The Little Mermaid - Live Action

TheIrishGrover

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120680202#Comment_120680202

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120667367#Comment_120667367

Elemental trailer did nothing for me. Nothing. It didn't even look that groundbreaking technically. Luca and Coco trailers didn't do much for me either but I found them pleasant movies but that's it. Now not every movie can be the Toys Story trilogy or Wall-E but I can't even remember Onward or Soul (Soul would have been MUCH better as a 30 min short. I remember thinking that at the time). I quite enjoyed Turning Red but didn't even finish Lightyear. I don't believe every animated movie should be Spiderverse (Discussed elsewhere) but, dare I say it, Pixar fare is looking a bit stale? I really enjoyed Zootopia. Raya was very derivative but had its moments and looked amazing. And Moana was quite traditional but fun and again looked fantastic. But again, they need a bit of a shakeup. They are beginning to look at bit old fashioned.

Apparently The Little Mermaid is only quite mediocre. For obvious reasons we won't get into here it was review-bombed but ignoring the perma-outraged, apparently it was only meh. Bailey is supposed to be fantastic in it but surrounded by a sea of mediocrity (Pun intended). Which is a pity for her.

And as for the "live action" remakes in general: I could understand Beauty and The Beast remake. I mean it's not a new story. You have the technology, Emma Watson is extremely popular (They could also have chosen any other young popstar too). Why not bring the songs to a Disney "Live action" version. But the rest? Why? What are they going to bring to the table? The Lion King? Apparently the fish in The Little Mermaid are horrifying 'cos they are "photorealistic" yet still attempting humanlike emoting/communicating. A live action Moana? Why? It could have been made live action initially but intentionally was not. Same with Lilo and Stitch. Could have been live action initially but wasn't.

And who then gets the blame if something doesn't work? Usually the extremely talented animation teams working on tighter deadlines with less and less creative control or opportunity to experiment: "Oh those fish look weird trying to talk and sing. That just looks stupid and fake" Yes, it is fake. Lobsters don't generally burst into versions of "Under the sea" but Lobsters aren't generally cute like Sebastian either. You wanna "live action" lobster that can sing: This is what you get. Just look at that bland Pinocchio movie and compare it to Del Toro's version.

Remakes/reimaginings have their place but only if they bring something NEW.

silverharp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120681506#Comment_120681506

they need to change their strategy, this was a $250m film and Elemental is a $200m film , note that the Spiderverse film is a $100m so its easier to make a return. As for this film, the most generic review I saw was its too long and mixed quality of the effects. If you are going to bring out this kind of water based movie after Avatar, it needs to be a triumph of screen effects.

TheIrishGrover

$250m. Jesus. That's insane.I would rate these almost as Straight-to-Video lower-cost sequels of the 80s/early 90s (Except now Straight-to-Disney+) but that's insane money.

I haven't seen it so I can't comment on the quality of the effects. As it's more fantastical affair I wouldn't be put off if the water effects didn't match Avatar. Would take it more of a stylistic choice. But that's mental money. Especially when you add advertisement/promotion. I haven't seen ANY Little Mermaid promotion. I don't think I saw a single ad. Mario brothers and Spiderverse were heavily promoted.

200M for Elemental? For what looks like yet another Romeo & Juliet/starcrossed lovers movie? I mean one of the jokes in that Elemental was ripped straight out of Spongebob about 10 years ago

I mean remember when everyone was saying: Hey, Dreamworks is the sassy-animals-on-a-mission-with-the-eyebrow-thing. And at the same time Pixar were giving us movies about what toys do when we are not around. Or where monsters are bluecollar workers working in an energy plant. Or a robot with only 3 words falls in love. Or the Magnificent Seven with bugs.

Luca was fine but owed a huge amount to Studio Ghibli. The Good Dinosaur world looked amazing but the story was disjointed and episodic. Onward was bland. Finding Dory, Cars 3 and Toy Story 4 were sequels nobody asked for or wanted.

It's always tempting to "Play it safe" in a crowded marketplace but those are HUGE budgets for "Playing it safe"

pixelburp

The budgets can be explained easily enough by dint of the fact that up to this point, those live-action remakes were making bank. Budgets almost never go down when sequels or follow-ups to successful prior films get made; it's not that surprising The Little Mermaid's team might have blagged a large pay-cheque when 'til now, as while those cash-grabs had absolutely no soul they were making money. Still may yet, depending on how their existence on Disney+ plays into the financial numbers in the spreadsheets.

Agent Coulson

Added to Disney+ today.