Contents

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Live-Action 'Aladdin' Is "Shining, Shimmering, Splendid" Enough

Basically, 2019’s Aladdin is just another cash-grab attempt by Disney to remake one of their classic animated films into live-action.  Nevertheless, I was somewhat hyped for it because Aladdin is one of my all-time favorite Disney animated features, and I couldn’t help but be intrigued of how it would be pulled off in live-action.

Overall, the live-action remake is enjoyable.  It definitely isn’t as good as the 1992 masterpiece.  But, from the very start, nobody really expected it to be otherwise.  Thus, being inferior to the original isn’t really a disappointing outcome.  But here’s the thing: there’s a good chance that those who didn’t grow up with the original – and thus, have no nostalgic attachment to it – would get to love this film, and develop a special place in their hearts for it.
It does some tweaks and adds some new stuff here and there, but the core of the story is the same, and many scenes are beat-for-beat duplications.  It essentially follows the game plan for success of 2017’s Beauty and the Beast.  And thus, it delights in the same way: by sticking closely to the elements that everyone had come to love the first time around.  Yes, the result is derivative, but still, there’s genuine joy to be had in witnessing those iconic song numbers, dialogues, and sequences play out in live-action form.

Of course, there are some things that only work in animation medium.  And thus, when they are translated into live-action, they don’t have the same potency.  On the other hand, there are some things that become more compelling in live-action delivery.  A noteworthy is example is the “Genie, you’re free” scene, which honestly made my eyes well up more effectively than its animated counterpart.
As for the few additions/changes the live-action remake opted to have/do, there are some that I didn’t like, but most of them actually add depth, humor (there’s at least one original scene that had me in stitches), and dynamics to the narrative (something I couldn’t say about the additions/changes in Beauty and the Beast).

Will Smith is inspired casting as Genie.  Nobody can ever fill Robin William’s shoes, but of all the actors working today, who else but Will Smith has the charisma, likability, and repute to pull off his own spin on such iconic character without getting universally hated for it?  Overall, I think Will Smith did tremendously with what was asked of him.
Mena Massoud is fine as Aladdin, but it’s Naomi Scott as Jasmine who is truly striking.  She’s wonderful in the role, and her screen presence is simply magnetic.  Just as I thought from watching Power Rangers, she was meant for greater things, and her performance here further enforces my belief that she’s going to be a superstar someday.

Marwan Kenzari is probably the weakest link in the cast.  I don’t know if it was the fault of his acting or the direction given to him, but his performance as Jafar is mostly bland.

Meanwhile, Alan Tudyk was given very little to do in voicing Iago.  His portrayal was just straight up parrot – no colorful personality at all.  It was a waste of Tudyk’s versatility.  In addition, I think the entertainment value of the film would have increased some more if it was Gilbert Gottfried reprising the role, and letting him play it in the usual sardonic way that the character has been known for.
In summary, the live-action Aladdin film succeeds more than it fails.  It may not have fully captured the magnificence of its animated classic source material, but it’s still a very entertaining reproduction.  At the very least, I like it more than the live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast.

I’m down for a live-action Return of Jafar sequel, by the way.

No comments:

Post a Comment