Which is the point, I guess. When in doubt ... mine the vault.
Doing live action remakes of animated properties has been a good business for Diz Co. to be in. It makes total sense commercially. Cinderella. The Jungle Book. Sleeping Beauty. etc.
This iteration of a hand-drawn animated icon will also likely make a fortune. And on it goes.
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comments:
Obviously remaking these classics is a safe way for Disney to line their coffers, but perhaps there might be a deeper motive behind all these live-action remakes of the Disney animated classics. Disney is, of course, not exactly planning to do more 2D animated features these days. So the question I have for you, Steve, is do you think that Disney could be making live-action versions of these films to replace the original animated classics? Obviously the original films are 2D, and "2D IS dead" on this side of the pond, anyway. Well, in most cases, it's probably just a crazy conspiracy theory. (removes tin-foil hat from head :P)
I think Diz Co. makes live-action versions of hand-drawn animated features because it's discovered that those reboots make a LOT of money.
The titles are well-known, and it's not like they've got to spend gajillions to pump up audience awareness. That's already there. I don't think the "conspiracy" is any deeper than that. Disney is making a good commercial bet. They're a conglomerate. Not a Renaissance art studio.
Post a Comment