According to Jon Favreau, despite what the trailers seem to indicate, the film is not a shot-for-shot remake.My big concern with this is that they appear to be doing it as a shot for shot remake, and I watched the original so much as a kid that I practically have the whole thing memorized. If that is the case, then now that I've seen the character designs I can almost literally play the whole movie out in my mind.
If the film is a lot like the original except for being made with CG, why can't that be criticized?
Oh, I think the point of a remake is to bring something new to the table.Because the entire point of a remake is for there to be similarities to the original.
If it’s the exact same film as the original but with realistic animation, why should I see it instead of the original? It contributes noting new and unique to the cinematic universe. That’s quite valid criticism.
It's not the same film. It's not like they kept the original audio track and replaced only the visuals. The basic story is the same, but the film is all new.
(In fact, IIRC James Earl Jones is the only actor returning from the original film)
But, same story scene for scene right
If it’s the exact same film as the original but with realistic animation, why should I see it instead of the original? It contributes noting new and unique to the cinematic universe. That’s quite valid criticism.
Its 99% similar.Not necessarily. I haven't seen the 2019 version yet, but I'm fairly sure it's not a shot-for-shot remake.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.