That is, besides the fact that it will make Disney massive amounts of money. Which I don’t begrudge them because, well, they’re making something that people will spend money on because they want it.
I just don’t quite get it myself. I like the original just fine. The trailer shows some (mostly) very impressive CG, and looks to be a faithful rendition of the “original,” but … nothing that makes me want to shell out theater prices. Or, honestly, even video prices. Maybe, at some point, streaming prices, but nowhere near the top of my list.
I guess what I’d like to see with these live-action remakes, if not a shot-for-shot of the original (purely from a technical perspective), is something that actually reshapes the story along the way. Gives it a new perspective. Alters the tone, or the focal lesson, something. Justifies a remake artistically, not just financially.
That’s likely the last thing Disney would ever do, because changing things artistically would possibly endanger that financially part of the equation. It would just make me feel better.
Still, pretty. They’re still struggling with having animals “talk” in a consistently non-uncanny-valley fashion, but pretty.
A thought that occured to me last night … is this a “black and white vs. color” thing?
My kid, while growing up, complained bitterly about the black and white movies I imposed. “It’s too hard to tell the difference between the people” was the lament when films like Casablanca and The Maltese Falcon were shown.
Has the spread of CG made traditional animation too outdated to grok?
I’m dubious, because there are still a ton of traditional cartoons on the market. But it still might be a matter of … evolving aesthetics. We’ll see.