Author Topic: Aladdin alive  (Read 7641 times)

madhair60

  • カッコイイ
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • バカ
    • Comics, videos, podcasts, writing, etc

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #151 on: May 15, 2019, 10:16:23 PM »


Actually, I must admit.  This one looks pretty decent!

Finally, a much-needed antidote to #metoo!!

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #152 on: May 16, 2019, 12:48:14 PM »
The autotune is really obvious on the word 'comes' in the line 'when it comes to exotic-type mammals'.

Disney films like Beauty & the Beast and Aladdin are musicals. Why do they keep remaking them with people who CAN'T SING?!

It’s not even limited singing skills that annoy me; I’d be happy if the studio could have the confidence to put out slightly weak singing voices or the odd duff note.  What I hate is the robotic autotune swaggering in to correct everyone.  It doesn’t make the voices more powerful, all it does is add a warble and a trill to underpowered voices that might be enduring if presented authentically.

The other option would be to have dedicated singers doing the songs, like they had for the original 2D versions of these films.  They seem to want it both ways - “This is non-singer Emma Watson’s actual singing voice - what a coup!” and pitch-perfect singing at the same time.  And in trying to do both, they fuck up both.

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #153 on: May 16, 2019, 12:52:43 PM »
"I CAN SHOW YOU MY BALLS
HAIRY CRINKLED AND BLOATED"

Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #154 on: May 16, 2019, 01:17:32 PM »
I am still baffled by the logic that led them to getting Guy Ritchie to direct this film

madhair60

  • カッコイイ
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • バカ
    • Comics, videos, podcasts, writing, etc
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #155 on: May 16, 2019, 01:21:31 PM »
I am still baffled by the logic that led them to getting Guy Ritchie to direct this film

Guy Ritchie sort of scans with "Prince Ali".

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #156 on: May 17, 2019, 08:52:11 PM »
I am still baffled by the logic that led them to getting Guy Ritchie to direct this film

It's a conveyor belt production.  It wasn't created to put an artist's vision on screen, it was created in the hope of making an obscene amount of money, by way of appealing to the general public's wistful nostalgia for a film which was created to put an artist's vision on screen.  A writer wasn't inspired to pen a remake of Disney's Aladdin because they had a unique take on the story.  Disney decided to produce a remake and then hired and dictated to a screenwriter in order to bring their money spinner into fruition.  In creative terms, it's the equivalent of putting the cart before the horse, before setting fire to both cart and horse and then attempting to drunkenly stumble to your destination, before promptly falling into a bush of brambles and throwing up on yourself but of course, it's not about creativity.  It never was.  The movie's raison d'être is to milk the financial teat of an intellectual property.

On that note, Disney sought a director who would shut up and do as they're told.  The Aladdin remake isn't a Guy Ritchie movie.  It's a Disney movie; one designed by committee to appeal to the widest possible demographic.  There's no room for artistic interpretation here.  Can you imagine Stanley Kubrick or Alfred Hitchcock directing an Aladdin remake, starring wicky wicky Will Smith as the genie?  Of course not.  It's not only an absurd notion because they're dead but also because they had artistic integrity and wouldn't lower themselves to making a soulless corporate product.  Likewise, their contemporaries aren't going to be interested in doing so either.  What Disney needed was someone willing to toe the line and make their boardroom of executives' vision a reality.  They needed a competent errand boy and a recognisable name to put on the poster.  It's movie making at its most cynical and no director with artistic integrity is going to take the job.  Hence; Guy Ritchie.
« Last Edit: May 17, 2019, 11:39:45 PM by St_Eddie »

Replies From View

  • Rubbing linseed oil into the school cormorant.
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • Gargoyles have milk bags.
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #157 on: May 17, 2019, 09:31:29 PM »
“I steal only what I can’t afford!” - Guy Ritchie

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #158 on: May 17, 2019, 11:41:30 PM »
The screenwriter for this remake had the easiest gig in town.

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #159 on: May 17, 2019, 11:43:25 PM »
This movie is bereft of soul.  If it were a person, then it would be dead behind the eyes.  Proper serial killer vibes, like.

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #160 on: May 23, 2019, 02:48:32 AM »
The reviews are starting to come in.  It's currently sat at 63% on rotten tomatoes (expect that percentage to drop significantly within the coming weeks).  I want to highlight this review because the writer discusses the very thing which I addressed in the 'Man With Annoying Face Might Be New Batman' thread...

I can't stand it when writers write their characters as women.  What I mean by that, is when one of the character's key "personality traits" is defined as 'woman'.  I've always viewed Ellen Ripley in the Alien films as the gold standard of how to write for a female lead; that is to say that Ripley wasn't written as a female character.  None of the characters in the script for Alien were assigned genders and so all genders were considered when casting the film.  In doing so, audiences were treated to a female protagonist who's written as a human being, as opposed to 'woman'.  The result?  One of the, if not the greatest screen heroine in all of cinematic history; strong willed and prepared to take action when the going gets tough but also someone with a very humanistic philosophy and not once does the film draw attention to Ripley's gender.  She stands toe to toe with the men around her but is never dismissive to the opposite sex based upon their gender.  She commands respect by virtue of her strength of will alone.  Both women and men can find inspiration in Ellen Ripley.  Both women and men can look up to that character and aspire to be more like her in life.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, we have the trailer for Batwoman.  Women in real life don't go around constantly thinking 'I'm a woman' and informing every man that they happen upon of this fact, as though it were a revelation.  Not that you'd believe it, going by the trailer.  The audience is constantly reminded of the character's gender, to the point of absurdity (they even used a song with the lyrics 'I am a woman', for Christ's sake).  Not only is this bad writing but it's actually harmful in the long run because it's defining people by their gender and in doing so, creating a division between the sexes.  You cannot achieve unification through division.

Equally, pouring scorn on one gender with lines such as "I'm not about to let a man take credit for a woman's work" is not conducive to bringing about the winds of change.  If a misogynistic man were to watch this trailer and hear that line, it's not going to make him reflect on his worldview, it's only going to inspire him to dig his heels even further into the sand out of defiance.   As is so often the case with woke entertainment, it exists as a form of masturbatory material for those who are already woke.  Those same people tell themselves that this show is changing the world.  Newsflash, people; the bigots aren't watching the show.

To come back to that line; "I'm not about to let a man take credit for a woman's work".  Imagine if you will, that the roles were reversed and a male protagonist stated "I'm not about to let a woman take credit for a man's work".  Doesn't sound great coming from the mouth of a hero, does it?  So why is that kind of divisive writing given a free pass when it's a woman saying the line?  Historically, woman have been oppressed.  I get that.  However, two wrongs don't make a right.  How is oppressing people because of their gender, whether they be male or female, a good thing?  Black people have also been historically oppressed and yet would we condone that a black person go out into the world and vocalise their disgust at every white person that he or she encounters?  No, because it would be advocating racism.  Racism is racism, no matter the target.  Just as sexism is sexism, no matter the target.  Batwoman isn't progressive, it's one step forward, two steps back.  Alien is what a progressive portrayal of a woman looks like and is done in a way that may very well have actuality altered a few sexist men's worldviews along the way because it didn't preach to them in a lecturous manner.  That was all the way back in 1979.  I lament how far we've fallen since then, in terms of credible and relatable heroines.

I desire to watch characters who are human beings.  I desire to watch characters who I can relate to, regardless of gender.  I don't want to watch 'man' and 'woman'.  I want to watch people.

That new song linked to in the Aladdin review is fucking horrendous (it's as awful musically, as it is insincere and patronising.  Feminism by way of corporate pandering).  Hollywood really needs to stop it with this shit.
« Last Edit: May 23, 2019, 03:00:25 AM by St_Eddie »

Kelvin

  • The best bits of a pantomime horse
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • With skin the colour of a freshly peeled apple
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #161 on: May 23, 2019, 08:10:37 PM »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9GmO_WFhjQ

Arabian Nights from the new film is a passable cover musically, but the amount of autotune is shocking, really.

madhair60

  • カッコイイ
  • Golden Member
  • *****
  • バカ
    • Comics, videos, podcasts, writing, etc
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #162 on: May 24, 2019, 08:48:38 AM »
That new song linked to in the Aladdin review is fucking horrendous (it's as awful musically, as it is insincere and patronising.  Feminism by way of corporate pandering).  Hollywood really needs to stop it with this shit.

It's a musical for children, mind. Might give some small girls the old anime sparkle eyes. They'd probably tune out if it was like I can show you some stats/ of workplace patriarchal oppre-ssion

St_Eddie

  • LIKES: Deviled eggs DISLIKES: The Devil & bad eggs
    • St_Eddie's YouTube Channel
Re: Aladdin alive
« Reply #163 on: May 24, 2019, 03:59:28 PM »
It's a musical for children, mind.

It's a family movie.  It's being marketed towards both children and adults.  Even if it were aimed squarely at children, that wouldn't negate any of my complaints.

Tags: