It's hard to find something to dislike about fan-favorite Disney classic characters. Live-action remakes started premiering at full speed ahead in recent years using new and advanced cinematic "magic." Attention to detail through CGI and costumes, for starters, was a huge component that added to the films' box office and pop-cultural success.
However, some fans of the original animations won't hesitate to point out what they didn't appreciate with the live-actions, such as the characters' new appearances. This comparison to the animated movies only revolves around the physical attributes that were adorned for the modern characters. Costumes play a large part in the new films, for example. Some of the costume choices were attempts to match cultural or historical accuracy. Nevertheless, there are many fans that will defend their opinions to the end as to why they don't like the modernized main characters.
10 Better: Aurora
Elle Fanning's Princess Aurora has a much better look in Maleficent. She matches the original animation's beautiful blonde locks, but her costumes provide a much more magical and angelic appearance, which literally suits who the character is.
This live-action princess is decorated with one primary blue dress with long sleeves that sink down nearly to the bottom. Although it has a majestic look to it, the costume is more subtle than what a princess's gown is supposed to look like in this fairytale. The pastel-like blue shade accents the character's young face, while maintaining the simpler look that the animation aimed for.
9 Worse: Cinderella's Stepmother
This is not to undermine the physicality of the lovely and talented Cate Blanchett, but the modern rendition's makeup and wardrobe create a look that's too bright for an evil character. Plus, the animated counterpart wears dim colors that accent her dark gray hair color.
The 2015 live-action stepmother has red locks, with eyeliner that makes her eyes pop out from her face. This, of course, may have been an attempt to create a more intimidating appearance, but her green gown and reddish hair brighten her essence. This is not what the character embodies, as she is supposed to be silently scary, not loudly frightening. This is why the remake's stepmother is worse, but it's not because she should look exactly like the animation. It's because the stepmother is supposed to be the dark side of the story and the modern live-action does not physically represent that.
8 Better: Prince Charming
The Prince Charming in the 1950 classic is emblematic of a dashing, royal character, but the modern prince embodies a more amicable appearance rather than solely one of a wealthy prince.
The 2015 Prince Charming (or "Kit" as he's called) was designed as much more of a commoner than the animated prince was. The animation strictly has a royal semblance, while the modern rendition seems more easily approachable, that even Cinderella doesn't initially realize he's the prince. His green top is sewn with gold leaves and a teal-blue collar. While the bright colors establish this Prince Charming as a friendly person, he also is decorated with a sword in his other, more original prince-like outfit. The sword gives him more of an edge (no pun intended) than the animated character seems to have.
7 Worse: Maleficent
No, this actually isn't a mistake! Angelina Jolie's villain has a truly intimidating appearance, but the animation actually is better. The different colors that the original Maleficent wears shape a more complex appearance, rather than just one dark color.
Meanwhile, the live-action character rocks a really edgy, black outfit. The main problem with this one though is how appealing her clothes look, rather than simply evil.
6 Better: Aladdin
Some will not agree with this entirely because they were looking forward to a shirtless Aladdin in the remake like the one in the animation. Nevertheless, the live-action character has a more intriguing appearance than the original does.
Wearing more layers to his entire "street rat" outfit, Aladdin's clothes look more worn-in and authentic for his lifestyle while the animated counterpart looks too clean. Granted, it's an animated film, but the remake Aladdin also seems more athletic in his movements.
5 Worse: Belle
This may cause some serious controversy because of how difficult it is to find an issue with Emma Watson's rendition of Belle. However, there are a few aspects of the 2017 film that are not as strong as the 1991 animation.
Belle's ball gown, while the production made it clear why they wanted this specific design, shouldn't look as lightweight as it is. The animated character's gown truly looks heavy to wear, but it's laced with golden-yellow ribbons and ruffles, topped off with gloves, that create more individuality for both Belle and the entire ballroom sequence. Quite frankly, the modern Belle's gown top looks like a tank top in comparison to the animated Belle's uniquely-sleeved gown.
4 Better: Cinderella
This live-action has one of the best costume creations out of the Disney remake films. The titular character dons an overwhelmingly beautiful ball gown. While the animated character wears the favorite classic, light-blue gown, and an up-do for her hair, the live-action reinvented the tale to look much more magical.
The 2015 Cinderella wears a large yet lightweight ball gown that's touched by butterflies and hinted with sparkles. While the gown isn't completely accurate for the supposed time period, the Fairy Godmother's magic is finally given the pedestal it deserves. Cinderella's hairstyle is also an upgrade from the animation's, thus looking even better, because of the shimmering hair-jewels that accent the character's angelic aura.
3 Worse: Beast
To state the obvious, the Beast is supposed to appear frightening when he threatens Belle and imprisons her in the beginning, but viewers love how sweet and humorous he seems later on as he falls for Belle. While the 2017 live-action uses impressive CGI effects, the Beast needed less of them.
Dan Stevens rocked the role with his talent, but the actor wasn't given the actual clothing pieces for the Beast's costumes. While the costume looks artistic, viewers can tell it moves in such a way that's too unnaturally computerized. Also, when looking closely, the Beast's hair looks a little too curly to seem beastly. It actually looks like the curls sprinkle a hint of a royal prince rather than a cursed, furry monster. It makes sense that they wanted to keep the human semblance to the face of the character, but the actor could have possibly been costumed with actual attributes of the Beast, like real claws.
2 Better: Jasmine
The live-action Jasmine is a true winner. Not only is she given more culturally-relevant clothing pieces, but she also knows how to dance and speak as if she were raised like a princess. The animated counterpart will always be loved for her bold and strong tone, but the live-action Jasmine's voice sounds like she was raised in an etiquette-filled household. This is accurate because Jasmine is expected to "be seen but not heard."
Of course, once she sings, Naomi Scott knew how to decorate Jasmine with strong, powerful singing pipes. Jasmine's costumes additionally add more complexity to the character, as they push her to walk a certain way in public and maintain a royal stature. Adding the "Harvest Dance" to Jasmine's lifestyle though was a brilliant choice because it shows her skills, yet also what she was required to know as a young woman in this story.
1 Worse: Jafar
Jafar has unfortunately fallen to backlash since the film was released, but there is a simple reason why. The original Jafar has a deeper, more intimidating tone of voice than the 2019 one does, although the actor, Marwan Kenzari, did a great job in using his yelling voice to cut through the air.
The animation is better than the live-action because he conveys a more naturally sinister personality. The 2019 rendition has to raise his voice a lot to scare the others. It's true that the animated Jafar yells too, but it sounds like the modern one needs to talk louder in order to be feared. Also, his curled beard gave him a more unique appearance than the modern one.
from ScreenRant - Feed https://ift.tt/3bh3MRt
0 Comments
Please don't use vulgar comments and avoid discussion on Religious matters