Aladdin Live action Trailer with Smurf Will!

[Midvillian1322]

Aladdin could be a bad remake, and Lion King a good one, y’know?

P.S., the “doesn’t want a remake but wants a remake” logic is flawed.

Lol thinking the same thing. I dont have a problem with the Aladdin trailer anyway. Genie looks weird but we only saw 5seconds of him. the rest if the trailer was fine with me. I woulda cast someone else for Jafar but again we got a couple seconds of him. there is no evidence this is gonna be hot garbage. And even if Dinsey got 50/50 on they're remakes that fine by me.Jungle Book showed me they can make a faithful remake while also adding something to the story. And Favrou who did that is doing Lion King. I can get not liking something but to hate soemthing so much that you think the entire category shouldn't exist is weird to me.

[Star_Jammer]

Lol thinking the same thing. I dont have a problem with the Aladdin trailer anyway. Genie looks weird but we only saw 5seconds of him. the rest if the trailer was fine with me. I woulda cast someone else for Jafar but again we got a couple seconds of him. there is no evidence this is gonna be hot garbage. And even if Dinsey got 50/50 on they're remakes that fine by me.Jungle Book showed me they can make a faithful remake while also adding something to the story. And Favrou who did that is doing Lion King. I can get not liking something but to hate soemthing so much that you think the entire category shouldn't exist is weird to me.

To hate something so much that one creates a blog post every few days about it, all while denying that anyone enjoys said thing (when there's evidence to the contrary), is what's really confusing to me...

Like...

[Jeramas]

I saw the trailer and MY GOD it looks like hot garbage.

And if anyone is appalled by how bad Disney's live action remake of Aladdin looks? Don't just boycott that film. Boycott all of Disney's live action remakes. That includes The Lion King, Dumbo and Lady and the Tramp.

Because if you contribute to The Lion King or Dumbo being hits, you are not showing Disney anything other than you want more of this horseshit. Bad reviews won't mean a thing. Disney cares only about the bottom line and pure profit. Aladdin could completely tank and lose hundreds of millions of dollars and Disney would not bat an eye if The Lion King makes over a billion and Dumbo is profitable.

If you think Disney is bad now wait until they make their X-Men movies and you start to like X-Men 3. I don't know why Disney started doing live actions of their cartoons. Disney has yet to cover all the fairy tales in animation. they have not made Hansel and Gretel , Rumpelstiltskin, the brave little taylor. jumping to live action of their already animated classics has become an unforgivable cash grab. Aladdin looks bad, lion king look worse. Did you see baby simba in the trailer? LOL.

Are we expected to believe in a convincing manner of that type of animation talking? when did Chronicles of Narnia come out? 2005. the lion in that movie looks better than Lion king 2019.

I will have rather watched a Rumpelstiltskin animation than a live action lion king or Aladdin from Disney.

Aladdin could be a bad remake, and Lion King a good one, y’know?

P.S., the “doesn’t want a remake but wants a remake” logic is flawed.

Aladdin looks like the better remake of the two just to tell you how bad I think Lion King looks.

[Midvillian1322]

To hate something so much that one creates a blog post every few days about it, all while denying that anyone enjoys said thing (when there's evidence to the contrary), is what's really confusing to me...

Like...

Yea I got no problem in someone expressing how much they hate something but to say they shouldnt exist when tons of people get enjoyment out of it is weird to me. I hate Harry Potter movies I see no situation in which I would wish they didnt exist. Tons of people love them good for them, it's just not for me at all.

[Gaastra]

Aladdin as a live action film is fine. Most people are fine with it. They just hated the trailer. They hated what they saw not that they made the movie. A lot of people were looking forward to the film but was let down by the awful trailer. Movie might be great but the teaser stunk.

[Jeramas]

Aladdin as a live action film is fine. Most people are fine with it. They just hated the trailer. They hated what they saw not that they made the movie. A lot of people were looking forward to the film but was let down by the awful trailer. Movie might be great but the teaser stunk.

It's a disconnection most people are struggling with. with the animation 20-25 years ago , there was a sense of wonder. a magic that drew you in. these live action films screams cash grab.

[Cyke]

It's a disconnection most people are struggling with. with the animation 20-25 years ago , there was a sense of wonder. a magic that drew you in. these live action films screams cash grab.

I'm not defending this remake, but every big film is a cash grab. Disney didn't make the original Aladdin out of charity and the goodness of their hearts, but it's also not mutually exclusive to have a good movie and a profit-driven movie. The studio doesn't just need to make money to stay in business and make execs rich, they also need money to pay the cast and crew, from the big name star to the caterer and the janitor.

Whether that cash grab is quality art and entertainment is the actual question.

[Star_Jammer]

Yea I got no problem in someone expressing how much they hate something but to say they shouldnt exist when tons of people get enjoyment out of it is weird to me. I hate Harry Potter movies I see no situation in which I would wish they didnt exist. Tons of people love them good for them, it's just not for me at all.

Hell, I hate the Star Wars movies. I've watched nearly every single one, and can't find one single redeeming factor (for myself) in them. The characters, the story, the action...it's all bland, cringy, campy, cheap **** to me.

I've expressed this opinion a time or two, when appropriately engaged in discussion about said topic, but I don't go around lambasting Star Wars movies/merchandise/creators or SW fans every chance I get, making Wall-o'-Text posts just to boost my ego.

[WebLurker]

I saw the trailer and MY GOD it looks like hot garbage.

Okay. Can't say I agree, but okay.

And if anyone is appalled by how bad Disney's live action remake of Aladdin looks? Don't just boycott that film. Boycott all of Disney's live action remakes. That includes The Lion King, Dumbo and Lady and the Tramp.

Because if you contribute to The Lion King or Dumbo being hits, you are not showing Disney anything other than you want more of this horseshit. Bad reviews won't mean a thing. Disney cares only about the bottom line and pure profit. Aladdin could completely tank and lose hundreds of millions of dollars and Disney would not bat an eye if The Lion King makes over a billion and Dumbo is profitable.

But I want to see some of those myself.

Aladdin looks like crap, the CGI that was crapped on the original film on the enterance to the cave looks just as fake as the teaser and doesn't have any of the style or flare the CGI one did, this has none and feeling not of the cast members even Will Smith as Genie. The CGI of him is atrocious and Disney is getting raked over the coals on how poor this is and looks bland/boring and none of it is making me go "Oh it looks like an event film", same for Lion King.

We haven't seen enough of the cast yet to know how well they will or will not do in their roles. Based on past movies, I think that Naomi Scott and Will Smith will be fine at worst, but that remains to be seen. As far as the bad CGI, trailers are often made with incomplete effects. It wouldn't be the first time a trailer had weak effects that were up to scratch in the final product.

Can't we just re-issue the original films with some updated animation because they still hold up really good to this day, both Aladdin and Lion King and two of them in my opinion are the best animated films of the 90s among others.

We have gotten some reissues often on. Lion King was given a 3D reissue with some (unneeded reanimation), for example.

We don't need an update, we don't need a live-action remake of Lion King which isn't even live-action, it's CGI, don't need a live-action remake of Aladdin as it's already been made, i mean maybe do a new adaptation of Aladdin and his wonderful life than do a remake of the Disney film.

Semantics in regards to Lion King not "really" being live action; it's how we're supposed to see the movie, same way there's a difference between Roger Rabbit and characters like Jar Jar Binks and Maz Kanata. As far as there being another live action Aladdin adaptation, I've never heard of it. Besides, there's never been a live action movie adaptation of the Disney movie, which, for some of us, is the the source material for the while thing, if that makes any sense.

I hope the people who saw the trailer and didn't like what they saw then speak with your wallet, and if your tired of Disney's lazy halfassed cashgrab remakes of their classics, don't pay to see them. So if you are sick of this lazy **** as much as I am, do not pay to see any of their live action remakes and just contribute to diminishing returns.

And yet this lazy "cash grab" got us Christopher Robin, possibly one of the best Winnie-the-Pooh movies ever made.

I have yet to give them a single cent for these casghrab efforts and I will continue to do so. That is the only way they will consider stopping. Because if they keep making money, no matter how bad the word of mouth and reviews are, Disney will not give a damn and keep making them. And if any film of live-action bombs then Disney will be like "oh wow, i guess people are tired of this! i guess audiences doesn't want this!" and that's how your gonna send your message. And if they are hits and make a billion dollars, all it takes is just one of them and one be saying "Oh i wanna see Lion King" and if your like "Aladdin looks like crap but the other ones i wanna go see" then it defeats the purpose, cause if Aladdin underperforms then it doesn't mean cause Disney can absorb that hit in the face, no problem. But if Dumbo and Lion King are both big hits especially Lion King then they are gonna keep these remakes, i guarantee it, no matter how bad the reviews are for Aladdin, no matter how many people don't go to see it, no matter how big of a flop it is, it doesn't matter cause if Lion King makes a billion dollars that just shows them you still want more of that, just watch, watch this all unfold.

Why would I not see a movie I want to see because it means the company will make other movies I don't want to? That's the situation ever single time I go to the theaters.

I mean your gonna get live-action remakes of Little Mermaid or Pocahontas, it's going to happen, i guarantee it and all but eventually the bottom will completely fall out and they are just gonna get diminishing returns, because they are no longer about the ideals that Walt Disney built his company around. They are about greed, power and manipulation of your nostalgia

The filmmaking industry was always about the bottom line. So, yeah, I'll be seeing the Aladdin and Lion King remakes this year because I think they look interesting and ignoring the Dumbo movie because they changed the classic too much for my case and will do do without guilt.

[TomServofan]

If you think Disney is bad now wait until they make their X-Men movies and you start to like X-Men 3. I don't know why Disney started doing live actions of their cartoons. Disney has yet to cover all the fairy tales in animation. they have not made Hansel and Gretel , Rumpelstiltskin, the brave little taylor. jumping to live action of their already animated classics has become an unforgivable cash grab. Aladdin looks bad, lion king look worse. Did you see baby simba in the trailer? LOL.

Are we expected to believe in a convincing manner of that type of animation talking? when did Chronicles of Narnia come out? 2005. the lion in that movie looks better than Lion king 2019.

I will have rather watched a Rumpelstiltskin animation than a live action lion king or Aladdin from Disney.





Aladdin looks like the better remake of the two just to tell you how bad I think Lion King looks.

One of my friends said "it looks like a live-action porn parody of Aladdin".


It does look like a porn parody and watch this film lose money but because Lion King makes over a billion worldwide, Disney won't bat an eye and keep pumping out more live action remakes of their animated classics. This is why if you are serious about this being a problem, you have to ban all of them. Not just Aladdin.
I won't be giving Disney a cent for this lazy ****. I didn't for any of their previous remakes and I won't start now.

[Ptrvc]

The current heads of Disney are creatively bankrupt. That's the long and short of it.

[Midvillian1322]

One of my friends said "it looks like a live-action porn parody of Aladdin".


It does look like a porn parody and watch this film lose money but because Lion King makes over a billion worldwide, Disney won't bat an eye and keep pumping out more live action remakes of their animated classics. This is why if you are serious about this being a problem, you have to ban all of them. Not just Aladdin.
I won't be giving Disney a cent for this lazy ****. I didn't for any of their previous remakes and I won't start now.

Looked at the money Beauty and the Beast and Jungle book made. People love this ****( I hated Beaity and the Beast and loved Jungle Book so I'm 50/50). You can hate it all you want but people enjoy them and Aladin isnt even out yet so again were playing this game where people claim to know some movie is trash that they have never seen. Much like the MCU these movies arent stopping in the near future. So just dont watch them, but they arent gonna stop and they shouldnt stop because theres a huge market who wants them

[Cyke]

The current heads of Disney are creatively bankrupt. That's the long and short of it.

Or they're doing what market research tells them. Disney's live-action original movies tend to do pretty badly in theaters, or at least even if they perform well, it's never at the level of their animated movies. So it's not for lack of trying. One of their last big non-animated-remake movies was A Wrinkle in Time, and despite high hopes it underperformed, which only confirmed their fears (now, if it's a self-fulfilling prophecy...).

If market research is telling them that they'll sell more merchandise and make more money with a remake than with an original creation or adaptation, it doesn't take a genius which way they'll swing. They'll take a "risk" with something original only if that risk shows mathematically that the odds of tremendous profit are in their favor, which then isn't much of a risk at all.

The thing is, too, if the remake is terrible and it causes people to buy or rent the original Aladdin cartoon en masse as a means of "scorning" the remake or washing away the taste of the remake, that's still profit produced for Disney. So even if they inspire distaste in this one, the remake can still accomplish its mission in the end.

[TomServofan]

Looked at the money Beauty and the Beast and Jungle book made. People love this ****( I hated Beaity and the Beast and loved Jungle Book so I'm 50/50). You can hate it all you want but people enjoy them and Aladin isnt even out yet so again were playing this game where people claim to know some movie is trash that they have never seen. Much like the MCU these movies arent stopping in the near future. So just dont watch them, but they arent gonna stop and they shouldnt stop because theres a huge market who wants them

Jungle Book wasn't a direct remake of the 1967 film despite a few homages but more of another adaptation of the book by Kipling and i think Disney should do a separate adaptation series of the Prydain books and not be a direct remake of The Black Cauldron film they attempted in 1985, that's preciously the kind of live-action adaptation to see than a lazy remake of the original disney films themselves like Beauty is a direct near shot to shot (as i heard) remake of the masterpiece from 1991 and i heard Cinderella is another adaptation of the book and not a direct remake of the 1950 film.

[Midvillian1322]

Jungle Book wasn't a direct remake of the 1967 film despite a few homages but more of another adaptation of the book by Kipling and i think Disney should do a separate adaptation series of the Prydain books and not be a direct remake of The Black Cauldron film they attempted in 1985, that's preciously the kind of live-action adaptation to see than a lazy remake of the original disney films themselves like Beauty is a direct near shot to shot (as i heard) remake of the masterpiece from 1991 and i heard Cinderella is another adaptation of the book and not a direct remake of the 1950 film.

They added some stuff in beauty of the beast but most of it added nothing. Maurice being a more fleshed out character is the only praise I'll give it. They added a new song beast sings and it was hot garbage. That said Jungle Book I felt was superior to the original in everyway and was a great movie. First thing was ShareKhan was actually terrifying and then like you said it wasnt a beat for beat remake it did it's own thing. And Favrou who did it is doing Lion King so hopefuly we get a new take on the story while also paying Homage like Jungle Book