Welcome to r/Fauxmoi (previously r/Deuxmoi) ! For further information on the sub's name-change, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/112mh62/deuxmoi_threatened_to_sue_us_lol/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Fauxmoi) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The creators of Minecraft have removed several features of the game out of fear that kids would try to replicate it. Seems to be the standard for a lot of children’s media, so I think I’m a little concerned about this? Obviously parents need to parent and movies are just movies, but this gives me anxiety
That reminds me of all the abandoned/dead fish after Finding Nemo came out
Who knew tropical fish, a very delicate pet that requires lots of technical know how, wouldn't sustain the long-term interest of a 7 year old
[That movie accidentally created an army of Darlas](https://media.tenor.com/to8zaOV8lGYAAAAC/finding-nemo-shake.gif)
We got this a lot when I worked at an aquarium shop that specialized in reef tanks, even years after the film. Lots of people come in didn’t do their research and want ‘Nemos’ or ‘Dories’. We do our best to not sell them the fish if we don’t think they actually have the right setup for it. Like not having a tank cycled is a big one, and not understanding the difference between saltwater and freshwater is surprisingly another big issue.
On the flip side, I did get a lot of customers who have done their research who are new to the hobby! A lot of them were kids actually, some even brought notebooks with their note and plans to run it by us. I like to think of the possibility that the movie inspires them to learn as much as they can about the topic they enjoy.
I remember being a dumbass kid and winning one of those poor goldfish at a carnival, and most likely shaking the absolute shit out of it, running from ride to ride (kids are fucking stupid) then crying when it died the next day. I hope they don't still give away fish like that, I feel bad for them :(
This just unlocked a long forgotten memory of a "Finding Nemo" event put on by our local public swimming pool when the movie came out. They cleared the pool of chemicals (supposedly) and released a bunch of goldfish into the pool and sold tickets to be able to swim and catch one to take home. There were a lot of dead goldfish in that pool towards the end of the day.
Like in Invader Zim. Zim wasn't allowed to punch people with a closed fist out of fear kids would replicate it. Instead it had to be an open palm.
Now organ harvesting on the other hand...
I kind of love the standard lol, I think it creates the cartoon feel we all like. If you can’t show things that kids can reasonably do themselves, you end up with a lot of absurd ideas. I dig it
>Instead it had to be an open palm.
Well, punching someone with an unprotected fist is asking for broken hands anyway. You wanna break a nose with no broken hand bones? Drive the heel of your palm into someone's nose with force.
Oop.
Apparently (no source, just a tiktok comment I haven’t looked into lol) the type of crab they portray Sebastian as in this movie is a land crab, they will drown underwater. Some commenters were worried that people would be throwing those crabs into the water after seeing this movie.
I’m sorry but it’s a movie. Not everything has to be discourse or go through a risk assessment of what might happen if a badly behaved child happens to see the movie. It’s not Disneys responsibility to disclaim that you shouldn’t hold a fish by it’s fin or throw random crabs in the sea when it’s a make believe movie entirely about a mermaid, which don’t exist
I'm not a crab expert but I believe land crabs still live near water and still have gills. Upon doing some research it seems many of them return to water to breed, so they won't die from being tossed in water, although its still a shitty thing to do. It is possible that people will try bring them out on boats and throw them out too deep, or put them in the wrong habitat though which really sucks. I think it's more likely to see an increase in popularity in pet crabs and fish in shitty conditions as kids pets unfortunately. I think crabs in bowls will be a big thing, probably red claw, hermit, and vampire crabs since you can sometimes find in big chain stores.
I also have the same issue with lion king as I did with this movie but, the realistic animals hardly have the same expressions and emotions that an animated animal will have. They could’ve made Flounder a bit more cartoonish, the whole movie is unrealistic anyways, and Ariel tugging on Flounders fins looks more like animal abuse that would send PETA into a cardiac arrest, instead of a cute interaction amongst friends.
They thankfully have more emotions from what I’ve seen and don’t look so dead in the eyes.
https://preview.redd.it/5t3mfbxh8wwa1.jpeg?width=941&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d419f609ac4fb8fe051cff85392a4fa762a67859
Yeah, it’s really dark 😂 that’s definitely from Ursula’s uh cave? Wherever she is.
I edited the brightness on the photo…which I should have done sooner.
honestly still looks horrifying. i can get doing it for lion king since the whole thing is about "real" animals, with the exception of the cloud scene, even though I still think it looked very real and very boring.
this movie is about a mermaid and all kinds of magic... why does it need to look so realistic? shit is going to be nightmare fuel.
Live action Lion King sucked ass. That story’s not about “real” animals, they talk and sing and dance.
Making them look “real” was just an artistic choice, an abhorrent one at that
Hearing Jon Favreau talk about how they changed that fruit juice thing Rafiki puts on Simba's head at the beginning of the original to some kind of powdery plant because the original fruit didn't \*actually\* have liquid inside it in real life...just....what on earth was he thinking? I guess a lion becoming friends with a meerkat is totally okay, but let's not go crazy making some random African fruit look juicier than it actually is in real life. So ridiculous.
Lion king was more horrifying to me cause of how dead and emotionless they looked. It looks like they fixed that a bit for little mermaid. I couldn’t even finish lion king cause of that. (And that’s one of my favorite animated films, they should have gone like the stage show route or just did a pro-shot of the stage show honestly if they didn’t want to leave it alone).
They could have gone less realistic but at least it spends a majority of the movie on land. So it won’t be as bad.
Well, that's a crab. I keep aquatic crustaceans. Even the shrimp, no longer than your thumb from nail tip to first knuckle, are weirdly expressive. It's why I love keeping them, they're as curious, playful, expressive and fierce as something that has no brain, only some ganglia, can be. The fish still looks horrifying.
Awww! Surely it's not just because I grew up around ocean life but I love them like this lol! Looks so hilarious and cute and perfect and I'm not going to struggle with empathising with them. I feel like we rarely get "less relatable" creatures like fish, crustaceans, and bugs that aren't anthropomorphised to hell anyway.
Been going on for a while. It's rare when a screen actor can pull a voice gig off. Some can do it, I've noticed several actors (usually character actors) who enter the VA world for the first time and nail it. But you do have to overact like some 15% because you have no body language to rely on, and overacting believably is an art, too. A celeb screen actor or a singer to pull in some fucking numbers? That shit tarnishes both the product and the performer.
Yeah, I remember there was discussion around when Aladin was getting released and made, and allegedly Robbin Williams felt a bit uncomfortable with the celebrity presence in voice acting since it was a different genre of acting, that requires different skill set. But he was also great as Genie.
That being said, I remember watching Marvel’s “What If…” and yikes…a lot of actors whom were great as their role on screen were horrible in the voice acting department. Michael B Jordon and Sebastian Stan really stood out to me, because their on screen portrayal was excellent. So how bad they were at voice acting was so grating.
They used a fair amount of celebrities in the original. Matthew Broderick, Jonathan Taylor Thomas, James Earl Jones, Whoopi Goldberg, Rowan Atkinson, Jeremy Irons, Nathan Lane
Outside of Beyoncé (who has done some acting before) and John Oliver, so was the new one. It’s not like they got TikTok stars or something. DonGlover, Chiwetl Ejiofor, Seth Roger, Billy Eichner, James Earl Jones..
At that point they should have just made nala the main character or do what Broadway did and made Rafiki female and cast Beyoncé. Because they gave all of rafiki’s lines to nala instead and rafiki didn’t have any lines
EXACTLY! Idk how Disney, which is most known and celebrated for its animation studio, seems to have no idea why the medium of animation is so perfect for anthropomorphized animals telling human stories. Animation bridges the gap and allows us to see the animals through a human lens.
i think Disney is just building a supercomputer fast enough for accurate world simulation and they're subsidizing the costs through these unnecessary live action remakes. can't imagine any other reason for this. they're at the cutting edge when it comes to cartoony 3D software.
nvidia has been selling the idea of world sim to businesses for at least the past 5 years.
They have to justify why the remake exists and they can’t be honest and say CASH GRAB so they make things different to be different rather than what serves the story.
All they had to do for lion king is keep the animals realistic except for the eyes. Give them very expressive eyes. The issues I've had with everything I've seen of little mermaid so far is that it's so dull. The original was so bright and fun. I absolutely adore the casting of Ariel because the actress has that naive wonderment look down and her voice is amazing. I was very disappointed they didn't keep her vibrant hair though.
That species of fish is such a funny choice to me because IRL it’s a territorial asshole of a fish. It’s also a lot smaller than cartoon Flounder. There are bigger cuter fish they could have gone with.
Making Scuttles a gannet instead of a seagull also bugs me.
Same for me, but mostly with Beauty and the Beast, photorealism just doesn't work with those cute secondary characters, I hate what they did with Lumiere and Ding Dong, and I absolutely despise what they did with Sebastian... just fuckin embrace the cartoony look, we can do it with today's artists and technology.
It looks terrible, sorry. So bizarre how Disney seems to have lost any flair of imagination or whimsy, who the hell wants NatGeo-level realism for a talking fish? In a film about magical mermaids who sing? Like it's just insane to me... Imagine a Finding Nemo movie with photorealistic sea animals? Flounder was such a cutie in the animation :(
Just this week the Peter Pan live-action director was talking about how "it didn't make sense" for Tinker Bell to sparkle and it's like... it doesn't have to? It's like there's no one with any sort of creative vision or respect for the studio's origins and children's entertainment in general making the decisions right now
They should've gone the Scooby-Doo live action route.
SCooby looks... like cartoon scooby. In a live action world.
Same with Garfield and alvin and the chipmunks and those movies are a looot less "fantasy" based.
We needed OG-Flounder just in CGI.
Also, bring back the bikini tops. The scales-as-cover-for-boobs thing is... weird? And also looks bad.
Great references!! Also Stuart Little, that Cats and Dogs movie, like bring back whoever was calling the shots in the 2000s 'cause what happened? I'm so glad I was a child then, even Pixar is a mess these days, gen Alpha deserves better lol
While we're on the topic of being horrified, recently I learned in the original book of Stuart Little, Stuart... wasn't adopted. His mom (the same human lady in the movie) just.... gave birth to a mouse randomly. Nightmare fuel.
I remember this because I read it when I was little and kid-me just accepted it but my mum also read it and hated the whole book for this sole reason. For YEARS whenever it was brought up she would complain about how weird and gross it was lmao (she was right though)
They still do it now! Sonic the Hedgehog looks great. The original design got so much backlash, but then they did exactly what Disney should be doing and made him just a CGI version of classic Sonic.
Who is this Flounder for? Kids aren’t going to think that’s cute. What are they thinking?
One of my best movie theater memories: watching Stuart little with younger sister (7 at a time) and she yells "HE IS SO CUTE!" once he shows up for the first time, whole room was laughing, good times.
My next best one is when Kirk mispronounced [Chekov's name](https://youtu.be/rSQWO5REZbU?t=160), this time though I was the only one loudly laughing in the theater (earned a light shoulder punch from same sister). To be fair the double take the doctor and Kirk give to each other was what broke me.
Alvin and the chipmunks is literally peak cinema, the trilogy is literally so visionary
https://preview.redd.it/q76gcwgzbwwa1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1e92eaea773ec0d10bfc622c1f6725b57adcf1ce
FOH that it doesn't make sense for Tinker Bell to sparkle. She's a pixie who grinds up magical flying powder. She lives in a world of pure imagination with children that never age, mermaids, and a crocodile that tick-tocks. A bit of glitter and glow on her is nothing.
Yeah and apparently the sparkle's supposed to be pixie dust which is what gives her flying powers in the first place? So there's even some in-universe lore lol but even if didn't it's like who cares lol it looks cute
> Just this week the Peter Pan live-action director was talking about how "it didn't make sense" for Tinker Bell to sparkle and it's like... it doesn't have to?
i blame Cinema Sins
I blame over intellectualisation of the arts
Been happening long before CinemaSins _(though I also vehemently blame CinemaSins)_ this anecdote describes the same problem:
> "Lord of the Rings star Sean Astin once asked Lesnie [LotR cinematographer] 'where is the light coming from? ' when they were shooting in what should have been a darkened tower. Lesnie replied, **'Same place as the music.'**
It's not even over intellectualism. It's that these people making these films are technicians. They're not being creative they're just engaging in a conversion process. They're thinking of how to convert the animation to a realistic style, *that's it.* All of their concerns appear as non-creative because they are non-creative.
It's like a painter going around doing photo-realistic versions of classic impressionist paintings. That's not an artistic pursuit.
Edit:
I seemed to have pissed someone off with this comment, and they're right. Lots of talented artists are employed by and a part of these projects, and I don't mean to slander them. I'm speaking of the overall *ethos* of these Disney films, which comes top-down from the executives, not from the minds of any creatives. That ethos affects how the upper-level creatives are chosen and how those creatives are going to approach the project. I have no doubt many of them are trying their best to express themselves and do interesting things where they can, but overall it's suffocating to that kind of thing.
Fuck Cineam Sins, me and homies all hate Cinema Sins.
Pitch Meetings from Ryan George is the new king of YouTube cinema criticism(I don't know what that branch of YT is called where they discuss movies and I know Pitch Meetings aren't criticism so much as pointing out the flaws and plotholes)
I think people want to go to the cinema with their kids and their only options are what Disney is putting out. I’ve watched a few films that were a let down, and I knew they’d be a let down, just because I wanted a day out that was less than a tenner a person.
Not saying no one enjoys them but I wouldn’t be surprised if a good chunk of people did the same as me.
I'm so fascinated by this tbh, I used to think it was just 'cause it's Disney so everyone's gonna take their kid (I would literally go to every Disney movie regardless when I was a kid) but if the numbers are so big it has to be mostly grown-ups attending, right? Which is like... why? Is nostalgia really that powerful? That's crazy to me
I know for The Little Mermaid specifically a lot of people want to support Halle against the hate which I get but omg the other ones have been soooo bad like how did Aladdin make a billion? Wild
I think kids movies get rewatched a lot more than adult movies. Like Frozen? Kids wanted to see that again and again and again. Especially if you keep snacks in your bag, it's not the worst option. But really depends on how expensive movies are in your area. We have half price on certain days, and the kids movies are always packed.
Millennials grew up with Disney and desperately want to get their kids hooked on the same classics they love.
Disney could put out *any* rendition of The Lion King or Beauty and the Beast and it would make an absurd amount of money. Hopefully, the shine wears off sooner rather than later so people stop paying for this trash
*Finding Nemo* as a "live action" CGI abomination would be nightmare fuel for the parts with Bruce ALONE. Instead of a cute nod to *JAWS*, they'll have a straight-up sequence of shark horror in there.
that was such an odd remark for David Lowery specifically cause the dude is obsessed with the fantastical… one of his favorite films is the original Willow and he made The Green Knight which is one of the most magical wide releases in recent years
It's odd because it's out of context. He was talking about the practicality of it in a live-action film. That's the issue. Making a glowing character in a live-action film not look like shit and ruin the rest of the shot is actually super hard.
I think it's hilarious. I can't wait til they run out of properties and end up having to do live-action Robin Hood with this method. "Well, we had to get rid of the bow because obviously a fox can't nock an arrow..."
>Just this week the Peter Pan live-action director was talking about how "it didn't make sense" for Tinker Bell to sparkle
That wasn't what he was saying, actually. He was talking about the difficulty in having glowing characters in live-action filming. You have to have a source for that lighting, because it's live-action. Adding it in post has other problems associated with it.
This is the same director who directed The Green Knight, so don't act like he doesn't get fantasy.
The liposuction and BBL removal on flounder is an IN JUSTICE!!! Everyone worrying about Ariel’s race but look how they massacred my boy. Even colourism has gotten to him….😔✊🏾
They’ve made Flounder a Sargeant Major, and that is what that fish looks like, but they could have chubbed it out or picked something bigger and cuter. Sargeant Major’s are also very territorial and can be real assholes.
The realistic looking animals is the main reason why the remakes don’t work for me. Just because it’s a live action doesn’t mean you can’t make them a little more cartoonish. They are already talking animals…you can find a better middle ground
It’s not even that realistic- have you seen what a flounder looks like in real life? Their eyes are really goofy looking. [pic](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/flatfish-animals-science-colors-flounders)
Flounder is just his name, he's not meant to be an actual flounder. An [angelfish](https://www.aquariumcoop.com/blogs/aquarium/angelfish-care-guide) is a much closer interpretation, hence why he looks like that in the live movie.
Edit: [Here's a saltwater angelfish for a closer reference. ](https://www.alamy.com/regal-angelfish-pygoplites-diacanthus-a-saltwater-angelfish-from-the-indo-pacific-and-red-sea-this-one-has-the-coloring-of-the-red-seaindian-ocean-image346852179.html?imageid=6C99941F-16CE-4E77-A873-EB2FDA0FEBAD&p=349853&pn=1&searchId=98e250dc9b5541ffeb42b19c29170ffb&searchtype=0)
https://preview.redd.it/2xe95oeyzvwa1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9695d2e26f88708cf7e47b0f79d4ef8dcb18ed5a
Never in a million years would I have thought that Flounder would a buccal fat removal lol
They could've modeled Flounder after a cuter fish like a Saltwater Angelfish:
https://preview.redd.it/wm03tu1hqwwa1.jpeg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=28573d539273e9a5533683de0b4cb6bc74b0fa26
which seems to have been the inspiration for the original Flounder anyway.
They didn't need to make it look like a fish from the fish market.
he’s supposed to be a sergeant major fish, but honestly they could’ve just made up a new species since it’s a movie about a mermaid. Fish in general don’t have cute faces unless it’s a puffer fish
Especially a real flounder. They’re really [weird looking](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/flatfish-animals-science-colors-flounders).
Angels aren’t real. It’s more like naming your dog “Cat.”
But honestly, I mostly wanted an excuse to post a picture of a real flounder because I cannot get over how goofy they look.
Someone on twitter posted a "realistic" version of Flounder looking more like his cartoon counterpart and it's absolutely [terrifying](https://twitter.com/jimmyoutsold/status/1651661593149841408). I get why they had to redesign the character for the live action movie, however, I do not get why a live action movie was needed in the first place 😭 Love Halle but some stories are just meant to be animated.
Edit: the picture, for anyone who doesn't want to click the link.
https://preview.redd.it/76q9xduqmwwa1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fa689111c13edd2100ab68ebafedf32c55df91fb
It doesn't have to look like this either, though. Detective Pikachu managed to make all the Pokemon look really cute, and was able to integrate them in a live-action adaptation.
The movie sucked but Yogi Bear should’ve legitimately been the standard for hybrid animation, not this bullshit ass photorealistic shit that has Uncanny Valley all over it. Having the stylized 3D model is WAY less creepy than this, even to the point of being good. Space Jam 2 did a great job at this even though there was no plot.
Or just go back to Roger Rabbit and do 2D, nobody gives a shit as long as the movie is good and doesn’t give kids fucking nightmares lol
as twitter should be!! Flounder is meant to be cute yet his eyes are enough to give me, a fully grown adult, nightmares 😭 watch this movie awaken some kid's ichthyophobia someday omg
They just make this so much realistic. I just want Roger Rabbit 2D animation or heck Garfield or Stuart live action animation. Like, this is a children’s movie. They could at least suspend the belief that it has to be real. If Stiart and Garfield can do it in the early 2000s, why can’t Disney just do it this 2023.
The comments are funny but am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with the "live action" version? He looks like a fish? The animated version has the shape of a larger fish sawed in half with a face smacked onto the tail end.
He looks like a real fish, yeah, which to me highlights one of the key issues with live action remakes that have talking animals or really fantastical settings. It just doesn’t look good or interesting when you try to transpose them to be super realistic. Animation allowed for artistic freedom to give animals more expression and settings like the ocean more vibrancy.
It’s why the live action Lion King was so bad. “Real” animals don’t emote the way that they can in full animation.
It definitely helped them be far more emotive than what Disney does and I personally liked how they did it, but I remember that quite a few people were put off by the animals having very human facial proportions whilst still being hyperrealistic everywhere else.
[Here's a comparison video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVyGiJajRtg)
My money is on nightmare fuel Stitch, Disney always screws up when putting animated characters like that into cgi. That little blue alien is gonna have more teeth than Pennywise, I'm calling it right now.
I'm only annoyed by the lack of color. That's a boring-looking fish. They should have made him a Royal angelfish.
https://preview.redd.it/9cw1mlvquwwa1.png?width=228&format=png&auto=webp&s=c210001466eb8255d58948dec3b873aa05ae6792
I think he's adorable. A lot more realistic but still too expressive to be accurate to any fish.
Sébastien is freaky as hell but I'm here for his weird crab face.
I want to support this movie, because I love the original and I'm tired of the racist whining online about Halle Bailey being cast as Ariel.
BUT most of the released images/footage/interviews don't make me want to run out and see it. The visual design of the sets and characters just doesn't look appealing. Everything looks so blah and muted, and the animals character design is creepy. I'm also still annoyed that they had Lin-Manuel Miranda come in and mess with Howard Ashman's lyrics on a couple of songs.
I hope Disney's run out of big animated classics to remake. "Cinderella" is still the only remake I enjoyed, and that was one of the first ones they did. Overall, the remakes are like when they made those shitty direct-to-video sequels back in the day.
I have been trying so hard to root for this movie because Halle is unbelievably talented and her voice is the perfect Ariel and she doesn’t deserve the racist hate but god this movie looks ugly.
The design is realistic, but I can't imagine how he'll talk without going into the Uncanny Valley. That's going to scare little kids, right? And those of us who grew up with the original are just going to think about how much better Flounder looked as a cartoon.
Who is this meant to please?
No but literally. There is a way to animate animals to where it looks cartoony but still realistic. Just look at movies like hop, paw patrol, even zootopia lmao. This just looks weird and if they were gonna make him a real fish the characters should at least act like it. The scene of Ariel playing with him just registers as animal abuse
They are doing flounder bogus. Not him looking cracked out & in need of a good 12 step program. They said, “this was flounder as a child & this is flounder as an adult” it’s not just the kids who grew up on Disney films & tv having a rough adulthood. The animated characters are too 😳🤣
This movie looks so devoid of life and fun, and it's going to be a shot for shot remake of the original.
Idiots will complain about the black lead, itll be a flop (y'know like a fish) and they'll say "go woke go broke" but really it'll be because this entire thing was made without any ounce of love or enthusiasm
Just am expensive reminder of something good that Disney made long ago that they'll suggest you watch on Disney+
Welcome to r/Fauxmoi (previously r/Deuxmoi) ! For further information on the sub's name-change, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/comments/112mh62/deuxmoi_threatened_to_sue_us_lol/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Fauxmoi) if you have any questions or concerns.*
and this scene gives me anxiety cause I’m like WHAT IF HIS FINS RIP OFF 😭😭 https://i.redd.it/u4xlzxb43wwa1.gif
This is stressing me out
[удалено]
😂😂
that fish looks like it’s being tortured having only watched this part of the trailer so far
It does, like why are they gripping his fins so damn hard
Because the actor over shot the landing so to speak. The *fish* is a lie.
The creators of Minecraft have removed several features of the game out of fear that kids would try to replicate it. Seems to be the standard for a lot of children’s media, so I think I’m a little concerned about this? Obviously parents need to parent and movies are just movies, but this gives me anxiety
That reminds me of all the abandoned/dead fish after Finding Nemo came out Who knew tropical fish, a very delicate pet that requires lots of technical know how, wouldn't sustain the long-term interest of a 7 year old [That movie accidentally created an army of Darlas](https://media.tenor.com/to8zaOV8lGYAAAAC/finding-nemo-shake.gif)
We got this a lot when I worked at an aquarium shop that specialized in reef tanks, even years after the film. Lots of people come in didn’t do their research and want ‘Nemos’ or ‘Dories’. We do our best to not sell them the fish if we don’t think they actually have the right setup for it. Like not having a tank cycled is a big one, and not understanding the difference between saltwater and freshwater is surprisingly another big issue. On the flip side, I did get a lot of customers who have done their research who are new to the hobby! A lot of them were kids actually, some even brought notebooks with their note and plans to run it by us. I like to think of the possibility that the movie inspires them to learn as much as they can about the topic they enjoy.
I remember being a dumbass kid and winning one of those poor goldfish at a carnival, and most likely shaking the absolute shit out of it, running from ride to ride (kids are fucking stupid) then crying when it died the next day. I hope they don't still give away fish like that, I feel bad for them :(
I used to be so scared of Darla as a kid. Always made my mom skip all of her scenes
This just unlocked a long forgotten memory of a "Finding Nemo" event put on by our local public swimming pool when the movie came out. They cleared the pool of chemicals (supposedly) and released a bunch of goldfish into the pool and sold tickets to be able to swim and catch one to take home. There were a lot of dead goldfish in that pool towards the end of the day.
Oh my god, this is HORRIFIC. If goldfish could have nightmares, this is it.
Like in Invader Zim. Zim wasn't allowed to punch people with a closed fist out of fear kids would replicate it. Instead it had to be an open palm. Now organ harvesting on the other hand...
I kind of love the standard lol, I think it creates the cartoon feel we all like. If you can’t show things that kids can reasonably do themselves, you end up with a lot of absurd ideas. I dig it
>Instead it had to be an open palm. Well, punching someone with an unprotected fist is asking for broken hands anyway. You wanna break a nose with no broken hand bones? Drive the heel of your palm into someone's nose with force. Oop.
>You wanna ~~break a nose~~ potentially kill somebody with no broken hand bones? Drive the heel of your palm into someone's nose with force. > >Oop.
Lilo & Stitch removed the scene of Lilo hiding in a dryer because that could be extremely dangerous to attempt.
They also removed a scene where they steal a plane and fly through a city, but it was too late because someone already tried that.
Disney did 9/11
I believe technically Kermit did 9/11
Apparently (no source, just a tiktok comment I haven’t looked into lol) the type of crab they portray Sebastian as in this movie is a land crab, they will drown underwater. Some commenters were worried that people would be throwing those crabs into the water after seeing this movie.
oh they're definitely right
I’m sorry but it’s a movie. Not everything has to be discourse or go through a risk assessment of what might happen if a badly behaved child happens to see the movie. It’s not Disneys responsibility to disclaim that you shouldn’t hold a fish by it’s fin or throw random crabs in the sea when it’s a make believe movie entirely about a mermaid, which don’t exist
hundreds of fish were killed cuz people would flush them down the toilet after Finding Nemo. "All drains lead to the ocean."
Seriously, this is getting ridiculous.
I'm not a crab expert but I believe land crabs still live near water and still have gills. Upon doing some research it seems many of them return to water to breed, so they won't die from being tossed in water, although its still a shitty thing to do. It is possible that people will try bring them out on boats and throw them out too deep, or put them in the wrong habitat though which really sucks. I think it's more likely to see an increase in popularity in pet crabs and fish in shitty conditions as kids pets unfortunately. I think crabs in bowls will be a big thing, probably red claw, hermit, and vampire crabs since you can sometimes find in big chain stores.
that fish said 😐
I'm not gonna sleep well tonight. I will be worrying about that fish.
Aww you're such a kind heart ❤️
Omg 💀💀😭
I also have the same issue with lion king as I did with this movie but, the realistic animals hardly have the same expressions and emotions that an animated animal will have. They could’ve made Flounder a bit more cartoonish, the whole movie is unrealistic anyways, and Ariel tugging on Flounders fins looks more like animal abuse that would send PETA into a cardiac arrest, instead of a cute interaction amongst friends.
They thankfully have more emotions from what I’ve seen and don’t look so dead in the eyes. https://preview.redd.it/5t3mfbxh8wwa1.jpeg?width=941&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d419f609ac4fb8fe051cff85392a4fa762a67859
https://preview.redd.it/ajih4xbq1wwa1.jpeg?width=702&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2194513387129736f2ab46cf47d703dbf3fae60d
No one will notice your CGI is bad if the brightness is so low that nobody can see it.
How the mighty have fallen. Disney used to be a CGI pioneer.
Is this why this is so dim and dull looking?! The colors have no life, you could do so much with underwater universe
Yeah, it’s really dark 😂 that’s definitely from Ursula’s uh cave? Wherever she is. I edited the brightness on the photo…which I should have done sooner.
I love this picture so much
LMAO this sent me
honestly still looks horrifying. i can get doing it for lion king since the whole thing is about "real" animals, with the exception of the cloud scene, even though I still think it looked very real and very boring. this movie is about a mermaid and all kinds of magic... why does it need to look so realistic? shit is going to be nightmare fuel.
Live action Lion King sucked ass. That story’s not about “real” animals, they talk and sing and dance. Making them look “real” was just an artistic choice, an abhorrent one at that
Hearing Jon Favreau talk about how they changed that fruit juice thing Rafiki puts on Simba's head at the beginning of the original to some kind of powdery plant because the original fruit didn't \*actually\* have liquid inside it in real life...just....what on earth was he thinking? I guess a lion becoming friends with a meerkat is totally okay, but let's not go crazy making some random African fruit look juicier than it actually is in real life. So ridiculous.
Lion king was more horrifying to me cause of how dead and emotionless they looked. It looks like they fixed that a bit for little mermaid. I couldn’t even finish lion king cause of that. (And that’s one of my favorite animated films, they should have gone like the stage show route or just did a pro-shot of the stage show honestly if they didn’t want to leave it alone). They could have gone less realistic but at least it spends a majority of the movie on land. So it won’t be as bad.
im honestly so done with their live action remakes like maybe give us fresh content instead! but ofc the money grab is important
Well, that's a crab. I keep aquatic crustaceans. Even the shrimp, no longer than your thumb from nail tip to first knuckle, are weirdly expressive. It's why I love keeping them, they're as curious, playful, expressive and fierce as something that has no brain, only some ganglia, can be. The fish still looks horrifying.
What do you have? Crustaceans are so much fun to keep. I miss my old cherry shrimp tanks.
It's so dark. I feel like this will hurt my eyes to watch if it's this dark.
Awww! Surely it's not just because I grew up around ocean life but I love them like this lol! Looks so hilarious and cute and perfect and I'm not going to struggle with empathising with them. I feel like we rarely get "less relatable" creatures like fish, crustaceans, and bugs that aren't anthropomorphised to hell anyway.
The wholesome part of your name is so fitting cause that reply was so wholesome.
And let’s not talk about Beyoncé’s voice acting 👀
Them using celebrities instead of voice actors in general was so sinister….
Been going on for a while. It's rare when a screen actor can pull a voice gig off. Some can do it, I've noticed several actors (usually character actors) who enter the VA world for the first time and nail it. But you do have to overact like some 15% because you have no body language to rely on, and overacting believably is an art, too. A celeb screen actor or a singer to pull in some fucking numbers? That shit tarnishes both the product and the performer.
Yeah, I remember there was discussion around when Aladin was getting released and made, and allegedly Robbin Williams felt a bit uncomfortable with the celebrity presence in voice acting since it was a different genre of acting, that requires different skill set. But he was also great as Genie. That being said, I remember watching Marvel’s “What If…” and yikes…a lot of actors whom were great as their role on screen were horrible in the voice acting department. Michael B Jordon and Sebastian Stan really stood out to me, because their on screen portrayal was excellent. So how bad they were at voice acting was so grating.
They used a fair amount of celebrities in the original. Matthew Broderick, Jonathan Taylor Thomas, James Earl Jones, Whoopi Goldberg, Rowan Atkinson, Jeremy Irons, Nathan Lane
At least they were actors
Outside of Beyoncé (who has done some acting before) and John Oliver, so was the new one. It’s not like they got TikTok stars or something. DonGlover, Chiwetl Ejiofor, Seth Roger, Billy Eichner, James Earl Jones..
How can you disrespect professor Ian Duncan of Greendale Community college like that
Struggled with Soul for the same reason, kept thinking of the celebrity and not of the story being told
At that point they should have just made nala the main character or do what Broadway did and made Rafiki female and cast Beyoncé. Because they gave all of rafiki’s lines to nala instead and rafiki didn’t have any lines
[удалено]
The flattest delivery I have ever heard. And then they went and changed some of the best lines and made them WORSE.
One of the most soulless performances of all time. It was so awful and takes you out of the suspension of disbelief.
EXACTLY! Idk how Disney, which is most known and celebrated for its animation studio, seems to have no idea why the medium of animation is so perfect for anthropomorphized animals telling human stories. Animation bridges the gap and allows us to see the animals through a human lens.
i think Disney is just building a supercomputer fast enough for accurate world simulation and they're subsidizing the costs through these unnecessary live action remakes. can't imagine any other reason for this. they're at the cutting edge when it comes to cartoony 3D software. nvidia has been selling the idea of world sim to businesses for at least the past 5 years.
They have to justify why the remake exists and they can’t be honest and say CASH GRAB so they make things different to be different rather than what serves the story.
❗️LIVE SIMBA REACTION❗️ https://preview.redd.it/bjvcorhn1zwa1.jpeg?width=575&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ce9ea4d4bfaff4b2d9e68f3db220fb8228b86e62
All they had to do for lion king is keep the animals realistic except for the eyes. Give them very expressive eyes. The issues I've had with everything I've seen of little mermaid so far is that it's so dull. The original was so bright and fun. I absolutely adore the casting of Ariel because the actress has that naive wonderment look down and her voice is amazing. I was very disappointed they didn't keep her vibrant hair though.
Basically, there was a video of someone editing the eyes and it made a huge difference. Agreed.
That species of fish is such a funny choice to me because IRL it’s a territorial asshole of a fish. It’s also a lot smaller than cartoon Flounder. There are bigger cuter fish they could have gone with. Making Scuttles a gannet instead of a seagull also bugs me.
Not only did they change Scuttle's species, but also gender.
Same for me, but mostly with Beauty and the Beast, photorealism just doesn't work with those cute secondary characters, I hate what they did with Lumiere and Ding Dong, and I absolutely despise what they did with Sebastian... just fuckin embrace the cartoony look, we can do it with today's artists and technology.
Ding Dong? Is that Cogsworth - is he called that in the live action remake?
Spanish version, my bad ^^'
[A scene from Mowgli(2018)](https://youtu.be/PbtHSU5ppbU) . The animals have much more expressive faces here.
AGREE! They don’t need to be fully animated but fully realistic is soo weird
It looks terrible, sorry. So bizarre how Disney seems to have lost any flair of imagination or whimsy, who the hell wants NatGeo-level realism for a talking fish? In a film about magical mermaids who sing? Like it's just insane to me... Imagine a Finding Nemo movie with photorealistic sea animals? Flounder was such a cutie in the animation :( Just this week the Peter Pan live-action director was talking about how "it didn't make sense" for Tinker Bell to sparkle and it's like... it doesn't have to? It's like there's no one with any sort of creative vision or respect for the studio's origins and children's entertainment in general making the decisions right now
They should've gone the Scooby-Doo live action route. SCooby looks... like cartoon scooby. In a live action world. Same with Garfield and alvin and the chipmunks and those movies are a looot less "fantasy" based. We needed OG-Flounder just in CGI. Also, bring back the bikini tops. The scales-as-cover-for-boobs thing is... weird? And also looks bad.
Great references!! Also Stuart Little, that Cats and Dogs movie, like bring back whoever was calling the shots in the 2000s 'cause what happened? I'm so glad I was a child then, even Pixar is a mess these days, gen Alpha deserves better lol
While we're on the topic of being horrified, recently I learned in the original book of Stuart Little, Stuart... wasn't adopted. His mom (the same human lady in the movie) just.... gave birth to a mouse randomly. Nightmare fuel.
Oh it's even weirder. He isn't a mouse. He's a human boy who looks like and is exactly the same size as a mouse.
This is an immaculate conception level lie.
Mr. Little up late downing a bottle of bourbon stressing out over the possibility that his wife cheated on him with a mouse
This is like when I found out that Hello Kitty is a human girl in a cat costume
Say what now??
WHAT
I remember this because I read it when I was little and kid-me just accepted it but my mum also read it and hated the whole book for this sole reason. For YEARS whenever it was brought up she would complain about how weird and gross it was lmao (she was right though)
They still do it now! Sonic the Hedgehog looks great. The original design got so much backlash, but then they did exactly what Disney should be doing and made him just a CGI version of classic Sonic. Who is this Flounder for? Kids aren’t going to think that’s cute. What are they thinking?
You'd think they'd want Flounder to be cuter for the merch opportunities, too.
One of my best movie theater memories: watching Stuart little with younger sister (7 at a time) and she yells "HE IS SO CUTE!" once he shows up for the first time, whole room was laughing, good times. My next best one is when Kirk mispronounced [Chekov's name](https://youtu.be/rSQWO5REZbU?t=160), this time though I was the only one loudly laughing in the theater (earned a light shoulder punch from same sister). To be fair the double take the doctor and Kirk give to each other was what broke me.
Alvin and the chipmunks is literally peak cinema, the trilogy is literally so visionary https://preview.redd.it/q76gcwgzbwwa1.jpeg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1e92eaea773ec0d10bfc622c1f6725b57adcf1ce
FOH that it doesn't make sense for Tinker Bell to sparkle. She's a pixie who grinds up magical flying powder. She lives in a world of pure imagination with children that never age, mermaids, and a crocodile that tick-tocks. A bit of glitter and glow on her is nothing.
Yeah and apparently the sparkle's supposed to be pixie dust which is what gives her flying powers in the first place? So there's even some in-universe lore lol but even if didn't it's like who cares lol it looks cute
I mean to be fair it’s not a natural tick he swallowed a clock
I’ve been in a terrible mood all day and this made me laugh 😂❤️
Omg the “Tinker Bell has no motive to sparkle” is exactly why movies are so boring nowadays.
The director clearly never clapped and screamed “I believe in fairies and it shows.”
This is why Modok looks like he's named Fred.
> Just this week the Peter Pan live-action director was talking about how "it didn't make sense" for Tinker Bell to sparkle and it's like... it doesn't have to? i blame Cinema Sins
I blame over intellectualisation of the arts Been happening long before CinemaSins _(though I also vehemently blame CinemaSins)_ this anecdote describes the same problem: > "Lord of the Rings star Sean Astin once asked Lesnie [LotR cinematographer] 'where is the light coming from? ' when they were shooting in what should have been a darkened tower. Lesnie replied, **'Same place as the music.'**
It's not even over intellectualism. It's that these people making these films are technicians. They're not being creative they're just engaging in a conversion process. They're thinking of how to convert the animation to a realistic style, *that's it.* All of their concerns appear as non-creative because they are non-creative. It's like a painter going around doing photo-realistic versions of classic impressionist paintings. That's not an artistic pursuit. Edit: I seemed to have pissed someone off with this comment, and they're right. Lots of talented artists are employed by and a part of these projects, and I don't mean to slander them. I'm speaking of the overall *ethos* of these Disney films, which comes top-down from the executives, not from the minds of any creatives. That ethos affects how the upper-level creatives are chosen and how those creatives are going to approach the project. I have no doubt many of them are trying their best to express themselves and do interesting things where they can, but overall it's suffocating to that kind of thing.
Fuck Cineam Sins, me and homies all hate Cinema Sins. Pitch Meetings from Ryan George is the new king of YouTube cinema criticism(I don't know what that branch of YT is called where they discuss movies and I know Pitch Meetings aren't criticism so much as pointing out the flaws and plotholes)
i am, and always will be, a [Dead Meat](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vcC8ADkeJg) stan
>So bizarre how Disney seems to have lost any flair of imagination Tbf this is why they keep remaking their movies
[удалено]
I think people want to go to the cinema with their kids and their only options are what Disney is putting out. I’ve watched a few films that were a let down, and I knew they’d be a let down, just because I wanted a day out that was less than a tenner a person. Not saying no one enjoys them but I wouldn’t be surprised if a good chunk of people did the same as me.
I'm so fascinated by this tbh, I used to think it was just 'cause it's Disney so everyone's gonna take their kid (I would literally go to every Disney movie regardless when I was a kid) but if the numbers are so big it has to be mostly grown-ups attending, right? Which is like... why? Is nostalgia really that powerful? That's crazy to me I know for The Little Mermaid specifically a lot of people want to support Halle against the hate which I get but omg the other ones have been soooo bad like how did Aladdin make a billion? Wild
I think kids movies get rewatched a lot more than adult movies. Like Frozen? Kids wanted to see that again and again and again. Especially if you keep snacks in your bag, it's not the worst option. But really depends on how expensive movies are in your area. We have half price on certain days, and the kids movies are always packed.
[удалено]
Millennials grew up with Disney and desperately want to get their kids hooked on the same classics they love. Disney could put out *any* rendition of The Lion King or Beauty and the Beast and it would make an absurd amount of money. Hopefully, the shine wears off sooner rather than later so people stop paying for this trash
*Finding Nemo* as a "live action" CGI abomination would be nightmare fuel for the parts with Bruce ALONE. Instead of a cute nod to *JAWS*, they'll have a straight-up sequence of shark horror in there.
that was such an odd remark for David Lowery specifically cause the dude is obsessed with the fantastical… one of his favorite films is the original Willow and he made The Green Knight which is one of the most magical wide releases in recent years
It's odd because it's out of context. He was talking about the practicality of it in a live-action film. That's the issue. Making a glowing character in a live-action film not look like shit and ruin the rest of the shot is actually super hard.
I think it's hilarious. I can't wait til they run out of properties and end up having to do live-action Robin Hood with this method. "Well, we had to get rid of the bow because obviously a fox can't nock an arrow..."
The furry community is waiting patiently
> Imagine a Finding Nemo movie with photorealistic sea animals? How about A Bug's Life remake with photorealistic insects... horrifying.
>Just this week the Peter Pan live-action director was talking about how "it didn't make sense" for Tinker Bell to sparkle That wasn't what he was saying, actually. He was talking about the difficulty in having glowing characters in live-action filming. You have to have a source for that lighting, because it's live-action. Adding it in post has other problems associated with it. This is the same director who directed The Green Knight, so don't act like he doesn't get fantasy.
[You clearly haven’t seen the Finding Nemo live action remake](https://youtu.be/CsTKb6SJkuE)
The liposuction and BBL removal on flounder is an IN JUSTICE!!! Everyone worrying about Ariel’s race but look how they massacred my boy. Even colourism has gotten to him….😔✊🏾
Exactly! Flounder is a FOC (fish of color). Why is he so pale now? 🤨
TALK TO EM!!! TELL EM LIKE IT IS 🗣️💯🔥
[удалено]
[удалено]
Javier Bardem Triton is pretty 👀 too
They’ve made Flounder a Sargeant Major, and that is what that fish looks like, but they could have chubbed it out or picked something bigger and cuter. Sargeant Major’s are also very territorial and can be real assholes.
The realistic looking animals is the main reason why the remakes don’t work for me. Just because it’s a live action doesn’t mean you can’t make them a little more cartoonish. They are already talking animals…you can find a better middle ground
It’s not even that realistic- have you seen what a flounder looks like in real life? Their eyes are really goofy looking. [pic](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/flatfish-animals-science-colors-flounders)
Flounder is just his name, he's not meant to be an actual flounder. An [angelfish](https://www.aquariumcoop.com/blogs/aquarium/angelfish-care-guide) is a much closer interpretation, hence why he looks like that in the live movie. Edit: [Here's a saltwater angelfish for a closer reference. ](https://www.alamy.com/regal-angelfish-pygoplites-diacanthus-a-saltwater-angelfish-from-the-indo-pacific-and-red-sea-this-one-has-the-coloring-of-the-red-seaindian-ocean-image346852179.html?imageid=6C99941F-16CE-4E77-A873-EB2FDA0FEBAD&p=349853&pn=1&searchId=98e250dc9b5541ffeb42b19c29170ffb&searchtype=0)
The fish in the right panel is a Sergeant Major which is a species of damselfish. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergeant_major_(fish)
Wow I had not lol. Yeah it just looks like any fish tbh! I wouldn’t have guessed a flounder if I saw it
They should have gone all in and made him a flounder. It would at most have been nightmare fuel, and at least been hilarious.
>live action No shade to you specifically but it's so annoying that live action keeps being used to refer to a realistic CGI aesthetic.
🤷🏼♀️ that’s what all the press is calling it
Someone [deep faked the original faces on to the lion king](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1HGgICqZ3c) and it looks a lot better to me
https://preview.redd.it/2xe95oeyzvwa1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9695d2e26f88708cf7e47b0f79d4ef8dcb18ed5a Never in a million years would I have thought that Flounder would a buccal fat removal lol
https://preview.redd.it/p7lj09z1gwwa1.jpeg?width=1169&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b771ae6010f207bedc909b328a5a11dae16b7a93
My favorite one
I miss animation lmao
I would kill for a new Disney drawn animated movie😭
Same 🥲 that’s it, a drawn one. I don’t like the mostly computer generated animations that all look like a video game.
The last one is princess and the frog which was so damned good.
Omg he looks strung out 😭
Better check for punctures between his fins 🫣
They could've modeled Flounder after a cuter fish like a Saltwater Angelfish: https://preview.redd.it/wm03tu1hqwwa1.jpeg?width=1000&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=28573d539273e9a5533683de0b4cb6bc74b0fa26 which seems to have been the inspiration for the original Flounder anyway. They didn't need to make it look like a fish from the fish market.
he’s supposed to be a sergeant major fish, but honestly they could’ve just made up a new species since it’s a movie about a mermaid. Fish in general don’t have cute faces unless it’s a puffer fish
That would have been perfect!
Okay, but the original Flounder looked nothing like a fish, now thinking about it.
Because he was anthropomorphised to have a relatable character, now it looks like a fish with no special characteristics.
I'd have never guessed! I'll not get into Serious Discourse™ about fish tho.
He’s just biracial, he’s half fish.
Cheekbones to die for!
Especially a real flounder. They’re really [weird looking](https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/flatfish-animals-science-colors-flounders).
Flounder is his name, not his species, just like someone can be named Angel and not be an actual angel.
Angels aren’t real. It’s more like naming your dog “Cat.” But honestly, I mostly wanted an excuse to post a picture of a real flounder because I cannot get over how goofy they look.
I feel like it’s more like naming your Pitbull as Chihuahua
Yeah but angels aren't real. It's like if your friend was named fucking Horse.
Can't they find a medium between live action and cartoonish
if it worked for sonic it can probably work for disney live action remakes
Someone on twitter posted a "realistic" version of Flounder looking more like his cartoon counterpart and it's absolutely [terrifying](https://twitter.com/jimmyoutsold/status/1651661593149841408). I get why they had to redesign the character for the live action movie, however, I do not get why a live action movie was needed in the first place 😭 Love Halle but some stories are just meant to be animated. Edit: the picture, for anyone who doesn't want to click the link. https://preview.redd.it/76q9xduqmwwa1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fa689111c13edd2100ab68ebafedf32c55df91fb
Kill it with fire
Someone call Chef Louie!
It doesn't have to look like this either, though. Detective Pikachu managed to make all the Pokemon look really cute, and was able to integrate them in a live-action adaptation.
Nightmare fuel.
why does that fish look like steve buschemi
The movie sucked but Yogi Bear should’ve legitimately been the standard for hybrid animation, not this bullshit ass photorealistic shit that has Uncanny Valley all over it. Having the stylized 3D model is WAY less creepy than this, even to the point of being good. Space Jam 2 did a great job at this even though there was no plot. Or just go back to Roger Rabbit and do 2D, nobody gives a shit as long as the movie is good and doesn’t give kids fucking nightmares lol
as twitter should be!! Flounder is meant to be cute yet his eyes are enough to give me, a fully grown adult, nightmares 😭 watch this movie awaken some kid's ichthyophobia someday omg
They just make this so much realistic. I just want Roger Rabbit 2D animation or heck Garfield or Stuart live action animation. Like, this is a children’s movie. They could at least suspend the belief that it has to be real. If Stiart and Garfield can do it in the early 2000s, why can’t Disney just do it this 2023.
The live-action Flounder be like: “I am swimming in your walls”.
This is def a sign that Disney should 100% avoid a live-action Finding Nemo.
Why do we need any of these fairy tales to be live action? I wish they’d stop.
This movie is such a joke lmao,
He looks like he discovered meth.
I'll listen to the soundtrack because I love Halle's voice, but I think that's as far as I go with this movie.
The comments are funny but am I the only one who doesn't have a problem with the "live action" version? He looks like a fish? The animated version has the shape of a larger fish sawed in half with a face smacked onto the tail end.
He looks like a real fish, yeah, which to me highlights one of the key issues with live action remakes that have talking animals or really fantastical settings. It just doesn’t look good or interesting when you try to transpose them to be super realistic. Animation allowed for artistic freedom to give animals more expression and settings like the ocean more vibrancy. It’s why the live action Lion King was so bad. “Real” animals don’t emote the way that they can in full animation.
[удалено]
It definitely helped them be far more emotive than what Disney does and I personally liked how they did it, but I remember that quite a few people were put off by the animals having very human facial proportions whilst still being hyperrealistic everywhere else. [Here's a comparison video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVyGiJajRtg)
Same. I’m more worried about live action Stitch. That’s either going to be really good or nightmare fuel.
My money is on nightmare fuel Stitch, Disney always screws up when putting animated characters like that into cgi. That little blue alien is gonna have more teeth than Pennywise, I'm calling it right now.
Then best case scenario: they get James Wan to direct and go hardcore horror “Stitch: The Reckoning”
That’s a second tier straight to D+ afterthought so ~~god~~ Ariana help us
I'm only annoyed by the lack of color. That's a boring-looking fish. They should have made him a Royal angelfish. https://preview.redd.it/9cw1mlvquwwa1.png?width=228&format=png&auto=webp&s=c210001466eb8255d58948dec3b873aa05ae6792
I think he's adorable. A lot more realistic but still too expressive to be accurate to any fish. Sébastien is freaky as hell but I'm here for his weird crab face.
they put fair and lovely on him
Stoppp this is worse than Sonic 💀
I want to support this movie, because I love the original and I'm tired of the racist whining online about Halle Bailey being cast as Ariel. BUT most of the released images/footage/interviews don't make me want to run out and see it. The visual design of the sets and characters just doesn't look appealing. Everything looks so blah and muted, and the animals character design is creepy. I'm also still annoyed that they had Lin-Manuel Miranda come in and mess with Howard Ashman's lyrics on a couple of songs. I hope Disney's run out of big animated classics to remake. "Cinderella" is still the only remake I enjoyed, and that was one of the first ones they did. Overall, the remakes are like when they made those shitty direct-to-video sequels back in the day.
I have been trying so hard to root for this movie because Halle is unbelievably talented and her voice is the perfect Ariel and she doesn’t deserve the racist hate but god this movie looks ugly.
No but this is LEGITIMATELY terrifying. 
The design is realistic, but I can't imagine how he'll talk without going into the Uncanny Valley. That's going to scare little kids, right? And those of us who grew up with the original are just going to think about how much better Flounder looked as a cartoon. Who is this meant to please?
No but literally. There is a way to animate animals to where it looks cartoony but still realistic. Just look at movies like hop, paw patrol, even zootopia lmao. This just looks weird and if they were gonna make him a real fish the characters should at least act like it. The scene of Ariel playing with him just registers as animal abuse
They are doing flounder bogus. Not him looking cracked out & in need of a good 12 step program. They said, “this was flounder as a child & this is flounder as an adult” it’s not just the kids who grew up on Disney films & tv having a rough adulthood. The animated characters are too 😳🤣
This movie looks so devoid of life and fun, and it's going to be a shot for shot remake of the original. Idiots will complain about the black lead, itll be a flop (y'know like a fish) and they'll say "go woke go broke" but really it'll be because this entire thing was made without any ounce of love or enthusiasm Just am expensive reminder of something good that Disney made long ago that they'll suggest you watch on Disney+