Showing posts with label remake. Show all posts
Showing posts with label remake. Show all posts

Thursday, October 17, 2019

Iconic "Pricked Finger" Appears At 'Maleficent II' Premiere // Is This Movie Disney's 'Game Of Thrones'?? (+ Surprisingly Positive Reviews Have Our Attention!)

Blood & Magic On The Red Carpet
Fashion has long had a fascination with capturing the essence of fairy tale in a garment or outfit but Gucci not only captured the modern idea of princess and fantasy magic in this particular outfit, but managed to draw attention to the spellbinding side of the story too, drawing onlookers under their enchantment.

At the Hollywood premiere of Maleficent II, Elle Fanning's custom Gucci dress personified her character of Aurora and the Sleeping Beauty fairy tale revisited. Fanning, not only dressed as a princess but one recently put under enchantment, and the effect was stunning.


Fanning wore a pale-olive trailing green dress (a color most can't quite pull off), with gathered layers of chiffon echoing the romantic 'natural' wood-nymph style seen in mythic paintings (cue serious Persephone vibes), princess-tiered off-the-shoulder sleeves, jeweled straps and waistband, luxurious layers and mauve velvet ribbons, all freely woven together with dusky flowers, in both dress and hair. There are even subtle nods to all three of the colors of the bumbling fairies who raised her (see the layers, including ribbons, and the rings on her left hand).

The most mesmerizing aspect of the outfit, however, which sets it apart from other ensembles on the red carpet, were the sheer tulle gloves with the blood-red crystal droplets that began at Fanning's right 'pricked' index fingertip, trailed the back of her hand, then dripped down the right side of her dress.

Symbols, Spells & Statements
Just by holding up a "pricked" finger for the cameras, Fanning, as Aurora, was making an iconic statement. Not just: "I am Sleeping Beauty", but also, "Yes, I'm bleeding, but I'm finally awake!"

(Side Note: Angelina Jolie's Hollywood premiere outfit was so striking it almost overshadowed the Aurora dress! It had a prominent diamond-encrusted scorpion pinned the hip of her black, sequin-chainmail dress, which might have corresponded to Fanning's pricked finger, but perhaps not. Whatever the case, it was definitely intentional so feel free to speculate on what it might symbolize... See our bonus content at the end of the post for a little on the folklore of insect/arachnid pins, a.k.a. brooches, and how Lady Hale's symbolic use of pins started the #girlyswot movement, something Jolie would likely be happy to be included in. But back to Aurora's outfit and motifs!)

The concept, according to one of the stylists (Samantha MacMillen) was to have “Sleeping Beauty waking up in a field of flowers and walking to the red carpet”, and the effect was that not only the appealing magic of the fairy tale is present, but also the darker side of enchantment, and of fairy tales in general. (The design team did an amazing job.) Not only was the effect a fashion statement, but it took a step away from basic cosplay and costume, and continued to bring a fresh way to look at the fairy tale to the public, and keep the story of Sleeping Beauty alive. We also love the shots of Elle Fanning, dressed in this outfit, walking on the thorny black and white background, created for the premiere. That image makes a statement by itself.


As Kailey Flyte/@mermaidensblog said on Twitter (we have combined her tweets):
I am IN AWE! The DETAILS! The gorgeous woodland nymph feeling, but then the tying in to the darker side of the tale with the blood !!! THE LAYERS!! The fact that they made such a stunning, woodland nymph type of dress but still referencing the inherently macabre nature of fairytales.

We agree. We love magic and wonder, of course, but we also like our fairy tales to have teeth.

Finding the balance between creating a costume to represent an instantly recognizable fairy tale character (which can come off as kitsch), and a high-fashion style that appeals artistically (but can be lost on the public), is a tall order but Gucci - and the styling team - did exactly that.

Respect!

It's truly wonderful to see storytelling  - and the revision of a fairy tale - be taken to different dimensions beyond film and print.
Consistently Positive Reviews Are Accumulating for Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (Surprise!)

To be honest, we're not sure folks are quite ready for another Maleficent movie right now, even a good one. Focus is elsewhere and Frozen II is stealing everyone's thunder. The marketing seemed to begin in one focus then headed in another direction entirely after the reveals of Maleficent's kinsmen, but ultimately, it's being marketed as a classic castle-fantasy movie with some epic creatures - something that should guarantee an audience - but the attention of social media is currently on Frozen II, Star Wars, HBO's His Dark Materials and the real-life issues of diversity, representation, insane politics. Apart from foks who are already fans there hasn't been a lot of buzz. But people are finally starting to pay attention. The lavish premieres, the fashion tie ins, the music videos and promises that it may have more relevant storylines than are immediately apparent - why? Because Maleficent II is getting consistently GREAT reviews from critics! 

The most repeated sentiment we've read is that this could be one of Disney's best live-action movies. Ever. (And that, as groundbreaking and blockbusting as the first one was, warts and all, this one is much better.) That's... a very bold statement for one reviewer or critic to make, but to see it echoed repeatedly has made us sit up and take notice.

It's clearly an unexpected response for critics (who were, admittedly, quite prepared to roast it) and we wonder whether part of this is to do with (perhaps) having low expectations of the film to start with. Though the trailers haven't done a great job of convincing us so far, reviews are surprisingly consistent in reporting that this is one of Disney's best live-action films to date (!). Generally, it seems to be agreed that this movie is much better written and crafted than the first, and is ultimately a satisfying revision and doesn't retread Disney's tired ground as a typical sequel or reboot. Nor is it a try-hard apologetic "correction" for the original property, which is a relief because, let's be honest, we are more than a tad tired of being preached to via the latest live-action batches, even if we agree with the basic sentiments.


Here are two excerpts from a review by Scott Mendelson for Forbes, which do a great job of summing up the many reviews we've read to date:
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is a breath of fresh air from Walt Disney’s sub-genre of live-action fairy tale adaptations. It is noticeably better than the previous Maleficent (which was allegedly stitched together via an assist from John E. Hancock) and the very best of these Disney fairy tales since the one-two-three punch of Cinderella (excellent), The Jungle Book (damn good) and Pete’s Dragon (spectacular). Okay, we’ll ignore Alice Through the Looking Glass for a moment, but you get the idea. The plot is almost as threadbare as the first one, but it makes A-to-B-to-C logic and exists as an excuse for a fantastical spectacle, some dynamite action and not a little camp melodrama. At its best, it’s a go-for-broke adventure that that avoids the mistakes that tripped up the last handful of Disney fairy tales 
...More so than any of these films since Pete’s DragonMaleficent: Mistress of Evil feels like Disney using the safety of a viable IP, or at least the protection of knowing that they will survive if this movie bombs, to just throw caution and fidelity to the wind. There’s a bare minimum of (to paraphrase Lindsey Ellis) “girl boss faux feminism,” attempts to “correct” the politically incorrect attitudes/ideologies of the original material or obsessive recreation of what came before to “appease the fans.” It’s a self-correction that brings (false?) hope to the next batch of presumably less slavishly faithful Disney adaptations coming down the pike. Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is the Disney remake/fairy tale as kid-friendly heavy metal madness. It may not be a masterpiece of music, but it rocks and rocks hard.
And although it's not a retelling/revisioning of Disney's Sleeping Beauty, the film does continue on from the tale and, does appear to be solidly in the realm of 'fairy tale film' instead of just a fantasy. As we are currently attempting to avoid major plot spoilers, it is difficult to gauge how much of a 'fairy tale' this film may really be. For reviewers so far, at least, the words 'original fairy tale' (though based on characters and in a world we know) seems to be the consensus but we are not convinced. Earlier trailers hinted at more mythic themes (even alluding to Faust, Dante and possibly Icarus) while later trailers seemed more rooted in fairy tale tradition, (editing can be very misleading!) so we shall just have to wait and see. We can always hope that writer Linda Woolverton (who also wrote Maleficent, and has a long history of writing for Disney) decided to dig a little further into her intial inspiration and references of Spenser's Faerie Queene. Perhaps we will have a little of everything.

This Friday is the start of "opening weekend", and the public will have the chance to go see it (giving up their hard-earned cash to do so). Box office numbers say a lot, so we shall see if there's been enough buzz to consider this a hit or not. Will people flock to the theaters? We would be surprised if they did, but that doesn't mean the audience won't grow as word gets around. From all we're hearing of the movie, we hope this "risky" approach to filmmaking pays off. We could really use a bold approach to the upcoming swath of Disney's live-action reboots coming our way; fresh and fearless storytelling with unapologetic truths is something we really - really - need right now.

Is Maleficent II Disney's "Family Friendly Game Of Thrones"?
Although there is no gore, the body count for the final clash is reportedly the highest of any Disney movie yet (easily earning it's PG rating), but that is also where the intrigue and the payoff for the rest of the movie apparently comes together; in the "third act". But that's only where the parallels to HBO's Game Of Thrones begin. GOT had the stunning and lush visuals (and creatures) that attracted people of all ages, yet the subject matter and violence made it very clear this was not something you should be sharing with your kids! 

Maleficent II appears to have many of those things everyone loved about GOT (kids included, since they also could not escape the marketing and images while it ran): fantastic creatures, epic battles (though, in Maleficent, shown carefully and without gore), magic that's very real, impossibly beautiful things, transformations and classically epic scenes. It also includes that lavish fantasy look, that's so inviting such as lavish banquets, romantic-medieval architecture, glorious set design, lovingly detailed costumes, flying creatures of all kinds and a world that has both color and beauty and dreamy magic scenes, to dark and detailed ones. While this is dangerous in GOT as it's an entry point for so many who were not ready to experience where the show went visually and thematically, there is no concern here of exposing your kid to a "Red Wedding" or other very adult scenes that came to be a staple of GOT. 

GOT explored a lot of political dynamics in its run but ultimately it became clear it had a very uneasy relationship, in particular, to women in power. (It's one of the main criticisms of the HBO show.) In Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, relationships  - and the mother-daughter dynamic in particular - is explored in tandem with politics and reportedly does a great job of keeping the heart of the film (the relationships) central throughout. The fact that Disney is exploring aspects of power and politics through a cast of strong female leads, while including hot-topic themes (see paragraph below with hidden spoilers for details) is bold, brave and has potential for serious substance. 

A possibly-slightly-spoilery report (on the themes, not plot details per se) from Maleficent Brasil (account is in Portuguese) might be of interest as well. If you are interested, highlight the white space below to read it, auto-translated to English:
MILD-SPOILERS IN WHITE SPACE BELOW

The film is also being considered as one of the most political of the year, addressing and allegorizing current issues such as the oppression of minorities and the destruction of forests. Queen Ingrith is being described as a Donald Trump-style ruler.
MILD SPOILERS ENDED
As a reminder, here are some of the trailers which, although they don't show all the teasers, give a decent intro to the premise.

We actually prefer the second below to this one but are including the EXTENDED COMPILATION TRAILER first, in case you have missed some of the more recent promos. Although there is some repeat footage (and it's not cut together very well) it hits all the important notes and includes some international promos too:
We like this one below much better as it gives a lot of insight into the driving forces behind the movie. (We wish more of these scenes had been used in earlier promotion). It's a compilation trailer too, with some non-spoilery behind the scenes views which are wonderful. Enjoy!
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil releases in US theaters this Friday, October 18, 2019.
**************
Folklore Meets Fairy Tale Bonus of the Day:
Pins, Brooches & Accessories As Symbols, Statements & Messages
The women in Maleficent II are the prominent characters and run the politics in the various lands and territories of the movie (one of the reasons it's getting noticed) but even with women facing women, there are still so many assumptions made. Women in politics have a daunting job. Not just because it's difficult but because there is so much discrimination - still - just due to their gender. So it's no surprise that women in politics will sometimes use creative and unusual ways to help make their statements clear and unwavering. Fashion and the use of accessories is one of those tools (something Angelina Jolie is obviously aware of, hence speculation about her prominent scorpion to the premiere - but we'll come back to that).

In the UK, Lady Hale's announcement in September (2019) that "the prorogation of parliament was unlawful", was backed by the strong visual of her black outfit, with a large, jeweled spider brooch pinned below her collarbone. That visual statement was so strong it had people speculating on what messages Hale's spider was sending, and set off a wave of support and solidarity in the form of a movement called "Girly Swot", which used, as their symbol, the spider for t-shirts and other merchandise (most of the proceeds of which went to charity). One of the reasons it took off like it did was that Lady Hale is known to wear brooches specifically to make statements. And she's not the only powerful political woman who does. Madeleine Albright has her own stories with associated brooches, and even released a book called "Read My Pins: Stories From A Diplomat's Jewel Box".

So, considering the themes of the film, what message might Angelina Jolie's scorpion have been sending as she took the red carpet? Let's just say we were not surprised (though still delighted) to see what the most likely 'messages' might be. traditionally and folklorically speaking, that is. Looking at a variety of sources, we found the following symbology for scorpions in common. They are symbols of passion, dominance, defense, transformation, and rebirth. People who see the scorpion as representative of themselves tend to be self-reliant (sometimes to a fault), defensive and highly sensitive, yet also very resilient (like the animal). When these people love, "they do it to the fullest" and when they hate "it is with their whole being". In Egyptian mythology, scorpion amulets were made to protect people from evil, while in Africa shamans used scorpion venom to heal and venerated them as a medical source. 

That certainly sounds like the Maleficent of the first film and certainly suits what we've heard of the second. The words "transformation" and "rebirth" are part of the marketing campaign and feature over Maleficent finding others like herself and recovering from, what appears was meant to be, a killing blow.

The most common and current use for the scorpion as a symbol, however, is via the tale of The Scorpion and the Frog, a fable which has come back into social popularity with a force the past few years. In case you are unfamiliar with it, here is a quick retelling:
"A scorpion asks a frog to carry him over a river. The frog is afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, both would sink and the scorpion would drown. The frog then agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When asked why, the scorpion points out that this is its nature." --Fable of the Scorpion and the Frog (via Forbes)
"The moral of the story is that, like the scorpion, vicious people often cannot help hurting others even when it is against their interests." (summarized by Wikipedia). It's a tale that is often referenced with regard to politics, leaders, and corporations and, worn by Jolie (as a statement on either her character, the message of the film or a political one she is sending herself), it makes for an interesting context, especially as we know the specific design  - including made to be very visible and noticed - was not only conceived by Jolie, it was chosen for the premiere night with a specific purpose. (And yes, Lady Hale's spider is referenced in the linked article too! Turns out we weren't the only one thinking Jolie may have taken her cue from another politically powerful woman.)

There is one additional layer to this scorpion, though, and that is, that Jolie (and her children) ate them (yes, they ate scorpions - spiders too). When visiting Cambodia for the premiere of her film "First They Killed My Father", about the genocide under Pol Phot's Khmer Rouge, Jolie was very focused on sharing with her children the humanitarian aspect of her work. It was a film about survival and Jolie was making a point of showing to her kids how people were able to survive:
'I think it's always been a part of the diet, the bugs,' (Jolie) explained. 'But I think there is a truth to the survival during the war of course.'She continued with a history lesson: 'When people were being starved they were able to survive on things like this and they did.'She was then asked when she first had the bugs and replied she first had then when she first visited the country. (2002 when adopting her eldest son Maddox - via Dailymail.co.uk that includes lots of pictures of spider cuisine being enjoyed by Jolie and her kids)
So for Jolie scorpions are associated with extreme survival and tenacity in the face of devastation. That fits with her role in the movie (as we understand it) too and is a common theme in all her chosen work these days, whether it's while working in film, or as an activist. Whatever the case, she's made sure we're paying attention!
Elle Fanning & Angelina Jolie at the European Premiere, dressed to reflect their mother & daughter roles

Note: We also wish to acknowledge the collaborative effort and artistry Fanning's Aurora look took, so here are the appropriate credits (and personal thanks) from stylist Samantha McMillen, as posted on her Instagram:
Details: Elle/Aurora in custom Gucci. Thank you @Gucci and @alessandro_michele for this incredible creation. You gave us everything we asked for and more! @justjenda and @erinayanianmonroe completed the vision with incredible hair and make up. Thank you @ellefanning for inspiring all of us. The creativity coming from this team brings me so much life and so much joy! #ellefanning #sleepingbeauty #aurora #gucci #alessandromichele

Tuesday, July 16, 2019

As Pretty As It Is, The New "Lion King" Leaves Little To The Imagination

Quick Q&A before we start:
Q:   Is "The Lion King" a fairy tale?
A:   No.
Q:   Then why is it on OUABlog? 
A:   Since Julie Taymor brought her culturally-aware adaptation to the Broadway stage, it's been retold using aspects of tradition, folklore and folktale.
Q:   How?
A:   The theatrical adaptation connects us to (South) African folklore, culture and storytelling, echoing traditional folktales, in a way the original film never did.
Q:   OK but isn't the subject here the new CG/live-action film, not the stage musical?
A:   Yes - and because cultural representation is a big aspect of this remake, we're doing our due diligence to make sure we don't overlook a new folktale-based connection.

So let's get into it:
When Things Get Real
The first wave of reviews are in for Disney's live-action Lion King and they are... not great. It's opening week (the film opens in regular theaters on Thursday July 18th) and the film has already made a mint, of course, but will it be the billion-dollar baby Disney is expecting? The trailer was one of THE most viewed trailers ever online, so it's clear that curiosity is high and people are very motivated to see it (aka spend their money). But the "such-good-CG-animation-it's-hard-to-tell-what's real-and-not" appears to be both its strength and its curse.

While it does look a lot like real animals (there will be generations of misinformation for National Geographic and Animal Planet to undo!) it's not quite real enough to find the sweet spot between realistic animal expressions and anthropomorphization. (Note: The Disneynature film, Born In China, is a perfect example of how careful filmmaking with live animal footage can be both emotive and unforgettable.) With just days before the general public gets to see what all the fuss is about, a lot of 'sneak peeks' have been released, trying to "hit them in the nostalgia" and entice folks toward the box office this weekend. But no matter how you frame it, the scenes look... well, lifeless. The leaked scenes look downright flat in comparison to the animated classic. What hand-drawn animation did so very well - brought a sense of humanity and impossible expressions and sentiments to wild animals, a sense that not only told an exciting story but sparked the imagination of children and adults everywhere, it would seem that this hyper-real CG approach cannot.

Disney Represents
"But that's OK", an enthusiastic group people are saying. "Look at what it has done!"

So what has it done?

Perhaps it has pushed the technical possibilities of CG animation further but not in a way audiences are really caring deeply about. (It's unlikely it will hold the same special place in young ones' hearts as Paddington 1 and 2 has managed to do.) What people are usually referring to, however, is the casting. It is a mostly black cast - African American people creating African characters - and that is wonderful to see. Even the musicians for the updated score show a much larger diversity in their number this time around. It seems most agree it's overdue and very important.

But it's not new.
Not by a long stretch - not for The Lion King.

Julie Taymor's vision for The Lion King on Broadway completely reworked the aesthetic of the animated film, and updated aspects of the story too. Instead of trying to replicate what the film did so well, it took the characters, revealed the real - and authentically cast - actors behind them and showed us who was telling the story. It was all about storytelling and the suspension of disbelief. Suddenly it didn't matter that there was a male lion in charge of the pride, because it became a human story, told through animals, just like a folktale. And boy did it resonate!

Beautifully conceived, staged, designed, acted, puppeteered and sung, and more, it was, is -over twenty years on stage and counting- live storytelling at it's best. It's outlasted all other Broadway shows and for good reasons. The experience is unlike any other - something people will often describe as "spiritual".
The first few minutes of that theatrical titan? Holy cats. Unforgettable. Giraffes, created by humans on stilts, strolling down the aisles. A rotating “gazelle wheel,” poetry in motion. An actress manipulating a wondrous rod-puppet cheetah creation, moving so that a feline licking its paw becomes a moment vividly recalled decades later. It was the stuff of dreams, and the highest sort of commercial art. 
(Michael Phillips for Chicago Tribune)
The Human Connection in The Lion King
The human heritage of ancient storytelling is echoed in the animals speaking, personalities overlaying the actors who wear animal masks almost as headpieces. As the audience watches the animals and the humans begin to blend together in their minds' eye, they become part of that storytelling.
Image result for lion king broadway
Taymor's vision and direction for the theatrical adaptation of The Lion King retold the same story as the film, yes, but she both adapted it for the medium in which it was told (the stage) and, very importantly, updated it (see below for the story and character modifications which have made a lasting a positive impact on the story) . The result was that it's a joyful celebration of life that stands on its own, not needing the original inspiration to validate it. It is its own, unique and separate experience and it's unforgettable.

Julie Taymor on the lasting legacy of The Lion King (emphasis in bold is ours):
Julie Taymor
“The characters in the animated film are so expressive and human,” she says, citing Jeremy Irons’s voicing of Scar, Simba’s villainous uncle. “I thought, ‘I’ll create this animal’s head to show the essence of who Scar is, but let his personality come through in the actor below the mask.’”

 Taymor was also keen to increase the presence and potency of female roles in The Lion King. She expanded the role of Rafiki, the shamanistic mandrill voiced by Robert Guillaume in the movie, making it a woman’s part and “the spiritual guide to the whole show.” She also buffed and toughened up the lioness Nala: “When you talk about lions, the females do all of it, including the hunt. So I threw out a lot of the soft stuff in the film and made Nala very strong. She’s got one of the best songs in the show, ‘Shadowland,’ which is about being a refugee, a subject that’s very topical right now.”
Indeed, for Taymor, a lifelong world traveler who has always integrated aspects of different cultures into her work, “The Lion King has lasted so long because it’s socially minded, and it has a sense of spirituality that connects with people all over. Everywhere I’ve been, there’s always something in the show that becomes distinctly political there.” 
At home, race is a particularly key factor. “You have to remember that 20 years ago, black people were mostly seen on television and movies as inner-city gangstas,” says Taymor. “And here we were, bringing Africa to the stage in this positive and powerful and beautiful way.” When tapped for The Lion King, Taymor says, she “told Tom and Peter I wasn’t going to cast white people in most of these roles. … This was way before Hamilton, before Obama. Lion King has given more presence to nonwhite performers than any show — as we now know, because many of them are now performing in Hamilton and in other shows.” (Source: Julie Taymor on The Lasting Legacy of The Lion King - Broadway Direct, Nov 2017)
The result is that the experience closes the distance between story and audience and makes the common humanity of the tale much more evident.  The actors bring the story, the audience brings their imagination - together it's a magic sweet spot.

Three Versions, Three Artforms? 
When the animated Lion King debuted, it wowed audiences with its stunning visuals, heart-stirring songs, and an epically presented setting. The impossibly-human expressions of the animals stirred hearts and made people care about the story. It was a new experience (at the time) to see animals in such an epic story (though animals as main characters in Disney films were common, a story on this scale with them was not), and audiences happily journeyed with them then relived the laughs and gasps on repeat when it entered their homes. It was animation as Art, telling a story in a way no other medium could. A live-action remake that does its best to replicate the original, without changing its form to accommodate a different medium (hyper-real CGI as opposed to hand-drawn) cannot hope to approach how unique the experience of the original was at the time.
On a conceptual level, (the 'live-action') “The Lion King” betrays the power of the hand-drawn artwork that once put the wonder into Disney animation from its earliest features. Favreau’s movie fails to grapple with how the unreality of the studio’s lush 2D artwork unlocked kids’ imagination and made it so much fun to suspend disbelief; the digital wizardry denies our minds the permission they need to dream. Julie Taymor’s award-winning Broadway adaptation is so transportive because it celebrates its artifice, not in spite of it. Favreau has likened the process of making this film to restoring an architectural landmark, but at the end of the day, he’s merely gentrified it. (David Ehrlich for Indiewire - emphasis in bold is ours)
The Power Of Nostalgia vs Imagination
But perhaps that's what the hype about the 'sound' is about. If you can, in fact, see the movie in a theater equipped to playback the full range of dolby+ surround-sound, then the vocal performances and songs might reach people in a new way, otherwise, they're relying on nostalgia being the driving force behind having people connect to - and like - the movie. It's certainly what the team keep talking about in their interviews - as if they know the visuals alone are not quite to par.
Nostalgia is not to be underestimated, of course, but the new film brings nothing fresh of lasting consequence to a now-tired story - one that was told better originally and also has a thrilling live experience as an option. In contrast, repeat visits to see The Lion King on stage make for a subtly-unique experience every time. With nothing new to say, creating a new and permanent place in people's hearts for the long term is less than likely. Perhaps listening to the soundtrack with an amazing sound system, with these new and powerful voices will create a much-needed new perspective on the story - which would be wonderful (we hope it does just that) - but then why have a whole new film? As Michael Phillips of the Chicago Tribune wrote:
"The new “Lion King” has every reason to exist in fiscal terms. It has no reason to exist as a movie we might take with us into our futures."
What Might Have Been
Tweet posted by @joamettegil
Once you hear the rumor that Julie Taymor approached Disney to direct the live-action (but turned down) one begins to wonder just what that film might have looked like. Perhaps, instead of a hyper-realistic CG film, it might have been a VR film, based on the idea behind the stage adaptation, with perhaps some blending of live-filmed performance with hyper-real CGI to echo the animalistic ancestral spirits invited to a traditional storyteller's fire.

Perhaps it might have been truly live-action with CG animation of the animals overlaid and intertwined as part of the story-telling, like @Joamettegil on Twitter suggested. (See pic on right.)

Either of these ideas has the potential to be breathtaking. Apart from avoiding the criticisms of hyper-real versus cartoon visuals, all the problems that come with trying to be 'too real' (and giving scientists and National Geographic a headache) are completely sidestepped, because it's clear it's not a lion story but a people story; one that you - the audience - can relate to. That could have been an AMAZING thing to see/experience! Thanks to a viewers' limited autonomy in VR, a slightly different experience for each viewer and viewing, would work to make the experience even more personal. In an era in which relevancy, representation, and authentic experiences that engage the imagination and connect with the viewer are very specific challenges, such an approach would have hit all those notes, and expanded story and legacy, still further.
Sure doing something unexpected would also have been a huge risk.

It may have been just what today's audience, stuck in the tug-of-war of "play-it-again-Disney-BUT-not-too-different-and-not-too-much-the-same" really need. 

Unfortunately, now we will never know.

Disney's "live-action" The Lion King comes to US theaters on July 18, 2019.

SOURCES REFERENCED:

YOU MAY ALSO WISH TO READ:

  • Let's Fact Check the Lion King by Naturalish - fun and light article, comparing some of the aspects of The Lion King to science (biology, ecology & species distribution - cool maps for the latter!) - great to share with kids, but with regard to the elephant graveyard myth, include this info from the University of Sussex: Research Shows Elephants "Remember" the Dead
  • New article published July 16, 2019, just as this article went live on OUABlog (not used for reference). This article acknowledges the stunning visuals created but also discusses how such an approach has brought a new set of unexpected problems. ‘The Lion King’ Review: Disney’s Circle of Lifelessness by Joe Morgenstern for The Wall Street Journal
Fanmade poster of the new Lion King 2019 by aliciamartin851 on deviantArt

Sunday, May 4, 2014

Gans' La Belle et la Bete coming to Blu-ray & DVD (but no English subtitles, or English region friendly version in sight)


The question keeps popping up on old posts or in my inbox so I thought it was high time I addressed this in a post. The questions are: Will Gans' La Belle et la Bete be coming to US/UK/Aus theaters? Will there be an English translation or subtitles if it does? How about Blu-ray/DVD - will we be getting one of those? Will that have subtitles at least??

I've been constantly searching for any news of an American, or English speaking country, release of Gan's sumptuous Beauty and the Beast remake, but whether it be theaters, a limited release/showing or DVD/Blu-ray and there has been nothing. Unless Pathé do an English international release later in the year or in 2015 (like sometimes Japanese films do) then it looks like we're out of luck at seeing it on the big screen.

(It's just so bizarre. I haven't even had luck with Canadian releases.)

I've been watching the Blu-ray/DVD announcements for other countries as well to see if there are English subtitles but so far zero. Again, it's just bizarre, especially as the feature film song had an English version so I'm a little confused. Maybe distribution agreements with Pathé haven't been working out well? 

The French DVD and Blu-ray release however, (though there are no English subtitles) is June 26, 2014 and you can find that HERE. (Note: the disc release seems pretty light on content. It looks like just the film and no behind-the-scenes footage, although some was released online as part of the marketing lead up).
 

And here is something that looks like it was created for a steel book release but apparently isn't. It's just the Blu-ray/DVD combo packaging.
✒ ✒ To see it & LOTS of behind-the-scenes & "making of book" pics click the "Read more" link below✒ ✒

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Next In Line For A Disney Live Action Reboot: "The Jungle Book"

The Jungle Book by Rudyard Kipling (image by Nenad Pantic)
 Wow. This is definitely a huge trend at Disney right now, that is, beloved animation classics getting rebooted as live action movies.

Next on the list is The Jungle Book and it's already in development with a writer attached.

From THR:
Justin Marks has been hired to pen the script.Disney famously adapted the stories in a 1967 animated film (it was the last film to be produced by Walt Disney, who died during production). The stories also have been adapted into numerous live-action and cartoon forms.The Jungle Book stories are in the public domain and are so popular that Warner Bros. is developing its own Mowgli adventure. Steve Kloves, who wrote the majority of the Harry Potter movies, is writing that script. A stage production of the book debuted July 1 at Chicago's Goodman Theatre. (Edit FTNH: link added)Disney’s take is in the early stages, and the project has no producers attached. A search for a director is underway.
Wait. We're going to have dueling Jungle Books too? Or am I reading this press release incorrectly?
✒ ✒ ✒  ✒ (click the "Read more" link below this line) ✒ ✒ ✒ ✒ ✒