Disney's Live-Action Thread

I'm pretty tired tonight, so forgive me please if I'm brief or vague in my points. ^^;

While I can see some of how you might get there, I don't agree at all.

(I've outlined my objections before, so I won't repeat them here.)

Or none of the above, as has been suggested elsewhere.

And as has been noted, there seems to have been mention that she could well have grown and changed, and so found Aslan's Country too.

She was left out, yes—for the time being. Not necessarily forever at all.

On this I likewise disagree: I see no real problem with it as a fantasy story. Why should such a theme or plot be excluded from fantasy?

If I recall correctly, at least one of Tolkien's works (The Silmarillion, perhaps? I'm not sure) mentions the final battle, Dagor Dagorath, in which Melkor would be freed from imprisonment—and finally defeated.

It wasn't part of The Lord of the Rings, true—but then The Lord of the Rings was only one small part of Tolkien's overall narrative.

I don't know: to my mind those suggest different sorts of thing to what I suggested. Parties needn't be boring, for example, and an interest in fancy dresses might suggest aesthetic appreciation rather than social cachet or the like.

Errr... I'd like to point out here that Christianity doesn't uniformly condemn all sexuality. I'm not even convinced that it's all that common. Even the Bible itself has a line to the effect that, if one cannot be celibate, then marry and not withold yourselves from each other, as I recall.

Again, I disagree: I see a lot of space for doubt; indeed, it seems to me if anything unlikely that Lewis was saying that Susan was at all interested in guys, and thus excluded from Heaven.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Mar 30th 2020 at 5:13:23 PM

My Games & Writing

All the suggestions I saw you wrote before I've addressed and, likewise, seem terrible to me. Susan's punishment absolutely did not fit the "crime" of either trying to be mature or not being interested in Narnia. It's a weird dichotomy — I think Susan "forgot" about Narnia because Lewis was trying to make a point about atheists and how they can't get into Heaven and that once Susan believes in Jesus again, she'll get into Heaven, but that just makes it all worse.

I think you are completely missing my point — other people are allowed to grow and change normally as part of growing up and maturing. Susan, on the other hand, is punished for trying to be mature by having her entire family killed. Even if we go with the "allegory for atheism" route, Susan is still left completely alone and with her entire family dead because she stopped believing in Jesus/Aslan/Narnia. It's a "believe or you'll be sorry" approach to religion that I find absolutely horrifying.

There's a difference between telling a story like that is an in-universe mythological story (which is what that is) and making it the actual ending to your fantasy epic. Once again: Tolkein knew better than to end his fantasy epic that way. The Silmarillon is a set of in-universe stories and done in a very different way than both LOTR and Chronicles of Narnia.

Just premarital sex. And having sex for pleasure.

If you can't read the words "nylons and lipstick and invitations" and see how that relates to boys, I can't help you.

Edited by alliterator on Mar 30th 2020 at 8:28:52 AM

That depends on the Christian sect; there are hundreds and many have different attitudes towards sexuality. For the one most relevant to this conversation, Anglicanism, Lewis's views in The Screwtape Letters were that sexuality could be used as a means of temptation but was not inherently evil nor wrong to derive pleasure from, with the book's demons considering it "a subject of considerable tedium".

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Mar 30th 2020 at 8:28:45 AM

Looking back over the thread quickly, I don't see it so addressed, but my apologies if I did miss it.

I would argue here that not everything bad that happens—or rather, not every negative element of something that happens—to someone is "punishment".

If there's punishment in this case, it's that of Susan not getting into Aslan's country. That her family dies is tragic, and her being in that situation is heartbreaking, but I don't think that it's intended to be read as punishment of Susan.

This seems to me like a very specific reading—and one that's not necessarily accurate.

Possibly—I could see that interpretation. I think that it seems more likely that it's about worldly temptations, and the desire to be "very grown up" at the expense of all else, that constitutes Susan's "problem".

Again, I'm not convinced of the reading that Susan's loss of her family is intended to be her "punishment".

Okay, that's fair. I still don't see a problem with so ending a fantasy epic, myself. It seems like a suitably, well, epic conclusion.

As noted by the poster above, this isn't at all universally true, no.

And even if we agree on just that first item... yes, and? Is it really so horrible to have a book that includes such a moral position?

I can read those words and see how it could so relate—but I can see other interpretations, too.

And then, even if we do accept the idea that it relates to Susan's sexuality—I still dispute that, to be clear—there's the detail that she's mentioned to like those things to the exception of all else. It's possible, after all, to be interested in boys and still be interested in matters intellectual, spiritual, imaginative, and so on and so forth.

Edited by ArsThaumaturgis on Mar 31st 2020 at 8:20:05 PM

My Games & Writing

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/amp/heat-vision/black-widow-mulan-nab-new-release-dates-jungle-cruise-delayed-a-year-1286854?utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&__twitter_impression=true

Mulan comes out in July.

Artemis Fowl is going straight to Disney+.

Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)

This is probably no more live-action than the Lion King remake, but I'm adding mention of it here from the Western Animation thread because of the shared brand. Disney's Robin Hood is getting a remake.

Ya know, Disney, a Zootopia-style remake would've been just fine. We don't need to see Robin Hood's anatomically correct blank eyes and inarticulate jaws.

Sounds like the film version of The Fantastic Mr. Fox. Though there it was more "bizarre taxidermy" than "photorealism."

Either way, the fact that the characters have to be humanoid and engage in human situations means there's going to have to be more emotional detail, so I'm hoping it to come out more like The Jungle Book.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Apr 11th 2020 at 12:42:27 PM

"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.

Would be wild if this turns out to be part of Bob Chapek's secret plan to put the furry following that the Zootopia unleashed back in the box. Though come to think of it, the movie would work pretty well with Wes Anderson's style.

Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)

Zootopia got a huge following regardless of its use of anthropomorphic animals because it was well-written from the ground up.

When will writers learn that we would rather see reboots that ideally improve upon the originals, or at least be on the same level, than creatively-bankrupt remakes?

Oof, unless this is the one remake that improves on the original I smell a bomb right away. The original is barely that good and I know the little charm it had will be replaced by "serious tone" attempting to cash-in on the "serious Medieval genre" that Game of Thrones made popular and add creepy Cats-like animation...

It's not even that well-regarded in the fandom, so really who will watch this?

I love Disney's Robin Hood! It's a ton of fun. ^^

I think it'd be cool if they made remakes of the better sequels/prequels/midquels. One of the things I like best about them was that they fleshed out minor characters more, like Ariel's sisters.

The Protomen enhanced my life.

Then again they did announce a remake on "Bambi".

"A Lady does not start fights but they can finish them"

And Song of the South

yes.

New theme music also a box

This is the first I'm hearing of a Song of the South remake.

"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.

[[redacted]]

Edited by Ultimatum on Apr 11th 2020 at 4:33:50 PM

New theme music also a box

Look at the logo at the top of the page: "Uncle Walt's Insider. Magical Fake News."

There is not and never will be a remake of Song of the South. Even Disney isn't that stupid.

Edited by alliterator on Apr 11th 2020 at 9:33:24 AM

Well

shit

New theme music also a box

Plus there's literally no one in a major representative position that I can find at Disney named Stephen White.

Edited by KnownUnknown on Apr 11th 2020 at 9:34:03 AM

"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.

Everyone go home I embarrassed myself

Someone went on on the internet and told lies

Edited by Ultimatum on Apr 11th 2020 at 4:34:55 PM

New theme music also a box

Anyway,fake news aside I did rumours that they legit have thought about it

New theme music also a box

I really doubt that's the case when they would rather pretend that the original never existed at all.

Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)

Hell, it's not even on Disney+.

Like Disney considers the original an Old Shame. Why would they remake it ?

"That's right mortal. By channeling my divine rage into power, I have forged a new instrument in which to destroy you."

Actually, making a couple modern shorts based off Br'er Rabbit stories, with a spotlight on African American animators in the Disney Studio might not be a terrible idea.

Edited by megaeliz on Apr 11th 2020 at 2:29:39 PM