Lilo & Stitch live-action remake (1 Viewer)

[Jake Lipson]

Because they won't rest until they've done one for every single hit, Lilo & Stitch is next on Disney's remake checklist:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/lilo-stitch-live-action-disney-remake-works-1148811

I suppose it was inevitable they would get to it sooner or later, but this seems like an odd choice because it's much more recent than anything else they've remade yet. Also, Stitch was voiced in a *really* distinctive way by Chris Sanders, who came up with the concept and was co-writer and co-director of the original film. He now works for DreamWorks Animation after a nasty split from Disney, so I doubt he's going to be involved this time, and the original was his brainchild. So this feels a little weirder than the other films that they've dusted off and done again.

We'll see how it goes.

 

[dpippel]

Milk it, Disney. Milk it.

 

[MatthewA]

Milk it, Disney. Milk it.

This is the cow, the cow says …

 

[Jake Lipson]

Jon M. Chu is in negotiations to direct this waste of time.

Jon M. Chu in Talks to Direct Live-Action ‘Lilo & Stitch’ Movie (Exclusive)

Jon M. Chu is in final negotiations to helm Disney’s live-action remake of ‘Lilo & Stitch.’

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I’m sure there will be plenty of people in their target audience who will not see it as a waste of time.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Oh of course. It will probably make a ton of money.

The original film made particularly strong use of traditional animation to evoke a feeling (not to mention alien characters) which will be difficult to recreate in photorealistic live action. There is nothing realistic about Stitch or Jumba or Pleakly and it seems particularly shortsighted to make them exist in the real world. Also, because this story was the original brainchild of Chris Sanders, it seems particularly inappropriate for it to be remade without him. This isn't always the case with Disney films. Without taking anything away from many of the animated classics that have been remade, those were already adaptations from fairy tales and other sources. To do an adaptation of something that came originally out of his brain and not havre him on board just seems wrong to me.

 

[Edwin-S]

More live-action garbage adaptations of animated films. Disney management is totally bereft. I thought Eisner was bad but he was nothing compared to the crew there now.

 

[Malcolm R]

Oh of course. It will probably make a ton of money.

Not guaranteed. Mulan didn't fare so well. It was released theatrically in much of Asia, eastern Europe, and the Middle East, and only manged $69 million.

Personally, I'm waiting for the live action version of The Emperor's New Groove.

 

[Ejanss]

Personally, I'm waiting for the live action version of The Emperor's New Groove.

We'll probably get it:
Disney's going through the same stages that they went through with direct-videoquels in the 90's/00's--First the core titles (like the LA Lion King and Aladdin to follow Beauty & the Beast, since the 90's Big Four have to be together wherever they go), and then it hit upon them that since audiences were buying them anyway, why not use them as feature-length commercials to revive promotional interest in older titles whose sales have fallen by the wayside?
(Which they figured out after Bambi II, and explains why the heck we got Fox & the Hound II.)

And just as the Vidquels were working on an Aristocats sequel when they were shut down, Disney's still at work on a live-action Robin Hood.
A live-action Atlantis and Hercules have also been rumored, which means that the '97-'05 post-Renaissance titles are now the "forgotten" titles in need of re-promotion.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Not guaranteed. Mulan didn't fare so well.

I know. But obviously Disney still thinks that is an aberration. Their remake process has on the whole been very effective at raking in a lot of money even though very few of the films have been effective at being good movies, so they're going to continue to hope for that result.

 

[Jake Lipson]

Dean Fleischer Camp (Marcel the Shell With Shoes On) is directing. Jon M. Chu, who had previously been in negotiations, is busy with Wicked through 2025, so I guess Disney didn't want to wait for him.

‘Lilo & Stitch’ Live-Action Pic At Disney Taps ‘Marcel The Shell With Shoes On’s Dean Fleischer Camp To Direct

EXCLUSIVE: Following the critical success of his movie Marcel the Shell With Shoes On, Dean Fleischer Camp has found his next project as he has been tapped to direct the live-action adaptation of t…

deadline.com

 

[Edwin-S]

The scavenging and pillaging continues.

 

[JimmyO]

I think there's a school of thought that says that animation is a very unique form of entertainment. Certain characters and story types thrive really well with it. You could go further and say that the original form of the media tends to bias the audience towards that 'original incarnation'.

That's where these live action translations really are problematic. You're already running the risk that the live action version is an outlier, an imitation, and a cash grab. None of these things work in favour of the live action version.

What does work in it's favour is that if there was a big audience for the animated original, then Disney is going to play those numbers and hope that the gamble pays off that the built-in audience will want to check it out. But it's still a gamble. I am finding that overall, the live action versions of animated originals are a waste of resources that could be spent on something innovative and new.

I wonder if projects like 'Tomorrowland' made Disney lose faith in themselves with new ideas. Badly marketed as it was.

 

[Jake Lipson]

I am finding that overall, the live action versions of animated originals are a waste of resources that could be spent on something innovative and new.

Disney doesn't see them as a waste of resources when they work. The last two live-action remakes released to theaters were Aladdin and The Lion King prior to the pandemic. They came out only two months apart, which I thought was a really compressed time period for two similar projects, but both of them made over a billion dollars. I thought both of them were absolutely terrible, but the general audience obviously approved of them in significant numbers.

What you're talking about is a creative issue. What Disney is talking about is a financial issue, and in that respect these films clearly work more often than they don't.

I wonder if projects like 'Tomorrowland' made Disney lose faith in themselves with new ideas.

I don't think the desire to make Lilo & Stitch again has anything to do with the failure of Tomorrowland. And for the record, I liked Tomorrowland a lot. But even if Tomorrowland had been a big hit and spawned a franchise, they would still be doing the remakes because they usually make a lot of money. Tomorrowland didn't cause them to turn to remakes. They were already doing that before Tomorrowland anyway.

Disney has been very consistent in exploiting the audience's nostalgia for their existing properties. In the mid-to-late '90s and early 2000s, they did this with the direct-to-video cheapquels, most of which have now become regulated to essentially bonus feature status on the corresponding original's Blu-ray. Now that the cheapquels have run their course, they're doing it with remakes instead. The remakes cost vastly more money to produce, but it's the same basic playbook.

 

[JimmyO]

Disney doesn't see them as a waste of resources when they work. The last two live-action remakes released to theaters were Aladdin and The Lion King prior to the pandemic. They came out only two months apart, which I thought was a really compressed time period for two similar projects, but both of them made over a billion dollars. I thought both of them were absolutely terrible, but the general audience obviously approved of them in significant numbers.

What you're talking about is a creative issue. What Disney is talking about is a financial issue, and in that respect these films clearly work more often than they don't.


I don't think the desire to make Lilo & Stitch again has anything to do with the failure of Tomorrowland. And for the record, I liked Tomorrowland a lot. But even if Tomorrowland had been a big hit and spawned a franchise, they would still be doing the remakes because they usually make a lot of money. Tomorrowland didn't cause them to turn to remakes. They were already doing that before Tomorrowland anyway.

Disney has been very consistent in exploiting the audience's nostalgia for their existing properties. In the mid-to-late '90s and early 2000s, they did this with the direct-to-video cheapquels, most of which have now become regulated to essentially bonus feature status on the corresponding original's Blu-ray. Now that the cheapquels have run their course, they're doing it with remakes instead. The remakes cost vastly more money to produce, but it's the same basic playbook.

I don't think I said that the decision to green light a live action Lilo and Stitch was tied directly to Tomorrowland. My thought here is that there may be a Disney culture when it comes to film making decisions that odd favour making money when you use familiar content as your base, and passing up the risk of taking on new ideas. Tomorrowland might be a convenient signpost to look at in the rear view mirror to reinforce that culture.

Shame we will likely never see a Tron 3, due to the performance of Tron 2. I think Tron is one of the best ideas to ever come out of Disney in-house. Ironically, Tron evolved in the reverse. First two films were live action, which then became an animated series.

 

[Alex...]

Zach Galifianakis to Star in ‘Lilo & Stitch’​

Zach Galifianakis to Star in ‘Lilo & Stitch’ Live-Action Movie (Exclusive)

Dean Fleischer Camp, the filmmaker behind indie darling and best animated Oscar nominee 'Marcel the Shell With Shoes On,' is directing the Disney+ feature.

www.hollywoodreporter.com

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

I don't know if she can act, but visually they nailed this casting:

 

[Edwin-S]

I agree that they managed to find an actor that looks a lot like the original animated character. It is just too bad that her debut is going.to be in a terrible remake. I hope she doesn't end up getting a load of hate like Loyd got for "The Phantom Menace".

 

[Alex...]

 

[Alex...]