Don't fix what isn't broken

That's just the thing. I've seen them do better. I liked the live-action "Alice in Wonderland," and loved the "Cinderella" story from 2015. "Maleficent" is kinda iffy to me, but I'll elaborate on that on another thread. I liked it when they took elements from their cartoons, but showed them in a way that wasn't a cut-and-paste job. I liked when they added something truly original and kept us guessing how they would find their way to the ending in this version or that version.

Maybe they keep clapping and lapping up the “same film” because a lot of them are... I don’t know... actually considered good and manage to keep things fresh? Plus, the source material in which this “same film” is based on has a long, incredibly creative and rich history. And it is not just audiences loving this “same” film. No, sir! Even critics (some not overly fond of the superhero genre) praise this “same film” for its storytelling and technical aspects. The Disney remakes? Some have been hit and misses, but even something like Dumbo attempted to do something new with the SOURCE MATERIAL. Disney, for the most part, hasn’t technically remade their animated classics; they’ve reinvented them.

But knowing where you’re smug self is coming from, none of this is going to register. To you, we live in dark times when there is absolutely no creativity and originality happening in Hollywood (when something seen as highly unique AND mainstream comes out - try the last two Jordan Peele films - people like you blast them as unoriginal and bring up a dozen of films from the past to downgrade these beloved new films) and you feel you are essentially too good for any of this “lowest common denominator” stuff that keeps audiences flocking to movie theaters. But mainstream films aside, do you bother to watch any independent or art house films? Because these days there are no shortage of them and a myriad of them are indeed quality films. But you don’t care, right? After all, “true” filmmaking isn’t what it used to be and there is no possible way every story there is to tell hasn’t been told! 🙄


As for The Lion King (Hamlet with animals), I am willing to be that if that film lives up to the very real hype, it is going to wow critics and audiences from a visual and, yes, storytelling standpoint. You? You will predictably scoff at the acclaim it’ll garner. Why even remake it all? Well, let’s get the easy profit argument out of the way (films have ALWAYS been made for profit btw). Perhaps they did it to... present it in a completely different way? Simply put, they had a new vision for it. Is that so wrong? Many people welcome it, and if that makes them mindless sheep according to you, then bravo... You have such superior taste!I’d tell you to get off your high horse, but no doubt you and other sanctimonious individuals will tirelessly continue to complain about the same thing the “back in my day” generation has whine about throughout history (“this generation doesn’t have the brains, attention span, taste...” blah blah blah).

On that note, remember how for over 20 years audiences kept going to see the -unarguably - same damn western? Or how about the endless gangster and cop films that were so popular? That’s why films like 2001: A Space Odyssey were such a hit when they came out because audiences back then embraced creativity and quality (actually, 2001 was anything but a hit). Ah, those were such more creatives times! Fact is tons of garbage was made back then, but people like you only want to remember the good stuff (and I know, there was more excess of good stuff back then compared to now... Yawn). Oh, and the western fad isn’t comparable to the worldwide success and popularity of Marvel Studios. Your narrow-minded worldview says these movies are successful for superficial reasons, but I’m glad to say you are full of it.

In closing, Disney and Hollywood’s supposed unoriginality>>>>> miserable and pompous film snobs that just can’t have nice things.