Question Disney must be smoking pot really hard...

1) They're making what appears to be a live-action Lion King remake. That's REALLY going to go well ISN'T IT???

2) Dear god, they're making a movie of Eoin Colfer's Artemis Fowl books. A series of books about a self-proclaimed teenage supervillian, who really isn't super or a villain, and does stupid shit in every book with a bunch of technofaeries. \

Dear god. The lion king movie is just ASKING for something to go horribly wrong, the Artemis Fowl movie looks a LOT like the Percy Jackson movie, and that was shit in a multitude of fashions, and I have to ask:

The fuck has Disney been smoking? Seriously large amounts of pot?

I thought I heard another Percy movie is in the works, but I could be wrong. I wasn't paying that close of attention

Hmm wonder if the Greek tragedy of comedy (the Olympians) kids would count as demi-gods.

The "live action" Lion King might be largely CGI, They had some success with doing that for The Jungle Book. And who would have thought Lion King would make an awesome Broadway Play? You just never know...

My only question is why even recast it? Use either one the musical casts, or use the original dub work.

Katssun wrote: My only question is why even recast it? Use either one the musical casts, or use the original dub work.

well, using the original dub is likely not practical, if you have to ADR-replace any of Robert Guillaume's lines, you'll need to find someone that sounds enough like him to do it.

CrazyMinh wrote: The fuck has Disney been smoking? Seriously large amounts of pot?

They're high on money and being the biggest on the block. They are pretty sure that no matter what they do, millions will watch this and pay for it.

DasVals wrote:

CrazyMinh wrote: The fuck has Disney been smoking? Seriously large amounts of pot?

They're high on money and being the biggest on the block. They are pretty sure that no matter what they do, millions will watch this and pay for it.

There's also the Nostalgia factor to count into this. So many adults now have seen the Lion King when they were little kids after all, trying to relive that moment again would drive them in theaters too. In a fashion, it will make 'some money' at least. If it's a gamble to invest that much into the movie, then it's at least a 'safe bet'. If it's a hit, then the better for it.

As for a Lion King 'realistic CG', at least in contrast to the Jungle Book, is that the animators will control everything, rather than having to coordinate with set and live actors.

Problem with that though, is that the original was animated, and allowed to greater emotional movements in the characters. I'm not sure you can get the same flow in realistic CG without running smack into uncanny valley.

Picture for a moment a meerkat dressing in drag and doing the hula...

Disney is a Corporation that is lucky enough to have a certain cachet that draws very talented people into the production end of their projects. BUT, the guys at the very top are Suits, and if the things I've heard of them are true, they are Suits of the very worst sort. It's said that there are two kinds of people who work at the Disney theme parks: Disney Dream True Believer Lifers, and people who quickly grow to loathe Disney in every aspect. BUT, there's one thing they both agree on: they both despise Corporate; the former hate them for crapping all over the dream, and the latter hate them for making the parks everything they revile.

The Lion King broadway production is one of the longest running and most profitable productions on the Great White Way. A movie doing more or less the same thing was inevitable. All hail the Profit, may it ever increase

what I'm more concerned about is the Artemis Fowl movie...

...not because I like the series...

...but because it was a decent-ish novel back when I read that sort of shit. I've moved on, and I can now see the massive fissures in the plot and the large armies of flaws with Eoin Colfer's writing...but I still used to love the books, and them getting the 'Percy Jackson Movie Treatment' isn't exactly the best thing. Let me give a example.

Maximum Ride was another series I liked back in the day, about a bunch of flying bird kids. It was...ok...apart from jumping the shark after book 3 and also having more loose threads than a bowl of spaghetti, and more plot holes than your average wheel of Swiss cheese. The books quickly had their movie rights sold off, a movie was going to be made...and then it got stuck in dev hell for ages. It was only last year or so that the movie came out, after the first director died, the movie was stuck in limbo for years, and then got finished and released without much fanfare on Netflix.

Artemis Fowl got sold to Disney long before Maximum Ride got sold to god knows who made it. It has been in dev hell for about a decade now. I think. Think about how that's going to go...

Bek D Corbin wrote: Disney is a Corporation that is lucky enough to have a certain cachet that draws very talented people into the production end of their projects. BUT, the guys at the very top are Suits, and if the things I've heard of them are true, they are Suits of the very worst sort. It's said that there are two kinds of people who work at the Disney theme parks: Disney Dream True Believer Lifers, and people who quickly grow to loathe Disney in every aspect. BUT, there's one thing they both agree on: they both despise Corporate; the former hate them for crapping all over the dream, and the latter hate them for making the parks everything they revile.

The Lion King broadway production is one of the longest running and most profitable productions on the Great White Way. A movie doing more or less the same thing was inevitable. All hail the Profit, may it ever increase

you nailed it!
I worked at Disneyland and at the studios both and very soon after you get in...you figure out FAST that you are working for a CHEAP RAT! And your only protection from its teeth is your union!

they run both places on the line of insanely cheap and dangerous to labor....and guests sometimes!

Katssun wrote: My only question is why even recast it? Use either one the musical casts, or use the original dub work.

I semi-rhetorically asked some friends "why should we care about this?" , while admitting that on some level I was, in fact, intrigued by the concept.

The most common response was one that never would have occurred to me in a million years. "Because Beyonce is doing one of the voices."

I will grant they knew, at least on one point, where not to meddle. James Earl Jones's role will be replaced with... James Earl Jones.