Posted: 7/10/26 at 6:27pm
No shock. The last two Thomas Kail shows I saw (Sweeney and Anna Christie) had some of the worst direction I've ever seen. Can't imagine he'd be anymore skilled with film.
Posted: 7/10/26 at 7:29pm
malcs98 said: "Jeffrey Karasarides said: "As someone who personally never has any interest in Disney's live action remakes, I'm of course skipping this one."
Hot Take: Cinderella (2015) is the only good Disney live action remake they've released."
Of the few I actually have seen, I agree that Cinderella is the one I did enjoy most.
Updated On: 7/10/26 at 07:29 PM
Posted: 7/10/26 at 7:42pm
I feel like the original thread title was immediately understandable, and I've definitely heard the word abortion used like this (cf. senses 3 and 4 here).
On topic, I don't have any interest in this movie. I agree that Cinderella was the best of the mediocre bunch, though I somewhat enjoyed Beauty and the Beast as well.
Posted: 7/11/26 at 12:19am
Jg2019 said: " i can appreciate things about beauty and the beast but the production design was not good, and poor casting choice for belle. emma watson looked like herself. didn’t even give her darker hair, plus her gold dress was not good."
Ok, Belle should have been cast better, her gold dress needed to be better…but what was wrong with the production design? That was the best part of the movie and my favorite production design of the Disney live-action remakes. Beauty and the Beast (2017) had absolutely gorgeous 18th century-appropriate rococo prodcution design! It got Oscar nominated for it!
Also, I gotta agree Cinderella (2015) was the best Disney live-action remake ever. That movie was beautiful, too.
Updated On: 7/11/26 at 12:19 AM
Posted: 7/11/26 at 6:26am
MagicalMusical said: "Jg2019 said: "What was wrong with the production design? That was the best part of the movie and my favorite production design of the Disney live-action remakes. Beauty and the Beast (2017) had absolutely gorgeous 18th century-appropriate rococo production design! It got Oscar nominated for it!
I never saw the film, but from photos I've seen, the castle looked too clean. Especially compared to the cartoon, which while had its share of nice-looking rooms, still had others that naturally gave you a sense of uneasiness.
Posted: 7/11/26 at 6:46am
Jay Lerner-Z said: "TotallyEffed said: "Jay Lerner-Z said: "ClumsyDude15 said: "I get not being fond of the live action remakes, but there really wasn't a better word you could have used in the title of this thread?
It doesn't even really make sense overall, but also it's kind of weird."
It's a sensitive issue for sure, but it's not a dirty word. No shame attached, perhaps normalizing its usage is a good thing?"
Why would you normalize the word in reference to a kid'smovie that has nothing to do with abortion?"
Dunno.
Language is funny. Words often lose meaning through usage totally unconnected to original usage.
"
Second definition of Abortion in Miriam Webster is “something regarded as horrifically or disgustingly bad”.
Posted: 7/11/26 at 8:04am
Dreamboy3 said: "Second definition of Abortion in Miriam Webster is “something regarded as horrifically or disgustingly bad”."
You haven't read carefully. The second definition in Miriam Webster is: "a misshapen thing or person : monstrosity".
There is an additional sub-definition that's specifically labeled as being "informal + sometimes offensive" - which the use of the word in this thread's title most definitely is, and seems intended to be.
Updated On: 7/11/26 at 08:04 AM
Posted: 7/12/26 at 11:43am
Moana Box Office: Disney's Live-Action Remake Struggles in Opening
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/moana-box-office-disney-opening-evil-dead-burn-1236644503/?
Posted: 7/14/26 at 12:41am
Jeffrey Karasarides said: "I never saw the film, but from photos I've seen, the castle looked too clean. Especially compared to the cartoon, which while had itsshare of nice-looking rooms, still had others that naturally gave you a sense of uneasiness."
Ok, I will admit the animated castle looked creepier than the live-action one. If only they could keep that glorious rococo beauty but have added more scare.
Posted: 7/14/26 at 8:44am
TotallyEffed said: "Jay Lerner-Z said: "ClumsyDude15 said: "I get not being fond of the live action remakes, but there really wasn't a better word you could have used in the title of this thread?
It doesn't even really make sense overall, but also it's kind of weird."
It's a sensitive issue for sure, but it's not a dirty word. No shame attached, perhaps normalizing its usage is a good thing?"
Why would you normalize the word in reference to a kid'smovie that has nothing to do with abortion?"
I agree, so many words you could use, and I believe that word was selected to draw attention. You could say this movie is a "bomb", flop" or "disaster" for example.
Posted: 7/17/26 at 9:12pm
Despite Moana currently flopping at the box office, Disney is developing a live action spin-off of The Princess and the Frog. Colman Domingo is in-talks to co-write the screenplay with Robert O’Hara.
https://www.broadwayworld.com/article/Colman-Domingo-in-Talks-to-Co-Write-Live-Action-Princess-TianaFilm-With-Robert-OHara-20260717
Posted: 7/18/26 at 8:30am
Posted: 7/19/26 at 4:25am
I’ve seen that a live action Princess and the Frog movie is in the works, but it’s a sequel to the original movie instead of a remake. I always thought that’s what Moana should have done, been a live action sequel instead of a remake!
Posted: 7/19/26 at 8:39am
Posted: 7/22/26 at 12:37pm
The Hollywood Reporter calls out Moana and other recent franchise bombs that it claims are turning audiences off with their bland artificiality and over reliance on shoddy CGI effects.
‘The Odyssey’ Proves It: Audiences Want Movies Made The Hard Way
Updated On: 7/22/26 at 12:37 PM
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
