|
|
Post by Vits on Nov 23, 2018 14:19:42 GMT
1) They're going to use the same recording of CIRCLE OF LIFE in the movie, instead of re-record it with new singers. That would be lazy.
2) They're just using that recording for the trailer. That would be stupid. Think about it: It would be an indirect way to admit that people still remember the original... so why bother to remake it in the first place?! The same thing happened in that CARRIE trailer that spoiled the climax.
|
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Nov 23, 2018 15:00:25 GMT
1) They're going to use the same recording of CIRCLE OF LIFE in the movie, instead of re-record it with new singers. That would be lazy. 2) They're just using that recording for the trailer. That would be stupid. Think about it: It would be an indirect way to admit that people still remember the original... so why bother to remake it in the first place?! The same thing happened in that CARRIE trailer that spoiled the climax. So both your options are negative...
Here's another possibility: They're not done with the music since the movie comes out NEXT YEAR! So they had to use this on the teaser trailer.
And yes people still remember the original. If anything that's a reason TO remake the movie. Why would you remake a movie that no one cares about? Plus, It's not completely a remake; I don't remember the first one being live action; giggle.
HAPPY THANKSGIVING!
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Nov 23, 2018 15:07:37 GMT
So both your options are negative... Yes. That's what happens when I see a trailer that I don't like. Was that a question or...? Why would you remake a movie that no one cares about? That would give the makers the opportunity to fix what didn't work the first time. It wouldn't be a pointless cash-grab. Heck, Jon Favreu of all people should know this. THE JUNGLE BOOK 1967 wasn't "a movie no one cares about," but it did have flaws. I and a lot of people thought the remake was not only a better version but also one of the best movies of 2016. It's not completely a remake; I don't remember the first one being live action For all intents and purposes, this remake is animated too. |
|
|
|
Post by lenlenlen1 on Nov 23, 2018 15:21:21 GMT
So both your options are negative... Yes. That's what happens when I see a trailer that I don't like. Was that a question or...? Why would you remake a movie that no one cares about? That would give the makers the opportunity to fix what didn't work the first time. It wouldn't be a pointless cash-grab. Heck, Jon Favreu of all people should know this. THE JUNGLE BOOK 1967 wasn't "a movie no one cares about," but it did have flaws. I and a lot of people thought the remake was not only a better version but also one of the best movies of 2016. It's not completely a remake; I don't remember the first one being live action For all intents and purposes, this remake is animated too. A) No, it was an observation. B) What arrogance and folly it would be to make a studio spend millions of dollars remaking a movie no one cares about just to "fix" what didn't work the first time. C) It IS still an animated movie, isn't it? Well played, my friend. Well played...
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Nov 23, 2018 18:02:08 GMT
"1) They're going to use the same recording of CIRCLE OF LIFE in the movie, instead of re-record it with new singers. That would be lazy."
Not lazy, marketable. This movie is essentially capitalizing on Millenial nostalgia, Disney is hoping a lot of people who grew up watching the original in the 90s will go watch this one, hearing the original version of "Circle of Life" (not some remake they didn't grow up with) harkens on those nsostalgia harp strings and makes them wanna go relive their childhood a bit. It's a remake so obviusly some things are going to change, but they're gonna leave in quite a few things (including the main theme) to reminds us enough of the original to go see it. That's part of why "Ghostbusters" (2016) failed, it strayed waaayy too far from the original version to be nostalgic.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Nov 23, 2018 18:36:03 GMT
The remaining 90% being because it sucked. |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Nov 24, 2018 17:26:47 GMT
That's part of why "Ghostbusters" (2016) failed, it strayed waaayy too far from the original version to be nostalgic. I'm pretty sure it's the opposite. It was pretty much the same story, only with women and a different style of humour. Fans felt it was redundant, so they didn't go to see it. Oh, and there were people who didn't go to see it just for re-writing the characters' genders. |
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Nov 24, 2018 19:31:56 GMT
Disney needs to be careful releasing these unnecessary, big budget, CGI-heavy remakes since we're getting three of them (Dumbo, Aladdin and The Lion King) within 5 months of each other in 2019 (March, May and July). They're at risk of oversaturation just like with Star Wars.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2018 19:35:24 GMT
OF COURSE they want people to remember the original. The whole thing, just like Beauty and the Beast and the other live action remakes, is a nostalgia cash grab.
|
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Nov 24, 2018 19:56:13 GMT
Disney needs to be careful releasing these unnecessary, big budget, CGI-heavy remakes since we're getting three of them (Dumbo, Aladdin and The Lion King) within 5 months of each other in 2019 (March, May and July). They're at risk of oversaturation just like with Star Wars. I don't think they are worried. They are buying up other studios. Soon it will be a case where you either watch their crap or nothing. I have heard Disney is not interested in releasing archival stuff either-which suggests they care much more about controlling cultural message than making money. If they were hurting for cash they wouldnt be able to buy FOX.
|
|
