Aladdin (2019) (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

I'm thinking of millions of children taken to see this movie by loved ones. That this may possibly, and probably be the only way they ever experience Aladdin is depressing. Lake of tears depressing.

I just don't see that being the case. If I were a parent taking a kid to see the new Aladdin, I would want to share the animated film with them as well. And if I were a kid and I saw the new one first and liked it, I would want to see the animated one once I found out there was another movie. Remakes open the door to more people finding the original, not less.

 

[Bryan^H]

I just don't see that being the case. If I were a parent taking a kid to see the new Aladdin, I would want to share the animated film with them as well. And if I were a kid and I saw the new one first and liked it, I would want to see the animated one once I found out there was another movie. Remakes open the door to more people finding the original, not less.

I strongly disagree.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I would say that if this weren't a Disney film, but just a regular film from a regular studio being given a regular old fashioned remake, then yes, there would be more of a chance that the newer version could erase the older version from the public consciousness.

But when it comes to Disney, I think it's an entirely different ballgame. The vast majority of the movie going public is interested in contemporary films almost exclusively, and has little interest in catalog titles. We know this is true from a variety of factors, whether it's anecdotal conversations with colleagues, or sales numbers on disc purchases. There are some narrow exceptions to this, culturally speaking, things like Star Wars or The Wizard Of Oz or The Godfather which remain popular across generations. The biggest example of this is the entire genre of animated Disney films. Speaking very generally, very broadly, there's no other category of catalog title that generates the interest that a classic Disney animated film does. My parents remembered the Disney movies they saw as kids, which their parents saw as kids before them, and which were then showed to me when I was a kid. People who have no interest in collecting physical media and who never did still purchase Disney videos for their kids.

In that context, I don't see the animated Aladdin disappearing. At worst, if the new version is massively successful and critically and commercially beloved, meeting and exceeding all expectations, the spotlight will shine brighter on it for the next few years. If it does respectable business but doesn't spark a passion among the audience, the remake fade away a little sooner. But these movies are being made specifically because of the enduring popularity of the animated versions, and I don't think their success will reduce the appeal or popularity of the original films.

(And, from a strictly parenting point of view, I think there will be plenty of parents who would be more comfortable showing the animated version of films like Aladdin and The Lion King to their youngest children. I think there's still a perception that animated equals all ages all the time, and that live action is better for slightly older children.)

 

[Jake Lipson]

I agree with most of Josh's points.

I would also add that Beauty and the Beast did $1 billion worldwide -- a number which I am sad to say I would be very surprised if the new Aladdin reaches -- and it has not superseded the animated original at all. It is "the live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast" in every sense.

On another note, the full trailer for Aladdin will air on Good Morning America tomorrow. Presumably this means it will screen in theaters with Dumbo at the end of the month. However, I am completely flabbergasted that Disney is doing this now, instead of last week when Captain Marvel came out. They just had a huge blockbuster $153 million opening weekend, which is the largest opening of anything since Incredibles 2 last summer, and they did not have this new Aladdin trailer attached to it, even though if it's airing Tuesday it was almost surely completed in time to have gone with Captain Marvel if they had wanted it to do so.

Dumbo could go a lot of ways, but it is almost surely not going to be as big as Captain Marvel, which means more people would have seen it with Captain Marvel than with Dumbo. And yes, it will get a lot of shares online, but people who look up trailers online are already plugged into the movie that it's advertising. There is nothing like having your trailer in front of another huge movie that everyone wants to see. Disney had the opportunity to do that here and blew it. Why they wouldn't want the Aladdin trailer to go out with their biggest movie of the month is a mystery to me.

The way the marketing on this one has gone so far makes me think that Disney does not have much faith in the movie. I hope I am wrong. I want it to be good, and if it is good, I want it to be a big success. However, if they believe in the movie, so far they're not acting like it.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think it's what you're hinting at, that Dumbo is the current priority. A $153 million blockbuster playing the the trailer for Dumbo, opening the same month, is probably going to help that film more than debuting a trailer for Aladdin in March would have helped Aladdin. They may also not have wanted anything in the news to steal any of Captain Marvel's thunder, and debuting a new Aladdin trailer might have taken some of the focus away from what Disney was probably very excited to promote, "Captain Marvel" becoming Disney's first female-led superhero film.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I don't think that a trailer debut for Aladdin would have been a distraction from Captain Marvel at all anymore than the end credits tag setting up a future film did. Even if the trailer had been there, Captain Marvel would be the thing that they came to see. Disney still had other trailers running before the feature, including Frozen II, which doesn't even come out until November.

Dumbo has been marketed extensively over the last few months. Comparatively, Aladdin's only trailer played with The Nutcracker and the Four Realms, which bombed and therefore did not get as much of an audience on the trailer as they would have liked. It did not screen with either Ralph Breaks the Internet or Mary Poppins Returns, both of which made more money, although Mary Poppins Returns had The Lion King on it, which doesn't come out until two months after Aladdin does.

We'll see how it goes as things get closer to release.

 

[Sam Favate]

Here it is. Looks like Disney had the team working overtime to improve the look of the Genie.



I think it it looks good, although Disney is clearly trying to sell this on familiarity. They want the audience to know that their favorite moments from the animated film are here. Personally, I think the live-action movie should have been less movie-musical, more Raiders of the Lost Ark.

 

[TonyD]

So only blue sometimes.

Didn’t some one in here predict or suggest that?

 

[Wayne_j]

Will Smith did say that the non blue version was the Genie in human disguise. They were always going to do both.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

It's the best trailer yet, but the world still doesn't feel lived in. It always feels like sets with CG extensions to me.

It sounds like Naomi Scott has the singing chops for Jasmine, but I'm not a huge fan of Mena Massoud's singing voice from the few bits we got in that trailer.

I think for the genie they would have been better off making him either a live action performance a la "I Dream of Jeannie" or a fully CG creation that bore no relation to how Will Smith (or any living human) actually looks.

 

[Johnny Angell]

That trailer is much better. I’m looking forward to this. It strikes me that the character that may be the most difficult to translate to live action is Iago, the parrot. Gilbert Godfried defined the role, perhaps more the Robin Williams defined the genie. The parrot has been very sparsely represented in the previews so far. I wonder if he’ll even talk?

 

[Sam Favate]

FInal (?) poster:

 

[Jake Lipson]

Alan Tudyk is the new voice of Iago: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/aladdin-alan-tudyk-voice-iago-1194074

I think this is a terrific choice. However, Tudyk is such a versatile actor and can sound like so many different things that knowing he will be doing the voice doesn't mean we know what Iago will sound like.

Since his Iago voice wasn't heard in the new trailer, unless we hear it in a TV spot closer to release, we might not actually hear him before hearing him in the movie.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Didn’t some one in here predict or suggest that?

It was already clear that they were doing that from the Entertainment Weekly story last year, which had photos of Smith in human form before the Grammys TV spot revealed his "blue" look.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

I really enjoyed the new trailer (after the underwhelming ones before), and can't wait to see this now. As a father, I will use this film to introduce my son to Aladdin later in the year (assuming it checks out okay for him first) then show him the animated one after. No particular rhyme or reason that I can think of, but that's the plan that came to me after watching the new trailer

 

[Jake Lipson]

As a father, I will use this film to introduce my son to Aladdin later in the year (assuming it checks out okay for him first) then show him the animated one after

If you have to "check" the film first in order for him to see it, does that mean you're going to go to the theater for it twice? Once by yourself and once with your son? I understand your desire to view it first, but in that case, I'd probably start with the animated film because you've already seen that and know it's kid-safe. It would also give him a frame of reference for what to expect in the live-action film, which might make the latter easier to handle if it is more intense than its animated counterpart.

 

[Neil Middlemiss]

If you have to "check" the film first in order for him to see it, does that mean you're going to go to the theater for it twice? Once by yourself and once with your son? I understand your desire to view it first, but in that case, I'd probably start with the animated film because you've already seen that and know it's kid-safe. It would also give him a frame of reference for what to expect in the live-action film, which might make the latter easier to handle if it is more intense than its animated counterpart.

No, he's not quite ready for the theater experience so when it comes out we'll watch it and then share with him. He is just now getting in to full movies so I am being careful about what we share with him and when.

I wasn't sure if I had Aladdin and I checked and we sure do, so I might end up trying that version on him this summer. I'm sorta figuring this out on the fly

 

[Jake Lipson]

No, he's not quite ready for the theater experience so when it comes out we'll watch it and then share with him. He is just now getting in to full movies so I am being careful about what we share with him and when.

Ah, that makes sense. For some reason the way you wrote your original post about it suggested to me that he was old enough to go in a theater but you wanted to see the film first.

I would err on the side of starting with the animated film personally -- but then the animated film is my favorite movie of all time so I'm obviously biased.

Still, I think this trailer is pretty great and a big improvement on the TV spot. My reservation mostly is actually that Jafar seems awfully young and not suitably creepy, but I'm willing to give it the benefit of the doubt for now until we see the full performance in the context of the movie.

Bring it on, Disney. I'll be there on the opening Thursday night for this for sure.

 

[Jake Lipson]

A major difference between this trailer and the Beauty and the Beast remake's final trailer just occurred to me.

Here, the version of A Whole New World we hear is Mena Massound and Naomi Scott, presumably from inside the movie.

For the Beauty and the Beast trailer, they included not Emma Thompson's version of the title song from within the body of the film, but the single version by Ariana Grande and John Legend, which was released as a single and used over the film's credits.

While I'm happy to hear a Massound and Scott in this trailer, I wonder if Disney is going to produce another single for the credits of this version. Last time, A Whole New World was covered over the credits by Peabo Bryson and Regina Belle. Their version was a #1 hit on the Billboard chart and displaced I Will Always Love You from that position.

So...will there be a new single? And if so, who are the modern equivalents of Peabo Bryson and Regina Belle who would get to sing it now?

They could also probably have Will Smith sing on the credits, but since he will have at least two songs within the film itself, I think a new single of A Whole New World by some famous music stars of today would be nice if it was good. It would also be a nice way to get some more famous people on board to promote the remake, since Will Smith is the only well-known Western box office star in the film. Another hit single would probably help.

Josh Groban did a very nice version of "Evermore" over the credits of the Beauty and the Beast remake; maybe he could be paired with someone for the (hypothetical) Aladdin single?

 

[Tommy R]

I hope they change "Friend Like Me" to "Gettin' Jiggy Like Me".

Spoiler

Just kidding!