I think Christina could def pull of being sweet she is a very talented actress. She has done quite a variety of differnt films and I truly believe she looks the part and could pull it off.
Kristin as Snow White was a stupid casting choice for the Snow White Movie she was in. I didn't see it but she looks nothig like the Disney Sno White, but if they were not wanting her to look that part it's fine but for Disney to use her as Snow White would be stupid in my opinion.
Princessmarlo wrote:Kristin as Snow White was a stupid casting choice for the Snow White Movie she was in. I didn't see it but she looks nothig like the Disney Sno White, but if they were not wanting her to look that part it's fine but for Disney to use her as Snow White would be stupid in my opinion.
That's because that version of the movie wasn't by Disney. Hallmark produced it; Disney merely aired it on ABC. Besides, no one said that version was supposed to be a live-action version of the Disney movie. It's about as different as you could get, actually.
I think it would be really hard to find someone who looks exactly like Snow White, I've never seen the version (despite being the one who brought it up ) but from what I've seen for it trailer wise, she does look pretty decent IMO. The only problem I have with Christina Ricci, is her eyes are kind of buggy I really noticed it in the movie Cursed. I can't see her as Snow White, something about her just isn't right for me not sure what it is though.
I would say she (Christina Ricci) has big eyes not bug eyes, I have seen just about all her films and the reason I think she looked like she had"Bug Eyes" in Cursed was because she was suppose to be acting frighted and when your frighted you get wide eyed, hope I explained that well, but if you watch other films of hers she isn't like that. As for Kristin playing Snow White I think that would be wrong as Kristin is of Chinese ancestry and you can see it.
I wasn't trying to imply Kristin is a better choice because of looks alone, but she has portrayed Snow White before so there must be a reason she was chosen for the Hallmark version.
Right now I think Jessica Biel would be a good actress to use for Meg in Hercules. Rachel Weisz might be a good Jane in Tarzan, since her character in the Mummy movies is similar to Jane in a way.
Well, she's at least.....17/18 at the very youngest, but I think she's in her mid twenties? My best estimate would be 17-29, I could be waaaay off though. I've never really thought about it age wise, I was mostly going by looks and by the characters she's played before. Rachels shown that she can play a brainy character, and also a bit of a fighter as seen in Mummy Returns. I haven't seen Tarzan for a while so I don't know if Jane has any action type scenes, I do remember her running from Baboons
The similarity that immediately springs to mind is between the Queen and Joan Crawford. I know she's dead now, but hypothetically she'd be a dead ringer (legend has it she served as the inspiration for the Queen's face):
As far as living actors are concerned, Bruce Spence (LOTR's Mouth of Sauron, and the Prime Minister of Utapau in Revenge of the Sith) would be quite convincing as Jafar.
However, I don't really think live-action remakes of animated films are worthwhile. A lot of the appeal and originality of the original is lost.
I don't know, I tend to wonder if Walt wouldn't make all his films live-action nowadays, considering the technology available. I was watching the extras on the Peter Pan Platinum Edition the other day, and there's always that reasoning for using animation that you can do things easily that you can't with live-action. Well, now that you can do pretty much ANYTHING in live-action nowadays... it makes me wonder.
A lot of things are possible in live-action now, but the individual style of the animated film would be lost. The 101 Dalmatians remake lost its Ronald Searle-ness, and I'm sure that a live-action Alice in Wonderland would lose its Mary Blair-ness and a live-action Pinocchio would use it's Gustaf Tenngren-ness.
I've thought of a few more, though!
Dawn French as the Queen of Hearts?
Charles Laughton (dead, I know) as Governor Ratcliffe?
I agree about the value of animation as a unique art form and most of us here probably do, but I know a great many people do not. The loss (for the most part) of big-screen 2D animation to 3D sort of proves that. I don't really think that the mentioned characters can only work in animation or necessarily work best in animation, I think that falls more under a matter of taste. Yeah, I prefer animated Cruella, but there are going to be folks who don't, and I think they can work either way really. In the longrun though, I think moviemakers, maybe even Walt Disney, would lean towards what turns a bigger profit now that they can do things in live-action they could only do in animation before. But I don't mean to get off topic. It's just something that came to mind when I was watching those Peter Pan extras the other day. Frankly, I hope we never lose 2D animation, but at the moment it seems to be a dying artform. I hope the new attempts from Disney can revive it, but we'll see...
Nicholas Brendon might work, the only real difference is the eye colour, but that can be changed with contacts. Alyson Hannigan looks like an interesting choice, she might work better than Rachel McAdams I think since Alyson's a natural redhead right? I like those choices Siren
Chernabog_Rocks wrote:Nicholas Brendon might work, the only real difference is the eye colour, but that can be changed with contacts. Alyson Hannigan looks like an interesting choice, she might work better than Rachel McAdams I think since Alyson's a natural redhead right? I like those choices Siren
I could see Nicholas playing more on the humor with Grimsby. And though I know Alyson Hannigan doesn't have a good singing voice, I think she could play the part of a Ariel. And yes, she's a natural red head. Though I think sadly she dyed her hair brown recently.