Disney’s Best and Worst Live Action

In the beginning it was Maleficent. Disney’s new wave of live performances starts off perfectly with to turn dedicated to the villain sleeping Beautyto which he gives a face (and evil-veneers) Angelina Jolie has never been so partial. Of course, there’s the somewhat forced idea that even villains cry (a theme we’ll find again in several subsequent titles), and the equally forced “sisterhood” between fairies and witches. But the main character has undeniable charisma, Elle Fanning is the perfect Aurora, and the frankly kitsch kote is fun. Sequel, subtitles mistress of evilfive years later: yes, on the contrary, useless.

Alice in Wonderland + Tim Burton: On paper what is called a marriage made in heaven. Instead, it hurts to admit, almost nothing works. From the protagonist Mia Wasikowska, always good but too mature for the role, to the mischief of Mad Hatter Johnny Depp and queens Helena Bonham Carter and Anne Hathaway. Right down to the ultra-luxury, but very tasteless packaging, and above all undecided between tones, which should satisfy the “large” audience, consisting of very small (as it was at the box office) like darkness typical of the author, which, however, is confused here, if not missing. Sin.

Another round, another supervillain. Because, let’s face it: here, too, the real protagonist of the story is not the one that the classic fairy tale gave us (in this case, the Cinderella of the spectacular Lily James), but her sworn enemy. That is Cate Blanchett in a noir version of a lady of the 40s, between Joan Crawford and Bette Davis. Yes, there are mice, a glass slipper, Prince Charming (Richard Madden: one of the few who works in this wave of adaptations that corner boys). But it is Lady Tremaine of Her Majesty Kate who steals the show. And Kenneth Branagh, on vacation at Disney, knows this.

Another signing that doesn’t pass Disney’s live-action test is Guy Ritchie, called to direct a flesh-and-blood version of one of the funniest “new classic” phase titles. But what would you like to be imitation it’s just a mess, with a Genius that can’t even remotely match the original “voice actor” Robin Williams (sorry, Will Smith), main characters with no charisma (they haven’t actually been seen anywhere else), and the usual feminist slant (Jasmine, who dreams of becoming a sultana) stuck as well as possible. None of the lamp’s wishes were fulfilled.

Try again, Tim. In his second foray into the Disney classic, Burton hits the bullseye. With a film unfairly panned by most critics and almost ignored by the public. “Cleansed” of the most controversial elements of the original version (above all, the raven, which, according to today’s politically correct court, insults African Americans) and brings its world closer to the world of a flying elephant. Or vice versa. A circus, supposedly “monstrosity”, horror always mixed with tenderness, and a perfect cast. feat. the big shoulders of Eva Green, Michael Keaton and Danny DeVito. Misunderstood.

Does it make sense to redo the movie scene by scene? Yes, if a cinephile operation leads to it Psycho Gus Van Sant. No if, as in the case The beauty and the Beast, it’s a slave photocopy that doesn’t add anything. Watching Emma Watson replicate Belle frame by frame (only with the addition of feminist empowerment: come on) might just appeal to today’s kids, who may have never seen — or don’t know by heart like the previous generation — the cartoon. about departure. . However, the box office success was sensational, so they are right about that.

Did we mention that live performances love the bad guys? To confirm this, here it is origin story Cruella De Vil, aka the amazing Emma Stone, as always. Here, too, there is an attempt to sweeten one of the most bitchy Disney panoramas, but director Craig Gillespie (that same handsome Tonya) gives us the punk scratch we want. Just like London, which is the backdrop for everything, including (amazing) costumes a la Vivienne Westwood and the soundtrack from Clash to Florence + The Machine. And, there is also the wild Emma Thompson: what else?

The question arises: what does live action mean? A movie with real actors, right? And yet new king lion, one of the most beloved games ever made by the House of Mouse, is purely digitally animated, but in reality still goes by the heading of live action. There is a remake here too. frame by frame classics at the core, with a set of super voices (Simba in the original version – Donald Glover), a Beyoncé spin-off album and a stratospheric collection. But do we care? You already know how to answer this question.

Let’s face it, we put in a new Mermaid between “best” only to exclusion and exhaustion (or maybe because that’s what we remember best when we just stepped out). Here, too, the effect of a photocopy in the style The beauty and the Beast not far off, but at least this live action has sparked some discussion: from black mermaid from Halle Bailey (perfect for the role) to skinny Flounder (ugly, but is it worth it?). And from Ursula Melissa McCarthy to various local dubs (see our Mahmoud as Sebastian the crab), the choice is very right. Of course, now we need quite a bit.

It is very sad to put this genius Robert Zemeckis under any “worst”. But after futuristic animated films (from polar Express V Legend of Beowulf) and works that could equally avant-garde connect the world of cartoons and “real” cinema (that absolute masterpiece that Who Framed Roger Rabbit?), such a dull and benevolent version of the Collodi tale is unacceptable. Even Tom Hanks’ Geppetto can’t contain a shack and puppets (sorry). Released straight to Disney+: there will be a reason.