It would unironically make more money than this piece of shit will. Because nobody gives a frick about Bambi and literally less people give a frick about a live action Bambi.
>What were you expecting, a live-action remake of Song of The South that goes full /misc/tard? >First post >Cinemaphileumblr already b***hing and moaning about muh /misc/
RENT FREE
The only purpose of this thread was political garbage in the first place. It would have been >women are shit directors >libs are gay troony paedos >some schizo shit about yidsney not actually making money but being a vague israelite plot to demoralise le ebin white man
>It sanitizes and romanticizes a horrible period in Human history.
I guess we can't have movies about pirates either since it romanticizes a group of criminals that pillaged and raped innocent people.
Like a movie showing Blackbeard in a heroic light I would say is pretty fricked up, but one focusing on someone turning to piracy to avoid the brutal imperialism militarism and slavery going on at the time wouldn't necessarily be that fricked up
So, it's okay to make a movie about American slaves portrayed in a positive light as long as it focuses on a slave that wasn't mistreated, got it.
11 months ago
Anonymous
There is no such thing as a "slave that wasn't mistreatment." Chattel slavery by definition is mistreatment.
11 months ago
Anonymous
That anon resorted to an hypothetical, made up scenario so I did the same.
11 months ago
Anonymous
In which case the issue loops back to the "sanitization." Creating a fictional story about a happy slave by definition is a historical lie that presents one of histories great tragedies as "not that bad."
11 months ago
Anonymous
And it goes back to my example about piracy, an atrocity that affected a far larger number of people yet everybody is fine with romanticized takes on them, also. >one of histories great tragedies
Every major civilization had its share of slavery, Americans aren't special.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Americas are pretty special due to the sheer scale and distance of the trade.
Also yeah genuinely we shouldn't portray being pirates positively. Hell the pirates we have barely exist as pirates seriously when did Jack Sparrow ever frick over anyone who wasn't implicitly the bad guy?
Or imagine how upset the west would be if we portrayed the current real life pirates as the good guys trying to take back what little they can from the western powers who continue to prop up dictators to frick them in the ass.
Uncle Remus is an ex-slave still happily working on a plantation that makes use of sharecropping, a horrific system barely better than slavery designed explicitly to be slavery with the serial numbers filed off.
And the Lion King takes place in the wilds of Africa where animals constantly devour and kill each other, die of starvation or dehydration, and are regularly poached. Beauty and the Beast takes place in rural medieval France and shows peasants to live happy lives with little worry or struggle. Is that movie problematic because we don't see a third of the cast die from the plague?
11 months ago
Anonymous
Both Lion King and Beauty and the Beast made reference to the material conditions of the setting.
Lion King was full of death and brought up animals killing each other constantly.
Beauty and the Beast made period sexism a centerpiece of it's story.
Neither story sanitized the setting in the way Song of the South did.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Lion King was full of death and brought up animals killing each other constantly.
But the system is never criticized. Mufasa is shown to be a benevolent leader despite the fact that he literally devours his own subjects alive. Herbivores dance and sing about how wonderful the lions are and practically worship them. >Beauty and the Beast made period sexism a centerpiece of it's story.
Belle is seen as an outcast for being well-read, but that hardly means the setting isn't sanitized. Her village is clean and safe, there are no wars, no one is starving or sick, we don't see people being bled to cure illness, and in the end there are zero issues whatsoever with a peasant marrying into nobility.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>and in the end there are zero issues whatsoever with a peasant marrying into nobility.
To be fair, it's pretty clear that the Beast's subjects just wanted to break the curse. Besides, Belle wasn't written like the average woman at the time, she was well educated and more of an know-it-all, modern day college student. We even see she and the Beast do noble shit together and Beast is the one struggling with it.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Exactly my point. Having a peasant woman being able to become well educated, shun male suitors, and get married to nobility is absolutely sanitizing the period the film takes place in. That's fine, but it's no different from Song of the South which people b***h about. Hell, I'd argue it's more sanitized.
11 months ago
Anonymous
Its not more Sanitized because at least it brings up the issues of the time and shows a character suffering under them.
Even if it is less extreme that "reality" it's better than a sharecropper being totally happy with working on a plantation
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Even if it is less extreme that "reality" it's better than a sharecropper being totally happy with working on a plantation.
How is this extreme? Do you really think there was not a single sharecropper throughout the entire South who was content with their position? I'd wager that was more common than liberated women being able to marry noblemen. Is it more sanitized than Hercules, which completely ignores the institution of slavery within ancient Greece?
11 months ago
Anonymous
So Mr. Enter was right. Turning Red is a fun time after 9/11 and should not have been made in a post 9/11 world.
2004 Toronto is not 1890s Alabama.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Belle is seen as an outcast for being well-read, but that hardly means the setting isn't sanitized. Her village is clean and safe, there are no wars, no one is starving or sick, we don't see people being bled to cure illness, and in the end there are zero issues whatsoever with a peasant marrying into nobility.
Beauty in the Beast is set in a middle class village in late 1700s France. That time period wasn't a dark ages hellscape.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Beauty and the Beast made period sexism a centerpiece of it's story.
It made a an over the top, cartoonish version of contemporary sexism the centerpiece in the form of Gaston, who was a parody of Florian and prince Charming. They wrote Belle as an modern day woman who is smart and independent and needs no man, as opposed to someone like Snow White or Cinderella who would be more than happy to start a family and become house wives. The renaissance generation wasn't interest in being culturally or era accurate as seen in Pocahontas, Aladdin and Little Mermaid.
11 months ago
Anonymous
To be honest Belle's POV wasn't THAT period innacurate. If she was real she probably would have been middle aged when the Declaration of Rights if Woman and the Female Citizen was written.
It may have been a coincidence, but a lot of irl Belle Types were actually part of the cultural movement that the French Revolution was one part of.
11 months ago
Anonymous
I still remember watching Lion King and finding it funny how the preys just rolled with the idea of their king being a predator. It made me wonder how Mufasa even managed the whole thing, would he just pick whoever gets to be eaten that day? I don't know.
11 months ago
Anonymous
MAD's Lion King parody talked about that.
11 months ago
Anonymous
>Bart making fun of cash cows
The irony.
11 months ago
Anonymous
This brought back memories. Loved Mad Magazine. Or maybe it was Cracked Magazine.
>It sanitizes and romanticizes a horrible period in Human history.
Many fricking movies do that. You think cartoons that take place in Ancient Rome or Greek aren't glossing over some of the terrible shit that happened there and just treating it like modern-day America? Mulan is downright neglectful in how they portray their characters living in feudal times by having them act like typical Americans. Pocahontas is fricking offensive with its ending message of, "WHITES AND NATIVES CAN GET ALONG". Movies like Pretty Woman portray prostitution as this humdrum factory job that a woman is tired of doing and longs for more instead of a horrible situation that a woman has to illegally put herself in just to pay the rent.
I seriously don't understand why movies like "Gladiator" gets a pass despite romanticizing Ancient Rome, but anything involving American slavery or the lack of mention of it around that time period is analyzed under a microscope.
>I seriously don't understand why movies like "Gladiator" gets a pass despite romanticizing Ancient Rome, but anything involving American slavery or the lack of mention of it around that time period is analyzed under a microscope.
My understanding is that American culture inherited Christian beliefs and taking heritage rather seriously. In Christianity, there is the whole deal about inherited sin and seeking redemption in the eyes of god, so it makes sense that they would make a special case for slavery because, from their perspective, the atrocities committed by white people in the past are their responsibility and it's their duty to seek redemption. After all, one's identity is partially defined by their heritage, or at least that's how it strikes to me when it comes to their culture.
Another thing worth bringing up is how people manage anger towards something that they cannot reach. If it's nature or a very powerful person, you can't directly express your rage and satisfy your desires. If someone reads about slavery and gets pissed off about someone that died hundreds of years ago, it's not like they can dig up the corpse and satisfy that desire, so they go for the closest person that they can associate with that target. This would explain why despite none of the people who lived through that era still being alive, this subject is still so turbulent among them.
Sharecropping wasn't true "freedom." It was basically a deliberate attempt to recreate European serfdom as a way to replace slavery.
Picture this, you were just freed. You have no money you have no land you have no property. But your ex-master says he will "hire you" to farm for him.
But you don't have any land so you have to pay him for a plot to work. And you have no seeds so you have to pay him for them too. But you have no money.
So he says you will loan me. I will give you the seeds and let you work the land for "free" in exchange you pay me back with the crops come harvest season, and you can keep everything else for yourself.
Of course the interest rates on these loans were so sky high that after the loans were paid back the sharecroppers had barely enough money to live on. Often they wound up OWING the ex-master money after all that so their debt got pushed back to the next harvest.
And you also had to pay the ex-master for housing a lot of times. Often these were the same shacks you were forced to live in as a slave.
And since you literally didn't have a choice. (Especially once Jim Crow really stepped in and you could be locked up for the crime of "truancy" for not having a job.) You just had to accept these grossly unfair "employment" terms.
For most of them, the only material difference from slavery is that you couldn't legally be sold off ,raped or beaten at will. (And given the extreme leverage sharecroppers were under if they WERE raped or beaten, they couldn't do anything about it )
Give briar rabbit his due.
Not my fault liberals are offended by black people existing. Maybe if you order him to uncle Remus will try real hard to "talk white" and not offend you with his accent.
How will c**tservatives cry pedophile over this one?
The irony of all ironies is that people like you are more mentally unwell than the trans folk you forth at the mouth over. I hope this all ends with the logical conclusion of sending you mentally deranged mother frickers off to a funny farm.
>incels screeching about their headcanons again
embarrassing
The irony of all ironies is that people like you are more mentally unwell than the trans folk you forth at the mouth over. I hope this all ends with the logical conclusion of sending you mentally deranged mother frickers off to a funny farm.
Interesting that you single out this anon specifically, and not the one who instigated the argument in the first place by being just as mentally ill.
Why could that be, I wonder.
The irony of all ironies is that people like you are more mentally unwell than the conservatives you forth at the mouth over. I hope this all ends with the logical conclusion of sending you mentally deranged mother frickers off to a funny farm.
The irony of ironies is that even though we all have eyes, the one thing we can't see is our own eyes looking out at others.
See, I can type stupid, meaningless shit on the internet, too. It's actually pretty easy when you try. Thanks for showing me the way, homosexual moron!
How will libsharts add groomer propaganda and then pretend nothing happened this time?
Hint: The "libsharts" aren't adding groomer propaganda to things, you're just tripping your faces off on rightwing propaganda and it's have cooked your brains at crack addicts. At most, all the "libsharts" are doing is acknowleding that LGBT exist and the rest is your nonsense.
https://i.imgur.com/O3kAAdU.jpg
RIP
That said, this movie is going to be meh at best and probably shit like all the live-action remakes have been. "Get Woke, Go Broke" isn't real, but Wokeness only fixes one or two specific types of shittiness. If it's shitty in any other way Wokeness won't magically make it better.
I'm convinced Disney is just a front for money laundering at this point. Their park, movie and TV ideas have been terrible. It's like they want to lose money.
>DUUUUDE PRIDE ROCK
That stupid homosexual's stupid voice may actually be burned into my memory forever. I can't believe I'm actually cheering on my family history of Alzheimers.
Get used to it. They're not going to stop until they live action their whole catalog. Then they'll probably do animated versions of the live action versions using the wonderful world of AI.
>Then they'll probably do animated versions of the live action versions using the wonderful world of AI.
Frick it, just have AI go full Skynet so I don't live to see this.
How are they going to make this one woke? I assume Bambi is going to be female/gay because feminine straight men go against trannies' precious traditional gender norms
> How are they going to make this one woke?
Faline won’t need no man and go full girl power against attempted raped.
She’ll save Bambi after he gets beat up.
>Bambee's mother will be voiced by a stronk black womyn and will have a more prominent role until her death, and will have a African-inspired name >her death will happen after a long action sequence where she saves several animals and even get the hunter hurt with her wits >at the end of that sequence, she'll be cornered by the chud hunter, look him dead in the eyes and say something in the lines of "I will gladly give my life it means saving others" >the "twitterpation" speech will add a part that implies that some animals will find love with animals from the same gender, or even snother species >most characters will be LGBTHIV+ >they will mention that forest fires happened in the past, but climate change is making them worse >FEATURING AWQUAFINNA AS THUMPER
Bambi's dad will be a useless bastard instead of being the stalwart protector of the forest and bambi's mom wont die and gain the courage to deervorce him and lead the forest herself
think of the people in the future who will be forced to watch it as part of their torture. the baby shark song already took a victim now imagine what a flopaction Disney bambi can do to the human brain.
My expectation is that they will take the "Bambi is gay" jokes and make them canon since general audiences (read: normalgays and zoomers) never saw the movie to know that half of it is dedicated to Bambi being a horny bastard. Them, internet activists will infight over a movie they never cared about in the first place for a few days.
>the movie that mixes a coming of age story with a documentary >the movie about girly, cutesy animals getting really horny and having sex
What could possibly go wrong.
It's a boring ass movie that people here will now pretend to like to win the war against whatever abstract stereotype is living rent free in their heads.
If you were born after 96 your opinion doesn't matter
It's a boring ass movie that people here will now pretend to like to win the war against whatever abstract stereotype is living rent free in their heads.
I binge watched all 2D Disney movies around 2 years ago. Bambi was legit one of the worst and I have no doubt that the people who praise it are doing it out of nostalgia. It's a boring movie that doesn't know if it wants to be a coming of age story or a documentary, failing to do both. It wastes screentime on bullshit instead of moving the (barely existent) plot forward. If you want the same idea done 10 times better just watch Lion King.
Maybe the real truth is that most Disney movies, while very impressive from a visual and technical angle(and even then far from all of them were that) just were never very good.
Some of them still hold up but the fairy tale formula was already tired by the time the new generation that took over, it's why they leaned more towards Broadway style cinematography while occasionally poking fun at the classics (see: Emperor's New Groove and Hercules).
>is that most Disney movies, while very impressive from a visual and technical angle(and even then far from all of them were that) just were never very good.
Bambi is a masterpiece and one of the best things Disney ever made, and this is coming from someone who watched all the golden age movies again very recently. It's also been implied by the animators that Disney himself thought it was the best thing that he had produced (which is also a sentiment shared by other animators and filmmakers, such as Osamu Tezuka who thought it was the best film ever made). If you dislike the movie, I think it's because you got filtered by the fact that it's a coming-of-age movie based around vignettes, and that's kinda sad. Have your opinions all you want, I'm never going to stop thinking it's amazing. As for remaking, I won't be surprised when the inevitable live-action Fantasia is announced, since that's the only early feature-movie that they haven't touched yet.
I was thinking live-action environments (or sound stages or whatever they did for Jungle Book and Lion King) and then having CGI characters for mostly everything else. That's one you could do it as "live action". If you want to call 3D deers and lions live-action anyway.
-Bambi's Father is tyrannical leader who disowns Bambi because he effeminate male.
-Bambi's Mother was a forced concubine turned outcast single mother who tries protect Bambi from the truth.
-Bambi still maintains his core personality from the animated version. But is more effeminate coded.
-Thumper is sex-reversed, still has the same personality type.
-Flower is sex-reversed, still has the same personality type.
-Faline is both a tomboy and Bambi's love interest. Way less docile than animated version and actually defends Bambi against initial encounter with Ronno.
-Ronno is Bambi's acknowledged half brother who's Bambi's Father preferred over.
-Man, white hands and red hat. Nothing more, nothing less.
>Bambi's Mother is killed trying to protect Bambi's Father because she still loves him. >Bambi and Ronno fight, but when Bambi appears to be losing Faline interferes long enough for Bambi to get the upper hand and win. >Bambi's Father takes anger out on Faline for interferring. Bambi fights his Father during the forest fire to a draw. Faline convinces Bambi it's not worth fighting his Father anymore. All three help each other escape the fire. >Bambi finally gets acknowledged and respected by his Father.
Let me guess, they’re going to try and impose the human concepts of feminism onto a bunch of literal animals again?
Real animals don’t abide by feminist ideology. In the wild, if a male animal wants to mate, he’ll mate, and the female can’t do shit about it. The female doesn’t try to abort the child, it just carries it to term, because that’s what animals do.
...that's not how nature works. If it were, there wouldn't be countless rituals different species perform before the sex happens. That's also not how sex differences in nature work.
It wasn't that long ago that if an award-nominated director wanted to make a movie that people would actually see, they would make a comedy, or a drama, or an adaptation of some big novel, or a thriller, or...
...but none of those things are at multiplexes any more, so if you want to make a big hit you can do nothing but swallow whatever shit Disney gives you and pretend you've always wanted to give your own personal take on this story.
A new movie of "Bambi" wouldn't be such a bad thing, or a new "Little Mermaid," or even a new "Cinderella." It's being forced to adapt Disney's own adaptation that is the soulless part. They all know it deep down.
>It's going to be full of ugly-ass "live action" CGI just like Lion King >they're going to completely frick over Faline just like they did with Nala >they'll probably show the hunters, and depict them as a bunch of amoral buttholes
Oh god I want to vomit...
How in the frick can you call films like this hypothetical Bambi film or the Lion King remake "live action" when they're literally all CGI? They're cartoons with cartoon characters.
I don't get it, what's the RIP about? The director? Or that there's going to be a Bambi remake?
Are there people on this board who haven't fully accepted Disney doing all this remake shit by now? It's already locked in and done, the train is halfway through its route. This is modern Disney's version of DTV sequels in order to get easy cash. How are people surprised when a new movie gets announced?
What value there was to Bambi was entirely in it's gorgeous animation. Making a shitty live action version of Bambi is taking away literally the one thing that made it impressive, and entertaining.
They can't be expecting to make much money on this.
What were you expecting, a live-action remake of Song of The South that goes full /misc/tard?
It would unironically make more money than this piece of shit will. Because nobody gives a frick about Bambi and literally less people give a frick about a live action Bambi.
no it wouldnt and you know that
>What were you expecting, a live-action remake of Song of The South that goes full /misc/tard?
>First post
>Cinemaphileumblr already b***hing and moaning about muh /misc/
RENT FREE
>implying this wasn't already a culture war /misc/Black person thread from OP
>I'm going to preemtively fill the htread with political garbage
Go to Twitter
The only purpose of this thread was political garbage in the first place. It would have been
>women are shit directors
>libs are gay troony paedos
>some schizo shit about yidsney not actually making money but being a vague israelite plot to demoralise le ebin white man
Ok, keep fighting the coulture war like a loser
>a live-action remake of Song of The South that goes full /misc/tard
I'm sick of remakes which miss the point of the original.
A bank collapse that would leave all these people drawing cartoons of people in the street for a couple of bucks
>Song of the South is about white children positively interacting with a black mentor
>"DAT'S RACIST"
I hate the left so much.
If it doesn't promote conflict, it's not useful to them.
It sanitizes and romanticizes a horrible period in Human history.
It's like having a story about an army boy and his helpful israeli railroad worker in 1940s Germany
>NOOOOO YOU CAN'T FIND A RAY OF HOPE IN A BAD SITUATION
>BE MISERABLE ALL THE TIME RIGHT NOW
>It sanitizes and romanticizes a horrible period in Human history.
I guess we can't have movies about pirates either since it romanticizes a group of criminals that pillaged and raped innocent people.
Depends on the pirate.
Like a movie showing Blackbeard in a heroic light I would say is pretty fricked up, but one focusing on someone turning to piracy to avoid the brutal imperialism militarism and slavery going on at the time wouldn't necessarily be that fricked up
So, it's okay to make a movie about American slaves portrayed in a positive light as long as it focuses on a slave that wasn't mistreated, got it.
There is no such thing as a "slave that wasn't mistreatment." Chattel slavery by definition is mistreatment.
That anon resorted to an hypothetical, made up scenario so I did the same.
In which case the issue loops back to the "sanitization." Creating a fictional story about a happy slave by definition is a historical lie that presents one of histories great tragedies as "not that bad."
And it goes back to my example about piracy, an atrocity that affected a far larger number of people yet everybody is fine with romanticized takes on them, also.
>one of histories great tragedies
Every major civilization had its share of slavery, Americans aren't special.
Americas are pretty special due to the sheer scale and distance of the trade.
Also yeah genuinely we shouldn't portray being pirates positively. Hell the pirates we have barely exist as pirates seriously when did Jack Sparrow ever frick over anyone who wasn't implicitly the bad guy?
Or imagine how upset the west would be if we portrayed the current real life pirates as the good guys trying to take back what little they can from the western powers who continue to prop up dictators to frick them in the ass.
Correctpilled
Song of the South takes place after the Civil War
Uncle Remus is an ex-slave still happily working on a plantation that makes use of sharecropping, a horrific system barely better than slavery designed explicitly to be slavery with the serial numbers filed off.
And the Lion King takes place in the wilds of Africa where animals constantly devour and kill each other, die of starvation or dehydration, and are regularly poached. Beauty and the Beast takes place in rural medieval France and shows peasants to live happy lives with little worry or struggle. Is that movie problematic because we don't see a third of the cast die from the plague?
Both Lion King and Beauty and the Beast made reference to the material conditions of the setting.
Lion King was full of death and brought up animals killing each other constantly.
Beauty and the Beast made period sexism a centerpiece of it's story.
Neither story sanitized the setting in the way Song of the South did.
>Lion King was full of death and brought up animals killing each other constantly.
But the system is never criticized. Mufasa is shown to be a benevolent leader despite the fact that he literally devours his own subjects alive. Herbivores dance and sing about how wonderful the lions are and practically worship them.
>Beauty and the Beast made period sexism a centerpiece of it's story.
Belle is seen as an outcast for being well-read, but that hardly means the setting isn't sanitized. Her village is clean and safe, there are no wars, no one is starving or sick, we don't see people being bled to cure illness, and in the end there are zero issues whatsoever with a peasant marrying into nobility.
>and in the end there are zero issues whatsoever with a peasant marrying into nobility.
To be fair, it's pretty clear that the Beast's subjects just wanted to break the curse. Besides, Belle wasn't written like the average woman at the time, she was well educated and more of an know-it-all, modern day college student. We even see she and the Beast do noble shit together and Beast is the one struggling with it.
Exactly my point. Having a peasant woman being able to become well educated, shun male suitors, and get married to nobility is absolutely sanitizing the period the film takes place in. That's fine, but it's no different from Song of the South which people b***h about. Hell, I'd argue it's more sanitized.
Its not more Sanitized because at least it brings up the issues of the time and shows a character suffering under them.
Even if it is less extreme that "reality" it's better than a sharecropper being totally happy with working on a plantation
>Even if it is less extreme that "reality" it's better than a sharecropper being totally happy with working on a plantation.
How is this extreme? Do you really think there was not a single sharecropper throughout the entire South who was content with their position? I'd wager that was more common than liberated women being able to marry noblemen. Is it more sanitized than Hercules, which completely ignores the institution of slavery within ancient Greece?
2004 Toronto is not 1890s Alabama.
>Belle is seen as an outcast for being well-read, but that hardly means the setting isn't sanitized. Her village is clean and safe, there are no wars, no one is starving or sick, we don't see people being bled to cure illness, and in the end there are zero issues whatsoever with a peasant marrying into nobility.
Beauty in the Beast is set in a middle class village in late 1700s France. That time period wasn't a dark ages hellscape.
>Beauty and the Beast made period sexism a centerpiece of it's story.
It made a an over the top, cartoonish version of contemporary sexism the centerpiece in the form of Gaston, who was a parody of Florian and prince Charming. They wrote Belle as an modern day woman who is smart and independent and needs no man, as opposed to someone like Snow White or Cinderella who would be more than happy to start a family and become house wives. The renaissance generation wasn't interest in being culturally or era accurate as seen in Pocahontas, Aladdin and Little Mermaid.
To be honest Belle's POV wasn't THAT period innacurate. If she was real she probably would have been middle aged when the Declaration of Rights if Woman and the Female Citizen was written.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_the_Rights_of_Woman_and_of_the_Female_Citizen#:~:text=The%20Declaration%20of%20the%20Rights,to%20the%201789%20Declaration%20of
It may have been a coincidence, but a lot of irl Belle Types were actually part of the cultural movement that the French Revolution was one part of.
I still remember watching Lion King and finding it funny how the preys just rolled with the idea of their king being a predator. It made me wonder how Mufasa even managed the whole thing, would he just pick whoever gets to be eaten that day? I don't know.
MAD's Lion King parody talked about that.
>Bart making fun of cash cows
The irony.
This brought back memories. Loved Mad Magazine. Or maybe it was Cracked Magazine.
I'm glad you know best for the blacks, whatever would they do without your guiding hand?
Why are you assuming I'm not Black.
Also Black people protested the hell out of it even when it came out.
>It sanitizes and romanticizes a horrible period in Human history.
Many fricking movies do that. You think cartoons that take place in Ancient Rome or Greek aren't glossing over some of the terrible shit that happened there and just treating it like modern-day America? Mulan is downright neglectful in how they portray their characters living in feudal times by having them act like typical Americans. Pocahontas is fricking offensive with its ending message of, "WHITES AND NATIVES CAN GET ALONG". Movies like Pretty Woman portray prostitution as this humdrum factory job that a woman is tired of doing and longs for more instead of a horrible situation that a woman has to illegally put herself in just to pay the rent.
I seriously don't understand why movies like "Gladiator" gets a pass despite romanticizing Ancient Rome, but anything involving American slavery or the lack of mention of it around that time period is analyzed under a microscope.
Pocahontas was so bad it bordered on a hate crime.
>I seriously don't understand why movies like "Gladiator" gets a pass despite romanticizing Ancient Rome, but anything involving American slavery or the lack of mention of it around that time period is analyzed under a microscope.
My understanding is that American culture inherited Christian beliefs and taking heritage rather seriously. In Christianity, there is the whole deal about inherited sin and seeking redemption in the eyes of god, so it makes sense that they would make a special case for slavery because, from their perspective, the atrocities committed by white people in the past are their responsibility and it's their duty to seek redemption. After all, one's identity is partially defined by their heritage, or at least that's how it strikes to me when it comes to their culture.
Another thing worth bringing up is how people manage anger towards something that they cannot reach. If it's nature or a very powerful person, you can't directly express your rage and satisfy your desires. If someone reads about slavery and gets pissed off about someone that died hundreds of years ago, it's not like they can dig up the corpse and satisfy that desire, so they go for the closest person that they can associate with that target. This would explain why despite none of the people who lived through that era still being alive, this subject is still so turbulent among them.
>Pocahontas
Everybody called it out though.
So Mr. Enter was right. Turning Red is a fun time after 9/11 and should not have been made in a post 9/11 world.
What fricking horrible period? When blacks were freed and could work a wage job like anyone else? What a fricking horror.
Sharecropping wasn't true "freedom." It was basically a deliberate attempt to recreate European serfdom as a way to replace slavery.
Picture this, you were just freed. You have no money you have no land you have no property. But your ex-master says he will "hire you" to farm for him.
But you don't have any land so you have to pay him for a plot to work. And you have no seeds so you have to pay him for them too. But you have no money.
So he says you will loan me. I will give you the seeds and let you work the land for "free" in exchange you pay me back with the crops come harvest season, and you can keep everything else for yourself.
Of course the interest rates on these loans were so sky high that after the loans were paid back the sharecroppers had barely enough money to live on. Often they wound up OWING the ex-master money after all that so their debt got pushed back to the next harvest.
And you also had to pay the ex-master for housing a lot of times. Often these were the same shacks you were forced to live in as a slave.
And since you literally didn't have a choice. (Especially once Jim Crow really stepped in and you could be locked up for the crime of "truancy" for not having a job.) You just had to accept these grossly unfair "employment" terms.
For most of them, the only material difference from slavery is that you couldn't legally be sold off ,raped or beaten at will. (And given the extreme leverage sharecroppers were under if they WERE raped or beaten, they couldn't do anything about it )
The black mentor literally reminisced about the good ol' days when he was a slave
>American education
Leftists try not to b***h about racism for ten seconds challenge (IMPOSSIBLE)
/co try not b***hing about leftists or transgenderism for 10 seconds (IMPOSSIBLE)
about the only thing that would make me give money to Disney
Yes.
Pause at just the right moment at the end and you'll see an Egyptian God grab a boy's ass.
A remake of Song of the South could be interesting, considering they could keep most of the animated segments.
We need a Song of the South remake
yes
At least it would have parts that are actually live-action in it.
Yes but either race swap everyone or turn it into 2hour session of buck breaking
Give briar rabbit his due.
Not my fault liberals are offended by black people existing. Maybe if you order him to uncle Remus will try real hard to "talk white" and not offend you with his accent.
Dilate
u
Unironically, yes.
unironically might watch it
Grass grows
Sun shines
Birds fly
White women ruin everything they touch
From what I’ve seen she’s never directed nor wrote a bad movie. Mediocre at worse. I have no faith in it for simply being live action.
How will c**tservatives cry pedophile over this one?
How will libsharts add groomer propaganda and then pretend nothing happened this time?
Flower is a troony.
He will be a homosexual so that people can say he always was
The Prince of the Forest is now a Princess, and Bambi is a magical lesbian spawn.
The irony of all ironies is that people like you are more mentally unwell than the trans folk you forth at the mouth over. I hope this all ends with the logical conclusion of sending you mentally deranged mother frickers off to a funny farm.
Interesting that you single out this anon specifically, and not the one who instigated the argument in the first place by being just as mentally ill.
Why could that be, I wonder.
The irony of all ironies is that people like you are more mentally unwell than the conservatives you forth at the mouth over. I hope this all ends with the logical conclusion of sending you mentally deranged mother frickers off to a funny farm.
They cut holes in their genitals because of their fetish
The irony of ironies is that even though we all have eyes, the one thing we can't see is our own eyes looking out at others.
See, I can type stupid, meaningless shit on the internet, too. It's actually pretty easy when you try. Thanks for showing me the way, homosexual moron!
Hint: The "libsharts" aren't adding groomer propaganda to things, you're just tripping your faces off on rightwing propaganda and it's have cooked your brains at crack addicts. At most, all the "libsharts" are doing is acknowleding that LGBT exist and the rest is your nonsense.
That said, this movie is going to be meh at best and probably shit like all the live-action remakes have been. "Get Woke, Go Broke" isn't real, but Wokeness only fixes one or two specific types of shittiness. If it's shitty in any other way Wokeness won't magically make it better.
The hunter is a zoophile.
>The hunter is a brony.
Gotta rep the fans still clinging to a dead show.
The mom will be black and the hunter a cop.
very interesting
more like the movie starts with the mom being raped by the prince
Given her last film you're not far off.
I'm convinced Disney is just a front for money laundering at this point. Their park, movie and TV ideas have been terrible. It's like they want to lose money.
>Live action CGI
so they can run for the best movie oscar category and not only for the best animated movie category.
Yes, braindead idiots did in fact say that the Lion King remake was live action so this isn't a new thing
>DUUUUDE PRIDE ROCK
That stupid homosexual's stupid voice may actually be burned into my memory forever. I can't believe I'm actually cheering on my family history of Alzheimers.
There was a Soviet version that used human actors. They weren't even dressed up as deer or anything.
It was like an attempt to film a stage version.
>Another remake
Disney fricking sucks
Get used to it. They're not going to stop until they live action their whole catalog. Then they'll probably do animated versions of the live action versions using the wonderful world of AI.
>Then they'll probably do animated versions of the live action versions using the wonderful world of AI.
Oh shit.
>Then they'll probably do animated versions of the live action versions using the wonderful world of AI.
Frick it, just have AI go full Skynet so I don't live to see this.
>live action Bambi
Wouldn't it be infinitely easier to just CG the animals like in the Lion King remake than try to wrangle live deer on a set?
How are they going to make this one woke? I assume Bambi is going to be female/gay because feminine straight men go against trannies' precious traditional gender norms
I don't see his father taking him in after the death of his mother in the second act with this one.
> How are they going to make this one woke?
Faline won’t need no man and go full girl power against attempted raped.
She’ll save Bambi after he gets beat up.
We'll see the face of a human as he sees the fire he started and figures out that "hunting was bad all along."
Bambi's Mom lives in this version won’t need no man and go full girl power against the hunters. She'll also be voice by some sassy black woman.
I can't wait for her victory rap
>Bambee's mother will be voiced by a stronk black womyn and will have a more prominent role until her death, and will have a African-inspired name
>her death will happen after a long action sequence where she saves several animals and even get the hunter hurt with her wits
>at the end of that sequence, she'll be cornered by the chud hunter, look him dead in the eyes and say something in the lines of "I will gladly give my life it means saving others"
>the "twitterpation" speech will add a part that implies that some animals will find love with animals from the same gender, or even snother species
>most characters will be LGBTHIV+
>they will mention that forest fires happened in the past, but climate change is making them worse
>FEATURING AWQUAFINNA AS THUMPER
Is that the chick from dawn of the dead? Frick, she aged like milk.
>Makes a film about women being drugged and raped.
>Disney be "She'll be perfect for our woodland animal film."
What the absolute frick?
Have you never looked into James Gunn and what he did before GotG?
Yea Troma films. I know Troma stuff. Guardians wasn't that big a stretch from those.
And as Vol 3 showed his writing doesn't go that far from Troma either.
>Live action
>Will still be animated.
in this version of the story Disney will cast a pitbull to play bambi
"I survived nearly getting blown up by Terry Gilliam for this?"
why the frick do they call it live action when it's clearly going to be 100% CGI animated?
Finally, a movie for /k/.
Knowing Disney they'll shoot an actual deer
>Bambi's mother getting shot
They're going to explicitly make this an anti-gun thing.
Bambi's dad will be a useless bastard instead of being the stalwart protector of the forest and bambi's mom wont die and gain the courage to deervorce him and lead the forest herself
>deervorce
heh
Unless it’s directed like Babe or Homeward Bound, there’s literally no point.
Literally what can you do to Bambi to ruin it. The story is barebones.
think of the people in the future who will be forced to watch it as part of their torture. the baby shark song already took a victim now imagine what a flopaction Disney bambi can do to the human brain.
My expectation is that they will take the "Bambi is gay" jokes and make them canon since general audiences (read: normalgays and zoomers) never saw the movie to know that half of it is dedicated to Bambi being a horny bastard. Them, internet activists will infight over a movie they never cared about in the first place for a few days.
Furries will never recover from this.
I thought they wanted gay sex
>the movie that mixes a coming of age story with a documentary
>the movie about girly, cutesy animals getting really horny and having sex
What could possibly go wrong.
Disney needs to stop ruining semen demons I mean god damn Bambi, the rabbit, Bambi's mom how am I supposed to fap to this shit now.
Based, and the only real complaint this thread should validate.
The rabbit's mom
inquiring minds wanna know, what are her pronouns? they/them/non binary?
Nobody adores Bambi. Just laugh at his dead mother and move on.
Bambi is a masterpiece fricking zoom zoom
A masterpiece in what? Boredom?
If you were born after 96 your opinion doesn't matter
87, dickbreasts.
Middle school level retort from a seething manchild.
A masterpiece in creating the very first furries. Including Osamu Tezuka.
I wouldn't brag about Tezuka
I've seen some of his drawings and some of what he did went WAAAAAY past furry and had more in common with shit like dorses
It's a boring ass movie that people here will now pretend to like to win the war against whatever abstract stereotype is living rent free in their heads.
AND TEAR
Why do they keep calling it live action? It's more animated the original.
Another live action remake that I am uninterested in.
>We're already doing the "Bambi was never good"
I hate zoomers so much it's unreal
I binge watched all 2D Disney movies around 2 years ago. Bambi was legit one of the worst and I have no doubt that the people who praise it are doing it out of nostalgia. It's a boring movie that doesn't know if it wants to be a coming of age story or a documentary, failing to do both. It wastes screentime on bullshit instead of moving the (barely existent) plot forward. If you want the same idea done 10 times better just watch Lion King.
I'm 35 and I never liked Bambi. It was more of a movie aimed at moms.
Maybe the real truth is that most Disney movies, while very impressive from a visual and technical angle(and even then far from all of them were that) just were never very good.
Some of them still hold up but the fairy tale formula was already tired by the time the new generation that took over, it's why they leaned more towards Broadway style cinematography while occasionally poking fun at the classics (see: Emperor's New Groove and Hercules).
The frick do you like then moron I swear to god if you say the last wish
Bambi was ok it was very beautiful visually but When I saw that it was just him getting his mother killed then growing up it seemed pretty empty
>is that most Disney movies, while very impressive from a visual and technical angle(and even then far from all of them were that) just were never very good.
Let me guess, anime is REAL art?
>bringing up anime out of nowhere
Obsessed much?
Bambi is a masterpiece and one of the best things Disney ever made, and this is coming from someone who watched all the golden age movies again very recently. It's also been implied by the animators that Disney himself thought it was the best thing that he had produced (which is also a sentiment shared by other animators and filmmakers, such as Osamu Tezuka who thought it was the best film ever made). If you dislike the movie, I think it's because you got filtered by the fact that it's a coming-of-age movie based around vignettes, and that's kinda sad. Have your opinions all you want, I'm never going to stop thinking it's amazing. As for remaking, I won't be surprised when the inevitable live-action Fantasia is announced, since that's the only early feature-movie that they haven't touched yet.
>live-action Fantasia
How would that even work? Besides, the original had live action segments already when they showed the orchestra.
I was thinking live-action environments (or sound stages or whatever they did for Jungle Book and Lion King) and then having CGI characters for mostly everything else. That's one you could do it as "live action". If you want to call 3D deers and lions live-action anyway.
What makes Bambi a good movie? I would like to see a more detailed answer from you.
-Bambi's Father is tyrannical leader who disowns Bambi because he effeminate male.
-Bambi's Mother was a forced concubine turned outcast single mother who tries protect Bambi from the truth.
-Bambi still maintains his core personality from the animated version. But is more effeminate coded.
-Thumper is sex-reversed, still has the same personality type.
-Flower is sex-reversed, still has the same personality type.
-Faline is both a tomboy and Bambi's love interest. Way less docile than animated version and actually defends Bambi against initial encounter with Ronno.
-Ronno is Bambi's acknowledged half brother who's Bambi's Father preferred over.
-Man, white hands and red hat. Nothing more, nothing less.
>Bambi's Mother is killed trying to protect Bambi's Father because she still loves him.
>Bambi and Ronno fight, but when Bambi appears to be losing Faline interferes long enough for Bambi to get the upper hand and win.
>Bambi's Father takes anger out on Faline for interferring. Bambi fights his Father during the forest fire to a draw. Faline convinces Bambi it's not worth fighting his Father anymore. All three help each other escape the fire.
>Bambi finally gets acknowledged and respected by his Father.
Flower will absolutely be the openly gay male
Nope, Disney will play this relatively safe and just sex swap Bambi's friends. The bigger risk will be saved for Bambi's Father, Faline and Ronno.
That way the toxic masculinity part can be focused on harder.
I don't know why they would waste their chance to retcon flower as their "very first gay character ever" since people already thought he was back then
Because money, they were probably tempted but Bambi would be an easy mark to protest as the latest LGBT thing for people to go against.
Plus they're lose some international markets which their live action movies keep trying to appeal to. So again they'll play it realitively safe.
True but that will depend on whether or not they learned a thing from lightyear and strange world
>Man, white hands and red hat. Nothing more, nothing less.
Joking aside, they will ONE THOUSAND PERCENT do this.
Let me guess, they’re going to try and impose the human concepts of feminism onto a bunch of literal animals again?
Real animals don’t abide by feminist ideology. In the wild, if a male animal wants to mate, he’ll mate, and the female can’t do shit about it. The female doesn’t try to abort the child, it just carries it to term, because that’s what animals do.
...that's not how nature works. If it were, there wouldn't be countless rituals different species perform before the sex happens. That's also not how sex differences in nature work.
>incels screeching about their headcanons again
embarrassing
Pretty cool how she's content to letting herself make Disney's literal shit for the rest of her career.
Reminder that Disney did a live-action Bambi sequel in 1957.
The frick
They did. There was even a watch-along thread on Cinemaphile, back when TCM did their "Treasures from the Disney Vault" block.
Rest assured Anons. The Hunter will still be white because they are portrayed in a negative light.
>live-action Bambi
>they won't shoot a deer in the set
What is the fricking point then?
The movie never shows Bambi's mom taking the bullet.
>live-action Bambi
>they won't have an already dead deer sitting around the set
What is the fricking point then??
We never see Bambi's mother's corpse at all, so it will have to be an already dead deer lying off-camera to set the mood.
>Originally, they were going to show Bambi's mother lying in a pool of blood and getting dragged away by the hunter
Fricking hell, Disney
It wasn't that long ago that if an award-nominated director wanted to make a movie that people would actually see, they would make a comedy, or a drama, or an adaptation of some big novel, or a thriller, or...
...but none of those things are at multiplexes any more, so if you want to make a big hit you can do nothing but swallow whatever shit Disney gives you and pretend you've always wanted to give your own personal take on this story.
A new movie of "Bambi" wouldn't be such a bad thing, or a new "Little Mermaid," or even a new "Cinderella." It's being forced to adapt Disney's own adaptation that is the soulless part. They all know it deep down.
>"live-action"
At what point are we going to stop calling CGI-fests "live-action"?
Maybe the live-action bits will be told by real people. Think The Lone Ranger, but everytime that stupid kid interrupts Tonto.
>It's going to be full of ugly-ass "live action" CGI just like Lion King
>they're going to completely frick over Faline just like they did with Nala
>they'll probably show the hunters, and depict them as a bunch of amoral buttholes
Oh god I want to vomit...
At least the animals being devoid of all expression will fit prey animals like deer and bunnies better than they did lions
don't forget the worst part
>it's gonna make a billion at the box office since consoomers are morons
Wait what happened with Nala?
literally who
WHO THE FRICK KEEPS ASKING FOR THESE
Pretty sure no one.
I think it's just straight up money laundering at this point.
Free idea, Disney can steal it if they want: Do the movie in the style of a fake Attenborough documentary. Get the man himself if you can swing it.
Enjoy the original, anon. You need not eat from the conveyor belt of shit
Same reason we typically only know one language
The countries that border us are beneath our notice
It's gonna be inoffensive and boring.
We should boycott the evil and corrupt company of today called Disney! If necessary, burn that company to the ground! Boycott Disney! Boycott!
How in the frick can you call films like this hypothetical Bambi film or the Lion King remake "live action" when they're literally all CGI? They're cartoons with cartoon characters.
>remake
Why?
>live action
The frick?
I don't get it, what's the RIP about? The director? Or that there's going to be a Bambi remake?
Are there people on this board who haven't fully accepted Disney doing all this remake shit by now? It's already locked in and done, the train is halfway through its route. This is modern Disney's version of DTV sequels in order to get easy cash. How are people surprised when a new movie gets announced?
Bambi was always shit so no loss here
have a nice day
you first furry
>Furries out of nowhere
What kind of incurable mental illness do you have zoomer
Bambi is perhaps Disney's most visually beautiful and precious film...and they're going to butcher it with shitty budget cgi. Why, God?
Probably some copyright/trademark frickery
>most visually beautiful
Snow White was still more technically impressive and Sleeping Beauty has the strongest art direction to this day.
It should be legal to slap everyone that calls 3dcg animated films live action
Does anyone really give a frick about Bambi?
What value there was to Bambi was entirely in it's gorgeous animation. Making a shitty live action version of Bambi is taking away literally the one thing that made it impressive, and entertaining.
They can't be expecting to make much money on this.
gay skunk sex
How do they get the deer to act? Peanut butter on the gums?
Headlamps on bright and a loaded gun.
Testan
>live action
Like... with a real deer and stuff?
this board has been baited into caring about idpol more than comics or cartoons and I blame YOU
So will this be starring live deer actors somehow or 'live action' in the way The Loin King 2019 is (100% animated)?