Yes No Maybe So: That other "Pinocchio"

by Nathaniel R

Pinocchio is everywhere. It's a cyclical thing that happens with a lot of "public domain" characters who are essentially free IP for storytellers. Consider that in the 21st century alone Pinocchio has appeared --take a deep breath the list is long-- as a supporting character multiple films in the Shrek franchise, as a character in a TV musical (Geppetto), as the subject of two live action adaptations (interesting enough both were Italian films) and three animated adaptations (from Canada, Italy, and Russia). Next up in the next several months he'll be the lead in a new video game (only hot and 20something this time), and have two more feature-length adaptations of his story. We've already seen the trailer for the Guillermo del Toro's stop motion version of the story which arrives in December. Now we get the trailer to the live action (with lots of CG characters) version from director Robert Zemeckis which will be on Disney+ beginning September 8th.

A Yes No Maybe So™ breakdown after the jump...

YES

• Tom Hanks will probably be loveable as Geppetto. Otherwise we're at a loss for a "yes" bullet point, and that's not even an enthusiastic one since the casting feels so predictable. 

• The quality of the animation is usually not the problem and that opening shot of Pleasure Island is a stunner...

 

NO

• ...on the other hand even the stuff that we assume is partially practical sets looks extremely processed if you will, like it's been run through the computer hundreds of times. Despite a few flesh and blood actors this looks fully animated which is a pity since you can lose the soul if it's too "artifical".

• If you don't have a fresh visual take (it looks largely copied from the original) or new ideas about an old story, why bother re-telling it? The first big-screen Pinocchio (1940) hasn't lost any of its original magic and that's also streaming free on Disney+. 

MAYBE SO

• Maybe they'll let Cynthia Erivo sing in which case her Blue Fairy could be a highlight.

• Near the beginning of his career Robert Zemeckis consistently delivered extremely loveable pure movie magic for a full decade (Romancing the Stone, Back to the Future trilogy, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Death Becomes Her). Since then it's been wildly hit and miss. A lot of people love his most celebrated picture Forrest Gump but we think it's legitimately a bad movie. Post hot streak and Gump, we've seen pictures with incredible elements that the movie as a whole couldn't consistenly capitalize on (Cast Away, Contact, and What Lies Beneath), there was a strange five year stretch of animated movies that had their moments but weren't that easy to love  (The Polar Express, Beowulf, A Christmas Carol) and then one final box office hit (Flight). For the past ten years, though, his films have been very poorly or indifferently received  (The Witches, Welcome to Marwen, The Walk and the best of them though it's not great... Allied). It's hard to argue that they didn't deserve the public shrug. Why hasn't he been able to regain his early mojo? Is it foolish to keep hoping a new picture will change things?

Alas, we're a no. How about you? 

Disney was probably wise to schedule this in the wasteland of September and with some breathing room before Guillermo Del Toro's sure to be more imaginative version (no matter the unknown quality) on Netflix. From all appearances this is yet another useless copy/retread of superior earlier Disney magic that the Mouse House is so currently enamored of churning out. The only films in this infernal remake phase that have been worth a dime are Cinderella (because it actually had a fresh take) and Dumbo (it wasn't great, but at least it was trying to work through some ideas about the material rather than just soulless recreations). The public isn't helping end this current Disney phase either, dutifully attending all the mostly imagination-free even shot-for-shot (at times) cash-grab remakes.

Comments

[Finbar McBride]

Perhaps it’s me but doesn’t that sculpted bust leering over the entrance to Pleasure Island bear a resemblance to Tom Hanks in full Colonel Tom Parker make up?

[thevoid99]

I might watch this although I'll be honest about this. Robert Zemeckis hasn't really made anything interesting since Flight even though I did like The Walk even though it was absolutely inferior to Man on Wire.

Zemeckis needs to stop with this idea of using visual effects to tell a story and also stop dramatizing fact-based films. He needs to go back to some serious human drama w/o all of that bullshit.

[Mr Ripley79]

I'm not a fan of his 84 - 90 run,the movies are ok but none hold a special place for me.

I like Forrrest Gump but all those Oscars we're too much and Hanks winning a 2nd in a stellar year was the wrong choice

Death Becomes her is my ultimate favourite,I watch it once a year.

My favourites after that are the very undervalued Contact with peak Jodie and What Lies Beneath with a terrific Pfeiffer an underwhelming Ford with a sprinkling of marvellous Diana Scarwid.

His version of The Witches is awful,the casting,vfx are all wrong apart from Octavia.

I doubt i'll watch Pinocchio.

[Travis C]

Not only were the two live-action versions Italian, they both featured Roberto Benigni (first as the puppet (which he directed as well), then as the toymaker).

[Antônio]

Love his pre-Gump work, dislike Forrest a lot (because I think it’s some kind of a poor Zelig) and hate all his post-Gump era, except Contact, Lies Beneath and Marwen.

Disney should stop this remake-mania, all the movies from this trend are bad copies of the originals. But somehow they make money.

[Antônio]

Love his pre-Gump work, dislike Forrest a lot (because I think it’s some kind of a poor Zelig) and hate all his post-Gump era, except Contact, Lies Beneath and Marwen.

Disney should stop this remake-mania, all the movies from this trend are bad copies of the originals. But somehow they make money.

[Cash]

Pinocchio looks more like shiny plastic than a puppet made of pine. Strange choice.

[Edwin]

I watched WHAT LIES BENEATH recently and although Michelle Pfeiffer was typically good in her role, the main issue I had with the movie was that I kept thinking the whole time that someone else should have directed it because man, Zemeckis’s direction is just too flat and conventional to work for a Hitchcockian thriller. The script was fine, the performances were fine (except maybe Ford who just seems bored), but the movie needed some style in order to be truly effective, and Zemeckis is far too technical and safe as a director to provide that. Someone like a De Palma or a Verhoeven could have elevated this material to something interesting at the time, but for me Zemeckis is in that category of directors who is so entrenched in Hollywood professionalism and technical “correctness” that they register as totally sexless and boring when given material that calls for heightened style and are basically only suited to the most middlebrow fare imaginable.

In short, he’s perfect for a modern Disney remake. Hard pass from me though.