• MaXimus421@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It was a Lion King movie. Of course people paid to go see it. Box office profits (tickets sold) do not equate to an enjoyable film.

        I’ve never heard of anyone IRL or online claim that film was worthy of their time.

        We all got catfished on that one but I’m not surprised. You cannot remake a classic. It will work only 1 time out of 50. The odds are never good.

        Jungle Book was an exception, imo.

        • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          I know a person who loved the movie. Of course they haven‘t watched the original nor do they intend to because cartoons „are for children“. Some folks just watch anything that just gets advertised enough I guess.

        • hex@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          I watched both, liked both. I don’t think it’s that deep. It was just The Lion King with new voices and new visuals.

          What do people generally dislike about it? Just that it’s a remake of a film?

          • Maven (famous)
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            It’s a remake of the film but with less emotion and far less fun.

            Making it photorealistic and trying to limit yourself to real film techniques limits things heavily and meant that you couldn’t show the same emotions on all of the characters that you could before.

            I also firmly believe that replacing Rowan Atkinson was the worst decision Disney had made since hiring Jake Paul.

    • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Wasn’t that the first of the modern “live action” remakes? Nobody knew how terrible they’d all be yet so it probably sold well.

  • Kit@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    My therapist recommended that I check this out. I’m looking forward to it hitting torrent sites.

  • BrightCandle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    I thought the first movie was better. Inside Out 2 was fine and enjoyed it but it felt a bit more painful comedy wise than the first one and the story was less compelling.

    • ApollosArrow@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m a bit torn. While I think the overall first movie is better, as an adult… I very much connected to the inside story of the second one much more, as did most people I know that watched it.

  • CCMan1701A@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I had a hard time watching some of the Inside Out sequel, but now that I know how it ends I will feel a lot less stressed/anxious during a rewatch. Kind of like rewatching The Sixth Sense.

    I feel that I likely will rewatch the first movie more as it’s easier on my brain.

    • TheImpressiveX@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      It was certainly marketed as live action. Believe it or not, the opening sunrise shot is the only piece of live-action footage in the entire movie. The rest of the movie is photorealistic CGI animation.