The decision to remove all references to smoking and drinking alcohol in favour of consuming candy and root beer not only removes the anti smoking and drinking message of the original, but basically punishes the children for doing typical childlike things.
I didn't watch it but damn I forgot how sensitive the companies are because of society being full of "cancellers" alright alright it's for kids yes but remember when there were guns and smoking in kids cartoons? and it wasn't cancelled by society?
@guzita Yeah, because by not serving what the original did it's apparently that these remakes are mere cash-grabs. Guess Disney execs are lucky that the casual movie-goer is ignorant enough to fall for this trap over and over again.
I heard they were thinking of a Hunchback remake. That one, I'm truly afraid of- I bet they'll scrap Hellfire, give the gargoyles more songs, make Frollo just a little racist, maybe a bit creepy, and make Phoebus some Mary Sue hot shot to make Esmeralda fall for him faster.
@@ravengyal well they are still doing it. Strange World is in like two months. We also have that Elemental, Elio and Inside Out 2. The live remakes however do feel like they were abit of a cash grab and disney never truly figure out of they want a shot for shot recreation or something truly different.
the only thing these live action disney remakes do nowadays is remove EVERY bit of personality, nuance, depth and complexity from the original animated counterparts and write in a couple new corny jokes, which is shocking because these are supposed to be "updated" versions of the classics...? why does disney feel like they need to dumb down their films to make them accessible for modern audiences?
It's almost entirely a reflection of how how hollywood execs see the rest of the population -- not as real people who appreciate all those traits, but as mindless consumers. I'm kind of more and more offended every time one of these comes out, honestly.
I disagree with you completely I think the best remake they did was The jungle book you know why because they changed that ending from the original which I appreciate that because the ending of the original movie was completely stupid
The remakes are awful, yet they keep making money. That's what Disney wants - as do the other entities that make reboots, sequels, etc. They don't take risks with new ideas, just recycle the old ones with existing fanbases.
Not a liked opinion but the newer generation need a dumbed down version. I was just talking with some kids at work the other day and they said they didn’t like the animated movies only the real ones:( it was so disappointing to hear..
The fact that they turned Pinocchio into a victim rather than a participant in his trials is such a sad reflection of our toxic self esteem culture 🤦 you're not always an innocent victim of persecution, sometimes you're wrong and you need to learn something.
That's the main problem with these remakes. They're perfect and can never be wrong which is highly unrealistic to the real world. Yes, there can be external factors beyond your control but you also control yourself and the way your react to things. And there’s also the fact everyone makes mistake and that no one is perfect at everything you put in front of them. We all have to learn and grow to be the best version of ourselves and telling people that they’re perfect is disingenuous at best and toxic and harmful at worst.
A lot of people associate Disney with being this super sanitized company, but if you watch any of the Disney classics up until the Renaissance there is always an "edge" or slight darkness to them. I think this is part of what makes them classics. Our heroes have to experience the lows to appreciate the highs. For instance, in Cinderella her handmade dress is violently torn apart by her stepsisters. This is basically absent in the remake. She has to experience the lowest of the low which makes her transformation by the godmother all the more impactful. Disney is so concerned about hurting anyone's feelings they have stripped their classic stories of their "edge." It's all the more worse when we can compare the remakes with their originals and see how underwhelming they are.
That was my issue with "Tangled", too. The tone of the film was so 'jokey' that at no point did I feel that Rapunzel was in any peril with her Stepmother Gothel. She just seems like a kooky, singing eccentric that I never got invested in her story. By the end, I didn't really care and when Pasquale trips Mother Gothel, I felt that tiny element wiped away any of the pathos developed for his character. She could have easily just fallen and then it would have been poetic justice. It seems ever since "Shrek" arrived, Disney hasn't really understood their strengthens for storytelling and tries to shoehorn dull jokes wherever they can.
@@americantoycoon9206you might want to watch the series (starting with tangled before ever after) it gets pretty dark for a kids show. just look up decay incantation if you want to see what I mean
The old Disney 6-minute cartoons were definitely edgy by today’s standards. They showed characters like Daisy Duck pointing guns to their own heads in suicide attempts, teetering off dangerous cliffs, and nonchalantly using dangerous tools and explosives. On top of this, every other one of these shows seemed to have a “death” scene where some character sprung back up to life, making everyone happy at the end. It was a different era back then.
@@queerqueen098 I have heard that before. Thanks for reminding me. I've never had the chance to watch the show, however. Disney classic animation has always been my marker for storytelling (I also create animation) so I'm critical when they fall short of the mark.
Pinocchio was such a goody two shoes in this movie and for what? The whole point of Jiminy is to symbolize that Pinocchio doesn't have an internal conscience, compelling him to make bad decisions and not give his situations much thought. If he's not a little shit that has a lesson to learn and already has a sense of morality, he's just Pinocchio the human trafficking victim who's always smiling.
exactly !! like the entire point of pinocchio is that he’s a bad kid and he learns from it. what’s the point if you just make him all good from the very beginning ??
I Don’t Think Pinocchio Is that bad i like the Movie have lot Fun Watching this Movie I think some of you are over React and too Harsh of this Remake bc I like some this Disney Remake Movie My Favorite Remake Disney is Beauty and The Beast
At least we’re getting Guilermo Del Toro’s absolutely gorgeous stop motion adaptation of Pinocchio that seems to be a genuinely unique and original take on the source material
This is how Disney tricks people into going to the remix. They hire a well-known Director to make it, but they basically put so many restrictions on the Director leaving little to no creativity for them.
This is why I really like the live action Alice in Wonderland. It was different than the original and wasn't a complete remake. It also had a darker vibe to it too which Disney is too afraid to do anymore
@@graffiti.777 I don't even really count that one as a remake because it's not a retelling of the original story it's more kinda like a sequel to it following Alice as an adult RETURNING to Wonderland.
The weirdest thing to me was that they put so much emphasis on Geppetto's clock, that he cared about them so much, when in the original I always thought that the clocks were there to show Geppetto's creativity, eccentricity, and loneliness as he has all that time to make clocks. He made things for the sake of making them (kind of like Disney when the original came out).
That's what pisses me off about these remakes by Disney as of late. They're so needless and often bogged down with overly complicated garbage that the story doesn't need. It was done right the first time, Disney. Just release a 'Disney vault classic" edition or something and call it a day.
Of course most the clocks are Disney IP’s (intellectual properties) now. Kinda hilarious actually. It’s so obvious the Disney company are full of themselves and trying to sell their franchises right in our face. It’s a microcosm to the Bob Chapek era. Toy Story, Dumbo, Snow White, Maleficent, Lion King… even Geppetto’s clocks got the IP treatment.
@@frug5629 Society has reached such an absurd point of cultural & artistic bankruptcy, that you end up with things like this. A beloved family-oriented company like Disney, is down to cancelling itself through the vain venture of churning out remake after remake of its most well-know classics, in a bland, soulless, corporate packaging. Just throw a bit of Woke Powder into the mix and KABOOM!! All of the magic is gone.
@@rigelb9025 cancelling? woke??? why you just thrown in meaningless buzzwords that have no relation to the actual conversation? it’s a video about fucking pinocchio and you’re speaking like a Fox News presenter
There are two very important parts that are missing: 1. Pinocchio is supposed to save geppetto and die in the process. The Blue fairy is supposed to fulfill her promise and make Pinocchio a little boy once he proves himself brave and unselfish. That brings Pinocchio back to life. They all celebrate by dancing with the clock music. 2. The Blue fairy is supposed to revisit Pinocchio in Stromboli's wagon to explain how his nose works.
"2. The Blue fairy is supposed to revisit Pinocchio in Stromboli's wagon to explain how his nose works." Huh, no time for that in this skimmed rush to the end of a movie.
@@joshuanesbit yeah. That's what made the original movie so sad. Pinocchio died as a wooden boy and it was only geppetto's deepest wish that brought him back as a human.
Jiminy Cricket: “In his heart, Pinocchio was as real as any boy could ever be!” Translation: “In reality, the CGI animators decided it was too much work to recreate the transformation scene so we’ll just leave the ending ambiguous to for the sake of time and money!”
I think it actually has more to do with today's social political messaging which woke Disney certainly is a major player in. If you just wish it so, then it of course must be true, such as with gender identity.
@@chrisb.1214 Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s both. The current Disney formula is: Laziness/remakes x sequels + Pandering to audience = ungodly success and *CHACHING*💰 Only Dis freakin ney can make that one add up..🤦🏼♀️
Yes. I wasn't the only one who felt that the Blue Fairy's role was so insignificant in this movie. She just shows up and then dips. Bruh the seagull got more screentime than her lmao.
This change also makes the Blue Fairy pretty irresponsible. In the original she would show up when Pinocchio was in danger to save him, actually taking responsibility for the life she created. She let him make his own choices, but when his bad decisions would go too far she would intervene. This Blue Fairy gives Pinocchio life and basically goes, "You're on your own kid."😑
Here they basically want to sell to the good modern catholic moms, who first check on their mommy Facebook groups if the cartoon is going to have evil sin and bad behavior. Someone think about the kids 🍺🔫🚬
@@inventions178 I truly hate that society treats children like they're completely moronic. We watched the original cartoons while we were younger and they didn't turn us into chain-smoking, violent drunkards. People complain that the younger generation can't cope with anything while at the same time, seriously trying to make it so they can't cope with anything. (I'm 28 for the record if it helps.)
What SPECIALLY makes 2022 Pinocchio so bad is that the point of the character since his creation by Carlo Collodi is that Pinocchio is kind of a cunt half of the time. He's not necessarily evil, but just like an actual kid his moral compass isn't that well developed and so he gets tricked easily and also does some pretty annoying stuff from time to time.
It’s so painful to see Pinocchio’s story be so wrongfully treated. I feel like American directors truly don’t get that it’s a deep and heartfelt story about human nature and growing up and admitting to your faults, and not a tale about the “american dream” and the savior complex that comes with it: Geppetto is a DIRT POOR father who gives away EVERYTHING he has in order to raise his only son (he literally sells the clothes that he’s WEARING to buy a school book for Pinocchio), who in turn is spoiled and mean and a liar, and takes his father’s sacrifices for granted and makes mistakes but ultimately learns his lesson, and through the remorse of Pinocchio and the unconditional love and forgiveness of Geppetto the two reunite in the end. If you want to see a more faithful adaptation of the novel then go watch 2019’s “Pinocchio” by Italian director Matteo Garrone
Spoiled, mean and a liar, if those traits have not been treated from childhood the person would grow into a rotten adult that no one would like to associate with. Am speaking from experience here, man they very salty, toxic.
@Fraction Facta This isn’t just an American problem. The problem is that it’s trying to get modernized. But yea I agree on the fact that Disney put no thought in this
@@Zamarae the way I see it, in “Pinocchio” from 1940 (and in the 2022 version even more so) Pinocchio is depicted as a good boy who wants to study hard but he’s a victim of mean spirited individuals who want to take adventage of him and stray him from the right path; in the novel, however, Pinocchio makes most bad decisions by (and because of) himself: he sells his school book to buy a ticket to Mangiafuoco’s show instead of going to school, he doesn’t want to work hard, he’s lazy and only wants to have fun. Also, in both movies, everybody is rich: the opening of the 1940 film shows Geppetto’s house with big rooms and a real fire in the fireplace, whereas in the original novel Geppetto was so poor he didn’t even have the money to buy wood for the fire and had instead painted a fire on the wall (so it’s even more significant that he decided to use the wood to build Pinocchio instead of keeping warm, and makes Pinocchio’s ungratefulness to his father’s sacrifices even more upsetting). As an outsider of American culture, it’s so blatant how their “heroes” are always kind-hearted and good from the start and are just victims of cruel people (on the other hand for example, in the novel by Collodi, Pinocchio kills the talking cricket). In both the novel and the movies Pinocchio redeems himself in the end, but whereas in the movies he does so by saving Geppetto from drowning ONCE, in the novel Geppetto falls very ill and for quite some time Pinocchio has to take care of him and work to earn enough money to support him: I think it’s much easier to “call a hero” someone who saves someone else from drowning (in a very hero-like, one of a kind, one chance in a lifetime kind of way), rather than recognize the merit of someone who for years puts the needs of a sick loved one above their own. Maybe “American dream” was not the right way to describe the “Americanization” that often seems to happen with adaptations from different cultures, but I hope you understand what I mean. For this story specifically, I believe that the contrast between Pinocchio’s selfishness, stubbornness and overall mean character, and Geppetto’s selflessness and unconditional love which eventually Pinocchio learns, is fundamental to get the message across.
side note: I am VERY excited to see Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio coming out later this year! It's a stop motion animation and looks really creative and I hope it gets the attention it deserves!
It was amazing. Especially with pleasure island being a fascist school for young men (meaning that it took place around 1930s-1940s) takes the ‘boys don’t come back as boys’ to a whole new meaning
I just feel bad for kids nowadays. The animations have taught me so much since childhood. They actually made sense. Now disney is "correcting" their past with live actions when it's not even necessary. These remakes are horrible, the meaning and creativity are reduced. I hope kids explore the animations, not taken away by the remakes.
I think kids these days will be fine, animation still exists as the new Pinocho movie was 3D animated, just because something is 2D doesn’t mean it will be superior. The real issue isn’t exactly animation, it’s big corporate businesses making lackluster films for the sake of money. They are getting desperate and it shows, and I think there will be some shift from big blockbuster movies to individual smaller studios, just how Disney was back in the day. Studios can’t relate to what is new and original and just simply try to remake things that worked in the past. Also the problem with “animation only being for children” and that’s why companies can’t make something original or creative. Why do you think RUclips is so popular among younger children? People put their art onto the world and get rewarded for it especially with animation side of RUclips. Kids will find interesting ways to be creative, my little sister who is 7 loves to draw and make things, and she watches cute little animation stories provided from streaming services. And these old Disney classics can be played anywhere so I suppose that’s the best part as well.
Hey man, the originals are still there and they can still watch them, just remember to tell them the crows from Dumbo are racist. Or better yet, with Pinocchio specifically I would say it's much more productive to read the book to them. It is genuine high art but it's still really funny and has a lot of valuable lessons.
The change of Jiminy Cricket seems to be a reflection on how Disney portrays their most popular and iconic characters in most media other than the movie they came from. In the original movie, Jiminy is an actual character who's more of a sidekick to Pinocchio than literally his omnipresent conscience, and we see him react in different ways throughout the film, however he's portrayed as this holier than thou teacher in most promotional media, like the educational videos or stuff like House of Mouse. A similar thing happened to Tinkerbell, who was bitchy and unlikable in the original Peter Pan film, but in most promotional media she was portrayed as this whimsical, magical fairy that can do wonders, and that thing was actually portrayed in her own films, where she doesn't resemble her original movie character on the slightest.
The way they removed all of Tinkerbell's sass and temper in her movies irritated me so much. It didn't even make sense when she kept her original personality in the books those movies were supposed to be based on (if I remember right).
Tinkerbell isn't perfect at all in her movies. She's still jealous and a bit egotistical, especially in the second movie. They did tone it down a lot though, which makes sense because in a movie where she is the protagonist, and a movie made for kids at that, she can't be a bitch. They just take those characteristics and make them her downfall in the movies, ie. She always gets in trouble for being jealous, selfish and mean.
the tinkerbell change was actually for the better since the original peter pan movie treated her (and other female characters) in a such misognistic way. they made her a likeable character with an actual fleshed out story and good friends that dont treat her like garbage like peter pan does
I haven't seen it yet, but I feel nothing could be worse than Mulan 2020: no songs (I wanted MORE), no sidekicks, different villains/love interest/supporting characters, different personality for the main character...it was a completely different movie.
@@jackyyrag So you don't like songs, find the new characters more interesting than the old, and want a power fantasy instead of an inspirational adventure. If it makes you feel better you are the minority being... focused on so there's no reason to care that most people dislike it. Oh yeah, the movie was filmed next to a concentration camp, have fun with that knowledge
@@helltaker6865 whoa idk why you felt the need to attack me for saying I liked the movie? And did not know about the concentration camps, thanks for letting me know
One benefit of this shitty remake existing is that it'll hopefully bring more eyes to the original. I just watched the 1940 version for the first time since childhood, and the animation alone is spectacular and worth admiring as an adult. The entire Monstro sequence is insane with how beautifully they animated the water, and basically any piece of its background art could pass as an artist's masterpiece, and yet Disney thought shoddy budget CGI could be a replacement.
Agreed! I watched the original film about two years ago and I'd forgotten what an amazing piece of storytelling it is. I watched breathlessly like a child wondering what would happen to Pinocchio next. The scenes with Lampwick changing into a donkey were marvelously terrifying! The scenes on the sea with Monstro were breathtaking and glorious. It's almost like the current filmmakers had no new vision for the film so they just piled more CG onto it hoping to 'hide lack of inspiration'. Tragic....
Those water effects, and all the others (like the sparkles on the Blue Fairy's gown), were done by Joshua ("Josh") Meador. He was so good at it that MGM borrowed him to do all the animated effects in "Forbidden Planet."
Sometimes, feel like they purposely do stuff like that. “Let’s make a remake of an older movie and people will go back and watch original and then we will get more money from them watching both. Plus, if people make posts and videos that’s even more attention!”
@@rosymaze Like making New Coke so that the older formula of Coke rebranded as Coca-Cola Classic will experience an uptick in sales as well as prevent the brand name from turning into a generic term like Xerox or aspirin.
I have a few things to point out why the 1940's is far better at telling it's story than the remake. When the audience first hears about Pleasure island, it's not when Pinocchio, it's in a meeting in a tavern with Honest John and the Coachman. The way Honest John reacts in fear at the thought of pleasure island sets the audience up to know something is wrong about that place. Because it was disscussed between the three of them in a shady tavern, it's implied that only these three know the true nature of the island. So when you see Pinocchio getting tricked into going to pleasure island, it's because John is getting paid to round of kids. The audience then finds out WHAT exactly is wrong with pleasure island when Jiminy Cricket finds out the kids are turning into donkies and runs off to save Pinocchio before it's too late. THIS SETS UP THE URGENCY OF THE NEXT SCENE which is when Lampwick transforms. THIS IS WHY THE SCENE IS SO TERRIFYING. The audience has been prepped to experience this trama. In the remake, if an audience member has never seen the original. The donkey transformation comes out of the blue. Sure Jiminy Cricket sees the donkys being carted away, but never discovers why there are so many donkies. The only reason the audience thinks pleasure island is bad is because Gepedo finds out Pinocchio went to pleasure island and is like "OH NO I HAVE TO GET HIM BACK!" This again implies that the LOCALS KNOW ABOUT PLEASURE ISLAND. AND THEY DO NOTHING TO STOP THE COACHMAN ROUNDING THEM UP.
Removing the alcohol and smoking ruins the message and the comedic timing that takes place before the terrifying transformation. They could have had so much fun incorporating Italian art and culture to this version. Also I am way more excited for Guillermo Del Toro's version coming out soon.
Disney had no choice it was clear that the rules of the company none of their projects will feature any reference to alcohol or beer because the last thing they want is angry letter from parents. But I do agree with you about exploring more Italian art and culture I did like the movie and I am looking forward to the other version coming from Netflix this didn't remake doesn't deserve all the hate is getting
@@animezilla4486 which is why it is better for filmmakers to explore streaming services like Netflix. They are more open to original ideas and there is less studio interference, so they don’t have to worry about the company ruining the story.
it's really fitting that the fact he STAYS a puppet instead of a real boy by the end of the "remake" because thats just what he is the entire time, a wooden character that does not change at all & learns nothing, no agency, a PUPPET, vs a character with flaws and mistakes who BECOMES a fleshed-out human boy ironic isnt it lol
@@inventions178 Learn what? He's already a good little boy. A bit naive, but still a very good boy. (in fact, he's unrealistically good for a child). I agree with ModerGurlz, everything that happened was not because he misbehaved but because he was put by others in that situation. While in the original HE is the one putting himself in those situation by misbehaving, ignoring advice and being greedy. That is why the story in the original is much more powerful and much better than this joke of a film. I'm really disappointed with this lame money-grabbing remake.
I eye-rolled so hard with the Chris pine joke. I get they try to make the name a pun, but it’s so cringy and as horribly cliche as seen with disappointing live action jokes
Ugh I know. What child is going to know who that actor is to find the reference funny? When movies do this, what relevance is a placement joke like that going to add 10 years later and onward?
I agree. Disney used to give me that magical feeling but now when I see Disney, I don’t feel anything anymore. I’m also so tired of the remakes and superhero stuff.
My dad fell asleep through this remake, and he's a regular defender of these live-action adaptions. He found the Buzz Lightyear reference with one of the clocks to completely shatter the immersion.
am i the only one infuriated by the fact that pinocchio, the puppet character, is cgi? like clearly they've made puppeteering in a movie work before in previous pinocchio films, and disney has the resources to make a pinocchio puppet (re: baby yoda) and i'm sure they'd be able to make a really good one!!!!!!!!! so WHY did they cgi him!!!!!!! it's the only classic movie about a puppet and they can't even get that right!!!!!!!!!
It's because puppeteers are unionized and cgi vfx artists aren't. That's why so many movies are 99% greenscreen nowadays, it's to save on money at the expense of vfx workers. The cgi studios are often forced into crunch as well
The Dark Crystal series on Netflix revived the Jim Henson puppets and blended it subtly with CGI and the results were BREATHTAKING! It was a true labour of love. It got soooo many accolades, and then what happens? They cancel series 2 😢 Even if you don't watch the series it is worth watching the "Making Of" just to see the puppeteers in action. They're so talented, funny and amazing! Such an underrated craft! Pinocchio would have been brilliant as a 'real' puppet!
Honestly, when I heard they were doing a live action remake of Pinocchio, I thought that it could potentially be one of the most warranted versions yet, so long as they did one thing… USE PUPPETS. For crying out loud, it’s a story about a puppet, it just seems so obvious! Disney… y’all own the Muppets. What’s the point of doing a live action remake of an animated film if you’re still going to be so reliant on terrible CGI anyway? I’m not saying that it’d completely redeem the cash grab nature of live action remakes, but they’d probably be a lot better with some some practical effects…
A Dark Crystal styled Pinocchio would be really unique and interesting. The stuff people can do with puppetry is incredible and I wish more movies explored it.
*Muppets Pinocchio, with everyone being a muppet except for Pinocchio, played by a human, who turns into a "real boy", AKA another muppet, at the end. *Take ALL of my money.*
Maleficent, Cinderella, and some of the beginning remakes were brilliant to me because they changed enough to keep it interesting but didn’t disrespect the original work. Now they just need to stop.
Maleficent didn't disrespect the original? You sure we saw the same movie? Maleficent was absolute garbage. The only fantasy film I've ever seen that completely failed to pull me in to the world. I actually saw it in theaters to boot. It's the most blatant anti-male woke BS Disney has ever made, and trashed just about every character. ... Aurora went from a character who, if a person cares to actually observe and interpret her body language, disposition, and actions, is smart, witty and playful. She had a deep sense of responsibility, and bravery to give up everything she knew and dreamed of for herself, to embrace an unknown life, for the good of others... to some idiot, aimless child. ... The Good Fairies went from selfless, loving mother figures, and true heros, to wishy washy idiots, who only undertook caring for Aurora because the King intimidated them into doing so. Will never get over how 'ground breaking' people try to say Maleficient is because 'mother love', when that is exactly what the Fairies did all along. They sacrificed their freedom to nurture and protect her. They rode the storm of her 'coming of age' moment when they had to reveal the truth to her, stood by her side through the fear of moving into a new phase of her life. Then in the finally, they risked their lives for her. Just because the kiss came from Prince Phillip doesn't change that their love was just as much what saved her. ... Maleficent went from one of the most badass villain in Disney, who was capable to long drawn out ventures of revenge just to prove she was not to be disrespected to... I mean, what did she even do? For a second she cursed a baby, and that was it. ... King Stephen and Prince Phillip were completely destroyed. The former went from a loving father in a desperate situation, to the personification of 'evil oppressive man'. The latter from a confident, battle trained Prince (as he would have been), to some clueless child. Watch Phillip in the original, absolutely suave in sing to his lady, and waltzing in the middle of the forest, and try to claim the bumbling kid, who is rendered unconscious and floated around the room does him justice. ... The movie was utter trash, and kicked off the 'have to tear down male characters to make female characters look good' trend.
@@saribeepo.o5111 I respect your opinion on the movie, and I agree that there were some flaws that could’ve been fixed. However, I personally liked the creative twist on telling her version and I thought that it kept a lot of elements similar. And in regards to it being “the most anti-men BS movie Disney has ever made”, you obviously haven’t seen the hot garbage that is the live action Mulan where it was literally bashing on men the whole time and got rid of her growth arc and basically just made her a Mary Sue. Don’t even get me started with recent Marvel cinema. But otherwise, I respect your opinion. In my eyes, I really enjoyed Maleficent. It’s personally just a movie that works for me. It’s okay if not everyone likes it. I just think that it’s intentions were far more innocent and were meant to expand the characters rather than just a cheap way to make money like recent live action adaptations are.
Maleficent? The bad Once Upon A Time ripoff that does NOT hold up to scrutiny and literally villainizes most of the original 'good' characters and makes Aurora a MORON in order to prop up Maleficent?
You took the words out of my mouth. What’s so fascinating about the original movie is that Pinocchio and Jiminy are two flawed characters that make mistakes, they took away all the scenes they do something wrong, made them flawless, inoffensive, just like everything else in the movie such as the root beer instead of beer and no smoking in Pleasure Island, they completely didn’t understand what made the original so good
You act as if the only things the kids did at Pleasure Island in the original was smoke and drink alcohol. In fact, in both the original and remake they steal things, insult each other, break things such as clocks and vandalize things. That’s misbehaving right there even without drug references.
The more remakes or “retales” I see from Disney, the emptier and soulless they become. It feels like it’s just for the money grab and a politically correctness checklist that has to be filled. Why casting an amazing actress for the blue fairy, brag about it to only show her ONCE?! Why is it that making mistakes is seeing so badly and characters have to be pure and immaculate all the time? The point of this story and many others is to show how humans can grow and become better with their good and bad decisions and actions… if you are “good and perfect” all the time what story is to be told? Also, the CGI for Pinocchio was horrible with his eyes in particular , they looked like stickers… I recommend strongly to watch the 2020 Italian version of Pinocchio where they used prosthetics and real actors to portrait ALL the characters, the cinematography is gorgeous, the characters are lovable and it is so far one of my favourite fairy tales.
Oh my! If you are so well versed in the 'how-to' of making productions, I highly recommend you get involved and make some stories! You seem highly passionate with a flair for detail. So why not? What's the worst that could happen, a bunch of criticism? Sincerely.
They built the most expensive rides at one of their parks ($500 million) and got all the money back in a few days on park tickets alone. They just recently raised their prices for admission this year. Walt built his parks with the philosophy of making them affordable to all families no matter what income. Can you afford to go to Disney? I can’t! Disney is an evil greedy company since Walt’s death.
The original Pinocchio is such a beloved, beautiful tale of morality. It actually makes me so sad to see how kids are being cheated by this new version. The horror from the original is part or what makes it stay with u. This film has none of what made the original unforgettable and effective
I’ve been reading Walt Disneys biography by Neal Gabler and what made Disney a pioneer in animation in the first place was due to how METICULOUS Walt Disney was about the animation his company produced. We’re talking redrawing finished animation multiple times. The animators had to look at their work and figure out how to make it better. These live action remakes are so lazy and soulless, Walt would be rolling in his grave right now. it really is a shame how Disney is completely ruining their reputation for a quick buck
Quick buck has always been the thing Walts animators at the time had no choice but to draw frame by frame (thats why things were less detailed and shorter) I mean, Walt didn't even make Mickey, he stole it from the guy that invented Oswald bc they were friends. Walt was always a money/idea mooch
The only remakes I love Is the first Alice in Wonderland. It is not a remake , but rather a sequel to the original story. I know It has it's flaws. But Tim Burton brought a more dark tone to the story. And it feels like it has a soul. Whereas these remakes are just useless. The only thing they do is that they are ruining the original fairy tale.
It’s for money but it’s also because copyright eventually expires and some of disneys work are getting old and they have to remake them to restart the clock on the copyright. Especially considering most of their works aren’t original but adaptations of works that are already public domain (fairytales etc) Somehow that makes it worse to me.
Even when they turned Monstro into a full-blown animalistic abomination in the live-action remake, I still found the original film’s Monstro much more of a threatening beast.
@@CrazyManhog the character itself reacts realistically in backrounds, shading, etc. but the model looks too cartoonish and more clay like rather than wood, which is pinoccio supossed to be made of.
You should definetely check the italian version of Pinocchio made by Matteo Garrone in 2019. They made most of the caracters with makeup and very little cgi and Pinocchio seems so real. Might not meet everyones taste but there are many brilliant italian actors in it and it is quite enchanting.
Basically Disney was worried about all the backlash that they could receive if they used the original script, so they did it like this and it backfired. For the person who made this video, thank you for watching this film so that way my family wouldn't have to. Heck, even my 10-year-old cousins who compared the film with the 1940s classic could tell that there is a huge difference.
I also like how the lying in the original didn't just lengthen his nose, but also made it more tree-like and unwieldy with gravity pulling the end down. It just getting longer and acting like a light ray is just funny.
NGL my gf and i stopped watching after the clock scene, we couldn’t stomach it. But from these few bits my biggest critique was “where is the color?!” I’ve felt this with the last live actions, they lack the color (and soul) of their predecessors [even Alice in wonderland, the dark palette fit the story and made sense] Im very afraid of the upcoming ones, as their teasers (Little mermaid) and set pictures (Snow White) are already lacking the color, I’m so tired of these attempts of realism
They want it to be realistic, and mature. I think it's passible to mature with your auduence, and make it realistic, but Disney remakes are doing it in the wrong way. You can be mature, and be colorfull at the same time. The two not oposits of eachother. Just look at Helluva Boss. And they don't know how to write realisum eather. In the live action remake of Mulan, they removed the songs, because they though it was unrealidlstic, when historicly speaking, it's not unrealidtic, but rather realistic. If we do reaserch we can find a lot of songs that solgers singed, when they preperd they weapens, and went to the fields to fight. This can be found in everywhere in the world up to WW2. And at least here in Europe a the people who worked in the fields, singed songs when they worked, because they were board whaile they worked, so to don't get tierd. (Sorry for the grammer, and speling mistakes English is not my first launvige)
@@Alexandraadftxr7052 yes that’s right, honestly the issue with these live action remakes is that they make wrong decisions and for the wrong reasons. They change what worked and replace it to something mediocre or plain dumb.
@@Alexandraadftxr7052 Snow White movie with Lily Collins is a good example. I don't understand why colorful stuff are "inmature". It's even something I have seen these late years with musicians as well...everything colorful is "childhish". We are in 2022, in a world where pink and blue aren't seen as color assigned for a specific gender but what we are seeing in the entertainment industry is a bad message to children. For example, anime. They have a variety of color palettes depending of the scene, colorful scenes doesn't mean the story isn't mature.
Go support Italian talent and watch the 2019 Pinocchio by Matteo Garrone: faithful to the book, even when it comes to the most disquieting aspects of it, but also doesn't shy away from its heartwarming moments. GREAT cast, even greater costumes and practical effects: the whole movie was storyboarded before shooting and it shows. Maybe it's not your cup of tea, but I guarantee you you'll get that 19th century fairytale feeling that too many movies are afraid to truly explore (only other movie that comes close for me is the 2005 "The Brothers Grimm")
Thank you so very much for raising the profile of this version. A great adaptation, and Roberto Benigni successfully gaining the forgiveness of the public through his touching portrayal of Geppetto, leagues ahead of Tom Hanks.
The original Pinocchio is a just-about-perfect movie and it's as though they decided to suck the life out of it in every conceivable way they could. Thanks for the heads up.
It seems that they're scared of giving the protagonist any flaw so they basically wrote a "purer" version of the original. I've been seeing this trend in many films, and I kinda understand why. People are afraid of making mistakes more than ever because our lives could be ruined over night for one wrong thing we did and it's harder than ever to flip the page with digital traces recording everything 24/7
Ugh... they actually managed to use the word "influencer" on fucking Pinocchio? Not only is that such a corporate word that nobody in any actual community uses, but every time it shows up in any kind of media, it makes me want to vomit.
@@cafeAmericano I mean, it still makes no sense...Chris Pine? Why? It would have been funnier if they said a name associated with another Disney character, like Robin Williams or, wow, Toy Story reference AND pun, "Woody"
Disney didn’t even make the scene where Pinocchio ‘dies’ in the live action, the scene was emotional in the original. But I really wanted to see that scene in 3D.
If you watch closely, as Jiminy is speaking the outro, Pinocchio actually does transform into a real boy (not like he isn’t animated anymore, he is, but his hinges and the wood lines are gone)
I just wish Disney would remake things like The Black Cauldron, Atlantis The Lost Empire, and Treasure Planet- movies that flopped and actually lend themselves for another shot instead of classics that are just fine. I mean COME ON The Black Cauldron is based on a book series of 5; Disney literally has the next Lord of the Rings on their hands!
The real animated Pinocchio had so much more personality.Removing the smoking and drinking was the worst decision they ever made,that's why this remake cannot even pass as good.Also in the old one,even the emotions and just how the fox tried to trick him,everything was somehow shown on a much deeper level.Even Pinocchio's immaturity and naiveness,that was the whole point in the old one.He was supposed to learn from his mistakes.This just seems so boring and not inspirational at all.Not all of Disney's cartoons were bright,but they had a message,that's how kids will learn from it.These are truly one iconic characters,it's a shame.What I loved about old Disney is that many characters were far from perfect,some were even problematic but they tried to fit them in,they didn't try to make them good or change them,they always showed their flaws.They tried to make them regret their decisions maybe afterwards,but they never changed their personalities.Pinocchio was capable of making mistakes just like everybody else,no one is perfect,it's just gross how they removed every part of him.
if y’all are interested in a good Pinocchio adaptation there’s a fully stop motion one by Guillermo Del Toro is coming out in December on Netflix. I haven’t heard much about the story but based on the trailer the visuals alone are enough to make it worth checking out. If you want to see more movies with actual care and effort put into them please support projects like this; stop motion takes ages to do but is a beautiful art form.
Pinocchio was never my favorite Disney movie - but this remake definitely made me appreciate the original more. Honest John and Gideon were lovingly animated, though. Can’t say the same for the rest of the CGI mess.
I think most film makers don't know how to tell good stories any more because they are so focused on pleasing everyone in the audience that they forget to give the message that no matter at what point you are in life, there is always room for character development and improvement.
I suspect it's also that there are too many with a say in the film, particularly corporate divisions. In the original, Walt Disney gave the directors the project and they ran things by him for approval, but they had the freedom to make something artistic and timeless and trusted the animators talents.
What really bothered me watching this is how it felt like Tom Hanks was all alone in-front of a green screen talking to himself for more than half the movie.
Haha my husband and I were joking that the behind the scenes for this movie is just Tom Hanks naked in a green screen room mumbling incoherently to himself. Everything, even the clothes are CGI 😂
When I heard that Pinocchio was going to be a live action film I knew they wouldn’t show him drinking, smoking or behaving badly. Modern Disney would never have the balls to show him misbehaving like the original. Although I was surprised that they did keep the donkey scene.
Dunno. People change. Feelings change. Life moves on. I honestly don't feel disney 'used' to be better. It's that we people have grown in our views, our tastes, or sight. And that we love our childhood memories :)
I did enjoy the remake, but it doesn't compare to the original. If anything, it only makes the first one stand out even more. I was also disappointed that they omitted the scene of Pinocchio searching for Geppetto UNDERwater. However, I did like that they explore the idea of how peer pressure can make people, especially children, make bad decisions.
My partner and I watched this over the weekend... Wow it was definitely the worst! We just sat there talking about how horrible and soulless the film is. It didn't make me feel anything but annoyance. They added too many characters too! I couldn't get attached to anyone because I never got to know any of the characters, not even Pinocchio himself!
From the past dozen of movies from Disney, it’s quite clear how the company sees their protagonists. It feels like they can’t have any of their characters have any flaw’s absolving the protagonist of any humanity. Humans make mistakes and are not perfect, that’s what makes them relatable.
Just about an hour ago I walked into the living room to see my younger siblings and cousins all watching this movie. One glance and I was like, "Bro, this looks like it was animated TEN years ago!"
apart from the horrendous writing in disney's live action remakes, the cgi is always so TERRIBLE. one of the amazing things about animation is that since it's so stylistic it conveys things you can't do as well in live action, and there are so many more possibilities with animation. this cgi remake, like the lion king, feels devoid of any emotion. it feels like we're watching clay robots
If anyone is interested in an ACTUALLY good (imo), creative and fresh take on the story/character, I HIGHLY recommend reading the graphic novel, "Pinocchio, Vampire Slayer" written by Van Jensen and WONDERFULLY illustrated by Dusty Higgins. It's both EXACTLY what it sounds like and SO MUCH MORE than what it sounds like. And yes, he uses his nose.
I mean, I doubt I'll ever watch this, but from the shots you're showing I was actually super impressed with the fox though? The animation and facial expressions are so lively and fun, especially when compared to the lion king remake. I may go look for just the fox clips, now. (Just did and it's even more impressive and entertaining in action, both the animation and the voice actor)
@The Dark Overlord yup, but she is correct in saying other characters aren't well designed and animated, and that's basically objective the fact the cgi artstyle is not consistent. Pinocchio has actually not a bad artstyle, I wish it was the one used for the lion king for example, but it definitely doesn't look great paired with the fox for example. (Jiminy is atrocious tho)
Am I right in remembering that Disney are remaking Robin Hood? Could be why so much effort was put into the fox, so the character could be re-used for that.
I recently came across the Walt Disney quote “We keep moving forward, opening new doors and trying new things because we’re curious and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths”. It’s jarring to realize how far removed Disney has come from this quote, although I was never interested in movies like Turning Red or the tv shows that Disney has recently turned out I can appreciate them because at least they were in fact doing something new and fresh. It also makes me think of the original Pinocchio, watching it over again it’s so clear that the staff and studio put their hearts and souls into making it, every detail is flawless and you can find yourself enjoying even the things that are happening in the background and that was just drawings, in comparison the remake was alive and yet it’s so bland and joyless.
I am way more excited for the Guillermo Del Toro version coming up soon. His version of Pinocchio is hosting the spirit of Gepetto’s deceased son and the film embraces the dark fantasy themes that works with Del Toro’s authentic. And his version of the blue fairy looks creepy and enchanting at the same time.
Speaking about the blue fairy « drama », it’s insane for me that everytime there’s POC characters people feel likes it’s a « woke » movie, even if the movie is from a fantasy/imaginary world or won’t even speak about racism and treated as a fun fact about the character.
Disney has been capitalizing on poc and racism for a decade now. They think if they put poc (especially women) in their movies, it will distract people from their racist past to which they only took attention to when someone actually pointed it out.
I think the issue is that there's been a repeated pattern of the cooperations using POC, female leads and queer characters as a response to any criticism that has nothing to do with the diversity in the film. It's sorta like this mix of gaslighting, bigoted machiavelian scapegoating. Bigoted in the sense that these cooperations use the suffering of marginalised characters for their own gain. Also, many of these characters aren't getting the same trestment as straight white characters do in terms of writing. So when ppl see diverse characters in the marketing they have low expectations, unfortunately. This can be fixed by writing good characters, and having stories that are so strong they don't warrant a fan backlash. There are bigot fans but they are in the minority. Most people are reasonable and just want good entertainment.
And it's usually the same kind of POC racelift too, which is a whole nother conversation but just goes to show they're really halfing it and doing it to go "here happy?" When no one was even complaining in the first place
The opening scenes of the original with all the clocks were some of my favorites as a kid. Every single one was so unique and fun and the music paired with it feels so nostalgic and perfectly Disney. Watching those scenes still gives me the same feeling of being an eight year old, walking down Main Street at Disneyland. Replacing those fun designs with product placement just makes me disappointed. First of all, you can't call them "Easter eggs" when they're so blatant and obvious. The point of Easter eggs is to search for them. Second of all, seeing something that felt so magical and special in the original replaced with only references to prior projects, makes me think Disney doesn't have faith in creating anything new. Like that magic was only possible in the past. It also makes me so upset seeing these movies cranked out without doing anything new when the originals worked so hard to be innovative. Pinocchio in particular is special for the opening where they hand animated a zooming shot over the town that was only possible with the multi plane camera. The animators working on it were the guys who taught the Nine Old Men. They were inventing this new medium in full length feature form as they went. Pinnochio had a lot riding on its shoulders to prove that Snow White's success wasn't a fluke. Seeing it reduced to an uninspired cash grab is so disheartening.
I'm not entirely sure anyone at Disney has seen a child as of late; they seem to act more according to their idea of what a child should be (absolutely perfect in every way).
It's ironic how to this day, the BEST live-action remake since 2015 is still Cinderella. That movie for me hit all the right notes and I still find myself rewatching it once in a while.
Oh, you mean the one that has almost nothing in common with the animated version except for the most basic plot point and therefore shouldn't even be considered a remake, but rather an entirely separate adaptation? That one?
@@stevenhiggins3055 Right. It's an almost completely new adaptation of the same story, but really not a remake of the previous film. I think that's a big part of why it holds up so much better than the other remakes.
I really liked Maleficent and how it subverted the genre expectations. I have to say I do prefer the first Maleficent movie to the original Sleeping Beauty film mainly because it takes such a well-known story and gives it a new, more modern twist. Most people who said negative things about it stated that it is way too different from the original… isn’t that the point of a remake though? Why would you rewatch a scene by scene remake of a movie you’ve already watched. The second Maleficent movie was beautiful, although way more predictable, so I didn’t like it as much.
Geppetto surviving the crash and then saying "Wow pinocchio, we would be dead if it weren't for your wooden leg puppet powers! I'm glad you're not a real boy" was such a weird way to end the movie. If you're gonna change it to be "you don't have to be a real boy", make it be something pinocchio discovers and not something geppetto tells him 2 minutes before the credits.
That was what ruined the entire thing for me. I always thought the story was learning to be a good human and him becoming real. Now that is thrown out? For what? He is still unique, why did they have to make that change?
I feel the reason why Disney won't put the effort into original cell animation is not only money but I think they don't know how to relearn the skill and effort put into that style of animation. 3D is cheaper in the long run too, in my opinion totally fine but it would just be nice to see some 2d animation once in a while.
They were actually going to jumpstart a traditional 2D training program earlier this year, where older Disney animators would train apprentices, but it got cancelled 🙃
@@Chiwowza what?? i heard about it but i can't believe they canceled it...it feels like we're slowly losing a genre of movie nowadays and that would've helped A LOT 😩
I'm looking forwards to the Guillermo Del Toro version coming out. That looks fantastic. Disney is doing what they've always done, slapped out a lackluster film in the attempt to drown out a rival version and attempting to keep hording copyrights to characters and folk stories that are well past going back to public domain.
Nah Beauty and The Beast is only due to the fact they kept all the original songs (par one which they replaced) and added more songs to it. I love Cinderella but there are literally no songs in it.
It won’t, but fortunately the next few remakes seem to be doing things differently. I really hope they remake Hunchback, because a live action musical adaptation would be INCREDIBLE.
What made a lot of earlier disney films work is that it was made for adults- Walt said so himself. I am convinced Disney is making these films for Gen z and younger and they just happen to get lucky that we adults also wanna pay to see our favorite films live.
I watched the live action remake of "Beauty and the Beast" because the original is one of my favorite Disney films of all time. I've seen it in the theater dozens of times and mainly sat in the front row to watch the drawings move past me on the screen. They took those beautiful designs for Lumiere, Cogsworth, Mrs. Potts and Chip and turned them into characters so bizarre that I couldn't even watch to the end of the film. It was abysmal! Seeing the trailers for 2022 Pinocchio seemed more hopeful but now that I see more of the film in these clips, it makes me realize that I would hate it. The proportions for Jiminy and Pinocchio are too tall for them to be cute. There's a delicate balance to these things and Disney seems to miss the mark when translating them to live action CG animation.
Beauty and the Beast is also my personal #1 Disney film and the live action version was infuriating. I only made it through the first song, turned it off and never went back. It was just too painful.
They DO look like Heartless. Maybe this is in indication that we will be giving him his comeuppance in Kingdom Hearts IV? (Not to mention Jiminy Cricket meeting Jiminy Cricket!)
When you showed shots of the new movie, especially 14:45 I actually gasped. Who where the poor souls tasked with animating this CG???? I`m an animation student and worker and I have very little words to describe the shittines of this shot. I`ll focus on the drink the kid has on his left hand. They try to make the foam shoot forwards towards the audience but it goes down into the right frame, doesn't match the depth of the scene also has an unrendered texture on it that`s lit like PLASTIC. When he moves the jug MOVES INDEPENDENTLY TO THE HAND. The poor animators try to hide it by smearing the frames. finally the liquid DISAPPEARS. I DONT CARE if they want to pass these "choices" as a style. Its not a style, its inconsistent. Why super render Pinocchio and the gang and also try to pass the humans and physical props as cartoony?? ITS SO BIZARRE. ALSO the clocks?? it would've been so cool to actually commission real life clocks for those designs, it wouldn't have made them any less cash grabby, but it was to ~expensive to do so I bet. rant over.
I watched the movie yesterday and it is truly awful. I remember watching the original version and pinocchio was relatable as he makes some mistakes and actually learnt from them suffering the consequences. but now he's just plain stupid and doesn't learn anything. the worst part is he didn't even become human! so the whole movie didn't do anything. He cannot go to school, he didn't learn the consequences of lying, nothing! (and the blue fairy didn't actually finish her job so why put pinocchio through this misery of trying to be a real boy) I feel like disney is constantly trying to paint the main characters as victims that they cannot do any wrongs, which makes it so offputting to see a movie where the characters didn't evolve didn't learn anything
I'm really glad that you mentioned the 1996 live action right at the end. I was like, "didn't they already make a live action?" Turns out, it was actually Universal, but it's still the better live action version it seems.
Nice review. I agree completely. My theory on why they didn't show Pinocchio walking under the water or why they didn't show him turn into a real boy is budget and time constraints that they didn't have the time to animate. That or, they didn't want a physical boy to come on set that looked nothing like the poorly animated version. All these remakes are terrible.
Which is kinda baffling, seeing as Disney definitely has the most financial resources of any animation studio ever. They own almost anything, how could there possibly be budget constraints? If that were true, it just goes to show once again that they don't even care about the end product anymore. Churn out a quick cash grab based on people's nostalgia and onto the next project it is! All the more reason to loathe the remakes.
ngl, i really liked the concept of fabiana's character and i thought she was cute in her introduction but it gets me so mad that they introduced her for NO reason other than to replace the blue fairy!
As someone who works with kids, the original showcases how kids often behave due to their lack of real life experience and understanding. One girl outright lied to me, saying she needed to go to the bathroom only to sneak off to play outside when the entire class was supposed to be inside. So yeah, the animated Pinocchio may be a scary movie but the lessons are vital for kids to learn. Heck, even teenagers since they are prone to rebellion against authority at that age. One could argue that adults today should be reminded of these lessons as well.
I sincerely hope that this live action release encourages people to revisit the 1940's animated Pinocchio, or even help some to discover it for the first time if they haven't watched it. It's been my absolute favourite movie for years and I'd love for it to get a resurge in popularity so that everyone can get a taste of the old Disney magic again
I know it wasn't made by Disney, but I feel like The Adventures of Pinocchio (1996) is one of the few adaptations of Pinocchio I enjoyed the most, especially as a kid. I know people definitely found the movie disturbing and weird, and looking back at it, it still is. But that movie stuck with me as it's one of my favorite adaptations of the story? A lot better than whatever Disney just put out. Also there's a scene where Pinocchio steps on Jimmy because he scared him... he was fine.
The 1996 movie's transformation was horrifying! It's in the trailer too. I think the implication in the new movie is that the transformation can be undone as soon as the kids decide to be responsible, or want their parents, or something.
What will happen when Geppeto dies? Does Pinocchio die with him or is he immortal? Being a real boy would mean that he could grow up and die of old age. How could he function on his own as a small wooden boy???? So many questions!
The decision to remove all references to smoking and drinking alcohol in favour of consuming candy and root beer not only removes the anti smoking and drinking message of the original, but basically punishes the children for doing typical childlike things.
I swear Disney lost their guts ~
@@maybe8985 couldn't agree more
seriously, it's like they didn't even watch or pay attention to the original
i swear, kids are gonna start being afraid that if they drink root beer, they’re gonna turn into donkeys.
I didn't watch it but damn I forgot how sensitive the companies are because of society being full of "cancellers" alright alright it's for kids yes but remember when there were guns and smoking in kids cartoons? and it wasn't cancelled by society?
this is why some of those reboots shouldn't exist. if Disney isn't brave enough to serve what the original did, then just don't do it.
@guzita
Yeah, because by not serving what the original did it's apparently that these remakes are mere cash-grabs.
Guess Disney execs are lucky that the casual movie-goer is ignorant enough to fall for this trap over and over again.
I know! I know! How about creating ORIGINAL STORIES?!
I'm honestly afraid what they're going to do with the little mermaid
I heard they were thinking of a Hunchback remake. That one, I'm truly afraid of-
I bet they'll scrap Hellfire, give the gargoyles more songs, make Frollo just a little racist, maybe a bit creepy, and make Phoebus some Mary Sue hot shot to make Esmeralda fall for him faster.
@@ravengyal well they are still doing it. Strange World is in like two months. We also have that Elemental, Elio and Inside Out 2. The live remakes however do feel like they were abit of a cash grab and disney never truly figure out of they want a shot for shot recreation or something truly different.
the only thing these live action disney remakes do nowadays is remove EVERY bit of personality, nuance, depth and complexity from the original animated counterparts and write in a couple new corny jokes, which is shocking because these are supposed to be "updated" versions of the classics...? why does disney feel like they need to dumb down their films to make them accessible for modern audiences?
It's almost entirely a reflection of how how hollywood execs see the rest of the population -- not as real people who appreciate all those traits, but as mindless consumers. I'm kind of more and more offended every time one of these comes out, honestly.
I disagree with you completely I think the best remake they did was The jungle book you know why because they changed that ending from the original which I appreciate that because the ending of the original movie was completely stupid
The remakes are awful, yet they keep making money. That's what Disney wants - as do the other entities that make reboots, sequels, etc. They don't take risks with new ideas, just recycle the old ones with existing fanbases.
To appeal to social justice warriors and to make money. Why else?
Not a liked opinion but the newer generation need a dumbed down version. I was just talking with some kids at work the other day and they said they didn’t like the animated movies only the real ones:( it was so disappointing to hear..
The fact that they turned Pinocchio into a victim rather than a participant in his trials is such a sad reflection of our toxic self esteem culture 🤦 you're not always an innocent victim of persecution, sometimes you're wrong and you need to learn something.
Thank you!!!
That's the main problem with these remakes. They're perfect and can never be wrong which is highly unrealistic to the real world. Yes, there can be external factors beyond your control but you also control yourself and the way your react to things. And there’s also the fact everyone makes mistake and that no one is perfect at everything you put in front of them. We all have to learn and grow to be the best version of ourselves and telling people that they’re perfect is disingenuous at best and toxic and harmful at worst.
A lot of people associate Disney with being this super sanitized company, but if you watch any of the Disney classics up until the Renaissance there is always an "edge" or slight darkness to them. I think this is part of what makes them classics. Our heroes have to experience the lows to appreciate the highs. For instance, in Cinderella her handmade dress is violently torn apart by her stepsisters. This is basically absent in the remake. She has to experience the lowest of the low which makes her transformation by the godmother all the more impactful. Disney is so concerned about hurting anyone's feelings they have stripped their classic stories of their "edge." It's all the more worse when we can compare the remakes with their originals and see how underwhelming they are.
That was my issue with "Tangled", too. The tone of the film was so 'jokey' that at no point did I feel that Rapunzel was in any peril with her Stepmother Gothel. She just seems like a kooky, singing eccentric that I never got invested in her story. By the end, I didn't really care and when Pasquale trips Mother Gothel, I felt that tiny element wiped away any of the pathos developed for his character. She could have easily just fallen and then it would have been poetic justice. It seems ever since "Shrek" arrived, Disney hasn't really understood their strengthens for storytelling and tries to shoehorn dull jokes wherever they can.
@@americantoycoon9206you might want to watch the series (starting with tangled before ever after) it gets pretty dark for a kids show. just look up decay incantation if you want to see what I mean
The old Disney 6-minute cartoons were definitely edgy by today’s standards. They showed characters like Daisy Duck pointing guns to their own heads in suicide attempts, teetering off dangerous cliffs, and nonchalantly using dangerous tools and explosives. On top of this, every other one of these shows seemed to have a “death” scene where some character sprung back up to life, making everyone happy at the end. It was a different era back then.
That's true, probably because the source material was dark in the first place for the majority of their films. Sleeping beauty etc.
@@queerqueen098 I have heard that before. Thanks for reminding me. I've never had the chance to watch the show, however. Disney classic animation has always been my marker for storytelling (I also create animation) so I'm critical when they fall short of the mark.
Pinocchio was such a goody two shoes in this movie and for what? The whole point of Jiminy is to symbolize that Pinocchio doesn't have an internal conscience, compelling him to make bad decisions and not give his situations much thought. If he's not a little shit that has a lesson to learn and already has a sense of morality, he's just Pinocchio the human trafficking victim who's always smiling.
exactly !! like the entire point of pinocchio is that he’s a bad kid and he learns from it. what’s the point if you just make him all good from the very beginning ??
They had him make the right decision every time which defeats the purpose.
I Don’t Think Pinocchio Is that bad i like the Movie have lot Fun Watching this Movie I think some of you are over React and too Harsh of this Remake bc I like some this Disney Remake Movie My Favorite Remake Disney is Beauty and The Beast
I’m still disturbed they let people get away with a mass child slave industry…
Ooouch. This needs to be the top comment.
At least we’re getting Guilermo Del Toro’s absolutely gorgeous stop motion adaptation of Pinocchio that seems to be a genuinely unique and original take on the source material
There's also a Pinocchio movie from 2019 (An Italian movie) That I've heard is good but yeh excited for Guilermo Del Toro's
I'm so glad you said that: I heard and was hyped that Del Toro was doing a version, and was afraid that THIS was it! Phew 😅
This is how Disney tricks people into going to the remix. They hire a well-known Director to make it, but they basically put so many restrictions on the Director leaving little to no creativity for them.
This is why I really like the live action Alice in Wonderland. It was different than the original and wasn't a complete remake. It also had a darker vibe to it too which Disney is too afraid to do anymore
@@graffiti.777 I don't even really count that one as a remake because it's not a retelling of the original story it's more kinda like a sequel to it following Alice as an adult RETURNING to Wonderland.
The weirdest thing to me was that they put so much emphasis on Geppetto's clock, that he cared about them so much, when in the original I always thought that the clocks were there to show Geppetto's creativity, eccentricity, and loneliness as he has all that time to make clocks. He made things for the sake of making them (kind of like Disney when the original came out).
That's what pisses me off about these remakes by Disney as of late. They're so needless and often bogged down with overly complicated garbage that the story doesn't need. It was done right the first time, Disney. Just release a 'Disney vault classic" edition or something and call it a day.
Of course most the clocks are Disney IP’s (intellectual properties) now. Kinda hilarious actually. It’s so obvious the Disney company are full of themselves and trying to sell their franchises right in our face. It’s a microcosm to the Bob Chapek era. Toy Story, Dumbo, Snow White, Maleficent, Lion King… even Geppetto’s clocks got the IP treatment.
@@frug5629 Society has reached such an absurd point of cultural & artistic bankruptcy, that you end up with things like this. A beloved family-oriented company like Disney, is down to cancelling itself through the vain venture of churning out remake after remake of its most well-know classics, in a bland, soulless, corporate packaging. Just throw a bit of Woke Powder into the mix and KABOOM!! All of the magic is gone.
@@rigelb9025 cancelling? woke??? why you just thrown in meaningless buzzwords that have no relation to the actual conversation? it’s a video about fucking pinocchio and you’re speaking like a Fox News presenter
There are two very important parts that are missing:
1. Pinocchio is supposed to save geppetto and die in the process. The Blue fairy is supposed to fulfill her promise and make Pinocchio a little boy once he proves himself brave and unselfish. That brings Pinocchio back to life. They all celebrate by dancing with the clock music.
2. The Blue fairy is supposed to revisit Pinocchio in Stromboli's wagon to explain how his nose works.
"2. The Blue fairy is supposed to revisit Pinocchio in Stromboli's wagon to explain how his nose works." Huh, no time for that in this skimmed rush to the end of a movie.
does this happen in the animated movie?
@@joshuanesbit yeah. That's what made the original movie so sad. Pinocchio died as a wooden boy and it was only geppetto's deepest wish that brought him back as a human.
Jiminy Cricket: “In his heart, Pinocchio was as real as any boy could ever be!”
Translation: “In reality, the CGI animators decided it was too much work to recreate the transformation scene so we’ll just leave the ending ambiguous to for the sake of time and money!”
I think it actually has more to do with today's social political messaging which woke Disney certainly is a major player in. If you just wish it so, then it of course must be true, such as with gender identity.
@@chrisb.1214 Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s both. The current Disney formula is: Laziness/remakes x sequels + Pandering to audience = ungodly success and *CHACHING*💰
Only Dis freakin ney can make that one add up..🤦🏼♀️
If most of your main characters need to be CGIed in, maybe a live action adaptation just wasn't the move.
Tell that to the Lion King
@@juliamavroidi8601 to be fair all cgi animals do work out sometimes like in legends of gahoole
Yes. I wasn't the only one who felt that the Blue Fairy's role was so insignificant in this movie. She just shows up and then dips. Bruh the seagull got more screentime than her lmao.
they did my girl Cynthia Erivo so dirty
Ditto, the Blue Fairy is such an iconic aspect of the original story, and they really did both the character and Cynthia a major disservice.
I thought The Blue Fairy would look like herself in the original movie. Turns out I was wrong.
This change also makes the Blue Fairy pretty irresponsible. In the original she would show up when Pinocchio was in danger to save him, actually taking responsibility for the life she created. She let him make his own choices, but when his bad decisions would go too far she would intervene. This Blue Fairy gives Pinocchio life and basically goes, "You're on your own kid."😑
She needed hair too lol
These writing mistakes seem like an over correction for "problematic" characters. Instead of interesting nuance, we get bland dumbed down remakes.
Here they basically want to sell to the good modern catholic moms, who first check on their mommy Facebook groups if the cartoon is going to have evil sin and bad behavior. Someone think about the kids 🍺🔫🚬
@@ilpensatore1462 Not really. They're just not allowed to advertise guns, beer or cigarettes in a kids movie....
@@inventions178 I truly hate that society treats children like they're completely moronic. We watched the original cartoons while we were younger and they didn't turn us into chain-smoking, violent drunkards. People complain that the younger generation can't cope with anything while at the same time, seriously trying to make it so they can't cope with anything. (I'm 28 for the record if it helps.)
What SPECIALLY makes 2022 Pinocchio so bad is that the point of the character since his creation by Carlo Collodi is that Pinocchio is kind of a cunt half of the time. He's not necessarily evil, but just like an actual kid his moral compass isn't that well developed and so he gets tricked easily and also does some pretty annoying stuff from time to time.
@@inventions178 Pinocchio cartoon didn't advertise alchool and smoke
Damn It the Kids turn in donkeys right After using those
It’s so painful to see Pinocchio’s story be so wrongfully treated. I feel like American directors truly don’t get that it’s a deep and heartfelt story about human nature and growing up and admitting to your faults, and not a tale about the “american dream” and the savior complex that comes with it: Geppetto is a DIRT POOR father who gives away EVERYTHING he has in order to raise his only son (he literally sells the clothes that he’s WEARING to buy a school book for Pinocchio), who in turn is spoiled and mean and a liar, and takes his father’s sacrifices for granted and makes mistakes but ultimately learns his lesson, and through the remorse of Pinocchio and the unconditional love and forgiveness of Geppetto the two reunite in the end. If you want to see a more faithful adaptation of the novel then go watch 2019’s “Pinocchio” by Italian director Matteo Garrone
I agree except not sure where the “American dream” idea falls into this besides that it is American-made.
America made the old Disney films so America isn’t the problem obviously 😑
Spoiled, mean and a liar, if those traits have not been treated from childhood the person would grow into a rotten adult that no one would like to associate with.
Am speaking from experience here, man they very salty, toxic.
@Fraction Facta This isn’t just an American problem. The problem is that it’s trying to get modernized. But yea I agree on the fact that Disney put no thought in this
@@Zamarae the way I see it, in “Pinocchio” from 1940 (and in the 2022 version even more so) Pinocchio is depicted as a good boy who wants to study hard but he’s a victim of mean spirited individuals who want to take adventage of him and stray him from the right path; in the novel, however, Pinocchio makes most bad decisions by (and because of) himself: he sells his school book to buy a ticket to Mangiafuoco’s show instead of going to school, he doesn’t want to work hard, he’s lazy and only wants to have fun. Also, in both movies, everybody is rich: the opening of the 1940 film shows Geppetto’s house with big rooms and a real fire in the fireplace, whereas in the original novel Geppetto was so poor he didn’t even have the money to buy wood for the fire and had instead painted a fire on the wall (so it’s even more significant that he decided to use the wood to build Pinocchio instead of keeping warm, and makes Pinocchio’s ungratefulness to his father’s sacrifices even more upsetting). As an outsider of American culture, it’s so blatant how their “heroes” are always kind-hearted and good from the start and are just victims of cruel people (on the other hand for example, in the novel by Collodi, Pinocchio kills the talking cricket). In both the novel and the movies Pinocchio redeems himself in the end, but whereas in the movies he does so by saving Geppetto from drowning ONCE, in the novel Geppetto falls very ill and for quite some time Pinocchio has to take care of him and work to earn enough money to support him: I think it’s much easier to “call a hero” someone who saves someone else from drowning (in a very hero-like, one of a kind, one chance in a lifetime kind of way), rather than recognize the merit of someone who for years puts the needs of a sick loved one above their own. Maybe “American dream” was not the right way to describe the “Americanization” that often seems to happen with adaptations from different cultures, but I hope you understand what I mean. For this story specifically, I believe that the contrast between Pinocchio’s selfishness, stubbornness and overall mean character, and Geppetto’s selflessness and unconditional love which eventually Pinocchio learns, is fundamental to get the message across.
side note: I am VERY excited to see Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio coming out later this year! It's a stop motion animation and looks really creative and I hope it gets the attention it deserves!
That will be much better
And it is, it is wonderful, one of the best animated film I have ever seen
It just won an Oscar 🤩🤩
It was amazing. Especially with pleasure island being a fascist school for young men (meaning that it took place around 1930s-1940s) takes the ‘boys don’t come back as boys’ to a whole new meaning
I just feel bad for kids nowadays. The animations have taught me so much since childhood. They actually made sense.
Now disney is "correcting" their past with live actions when it's not even necessary. These remakes are horrible, the meaning and creativity are reduced. I hope kids explore the animations, not taken away by the remakes.
I think kids these days will be fine, animation still exists as the new Pinocho movie was 3D animated, just because something is 2D doesn’t mean it will be superior.
The real issue isn’t exactly animation, it’s big corporate businesses making lackluster films for the sake of money. They are getting desperate and it shows, and I think there will be some shift from big blockbuster movies to individual smaller studios, just how Disney was back in the day. Studios can’t relate to what is new and original and just simply try to remake things that worked in the past.
Also the problem with “animation only being for children” and that’s why companies can’t make something original or creative. Why do you think RUclips is so popular among younger children? People put their art onto the world and get rewarded for it especially with animation side of RUclips.
Kids will find interesting ways to be creative, my little sister who is 7 loves to draw and make things, and she watches cute little animation stories provided from streaming services. And these old Disney classics can be played anywhere so I suppose that’s the best part as well.
Kids can ways watch the original movies anyway, they're not going anywhere
@@heyitsmira17 but are they watching them?
@@fabiofuoco depends on their parents ig
Hey man, the originals are still there and they can still watch them, just remember to tell them the crows from Dumbo are racist.
Or better yet, with Pinocchio specifically I would say it's much more productive to read the book to them. It is genuine high art but it's still really funny and has a lot of valuable lessons.
The change of Jiminy Cricket seems to be a reflection on how Disney portrays their most popular and iconic characters in most media other than the movie they came from. In the original movie, Jiminy is an actual character who's more of a sidekick to Pinocchio than literally his omnipresent conscience, and we see him react in different ways throughout the film, however he's portrayed as this holier than thou teacher in most promotional media, like the educational videos or stuff like House of Mouse.
A similar thing happened to Tinkerbell, who was bitchy and unlikable in the original Peter Pan film, but in most promotional media she was portrayed as this whimsical, magical fairy that can do wonders, and that thing was actually portrayed in her own films, where she doesn't resemble her original movie character on the slightest.
The way they removed all of Tinkerbell's sass and temper in her movies irritated me so much. It didn't even make sense when she kept her original personality in the books those movies were supposed to be based on (if I remember right).
a reflection of the ppl who works and supports modern disney, all they are good for is to insult the audience
Tinkerbell isn't perfect at all in her movies. She's still jealous and a bit egotistical, especially in the second movie. They did tone it down a lot though, which makes sense because in a movie where she is the protagonist, and a movie made for kids at that, she can't be a bitch. They just take those characteristics and make them her downfall in the movies, ie. She always gets in trouble for being jealous, selfish and mean.
the tinkerbell change was actually for the better since the original peter pan movie treated her (and other female characters) in a such misognistic way. they made her a likeable character with an actual fleshed out story and good friends that dont treat her like garbage like peter pan does
@@babyblue3717 honestly the tinkerbell movies are great as its own thing. I don’t see that tinkerbell as the same one in peter pan tho.
I haven't seen it yet, but I feel nothing could be worse than Mulan 2020: no songs (I wanted MORE), no sidekicks, different villains/love interest/supporting characters, different personality for the main character...it was a completely different movie.
I actually liked Mulan for those reasons 🤣 based on the comments tho, I am in the minority
@@jackyyrag So you don't like songs, find the new characters more interesting than the old, and want a power fantasy instead of an inspirational adventure. If it makes you feel better you are the minority being... focused on so there's no reason to care that most people dislike it. Oh yeah, the movie was filmed next to a concentration camp, have fun with that knowledge
@@helltaker6865 whoa idk why you felt the need to attack me for saying I liked the movie? And did not know about the concentration camps, thanks for letting me know
@@jackyyrag ....you must think you're soooo quirky
@@OReily08080 I'm too old for that nonsense, I was just sharing that I liked it 😭
One benefit of this shitty remake existing is that it'll hopefully bring more eyes to the original. I just watched the 1940 version for the first time since childhood, and the animation alone is spectacular and worth admiring as an adult. The entire Monstro sequence is insane with how beautifully they animated the water, and basically any piece of its background art could pass as an artist's masterpiece, and yet Disney thought shoddy budget CGI could be a replacement.
Agreed! I watched the original film about two years ago and I'd forgotten what an amazing piece of storytelling it is. I watched breathlessly like a child wondering what would happen to Pinocchio next. The scenes with Lampwick changing into a donkey were marvelously terrifying! The scenes on the sea with Monstro were breathtaking and glorious. It's almost like the current filmmakers had no new vision for the film so they just piled more CG onto it hoping to 'hide lack of inspiration'. Tragic....
I started watching the 1940 one after this and yes even the puppet physics and water splashes just a masterpiece
Those water effects, and all the others (like the sparkles on the Blue Fairy's gown), were done by Joshua ("Josh") Meador. He was so good at it that MGM borrowed him to do all the animated effects in "Forbidden Planet."
Sometimes, feel like they purposely do stuff like that. “Let’s make a remake of an older movie and people will go back and watch original and then we will get more money from them watching both. Plus, if people make posts and videos that’s even more attention!”
@@rosymaze Like making New Coke so that the older formula of Coke rebranded as Coca-Cola Classic will experience an uptick in sales as well as prevent the brand name from turning into a generic term like Xerox or aspirin.
I have a few things to point out why the 1940's is far better at telling it's story than the remake.
When the audience first hears about Pleasure island, it's not when Pinocchio, it's in a meeting in a tavern with Honest John and the Coachman. The way Honest John reacts in fear at the thought of pleasure island sets the audience up to know something is wrong about that place. Because it was disscussed between the three of them in a shady tavern, it's implied that only these three know the true nature of the island. So when you see Pinocchio getting tricked into going to pleasure island, it's because John is getting paid to round of kids.
The audience then finds out WHAT exactly is wrong with pleasure island when Jiminy Cricket finds out the kids are turning into donkies and runs off to save Pinocchio before it's too late. THIS SETS UP THE URGENCY OF THE NEXT SCENE which is when Lampwick transforms. THIS IS WHY THE SCENE IS SO TERRIFYING. The audience has been prepped to experience this trama.
In the remake, if an audience member has never seen the original. The donkey transformation comes out of the blue. Sure Jiminy Cricket sees the donkys being carted away, but never discovers why there are so many donkies. The only reason the audience thinks pleasure island is bad is because Gepedo finds out Pinocchio went to pleasure island and is like "OH NO I HAVE TO GET HIM BACK!"
This again implies that the LOCALS KNOW ABOUT PLEASURE ISLAND. AND THEY DO NOTHING TO STOP THE COACHMAN ROUNDING THEM UP.
This is a perfect comparison between well-organized, thoughtful storytelling and lazy storytelling! It really makes a difference
I hate your pfp
Removing the alcohol and smoking ruins the message and the comedic timing that takes place before the terrifying transformation. They could have had so much fun incorporating Italian art and culture to this version. Also I am way more excited for Guillermo Del Toro's version coming out soon.
Disney had no choice it was clear that the rules of the company none of their projects will feature any reference to alcohol or beer because the last thing they want is angry letter from parents. But I do agree with you about exploring more Italian art and culture I did like the movie and I am looking forward to the other version coming from Netflix this didn't remake doesn't deserve all the hate is getting
Guillermo Del Toro will ramp up the horror factor--maybe show Lampwick's fate as he dies of exhaustion from work.
I’m still disturbed they let people get away with a mass child slave industry…
@@animezilla4486 which is why it is better for filmmakers to explore streaming services like Netflix. They are more open to original ideas and there is less studio interference, so they don’t have to worry about the company ruining the story.
@@devchekhov7512 right he is not scared to explore the dark themes in fairy tales.
it's really fitting that the fact he STAYS a puppet instead of a real boy by the end of the "remake" because thats just what he is the entire time, a wooden character that does not change at all & learns nothing, no agency, a PUPPET, vs a character with flaws and mistakes who BECOMES a fleshed-out human boy
ironic isnt it lol
But like he kinda does learn and change.
@@inventions178 and that was?
@@inventions178 Learn what? He's already a good little boy. A bit naive, but still a very good boy. (in fact, he's unrealistically good for a child). I agree with ModerGurlz, everything that happened was not because he misbehaved but because he was put by others in that situation. While in the original HE is the one putting himself in those situation by misbehaving, ignoring advice and being greedy.
That is why the story in the original is much more powerful and much better than this joke of a film. I'm really disappointed with this lame money-grabbing remake.
I think it’s ironic that in a movie made PURELY a for money, Disney couldn’t afford to pay just one more actor for the last 15 minutes of the movie
No he changed into a real boy as he was walking with Geppetto
I eye-rolled so hard with the Chris pine joke. I get they try to make the name a pun, but it’s so cringy and as horribly cliche as seen with disappointing live action jokes
Ugh I know. What child is going to know who that actor is to find the reference funny? When movies do this, what relevance is a placement joke like that going to add 10 years later and onward?
I saw this with an 8 year old and after seeing the don’t worry darling drama so I was laughing at the “adult” joke
It was so bad and so out of the blue that it's the only joked I laughed at haha
I don’t know why I didn’t turn off the movie then. I hated that joke.
Thats it, its literally just a fucking joke lmao
I think people have come to realize that Disney has lost its "Disney" magic and now they don't have faith in their remakes/movies.
I think the expectation for Disney 'magic' has become way over hyped.
I agree. Disney used to give me that magical feeling but now when I see Disney, I don’t feel anything anymore. I’m also so tired of the remakes and superhero stuff.
My dad fell asleep through this remake, and he's a regular defender of these live-action adaptions. He found the Buzz Lightyear reference with one of the clocks to completely shatter the immersion.
It was lost in 2001, where have you people been? The Emperor's New Groove was the last true Disney masterpiece.
@@calebsanchez1988
Guess you haven't watched 'Lilo & Stitch'.
am i the only one infuriated by the fact that pinocchio, the puppet character, is cgi? like clearly they've made puppeteering in a movie work before in previous pinocchio films, and disney has the resources to make a pinocchio puppet (re: baby yoda) and i'm sure they'd be able to make a really good one!!!!!!!!! so WHY did they cgi him!!!!!!! it's the only classic movie about a puppet and they can't even get that right!!!!!!!!!
That’s fair. They totally could have built him!
It's because puppeteers are unionized and cgi vfx artists aren't. That's why so many movies are 99% greenscreen nowadays, it's to save on money at the expense of vfx workers. The cgi studios are often forced into crunch as well
The Dark Crystal series on Netflix revived the Jim Henson puppets and blended it subtly with CGI and the results were BREATHTAKING! It was a true labour of love. It got soooo many accolades, and then what happens? They cancel series 2 😢 Even if you don't watch the series it is worth watching the "Making Of" just to see the puppeteers in action. They're so talented, funny and amazing! Such an underrated craft! Pinocchio would have been brilliant as a 'real' puppet!
@@wildthornrose YOU!!!!! you get it!!!!!!!!!
Honestly, when I heard they were doing a live action remake of Pinocchio, I thought that it could potentially be one of the most warranted versions yet, so long as they did one thing… USE PUPPETS. For crying out loud, it’s a story about a puppet, it just seems so obvious! Disney… y’all own the Muppets. What’s the point of doing a live action remake of an animated film if you’re still going to be so reliant on terrible CGI anyway? I’m not saying that it’d completely redeem the cash grab nature of live action remakes, but they’d probably be a lot better with some some practical effects…
Disney is at beef with the US puppeteer unionwhich is also why they don't do much with the muppets ip anymore
A Dark Crystal styled Pinocchio would be really unique and interesting. The stuff people can do with puppetry is incredible and I wish more movies explored it.
*Muppets Pinocchio, with everyone being a muppet except for Pinocchio, played by a human, who turns into a "real boy", AKA another muppet, at the end. *Take ALL of my money.*
@@MegaChickenfish The movie we deserved
@@MegaChickenfish I'd drain my bank account for something like that.
Maleficent, Cinderella, and some of the beginning remakes were brilliant to me because they changed enough to keep it interesting but didn’t disrespect the original work. Now they just need to stop.
They're never going to stop as long as they're making money
Maleficent didn't disrespect the original? You sure we saw the same movie? Maleficent was absolute garbage. The only fantasy film I've ever seen that completely failed to pull me in to the world. I actually saw it in theaters to boot. It's the most blatant anti-male woke BS Disney has ever made, and trashed just about every character.
...
Aurora went from a character who, if a person cares to actually observe and interpret her body language, disposition, and actions, is smart, witty and playful. She had a deep sense of responsibility, and bravery to give up everything she knew and dreamed of for herself, to embrace an unknown life, for the good of others... to some idiot, aimless child.
...
The Good Fairies went from selfless, loving mother figures, and true heros, to wishy washy idiots, who only undertook caring for Aurora because the King intimidated them into doing so. Will never get over how 'ground breaking' people try to say Maleficient is because 'mother love', when that is exactly what the Fairies did all along. They sacrificed their freedom to nurture and protect her. They rode the storm of her 'coming of age' moment when they had to reveal the truth to her, stood by her side through the fear of moving into a new phase of her life. Then in the finally, they risked their lives for her. Just because the kiss came from Prince Phillip doesn't change that their love was just as much what saved her.
...
Maleficent went from one of the most badass villain in Disney, who was capable to long drawn out ventures of revenge just to prove she was not to be disrespected to... I mean, what did she even do? For a second she cursed a baby, and that was it.
...
King Stephen and Prince Phillip were completely destroyed. The former went from a loving father in a desperate situation, to the personification of 'evil oppressive man'. The latter from a confident, battle trained Prince (as he would have been), to some clueless child. Watch Phillip in the original, absolutely suave in sing to his lady, and waltzing in the middle of the forest, and try to claim the bumbling kid, who is rendered unconscious and floated around the room does him justice.
...
The movie was utter trash, and kicked off the 'have to tear down male characters to make female characters look good' trend.
@@saribeepo.o5111 I respect your opinion on the movie, and I agree that there were some flaws that could’ve been fixed. However, I personally liked the creative twist on telling her version and I thought that it kept a lot of elements similar. And in regards to it being “the most anti-men BS movie Disney has ever made”, you obviously haven’t seen the hot garbage that is the live action Mulan where it was literally bashing on men the whole time and got rid of her growth arc and basically just made her a Mary Sue. Don’t even get me started with recent Marvel cinema.
But otherwise, I respect your opinion. In my eyes, I really enjoyed Maleficent. It’s personally just a movie that works for me. It’s okay if not everyone likes it. I just think that it’s intentions were far more innocent and were meant to expand the characters rather than just a cheap way to make money like recent live action adaptations are.
Maleficent? The bad Once Upon A Time ripoff that does NOT hold up to scrutiny and literally villainizes most of the original 'good' characters and makes Aurora a MORON in order to prop up Maleficent?
Cruella too. WE NEED more remakes with a different take instead of the old story being ruined with details that doesn't work
You took the words out of my mouth. What’s so fascinating about the original movie is that Pinocchio and Jiminy are two flawed characters that make mistakes, they took away all the scenes they do something wrong, made them flawless, inoffensive, just like everything else in the movie such as the root beer instead of beer and no smoking in Pleasure Island, they completely didn’t understand what made the original so good
You act as if the only things the kids did at Pleasure Island in the original was smoke and drink alcohol. In fact, in both the original and remake they steal things, insult each other, break things such as clocks and vandalize things. That’s misbehaving right there even without drug references.
The more remakes or “retales” I see from Disney, the emptier and soulless they become. It feels like it’s just for the money grab and a politically correctness checklist that has to be filled. Why casting an amazing actress for the blue fairy, brag about it to only show her ONCE?! Why is it that making mistakes is seeing so badly and characters have to be pure and immaculate all the time? The point of this story and many others is to show how humans can grow and become better with their good and bad decisions and actions… if you are “good and perfect” all the time what story is to be told? Also, the CGI for Pinocchio was horrible with his eyes in particular , they looked like stickers… I recommend strongly to watch the 2020 Italian version of Pinocchio where they used prosthetics and real actors to portrait ALL the characters, the cinematography is gorgeous, the characters are lovable and it is so far one of my favourite fairy tales.
Oh my! If you are so well versed in the 'how-to' of making productions, I highly recommend you get involved and make some stories! You seem highly passionate with a flair for detail. So why not? What's the worst that could happen, a bunch of criticism? Sincerely.
They built the most expensive rides at one of their parks ($500 million) and got all the money back in a few days on park tickets alone. They just recently raised their prices for admission this year. Walt built his parks with the philosophy of making them affordable to all families no matter what income. Can you afford to go to Disney? I can’t! Disney is an evil greedy company since Walt’s death.
Agreed! She didn’t even return at the end to turn him into a real boy a-la- the 1940s version
Edited: 1940, NOT 1840
The original Pinocchio is such a beloved, beautiful tale of morality. It actually makes me so sad to see how kids are being cheated by this new version. The horror from the original is part or what makes it stay with u. This film has none of what made the original unforgettable and effective
I’ve been reading Walt Disneys biography by Neal Gabler and what made Disney a pioneer in animation in the first place was due to how METICULOUS Walt Disney was about the animation his company produced. We’re talking redrawing finished animation multiple times. The animators had to look at their work and figure out how to make it better. These live action remakes are so lazy and soulless, Walt would be rolling in his grave right now. it really is a shame how Disney is completely ruining their reputation for a quick buck
Soulless is exactly the right word for these movies. The remakes, like Disney corporation itself, have a dollar sign where their hearts should be.
Quick buck has always been the thing
Walts animators at the time had no choice but to draw frame by frame (thats why things were less detailed and shorter)
I mean, Walt didn't even make Mickey, he stole it from the guy that invented Oswald bc they were friends. Walt was always a money/idea mooch
@@The_Jerkinator I had known about the steal, but forgot it in recent years. Disney carries the DNA of Walt in its soullessness.
The only remakes I love Is the first Alice in Wonderland. It is not a remake , but rather a sequel to the original story. I know It has it's flaws. But Tim Burton brought a more dark tone to the story. And it feels like it has a soul. Whereas these remakes are just useless. The only thing they do is that they are ruining the original fairy tale.
It’s for money but it’s also because copyright eventually expires and some of disneys work are getting old and they have to remake them to restart the clock on the copyright.
Especially considering most of their works aren’t original but adaptations of works that are already public domain (fairytales etc)
Somehow that makes it worse to me.
Even when they turned Monstro into a full-blown animalistic abomination in the live-action remake, I still found the original film’s Monstro much more of a threatening beast.
Same
The fact he was somehow pretty fast for a huge creature is terrifying
Nah whales aren’t harmful and they couldn’t fit in one
@@cajunking5987The only reason why Monstro goes after Pinocchio and Gepetto is because they pissed him off.
what also bothers me is how unrealistic the cgi on pinoccio looks compared to other characters.
He looks realistic enough???
@@CrazyManhog the character itself reacts realistically in backrounds, shading, etc. but the model looks too cartoonish and more clay like rather than wood, which is pinoccio supossed to be made of.
@@stardusst I love the username, it’s nice to see someone who is also depressed on here :)
@@roxanne_ man are there people on here who aren't depressed? Probably but I don't know them 🥲
You should definetely check the italian version of Pinocchio made by Matteo Garrone in 2019. They made most of the caracters with makeup and very little cgi and Pinocchio seems so real. Might not meet everyones taste but there are many brilliant italian actors in it and it is quite enchanting.
Basically Disney was worried about all the backlash that they could receive if they used the original script, so they did it like this and it backfired.
For the person who made this video, thank you for watching this film so that way my family wouldn't have to.
Heck, even my 10-year-old cousins who compared the film with the 1940s classic could tell that there is a huge difference.
I also like how the lying in the original didn't just lengthen his nose, but also made it more tree-like and unwieldy with gravity pulling the end down. It just getting longer and acting like a light ray is just funny.
NGL my gf and i stopped watching after the clock scene, we couldn’t stomach it. But from these few bits my biggest critique was “where is the color?!” I’ve felt this with the last live actions, they lack the color (and soul) of their predecessors [even Alice in wonderland, the dark palette fit the story and made sense] Im very afraid of the upcoming ones, as their teasers (Little mermaid) and set pictures (Snow White) are already lacking the color, I’m so tired of these attempts of realism
They want it to be realistic, and mature. I think it's passible to mature with your auduence, and make it realistic, but Disney remakes are doing it in the wrong way. You can be mature, and be colorfull at the same time. The two not oposits of eachother. Just look at Helluva Boss. And they don't know how to write realisum eather. In the live action remake of Mulan, they removed the songs, because they though it was unrealidlstic, when historicly speaking, it's not unrealidtic, but rather realistic. If we do reaserch we can find a lot of songs that solgers singed, when they preperd they weapens, and went to the fields to fight. This can be found in everywhere in the world up to WW2. And at least here in Europe a the people who worked in the fields, singed songs when they worked, because they were board whaile they worked, so to don't get tierd. (Sorry for the grammer, and speling mistakes English is not my first launvige)
What clock scene?
@@Alexandraadftxr7052 yes that’s right, honestly the issue with these live action remakes is that they make wrong decisions and for the wrong reasons. They change what worked and replace it to something mediocre or plain dumb.
@@Alexandraadftxr7052 Snow White movie with Lily Collins is a good example. I don't understand why colorful stuff are "inmature". It's even something I have seen these late years with musicians as well...everything colorful is "childhish". We are in 2022, in a world where pink and blue aren't seen as color assigned for a specific gender but what we are seeing in the entertainment industry is a bad message to children. For example, anime. They have a variety of color palettes depending of the scene, colorful scenes doesn't mean the story isn't mature.
Agreed. Alice was dark because they were at war and people were in danger. In the 2nd movie it was AAALLL COLOR pretty
I cannot get over the fact that they didn't simply use an actual puppet for the live action movie
Go support Italian talent and watch the 2019 Pinocchio by Matteo Garrone: faithful to the book, even when it comes to the most disquieting aspects of it, but also doesn't shy away from its heartwarming moments. GREAT cast, even greater costumes and practical effects: the whole movie was storyboarded before shooting and it shows. Maybe it's not your cup of tea, but I guarantee you you'll get that 19th century fairytale feeling that too many movies are afraid to truly explore (only other movie that comes close for me is the 2005 "The Brothers Grimm")
Thank you so very much for raising the profile of this version. A great adaptation, and Roberto Benigni successfully gaining the forgiveness of the public through his touching portrayal of Geppetto, leagues ahead of Tom Hanks.
So... It's like a copy of the original?
The original Pinocchio is a just-about-perfect movie and it's as though they decided to suck the life out of it in every conceivable way they could. Thanks for the heads up.
Yep, rewatched the film last night, phenomenal masterpiece.
It seems that they're scared of giving the protagonist any flaw so they basically wrote a "purer" version of the original.
I've been seeing this trend in many films, and I kinda understand why. People are afraid of making mistakes more than ever because our lives could be ruined over night for one wrong thing we did and it's harder than ever to flip the page with digital traces recording everything 24/7
Ugh... they actually managed to use the word "influencer" on fucking Pinocchio? Not only is that such a corporate word that nobody in any actual community uses, but every time it shows up in any kind of media, it makes me want to vomit.
They even barged in a CHRIS PINE joke in there.
It definitely influences me to want to stab someone
@@darwincity the Chris pine joke was corny but effective. Get your nose out of the air
@@cafeAmericano I mean, it still makes no sense...Chris Pine? Why? It would have been funnier if they said a name associated with another Disney character, like Robin Williams or, wow, Toy Story reference AND pun, "Woody"
I literally died when I saw that.
Oh, not of laughter. Just… died.
Honestly... It feels like they got the inspiration for Pinocchio using lies to free himself from Shrek 2 😅
I KNEW IT LOOKED FAMILIAR WHAT THE HECKKKK
Oh yeah! I liked that part; it was funny!
So that is why I had the feeling like I saw that before
A similar scene was also used in Filmation's "Pinocchio and the Emperor of the Night."
@@arnequis I've never watched that :o
The ending took away all the payoff that the emotional journey was building towards.
I kinda disagree I like the new ending the being happy with what you are not needing to change.
I was soooo MAD lol I almost threw my remote at my TV
The original is way better they didn’t even make Pinocchio a real boy in this one
Disney didn’t even make the scene where Pinocchio ‘dies’ in the live action, the scene was emotional in the original. But I really wanted to see that scene in 3D.
If you watch closely, as Jiminy is speaking the outro, Pinocchio actually does transform into a real boy (not like he isn’t animated anymore, he is, but his hinges and the wood lines are gone)
I just wish Disney would remake things like The Black Cauldron, Atlantis The Lost Empire, and Treasure Planet- movies that flopped and actually lend themselves for another shot instead of classics that are just fine. I mean COME ON The Black Cauldron is based on a book series of 5; Disney literally has the next Lord of the Rings on their hands!
The real animated Pinocchio had so much more personality.Removing the smoking and drinking was the worst decision they ever made,that's why this remake cannot even pass as good.Also in the old one,even the emotions and just how the fox tried to trick him,everything was somehow shown on a much deeper level.Even Pinocchio's immaturity and naiveness,that was the whole point in the old one.He was supposed to learn from his mistakes.This just seems so boring and not inspirational at all.Not all of Disney's cartoons were bright,but they had a message,that's how kids will learn from it.These are truly one iconic characters,it's a shame.What I loved about old Disney is that many characters were far from perfect,some were even problematic but they tried to fit them in,they didn't try to make them good or change them,they always showed their flaws.They tried to make them regret their decisions maybe afterwards,but they never changed their personalities.Pinocchio was capable of making mistakes just like everybody else,no one is perfect,it's just gross how they removed every part of him.
we can't forget mulan, filmed next to actual concentration camps, in the year of our lord 2020 though
Also the actress that played Mulan supports the police brutality happening in Hong Kong and people who live there were boycotting her and the movie
@@TC-wk8vq disney even thanked them in the credits
if y’all are interested in a good Pinocchio adaptation there’s a fully stop motion one by Guillermo Del Toro is coming out in December on Netflix. I haven’t heard much about the story but based on the trailer the visuals alone are enough to make it worth checking out. If you want to see more movies with actual care and effort put into them please support projects like this; stop motion takes ages to do but is a beautiful art form.
Or, if you can wait, there is the 2019 Italian adaptation by the director of Gomorra and with Roberto Benigni killing it as Gepetto.
That's the version I've been waiting for. ☺️
You lost me when you started your sentence with y'all
Pinocchio was one of my favourite movies growing up. It sucks that its not getting the justice it deserves.
Watch The Adventures of Pinocchio
@@OfficialROZWBRAZEL I am so hyped for that movie. There's also that Lionsgate movie but I'm just going to watch it for the memes.
Pinocchio was never my favorite Disney movie - but this remake definitely made me appreciate the original more. Honest John and Gideon were lovingly animated, though. Can’t say the same for the rest of the CGI mess.
I think most film makers don't know how to tell good stories any more because they are so focused on pleasing everyone in the audience that they forget to give the message that no matter at what point you are in life, there is always room for character development and improvement.
I suspect it's also that there are too many with a say in the film, particularly corporate divisions. In the original, Walt Disney gave the directors the project and they ran things by him for approval, but they had the freedom to make something artistic and timeless and trusted the animators talents.
What really bothered me watching this is how it felt like Tom Hanks was all alone in-front of a green screen talking to himself for more than half the movie.
Haha my husband and I were joking that the behind the scenes for this movie is just Tom Hanks naked in a green screen room mumbling incoherently to himself. Everything, even the clothes are CGI 😂
Pinocchio is a morality tale, without any contest to the morals Giepetto and Jiminy attempted to teach him - it makes the story pointless.
When I heard that Pinocchio was going to be a live action film I knew they wouldn’t show him drinking, smoking or behaving badly. Modern Disney would never have the balls to show him misbehaving like the original. Although I was surprised that they did keep the donkey scene.
Dunno. People change. Feelings change. Life moves on.
I honestly don't feel disney 'used' to be better. It's that we people have grown in our views, our tastes, or sight. And that we love our childhood memories :)
I did enjoy the remake, but it doesn't compare to the original. If anything, it only makes the first one stand out even more. I was also disappointed that they omitted the scene of Pinocchio searching for Geppetto UNDERwater. However, I did like that they explore the idea of how peer pressure can make people, especially children, make bad decisions.
My partner and I watched this over the weekend... Wow it was definitely the worst! We just sat there talking about how horrible and soulless the film is. It didn't make me feel anything but annoyance. They added too many characters too! I couldn't get attached to anyone because I never got to know any of the characters, not even Pinocchio himself!
From the past dozen of movies from Disney, it’s quite clear how the company sees their protagonists. It feels like they can’t have any of their characters have any flaw’s absolving the protagonist of any humanity. Humans make mistakes and are not perfect, that’s what makes them relatable.
Disney basically watered down the entire message and they made it look ugly at, too. I’ll stick to the original.
It's so, so sad that Disney doesn't even know or understand their own story.
And they don't even care.
I just have to say before watching, the animation is absolutely ABISMAL, even by Disney remake standards.
Just about an hour ago I walked into the living room to see my younger siblings and cousins all watching this movie. One glance and I was like, "Bro, this looks like it was animated TEN years ago!"
apart from the horrendous writing in disney's live action remakes, the cgi is always so TERRIBLE. one of the amazing things about animation is that since it's so stylistic it conveys things you can't do as well in live action, and there are so many more possibilities with animation. this cgi remake, like the lion king, feels devoid of any emotion. it feels like we're watching clay robots
At least Cats and Dogs movie characters felt like they have emotions even though they're cgi.
But the Lion King 2019 is an absolute snooze fest 😴
At least clay robots have charm
If anyone is interested in an ACTUALLY good (imo), creative and fresh take on the story/character, I HIGHLY recommend reading the graphic novel, "Pinocchio, Vampire Slayer" written by Van Jensen and WONDERFULLY illustrated by Dusty Higgins. It's both EXACTLY what it sounds like and SO MUCH MORE than what it sounds like.
And yes, he uses his nose.
I want to read that…
@@Coco_1958 Seconded
Thank you for the rec 👏
Top things that wasn't expecting to learn today:
1. This
Yes! I read the first volume and it was great. Also more heartbreaking at the end than I would’ve expected from the title.
I mean, I doubt I'll ever watch this, but from the shots you're showing I was actually super impressed with the fox though? The animation and facial expressions are so lively and fun, especially when compared to the lion king remake. I may go look for just the fox clips, now.
(Just did and it's even more impressive and entertaining in action, both the animation and the voice actor)
From the footage shown, some of the characters look okay but others probably needed changes in the design
@The Dark Overlord yup, but she is correct in saying other characters aren't well designed and animated, and that's basically objective the fact the cgi artstyle is not consistent. Pinocchio has actually not a bad artstyle, I wish it was the one used for the lion king for example, but it definitely doesn't look great paired with the fox for example. (Jiminy is atrocious tho)
Agreed, his movements were exaggerated and fit his character perfectly, shame the rest of the characters looked kinda meh in comparison
Am I right in remembering that Disney are remaking Robin Hood? Could be why so much effort was put into the fox, so the character could be re-used for that.
He looked great , Jiminy looked bad though
I recently came across the Walt Disney quote “We keep moving forward, opening new doors and trying new things because we’re curious and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths”. It’s jarring to realize how far removed Disney has come from this quote, although I was never interested in movies like Turning Red or the tv shows that Disney has recently turned out I can appreciate them because at least they were in fact doing something new and fresh. It also makes me think of the original Pinocchio, watching it over again it’s so clear that the staff and studio put their hearts and souls into making it, every detail is flawless and you can find yourself enjoying even the things that are happening in the background and that was just drawings, in comparison the remake was alive and yet it’s so bland and joyless.
I am way more excited for the Guillermo Del Toro version coming up soon. His version of Pinocchio is hosting the spirit of Gepetto’s deceased son and the film embraces the dark fantasy themes that works with Del Toro’s authentic. And his version of the blue fairy looks creepy and enchanting at the same time.
Disney just needs to stop making live action remakes-they are all just horrible.
No
I hope you're not including Cinderella in that. It was exquisite.
Who's soul will be claimed next
@@cafeAmericano The Jungle Book wasn't bad, either.
@@locomotivetrainstation6053 I'm thinking it will be The Sword in the Stone or The Aristocats.
Speaking about the blue fairy « drama », it’s insane for me that everytime there’s POC characters people feel likes it’s a « woke » movie, even if the movie is from a fantasy/imaginary world or won’t even speak about racism and treated as a fun fact about the character.
Disney has been capitalizing on poc and racism for a decade now. They think if they put poc (especially women) in their movies, it will distract people from their racist past to which they only took attention to when someone actually pointed it out.
Like she’s a fairy, she doesn’t go by human standards, so I agree. If it’s a fantasy character than idc what color they are
I think the issue is that there's been a repeated pattern of the cooperations using POC, female leads and queer characters as a response to any criticism that has nothing to do with the diversity in the film. It's sorta like this mix of gaslighting, bigoted machiavelian scapegoating. Bigoted in the sense that these cooperations use the suffering of marginalised characters for their own gain. Also, many of these characters aren't getting the same trestment as straight white characters do in terms of writing. So when ppl see diverse characters in the marketing they have low expectations, unfortunately.
This can be fixed by writing good characters, and having stories that are so strong they don't warrant a fan backlash.
There are bigot fans but they are in the minority. Most people are reasonable and just want good entertainment.
@@Mariathinking That’s also correct
And it's usually the same kind of POC racelift too, which is a whole nother conversation but just goes to show they're really halfing it and doing it to go "here happy?" When no one was even complaining in the first place
The opening scenes of the original with all the clocks were some of my favorites as a kid. Every single one was so unique and fun and the music paired with it feels so nostalgic and perfectly Disney. Watching those scenes still gives me the same feeling of being an eight year old, walking down Main Street at Disneyland. Replacing those fun designs with product placement just makes me disappointed. First of all, you can't call them "Easter eggs" when they're so blatant and obvious. The point of Easter eggs is to search for them. Second of all, seeing something that felt so magical and special in the original replaced with only references to prior projects, makes me think Disney doesn't have faith in creating anything new. Like that magic was only possible in the past.
It also makes me so upset seeing these movies cranked out without doing anything new when the originals worked so hard to be innovative. Pinocchio in particular is special for the opening where they hand animated a zooming shot over the town that was only possible with the multi plane camera. The animators working on it were the guys who taught the Nine Old Men. They were inventing this new medium in full length feature form as they went. Pinnochio had a lot riding on its shoulders to prove that Snow White's success wasn't a fluke. Seeing it reduced to an uninspired cash grab is so disheartening.
Honestly I can’t believe you actually watched this. I saw the ad on tv and said “nobody wants this”
I'm not entirely sure anyone at Disney has seen a child as of late; they seem to act more according to their idea of what a child should be (absolutely perfect in every way).
It's ironic how to this day, the BEST live-action remake since 2015 is still Cinderella. That movie for me hit all the right notes and I still find myself rewatching it once in a while.
Oh, you mean the one that has almost nothing in common with the animated version except for the most basic plot point and therefore shouldn't even be considered a remake, but rather an entirely separate adaptation? That one?
@@stevenhiggins3055 Right. It's an almost completely new adaptation of the same story, but really not a remake of the previous film. I think that's a big part of why it holds up so much better than the other remakes.
i honestly like that one more than the original, though both are great obviously
I really liked Maleficent and how it subverted the genre expectations. I have to say I do prefer the first Maleficent movie to the original Sleeping Beauty film mainly because it takes such a well-known story and gives it a new, more modern twist.
Most people who said negative things about it stated that it is way too different from the original… isn’t that the point of a remake though? Why would you rewatch a scene by scene remake of a movie you’ve already watched.
The second Maleficent movie was beautiful, although way more predictable, so I didn’t like it as much.
@@stevenhiggins3055 Yes.
Geppetto surviving the crash and then saying "Wow pinocchio, we would be dead if it weren't for your wooden leg puppet powers! I'm glad you're not a real boy" was such a weird way to end the movie. If you're gonna change it to be "you don't have to be a real boy", make it be something pinocchio discovers and not something geppetto tells him 2 minutes before the credits.
That was what ruined the entire thing for me. I always thought the story was learning to be a good human and him becoming real. Now that is thrown out? For what? He is still unique, why did they have to make that change?
I feel the reason why Disney won't put the effort into original cell animation is not only money but I think they don't know how to relearn the skill and effort put into that style of animation. 3D is cheaper in the long run too, in my opinion totally fine but it would just be nice to see some 2d animation once in a while.
People that worlednon these movies are still alive, and the y make 2D tests before 3D movie ( wreck it ralph, moana)
They were actually going to jumpstart a traditional 2D training program earlier this year, where older Disney animators would train apprentices, but it got cancelled 🙃
@@Chiwowza what?? i heard about it but i can't believe they canceled it...it feels like we're slowly losing a genre of movie nowadays and that would've helped A LOT 😩
I'm looking forwards to the Guillermo Del Toro version coming out. That looks fantastic. Disney is doing what they've always done, slapped out a lackluster film in the attempt to drown out a rival version and attempting to keep hording copyrights to characters and folk stories that are well past going back to public domain.
How did their original crown jewel become their worst remake
Disney is truly accursed
Cinderella is BY FAR the best life action movie from Disney…and it should’ve stopped there.
RIGHT
EXACTLY
I wish we lived in that timeline 😕
Agreed
Nah Beauty and The Beast is only due to the fact they kept all the original songs (par one which they replaced) and added more songs to it. I love Cinderella but there are literally no songs in it.
Hopefully, this new Little Mermaid with Halle Bailey will be their last remake cuz this is getting unserious 🙄
Honestly it doesn’t look that bad, and Halle has the voice of an angel
At least with Little Mermaid, Halle Bailey will deliver the vocals with the songs
Snow White is already scheduled for 2024 with gal gadot playing the evil queen
it won't, they have announced snow white, peter and wendy, and more
It won’t, but fortunately the next few remakes seem to be doing things differently. I really hope they remake Hunchback, because a live action musical adaptation would be INCREDIBLE.
I wasnt even aware there was a remake 💀😭
I was only aware since I got ads for it
What made a lot of earlier disney films work is that it was made for adults- Walt said so himself. I am convinced Disney is making these films for Gen z and younger and they just happen to get lucky that we adults also wanna pay to see our favorite films live.
I watched the live action remake of "Beauty and the Beast" because the original is one of my favorite Disney films of all time. I've seen it in the theater dozens of times and mainly sat in the front row to watch the drawings move past me on the screen. They took those beautiful designs for Lumiere, Cogsworth, Mrs. Potts and Chip and turned them into characters so bizarre that I couldn't even watch to the end of the film. It was abysmal! Seeing the trailers for 2022 Pinocchio seemed more hopeful but now that I see more of the film in these clips, it makes me realize that I would hate it. The proportions for Jiminy and Pinocchio are too tall for them to be cute. There's a delicate balance to these things and Disney seems to miss the mark when translating them to live action CG animation.
Beauty and the Beast is also my personal #1 Disney film and the live action version was infuriating. I only made it through the first song, turned it off and never went back. It was just too painful.
@@pamelalansbury94 It was really tragic. I made it about halfway through and turned the channel.
Wait, now Disney is also pushing the “perfect protagonist” agenda to men too? It was bad enough that they did it with Mulan and Belle
Not men, boys.
I think a really bizarre choice was turning the coachman's henchmen from pitch black humanoid figures to the Heartless from Kingdom Hearts
They DO look like Heartless. Maybe this is in indication that we will be giving him his comeuppance in Kingdom Hearts IV?
(Not to mention Jiminy Cricket meeting Jiminy Cricket!)
When you showed shots of the new movie, especially 14:45 I actually gasped. Who where the poor souls tasked with animating this CG???? I`m an animation student and worker and I have very little words to describe the shittines of this shot. I`ll focus on the drink the kid has on his left hand. They try to make the foam shoot forwards towards the audience but it goes down into the right frame, doesn't match the depth of the scene also has an unrendered texture on it that`s lit like PLASTIC. When he moves the jug MOVES INDEPENDENTLY TO THE HAND. The poor animators try to hide it by smearing the frames. finally the liquid DISAPPEARS. I DONT CARE if they want to pass these "choices" as a style. Its not a style, its inconsistent. Why super render Pinocchio and the gang and also try to pass the humans and physical props as cartoony?? ITS SO BIZARRE. ALSO the clocks?? it would've been so cool to actually commission real life clocks for those designs, it wouldn't have made them any less cash grabby, but it was to ~expensive to do so I bet. rant over.
Wow! I see it, that is absolutely ridiculous! And you're right, it is so terribly inconsistent. It seems no integrity was put into this film at all.
I watched the movie yesterday and it is truly awful. I remember watching the original version and pinocchio was relatable as he makes some mistakes and actually learnt from them suffering the consequences. but now he's just plain stupid and doesn't learn anything. the worst part is he didn't even become human! so the whole movie didn't do anything. He cannot go to school, he didn't learn the consequences of lying, nothing! (and the blue fairy didn't actually finish her job so why put pinocchio through this misery of trying to be a real boy)
I feel like disney is constantly trying to paint the main characters as victims that they cannot do any wrongs, which makes it so offputting to see a movie where the characters didn't evolve didn't learn anything
I'm really glad that you mentioned the 1996 live action right at the end. I was like, "didn't they already make a live action?" Turns out, it was actually Universal, but it's still the better live action version it seems.
Nice review. I agree completely. My theory on why they didn't show Pinocchio walking under the water or why they didn't show him turn into a real boy is budget and time constraints that they didn't have the time to animate. That or, they didn't want a physical boy to come on set that looked nothing like the poorly animated version. All these remakes are terrible.
I think they should have got the boy who voiced Pinocchio to play him as a real boy because Benjamin Evan Ainsworth does kinda look like Pinocchio
I disagree with you about all remakes are terrible I think some of them are okay the best one in my opinion is the jungle book
Which is kinda baffling, seeing as Disney definitely has the most financial resources of any animation studio ever. They own almost anything, how could there possibly be budget constraints? If that were true, it just goes to show once again that they don't even care about the end product anymore. Churn out a quick cash grab based on people's nostalgia and onto the next project it is! All the more reason to loathe the remakes.
They do show him become a real boy. Look carefully when Jiminy is narrating and you’ll see it.
ngl, i really liked the concept of fabiana's character and i thought she was cute in her introduction but it gets me so mad that they introduced her for NO reason other than to replace the blue fairy!
As someone who works with kids, the original showcases how kids often behave due to their lack of real life experience and understanding. One girl outright lied to me, saying she needed to go to the bathroom only to sneak off to play outside when the entire class was supposed to be inside. So yeah, the animated Pinocchio may be a scary movie but the lessons are vital for kids to learn. Heck, even teenagers since they are prone to rebellion against authority at that age. One could argue that adults today should be reminded of these lessons as well.
One word to tell them:
"YOUR CLASSIC MOVIES DON'T WORK TWICE!"
13:15. The cat is Figaro. Cleo is the goldfish
I sincerely hope that this live action release encourages people to revisit the 1940's animated Pinocchio, or even help some to discover it for the first time if they haven't watched it. It's been my absolute favourite movie for years and I'd love for it to get a resurge in popularity so that everyone can get a taste of the old Disney magic again
I didn't mind the Beauty and the Beast remake, but I don't think the remakes are worth it. Taking away the beauty of Disney
I know it wasn't made by Disney, but I feel like The Adventures of Pinocchio (1996) is one of the few adaptations of Pinocchio I enjoyed the most, especially as a kid. I know people definitely found the movie disturbing and weird, and looking back at it, it still is. But that movie stuck with me as it's one of my favorite adaptations of the story? A lot better than whatever Disney just put out.
Also there's a scene where Pinocchio steps on Jimmy because he scared him... he was fine.
Is that the one with JTT?!
@@KatieLHall-fy1hw yup!
The 1996 movie's transformation was horrifying! It's in the trailer too. I think the implication in the new movie is that the transformation can be undone as soon as the kids decide to be responsible, or want their parents, or something.
The Chris Pine joke made me cringe so hard that I fell out of my chair
Little kids and old people don't even know who he is, so the joke is a complete miss with them.
@@KawaiiBabyTragon exactly, the ones most likely to be watching this movie 😂
I had to pause and take a minute lmao
Honestly, kind of a let down. But Disney's wasting their own money, so I can't complain.
The only reason they made this movie is to extend copyright anyways, it's clear that a good story is just an afterthought.
What copyright, though? The fairy tale of Pinocchio is public domain anyway.
Disney trademarked its own version of Beauty and the Beast.
@@D0MiN0ChAn Not the Disney version it isnt.
I just realized how creepy that cat from the fox looks in the drawn version. He looks like an actual drug addict.
What will happen when Geppeto dies? Does Pinocchio die with him or is he immortal? Being a real boy would mean that he could grow up and die of old age. How could he function on his own as a small wooden boy???? So many questions!
The Italian remake of Pinocchio from 2019 keeps to the original source material well. But if I remember correctly has a lot of nightmare fuel