DVDizzy Forum

But the original is already an animated/live-action hybrid!

Sam Mendes is in early talks to direct a live-action James and the Giant Peach, which he is developing with Disney. Brooklyn scribe Nick Hornby is in early talks to adapt the 1961 Roald Dahl children's book, which follows an orphan boy as he travels to New York City with a rag-tag group of anthropomorphic bugs by way of a large piece of magical produce.

Source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... ect-923082

The only difference between this and the original: the bugs will be computer-animated.

Sotiris wrote:But the original is already an animated/live-action hybrid!

Sam Mendes is in early talks to direct a live-action James and the Giant Peach, which he is developing with Disney. Brooklyn scribe Nick Hornby is in early talks to adapt the 1961 Roald Dahl children's book, which follows an orphan boy as he travels to New York City with a rag-tag group of anthropomorphic bugs by way of a large piece of magical produce.

Source: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-v ... ect-923082

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io-ZbKfCkxg[/youtube]

I think Mendes will get rid of the Randy Newman songs and just do a straight adaptation of the book.

What the actual FRUITCAKING hell?! What was wrong with the original??

The 1996 film is fine. Not interested in a remake of this.

Cant say I care one way or another about this. I could never bring myself to watch the original. Something about the style just kinda grossed me out somehow. I can't really explain it.

I saw the original when I was a child and I have to admit it was one of the very few children's films that kind of terrified me. Something about the way the rhino and the shark/seagulls were created really creeped me out. But I consider that a good thing. Miriam Margoyles and the other woman (from AbFab) were fantastic as the aunts.

Controversial Opinion here, but I'm of the opinion that all books deserve at least two film adaptations. It's always interesting to see multiple interpretations of something. And somebody who never liked the first film adaptation is given the opportunity to see something more to their liking.

Imagine if Peter Jackson thought to himself "Well, Ralph Bakshi already made a movie based on The Lord of the Rings. No reason for me to do my own version." We would have missed out on a landmark piece of filmmaking.

I don't think Sam Mendes is remaking the Henry Selick film. He will more than likely do his own take. I like the Selick film, but there's room for another take on the material. Even as one of the few Randy Newman fans on here, his songs weren't exactly his best work and I don't see Mendes reusing them. And despite his background in musical theatre, he may not even turn it into a musical.

I remember being really scared by the Rhino too.

Don't care either way about this new adaption since I have never seen the 1996 movie either. Something about it's style that I really dislike. But, I have to wonder: Do Disney really think that this will be a huge box office sucess? Don't recall that the 1996 film did huge numbers at the box office. Also, this new movie seems to me as fitting in the category of Disney live action movies that bomb at the box office - Pete's Dragon, The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Tomorrowland, Mars Needs Moms etc.

I mean, Disney's adaption of "The BFG" just bombed, and that movie was like "James and the Giant Peach" also an adaption of a Roald Dahl book. Why does the suits at Disney think this will do any better?

I wish Disney would instead use the money they use to make these live action movies that nobody wants (Sorcerer's Apprentice, Pete's Dragon, James and the Giant Peach...) and instead made live action versions of beloved Disney classics that at least did some business back in the days and who have some fans today - as for example Pocahontas, Hunchback or Hercules. Instead of remaking James and the Giant Peach.

Prince Edward wrote:Don't care either way about this new adaption since I have never seen the 1996 movie either. Something about it's style that I really dislike. But, I have to wonder: Do Disney really think that this will be a huge box office sucess? Don't recall that the 1996 film did huge numbers at the box office. Also, this new movie seems to me as fitting in the category of Disney live action movies that bomb at the box office - Pete's Dragon, The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Tomorrowland, Mars Needs Moms etc.

I mean, Disney's adaption of "The BFG" just bombed, and that movie was like "James and the Giant Peach" also an adaption of a Roald Dahl book. Why does the suits at Disney think this will do any better?

I wish Disney would instead use the money they use to make these live action movies that nobody wants (Sorcerer's Apprentice, Pete's Dragon, James and the Giant Peach...) and instead made live action versions of beloved Disney classics that at least did some business back in the days and who have some fans today - as for example Pocahontas, Hunchback or Hercules. Instead of remaking James and the Giant Peach.

James and the Giant Peach might be bettered remembered by audiences than the others you listed though. I'm just going off of my experience because I remember in elementary school we watched this movie, maybe more than once. But I also went to elementary school in the early 2000s which isn't far off from when James and the Giant Peach was released, so maybe the fact that it was still a recently new movie was why we watched it (besides reading the book). But like you said, I see this being more like Pete's Dragon and the BFG, in getting good reviews but not doing well at the box office.

I wish we could see Pocahontas, Hunchback, and Hercules. I'm still holding out hope for Hunchback though. Even though it didn't get to Broadway, I don't think Disney would have green-lighted the project if they hadn't had some interest in it (I'm assuming Disney is the reason why Hunchback was given the go-ahead to be adapted on stage. Correct me if I'm wrong here). Also about two years ago, ABC was planning on making an Esmeralda miniseries or limited series show. It ended up being cancelled, but the fact that it was in development at all suggests that Disney knows there is an audience for Hunchback, it just might not be the typical Disney audience they generally attract. Also I think I posted sometime back that another studio (non-Disney) will be creating an Esmeralda live-action film. If it does well, Disney might reconsider their stance on Hunchback. Honestly, since Les Mis did so well, I see no reason why Hunchback wouldn't either. True it isn't a well known Broadway musical like Les Mis, but the fanbase wouldn't be that different, especially since Hunchback is more represented than Les Mis in every other format: operas, ballets, multiple film adaptations, the Disney treatment, and even the fact that the original novel is way shorter and more accessible than Les Mis will ever be. I'm sure it would be a bonafide hit in Europe and foreign box offices matter just as much now as domestic ones. Not sure how well it would do in Japan, China, and India though.

Pocahontas though Disney really seems to avoid like the plague. Hercules as well for different reasons. After the multiple box office flops for Hercules, I'm not sure if Disney will want to touch it yet especially since while Hercules is pretty iconic and well known in the public consciousness, it may not be the Disney version that most people think of first. The lack of a stage adaptation for Hercules also shows a disinterest in it by Disney which is a pity.

Mendes will no longer direct the “James and the Giant Peach” remake for Disney, which he was attached to less than a year ago.

Source: http://variety.com/2017/film/news/sam-m ... 202393732/

If i was making this movie i would cast a female actress as James and i would stunt cast two major comedians as Spiker and Sponge.