- Dec 21, 2002
- Real Name
- Jake Lipson
Naomi Scott's interview with Jimmy Kimmel from last night's Jimmy Kimmel Live is up:
EW is more reserved:(CNN) Chalk it up to modest expectations -- starting with early previews that rubbed people the wrong way -- but "Aladdin" is a great deal of fun, with charming leads and elaborately mounted songs. It's hardly a whole new world, but in this suddenly well-populated land of live-action reboots, makes the most out of its familiar one.
So the big question hanging over the whole thing is… why? Like Dumbo, the new movie is a big, lavish fantasia that no one asked for or particularly needs. There are no new wrinkles, no real new take. Even the original’s more objectionable Middle Eastern characterizations are left untouched — the one place that it could have really used an update. It still has more stereotypes than you can shake a scimitar at.
And yet, the new Aladdin is hardly the folly that the advance bad buzz prepared us for. The candy-colored costumes and production design are stunning, Alan Menken’s songs are as infectious as ever, the dance numbers have an electric Bollywood flair, and some of the bazaar chase sequences have a Young Indiana Jones sense of rollicking, Rube Goldberg fun. But mostly it all feels too dutiful, too familiar.
And it has fallen off the wrong side of that point. As of right now, with more reviews being counted, it's down to 58%, which means it's got the green rotten designation. We'll see whether it can get back to 60% if more reviews are filed or if it is settling here permanently.It's 60% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes right now, which is the exact straddling point between fresh and rotten.
I personally think it’s biggest obstacle is the “Solo” effect.My local theater has it on their biggest screen on Thursday and it's probably 80% sold already.
I think this movie's biggest obstacle is opening on Memorial Day weekend.
It's 60% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes right now, which is the exact straddling point between fresh and rotten.
See, here's the thing: I glanced at the review snippets on the main page at RT (for the rotten reviews). And a lot of them are referencing the 1992 movie. I understand why that would happen but I think it's 100% unfair to both productions. This movie has to stand on its own (just like the 1992 version did) and be taken as a separate entity. Way too many people aren't doing that for these Disney reimaginings, let alone entertainment in general.Oh no, I am seeing a not so good review, but since I love the story of Aladdin I think that I will go see it in the movie theater this weekend.
That's literally impossible to know because the original film DOES exist. Obviously, I haven't seen Aladdin yet so I can't speak to it until tonight, but let's take Beauty and the Beast as an example because that one I have seen. It's impossible to ignore how many beats in that film are lifted directly from the animated version. The remakes would not exist in their current form without the original having existed first, because they are taking the structural choices (and sometimes even the words) directly from the prior film, without crediting its screenwriters. Disney WANTS audience members who are familiar with the original; their whole marketing strategy on these films relies upon evoking the nostalgia that viewers have for the original.I'd rather know, if the original film did not exist, what would they think of this film?
Yes, Disney wants the nostalgia factor here. Without a doubt. But for people who make their living reviewing films, it should be easy enough not to hold an animated film from 1992 up to a live action film in 2019 and automatically ding the new one because it's not the old one. It's a lazy way to review something; all it tells me is the writer has nothing new to say.The only way to know what someone thinks of this film without knowledge of the prior one would be if you found someone who has never seen the original at all or interacted with any of its spinoffs/merchandise. And their view would be impacted by not recognizing how much of it has been copied over.
The Broadway Genie works because they took the portrayal of him in a completely different direction from what Robin Williams did. I'm not talking about performances here but the structure of the story. Even though the interpretation of the character is completely different, comparisons to the animated film are still inevitable and fair because he's saying words that were written for the film.Will Smith will never be Robin Williams. He will be a new version of the Genie. Does that make his interpretation wrong or lesser or invalid? No. It's a different take. Everyone got their knickers in a twist because Genie wasn't blue in the original teaser. Big freaking deal. I don't honestly care. Entertain me. (The Broadway version of Aladdin has the Genie actor in a blue jumpsuit; his skin is NOT blue. Did anyone care? Not that I know of. Did that diminish that version of the character or the story? Nope.)
It's just a couple minutes 3pm here, so the screenings I was referring to start in three hours. Obviously, I can't account for walk-ins later tonight, but for those curious, here are the attendance counts as things stand right now. Remember, these are for the first screenings in the premium auditorium (either Cinemark XD, or in the case of the sole AMC around here, IMAX.)I also got curious to see how well it's been doing locally in terms of presales today and started looking at seating charts for various reserved seating theaters. This is obviously not a complete or in any way scientific study, but there are three Cinemark theaters around here which all have 2D screenings starting at 6pm in their premium auditoriums. And there's the AMC IMAX with same.
Let's call my local theater where I will be seeing it Cinemark A. This screening has sold exactly two tickets. The first one of those two was mine.
We'll call the other two Cinemark theaters B and C. Cinemark B, which has luxury reclining seats, has not yet sold any tickets for their 6pm XD show.
Cinemark C, which is an XD auditorium without reclining seats, has sold 11 tickets so far for their 6:00pm XD show.
The AMC IMAX, which also starts their first show at 6:00pm, has sold ten tickets so far, including five tickets together, which I assume must be a group of people seeing it together. Of course, there's no way of knowing how many of those people paid retail price for the ticket versus using their A-List membership to reserve it, but still.
This indicates that Aladdin isn't really a huge advance priority for a lot of people here, even though all of the theaters I checked are premium auditoriums with reserved seating. A few other theaters have showtimes listed for purchase in normal auditoriums which don't do reserved seating, but since I can't see the seating chart in those, I have no way of knowing how many tickets have been sold there. I'll check again a few days before the movie opens to see how this has changed. Obviously I hope more people will buy more closer to the date of the screening.