#cgi remake

I mean, look at the eye-mask effect and the line under the eye along the cheekbone:

That hand-drawn, animated Jim Hawkins could be channeling James Dean’s ghost

But where is my Robin Hood edgy cgi remake??

No humans allowed only furries

And Prince John still sucks his thumb like a pacifier

I know you've thought about it don't lie

So

Where

Is

no talking animal cgi, just dogs.

a wordless love story like the ones you managed to create in Wall-e and Paperman. adapt the story so all the exposition is delivered in the background by the humans in the movie. 

This shot comparison tells you everything about this remakes, the one on the right, the original, look like a Salvador Dali painting, fire and smoke coming from below as if the gates of hell opened, the principal figure on the top with a red moon behind him. And the remake version well, sucks, I am being honest, look at it, you can hardly tell anything from anything but the moon, everything is covered in darkness nothing is highlighted but the moon, the director wants you to focus on the moon for some reason, not on the lions or the hyenas. Everything about it is bad. I don’t even know where to start. I’m having a sense that during the length of the scene, Scar climbed to a high place, and then, well its over, while the traditionally animated and highly superior version of the film had him pretty much riding a volcano. In the original version it’s night time and it looks and feels like it, and yet you have a lot of colors, that help you differentiate the elements of the shot. In the remake you have 3 black withe and blue, and maybe a little grey in some places.

A common commentary on this movie on this remake is that it looks more like a National Geographic documentary than a movie, but if a photographer on National Geographic took this picture, he would be fired. This shot is so bad that in any other movie it would be replaced or eliminated, and the overall scene would have been rethought in order to not have to use such a bad shot. This shot is only in the film because there was a really similar but way superior one on the original. 

And don’t get me wrong, please, I’m not complaining about the remake not being like the original enough, My complaint is about it trying to be like too much like the original, and yet being so inferior, they’re not doing anything original, and they’re also really bad at copying. This movie hands are tied, both by it’s “realism” gimmick, and the expressionism of the original. 

Just look at this, look at the strength of the shot in the original, that’s a villian, that's a dictator, that's intimidating, look at the camera angle, at the pose, so much power, in one image you can know whats happening there, and then there are the expressionist elements, those that you can hardly find in nature, or reality, those are the ones that make the scene, that green light coming from below, something wicked is happening, like if that light came from hell itself.

And then you got the remake.

And it doesn't feel that evil, I see what the director is doing, he placed the hyenas in the shot to make evident that scar is in a higher place, and to try to make up for lack of the wicked light, he covered the characters in a gloomy darkness, so he made the shot mysterious, and therefore, scary, after all, that’s what scary stuff look like in real life right?, so there are two options, neither is good: 

1.-The scene in the original wasn’t supposed to be mysterious, it couldn’t be, we already knew the characters involved, so what we got is that the remake creators doesn’t really get the original material and they're just doing it because the original did so.

2.- The scene makes sense in the movie, because the elements or events of the original were changed a bit so it makes sense for it to be mysterious, or the nature of the scene was changed to be more dark and gloomy. Which isn’t really a problem on itself, it actually makes the movie a little bit less irrelevant (not enough of course), the problem here is that, it means that this is the best they could do, 

And that represents three problems

1.-It is just way inferior to the original, which makes the movie irrelevant again.

2.-He look sad, he doesn't look evil, nor pompous, not evil angry, the original, looks evil and loving it, the new one’s lacks expression but the lightning makes him look sad, and the colors, and the general feel of the shot, are pretty sad, it’s like the sad batman meme all over again.

3.-The scene of the villain rising uses pretty much the same color pallet of the triumphant moment of the hero, maybe less gloomy. Which I also get, in one night and in the other is dawning, it’s pretty damn obvious, it’s just not really well executed, it's that really the best dawn your computer could generate. Damn it.  I could honestly believe both shots come from the same sequence

“That´s one fine looking movie!