The only way I can see it work, is if they do a whole completely different story, like a what if scenario. Or if the is tonally/genre different assuming this is aimed at kids I doubt the latter will happen.
These movies are hugely popular with audiences. We may not like it, but the truth here is that these movies are made because people want to see them. General audiences reject original movies at the moment.
The fact that toothless in the HTTYD trailer looks EXACTLY as the original, same cartoonish design, same level of photo realism, it's like, what's even the point then? It's baffling to me
I checked out basically right after Beauty and the Beast. The problem isn't that they're live-action but rather that they don't justify why they are live-action and offer nothing of variance that would make, what's basically an adaptation of an adaptation, distinct. If they feel they have to go this route but still adhere to their animated counterparts, they're basically walking rendundancies as far as presentation goes. Jungle Book was great because it didn't look or feel like I was just watching a neutered version of a film I can already watch
I completely agree. Like, Mulan I gave a pass because at least they tried to kinda do something new with it and be more authentic to the actual legend of Mulan, but most of these are like 1:1 remakes for no reason. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Disney (and Dreamworks) want to commit to these live action reboots, they should do it to films that maybe didn't do so well originally but have a LOT of potential and could really benefit from live action. The one the comes to mind? The Black Cauldron. For the love of the Gods, I would LOVE a live action Black Cauldron film. Give it a second chance to be incredible, and with the new advances in film since the 70s, you could really do something special with it. Or like Treasure Planet. I'd rather they do something original, but if they're dead set on live-action reboots of films that already exist, do it to some films that deserve a second chance.
@@danyg4063Disney also knows that there are so many people who have the mentality of just wanting to see theses characters in a real life setting, there is something admittedly intriguing about that, but I’ve noticed that despite being in live action and having the ability to act more and put in more emotion, they are really lifeless and boring instead, the animated version is always just so much more alive and creative imo
Same. The medium of animation is king at selling “whimsy”, which is part of what made the Disney renaissance fairy tale musicals so successful and appealing. They’re also very tight 90ish minute films that don’t waste time. The live action renditions are generally a downgrade in visuals, pacing, whimsy, and singing.
Yeah I enjoyed seeing older movies in a new format, at first. Then they made live action remake after live action remake and it started being disappointing instead of exciting, because there wasn’t enough “new” to make them interesting. They can be done well; the issue is that they’re mainly being created for profit rather than attempting to reimagine previous movies/stories with care. Also there are way too many of them coming out at once.
What about Transformers? The robots are cgi, but theyre live action. At least 70% of mcu and dc movies are cgi. The dragons in game of throne is cgi just like the httyd remake. What do you want? Them to train actual african animals to use as actors? Make dragon suits for httyd? Movies use cgi and thats that. If you dont want movies with cgi then you dont like movies
It was because they were trying to make it looks "real" which is a catch 22 because you're already making them sing. Terrible idea through and through.
I always think The Jungle Book is so far and away the best of them because it's not even remaking the animated movie for chunks of the runtime, it's adapting parts of the books that the previous Disney version didn't. It's still clearly meant to evoke the animated Disney movie, but it's at least the closest to being less a remake and more just a different adaptation of the same source material by the same company.
@@sathrielsatanson666 well it's not my sole criteria but I genuinely just don't count Maleficent as a remake at all because you're right, it is a whole new story
It's still a bad movie dragged down by bad acting, inconsistent tone and inability to decide what kind of story it wants to be. Also, it made Mowgli a Mary Sue who never faces consequences and stays in the jungle in the end. The movie also fundamentally misunderstood the original film.
Why is animation still seen as something to go "beyond"? You realize that before Snow White, people mostly just pointed cameras at things? Do you realize how revolutionary it is for every single frame to be entirely artist-rendered? If you watch an animated film and think, "I wish it were acted out in front of a camera with photorealistic CGI animals," you seriously lack imagination as either an executive or an audience member.
I think the whole conception of them is an insult to the art of animation. Animation isn’t just ‘filling in’ until a story can be told ‘properly’ in live action. It is a medium with its own (many) strengths and is a choice for a story not a stopgap.
i'll turn to glass and shatter myself if they did that, the COLOUR made Emperor's New Groove pop, the live action Beauty and the Beast or Mulan had colour grading on the scale of Civil War concrete airport tarmac fight
The only way Emperor’s New Groove can be saved in any capacity is if they go the Deadpool route when it comes to 4th wall breaks And even if they did that it doesn’t guarantee a success
I’ve seen somewhere that the director of HTTYD said he is directing it because the studio wants it and doesn’t want anyone else to ruin it. This screams to me that Universal is trying to do two things: 1) make easy money 2) revitalize the property for Epic Universe since it comes out a month after the park opens.
That trailer freaked me out little. Dragons look great IF you want them almost exactly same as animated ones from og movie, ppl are fine too, but seeing them together is soo uncanny.
It’s not even a live action remake at this point it’s just a photorealistic remake. And the problem with photorealism is that there’s so much less room for stylization. Not that it’s impossible to stylize something photorealistic, but you can definitely tell the difference
My biggest problem with the How to Train Your Dragon remake for me is the fact that the IP is based on a book series, and the original film trilogy is wildly different. So, with a remake, you could do something different, take some more from the books, or hell even take less from the books. But instead it is literally just the exact same movie. Such a waste of an opportunity.
I know this is going to sound rich - but I don't think that will work either 💀 like people are mad a 3/4ths white actress is playing Astrid I can't imagine the backlash to hiccup and snotlout being cousins or if toothless was small. Idk I think people drastically overestimate the social palate for change.
@nicholalehtimaki3597 run the numbers this year! Original projects just don't have the numbers to sustain theatre runs! The ones that pull public attention are IP mining because like it or not something recognizable gets people to see it whether bad or not (they won't do the cost of production but they will yield more money than a completely new idea)
@@joshuaperrine2019I've definitely annoyed a few people talking about all the ways Stargate and Atlantis are the same. It's always nice to see people who think like I do.
I mean, personally, if I wanted to show my future children something I grew up on, I'm not gonna just hope they make a live-action remake of Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, Pokémon 2000, or Transformers 1986. I'll just show my theoretical kids those things and let the kids decide if they like them.
I heard once that these "live action" remakes are the legacy of the "straight to vhs/dvd sequels" department from the early 2000s. And I think whoever said that had a good point
Muppets!!! Remake it all with Muppets! Why own them if you don't do the best thing with them!? Muppet little mermaid! Muppet avengers! Muppet Star wars!!!!
i enjoyed that Bob Hoskins movie as well i think there was a time when i got older when i heard it was considered bad where i denied it for a bit and felt bad for liking it but after that i think i stopped caring as much, I think i embraced it more and appreciated it a whole lot more and enjoying it way more again
I doubt they'll find an actress who rivals Chel in beauty and one who'd be willing to wear a simple tube top and loincloth (unless they choose to censor and add more clothing, which is most likely).
I was on board with the earlier remakes for the reasons you said. Story telling had changed so much in the 50 or 60 years since the original that there are some creative avenues to take them. But these remakes of the renaissance or even more modern animated movies are just so lifeless and safe.
My son was 5 when how to train your dragon came out and it has remained his favorite animated movie ever since. He is not at all excited about the live action remake and is already disappointed based off the casting. So I have no idea who they are making these movies for. He isn't old enough to have children to take and see it which might be a reason to do a remake for older properties but it just hasn't been long enough since the last movie and the end of the series to do a live action remake. We need another decade then maybe 🤷🏻♀️
I'm so tired. They're going shot-for-shot remaking films I remember watching in the cinema as a teenager. No one needs these. The worst part is that when they started, people were excited for them to take flawed films and improve them for a modern audience, but they're remaking better films and making them mediocre. Like, take Aladdin. It was pretty racist in how it treated the middle east and they took Jasmine, a good character with agency, and objectified her in the final act of the film for titilation. Easy, key things to improve. Except they hired white extras and covered them in brown paint, hired light-skinned actors for dark-skinned roles, hired white costume designers to bungle middle eastern fashion, and gave Jasmine "girlboss" moments while taking away her actual moments of agency and personality (seriously, "I won't be silenced" is a great song.... if they gave us any idea of what Jasmine as a character wanted to say) I don't trust that same mentality to take a genre-defining animated film like HTTYD and make it worth watching. I don't trust that same mentality to take the sub-par dialogue and somewhat awkward pacing of Moana and make it better. Instead, we'll get Johnson's actual face leering at us for 90 minutes. Yay.
I think the only way I would be excited about a live action How To Train Your Dragon movie is if it’s a more faithful adaptation of the original books, the animated movie is so different to the book series that a faithful book adaptation would be a whole new movie
Wait wait wait .. there were books BEFORE og movie?? Aaand are they good? Are they worth reading as adult now? And how different (in which direction) they are from anim movies?
@@mar.s6516 Dragon is tiny, angry, dragons can talk, dragons are trained from day one, hiccup didn't change the world like that, its just life in a society that trains small dragons
I read lots of the books as a kid, but I don’t think I’d recommend them to an adult. Unlike the films (which are completely original), the story doesn’t hold up for all ages.
@@wesreleases6346 Thanks for your reply, i still love reading books (well mostly audiobooks theese days, they are so much more convenient 😊) and still love reading about dragons, they just need to be either fun read for all ages, or more mature story now. So i am glad i wont waste time on books not in that line.
I'm firmly in the Gen Z camp, and I was still pretty young when the original How To Train Your Dragon came out - however, it was one of the best animated movies I had ever seen, and is still one of my all-time favorites. I do not need some stupid, unnecessary, pointless, hyper expensive, nostalgia bait, live action remake cash grab being shoved down my throat, especially for a movie that amazing.
The difference with remakes now is they're just cover versions now: people go to see the things they already know. But the audience for the George Clooney Ocean's 11 wasn't Frank Sinatra fans. Nobody looked at Matt Damon's casting as Jason Bourne wondering if he could ever compare to Richard Chamberlain. The heist in The Thomas Crown Affair was a museum, not a bank, and the signature Steve Mcqueen car chase was entirely absent. Nowadays all of that would be seen as "disrespectful", "a slap in the face", etc.
but soderbergh's oceans 11 was the perfect example of what a remake can and should be, bc it's taking an interesting premise, but where the execution originally can be improved upon. in this case, that rat pack movie was so boring to the point of being unwatchable. they didn't give a fuck about the actual movie they were making it, it was about getting paid to hang out in vegas.
I read an interesting article about how "adults dont like cartoons" and that these movies are for disney adults who dont enjoy the cartoonish style anymore(which is dumb in my opinion because those disney adults fell in love with disney with the cartoons)
@studiolinn i kind of agree because they became fans with the cartoon animation but idk there could be something there if you look towards trends of the themeparks they arent bringing their kids as much.
It’s an interesting take but there is no way that population exists. I find it hard to believe that the kind of adults who will dress up as cartoon characters and wear fake ears, all while standing in line for photos with grown adults in costumes at a theme park would have a problem watching an animated film You can’t be both a “Disney Adult” and “too old for animated movies”
I mean, I saw HTTYD as a kid, but I'm not old enough to have kids yet. Also: If Disney is going to keep doing these live action remakes, they should make a Emperor's New Groove remake that follows the original Kingdom of the Sun pitch that got scrapped part of the way through development.
Hell, you could probably make some genuinely interesting stuff out of beefing up the "prototypes" of some movies. Like a glimpse into an alternate universe or something.
A different division of Disney works on live actions remakes from the one that works on the animated films. Both studios have always made movies for Disney in parallel, and the number of animated movies has not been reduced to make way for live action remakes. The real threat to original animated films from Disney is not live action remakes but rather the increasing prevalence of theatrical animated sequels.
Some remakes and re-series that come to mind are Sherlock Holmes and James Bond, both are constantly updated for the modern age, and sometimes in different format (like tv) for modern consumption. I like the change up of era with these, like Sherlock in the 2010s instead of 1800s. Maybe we do Lion King but in ancient Greec- oh… wait…
Godzilla's had lots of origin stories... The original, both US versions, "Shin Godzilla", and "Godzilla Minus One" are all the first time people in that version of the "universe" have encountered Godzilla. And I'm pretty sure there are others.
I'm with you on everything except Emperor's New Groove. I really can't see how they could make a good live action of it. The original was so fun. But in regard to remakes, the only one that comes to mind that I like more than the original is Hairspray.
2 things: They seem to have run out of ideas for original content. This is why there are live action remakes and endless animated sequels for popular IPs. Also, kids are the market. We may not care, but it sells. Kids must have a parent with them to go to the theater, so it's a minimum of 2 ticket sales per kid. That's why they make so much at the box office despite not being very good.
Disney gets pitched new stuff ALL THE TIME. I think they're out of ideas they can sell to investors for a 9-figure budget. If they started making mid-budget movies again they might have more freedom to take chances and use those new ideas.
Disney Animation‘s last 4 movies were originals. 5 of Pixar’s last 7. The truth here is Elemental, Pixar’s 2023 original movie made 480 million, Inside Out 2 made 4-times that much at 1.7B. Audiences make the choices for the studios here
If they wanna remake animated movies into live action, they should do the ones that had a good premise but either didn’t do as well in the execution of that idea, or didn’t thrive at the box office. I think Treasure Planet is the way to go
Maybe they're being made for the people who won't give animated movies a chance. My mother is one of those people, "animated movies are for kids." (That's dumb but oh well) (SAUSAGE PARTY is not for kids) THE LION KING "live-action" should not be considered a live-action remake. I think that "photorealistic CGI remake" would be a better term for it.
Moana came out about 7 years ago (I know this as it’s my wife and my first movie which I later showed to my daughter). It’s still quite new as far as animations are concerned
I know it's not a remake from animated to live action but one really solid Disney live action remake was Pete's Dragon because it took that core idea but completely changed the tone of the film. I think it was good as that core idea worked really well as both a brightly colored movie with songs AND a more serious, less colorful, more action-filled film, and so that very different style of film warranted a new version and gave it a unique identity 😊
@@thenandocut you're not the only one i remember seeing the trailer for it and maybe a poster years ago didn't go see it and i forgot this remake happened until i scrolled down and saw the above comment.
I actually enjoyed that film...years later, when I saw it on Netflix. And I have no idea how it could have been marketed successfully. It's such a childlike, fantastical story ... that starts with the title character being orphaned in a horrific car crash, running off into the woods, and growing up semi-feral. It's a wonderful movie, and I have no idea who it's for. Wish there were more movies like that.
Fun fact: as a teen, I wanted a live action remake of How To Train Your Dragon because I wondered what it'd be like do have a story like that in the visual tone of something like Game Of Thrones
I’ve never been a big fan of the live action remakes. Live action tends to feel slower and less dynamic than animation to me. But I do enjoy seeing live action versions of characters. It’s fun to imagine how things would look in real life (I still praise the MCU for figuring out a way to make Spider-Man’s eyes expressive). Personally, I think the live action stuff works best when they use it to create new stories. I loved the Scooby Doo movies as a kid, but they’re their own thing, not a remake of an existing movie.
I do really wish they'd do a remake of Treasure Planet, I love that movie, and maybe with another pass at it, they could actually make it work in a way that other people would actually enjoy it.
The ‘HD Animated Remakes’ of animated movies does sound really cool to me with the caveat that the conversation would almost certainly be plagued by either accusations of using generative ai OR them actually using and promoting generative ai
The answer is easy: themselves. They want the money from either headless chickens going to see these movies because "hey moana I like moana, cool, monkey brain clap" or the actual people going to the movies to rightfully hate watch them. Its the jingling of familiar keys that gets them money either way, no matter how bad the products and their reputation end up getting
I prefer animation to live action and the live action versions being primarily being CGI feels so pointless. I'm surprised they didn't do Snow White before getting to New stuff like Aladdin, Little Mermaid and Moana. I really really disliked the new Lion King, especially since they took out Be Prepared, it was so unnecessary and I felt like I wasted my time. Most parents are just going to show their kids the original animated ones as they still hold up and they hold a kids attention more anyway.
I would honestly LOVE a remaster of The Incredibles. We can't just conjure up a 4k version of an animated movie the way we can with film, but I think all those classic Pixar movies deserve a glories HD version that isn't just a lazy upscale or something.
What’s odd about the HTTYD live action, is that by so strictly sticking to the animated version, they give the whole jig up, cause the books… are a gold mine that the animated film didn’t really touch. If you made the live action pull more from the books you could’ve made the book fans hop on board (if it passes the smell test) and not pissed off the fans of the animated version and whatever ven-diagram exists of both. Instead it will be a slightly worse version of the animated film
How to Train Your Dragon is the most frustrating of these because had the opportunity to be an adaptation that was closer to the books (which, to be honest, would be best as a TV show anyway), but instead they decided to do the movies just... again. At least Cinderella was more of an adaptation of the Cinderella fairy tale that just used some Disney aesthetics, and Maleficent went for a different angle. None of the rest of these do that.
THIS!!!! Nando comparing Live Action Remakes to the many Batman we have had over the years is missing the point by a mile. The reason the many Batman work is because they are all re-interpretations of the original source material. Matt Reeves Batman interpretation isn’t based on Snyder’s, it’s based on the comics. All these live action remakes have a chance to go back to the original source material and tell the story from a different perspective, but instead they choose to make a shot by shot remake of their own interpretation
I mentioned this before, but the problem isn't even now that people are mad at D̶i̶s̶n̶e̶y̶ HOLLYWOOD for doing remakes. But it's that they're doing it with their SUCCESSES, and not their FAILURES. As an old and wise clock once said, "If it's not broke, DON'T FIX IT.". And it's true. Why aren't they trying to fix their failures (critical or commercial) instead? The thing that made their successes work so well was just how interesting their characters were. Therefore, the story was so great for people. But with their remakes, they keep changing characters, yet keep the same plot, but still expect their story to play out the same, when it really doesn't. CHARACTER IS STORY. Therefore, by making such alternations to a character, the plot doesn't work. And if the plot doesn't work, neither does the story.
Okay, don't know why my comment needed to go, so I try to phrase it better (I guess) The reasons for the massive amount of live action remakes are simple really. For one, it is a way safer options for studios to go for. Streaming and other entertainment (Like Videogames for example) are now also competing with movies for the attention of potential customers, which is why movie budgets had to baloon to extreme proportions to pay for either marketing and/or extra-vagant special effects. And nobody really wants to gamble on something new when most people tend to gravitate towards something they already know normally. It is really hard to make people care about a completely new story in general, and if you add high stakes to it next to nobody is willing to bet on that, especially after in the last few years alone when we have seen many of these projects crash and burn, regardless of their quality. Also, another factor in this particular case is another issue animation in general faces: The public notion that Animation is ONLY for children. Have seen and talked with people who didn't want to see a good movie just because it was animation, but wait until a live action remake is announced and they will be watching it without ANY hesitation, which probably feets into this, hence why I'm shocked they haven't announced a live action Frozen at this point.
Whats interesting- no scrap that, whats laughable, is reading comments praising the companies for giving them the exact same product again. “HE LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ANIMATION!” Yes. A movie you can watch right now. A movie that looks stunning to this day. It didn’t need a remake. But you just need the bare minimum to go fill the pockets of the corporation with cash.
What's more the traditionally animated movies can do so much more style. The characters are exaggerated. The Rock is big, but he's no Maui. The lions, Stitch, and Toothless are as much an animator's creation as the original. Maleficent was worth it because it's a new story. It's not a remake, but a new story. That's what I want to see. most of these worlds have so much room to grow into that they could do something different. Prequels, sequels, stories about side characters.
Kind of self-evident, is it not? A lot of these remakes have made enormous amounts of money. That lifeless _Lion King_ remake was technically the highest-grossing animated film of all-time until _Inside Out 2_ thankfully deposed it.
Us marvel fans always say, “yes! I’m finally getting a live-action [insert character name here],” so I bet the 5-y-o that grew up LOVING HTTYD will appreciate the live action remake with Toothless looking just like toothless.
To answer your question at 4:00: No! I liked How to Train your Dragon, but it was not intended for me, I was already 18 when it came out. I do have a kid now... She is 2. So the remake is not for her either. If she was older then I wouldn't have cared about the first one, and if I cared about the first one then she wouldn't even exist yet. The time period is way too short, it makes no sense.
A 15 year old who watched how to train your dragon in theaters will be 30 when the new one releases. They have totally new lives now. I will always remember the first time i saw it on dvd on vacation, and I will be there day one for the new one. I hope the people who are bothered by this don't show up so they won't be drags on the experience.
The answer is clear. We have to start making more animated adaptations of live action properties. We’ve already started with fast and furious and terminator
Having never seen how to train your dragon, being the outsider looking in, to me, given how successful that trilogy actually is, it’s not shocking we’re getting a Live Action version so soon
My idea for a live action Emperors New Groove is to have the entire old cast sans Eartha Kitt return wearing costumes of their characters while superimposing the cell animation of Yzma and her voice into frame. Then we would have them reenact the entire movie beat for beat in a random neighborhood with very cheap props and costumes. Also Kuzco is the “two people in a llama costume” gag
Hey Nando, loved this video! Since you mentioned Treasure Planet and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, I was wondering if you’d consider doing one of your fan-cast videos for a live-action remake of either of them. They both have so much potential for a fresh take, and your casting ideas are always top-tier. Go with whichever you’re most excited about-can’t wait to see what you come up with!
I think there is a little bit of disconnect between us geeks and general audiences. One thing I notice whenever I talk, about film or series with friends whom are not into comics or other media which have a solid cartoon presence is a general suspicion or dismissal oc the cartoon media (essentially "cartoons are by their nature childish and/or break suspension of disbelief"). It feels to me like the live action and realistic CGI-trend is in part to widen the potential audience beyond people who are willing to watch animated media.
I'm really at a "I don't care" place too. Like if they're something you'd get offended at, I dunno, don't watch them, no one is forcing you to, you can just ignore them. I find the "Disney is wasting their time on these instead of x" arguments just silly, because people like to act like this is money being taken away from smaller "real" movies, but they just aren't. If Disney wasn't making these remakes, they'd just be making some other kind of blockbuster with this money. And let's remember that the entire reason Disney really got stuck in this remake train is because they did spend a decent amount of time in the 2000s and very early 2010s making more original movies, and they kept making bomb after bomb (and also because Alice in Wonderland got a post-Avatar 3D novelty boost, which Disney took as "no, people really like this Alice in Wonderland movie". Then they made a couple remakes and they did well, so here we are. Which is to say that even if they were making original movies instead, they could still be just as bad as the remakes.
Honestly, in my opinion, the only one of the Disney animated movies that NEEDS a live action remake is Hunchback of Notre Dame. It'd be a chance to go darker and more mature than the original film. Maybe even just an adaptation of the stage musical version that's a lot darker. But with Disney's corporate "family friendly" image, I highly doubt that'd ever happen
I'd prefer a hunchback movie by someone like Robert Eggers and being closer to the original book, which is basically a tragedy. All the good characters die, while Phoebus is a womanizer and also survives in the end while Esmeralda, her mother and everyone else dies. But there is no way in hell Disney's gonna do that.
While probably not the biggest factor, but it’s also easier for companies to take advantage of VFX/CGI artist than the usual animators(not that the animators have it significantly better)
My thought is, remakes are fine if you have a reason to remake it. Some movies are remade because people had a specific way they wanted to tell the story that is new and changes things and is interesting. But most of these are just Disney checking movies off a list.
There is a reason to remake How To Train Your Dragon and it’s to bring it closer to the books but the trailer makes it abundantly clear that they aren’t doing that
My 13 year old is thrilled about HTTYD and Lilo and Stitch, but Moana baffles both of us with Moana 2 coming out. I think it's been long enough since Lilo and Stitch came out to bring it into live action. How to Train Your Dragon doesn't bother me as it's the director from the animated and Gerard Butler playing Stoic is respectful.
I remember seeing an interview about Toy Story where one of the creators said that because of the changes in technology they wouldn't be able to update the original without basically remaking it form scratch. That doesn't mean they couldn't or shouldn't do it... but it would be as easy as just doing a new render of old work.
I’m too lazy to look it up, but the cynical part of me wonders if they’re doing this because they didn’t get the capitalize on China during these movies original releases
China is not considered as a very important market anymore, because marketing is basically the only thing that’s related to our box office and marketing in China is extremely convoluted which mainly focuses on creating narratives in highly regulated Chinese social media sites. Also the CCP’s is extremely unstable in its standards, for example Shang-chi was not released in China but the uncut version of furiosa was, it’s basically impossible to the situation here in three years. Another important factor is that the mainstream ideology in China is basically the polar opposite of any liberal leaning American, for example I have seen numerous racist comments with the n-word in it about the live action the little mermaid movie, making many movies basically unmarketable.
They are for people who aren't going to go back and watch the cartoon. Some people don't watch cartoons. Some people connect better with things that look real. And as you mentioned, there are new kids.
They need to keep their grubby remake hands off Hunchback of Notre Dame and instead take the fantastical stage musical adaptation to Broadway. And if they MUST do a live action movie, adapt that stage show's script, and cast Charles Dance as Frollo (so long as he can sing).
There are new movie viewers born daily...I'm old enough that the last "new" Disney animated feature I saw in theaters was..."The Fox and Hound" in 1981. I know these "modern" Disney animated films by pop culture osmosis only and to me the live action remakes are no more offensive than...any other movie I don't consider myself part of the target audience for.
I had to rethink my stance recently when I remembered that I got a lot of friends that do not connect to animated characters at all. For them, these movies are a way to experience these stories.
Maleficent is more like Wicked. It reimagines the villain as a tragic hero. Still I agree on this sentiment finally with Moana and How to Train Your Dragon... I mean, I get it, a lot of kids today want to see things as "real" more than cartoon, but still... (Is that a good thing either? I dunno) It feels weird to see Disney advertising and presenting a Live Action Moana... a couple weeks out before the Animated Sequel (coming out this friday as time of writing). And I mean, Moana 2, which doesn't feel like it's a sequel from a long ago movie, nor is it like getting Frozen 4 before it's Live Action comes out (I believe I remember hearing rumblings of that). It's getting this news and almost overshadowing this first sequel's press.
I think HTTYD did complete it's series and planned on no more sequels even though it's getting a new Theme Park next year (which is the real reason why I think this movie is coming), it just annoys me a little that it looks shot for shot the same... even including the same actors. Normally I would think it's cool that they kept the same actors, but it just feels like I'd be more open to a new take on this movie. (And seeing the returning actors makes it feel less experimental and original)
I went to see Gladiator 2 and there was a trailer for the live action HOTYD and I swear the guy next to me said the exact same thing "Ok but who is this for?!"
so normally i'm anti-live action disney slop remake, BUT I will make one exception: If Nani is hot in lilo in stitch, I will not complain about this one. Hashtag #IYKYK 💚
Tho i do disagree that the live action Beauty and The Beast is the same as the animated movie. They did not understood the romantic aspect of the animated movie.
Disney could do remakes of Sword in the stone, Black cauldron, Treasure planet and Atlantis. Thoses movies deserved a second chance! Maybe new elements can be add to the story like flash-backs of the Atlantis crew's pasts| childhood or make princess Eilonwi brave and proactive instead of always laughing. Small changes who can make the characters interresting and likable 🙂
It's even dumber for Moana because Moana 2 is coming out soon and then the remake is coming out next year.
The only way I can see it work, is if they do a whole completely different story, like a what if scenario. Or if the is tonally/genre different assuming this is aimed at kids I doubt the latter will happen.
@@Hollowdarling You know damn well the Rock and Disney ain't gonna take that risk
And the OG movie isn't even 10 yet 💀
It's probably bc moana 2 started as a tv series. By the time they decided to turn it onto a full on film the live action version couldn't be stopped
Moana is the most watched movie on Disney+, that’s why. Lol
They're for shareholders. Investors hate risk, so Disney leans on old IP to make film investment more palatable for shareholders.
It’s also true for Disney Channel and Nickelodeon as the only “new” live action shows they greenlit are all sequel shows!
And let's face it, they're for children. They're very popular.
Came here to say exactly this
@@BonJoviBeatlesLedZepChildren don't deserve lazy rehashes.
These movies are hugely popular with audiences. We may not like it, but the truth here is that these movies are made because people want to see them. General audiences reject original movies at the moment.
It's IP farming that's it.
Theyre trying to hold onto the character right for as long as possible to get more money...
The fact that toothless in the HTTYD trailer looks EXACTLY as the original, same cartoonish design, same level of photo realism, it's like, what's even the point then? It's baffling to me
Also, as much as I love the original design, I think it looks so out of place next to the actors
There dosen’t need to be A point.
look at Toothless from the original book illustration. That’s what they should have adapted
@@nicholalehtimaki3597Exactly
If the design for toothless was different for the live action, people would STILL complain regardless
I checked out basically right after Beauty and the Beast. The problem isn't that they're live-action but rather that they don't justify why they are live-action and offer nothing of variance that would make, what's basically an adaptation of an adaptation, distinct. If they feel they have to go this route but still adhere to their animated counterparts, they're basically walking rendundancies as far as presentation goes. Jungle Book was great because it didn't look or feel like I was just watching a neutered version of a film I can already watch
Exactly
I completely agree. Like, Mulan I gave a pass because at least they tried to kinda do something new with it and be more authentic to the actual legend of Mulan, but most of these are like 1:1 remakes for no reason. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if Disney (and Dreamworks) want to commit to these live action reboots, they should do it to films that maybe didn't do so well originally but have a LOT of potential and could really benefit from live action. The one the comes to mind? The Black Cauldron. For the love of the Gods, I would LOVE a live action Black Cauldron film. Give it a second chance to be incredible, and with the new advances in film since the 70s, you could really do something special with it. Or like Treasure Planet.
I'd rather they do something original, but if they're dead set on live-action reboots of films that already exist, do it to some films that deserve a second chance.
@@danyg4063Disney also knows that there are so many people who have the mentality of just wanting to see theses characters in a real life setting, there is something admittedly intriguing about that, but I’ve noticed that despite being in live action and having the ability to act more and put in more emotion, they are really lifeless and boring instead, the animated version is always just so much more alive and creative imo
Same. The medium of animation is king at selling “whimsy”, which is part of what made the Disney renaissance fairy tale musicals so successful and appealing. They’re also very tight 90ish minute films that don’t waste time. The live action renditions are generally a downgrade in visuals, pacing, whimsy, and singing.
Yeah I enjoyed seeing older movies in a new format, at first. Then they made live action remake after live action remake and it started being disappointing instead of exciting, because there wasn’t enough “new” to make them interesting.
They can be done well; the issue is that they’re mainly being created for profit rather than attempting to reimagine previous movies/stories with care. Also there are way too many of them coming out at once.
How is a mostly CGI remake considered live action film(lion king)?!? Isn’t that just another animated movie?!?
True but it has the soulless, brown "realistic" design of a live action film and only 5% more CG. It's earnt an honourary place
Simple: Animators are union, VFX artists are not. So it's not an 'animated movie'.
the difference is that one of those make shareholders full body orgasm and the other doesnt
He does say that in this video.
What about Transformers? The robots are cgi, but theyre live action. At least 70% of mcu and dc movies are cgi. The dragons in game of throne is cgi just like the httyd remake. What do you want? Them to train actual african animals to use as actors? Make dragon suits for httyd? Movies use cgi and thats that. If you dont want movies with cgi then you dont like movies
The Lion King was so strange because the animals had no emotion in their faces, even when they were singing.
It’s the first time in my life I turned Beyoncé off mid song. The whole film felt bland colorless to me and I couldn’t get through it.
It was like watching a David Attenborough docu with Sir Davids voice replaced with some actors playing along with the action
@RickCarleton exactly
It was because they were trying to make it looks "real" which is a catch 22 because you're already making them sing.
Terrible idea through and through.
I mean, as we all know, animals can never emote. That wouldn't be realistic..... Just don't google lions to test that theory
"acting's not that hard, Mark Walberg can do it." 🤣
I always think The Jungle Book is so far and away the best of them because it's not even remaking the animated movie for chunks of the runtime, it's adapting parts of the books that the previous Disney version didn't. It's still clearly meant to evoke the animated Disney movie, but it's at least the closest to being less a remake and more just a different adaptation of the same source material by the same company.
If that is our criterion then Maleficent is the best because it is a wholly new story.
@@sathrielsatanson666 Maleficent is damn good.
@@sathrielsatanson666 well it's not my sole criteria but I genuinely just don't count Maleficent as a remake at all because you're right, it is a whole new story
@Ecalsneerg Fair enough, it is not.
It's still a bad movie dragged down by bad acting, inconsistent tone and inability to decide what kind of story it wants to be. Also, it made Mowgli a Mary Sue who never faces consequences and stays in the jungle in the end. The movie also fundamentally misunderstood the original film.
Why is animation still seen as something to go "beyond"? You realize that before Snow White, people mostly just pointed cameras at things? Do you realize how revolutionary it is for every single frame to be entirely artist-rendered? If you watch an animated film and think, "I wish it were acted out in front of a camera with photorealistic CGI animals," you seriously lack imagination as either an executive or an audience member.
I think the whole conception of them is an insult to the art of animation. Animation isn’t just ‘filling in’ until a story can be told ‘properly’ in live action. It is a medium with its own (many) strengths and is a choice for a story not a stopgap.
Similarly, I think as adults we are insulted that Disney is undermining its own legacy of animation.
Animation is for children
@@Carloszavalalol 1/10 bait
The thing about emperor's new groove is that it's very cartoony in a way that would most likely be lost in a live action
i'll turn to glass and shatter myself if they did that, the COLOUR made Emperor's New Groove pop, the live action Beauty and the Beast or Mulan had colour grading on the scale of Civil War concrete airport tarmac fight
The only way Emperor’s New Groove can be saved in any capacity is if they go the Deadpool route when it comes to 4th wall breaks
And even if they did that it doesn’t guarantee a success
True
I’ve seen somewhere that the director of HTTYD said he is directing it because the studio wants it and doesn’t want anyone else to ruin it. This screams to me that Universal is trying to do two things:
1) make easy money
2) revitalize the property for Epic Universe since it comes out a month after the park opens.
That trailer freaked me out little. Dragons look great IF you want them almost exactly same as animated ones from og movie, ppl are fine too, but seeing them together is soo uncanny.
@ yeah, the fact that it’s the original director coming back and he has said it’s not a shot for shot remake gives me some hope.
I kind of assumed it was a case of “I’m doing it so no one else ruins it.” Doesn’t give me that much more hope, but I wish him the best.
Last time I heard "the studio wants to do it and I don't want anyone else to ruin it"... we got 'Joker 2'.
@ absolutely fair. My biggest issue with joker 2 is that it wants to be Chicago so badly. 🤣
how to train your dragon is just keeping the IP in peoples minds before they open the theme park
If they wanted to do that, they could have tried adapting the books
No that ones actually fucking cool
It’s not even a live action remake at this point it’s just a photorealistic remake. And the problem with photorealism is that there’s so much less room for stylization. Not that it’s impossible to stylize something photorealistic, but you can definitely tell the difference
My biggest problem with the How to Train Your Dragon remake for me is the fact that the IP is based on a book series, and the original film trilogy is wildly different. So, with a remake, you could do something different, take some more from the books, or hell even take less from the books. But instead it is literally just the exact same movie. Such a waste of an opportunity.
I know this is going to sound rich - but I don't think that will work either 💀 like people are mad a 3/4ths white actress is playing Astrid I can't imagine the backlash to hiccup and snotlout being cousins or if toothless was small. Idk I think people drastically overestimate the social palate for change.
People drastically underestimate the palate for change
@nicholalehtimaki3597 run the numbers this year! Original projects just don't have the numbers to sustain theatre runs! The ones that pull public attention are IP mining because like it or not something recognizable gets people to see it whether bad or not (they won't do the cost of production but they will yield more money than a completely new idea)
Agreed
Your line ( acting can't be that hard, Mark Walberg does it. ) just absolutely had me rolling 😂
When you said the two everyone wants: I think you meant to say Atlantis and TREASURE PLANET!
We already have a live-action Atlantis. It's called Stargate.
Failed movies deserve to get remade more than successful ones. But brand recognition matters more.
@@joshuaperrine2019I've definitely annoyed a few people talking about all the ways Stargate and Atlantis are the same. It's always nice to see people who think like I do.
@@ArifRWinandar Those two really aren't the same as much as I love both
I want the black cauldron
I mean, personally, if I wanted to show my future children something I grew up on, I'm not gonna just hope they make a live-action remake of Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, Pokémon 2000, or Transformers 1986. I'll just show my theoretical kids those things and let the kids decide if they like them.
I heard once that these "live action" remakes are the legacy of the "straight to vhs/dvd sequels" department from the early 2000s.
And I think whoever said that had a good point
I'm so happy seeing Cinderella (2015) is finally getting its flowers 😊
Muppets!!! Remake it all with Muppets! Why own them if you don't do the best thing with them!? Muppet little mermaid! Muppet avengers! Muppet Star wars!!!!
It’s true, we need more muppet adaptations. I don’t know why Disney is just sitting on all their potential.
Muppet Blade Runner
Imagine if they made a Live-Action Remake of The Super Mario Bros. Movie.
Lol IDC what anyone says I liked the live action super Mario Bros
i enjoyed that Bob Hoskins movie as well
i think there was a time when i got older when i heard it was considered bad where i denied it for a bit and felt bad for liking it
but after that i think i stopped caring as much, I think i embraced it more and appreciated it a whole lot more and enjoying it way more again
@@TheDamagedKodathat movie is very adventurous and expensive looking I dig it
Or an animated remake of the live action Super Mario Bros movie 😂
@SailorDisco oooh... I like the sound of that.
If dreamworks wants to give something a live action remake El Dorado would be perfect.
I mean, The Road to El Dorado in live action kinda already exists. It’s the old Road to-films
I doubt they'll find an actress who rivals Chel in beauty and one who'd be willing to wear a simple tube top and loincloth (unless they choose to censor and add more clothing, which is most likely).
Oh, who would be cast!?
@@weights_and_horror Pedro Pascal and Zendaya
@ Pascal, yes. Zendaya, no!
I was on board with the earlier remakes for the reasons you said. Story telling had changed so much in the 50 or 60 years since the original that there are some creative avenues to take them. But these remakes of the renaissance or even more modern animated movies are just so lifeless and safe.
My son was 5 when how to train your dragon came out and it has remained his favorite animated movie ever since. He is not at all excited about the live action remake and is already disappointed based off the casting. So I have no idea who they are making these movies for. He isn't old enough to have children to take and see it which might be a reason to do a remake for older properties but it just hasn't been long enough since the last movie and the end of the series to do a live action remake. We need another decade then maybe 🤷🏻♀️
Children like cartoons. Presumably that's why they made them cartoons in the first place. It's such a strange thing to do
My son is 5 now and I can't get him to watch it, the animation doesn't hold up for people who aren't nostalgic towards it.
I'm so tired. They're going shot-for-shot remaking films I remember watching in the cinema as a teenager. No one needs these. The worst part is that when they started, people were excited for them to take flawed films and improve them for a modern audience, but they're remaking better films and making them mediocre.
Like, take Aladdin. It was pretty racist in how it treated the middle east and they took Jasmine, a good character with agency, and objectified her in the final act of the film for titilation. Easy, key things to improve. Except they hired white extras and covered them in brown paint, hired light-skinned actors for dark-skinned roles, hired white costume designers to bungle middle eastern fashion, and gave Jasmine "girlboss" moments while taking away her actual moments of agency and personality (seriously, "I won't be silenced" is a great song.... if they gave us any idea of what Jasmine as a character wanted to say)
I don't trust that same mentality to take a genre-defining animated film like HTTYD and make it worth watching. I don't trust that same mentality to take the sub-par dialogue and somewhat awkward pacing of Moana and make it better. Instead, we'll get Johnson's actual face leering at us for 90 minutes. Yay.
People who REFUSE to watch animation cus they think it's all kid cartoons
It is disheartening and outrageous. Animators deserve credit and respect
I think the only way I would be excited about a live action How To Train Your Dragon movie is if it’s a more faithful adaptation of the original books, the animated movie is so different to the book series that a faithful book adaptation would be a whole new movie
Wait wait wait .. there were books BEFORE og movie?? Aaand are they good? Are they worth reading as adult now? And how different (in which direction) they are from anim movies?
@@mar.s6516 Dragon is tiny, angry, dragons can talk, dragons are trained from day one, hiccup didn't change the world like that, its just life in a society that trains small dragons
I read lots of the books as a kid, but I don’t think I’d recommend them to an adult. Unlike the films (which are completely original), the story doesn’t hold up for all ages.
@@wesreleases6346 Thanks for your reply, i still love reading books (well mostly audiobooks theese days, they are so much more convenient 😊) and still love reading about dragons, they just need to be either fun read for all ages, or more mature story now. So i am glad i wont waste time on books not in that line.
@@mar.s6516 i skimmed through the first one as a teen and the tone is very different - reminded me of Diary of a part time Indian. Much more angsty.
I'm firmly in the Gen Z camp, and I was still pretty young when the original How To Train Your Dragon came out - however, it was one of the best animated movies I had ever seen, and is still one of my all-time favorites. I do not need some stupid, unnecessary, pointless, hyper expensive, nostalgia bait, live action remake cash grab being shoved down my throat, especially for a movie that amazing.
The difference with remakes now is they're just cover versions now: people go to see the things they already know. But the audience for the George Clooney Ocean's 11 wasn't Frank Sinatra fans. Nobody looked at Matt Damon's casting as Jason Bourne wondering if he could ever compare to Richard Chamberlain. The heist in The Thomas Crown Affair was a museum, not a bank, and the signature Steve Mcqueen car chase was entirely absent. Nowadays all of that would be seen as "disrespectful", "a slap in the face", etc.
but soderbergh's oceans 11 was the perfect example of what a remake can and should be, bc it's taking an interesting premise, but where the execution originally can be improved upon. in this case, that rat pack movie was so boring to the point of being unwatchable. they didn't give a fuck about the actual movie they were making it, it was about getting paid to hang out in vegas.
shareholders and people who still devalue animation and think live action automatically makes a thing more respectable
That Pacific Rim comparison was good 😆
0:13 wait the life action Moana is real?!? I thought that was a joke 😂 oh my god
This is important because someone at work said “I’m pretty sure they canceled that” I said YOU LISTEN HERE MOTHERFUH
I did the math, the trendline isn't very good, but it should be around 2050 that the remakes release in the same year as the original
Aaah something to look forward to!
6:10 another big one you didn't mention, Treasure Planet.
YESSSSSSS
thank you for mentioning that
i knew something was missing
@TwinRiver100 right?? Incredible movie, loved it so very much as a wee lad.
I read an interesting article about how "adults dont like cartoons" and that these movies are for disney adults who dont enjoy the cartoonish style anymore(which is dumb in my opinion because those disney adults fell in love with disney with the cartoons)
this is such a strange take I just can’t believe there would be a single self-proclaimed ‘disney adult’ that doesn’t like animation
@studiolinn i kind of agree because they became fans with the cartoon animation but idk there could be something there if you look towards trends of the themeparks they arent bringing their kids as much.
It’s an interesting take but there is no way that population exists.
I find it hard to believe that the kind of adults who will dress up as cartoon characters and wear fake ears, all while standing in line for photos with grown adults in costumes at a theme park would have a problem watching an animated film
You can’t be both a “Disney Adult” and “too old for animated movies”
I mean, I saw HTTYD as a kid, but I'm not old enough to have kids yet.
Also: If Disney is going to keep doing these live action remakes, they should make a Emperor's New Groove remake that follows the original Kingdom of the Sun pitch that got scrapped part of the way through development.
Hell, you could probably make some genuinely interesting stuff out of beefing up the "prototypes" of some movies. Like a glimpse into an alternate universe or something.
A different division of Disney works on live actions remakes from the one that works on the animated films. Both studios have always made movies for Disney in parallel, and the number of animated movies has not been reduced to make way for live action remakes. The real threat to original animated films from Disney is not live action remakes but rather the increasing prevalence of theatrical animated sequels.
Some remakes and re-series that come to mind are Sherlock Holmes and James Bond, both are constantly updated for the modern age, and sometimes in different format (like tv) for modern consumption. I like the change up of era with these, like Sherlock in the 2010s instead of 1800s. Maybe we do Lion King but in ancient Greec- oh… wait…
Godzilla's had lots of origin stories... The original, both US versions, "Shin Godzilla", and "Godzilla Minus One" are all the first time people in that version of the "universe" have encountered Godzilla. And I'm pretty sure there are others.
Yeah, but they are still different stories but with the same characters. These remakes are just the same story but "live action".
I'm with you on everything except Emperor's New Groove. I really can't see how they could make a good live action of it. The original was so fun. But in regard to remakes, the only one that comes to mind that I like more than the original is Hairspray.
Yeah... CG llama!Kuzko? No, thank you.
2 things:
They seem to have run out of ideas for original content. This is why there are live action remakes and endless animated sequels for popular IPs.
Also, kids are the market. We may not care, but it sells. Kids must have a parent with them to go to the theater, so it's a minimum of 2 ticket sales per kid. That's why they make so much at the box office despite not being very good.
Disney gets pitched new stuff ALL THE TIME. I think they're out of ideas they can sell to investors for a 9-figure budget. If they started making mid-budget movies again they might have more freedom to take chances and use those new ideas.
You are so insanely dumb if you think humans ran out of ideas for movies
Disney Animation‘s last 4 movies were originals. 5 of Pixar’s last 7. The truth here is Elemental, Pixar’s 2023 original movie made 480 million, Inside Out 2 made 4-times that much at 1.7B. Audiences make the choices for the studios here
@@BuildinWingsexcept most of those movies are consistently flops
@@creed8712 As opposed to blockbusters, which... Oh yes, mostly flop as well.
If they wanna remake animated movies into live action, they should do the ones that had a good premise but either didn’t do as well in the execution of that idea, or didn’t thrive at the box office. I think Treasure Planet is the way to go
Just recently watched Atlantis for the first time - Dude! So many people die terrible deaths in that movie!
They're for only one group of people... the shareholders.
Maybe they're being made for the people who won't give animated movies a chance. My mother is one of those people, "animated movies are for kids."
(That's dumb but oh well)
(SAUSAGE PARTY is not for kids)
THE LION KING "live-action" should not be considered a live-action remake. I think that "photorealistic CGI remake" would be a better term for it.
Moana came out about 7 years ago (I know this as it’s my wife and my first movie which I later showed to my daughter). It’s still quite new as far as animations are concerned
i’ve been saying that a remaster with a theatrical rerelease could be really cool
I wonder if the cost of that would be worth it? I'd like to see it at least once but I know it would be like a limited theatrical release.
They do that all the time though
I know it's not a remake from animated to live action but one really solid Disney live action remake was Pete's Dragon because it took that core idea but completely changed the tone of the film. I think it was good as that core idea worked really well as both a brightly colored movie with songs AND a more serious, less colorful, more action-filled film, and so that very different style of film warranted a new version and gave it a unique identity 😊
That's a great example. I always forget that movie exists!
@@thenandocut you're not the only one
i remember seeing the trailer for it and maybe a poster years ago
didn't go see it
and i forgot this remake happened until i scrolled down and saw the above comment.
I actually enjoyed that film...years later, when I saw it on Netflix. And I have no idea how it could have been marketed successfully. It's such a childlike, fantastical story ... that starts with the title character being orphaned in a horrific car crash, running off into the woods, and growing up semi-feral. It's a wonderful movie, and I have no idea who it's for. Wish there were more movies like that.
Fun fact: as a teen, I wanted a live action remake of How To Train Your Dragon because I wondered what it'd be like do have a story like that in the visual tone of something like Game Of Thrones
I’ve never been a big fan of the live action remakes. Live action tends to feel slower and less dynamic than animation to me. But I do enjoy seeing live action versions of characters. It’s fun to imagine how things would look in real life (I still praise the MCU for figuring out a way to make Spider-Man’s eyes expressive).
Personally, I think the live action stuff works best when they use it to create new stories. I loved the Scooby Doo movies as a kid, but they’re their own thing, not a remake of an existing movie.
I do really wish they'd do a remake of Treasure Planet, I love that movie, and maybe with another pass at it, they could actually make it work in a way that other people would actually enjoy it.
The ‘HD Animated Remakes’ of animated movies does sound really cool to me with the caveat that the conversation would almost certainly be plagued by either accusations of using generative ai OR them actually using and promoting generative ai
The answer is easy: themselves. They want the money from either headless chickens going to see these movies because "hey moana I like moana, cool, monkey brain clap" or the actual people going to the movies to rightfully hate watch them. Its the jingling of familiar keys that gets them money either way, no matter how bad the products and their reputation end up getting
I prefer animation to live action and the live action versions being primarily being CGI feels so pointless. I'm surprised they didn't do Snow White before getting to New stuff like Aladdin, Little Mermaid and Moana.
I really really disliked the new Lion King, especially since they took out Be Prepared, it was so unnecessary and I felt like I wasted my time.
Most parents are just going to show their kids the original animated ones as they still hold up and they hold a kids attention more anyway.
I would honestly LOVE a remaster of The Incredibles. We can't just conjure up a 4k version of an animated movie the way we can with film, but I think all those classic Pixar movies deserve a glories HD version that isn't just a lazy upscale or something.
The incredibles sucked major ass
What’s odd about the HTTYD live action, is that by so strictly sticking to the animated version, they give the whole jig up, cause the books… are a gold mine that the animated film didn’t really touch.
If you made the live action pull more from the books you could’ve made the book fans hop on board (if it passes the smell test) and not pissed off the fans of the animated version and whatever ven-diagram exists of both. Instead it will be a slightly worse version of the animated film
Exactly. An adaptation of the books would be a great idea
How to Train Your Dragon is the most frustrating of these because had the opportunity to be an adaptation that was closer to the books (which, to be honest, would be best as a TV show anyway), but instead they decided to do the movies just... again. At least Cinderella was more of an adaptation of the Cinderella fairy tale that just used some Disney aesthetics, and Maleficent went for a different angle. None of the rest of these do that.
THIS!!!!
Nando comparing Live Action Remakes to the many Batman we have had over the years is missing the point by a mile.
The reason the many Batman work is because they are all re-interpretations of the original source material. Matt Reeves Batman interpretation isn’t based on Snyder’s, it’s based on the comics.
All these live action remakes have a chance to go back to the original source material and tell the story from a different perspective, but instead they choose to make a shot by shot remake of their own interpretation
I mentioned this before, but the problem isn't even now that people are mad at D̶i̶s̶n̶e̶y̶ HOLLYWOOD for doing remakes. But it's that they're doing it with their SUCCESSES, and not their FAILURES. As an old and wise clock once said, "If it's not broke, DON'T FIX IT.". And it's true. Why aren't they trying to fix their failures (critical or commercial) instead?
The thing that made their successes work so well was just how interesting their characters were. Therefore, the story was so great for people. But with their remakes, they keep changing characters, yet keep the same plot, but still expect their story to play out the same, when it really doesn't. CHARACTER IS STORY. Therefore, by making such alternations to a character, the plot doesn't work. And if the plot doesn't work, neither does the story.
Okay, don't know why my comment needed to go, so I try to phrase it better (I guess)
The reasons for the massive amount of live action remakes are simple really. For one, it is a way safer options for studios to go for. Streaming and other entertainment (Like Videogames for example) are now also competing with movies for the attention of potential customers, which is why movie budgets had to baloon to extreme proportions to pay for either marketing and/or extra-vagant special effects. And nobody really wants to gamble on something new when most people tend to gravitate towards something they already know normally. It is really hard to make people care about a completely new story in general, and if you add high stakes to it next to nobody is willing to bet on that, especially after in the last few years alone when we have seen many of these projects crash and burn, regardless of their quality.
Also, another factor in this particular case is another issue animation in general faces: The public notion that Animation is ONLY for children. Have seen and talked with people who didn't want to see a good movie just because it was animation, but wait until a live action remake is announced and they will be watching it without ANY hesitation, which probably feets into this, hence why I'm shocked they haven't announced a live action Frozen at this point.
Whats interesting- no scrap that, whats laughable, is reading comments praising the companies for giving them the exact same product again.
“HE LOOKS JUST LIKE THE ANIMATION!”
Yes. A movie you can watch right now. A movie that looks stunning to this day. It didn’t need a remake. But you just need the bare minimum to go fill the pockets of the corporation with cash.
Atlantis, The Emperors new groove would indeed be dope but also TREASURE PLANET
What's more the traditionally animated movies can do so much more style. The characters are exaggerated. The Rock is big, but he's no Maui. The lions, Stitch, and Toothless are as much an animator's creation as the original.
Maleficent was worth it because it's a new story. It's not a remake, but a new story. That's what I want to see. most of these worlds have so much room to grow into that they could do something different. Prequels, sequels, stories about side characters.
Kind of self-evident, is it not? A lot of these remakes have made enormous amounts of money. That lifeless _Lion King_ remake was technically the highest-grossing animated film of all-time until _Inside Out 2_ thankfully deposed it.
Us marvel fans always say, “yes! I’m finally getting a live-action [insert character name here],” so I bet the 5-y-o that grew up LOVING HTTYD will appreciate the live action remake with Toothless looking just like toothless.
To answer your question at 4:00: No! I liked How to Train your Dragon, but it was not intended for me, I was already 18 when it came out. I do have a kid now... She is 2. So the remake is not for her either. If she was older then I wouldn't have cared about the first one, and if I cared about the first one then she wouldn't even exist yet. The time period is way too short, it makes no sense.
I've actually thought about Pixar remastering old movies too. I think it'd be worth doing. Video games do it all the time, so why not movies?
A 15 year old who watched how to train your dragon in theaters will be 30 when the new one releases. They have totally new lives now. I will always remember the first time i saw it on dvd on vacation, and I will be there day one for the new one. I hope the people who are bothered by this don't show up so they won't be drags on the experience.
The answer is clear. We have to start making more animated adaptations of live action properties. We’ve already started with fast and furious and terminator
We’ll never truly know who they’re for. Yet, they’ll somehow make alot of money, and people will continue to question why they’re a thing.
Personally, i dont think the short gaps works. On the other hand, I'm super excited for hercules because it's more like a 25-year gap
Having never seen how to train your dragon, being the outsider looking in, to me, given how successful that trilogy actually is, it’s not shocking we’re getting a Live Action version so soon
My idea for a live action Emperors New Groove is to have the entire old cast sans Eartha Kitt return wearing costumes of their characters while superimposing the cell animation of Yzma and her voice into frame. Then we would have them reenact the entire movie beat for beat in a random neighborhood with very cheap props and costumes. Also Kuzco is the “two people in a llama costume” gag
Hey Nando, loved this video! Since you mentioned Treasure Planet and Atlantis: The Lost Empire, I was wondering if you’d consider doing one of your fan-cast videos for a live-action remake of either of them. They both have so much potential for a fresh take, and your casting ideas are always top-tier. Go with whichever you’re most excited about-can’t wait to see what you come up with!
I think there is a little bit of disconnect between us geeks and general audiences. One thing I notice whenever I talk, about film or series with friends whom are not into comics or other media which have a solid cartoon presence is a general suspicion or dismissal oc the cartoon media (essentially "cartoons are by their nature childish and/or break suspension of disbelief"). It feels to me like the live action and realistic CGI-trend is in part to widen the potential audience beyond people who are willing to watch animated media.
I'm really at a "I don't care" place too. Like if they're something you'd get offended at, I dunno, don't watch them, no one is forcing you to, you can just ignore them. I find the "Disney is wasting their time on these instead of x" arguments just silly, because people like to act like this is money being taken away from smaller "real" movies, but they just aren't. If Disney wasn't making these remakes, they'd just be making some other kind of blockbuster with this money. And let's remember that the entire reason Disney really got stuck in this remake train is because they did spend a decent amount of time in the 2000s and very early 2010s making more original movies, and they kept making bomb after bomb (and also because Alice in Wonderland got a post-Avatar 3D novelty boost, which Disney took as "no, people really like this Alice in Wonderland movie". Then they made a couple remakes and they did well, so here we are. Which is to say that even if they were making original movies instead, they could still be just as bad as the remakes.
Honestly, in my opinion, the only one of the Disney animated movies that NEEDS a live action remake is Hunchback of Notre Dame. It'd be a chance to go darker and more mature than the original film. Maybe even just an adaptation of the stage musical version that's a lot darker.
But with Disney's corporate "family friendly" image, I highly doubt that'd ever happen
It would be nice if they removed the gargoyles. Or at least just depict them as inanimate statues that Quasimodo pretends are alive.
Oh, it will happen. Just not how you described.
I'd prefer a hunchback movie by someone like Robert Eggers and being closer to the original book, which is basically a tragedy. All the good characters die, while Phoebus is a womanizer and also survives in the end while Esmeralda, her mother and everyone else dies.
But there is no way in hell Disney's gonna do that.
While probably not the biggest factor, but it’s also easier for companies to take advantage of VFX/CGI artist than the usual animators(not that the animators have it significantly better)
Yeah, if I'm not wrong, CGI animators aren't unionized compared to 2D animators, so companies can overwork them as much as they want.
My thought is, remakes are fine if you have a reason to remake it. Some movies are remade because people had a specific way they wanted to tell the story that is new and changes things and is interesting. But most of these are just Disney checking movies off a list.
There is a reason to remake How To Train Your Dragon and it’s to bring it closer to the books but the trailer makes it abundantly clear that they aren’t doing that
People wouldn’t complain about live action remakes if they were actually good
short answer, money
long answer, money
period.
My 13 year old is thrilled about HTTYD and Lilo and Stitch, but Moana baffles both of us with Moana 2 coming out. I think it's been long enough since Lilo and Stitch came out to bring it into live action. How to Train Your Dragon doesn't bother me as it's the director from the animated and Gerard Butler playing Stoic is respectful.
I remember seeing an interview about Toy Story where one of the creators said that because of the changes in technology they wouldn't be able to update the original without basically remaking it form scratch. That doesn't mean they couldn't or shouldn't do it... but it would be as easy as just doing a new render of old work.
I’m too lazy to look it up, but the cynical part of me wonders if they’re doing this because they didn’t get the capitalize on China during these movies original releases
China is not considered as a very important market anymore, because marketing is basically the only thing that’s related to our box office and marketing in China is extremely convoluted which mainly focuses on creating narratives in highly regulated Chinese social media sites. Also the CCP’s is extremely unstable in its standards, for example Shang-chi was not released in China but the uncut version of furiosa was, it’s basically impossible to the situation here in three years. Another important factor is that the mainstream ideology in China is basically the polar opposite of any liberal leaning American, for example I have seen numerous racist comments with the n-word in it about the live action the little mermaid movie, making many movies basically unmarketable.
They are for people who aren't going to go back and watch the cartoon. Some people don't watch cartoons. Some people connect better with things that look real. And as you mentioned, there are new kids.
They need to keep their grubby remake hands off Hunchback of Notre Dame and instead take the fantastical stage musical adaptation to Broadway.
And if they MUST do a live action movie, adapt that stage show's script, and cast Charles Dance as Frollo (so long as he can sing).
There are new movie viewers born daily...I'm old enough that the last "new" Disney animated feature I saw in theaters was..."The Fox and Hound" in 1981. I know these "modern" Disney animated films by pop culture osmosis only and to me the live action remakes are no more offensive than...any other movie I don't consider myself part of the target audience for.
I had to rethink my stance recently when I remembered that I got a lot of friends that do not connect to animated characters at all. For them, these movies are a way to experience these stories.
Anyone who doesn't connect to animation is uncultured.
Maleficent is more like Wicked. It reimagines the villain as a tragic hero.
Still I agree on this sentiment finally with Moana and How to Train Your Dragon... I mean, I get it, a lot of kids today want to see things as "real" more than cartoon, but still... (Is that a good thing either? I dunno) It feels weird to see Disney advertising and presenting a Live Action Moana... a couple weeks out before the Animated Sequel (coming out this friday as time of writing). And I mean, Moana 2, which doesn't feel like it's a sequel from a long ago movie, nor is it like getting Frozen 4 before it's Live Action comes out (I believe I remember hearing rumblings of that). It's getting this news and almost overshadowing this first sequel's press.
I think HTTYD did complete it's series and planned on no more sequels even though it's getting a new Theme Park next year (which is the real reason why I think this movie is coming), it just annoys me a little that it looks shot for shot the same... even including the same actors. Normally I would think it's cool that they kept the same actors, but it just feels like I'd be more open to a new take on this movie. (And seeing the returning actors makes it feel less experimental and original)
I'm so glad you made this video!
I'm so fed up with these live action remakes and seeing the Rock
I'm gonna start seeing him in my nightmares 💀
The rock voiced the fucking character is the first place
"acting is not that hard, Mark Wahlberg can do it"
-nando, 2024
There are people out there who simply won't watch anything animated no matter how good it is. I think that's who some of these remakes are for.
Those people have no imagination.
I went to see Gladiator 2 and there was a trailer for the live action HOTYD and I swear the guy next to me said the exact same thing "Ok but who is this for?!"
Thanks for saying that Lion King is not live action since none of it is filmed irl. Bit even calling it that in passing feels icky 😭
so normally i'm anti-live action disney slop remake, BUT I will make one exception:
If Nani is hot in lilo in stitch, I will not complain about this one.
Hashtag #IYKYK 💚
Waiting on the Hunchback of Notre Dame. But is Disney brave enough? Older movies please 🙏
Tho i do disagree that the live action Beauty and The Beast is the same as the animated movie. They did not understood the romantic aspect of the animated movie.
Toy Story 1 in UNREAL ENGINE 5 LET"S GOOOOOO
"Evil cannot create anything new. It can only corrupt and ruin what good forces have invented or made."
- JRR Tolkien (I think)
Disney could do remakes of Sword in the stone, Black cauldron, Treasure planet and Atlantis. Thoses movies deserved a second chance! Maybe new elements can be add to the story like flash-backs of the Atlantis crew's pasts| childhood or make princess Eilonwi brave and proactive instead of always laughing. Small changes who can make the characters interresting and likable 🙂
A new, live actor, version of the Prydain Chronicle books would be awesome...but I don't want a remake of the cartoon movie.
6:33 Inca. Inca not Aztec. Completely different cultures thst existed in different places and arguably in different times.