Disney has been remaking a lot of its animated classics the past few years.
As a general rule, I enjoy the product Disney doles out on an annual basis, and have mentioned on this blog that it would be difficult to imagine the current box office without the company’s “tentpole” films.
That said, the idea of remaking classic films isn’t something that gets my heart racing.
To be honest, other than 2015’s “Cinderella,” I haven’t really watched any of Disney’s live-action remakes of animated classics.
I didn’t have a burning desire to watch a live action version of “The Jungle Book,” and I thought they should have left well enough alone when it came to “Beauty and the Beast.”
Regardless, in this day and age you can’t fault “The Mouse” for attempting to refresh some of its older IP.
That brings us to Disney’s “Dumbo” remake.
Chances are you already know the basics. It’s the story of an elephant tot with big ears who can fly. He is the son of a circus performing pachyderm named “Mrs. Jumbo.” Dumbo’s skills are soon utilized by the Medici Brothers’ Circus to draw in crowds.
The story takes place in 1919 and this live-action version includes a subplot about the Farrier family. The Farrier’s team of performing horses is sold when Annie (the matriarch of the Holt brood) dies from Spanish flu.
Her widowed husband Holt (Colin Farrell) and children Milly (Nico Parker) and Joe (Finley Hobbins) soon discover Dumbo can fly.
Eventually, the flying elephant becomes a sensation in the Medici Brothers’ Circus, and owner Max (Danny DeVito) decides to join forces with entrepreneur V.A. Vandevere (Michael Keaton) — a businessman who owns an amusement park in New York City called “Dreamland” — to cash in on the novelty of the flying elephant.
Quite honestly, the most interesting thing about this “Dumbo” remake is that it was a “Batman Returns” reunion for director Tim Burton and actors Danny DeVito and Michael Keaton.
Other than that, it was a pretty big yawn.
Am I being too harsh?
The original 1941 animated “Dumbo” film was 64 minutes long. That movie focused on the animals — in particular, the relationship between Dumbo and Timothy Q. Mouse. Unlike the original, the 2019 remake didn’t have talking animals, nor did it feature the mouse sidekick (other than a brief shot of a mouse in a cage we assume to be Timothy).
Also absent were the musical numbers featured in the original.
I’m sure a Burton-led remake of “Dumbo” sounded like a good idea at the boardroom table.
Very few directors the past 30 years have brought viewers the unique visual style Burton infuses into his films. There are some visually interesting moments in “Dumbo,” but none of it soars like the director’s past efforts.
Not only that, the 1 hour 52 minute runtime is far too long. My niece and nephews squirmed a lot during the movie (the only time my youngest nephew was engaged came during the two-and-a-half minute trailer for “Toy Story 4” that played beforehand).
Disney has two more live-action remakes of animated classics coming to theaters this year — “Aladdin” and “The Lion King” — along with a live-action version of “Lady and the Tramp” coming to the new Disney+ streaming service this fall.
Here’s hoping those entries don’t fall flat like the refreshed “Dumbo.”
I forgot that this was coming out. Fair to say I won't be seeing it & your review didn't tip the scale in that favor.
ReplyDelete