Cruella

OU812 wrote: »

Looks like Disney’s take on a joker style origin story

https://youtu.be/gmRKv7n2If8

Highly doubtful looking at the writers.

Its Disney, so this will be primarily aimed at as wide an audience as possible so will probably be PG-13 . £££

Looks like a bad parody.

The SNL 'Grouch' parody was more faithful to the character than this.

They seem to be trying to make her into Tim Burton's 'Selina Kyle/ Catwoman' from Batman Returns.

On the plus side, it'll at least be funny. Unintentionally so, mind.

CastorTroy wrote: »

So are people expected to like her, even though she's known for killing animals for clothes and attempted to kill puppies?

I expect it's going to be like Maleficent-usual 'make villainess sympathetic' kinda deal.

Ultimately it ruined Maleficent.

Someone I know made decent point about the film. Folks have been stuck in lockdown, many of them with their pets, many of whom are dogs.

Trying to make a villain who kills dogs for their fur sympathetic is a hard sell.
After the pandemic, it's damn near an impossibility.

The Babylon Bee has a funny parody of the current 'explain away a villainess' origins so as to make her sympathetic'.

https://babylonbee.com/news/disney-announces-new-movie-telling-sympatheic-feminist-origin-story-of-xenomorph-queen

pixelburp wrote: »

That was my first, exact thought. This is a character who revelled in a desire to skin dogs. Don't really want to watch that characters rise/fall. Methinks this film will try for the angle of "here's someone even MORE evil", just so the script can sidestep Cruella's notoriety, and spin her as some misunderstood creature.

TBH I long checked out from these Disney live action remakes and prequels. The barrel is being well and truly scrapped for every last nostalgic dollar and, to hell with that.

I would have thought the same about The Joker but that film made a billion dollars. I can't see this doing anywhere near that but Hollywood does seem obsessed at the moment with making horrible people seem sympathetic ... I wonder why :pac:

pixelburp wrote: »

It is an odd trend ATM all right; I dunno. I think with Joker, that film really benefited from the hysterics across the internet before it even came out; all resulting in a cinematic Streisand Effect. Who didn't want to see the movie that would apparently cause incels to riot?

But both with Joker, and something more equivalent like Maleficent, the evil characters felt outsized enough you could make them the protagonists. Being as they were a supervillain and fantasy, evil witch respectively.

Cruella instead is a nasty woman who wanted to skin puppies, and ... that's a big, very relatable level of evil. Even the trailer is nodding at it, with that shot of Dalmations looking worried; so this film's obviously going to nod towards that malevolence. That's an odd choice; "hey, don't forget this woman will eventually want to kill pupsters!" :pac:

I actually feel the opposite, like you say skinning puppies is relatable but it's an accepted evil in a way because there is a fur trade and when you really get down to it is fur trade really that much worse than the meat trade and I say that as someone who loves meat. But these are accepted evils within society to a degree and therefore I actually think it's easier to make Cruella relatable than it is someone like Joker who, you know, kills people.

Anyway I probably I won't be seeing this because as a rule I don't like the idea of giving well established villains sympathetic origins,it just dilutes them imo.

Also on a kind of related note, I always forget that there was a live action remake of 101 Dalmatians like 20 years ago before the recent blight.

pixelburp wrote: »

It is an odd trend ATM all right; I dunno. I think with Joker, that film really benefited from the hysterics across the internet before it even came out; all resulting in a cinematic Streisand Effect. Who didn't want to see the movie that would apparently cause incels to riot?

But both with Joker, and something more equivalent like Maleficent, the evil characters felt outsized enough you could make them the protagonists. Being as they were a supervillain and fantasy, evil witch respectively.

Cruella instead is a nasty woman who wanted to skin puppies, and ... that's a big, very relatable level of evil. Even the trailer is nodding at it, with that shot of Dalmations looking worried; so this film's obviously going to nod towards that malevolence. That's an odd choice; "hey, don't forget this woman will eventually want to kill pupsters!" :pac:

Joker was meant to cause mass violence among supposed crazy people. The media were left tragically disappointed when nothing happened.
Then a Machete fight broke out during a screening of Frozen 2. :rolleyes:
Crazy people will always find a reason to be violent. The Son of Sam killer thought his neighbour's dog was telling him to kill.

They'll neuter her in some way. Maleficent is one of the most amazing Disney villains (in the animated Disney film Sleeping Beauty)... the Angelina Jolie film is a trashfire cesspit that shouldn't exist.
Maleficent 'delighted' in being evil... practically bathed in it.
When the Angelina Jolie movie came out, they 'had' to make her a victim. Turned her from villain to hero, even changing the 'curse' she put on Beauty, and having her try to remove the curse.

I feel like I can 'guess' what the Cruella movie will do, and neither one will be intelligent. You'll either have a 'she's a tragic victim' or 'mentally ill'... and both are egregious and stupid.
(If Sia's movie 'Music', or the remake of The Witches taught folks anything, you potentially stigmatize anything-folks will have to grovel. Especially after The Witches led to apologies).

OU812 wrote: »

Looks like Disney’s take on a joker style origin story

https://youtu.be/gmRKv7n2If8

The Joker Wears Prada

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Emma Stone channelling Eva Green

More like she's trying to imitate Michelle Pfeiffer's Selina Kyle, from Batman Returns.

Even down to the 'I am woman, hear me roar' line.

This will debut on Disney+ on the same day as it's cinema release on the Premier Access section.

https://variety.com/2021/film/news/disney-postpones-black-widow-shang-chi-1234935874/

Sunny_Arms wrote: »

I dont get why disney has to do something like this. I mean it started with maleficent. Im getting descendants (the tv show) vibes with the direction they're going through.

It saves them from doing something original.

Florence + The Machine have released a new song, Call Me Cruella.

The single features on the soundtrack for the new feature-length Cruella, Disney’s origin film for the One Hundred And One Dalmatians villain.

Has a high score on RT with the audience 97% but looks like a bit of a flop especially as it had a $200m cost , one of those films falling between stools

It did much worse than Mulan (39% lower) and A Quiet Place 2 did much better on a production cost of $61m, the film probably streamed another million watches so thats another $30m


https://screenrant.com/cruella-movie-budget-cost/

Cruella's production budget is reportedly $200 million, making it a very expensive endeavor. That price tag is higher than other Disney live-action re-imaginings like Aladdin ($183 million), Beauty and the Beast ($160 million), and Maleficent: Mistress of Evil ($185 million). Cruella's budget is more in line with what one would expect from a tentpole comic book adaptation.

https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl3708126721/

Grosses
DOMESTIC (64%)
$28,631,077
INTERNATIONAL (36%)
$16,100,000
WORLDWIDE
$44,731,077

Outkast_IRE wrote: »

Hopefully a signal to disney to stop producing mediocre adaptations nobody asked for and concentrate on some original content.

I dont know what they were thinking, its not a kids film, nobody was going to buy into a female Joker film stupid idea.

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

The Joker Wears Prada

The Devil Wears Prada cost $35m and took in over $300m

Take it this is worth a skip so?

Never watched it but watched the Pitch Meeting.
Seems they have a lot of licensed music which drove the budget up.

Deleted User wrote: »

Top Gun 2 which had a lot of CGI plus Tom Cruises fee was $152m.

You would really wonder how they managed to spend 200m on Cruella.

If Cruise took a fee. He may well take points at this stage.

Well I liked it

A brain at the door prequel, I stuck it on out of morbid curiosity more than anything to see just how they can make a more sympathetic character out of her, .

Great period piece, great casting (loved Emmas Stone and Thompson), FANTASTIC soundtrack .

Was it necessary? No.
Was it a blatant watered down female version of Joker? Yes
Was it a bit of fun for a couple of hours? I thought so.
Did a can and a half of cider help? Probably

The Phantom Pain wrote: »

The fundamental difference being that was 1996 and this is 2021 and this is an origin story where the central focus is on getting you to root for the main character.

And they did it well, IMO