Robin hood gets live action remake - The furry magnum opus for a new generation

Grumbo said:
On one hand, this movie could actually benefit from a good remake. It's definitely not considered one of Disney's top tier animations.

On the other, Disney's track record of remakes.
Click to expand...

Other than inventing furfags the movie has little to recommend it. It's not like it's a blasphemy or something, like remaking Fantasia as some wokeshit.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Agent Wet, Grumbo and FluffyTehFennekin
PS1gamenwatch said:
And remake this song:

Click to expand...
20200412_223619.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: nanny911
DrunkNDoziNDragN said:
Well this was inevitable. I was wondering when this would happen. Yep the original spawned many a fur fag, so I hope to christ this one just sucks badly and gets memory holed like Beauty and the Beast. Or Cats. If it sounds like what it sounds like, and it doesnt have any A-list team members, it's probably going to suck. Probably not Cats level bad because this one isnt a pretentious musical production.

The original movie was a surprisingly charming product despite it cutting corners like crazy. Fuck, Little John is just brown Baloo in a hat. Same voice actor and everything. Animation re-used all over. Snow white and Hunchback it wasnt. Plus I suspect that characters like Prince John are going to lose their charm and Maid Marian is going to be a stronk vixen who dont need no tod.

It looks like the House of the Sue Happy Mouse is going to remake all if their old movies, or are planning to, I'm honestly more anxious about how their going to fuck up The Sword in the Stone.
Click to expand...


Yeah, the original Robin Hood was just a recycling of the Jungle Book, but I liked Ustinov's Prince John and his interplay with Hiss. Baloo kicks ass whatever medium he's in. A lot of the other characters are kind of dated; I can't imagine the Sheriff of Nottingham and his vulture minions keeping their Southern accents and redneck personalities in a modern adaptation, as those kinds of characters are passe now. They'll have to inject "diversity" into the movie somehow, by having some of the characters played by POCs. I'm guessing Maid Marion gets a blacklift even if she is a red fox, and she'll probably get turned into an action girl to boot.

I'm not sure about the decision to use live action actors. CG would seem the better choice for this, if it's expressive enough. Action scenes with fursuits and puppets are going to be tough to do without CG, so why not make it all CG to start with?

Also, thinking of the Robin Hood cartoon, I couldn't help but post this old Waxonator vid:

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: frozenrunner and FluffyTehFennekin
Honestly if anything needs a lifelike creepy CGI remake it's Secret of NIMH, not only would the creepiness lend to the overall feel of the movie(because it's already dark and fucked up to begin with) but it would hopefully force a blu-ray release of the original with all the cut content and pre-production stuff.

Yeah it's Don Bluth so it's not under Disney, but that would be probably the only animated movie outside of Rock and Rule that would actually benefit from something like that.
 
  • Winner
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Disagree
Reactions: Autumnal Equinox, The Great Chandler, FluffyTehFennekin and 2 others
I think the reason the recentish Robin Hood movie failed was it's too "big". I think Robin Hood works better as low budget/indie type things rather than being a blockbuster.

Does that make any sense? It's meant to be a quaint squashbuckler, not a Modern Hollywood thing.
 
Puddleduck said:
I think the reason the recentish Robin Hood movie failed was it's too "big". I think Robin Hood works better as low budget/indie type things rather than being a blockbuster.

Does that make any sense? It's meant to be a quaint squashbuckler, not a Modern Hollywood thing.
Click to expand...
Nah, I saw it. It didn’t know whether it wanted to be a medieval period piece or a cyberpunk modern retelling and tried to be both. It failed.

The antifa stuff didn’t help, but beyond that the tones were all over the place.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: The Mass Shooter Ron Soye, JambledUpWords and FluffyTehFennekin
Puddleduck said:
I think the reason the recentish Robin Hood movie failed was it's too "big". I think Robin Hood works better as low budget/indie type things rather than being a blockbuster.

Does that make any sense? It's meant to be a quaint squashbuckler, not a Modern Hollywood thing.
Click to expand...


Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves disagrees with you. But then again, that movie had a charismatic villain played by Alan Rickman, a tone that was gritty, but not too grim, humor, Morgan Freeman as a wise Negro sidekick (back when that kind of thing wasn't cloying or pandering,) and it wasn't trying to do anything political, just be an adventure story. Sure, Kevin Costner was horribly miscast (as he was a flavor of the month actor back then,) but the movie itself wasn't so much about the hero as it was about the colorful villain and side characters, so it didn't matter.

Nowadays, Hollywood is interested either in Deconstruction or in making the next Game of Thrones, so every Robin Hood/ King Arthur/ medieval story has to be an overblown, overly serious, no-fun bloatfest that elevates women and POCs or has to make some kind of statement about modern politics. (Mostly about how either the White Man/ the Orange Man is bad. ) They also have to be self-aware on some level, as if to apologize for the earlier movies about these characters being sexist, non-politically correct, or just earnest in tone (a "quaint swashbuckler" as Puddleduck mentioned. Can't have a movie where good guys just do heroic things. Don't want your friends to think you're a pleb for enjoying such simple peasant fare, do you?) Tack on a 2-1/2 to 3 hour running time and it's no wonder people would rather give these movies a miss.
 
  • Winner
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: ToroidalBoat, Francis E. Dec Esc., Puddleduck and 3 others
Pokemonquistador2 said:
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves disagrees with you. But then again, that movie had a charismatic villain played by Alan Rickman, a tone that was gritty, but not too grim, humor, Morgan Freeman as a wise Negro sidekick (back when that kind of thing wasn't cloying or pandering,) and it wasn't trying to do anything political, just be an adventure story. Sure, Kevin Costner was horribly miscast (as he was a flavor of the month actor back then,) but the movie itself wasn't so much about the hero as it was about the colorful villain and side characters, so it didn't matter.
Click to expand...
Is that the film where a little kid asks Morgan Freeman, "did God paint you?" ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Francis E. Dec Esc. and JambledUpWords
Pokemonquistador2 said:
Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves disagrees with you. But then again, that movie had a charismatic villain played by Alan Rickman, a tone that was gritty, but not too grim, humor, Morgan Freeman as a wise Negro sidekick (back when that kind of thing wasn't cloying or pandering,) and it wasn't trying to do anything political, just be an adventure story. Sure, Kevin Costner was horribly miscast (as he was a flavor of the month actor back then,) but the movie itself wasn't so much about the hero as it was about the colorful villain and side characters, so it didn't matter.

Nowadays, Hollywood is interested either in Deconstruction or in making the next Game of Thrones, so every Robin Hood/ King Arthur/ medieval story has to be an overblown, overly serious, no-fun bloatfest that elevates women and POCs or has to make some kind of statement about modern politics. (Mostly about how either the White Man/ the Orange Man is bad. ) They also have to be self-aware on some level, as if to apologize for the earlier movies about these characters being sexist, non-politically correct, or just earnest in tone (a "quaint swashbuckler" as Puddleduck mentioned. Can't have a movie where good guys just do heroic things. Don't want your friends to think you're a pleb for enjoying such simple peasant fare, do you?) Tack on a 2-1/2 to 3 hour running time and it's no wonder people would rather give these movies a miss.
Click to expand...

And the Kate Bush song don't forget
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back