying to redefine ‘what is live action’ let’s just  considered how this movie might incorporate the “live” aspect without anyone knowing so Disney can continues to capitalize on this trend.

Disclaimer – This post is meant as joke.

So stupid idea number, this movie DOES have “live action humans” in it. Like the story is actually a nature documentary and there are humans off in the background or foreground trying to get those iconic cinematic shots and making commentary, like the narration in the Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty remakes .

Also these humans can harp on those plot-holes that were in the original that people on the internet like to point out all the time. Like the logic of King’s impact on  the weather and ecology, Nala’s dad and the incest that it implies, though watch this remake  address that Nala’s mother was taken in from some other pride so there is  no incest. Don’t worry about it because Disney fixed it.  Other plot-holes may include the elephant graveyard, Simba surviving on bugs (though Film Theory covered that ) and so on and so on. Disney will fix it, it will fix them all and create new ones but that will be the remake  of the remake’s problem.

Or perhaps maybe one of the animals is a real Animal hidden amongst the CG animation.  You will have to watch the movie 100 times to spot it. And it will be in the background and it will like a tiny lizard or something. Maybe one of the bugs Simba eats. Likes it’s a Metaphor for how CG is taking over.  But only TRUE DIE HARD DISNEY fans will spot the “live” animal in this remake.      

The reasons for these remakes  existing, besides more money, does seem to be pushing the  computer animation tech (which people are bored with at this point) AND to correct plot-holes from the originals because imagination is hard and people need things explained more. Like with Beauty and the Beast and logic of a curse and a magical castle. So now they need it with CG Lions meet Hamlet.

I hope this movie does actually shoe-horn in humans or one real animal just for the word usage of “Disney Live Remakes” but I also can’t WAIT for how people in interviews will BS some reason for how it’s “Live”  or why it doesn’t matter.   Then again does Disney actually use the term “Live Action remakes?” Is this even a problem?

Ultimately I do not care, Disney needs its money and repackage nostalgia is a safe bet to get that money.   Though if people really wanted Disney  to stop with these movies collectively we need to stop paying attention and sending money on them but we won’t so here we are with four “live action remakes” coming out in 2019.

WHERE IS THE LIVE ACTION HUNCHBACK DISNEY??????

 

Naomi Scott picture image

Naomi Scott

Let’s just unpack this bit of casting news.  Recently Naomi Scott was cast as Princess Jasmine in the upcoming Live-Action Remake of Aladdin and some people are upset. Scott is half Indian and half British and Jasmine is Middle-Eastren which means for a lot of people that she isn’t White or Indian. The reason for her casting is that she can sing and dance. At least that is excuse given.

Karen David as Princess Jasmine in Once Upon A Time picture image

Karen David as Princess Jasmine in Once Upon A Time

It’s a hard one. Personally  I think Scott would have been better suited for Esmeralda, though I would rather see Gigi Radics in the role but this isn’t the first time Jasmine has played by a women of Indian Descent. In Once Upon a Time she was played by Karen David who can also sing and dance, watch Galavant, that show is awesome. One point people are making against Scott playing the role is that is was great chance by Disney to have a Middle Eastern woman in a prominent positive role. Another issue is that casting Scott looks like Disney doesn’t understand  that Middle Eastern culture  and Indian culture are different, even though some have defended Scott by saying there is overlap in the styling of Aladdin  like the palace look like the Taj Mahal and Raja’s name. Also at Disney World Aladdin character frequent the Moroccan pavilion at Epcot. Disney has aways mixed vaguely similar cultures.  I mean Agrabah  is a combination of Arga  and Baghdad, which is where Aladdin was originally supposed to be sets. Agra is an Indian city in Uttar Pradesh where the Taj Mahal is located.

Princess Jasmine, Aladdin picture Imade

Princess Jasmine

Oh, boy am I generalizing today but a lot people feel that everyone should play any role and some feel that if you whitewash you have  to cast everything like in voice acting in accordance with a character’s race and background and it just a can worms. First off Whitewashing is a BIG issue. If a character is a specific race and if it’s important to their character and setting than YES cast someone who fits the mold. I had no idea that years ago bitch about Chinese women playing Japanese women in Memoirs of a Geisha that should have been grateful they were at least East Asians. I did here people complaining about black people in the new Beauty and the Beast movie as historical inaccurate. Forget about the implications of a forgoten Prince hanging out after I guess the Revolution, it’s the race of few minor characters that irked some people.

Mena Massoud picture image

Mena Massoud

Disney is in a unique position with its remake movies, they don’t need bankable actors. Sure, they help but people are going to see these movies more for nostalgia than the actors.  So far with Aladdin, Aladdin is being played by Egyptian- Canadian actor Mena Massoud and Will Smith playing the Genie. If there reason for casting Scott was predicated on Singing and Dancing made they either rethink making these remake musicals or they could considering dubbing.

Naomi Scott picture image

Naomi Scott

I think if Disney had expanded their search or at least rethought the singing necessity there might have been a better Jasmine. Scott might do fine in the role but I can understand both side of the argument of her casting. It seemed like filmmakers gave up trying to cast the role and settled for some who nearly had the right ethnic background.

Or maybe the film will make Agrabah a reverse Mughal-equse regime where the ruling and noble class are of Indian descent and the lower class are Arabic to justify this casting choice. (This will more than likely not happen.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/07/17/disney-aladdin-jasmine-naomi-scott_a_23034316/

http://fortune.com/2017/07/21/disney-aladdin-cast-naomi-scott/

Ariel Disney The Little Mermaid picture image

Ariel Disney The Little Mermaid

There are 19 planned Disney Live action Movies planned so far and gotta say some are weird concepts. Here’s a list or you can watch the video here 

  • Mulan  
  • The Lion King
  • Dumbo
  • The Sword in the Stone
  • Prince Charming  (looks at the archtype)
  • Genie (Aladdin Prequel)
  • Aladdin
  • Cruella
  • Winnie the Pooh
  • Little Mermaid
  • Peter Pan
  • Tinker bell
  • James and the Giant Peach (rumored)
  • Pinocchio
  • The Jungle Book 2
  • Maleficent 2
  • Chernabog (humanizing the demon who controls the dead)
  • Snow White and the 7 Dwarfs
  • Rose Red ( about Snow White’s sister)

A Puppet of Quasimodo bells Disney Hunchback of notre dame picture image

A Puppet of Quasimodo during the Bells of Notre Dame Disney Hunchback of notre dame

These movies join the group of Live action Disney remakes, which is their new favorite trend as it’s easy to capitalize on. While there are more than a few titles missing from the list, Hunchback is missing. Am I surprised? Not really. Do I wish they were making a live action version of Hunchback? Hellfire yes!  Aside from the new musical, the landscape of Hunchback is barren. Got a little from the new Beauty and the Beast version but since then nothing.

Quasimodo singing "Out There" Hunchback of Notre Dame Disney picture image

Quasimodo singing “Out There” Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame

So why isn’t Disney going to make a Live Action Hunchback? It makes more sense than a live action  Lion King or sequel to Jungle Book. The reason why they won’t is money, pure and simple. Hunchback of Notre Dame was not a money marker for Disney. Sure, it made its budget back but only barely and it was not a toy seller. I would hazard a guess that since there doesn’t appear to be the same amount of nostalgic love for the movie that can be easy quantified like with money, Disney assumes the fanbase isn’t there and there is no need for a remake.

Frollo singing Hellfire Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Frollo singing Hellfire Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame

On the flip-side, Disney might want to consider making a remake. Hunchback always seemed a little out of step with other family friend movies  and yet the parts of the Hunchback that were the most Disney-esque were the most hated parts (the gargoyles). A remake would give the company a chance to retcon the parts of Hunchback that REALLY worked and fixed parts that brought the movie down. It could be combined in part with the new musical or just follow the book a little more closely.

Djali Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame picture image

Esmeralda & Djali Disney Hunchback of Notre Dame

Do I think Disney will ever make a  Hunchback  live action remake? Maybe, wouldn’t completely rule it out but it won’t for a long while if ever.