Live-Action Remakes

 Recently, I watched Lilo and Stitch live-action remake in theaters this past week. The remake in my personal opinion landed in the middle for me. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great either. There were certainly changes made. Some of these made sense, and had some realistic approach backing them, but others felt more awkward, and made me scratch my head. Plowing forward, I will not delve too deeply to avoid major spoilers at the current time. I will continue the discussion of remakes after the asterisk lines. If you do not wish to be spoiled in the slightest then stop reading now.

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

***********************************************************************************

The few awkward decisions that they made were to remove a major character and change some aspects of Lilo's and Nani's personalities. With an essential, original character missing, it changed the third act of the film greatly, shocking many. While, I personally don't mind a surprise twist, like Prince Hans being the villain of Frozen, this one, in a similar boat, didn't have the same effect. It left the film feeling awkward and odd. They also removed Lilo's disability side and Nani's empathy to a degree that left it feeling more off. Other minor changes even removed the emotional strings of the original too.

**********************************************************************************************************************************************************************

Now, I wish to address the ongoing discussion about live-action remakes in a broad general way because analyzing each and every adaptation is going to be a too lengthy of a discussion here. Each individual remake will have its due on this blog, so don't worry.

I always love to start broad general discussions like this with my own personal view on the matter as a whole. I personally don't mind an occasional live-action remake from time-to-time of animated film that had come over a decade or so ago. Like it has to feel like a generally long time to a point where I think - it would interesting to see this in live action. This isn't something I think about with most animated films, much less recent ones. In other words, they need to be old enough that times have changed, the film feels kind of outdated in some of its elements, and that it is screaming for a remake like Beauty and the Beast, Peter Pan, and etc. At the same time, a live-action remake of a classic cannot be taken lightly. They need to be thought through and lot of thought needs to be put in to consider the best approach in remaking it.

Frankly, I feel that Disney and even Dreamworks, now, aren't entirely getting this. They are more concerned about a financial gain from a box office hit than the story itself. This is what I feel has happened to Lilo and Stitch, Peter Pan (Peter Pan and Wendy), Mulan, and other live-action remakes. These films are quickly made and released with little thought and heart, which had been put into the originals. In the process, the remakes lose what made the original animated film so special. It could be certain minor elements like not mentioning why the main character's parents have died, casting choices to be more inclusive, or visual effects. It honestly feels like these concepts look like an amazing draft to a beautiful remake, but remain just that - a draft.

Films like 101 Dalmatian, Alice in Wonderland, and Jungle Book, did a fine job in the remake department. Now, I know some might argue with me due to their own personal opinions, but I'm here to bring my own, and back them up with reasonable evidence. 101 Dalmatians with Glenn Close came out sometime in the 90s, I believe, and I really fell in love with story, visuals, and art styles picked for the film. True, it is certainly different from the animated film, where the animals could talk and it had a cat aiding in the puppies' escape from DeVil Manor. Yes, the live-action didn't have talking animals and Sargant Tibs was missing, but despite the changes, the execution of the film was stunning. You didn't need to hear the animals talk; you can figure out from the body stance to the barks and tweets of the animals to know roughly what is going on in a scene with just animals.

Alice in Wonderland from what I heard was a mixed bag in terms of its reception from audience and fans. For me, I loved it. However, I didn't watch the Disney's original Alice in Wonderland, but I did read the book by Lewis Carroll. I personally disliked the book because there was no sense of plot and felt like a very weird dream, as dreams often are. Yes, I'm aware that is kind of the point because it was all Alice's dream in the novel. This doesn't mean I want to be in one while awake and reading. So, watching Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland was a pure joy for me. I felt it certainly did better than the book in this regard because it had a plot. As for the remake aspect from the animated, I cannot judge it. However, I will say this - Walt Disney himself had admitted that Alice in Wonderland was one of his worst animated films he'd ever produced. Yes, the man himself hated it. Sadly, I can't speak for the legend himself, if he would have loved the live-action remake, but I feel, based on his response to original, and my take on the live-action vs the book, it is better.

The reason I feel the three of these did well is because they had had enough time in between each other to do well. A lot of time and effort was put to execute these films well. Now, I'm not saying the rest are complete trash because of it.

2017's Beauty and the Beast did a phenomenal job of cleaning up the plot holes left by original animated film. Also, I love the artistic musical approach it made. That doesn't mean the film was without flaws. Two of which I feel was Emma Watson's singing and her dress. Watson I feel was perfectly suited to the role of Belle, but I can't say the same for her singing voice. I also agree with many about the ballroom dress she wore. It certainly felt too modern. While, I appreciate wanting to change it up and get a new vibe and feel, but sadly it failed to deliver.

Films like Peter Pan and Wendy, while I appreciate the concept of maturity added, and being faithful the to Native American culture, which the original Disney film didn't do, I feel the magic joy I felt watching the original fell short with the visuals, and the filmmakers trying too hard to not make Peter the sole hero of the story. I don't mind Peter going on a character arc journey of learning to be selfless and mature, but I felt it was poorly executed.

The last aspect I wish to bring up, which I've heard many bring up and it has bothered me, is that people complain about not sticking to the originals scene for scene. I understand the desire to see every scene and moment you loved in the original animated film be adapted, but at the same time I feel it is tad unrealistic and boring. A lot of the remakes, brought new, interesting twists to outdated themes, which made the watch of the remake a little more enjoyable and appreciated. Honestly, I've seen a strict and faithful adaptation of A Wrinkle in Time and I was honestly bored because I knew what would happen next because I've read the book. Certain things have to change because the times have changed, and I might sound woke about it, but it is true. We have to respect and represent all aspect life, faithfully. We needed Cinderella and the prince to meet prior to the ball, otherwise it would be the same theme of "love at first sight" which isn't always true.

Overall, remakes have to walk the delicate balance of keeping what works and makes the heart of the original, at the same time, changing the things that are outdated. The best way I feel studios can do this is by giving these masterpieces time. Work through the stories and analyze all this before production. Also, pick stories that could use work because they did poorly in the box office and have room to grow like Atlantis, Treasure Planet, and The Black Cauldron. In addition, give these stories room to breathe and become their own classics before deciding to make them into live-action like How to Train Your Dragon and Moana (Yes, Moana is becoming a live action.).

These are my opinion and thoughts on all this. Please feel free to share yours. Do you agree? Disagree? Remember, be polite. Rudeness will not be tolerated here.

Inclusiveness in Remakes and Adaptations

 I struggled to find a suitable topic for discussion today. This past Friday, I rewatched the live action Beauty and the Beast, and considered discussing this. However, as I planned on what I might cover in the blog, I realized that there's a far more controversial and current topic trend spreading across the internet with each new remake and adaptation made.

Off the bat, I am all about being inclusive and representing every race and ethnicity out there. One of my favorite Pixar films is Coco alongside Brave and Inside Out. I even grew up loving the 1997 Rodger's and Hammerstein's Cinderella. Though my brother and I questioned the realistic approach because the Prince didn't look anything like his parents. Later, as an adult when I rewatched it, I think I heard one of the character's mention he was adopted, which makes a little more sense.

So, I have no qualms of a black Cinderella or anything like that, but it has to make some obvious sense. This is something I've picked up on in the recent show Rings of Power. I don't mind some racial diversity. However, having a random black elf and hobbit in the middle of a land filled with characters who are mostly white is a little off-putting. Tolkien's Middle Earth setting, as I understand it, is based on the English landscapes. (Yes, I know the films were filmed in New Zealand - a topic for another day and time.) Now, I don't have a clear history on this, so I could be wrong here, but from my understanding on this, blacks probably weren't heavily present in those areas at those times in history. If Middle-Earth is a representation of the UK at the time then it feels even more odd to have them. But, yes, I understand the need for diversity and inclusiveness, but that doesn't excuse lazy writing and world-building. There could very well be black dwarves and elves coming from elsewhere outside of Middle-Earth, or some backstory in how a random black hobbit integrated himself with the white hobbits. Do you see my point here?

I am aware some of you are rolling your eyes - It is a work of fiction? It doesn't take away from the story. So, drop it.

I hear you. Yes, it is fiction, and so are the number of other stories that have been subjugated to this lazy inclusiveness. In truth, and for the most part these race swaps don't often affect the story, but it can be jarring for those who aren't sure if the work is taking a romantic or accurate approach to the setting. Romantic approach, for example, would be the live action Lady and the Tramp where diverse inclusiveness is spread thoroughly through the story, but does not represent how the real world at the time and place truly worked. New Orleans, during that time, didn't have blacks who can own their own shops and be wealthy enough to afford the shipment of a fancy vase from Africa. Even a romantic approach can be jarring, but less so. When there's only one character who has been race swapped than it is even harder to swallow.

What is the big issue? I didn't mind Cinderella. "Cinderella" is a classic, timeless fairy tale that has had many iterations of its story. It is, therefore, immune to race swapping. However, stories that have characters with clear distinct descriptions or a specific film is being adapted into live action that comes with a certain set of expectations could prove problematic. By the descriptions and by what we grow up seeing, we get used to, or imagine without our own heads. So, when Little Mermaid live action remake came out, I was disappointed like many others because I expected a white female red-head to play her. Also, this move also created another problem, which I will get into shortly. The same occurred for me with the "Percy Jackson" show with Annabeth being black with black hair, and Percy being a blonde-haired kid. See, I got bothered by Percy's appearance, too. It has nothing to do with race. I read the books and knew to expect both these characters to be white, with blonde for Annabeth, and black for Percy. Granted a similar feel occurred with the "Forbidden Child" play where they made Hermione black too, but I was willing to let this one slide because the description of her never mentioned her skin, but her bushy brown hair, and buck teeth, which were open to interpretation. It jarred me a little, still, but that's because I knew I never ended up picturing Hermione like that, and I got used to Emma Watson in the role of Hermione. But, I do understand that others may have pictured her differently. So, I am able to get behind this one. However, I can't get behind Harry being Indian. I get it is a classic Indian boy look. Even as someone who has Indian born and raised parents, I can't get behind this one.

Now before diving into the case of Snape, I want to cover something quickly about the Little Mermaid live action. Disney's live action Little Mermaid ended up not just race-swapping the main character, but it also pulled a move that other films and shows have done with specific types of characters - red-headed females. I had watched the CW's "Flash" and I had no idea that Iris was originally meant to be red-headed white. Ariel is a female red-head, and she got swapped for a black. So, in the process of being inclusive for blacks, they're doing the opposite for female white red-heads. That's not cool.

In the case of Snape being black, it is given in the description that he is sallow skinned, and due to his backstory, Snape being black is going to take on a whole new meaning when James bullies Snape, which I don't think Rowling intended. There's already a theme of discrimination in Harry Potter, and I agree we don't always need the classic black against white happening all over again. I get it we need to ensure that future generations learns the power of treating people equally and that discrimination is bad, but surely we can find creative ways to say the same thing. Just look at Zootopia. And there are other races and ethnicities that could use some love, too.

Bottom line, I enjoy watching films and shows, and reading books with characters that are black, white, red-headed, Asian, etc. We grow up watching stories with a certain image in mind of how a character is supposed to look, and while their change in live-action might have little affect on the plot, can be off-putting due to not being used to the change. Even reading a book where a character is given a certain set of descriptions, and then the adaptation wishes to change it, can be upsetting because our minds have used those descriptions within the book to create the character in our heads. If the book mentions the character to be dark-skinned, then I will imagine that character to be dark-skinned.

Inclusivity is fine and important in our culture, but that doesn't excuse lazy writing and world-building. Don't just pick and choose characters at random who will be black for the sake of being inclusive. And don't push other minority groups further into the dark in the attempts to keep putting another race in need of inclusivity in its place.

Be creative and original with a diverse cast or a specific group focus story. Or find a way to be explain randomness. The Inheritance Cycle is a wonderful example of this. I remember one of the characters, I forget her name, is black and it is explained that she is from a certain tribe of people who have their own cultural norms. I loved this because it supported the reason why there's a random black character in the story filled with white characters.

Please share your thoughts. Do you agree? Do you disagree? Do wish to add to it? Did I miss something? Now keep in mind, please be courteous to everyone here. We all have a right to speak and be heard, no matter our opinions. You can say your opinions without hurting someone else.

Returning to Blog!

    It has been nearly six years, since I lasted posted on this blog. My journey over the past few years have been filled with many trials filled with both failures and victories. It has recently been made clear that what I do here is essential to my future. 

    So, now with my personal writing ready for querying, I've decided to redirect my focus here and on my vlog. The Tree Nook vlog will no longer be active, but this one will. However, this blog will have some changes. Nothing physical, but rather what this blog will focus on. I will focus not just on giving you quality writing from me, but also quality content focused primarily on discussions from a wide range of entertainment sources like books, films, and shows. 

    I know I've done so in the past, but I've also added things that may not relate or connect well. Those particular topics like parties, events, and theming will find a new home in a new blog. I don't know if I will be doing it soon or not. However, I will let you know.

    This blog from this day onward will focus on in-depth discussions on topics I enjoy discussing whether it be a book, film, or show. You are welcome to follow and join me in discussing these in the comments section below. I will do my best to respond in a timely manner, and, of course, respectfully too. I also ask you to do likewise. I will not tolerate insults, slurs, or misconduct here. That's fine if people disagree on things, but disagreement doesn't mean we need to hurl insults at each other.

    I am hoping to release one a week. At the moment, I don't know on which day. I am leaning towards one of the weekend days. Maybe Sunday. Also, if this does well, along with my vlog on Youtube - The Questing Bard, I may consider adding a podcast to this blog. My vlog will continue my writing progress and updates.

    So, stay tuned. Next week I will be bringing up a topic for discussion.