Mulan - Live Action Remake (2020)

Lulcielid

Media Thinker
AKA
Lucis Caelum
#1
Last edited:
AKA
Fancy
#3
omg yay! <3 Folks seemed to be gunning for Fan Bing Bing or Zhang Ziyi (which, yikes, I get it cuz she's one of the few Chinese actresses known in the west but she's old enough to play Mulan's mum tbh) for the longest time and AAAAHHH. Excited about Liu Yifei and the new love interest.
 
AKA
Fancy
#5
She was in a bit of trouble with the Chinese government, yeah, for supposed tax evasion and a lot of Chinese netizens have turned their backs on her as a result. It’s a bit sketchy and there’s rumours speculating that the government essentially framed her in order to knock her down a couple of notches. It’s a shame because her only crime, really, has been being too successful and influential in a country that is entirely paranoid of its own citizens. 😔
 
Last edited:

Lulcielid

Media Thinker
AKA
Lucis Caelum
#10
What kind of appropiation is being done?

Why do we have to have live action remakes? Is it because there's so much more technology than creativity in the film industry? Why can't we just have new films? I guess they're too much of a financial risk.
For the same reason adaptations of existing material (like OG Disney Mulan) exist, you can skip the starting from scratch process.

Piece of trivia, Liu Yifei was previously considered for the role of Mulan in the chinese live action movie Mulan (2009).
 

Cthulhu

Administrator
AKA
Yop
#11
I don't get the remakes either myself (both these and e.g. video games); I don't believe it's actually cheaper to redo the Lion King in CGI; the original Lion King had a budget of $45 million, which is pretty steep - especially for an animated film, especially back then - BUT a modern-day CGI film is more expensive.

I've pulled up the closest comparison - the Jungle Book animation from holy shit 1967 had a budget of $4 million (source, which corrected for inflation is $29.213.911 in 2016 money. The 2016 The Jungle Book had a budget of $177 million (source).

I don't think the starting from scratch is an issue. I don't think they would save a significant enough amount of money by not coming up with an original story. But, it's risk aversion, it's trying a winning formula, it's cashing in on nostalgia, err. All that shit. I don't know how these things work :monster:
 

Mage

Spores!
AKA
Mage
#13
@Lulcielid I thought the phrase 'childhood appropriation' would suffice, but since it doesn't (and we know none of these Disney stories are original anyway), it's frustration at seeing everything I loved and valued as a child being rechurned for profit. Case in point ATM is my watching the new She-Ra reboot. There was arguably absolutely nothing to be gained from doing it but it happened. Thundercats, Ghostbusters, Disney films, the Powerpuff Girls to name but a few, all rebooted and not necessarily for the better. Like Clement said, where's the USP? What was wrong with the original that it couldn't just be shown again? That's rhetorical, we all know it's the pursuit of profit from a new and improved version (like when your favourite shampoo gets new packaging, says 'new and improved' despite being exactly the same and yet costs more).
 

Lulcielid

Media Thinker
AKA
Lucis Caelum
#14
Sorry for your pain but I just cant feel sadness over a product being rechurned for profit when said product was made to produce profit in the first place (specially your examples of She-Ra and Thundercats which, lets not kid ourselves, were 80s glorified toy ads), none of Disney's movies were screened for free and none of your childhood products were greenlighted with the expectations of getting nothing in return.

What could be gained from getting these reboots and remakes is a better overall product than the original.

What USP stands for?
 
Last edited:

trash panda

---m(O.O)gle---
AKA
Howl
#16
Okay these remakes are happening regardless of how many childhoods are being crushed and paved-over in the process, so ninny all ye naysayers if ye will but it won't make a bit of difference. I haven't been especially impressed with any of the live action remakes so far, and I'm not enthused or anything, but can I just say YAY I LOVE GONG LI! :joy:
 
#17
Sorry for your pain but I just cant feel sadness over a product being rechurned for profit when said product was made to produce profit in the first place (specially your examples of She-Ra and Thundercats which, lets not kid ourselves, were 80s glorified toy ads), none of Disney's movies were screened for free and none of your childhood products were greenlighted with the expectations of getting nothing in return.

What could be gained from getting these reboots and remakes is a better overall product than the original.

What USP stands for?
Unique Selling Point. 'Why should I buy this and not its alternatives?' I am deeply ashamed of lapsing into marketing. Won't happen again.

I'm not sad or feeling childhood crushed, It just feels like a weird decision. If there's one company that can afford to take risks it's Disney, the only way they can make more money is actually printing their own currency.
 

Mage

Spores!
AKA
Mage
#18
Sorry for your pain but I just cant feel sadness over a product being rechurned for profit when said product was made to produce profit in the first place (specially your examples of She-Ra and Thundercats which, lets not kid ourselves, were 80s glorified toy ads), none of Disney's movies were screened for free and none of your childhood products were greenlighted with the expectations of getting nothing in return.

What could be gained from getting these reboots and remakes is a better overall product than the original.

What USP stands for?
She-Ra was specifically created to hoover up the 20% female He-Man fanbase - I was that target audience, I know perfectly well that the cartoons were created to sell toys (fucking hell, all the females with the exception of Madam Razz were exactly the same shape to lower production costs). So just because the stuff I loved as a kid came with or was created to sell merchandise I should not be annoyed at the total lack of originality? No, fuck that shit off a cliff, the success of those shows might have been based on the ability to generate income but I'm not the twat in a suit in an office crunching numbers, I was the child running round her garden with a wooden sword using the garden sprinkler to recreate the magick dust shower when I transformed into She-Ra.
I suspect your comment about gaining a better overall product than the original is based purely on speculative sales figures and completely ignores a lot of precious childhood memories essentially being set on fire - someone looking at them and saying 'yeah, those kids are grown up now, let's rehash that shit and sell it to a new generation'. Speaking as someone whose childhood was mostly miserable, it's utterly gut-wrenching and if you don't understand already then my attempts to explain it will make no difference.
 

Lulcielid

Media Thinker
AKA
Lucis Caelum
#21

Description said:
When the Emperor of China issues a decree that one man per family must serve in the Imperial Army to defend the country from Northern invaders, Hua Mulan, the eldest daughter of an honored warrior, steps in to take the place of her ailing father. Masquerading as a man, Hua Jun, she is tested every step of the way and must harness her inner-strength and embrace her true potential. It is an epic journey that will transform her into an honored warrior and earn her the respect of a grateful nation…and a proud father. “Mulan” features a celebrated international cast that includes: Yifei Liu as Mulan; Donnie Yen as Commander Tung; Jason Scott Lee as Böri Khan; Yoson An as Cheng Honghui; with Gong Li as Xianniang and Jet Li as the Emperor. The film is directed by Niki Caro from a screenplay by Rick Jaffa & Amanda Silver and Elizabeth Martin & Lauren Hynek based on the narrative poem “The Ballad of Mulan.”
Interested that they don't mentioned the animated movie (something that they did with the other live-action remakes)
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom