Didn't see a thread for this, so I figured I'd make one.
Heard about this last year and Disney has just released the teaser trailer, which will no doubt be playing before Maleficent later this month.
The film will be in the vein of the 1950 animated feature, with some obvious creative touches here and there.
It is being directed by Kenneth Branagh (Thor, Hamlet) and the screenplay is written by Aline Brosh McKenna (The Devil Wears Prada, forthcoming Annie film) and Chris Weitz (American Pie, The Golden Compass).
Playing Cinderella will be Lily James (Downton Abbey). Prince Charming will be played by Richard Madden (Game of Thrones). Lady Tremaine, Cinderella's step-mother, will be played by Cate Blanchett (The Lord of the Rings, How to Train Your Dragon 2). And in an interesting choice, playing The Fairy Godmother is Helena Bonham Carter (Harry Potter series, Alice in Wonderland). Curious as Branagh's affair with her while they were making Frankenstein 20 years ago resulted in his divorce with Emma Thompson.
Also in the cast are Branagh's mentor Derek Jacobi (The Secret of NIMH, Hamlet) as The King, Stellan Skarsgård (Thor, Pirates of the Caribbean) as The Grand Duke, Ben Chaplin (The Truth About Cats & Dogs, The Water Horse) as Cinderella's father, and Hayley Atwell (Captain America, forthcoming Agent Carter series) as Cinderella's mother.
Excellent casting...obviously this is continuing Disney's new line of reimagining their classic animated films.
Video releases have killed reissuing them theatrically, so the cash cow there has stopped, and the popularity and speed of CG means that many of those films will now slowly start to fade off the radar as feeling dated to young film fans (two decades ago, the near 60 year old Snow White easily beat out the then new Thumbelina for which film kids would enjoy more, from personal experience, but now? Which little girl would rather watch the dated 1930s band tunes of Snow White over the empty American Idol sheen of Frozen?).
Sad, isn't it?
So instead of doing the fully creatively redundant, like remaking these stories outright as animated films (though remember one "experiment" that would have seen CG updated animation applied to the 1953 Peter Pan soundtrack), they're bringing a newness to those properties while not technically stepping on any historic toes, by recreating them, with new angles, in a different medium (the same also applies to the stage shows, where Aladdin and The Jungle Book will play for the next few years).
I guess the best that could happen is that we get some interesting, half decent new movies. And, if as we can see with Saving Mr Banks and Maleficent, that can draw attention back to the originals (the bottom line of any property exploitation), then maybe that can't be such a bad thing either, right?
Or, the predominating theory, "They still think Tim Burton's Alice is popular, but they shifted the market to their OUAT fanbase after they replaced him on Maleficent".
Following Jolie in their new "Celebrity cosplay" trend, there were also plans to keep Meryl Streep around after "Into the Woods" by having her reboot Cruella DeVille in another 101 Dalmatians (since they discovered that McKenna had previously written a movie about nasty fashion designers), but, uh-hahh...say, it's gonna be a long awards show, Meryl, how about a drink?
Well, Cinderella was never one of my favorite Disney films, but if this is a full blown reimagining like Maleficent and not just a live action remake, it could be interesting. I'd approach with caution, though. While I sincerely hope this won't happen, there's still time yet for the executives to mess it up in their post-Frozen madness. We won't know until the movie comes out. If the execs leave it alone and it does well, there may yet be hope for Disney after all. Fingers crossed.
Personally, if they're going to do a whole series of films like this, I'd love to see them revive the idea of doing a live action film of the Beauty And The Beast Broadway show, which is reportedly something they had talked about doing but talk is as far as it went. A film version of the Mary Poppins Broadway show wouldn't be bad either since it's different enough from the original film to stand on its own. If they did that, they might even be able to include Temper Temper (which had to be cut from the stage version after parents complained it was too scary for young kids even though there were signs posted warning them that the show might be too scary for young kids. Head, meet wall).
Last edited by eddievalient on May 16th, 2014, 8:13 am, edited 2 times in total.
The Official Lugofilm Ltd Youtube Channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/bartsimpson83
And the new Cruella movie could still be happening, with Glenn Close already involved.
Disney was already making live-action versions of some of its features (Dalmatians, Jungle Book, etc) long before Burton's Alice and this current run of "property leveraging" movies.
Far as I know, neither Maleficent or Cinders feature any of the songs as sung in those films, though as we know, Lana Del Rey has redone Once Upon A Dream for promo and credit purposes. Any bets on So This Is Love for Cinders...?
I just hope they don't do a jokey Bibbity-Bobbity-Boo - if she doesn't sing it in the film it would make no sense, whereas a new version of a love song would appropriately blend in as a new version of an old standard, like Once Upon A Dream appears to for Maleficent.
Ben wrote:I guess the best that could happen is that we get some interesting, half decent new movies. And, if as we can see with Saving Mr Banks and Maleficent, that can draw attention back to the originals (the bottom line of any property exploitation), then maybe that can't be such a bad thing either, right?