My initial theory: they’re totally out of ideas and have gone to the reduce, reuse, recycle bin. Why? They banked everything on the Marvel and smiled and raked in the dough, and then a couple years ago went “wait, what’s supposed to hit the theaters once Endgame’s done?”
Crap–we need time to think!
I didn’t care enough to watch the live-action version of Beauty and the Beast, and I doubt I’ll ever watch the live-action Aladdin coming out soon.
There’s a good reason for that: the films were great the first time around.
The animation was fantastic (hell, Beauty and the Beast was nominated for Best Picture that year, for crying out loud). There’s so much awe and the imagery is wonderful, even as I’ve outgrown Disney flicks with a lot of musical numbers in them for the most part. I still appreciate them for what they achieved as an art form and as good stories.
I also firmly believe that since these films were animated, that only worked to benefit the stories. Animation was the perfect medium for the fairy tales.
Now, we have much better CGI to play with, though.
Crap, crap, crap.
I suppose that’s the gimmick this time around–we have CGI to fill in any impossibilities, green screens galore. Great costuming and more music to write for Radio Disney. Other than a couple character traits, it’s basically a remake.
Aladdin’s going to be a live-action adaptation, not something that takes the old story and goes from another angle. A few updated character traits and that’s enough of an excuse to remake a classic? Cinderella’s been done to death–oodles of times from many studios. I can’t believe they keep making more, high and low budget versions. I’ve lost count the number they’ve made of that story–or clones of it.
I know some people hate on Maleficent, which was about a whole different point of view on the Sleeping Beauty story, but at least it was different enough from the original idea to justify it’s existence. And yes, I know the animated flick was bland as hell with no character development, but it’s probably the only semi-decent Disney comparison I can use right now.
Other than pulling an update out of their ass through the tried and tested “reduce, reuse, recycle” method of storytelling for a cash grab on 90s nostalgia…I can’t think of why Disney felt it had to spend millions on an already loved story. A story that made them millions the first time around. It’s not like the animated films were flops–far from it!
On the other hand, how did we end up with three Spidermen in fifteen years, now that I think about it?
Okay, that’s a question for another day.
Hell, how many millions would they have made just re-releasing both animated flicks on the big screen for a few weeks? You know how many people would love to go back and see it on the big screen? Or people who didn’t get a chance to see it the first time around?
Dammit, dammit, dammit.
I guess this is proof they need more writers in the film and TV industry.
Time for me to sharpen my pencils and get working (hee hee).
Seriously, though, why the hell should Disney remake recent beloved classic animated films in a live-action style like this?
There are other ways to make money…new stories would be a great start.
At least I’m sure the SNL writers will get a kick out of it.
No wonder streaming studios are kicking the big-wig’s asses, if this is all Disney’s got left.
3 thoughts on “#093–Why The Hell is Disney Making Great Animated Films from the 1990s into Live Action Films Now?”
I’ve heard the theory that it’s their way of keeping the rights and stuff with them. They get to keep their claim on it, and make more money. I mean, if you had the ability to repackage something you already completed and sell it for more money, what company wouldn’t want to do that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah yes, the licensing and rights makes sense…that’s why crap like “Dragonball: Evolution” got made (shudder).
It’s moments like this where I get annoyed at the legalese and copyright laws…because then it looks like a desperate cash grab, no matter how well you pull it off. grr…