Disney Developing Live-Action Adaptation of MULAN!- Page 2

[Dave19]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 10:14pm

Aida as a live action musical film could be amazing.

It could also be great when animated, but then it should be in a mature way, as that's what the material asks for. So no silly fart-jokes and the songs cut in half, but going all the way.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 10:14pm

There is absolutely no reason to worry about this film, Showface. Cinderella and Maleficent did extremely well. Disney knows what it's doing!

The people behind this film know exactly what they are doing. They know how to make successes out of films; they will make sure they make money. Then, it's up to the creative team to see if it's actually good. The Cinderella creative team provided that aspect, and same with Into the Woods.

Absolutely no need to worry.

Just as long as you enter the film with optimism and not preconceived criticisms, all will be fine. If one enters a film proclaiming it "crap", then that is how he/she will probably feel after seeing it.

Updated On: 3/30/15 at 10:14 PM

[Starship]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 10:23pm

Ming-Na Wen as Mulan's mother would be PERFECT!

As for Aida, I'm still waiting for Disney to be bold and put it on the big screen. A live action film would be so incredibly beautiful, heart wrenching, and meaningful. There wouldn't be a dry eye in the theater. And if they want a star cast, I honestly wouldn't mind Zac Efron in it with maybe Lady Gaga as Amneris. She could still do her fashion show in "My Strongest Suit." Beyoncé would still be a fantastic Aida.

[Showface]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 10:25pm

^Agreed, Bilbo! Very well put! And I am getting more excited for this, mainly because I am interested in how they will pull it off!
I'm optimistic, and I can't judge it yet, but I will enter in with an open mind still!


(It seems you've changed your stance on this, no? )

Updated On: 3/30/15 at 10:25 PM

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 10:27pm

Completely!

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 11:12pm

I couldn't disagree more with Bilbo3 but I don't like getting into internet fights so I'll leave it at that. I will say that I'm not enthusiastic about this news. I'm always for more Asian representation in fiction but Disney is going to run into trouble if they want to turn ALL the Disney Renaissance movies into live action adaptations. There are story issues they could side-step with animation that aren't going to work with this new style of live action adaptation. Pocahontas, Hunchback, and Mulan would need to go realistic and Pocahontas is the only one I see working out of that group... not that Pocahontas movies have ever been that popular. Tarzan has a shot (though I think another studio is already making a movie). Hercules basically has no chance.

[gypsy101]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 11:15pm

The thing is, so many of Disney's movies really are pretty mediocre when looking back. I'll say that I think Sleeping Beauty is absolute perfection to this day, and Snow White was a revolution in filmmaking (although I find the whole movie a little creepy), but Cinderella has just an okay score and I never was a huge fan of Peter Pan, Jungle Book, Bambi, Dumbo and a lot of others. Everything they made in the 70's and 80's is absolutely dreadful (especially The Black Cauldron, which scarred me as a child), although i did enjoy Aristocats.

As for the Renaissance, The Little Mermaid, Beauty & The Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King are all fantastic and truly worth being listed as among the best. Pocahontas and Hunchback, while having some occasional bright spots and a few great songs (Just Around the Riverbend being maybe my favorite Stephen Schwartz lyric of all time), they are just okay movies. I have a soft spot for Hercules despite its plotholes and for Mulan, because I think both have great songs.

Disney then released mostly crap for the next decade (other than Enchanted, another favorite of mine), but I enjoyed the Frog and absolutely love Tangled to pieces, and Frozen (while it has its many detractors especially on this board for some reason) I thought was incredibly well done and a return to form for Disney movie musicals (although I'll never be okay that it wasn't Alan Menken that wrote the score). A live-action musical version of Mulan may be good, but I doubt it's necessary.

[Showface]

Posted: 3/30/15 at 11:22pm

The main thing I'm hesitant about is that Mulan isn't very "magical", I guess. Which may actually be my problem with the new Jungle Book. The animated films has that little bit of magic in them because they had anthropomorphic singing and dancing animals. Something tells me that this will be a more intense Mulan. I'll still wait for more development, however.

Can't judge the film yet!

Updated On: 3/30/15 at 11:22 PM

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 6:09am

It's going to be PERFECT, Showface. A less magical film makes it more realistic to place onscreen. Mulan is one of Disney's more adult cartoons and better ones at that. She is by far the best princess heroine in the Disney vault. You're being a negative nancy. It will be SUBLIME.

Updated On: 3/31/15 at 06:09 AM

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 6:29am

Bilbo: Regarding what you said earlier. Yes, the movies in the Reniassance and the Revival (this decade) are much stronger than some of the old movies. But, animation was a new thing at 1938-1940s, so they were exploring the art. And in the 1950s-1960s, they were still following gender roles (like Cinderella & Aurora), so males and sidekicks were the lead sometimes. The 1970s-late 1980s (plus the 2000s) were rough because there was no sound leadership and Walt Disney just died in the 60s. The 1990s and 2010s had better viewpoints of females & they had new storytellers that were very strong. So, naturally, today's movies are stronger than the old movies, whose animation style was brand new.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 6:47am

Valid point, disneybroadwayfan. Although I do wish the Disney films now (Frozen, tangled, Princess and the frog) were on par with the 90's films (beauty, Lion king, Hunchback).

Disney never really struck gold again after the 90's. I commend Princess and The Frog for it's effort, as it was closest to being on par with the Disney renaissance.

You MIGHT say Frozen is on par, based on how much money it made, but from an artistic viewpoint, Frozen doesn't even come close to touching the 90's films, in my opinion. The 90's films didn't rely on one song to carry the film's success. They were full score Broadway musicals set to animation. I'd give anything for Disney to go back to that route. Ohwell.

Updated On: 3/31/15 at 06:47 AM

[Dave19]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 7:01am

I think "Sleeping Beauty" is a masterpiece and the most glorious film ever made.

To me, "Maleficent" should never have been made. They took out the beauty, the music, the art, the tension, the essential hostility between Philip and Maleficent, the magic, the authenticity, it became a generic Hollywood film with a silly story (everybody sweet for Aurora, yay!).

I can see when a live film adaptation can work, for example with "Aida", all the great things of the show combined with the techniques of filmmaking and locations can be epic. I feel that with "Maleficent" they just tried to change things for the worse, just so that it would be "different". I wonder how they will do his with "BATB". It seems they stay pretty close to the animated film.

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 7:10am

Couldn't agree more about Maleficent. That one really hurt. The 2 minute trailer was better than the whole movie. They took one of Disney's most complex characters and turned her into Elphaba. No subtext, nothing under the surface, just some token rogue Strong woman you would see in Lord of the rings. All fluff.

I can't wait for Disney to buy the rights to a Wicked film, so we don't have to suffer through anymore films "subtly" wanting to be wicked... *cough* Frozen *cough*

[TheatreKid3]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 10:47am

THEY DIDN'T EVEN TURN HER INTO ELPHABA! Elphaba was never redeemed in the eyes of the Ozians, only the audience knew she was good. I could have settled for that in MALEFICENT, but NO - they made her into a full-blown HERO and made them all live happily ever after!

Sorry, I was so bitter after watching that movie. I was so excited for it.



[SPOILER]



I would have even been okay if Maleficent's kiss had been the one to wake Aurora, but only if it took a while to work and she woke up right after Phillip kissed her. I know that would be difficult to portray on film, but it would be so heartbreaking. No one would have known it was Maleficent, which would have angered her and so she would try to get rid of Phillip. The story could have been on track from there.



[END SPOILER] Updated On: 3/31/15 at 10:47 AM

[Liza's Headband]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 11:02am

I think arguing about the artistic merit of Disney properties is absolutely ridiculous and petty. Not only is it kind of something lame to argue over, but you're arguing about a commercial product by a major for-profit corporation intended for mass consumption. Say what you want about "Hunchback" or "Pocahontas," but it doesn't matter. It is all about the $$$$. Nothing more.

I would kill to see a live adaptation of Aida. Wasn't one planned?

Yes. Back in the mid-2000's. It had reached the initial developmental stages. I know there were discussions (not "negotiations" as bilbo / broadway guy incorrectly states) with Beyonce for Aida, Christina Aguilera for Princess Amneris, and Justin Timberlake for Radames. It just fell apart and never panned out. They were trying to capitalize on the recent Broadway run, even though it wasn't very successful.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 3/31/15 at 11:05am

I never said I didn't like them, just that they aren't that good when viewed objectively.

You can be objective and put the film in historical context. It would also sound less moronic.

It was definitely one of their best shows and dealt with adult themes and didn't rely on the Disney magic route. It was a very grounded piece of work.

Except when it was the opposite of all that. Like when it was a hodgepodge of styles devoid of cohesion despite the bookended scenes that alluded to ancient Egypt. The "Disney magic route" (aka $$$) is the only reason the show made it to Broadway. It was a flashy show with some nice tunes that shared an adaptation of a story for a children's book. A brightly colored mess that could entertain even when it seemed as if none of the designers met until opening night.

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 2:50pm

AS IF DISNEY COULDN'T GET ANYMORE DESPERATE:

 

Disney Plans Live-Action ‘Winnie the Pooh'; Alex Ross Perry to Write

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 3:01pm

LOL. This is too good. I must be getting punk'd.

[Showface]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 8:15pm

Winnie the Pooh?

 

Why?  I'm all for Disney redoing some of their films for live-action, but...all of them? No.

 

If I were to choose the next live action film, it would be a live action based off of Disney's Pinocchio!

[Bilbo3]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 8:22pm

There is absolutely no need to worry about Winnie The Pooh, Showface! Stop being a negative Nancy. Disney knows what it's doing! You just don't understand that things need to be adapted. Maleficent, Cinderella and Into the woods were uber amazing and perfect in every way! Winnie the Pooh will be too! Disney knows what it's doing! Don't judge this amazing film until after you see it! Disney knows what it's doing!

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 8:24pm

Never underestimate Disney junkies compulsion to return to their own sick. 

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 8:55pm

If Winnie the Pooh is like Paddington, then I'll see it.

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 9:07pm

What are the options for live-action animal movies? Real animals like Babe. CGI like Paddington. A slightly stylized CGI like Stuart Little. People in costumes... like... I can't think of a movie where that ever worked. I think the style of the animation is a large part of the success of Winnie the Pooh so I can't pretend to understand this decision. 

[Starship]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 9:59pm

I'm a huge, huge fan of Disney, but Winnie the Pooh? As if Dumbo wasn't already pushing it.

[disneybroadwayfan22]

Posted: 4/2/15 at 10:22pm

You know, I was thinking and I'm actually cool with these Disney remakes. If these remakes the only way to keep the magic of Disney alive, so fine! Go for it. What else can Disney do for the classics to keep the legacy alive? Yes, there are TV shows like House of Mouse & the 90s shows, but there are so many slots to fill in. Broadway shows? Expensive as heck and limited theaters. Disney Parks? Expensive and a lot of people can’t go. Clothes, books, toys….little kids stuff. What about adults, teenagers? What can parents give to kids for the magic of Disney? How can Disney prevent people from getting bored with the same things and forget about them?