Why Remake a Classic?

Why Remake a Classic?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To-gg1rIDfo - Video clip

• Characters and plots already exist.
• Already fans and fan bases.
• Reducing risk.
• Making old rides relevant again in Disney Land. Synergy.
• Have to create less ideas as the ideas already exist.
• Own so much they can constantly make remakes.
• Allows merchandise to be sold again.

What the Director of The Jungle Book 2016 has to Say.

Favreau said that he was motivated by Walt Disney Studios chairman Alan Horn to take the technological route for the film.

"The idea of going out to the jungle and shooting this, it just felt like it wouldn't have the magic that the 1967 film had had. There was a dreamlike quality to it. There was a surreal quality to it. It was a high-water mark for character animation and to me, that's what I remember about it. And so I wanted to make sure we preserved that.

"But what Horn said was: look at the technology. Look at 'Life of Pi', 'Avatar'. Why not use the technology to create a whole world that transports you? Let's really embrace this new technology and see what we can do if we push its limit."

Favreau also presented a glimpse of his vision by screening portions of the film.

The director explained that by re-imagining the film "you are serving many masters...you are trying to honour the memory, preconceived memory of people who grew up with it, but you are also trying to make a movie that appeals to the full audience -- that is ethically what we set out to do".

"We are trying to pay tribute, and we can also see that with the visual effects, we are pushing the technology. We are mixing the old story with cutting edge technology," he added.

So, how was the film made?

"We went back to the structure of it and saw what Kipling did because he offered a lot. We kind of picked between the two. The story structure of the 1967 film was good and offered a lot; so I stuck to it as much as I could. What I have tried to do is to focus on the images that I remember from it before going back to look at it again," he said.

He is brimming with joy after using "level of artistry and technology" to narrate a story with "humour and emotion, and showing nature, animals, and getting into that real deep mythic imagery that I think always marries well with technology, and always has."

Failure of the Warner Brothers Remake.

In the battle between the two “Jungle Book” movies, Disney appears to have the upper hand.

The studio just enjoyed a massive $103.6 million opening weekend for its live-action update of its 1967 animated classic and is already hard at work on a sequel that would bring back director Jon 

Favreau and focus on more of Mowgli’s adventures. Warner Bros. won’t counter with its own version of the Rudyard Kipling tales until 2018, 30 months after the Disney version took multiplexes by storm.

“Warner Bros. has to be really concerned,” said Jeff Bock, an analyst with Exhibitor Relations. “It could spell disaster.”

The history of competing studio projects with similar story lines is nearly as old as the movie business itself.

“There’s always a perception issue where if audiences feel like two movies are very similar, it can be problematic,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at comScore.

Warner Bros. has just started production on its version of the Kipling stories, but analysts say that the studio will be certain that its take is sufficiently different from what Disney and Favreau achieved with their telling of the man cub fable. It has tapped Andy Serkis, the motion-capture master behind “The Lord of the Rings'” Gollum, to direct and has assembled a top-shelf cast that includes Cate Blanchett, Christian Bale and Benedict Cumberbatch. Though Favreau was hailed by critics for making his version of “The Jungle Book” more realistic and less carbonated than the animated rendition, Warner Bros. could get darker still as a way of setting itself apart. That might mean reaching for older audiences by upping the action and getting a PG-13 rating.

“It’s all about the message,” said Dergarabedian. “Within the marketing they have to show there’s sufficient differentiation.”

Originally, the film was supposed to come out in October of 2017, but earlier this month Warner Bros. pushed the release date back by a year. The added time could help “Jungle Book” at the box office, giving it breathing room from the Disney version.

Over the longterm, however, Disney’s success with fairy tales may start scaring off other studios. Along with “The Jungle Book,” the company has revitalized familiar stories such as “Oz: The Great and Powerful,” “Cinderella,” “Maleficent” and “Alice in Wonderland” to an average box office return of $700 million globally. With new versions of “Dumbo” and “Beauty and the Beast” on the horizon, as well as a return to Wonderland with this summer’s “Alice Through the Looking Glass,” the studio may have a monopoly on stories that end in happily ever after.

“We’re seeing story extensions and many of these movies are delving deeper into these worlds,” said Dave Hollis, Disney’s distribution chief. “There’s just something in the Disney DNA that allows us to have this kind of a success ratio.”

Now the pressure’s on for Warner Bros.’ “Jungle Book” to make like Watson and Crick and discover its own double helix structure.