After finishing the film list at home, I suddenly found that the "real dog version" "Miss and the Tramp", which was launched on Disney+ last November, was not watched. It happened to be taking advantage of the time at home to revisit this bowl of "dog food". Probably since 14 years, Disney began to use its huge capital and mature visual effects technology to remake its own classic movies, such as the live-action series of "Alice in Wonderland", "Beauty and the Beast", and "The Sleeping Beauty". Maleficent, etc., the animal series also has a summer file like "The Lion King". Disney sells feelings unscrupulously, making the audience tired of aesthetics, but whenever there is a new remake series, we still can’t help but go. Look, I am curious about what it would be like to use the mature film industry to make old classic movies (this money is really good). Back to the topic, when it comes to "Miss and the Tramp", it is inevitable to compare it horizontally with "The Lion King" almost at the same time. I personally think that the adaptation of the former is better than the latter. First of all, the shooting methods of the two are still different. From the staff table and previous reports, we can understand that "Miss" uses real dogs to perform real shots with CG special effects, while "The Lion King" is the whole CG, but from the perspective of our perception There is almost no difference, and here I can't help but sigh the power of today's visual industry. In the adaptation of expressions, "Miss" has an advantage over "The Lion King". I think this is because we have a lot more empathy and familiarity with dogs than lions, as well as the variety of dogs and the richer expression changes. These all reduce the discomfort we feel when watching movies. At the same time, the environment in which the former is located is the human settlement that we are familiar with. Together with the excellent scenery and photography of Disney, we have a stronger sense of substitution. Although the dramatic tension of the animal performance in this film is still inferior to the animated version (this also highlights the irreplaceability of hand-drawn animation), it can be seen that the modelers are indeed trying their best to make the animal shape more Interesting, like the old dog Trusty in the film, the twin cats of aunt, the stray dogs Jock and Bull, you can see the exaggeration of the fusion in the realism, I think the impression is not bad. Many plots in the film have also been adapted into a film, like the bridge section of the lady's mouth-off. The director cleverly changed the beaver in the original work into a statue, which improved the rationality of the plot, and also received a wave of feelings and climax. The long and deep shot of the old Trusty tracking Butch even surpasses the original in terms of substitution. The adaptation of the singing and dancing part is also up to standard. The twin cats messed up "What a "Shame" uses a wealth of sports shots to express a sense of playfulness. Miss Jock's "He's a Trump" in the shelter uses an outdoor light source as a stage light. The design is also more agile than the original (also because the original does not focus on singing and dancing). The cast of this film is also luxurious enough, continuing the mainstream Hollywood "zzzq". This time Disney still uses black people as the protagonist (it was definitely impossible to match the black and white of the hostess and hostess in the United States in the 1950s). The Valkyrie Tessa Thompson is dubbed Lady, Justin Theroux is dubbed Butch, and Janelle, who shines at the opening of this year’s Oscars, has joined. The soundtrack does not use the pop style of mainstream Hollywood style, but adopts the retro Jazz style. In short, The film's audiovisual sophistication is no less than any theater movie of the same year. After blowing so much, this film is also regrettable. In the nearly two-hour period, it is almost a copy of the original story, without the slightest extension in the theme. However, the script of the 1950s is indeed placed today. It’s old enough. Although the kiss between Lady and Trump is still sweet, it really does not allow us to regain the deep touch that we had when we first saw this work. I think this is the movie that has become an entertainment consumer product and that it used to be. Those classic movies have the biggest difference in feeling. ps: By the way, Jia Bing is such a big name now, have you all come to play Disney movies? ! [Wang Chai] "Sa Trump" uses an outdoor light source as a stage light design is also more flexible than the original (also because the original does not focus on singing and dancing). The cast of this film is also luxurious enough, continuing the mainstream Hollywood "zzzq". This time Disney still uses black people as the protagonist (it was definitely impossible to match the black and white of the hostess and hostess in the United States in the 1950s). The Valkyrie Tessa Thompson is dubbed Lady, Justin Theroux is dubbed Butch, and Janelle, who shines at the opening of this year’s Oscars, has joined. The soundtrack does not use the pop style of mainstream Hollywood style, but adopts the retro Jazz style. In short, The film's audiovisual sophistication is no less than any theater movie of the same year. After blowing so much, this film is also regrettable. In the nearly two-hour period, it is almost a copy of the original story, without the slightest extension in the theme. However, the script of the 1950s is indeed placed today. It’s old enough. Although the kiss between Lady and Trump is still sweet, it really does not allow us to regain the deep touch that we had when we first saw this work. I think this is the movie that has become an entertainment consumer product and that it used to be. Those classic movies have the biggest difference in feeling. ps: By the way, Jia Bing is such a big name now, have you all come to play Disney movies? ! [Wang Chai] "Sa Trump" uses an outdoor light source as a stage light design is also more flexible than the original (also because the original does not focus on singing and dancing). The cast of this film is also luxurious enough, continuing the mainstream Hollywood "zzzq". This time Disney still uses black people as the protagonist (it was definitely impossible to match the black and white of the hostess and hostess in the United States in the 1950s). The Valkyrie Tessa Thompson is dubbed Lady, Justin Theroux is dubbed Butch, and Janelle, who shines at the opening of this year’s Oscars, has joined. The soundtrack does not use the pop style of mainstream Hollywood style, but adopts the retro Jazz style. In short, The film's audiovisual sophistication is no less than any theater movie of the same year. After blowing so much, this film is also regrettable. In the nearly two-hour period, it is almost a copy of the original story, without the slightest extension in the theme. However, the script of the 1950s is indeed placed today. It’s old enough. Although the kiss between Lady and Trump is still sweet, it really does not allow us to regain the deep touch that we had when we first saw this work. I think this is the movie that has become an entertainment consumer product and that it used to be. Those classic movies have the biggest difference in feeling. ps: By the way, Jia Bing is such a big name now, have you all come to play Disney movies? ! [Wang Chai]
View more about Lady and the Tramp reviews
