fujishig

You can suspend your disbelief for the dogs acting like humans and eating spaghetti, but not so far as the humans serenading them?

I see the racist cats are out of the film.

dex14

<iframe width="794" height="397" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/A2ZDDU34gYw" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>
...

Mabuse

Koby

Honestly Lady and the Tramp was always one of my least liked Disney flicks to begin with. I doubt I'd much care about this version of it which is pretty much guaranteed to be a lesser version than the original, but I'll be watching it regardless with my daughter.

Decker

Mabuse

Orbi-Wan Techno

Chrisedge

Rarely do I agree with my neighbor Mabuse, but he is 100% correct on this.

rbrown498

So when they run out of animated classics to turn into live action (Make Mine Music with a soundtrack by neo-Disney Channel stars, maybe?), will they start doing animated remakes of their live-action classics? I might be down for an animated Pollyanna or 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, but I'll have to draw the line at The North Avenue Irregulars and The Boatniks.

I guess the big question is when will Disney give us something that hasn't already existed in another form? When will someone in that massively huge organization come up with an original idea for a movie, one that isn't linked to a classic Disney film or a current franchise?

fujishig

Are we talking about completely original, like not even based on another IP? IIRC the one they originally touted as being an animation original was Lion King and anime fans are still kind of suspicious about that claim.

Otherwise, we've gotten Frozen, Inside Out, Zootopia, Moana, Coco and others (I always forget about the Good Dinosaur) which includes both Pixar and non Pixar. We've also gotten a lot of sequels. But it's not like they aren't making original (animated) movies anymore.

rbrown498

I'm only talking the last two or three years, but I'll give you Zootopia and Moana. I wasn't counting Pixar stuff, but even if I had, they have become pretty self-cannibalizing of late. Coco has been their only feature in the past (almost) four years to not be a sequel.

I'm mainly complaining about Disney's lack of originality. If Disney were to announce tomorrow that they've got an animated version of Rumpelstiltskin coming out, I wouldn't have a problem with that, as it's new to the Disney universe. But the seemingly endless parade of live-action remakes that nobody asked for (as in, Dumbo), Star Wars cash-grabbing, and Marvel sequels has gotten to be tiring.

I'm obviously in the minority on this, because world box-office has proven me wrong on all of the above-mentioned franchises. But it just seems to me that, in Disney's quest for complete global domination, they've lost their heart...and become quite adept at churning out good-looking, but infuriatingly soulless, product.

tanman

tanman

You're just completely wrong on that. They are always making new original movies at a rate almost on par with their vaunted Renaissance era.
Looking at the last 10 years:

Originals:
The Princess and the Frog
Tangled
Wreck-It Ralph
Frozen
Big Hero 6
Zootopia
Moana

Sequels:
Winnie the Pooh
Ralph Breaks the Internet

If you consider Pixar the sequel count does bump up.

Originals
Up
Brave
Inside Out
The Good Dinosaur
Coco

Sequels
Toy Story 3
Cars 2
Monsters University
Finding Dory
Cars3
Incredibles 2
Toy Story 4

Looking forward it looks even better because you have one sequel, Frozen 2 at Disney Animation and one original, Raya and the Last Dragon and two original movies from Pixar, Onward and Soul. So to say that Disney is not making original content is just completely wrong. They've released 12 wholly original animated movies out of the past 10 years (15 out of 11 if you count next year). Now to be fair they are producing a lot more content then they used to, way more than any other studio and if you take everything they are releasing into context then the percentage of it based on previous IP is high. The overall quality of their product is also objectively great based on both critical reception and box office.

I think it's really easy to bash Disney just because they are the top dog. I think people complaining about them as of late, forgot about the real cash grab era of direct to VHS sequels that nobody asked for. Cinderella 2? Pocahontas 2? Hunchback 2? The people are demanding these "real life" remakes based on the BO. IMHO one thing that's great about the remakes is that they leave the original wholly intact, unlike a half assed sequel that can completely change everything that happened in the original movie.

Moana, Inside Out, Up and Coco would like to have a word with you. And they are literally releasing a completely original movie called Soul next year.

GoldenJCJ

tanman

What they are producing today isn't anywhere near as bad as when they churned out those direct to video sequels. Remember this was the company that considered making Toy Story 3 without Pixar and as a direct to video movie. The studio and the company as a whole is producing much better content.

Mabuse

fujishig

I'm pretty sure the majority of those direct to home video releases made a ton of money relative to their budget. They aren't at all well regarded now but they sold to the home video market like hotcakes, took relatively little time to cobble together, and had a much smaller budget. It's not like the lower budget features have gone away either, they just make so much content now that they premiere on Disney Channel or whatever and are often live action.

I'm still amazed they made a big budget sequel to the Rescuers back in the day. I loved the Rescuers as a kid so I was excited but that seemed to kind of come out of nowhere.

rbrown498

Yes, but you're going back ten years, and completely ignoring the Marvel and Star Wars arms of the company. I had no problem with any of them ten years ago; it's, as I said, the last two or three years that have seemed like a never-ending cash grab. I honestly can't remember the last time that I got excited about seeing anything that Disney in its various guises has released.

And I'm not bashing them because they're the top dog; I'm bashing them because they're making the movie equivalent of fast food--their products may look and taste good, but they have no nutritional value and a short shelf life.

One more thing--again, nobody except the Disney accountants has been asking for live-action remakes of their classic animated films. I haven't noticed any online petitions for Disney to make a live-action Snow White, Pinocchio, or The Aristocats. People are going to see these live-action remakes not out of pent-up desire that's finally been met, but simply out of name recognition and Disney's marketing prowess.

I guess that we'll just have to leave each other to our opinions, as neither of us is going to convince the other that he's right.

tanman

I'm going to set aside the fact that 2-3 years is a ridiculously short amount of time to assess what a movie studio is outputting. Especially when it still takes years to produce any animated film. But yes you're right. If you only look at the past 2-3 years they have only released Moana, Coco, and Zootopia. Those are still very unique movies that created a brand new wholly original world. So that averages out to be one a year. That's still matching what they did during the Renaissance era of the 90's. And you're right about the company as a whole they are producing a lot of live action remakes and sequels. But where you're wrong is saying that they don't produce ANY original content anymore. That they don't have a soul. I'd argue that they are doing a great job in balancing giving what the people want in terms of sequels to existing IP and remakes with original content. What do online petitions have anything to do with audience desires? That makes no sense. People are voting with their dollars. Movies don't make a billion dollars out of just marketing and name recognition. You may think they just produce fast food equivalent movies but I don't see very many studios at all producing movies with the same level of artistry or cultural significance as Disney. I forsee Moana still being in the minds of little girls everywhere for decades to come and Coco was a Mexican cultural milestone. The biggest movie in Mexico of all time. One that really celebrates the religion and culture of that country. It's easy to dismiss them as kids movies but there is some real substance behind all the cutesy facade.

tanman

No it was Toy Story 3. Toy Story 2 was still under their initial 5 picture (not sure of the number) contract with Disney. It was after that that the negotiations were starting to sour and Disney started to work on Toy Story 3 without Pixar. Which was incredibly stupid.

I think that's the difference between the Disney of before and now. With the home video releases I would truly define those as a cash grab. They didn't care about the story or putting any money behind making them. Oftentimes they didn't even feature the principle cast from the original movie. Now it really seems like they aren't willing to make a sequel unless there is a real story worth telling. I had my doubts about Finding Dory and Toy Story 4 but those really told a brand new story with the same characters. It wasn't a typical kids movie sequel where they just do the same thing as they did with the first movie.

DJariya

I don't think I ever watched the original animated version of Lady and the Tramp from start to finish. But, this new trailer looks cute. I know I'm not really in the target audience for this. But, I'll watch this along with the animated version when my Disney + subscription is officially activated. Probably not right away though. I think this might be a good feel good movie to watch towards Christmas.

gmanca

Mabuse

tanman

Then we were both wrong and both right

dex14