Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 7 (click to see context) from:
* Headscratchers/{{Cinderella}}
to:
* Headscratchers/{{Cinderella}}Headscratchers/Cinderella2015
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 14 (click to see context) from:
* Headscratchers/{{Cruella}}
to:
* Headscratchers/{{Cruella}}Headscratchers/{{Cruella}}
* Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023
* Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 12 (click to see context) from:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
to:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]King]]
* Headscratchers/Mulan2020
* Headscratchers/{{Cruella}}
* Headscratchers/Mulan2020
* Headscratchers/{{Cruella}}
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 12,13 (click to see context) from:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
* [[Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023 The Little Mermaid]]
* [[Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023 The Little Mermaid]]
to:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
* [[Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023 The Little Mermaid]]King]]
* [[Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023 The Little Mermaid]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 12 (click to see context) from:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
to:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]King]]
* [[Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023 The Little Mermaid]]
* [[Headscratchers/TheLittleMermaid2023 The Little Mermaid]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** Headscratchers/MaleficentMistressOfEvil
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Deleted line(s) 1 (click to see context) :
[[WMG: '''The films and their sequels''']]
Changed line(s) 12,17 (click to see context) from:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
[[WMG: '''Misc. headscratchers''']]
* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)
[[WMG: '''Misc. headscratchers''']]
* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)
to:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
[[WMG: '''Misc. headscratchers''']]
* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)King]]
[[WMG: '''Misc. headscratchers''']]
* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Adding link to TLK headscratchers page
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
[[WMG: '''The films''']]
to:
[[WMG: '''The films''']]films and their sequels''']]
Changed line(s) 12 (click to see context) from:
to:
* [[Headscratchers/TheLionKing2019 The Lion King]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 11 (click to see context) from:
to:
* [[Headscratchers/Aladdin2019 Aladdin]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
[[WMG: '''The films''']]
* Headscratchers/OneHundredAndOneDalmatians
** Headscratchers/OneHundredAndTwoDalmatians
* [[Headscratchers/AliceInWonderland2010 Alice in Wonderland]]
** [[Headscratchers/AliceThroughtheLookingGlass Alice: Through the Looking Glass]]
* Headscratchers/{{Maleficent}}
* Headscratchers/{{Cinderella}}
* [[Headscratchers/TheJungleBook2016 The Jungle Book]]
* [[Headscratchers/BeautyAndTheBeast2017 Beauty and the Beast]]
* Headscratchers/ChristopherRobin
[[WMG: '''Misc. headscratchers''']]
* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)
* Headscratchers/OneHundredAndOneDalmatians
** Headscratchers/OneHundredAndTwoDalmatians
* [[Headscratchers/AliceInWonderland2010 Alice in Wonderland]]
** [[Headscratchers/AliceThroughtheLookingGlass Alice: Through the Looking Glass]]
* Headscratchers/{{Maleficent}}
* Headscratchers/{{Cinderella}}
* [[Headscratchers/TheJungleBook2016 The Jungle Book]]
* [[Headscratchers/BeautyAndTheBeast2017 Beauty and the Beast]]
* Headscratchers/ChristopherRobin
[[WMG: '''Misc. headscratchers''']]
* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)
