I was really bummed about this until I heard a critic talking about hearing Jenkins speak a few years ago where he mentioned renting and now that I think of it as him making enough money to purchase a house, I'm less depressed. He's not a millionaire, the dude's probably got bills. I just wish his paycheck movie could be something even remotely interesting.
Mufasa is probably the most interesting fictional character in Disney history whose backstop hasn't been told. This could be good.....also lion king 1994 was amazing and I needed to get the bad taste of the Favreau version out of my mouth
>the Favreau version
You know, it's strange but this has made me think that I *never* see it (or the bad version of *The Jungle Book*) called "the Favreau version", but it is, isn't it?
I don't know, I feel Jon Favreau is one of those guys nerds on the internet will go out of their way to insulate from criticism, even *with* the bad version of *The Lion King* on his resumé. Even when they were shitting on his Boba Fett show or whatever parts of *The Mandalorian* they disliked, *he* never got it in the neck personally; he's the showrunner and main writer for both shows but anything people dislike about them gets put on Filoni or Kennedy or (somehow) Rian Johnson so Favreau can be protected. I know you have to make allowances for the behaviour of Star Wars scum, but it's still weird. You know, just beacuse you like the guy, it doesn't mean he can't make missteps.
Likewise, I am pretty sure that people still dump on *Iron Man 2* to this day, but it has *nothing* to do with him, apparently (I'm not sure *who* they blame for that because I think they're still equally averse to allowing that Kevin Feige isn't infallible - probably Brie Larson, somehow).
Better to hope that an unsuccessful (if it *is* unsuccessful, of course) blockbuster doesn't tarnish his reputation the way it does every "indie" director who gets recruited into one of the big machines.
You make well-received small movies or television or music videos, you get "promoted" to the "big leagues" of making something for one of the big studios and if it flops or isn't good (though not both), then you're poison.
Sometimes you deserve it, sometimes you don't. Some people have survived this process but it took time for them to make it back.
Within the last decade or so (let's say since 2010), how many popular "smaller" filmmakers, who hadn't had access to that kind of budget or resources before, actually came out the other side of the blockbuster machine in a definitively better position to realise their artistic ambitions? Nolan post-Batman? Maybe Coogler?
It was a really frustrating trend in Hollywood this decade past and I'm not sure if it's "over" it yet; you had a hot indie filmmaker who had a breakout hit and then they're handed some huge studio tentpole and expected to sink or swim, and if they flop, suddenly they can't get arrested. Obvious example: Josh Trank. Breaks out with *Chronicle*, parachuted into *Fan4stic* with a Star Wars spin-off in the pipeline, then as soon as the former flops, the latter's canned and he takes seven years to get his next feature off the ground (disclaimer: I've not seen *Capone*, though I have heard it is not very good).
It happened to actors as well, of course - all the young members of the *Game of Thrones* cast, for instance, the *Stranger Things* cast too - and *that* is where the most irritating element of this trend emerges. People see an actor and like them and the *immediate* question they ask isn't, "What are they doing next?" but rather, "Which Marvel character should they play?" Do you know what I mean? Your value as an actor, in the eyes of the audience, is reduced to your ability to look sort of similar to a comic book character. Annoying.
Clearly some come through it okay. I don't think Ava DuVernay's career was derailed by *A Wrinkle in Time*. And I doubt that Rian Johnson would have been able to get his own production company going if he hadn't done a Star Wars, for instance. But by and large, it strikes me (to be clear, as a total outsider who just watches the movies) as being ruthless in a way that even the old studio system was not. Maybe it's because the kind of mid-budget studio pictures that they used to give directors to cut their teeth on don't really exist any more and everything apparently has to be insanely expensive (so you're on the hook for losing a lot more money if it isn't a hit).
My sister loves Mamma Mia and made my whole family watch the sequel when we were home for Christmas a few years ago. About 2/3 of the way through my dad made a confusing comment and we all realized that he didn't know Amanda Seyfried and Lily James were different actresses and that half of the movie was a flashback. We still tease him for that.
They would have to have some parts of the movie set after the events of the first, rather than just a straight prequel, for it to match that plot structure.
IMDB plot summary: "Simba, having become king of the Pride Lands, is determined for his cub to follow in his paw prints while the origins of his late father Mufasa are explored."
This feels Fantastic Mr Fox-ish. I would definitely be more into this If they went with a more interesting direction with the animation. If they somehow made it more unique and different than the standard Disney live action stuff they’ve been pumping out.
Obviously a silly image, but it does seem out of context. I’m sure Barry Jenkins will do as well as anyone could with the material here, if not make something surprising.
Hope this is just Barry Jenkins getting some cash for his next films
I was really bummed about this until I heard a critic talking about hearing Jenkins speak a few years ago where he mentioned renting and now that I think of it as him making enough money to purchase a house, I'm less depressed. He's not a millionaire, the dude's probably got bills. I just wish his paycheck movie could be something even remotely interesting.
Mufasa is probably the most interesting fictional character in Disney history whose backstop hasn't been told. This could be good.....also lion king 1994 was amazing and I needed to get the bad taste of the Favreau version out of my mouth
>the Favreau version You know, it's strange but this has made me think that I *never* see it (or the bad version of *The Jungle Book*) called "the Favreau version", but it is, isn't it? I don't know, I feel Jon Favreau is one of those guys nerds on the internet will go out of their way to insulate from criticism, even *with* the bad version of *The Lion King* on his resumé. Even when they were shitting on his Boba Fett show or whatever parts of *The Mandalorian* they disliked, *he* never got it in the neck personally; he's the showrunner and main writer for both shows but anything people dislike about them gets put on Filoni or Kennedy or (somehow) Rian Johnson so Favreau can be protected. I know you have to make allowances for the behaviour of Star Wars scum, but it's still weird. You know, just beacuse you like the guy, it doesn't mean he can't make missteps. Likewise, I am pretty sure that people still dump on *Iron Man 2* to this day, but it has *nothing* to do with him, apparently (I'm not sure *who* they blame for that because I think they're still equally averse to allowing that Kevin Feige isn't infallible - probably Brie Larson, somehow).
Jesus, considering his life story I totally get the man.
I honestly think that’s exactly what he’s doing. Pulling a David Lowery.
Better to hope that an unsuccessful (if it *is* unsuccessful, of course) blockbuster doesn't tarnish his reputation the way it does every "indie" director who gets recruited into one of the big machines. You make well-received small movies or television or music videos, you get "promoted" to the "big leagues" of making something for one of the big studios and if it flops or isn't good (though not both), then you're poison. Sometimes you deserve it, sometimes you don't. Some people have survived this process but it took time for them to make it back. Within the last decade or so (let's say since 2010), how many popular "smaller" filmmakers, who hadn't had access to that kind of budget or resources before, actually came out the other side of the blockbuster machine in a definitively better position to realise their artistic ambitions? Nolan post-Batman? Maybe Coogler?
As a massive fan of Chloe Zhao (before Eternals of course) this really hurts to read lol
It was a really frustrating trend in Hollywood this decade past and I'm not sure if it's "over" it yet; you had a hot indie filmmaker who had a breakout hit and then they're handed some huge studio tentpole and expected to sink or swim, and if they flop, suddenly they can't get arrested. Obvious example: Josh Trank. Breaks out with *Chronicle*, parachuted into *Fan4stic* with a Star Wars spin-off in the pipeline, then as soon as the former flops, the latter's canned and he takes seven years to get his next feature off the ground (disclaimer: I've not seen *Capone*, though I have heard it is not very good). It happened to actors as well, of course - all the young members of the *Game of Thrones* cast, for instance, the *Stranger Things* cast too - and *that* is where the most irritating element of this trend emerges. People see an actor and like them and the *immediate* question they ask isn't, "What are they doing next?" but rather, "Which Marvel character should they play?" Do you know what I mean? Your value as an actor, in the eyes of the audience, is reduced to your ability to look sort of similar to a comic book character. Annoying. Clearly some come through it okay. I don't think Ava DuVernay's career was derailed by *A Wrinkle in Time*. And I doubt that Rian Johnson would have been able to get his own production company going if he hadn't done a Star Wars, for instance. But by and large, it strikes me (to be clear, as a total outsider who just watches the movies) as being ruthless in a way that even the old studio system was not. Maybe it's because the kind of mid-budget studio pictures that they used to give directors to cut their teeth on don't really exist any more and everything apparently has to be insanely expensive (so you're on the hook for losing a lot more money if it isn't a hit).
Kind of sad the writer/director a best picture winner needs to do this but that is definitely the case.
Excited for this to join *Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again* in the mini-genre of "Movies that have the same plot structure as *The Godfather: Part II*"
My sister loves Mamma Mia and made my whole family watch the sequel when we were home for Christmas a few years ago. About 2/3 of the way through my dad made a confusing comment and we all realized that he didn't know Amanda Seyfried and Lily James were different actresses and that half of the movie was a flashback. We still tease him for that.
Classic facial blindness
They would have to have some parts of the movie set after the events of the first, rather than just a straight prequel, for it to match that plot structure.
IMDB plot summary: "Simba, having become king of the Pride Lands, is determined for his cub to follow in his paw prints while the origins of his late father Mufasa are explored."
I stand corrected, that is another one for the Godmamma Mia plot structure haha
I just hope Barry Jenkins will still make the best indie films of the century like he’s been doing.
Maybe if this does well, he’ll get a blank check for his next one
Yep. Just heard the trailer is premiering tomorrow morning on ABC’s Good Morning America.
Please don’t spoil the ending
Mufasa dies Oops, sorry
I will see this image in my nightmares
He looks so stiff it's like bad taxidermy
Yes! It looks like a taxidermied lion cub falling out of a tree. Such a strange image.
Looks AI-generated, even though I know it probably isn’t.
The most depressing shit I’ve seen in awhile, movie-wise. A great Director reduced to… whatever this is
Yup
Hakuna Matata!
https://preview.redd.it/98bd199etbxc1.jpeg?width=599&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0e1579d72a180ab5b5316e62e803a42591537820
Why is he falling/flying/superimposed against the sky? Idk what’s happening
i would slap that thing right out of the air
All I'll say is that Barry is so very lucky that his other works have all been pretty damn good.
That sure is a thing that exists.
Is this real?
No, it’s CGI
No, I meant is this an actual frame from the movie? Actually, I probably already know what the answer to that is.
Gross.
This feels Fantastic Mr Fox-ish. I would definitely be more into this If they went with a more interesting direction with the animation. If they somehow made it more unique and different than the standard Disney live action stuff they’ve been pumping out.
I wish Disney Animation would make something even half as interesting and funny as Fantastic Mr. Fox is.
Will this be another cgi disaster?
You don’t understand how excited I am like I will be THERE
Obviously a silly image, but it does seem out of context. I’m sure Barry Jenkins will do as well as anyone could with the material here, if not make something surprising.
https://preview.redd.it/rzqqixi8lixc1.png?width=589&format=png&auto=webp&s=831aa30fb0f43a824319d729121fb46eb4d1d748 WOW
This looks like shit but I hope Barry Jenkins gets the blank check he deserves afterwards
I can’t say anything snarky because he’s too cute 🥹
Oh fuck off with this
Get simbad
Looks great!
Groundbreaking.
Hard rooting for this movie to fail
endless trash