Aladdin (2019) (2 Viewers)

[Jason_V]

I'm kinda shocked at the legs Aladdin has at the theater. It came out almost six weeks ago and there are still five screenings today at a local AMC. $305 million domestic is nothing to sneeze at. Another $570 million international.

All that being said, it's nice to see. The chatter has been about Endgame vs. Avatar. Aladdin has snuck in there even with all the competition.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I never doubted that an Aladdin remake could be successful, but I gotta say that those results surprise me in light of the relatively lightweight marketing campaign Disney waged for this one.

Gonna be interesting to see what "Lion King" does. Seems like all the predictions were that "Aladdin" would do lackluster business and "Lion King" would be massive.

Which it still might, but "Aladdin" clearly did way better than most predicted!

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I hope there’s a lesson that someone learns here that if you have 100% brand recognition, you don’t need to spend twice the movie’s budget on advertising. Those campaigns are toxic to the industry in my view, because they add so much cost while adding so little of value to the actual film, but can be the difference between having a small profit or being hopelessly stuck in the red.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Official audio of "Desert Moon," the deleted song that will appear on the Blu-ray.



Why does this sound better than anything Ritchie actually kept in the movie?

 

[Mike Frezon]

Peg and I watched this last night.

I was really hoping that at least the musical numbers would be worth the purchase. They might make it so...but once it was over I really had a sense of "why was this necessary?" Answer: it wasn't.

The thing I hated most about the movie--and this often turns out to be the case for me whenever there is CGI'd animals--was the representation of Abu and Raj. Every single time they were on screen I was thinking about how unrealistic they looked and moved.

The two leads were very likeable. And Will Smith was engaging (as always)--although the CGI involving his physique was really off-putting. It (his physical shape) kept changing every few minutes and its movements (especially the way Smith's head moved in correlation to his body) just didn't work.

All of it just made me think that there was a reason the 1992 Aladdin was an animated effort. It made sense to make that film in that way. It did not make sense to tell the story in this way via live actors/animals.

I thought the Atmos soundtrack was pretty good.

 

[Tino]

I’m about thirty minutes in and hating every minute of it. My wife begged me to turn it off. I’ll finish it at a later time. I hope it gets better.

 

[Mike Frezon]

I’m about thirty minutes in and hating every minute of it. My wife begged me to turn it off. I’ll finish it at a later time. I hope it gets better.

Ain't gonna.

 

[Tino]

Ain't gonna.

Oof!

 

[cinemiracle]

Love this movie-watched it 3 times already.hated the recent JUNGLE BOOK Disney remake and was not overly keen on THE LION KING. Will be interested in seeing Disney's live action film MULAN- their first ever war film.THE SLEEPING BEAUTY trailer does not impress me.

 

[Jeff Cooper]

So much wrong with this movie for me simply story-wise.

The whole 'Seek ye out the diamond in the rough' scene is regulated to the background (really?) as the opening credits play. If you had not already seen the animated version, this scene would make absolutely no sense or have any meaning at all.

Aladdin only says "Trust me" to Jasmine in the marketplace, thus Jasmine's recognition of "Do you trust me?" later makes no sense at all.

In the animated version, Abu straight up steals the forbidden gem in the cave, and it's obvious that it's special. Here, it's just another random gem, and Abu doesn't steal it, it just falls into his hands. Why would the cave get pissed at that? They already had touched a lot of the gold lying around.

etc. etc..

 

[Colin Jacobson]

I’m about thirty minutes in and hating every minute of it. My wife begged me to turn it off. I’ll finish it at a later time. I hope it gets better.

I think it gets better when Genie enters the picture.

But I didn't hate the 1st half hour, so YMMV...

 

[Tino]

I think it gets better when Genie enters the picture.

But I didn't hate the 1st half hour, so YMMV...

Ha. I actually thought it got worse once the Will Smith’s Genie appeared.

 

[SFMike]

The thing I hated most about the movie--and this often turns out to be the case for me whenever there is CGI'd animals--was the representation of Abu and Raj. Every single time they were on screen I was thinking about how unrealistic they looked and moved.

You have got to remember that if they did use real animals they would have brought down the wrath of PETA and a 100 other animal rights groups. But I actually thought most of the animal animations worked well as did the movie. I liked it and thought it was a fun time. I actually liked it more than the original and feel the same about the live action Beauty And The Beast. These are not scared texts they are public domain stories that will be done again for the next generation. I think these will hold up well. There is room for both.

 

[Johnny Angell]

But I actually thought most of the animal animations worked well

I agree, but the movie was a fail for me.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Yeah. It's something with me. EVERY CGI animal I ever see in a film immediately takes me out of the movie. In another discussion somewhere on the forum someone had a term which defined that kind of situation. Damned if I can remember right now what it is though.

 

[Jake Lipson]

In another discussion somewhere on the forum someone had a term which defined that kind of situation. Damned if I can remember right now what it is though.

It sounds like you're talking about the "uncanny valley" effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncanny_valley

For me, this isn't a problem with every CGI animal -- Paddington, for example, works quite well in his movies -- but Paddington is designed to be a sort of exaggerated realism and isn't meant to mimic the exact behavior of a real bear. It's much more of a problem in stuff like the photorealistic Lion King remake, where there is a disconnect between the blank emotionless thing on the screen and the emotion that the situation and vocal performance requires them to be projecting.

 

[Mike Frezon]

That's it!

As I said in my first post after seeing Aladdin, None of this film's CGI really worked for me...but especially the animals and the genie. The talking cave of treasures? Fine. But anything that is supposed to look real, not so much.

 

[Tino]

I’m struggling to find the strength to finish this film. Probably this weekend.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Ain't gonna.

Yeah, it looks like some films either float your boat or they don't do so. In my case, I liked the film quite a lot and watched it a couple of times at an IMAX and then a Dolby Cinema theater. I haven't bought the 4K/UHD because it's too close to Black Friday sales and Disney+ launch in which it might play on that service right away.

 

[Robert Crawford]

You have got to remember that if they did use real animals they would have brought down the wrath of PETA and a 100 other animal rights groups. But I actually thought most of the animal animations worked well as did the movie. I liked it and thought it was a fun time. I actually liked it more than the original and feel the same about the live action Beauty And The Beast. These are not scared texts they are public domain stories that will be done again for the next generation. I think these will hold up well. There is room for both.

Same here!