
Disney to Adapt Iconic 'Fantasia' Sequence Into Live-Action Movie (Exclusive)
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... nce-799554
You said it.Mooky wrote:These live-action remakes are DTV cheapquels of the new millennium.
I agree with everything this post says.Toky wrote:This is actually a story I would like to see turned into a movie…. but reading that it will probably get the Maleficent treatment makes me sick…..Chernabog is practically the Devil….and I don't want to see how the devil was presumably a good creature….It's evil…
A live action version of this would have to be very dark...
You read my mind, but only it's worse because it's Disney's way of saying, "OH! OH! LOOK WHAT WE DID TO THIS MOVIE! IT'S SOOOOO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL! WHO'S WALT DISNEY? WHAT'S 2D? THIS IS THE ONLY VERSION THAT MATTERS. FORGET THE ORIGINAL VERSION."Mooky wrote:These live-action remakes are DTV cheapquels of the new millennium.
Aside from wanting to advertise their new products, I find little evidence to suggest this is the sentiment behind the live action remakes. In fact, I think Disney's making them further from the source material to avoid such sentiments. It seems like fans who are so incredibly fearful that anyone would put a remake above the original are the ones pushing this idea. It reads as a really irrational fear to me. The originals are never going anywhere, and no one forces anyone to see a new movie. If it appears desperate, let it flop or run its course. Life is much more enjoyable that way.disneyprincess11 wrote:You read my mind, but only it's worse because it's Disney's way of saying, "OH! OH! LOOK WHAT WE DID TO THIS MOVIE! IT'S SOOOOO MUCH BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL! WHO'S WALT DISNEY? WHAT'S 2D? THIS IS THE ONLY VERSION THAT MATTERS. FORGET THE ORIGINAL VERSION."
If they keep mentioning Maleficent, how does that lead you to doubt they will go the redemption route?Tangled wrote:Whatever, even if they do go the Maleficent route, I can't wait to see how Disney attempts to redeem the devil (although I doubt they will, because every live action Disney reboot announcement seems to mention Maleficent. Even the ones that aren't villain-redemption stories like Maleficent, for example Cinderella or Beauty and the Beast. Disney probably just refers to Maleficent because it's a success story of a reboot gone profitable).
Enchanted, Saving Mr. Banks and Cinderella (2015) weren't train wrecks.Disney's Divinity wrote:Bizarre.
I could see potential for this in the right hands, but with Disney you know it's going to be a mess like their other live-action films. The benefit is almost all-original material.
You can't really judge how the writers will do, based on their only produced screenplay. In fact, it's very likely they weren't even hired because of Dracula Untold. Up and coming screenwriters are usually hired by Hollywood studios based on a spec script, which budding writers use to find interest from agents and studios (these are what tend to end up on the Blacklist). And in the case of Dracula Untold, since that was their first credited screenplay, who knows how much the director and studio changed before its inception on the screen? It is entirely possible for screenwriter(s) to write something disappointing and then go on to do more impressive work later on, depending on the control they're given or the director their project is paired with.taei wrote:Dracula Untold was a massive dud, and a perfect example of how NOT to write a movie... And it underperformed! Why anyone, let alone DISNEY, hire him to scribe a beloved segment and produce it?! Seriously...