Mulan verdict

[YeaDZNY]

Ok everyone...just curious if anyone here (and like me, had, had to watch something new on tv for once) :-)
Now I have been pretty open to the idea's of "live action" Disney movies thus far..but what in THE HELL was that garbage I watched on Friday called Mulan!!!
That was the worst live action Disney flick to date..now I can see why they wanted to push this back multiple times. I believe the reason why these Disney Live Action movies have been pretty good..is because they follow a story that a majority of us love. Now what the hell happened to Mulan?? What did they do hire freakin Rian Johnson!!! What I witnessed def was not Mulan but a half story w/o most of its supporting cast and nothing but a series of stupid impossible martial arts moves, that made me feel Im watching Kung Fu Theater!! I stopped watching this film about 3/4's in and dont care to watch the end!! Thanks for ripping me off Disney and the only reason I only feel slightly ok with purchasing this horrible movie that I can now watch anytime I want...is to support my parks :-) What did ya'll think of this flick?

[Co Foo]

. I believe the reason why these Disney Live Action movies have been pretty good..is because they follow a story that a majority of us love. Now what the hell happened to Mulan?? What did they do hire freakin Rian Johnson!!! What I witnessed def was not Mulan but a half story w/o most of its supporting cast and nothing but a series of stupid impossible martial arts moves, that made me feel Im watching Kung Fu Theater!!

The tricky part about doing franchise films, especially remakes, is that everyone has an expectation of what they're going to see. It seemed to me that all of the previews showed that it was going to be a kung fun epic that was darker than the animated film. Would people have seen it on the merits of the previews that they saw if it weren't connected to the animated version?

I haven't seen it yet, so I can't say whether I thought it was good or not.

[Mr Wiggins]

And then there's this...


Why Calls to Boycott ‘Mulan’ Over Concerns About China Are Growing

"Disney’s live-action remake of 'Mulan' has drawn a fresh wave of criticism for being filmed partly in Xinjiang, the region in China where Uighur Muslims have been detained in mass internment camps.

The outcry, which has spread to include U.S. lawmakers, was the latest example of how the new film, released on Disney+ over the weekend, has become a magnet for anger over the Chinese Communist Party’s policies promoting nationalism and ethnic Han chauvinism.

It began blowing up on Monday, when several social media users noticed that in the film’s credits, Disney thanked eight government entities in Xinjiang, a region in China’s Far West that is home to the Uighurs. The predominantly Muslim, Turkic-speaking ethnic minority have lived for years under increasingly expansive surveillance and repression in the region.

The entities mentioned in the movie’s credits included the police bureau in Turpan, an ancient Silk Road city in eastern Xinjiang that has a large Uighur population. Last October, the Trump administration placed that bureau and other police organizations in Xinjiang on a blacklist that forbids U.S. companies from selling or supplying products to them. It was not immediately clear on Tuesday whether U.S. officials would scrutinize Disney’s work with government agencies in Xinjiang.

American politicians began firing off fiery missives against Disney. Rep. Mike Gallagher, Republican of Wisconsin, wrote on Twitter that 'while the CCP is committing crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, @Disney thanked four of the propaganda departments that are lying to the world about these crimes. It also thanked the Turpan Public Security Bureau, which is on the entity list for its role in these atrocities.'

Politicians from both parties are strongly criticizing China over a range of issues in the run-up to the November elections.

The film was already coming under fire months ago, facing calls for a boycott by supporters of the Hong Kong antigovernment protests after the movie’s star, Liu Yifei, said she backed the city’s police, who have been criticized for their use of force against pro-democracy demonstrators.

Last month, as Disney ramped up promotion for the new film, supporters of the Hong Kong protests anointed Agnes Chow, a prominent democracy activist who was recently arrested under the territory’s new national security law, as their own, 'real' Mulan...."

[YeaDZNY]

And then there's this...


Why Calls to Boycott ‘Mulan’ Over Concerns About China Are Growing

"Disney’s live-action remake of 'Mulan' has drawn a fresh wave of criticism for being filmed partly in Xinjiang, the region in China where Uighur Muslims have been detained in mass internment camps.

The outcry, which has spread to include U.S. lawmakers, was the latest example of how the new film, released on Disney+ over the weekend, has become a magnet for anger over the Chinese Communist Party’s policies promoting nationalism and ethnic Han chauvinism.

It began blowing up on Monday, when several social media users noticed that in the film’s credits, Disney thanked eight government entities in Xinjiang, a region in China’s Far West that is home to the Uighurs. The predominantly Muslim, Turkic-speaking ethnic minority have lived for years under increasingly expansive surveillance and repression in the region.

The entities mentioned in the movie’s credits included the police bureau in Turpan, an ancient Silk Road city in eastern Xinjiang that has a large Uighur population. Last October, the Trump administration placed that bureau and other police organizations in Xinjiang on a blacklist that forbids U.S. companies from selling or supplying products to them. It was not immediately clear on Tuesday whether U.S. officials would scrutinize Disney’s work with government agencies in Xinjiang.

American politicians began firing off fiery missives against Disney. Rep. Mike Gallagher, Republican of Wisconsin, wrote on Twitter that 'while the CCP is committing crimes against humanity in Xinjiang, @Disney thanked four of the propaganda departments that are lying to the world about these crimes. It also thanked the Turpan Public Security Bureau, which is on the entity list for its role in these atrocities.'

Politicians from both parties are strongly criticizing China over a range of issues in the run-up to the November elections.

The film was already coming under fire months ago, facing calls for a boycott by supporters of the Hong Kong antigovernment protests after the movie’s star, Liu Yifei, said she backed the city’s police, who have been criticized for their use of force against pro-democracy demonstrators.

Last month, as Disney ramped up promotion for the new film, supporters of the Hong Kong protests anointed Agnes Chow, a prominent democracy activist who was recently arrested under the territory’s new national security law, as their own, 'real' Mulan...."

Yea I heard about that...and i dont want to give that a reason as to why I disliked the film. Im speaking just from an fan/movie critic that we all are. :-)

[YeaDZNY]

The tricky part about doing franchise films, especially remakes, is that everyone has an expectation of what they're going to see. It seemed to me that all of the previews showed that it was going to be a kung fun epic that was darker than the animated film. Would people have seen it on the merits of the previews that they saw if it weren't connected to the animated version?

I haven't seen it yet, so I can't say whether I thought it was good or not.

Ok..give it shot, if you like have $30 less bux in your bank account. But just saying...and compared to all of these amazing live action films they have done..this one is doodoo

[savarese04]

I think people are missing the point of Mulan. It's more true to the original story. yes, the animated one is cute and all, but it took some Pocahontas-sized liberties. I have no problem with them telling a different version of the story versus the same one in a different format (see: Lion King). Separately, they tried to make the film more true to its Asian roots, which include the wuxia style of filmmaking. Again, making a different film is hardly a crime. If you're remake it, give me a reason to watch something new.

OP's very entitled to their opinion (which I might question based on calling the other live action films "amazing"), but keep in mind these opinions are the reason why we get garbage shot for shot remakes instead of new stuff.

Note that I'm keeping my thoughts on catering to the Chinese audience, the protests, and such out of this take. That's a not a point I care to debate on the internet.

[Mr Wiggins]

I think people are missing the point of Mulan. It's more true to the original story. yes, the animated one is cute and all, but it took some Pocahontas-sized liberties. I have no problem with them telling a different version of the story versus the same one in a different format (see: Lion King). Separately, they tried to make the film more true to its Asian roots, which include the wuxia style of filmmaking. Again, making a different film is hardly a crime. If you're remake it, give me a reason to watch something new.

OP's very entitled to their opinion (which I might question based on calling the other live action films "amazing"), but keep in mind these opinions are the reason why we get garbage shot for shot remakes instead of new stuff.

Note that I'm keeping my thoughts on catering to the Chinese audience, the protests, and such out of this take. That's a not a point I care to debate on the internet.

The reason why we get garbage shot-for-shot remakes instead of new stuff -- indeed, the reason why we get so many remakes and relaunches in every form -- is that the management of so many studios is dominated by risk-averse brand-marketing executives. Their business M.O. is focused on milking the marketing potential in any brand they own that has shown previous financial success. Their decisions are based less on people's opinions of a product, and more on how much money people actually spend on the product.

Disney's current CEO gave accurate voice to their expand-the-brand philosophy in this video, shot shortly before the opening of Star Wars Land. (The transcript is even more revealing.)

[MrGoat]

I wonder if Disney could have done this film without controversy? If they'd filmed it in any part of China, they'd face the same possibility of offending those who feel that China's civil rights record in general is unacceptable. If they'd filmed it outside of China, then, they'd face a backlash from the Chinese and many fans. I don't think they could have pulled it off, especially these days.

[Blurr]

My sister-in-law (whom we share a Disney+ account) purchased this film so the wife and I gave it a watch the other night.

Controversy regarding the actress, filming, etc. aside, I thought it was alright (I won't go too far into detail about why I feel this way about the film with this post because it will already be long enough). I didn't think it was spectacular but I also didn't think it was as awful as so many other folks online are making it out to be. I think it's important to understand the creative process that went into this iteration of Mulan and why so many changes from what we knew and loved, humor my explanation.

OP, you claimed you felt like you were watching "Kung Fu theatre" and that was the point. Make no mistake, this new iteration of Mulan was not made with western audiences in mind as the primary audience. There are large cultural differences between the East and West and the original animated Mulan was made for us over here in the West. There was lots of singing and a fun little dragon named Mushu who we seem to generally adore over here.

This was apparently not the case in the East. My understanding after reading various articles online about the departure from said elements of the previous films is that folks in China do not respond well to the singing, Mushu, etc. Apparently, the majority of them feel like it trivializes their culture.

Now, I'm not a fan of so many major movie studios bowing down to China for extra ticket sales (ghosts are taboo over there so Force Ghosts are used sparingly in Star Wars, Finn's shrunken presence on TFA posters, etc.) but I'm going to actually give Disney a pass on this one. If there was ever a time or film for Disney to actually take the opinions and cultural preferences of the Chinese into account, it is with this film. Mulan is a part of their culture, not ours, so it's important to present a representation that takes how they feel into account. Which is exactly what they did. Over there, "Kung Fu theatre" and big war movies with "impossible martial arts moves" are what they like to see and how they want to be represented. So the film team obliged.

So yes OP, it's perfectly understandable that you would be turned off by this version of the film especially after enjoying the original Disney animation so much. That first film was made with us in mind and I think it's important to note that this new one was made for a different target audience. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to suddenly say you enjoy it because of this, rather, I think it's just something that needs to be taken into account when trying to judge the work as fairly as possible. There are lots of films out there I don't watch or enjoy but a lot of them aren't made for me so that only makes sense. Where Mulan gets a little muddy with fans is that the title and source material from which it is derived is naturally going to bring in fans of the original.

I for one appreciate them trying new things/going in a different direction, even if I thought the end result was just "okay". I was actually more bored with the live action adaptations of Lion King and Aladdin (though I liked Aladdin's music) than this film because those former films were almost exactly the same as their animated counterparts and felt like they didn't need to be made. A question that creators generally need to ask themselves when going from book to animation or animation to live action is "what can be gained or be made different with this upgrade that the previous one couldn't accomplish?" If there is something new to be gained that wasn't there previously, then it's probably worth a shot. If the answer is "nothing" or "we aren't going to change much at all other than the format", then it probably doesn't need to be remade at all. Mulan has the familiar story of the animation but there was enough parts moved around to keep more of my attention, I guess.

The main takeaway would be to try and not let this version bother you too much if you didn't enjoy it. The unspoken reality of it is that the film wasn't made with us Westerners in mind. For our Mulan fix, we already have a lovely film made years ago that we can enjoy any time we want. This isn't like a theme park ride which is lost forever and replaced, we still have the original Mulan for ourselves and now Eastern audiences have this re-telling, too.

[YellowTugStrap]

I saw Mulan the night it came out- Jeez Louise- it was BAD! I thought the Lion King one was the worst it could get, but this one was weird. I was initially excited to see more of an emphasis on the culture and history with the removal of mushu and the songs, I was really curious what new take they were going to put on it. But all their choices were so dumb. I'd get into it further, but a lot of my thoughts on it have already been said.

EDIT: I think I'll add a little story here to help explain my perspective more. All of this is controversy aside.

I've said this in other threads, but I am a theater kid. In a show I did outside of school, I was lucky enough to get casted as Mulan (I'm not Asian, so it was a bit of a surprise, but that's besides the point). I got to spend a lot of time with this character, thinking through her motives and what drives her, and really getting into it. Part of what makes her story so great and empowering is the fact that Mulan is imperfect. She fails and she fails often. She can't get through a simple meeting with the matchmaker. When she decides to go to war, it's very scary because she doesn't know a thing about fighting. She can't even go five minutes at the army camp without starting trouble because she's so nervous. She eventually gains the skills to fight, but she's still not the best at it, and she wins major fights through a mix of luck and wit, since she still isn't a perfect combatant. This helps drive the key emotions of the film, the reason Mulan is going to war isn't because she wants to prove herself- she's doing it all to save her father. Through that, we see how brave she is; she risks her own life to fight in this army, and she's going in completely blind. It's empowering, since she puts her mind to something, sticks to her principles, and saves China all while showing she can do things just as good as a man. In the new film, however, she's perfect. She already knows how to fight when she's a little girl. She doesn't learn anything new at the army camp. Hiding her gender is seen as shameful since she's "hiding her true self" but... I mean, I would do the same thing??? I don't wanna be executed??? I don't get it??? She's not ashamed of being a woman- she just doesn't want to die? Whatever. She lacks a lot of personality and she's just a very bland fighting machine. Her actress, controversy aside, doesn't do a great job either. She always has such a blank expression on her face.

I don't mind the character removals, I know this film was mainly made to cater to Chinese audiences who didn't like the songs and goofy sidekicks trivializing their culture. That being said- where is the history? where is the culture? Coco and Moana were filled to the brim with the culture of their settings, where I think they say Chi like once in this movie. That's it. I may have missed things, since I'm not Chinese, but I felt like I learned more Chinese culture from The Last Air bender than this. And if this movie is supposed to be the more realistic/ historically accurate version, then why is their a bird witch and a phoenix running around? I just don't get this movie man. I don't mind it being more "Kung-Fu Theatre", I love old Jackie Chan movies and the crazy stunts are always crazy. I had to learn a few simple moves for my play, so I can really appreciate the talent that went into the fights. I could never do those crazy moves! However, that doesn't really fix the plot. As a girl, the new Mulan is not empowering, she's just to perfect. The old Mulan, however, is, and she's a character very near and dear to my heart. i hope young kids get raised on the old one, cause the more I think on this new one, the more sad it gets.

[Right Down Broadway]

Blurr is spot-on, the only one here so far who gets it.

[Starcade]

My wife and I had never seen the Animated version and with 2 pre-teen girls we decided to give it a try. We thought it was ok, yes there were a lot of martial arts action sequences but I thought that was likely going in. Some scenes reminded me of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon in the use of slower motion not quite slow mo and the apparent extensive wire work and acrobatics. My kids missed not having Mushu the Dragon and they missed the music from the Animated versions. The next night we watched the animated version. I can see if you watched or were a fan of the animated version how you would be a lil miffed, as the live action movie does lose a lot of the humor and the all the music. I think the live action movie was definitely pandering to overseas markets which are emerging as potentially more profitable than the domestic box office. All in all I do not feel upset we paid $30 it was way cheaper then going to a movie theater for a family of 4 which wasn't an option for the past 4-5 months. If this is the new future with this option being available to view new releases in tandem to theatrical releases then I am all for it as most movies we would probably choose to see at home with only leaving high-end blockbusters like an Avengers or Star Wars Epic or Tenet fo the theater.

[YeaDZNY]

My sister-in-law (whom we share a Disney+ account) purchased this film so the wife and I gave it a watch the other night.

Controversy regarding the actress, filming, etc. aside, I thought it was alright (I won't go too far into detail about why I feel this way about the film with this post because it will already be long enough). I didn't think it was spectacular but I also didn't think it was as awful as so many other folks online are making it out to be. I think it's important to understand the creative process that went into this iteration of Mulan and why so many changes from what we knew and loved, humor my explanation.

OP, you claimed you felt like you were watching "Kung Fu theatre" and that was the point. Make no mistake, this new iteration of Mulan was not made with western audiences in mind as the primary audience. There are large cultural differences between the East and West and the original animated Mulan was made for us over here in the West. There was lots of singing and a fun little dragon named Mushu who we seem to generally adore over here.

This was apparently not the case in the East. My understanding after reading various articles online about the departure from said elements of the previous films is that folks in China do not respond well to the singing, Mushu, etc. Apparently, the majority of them feel like it trivializes their culture.

Now, I'm not a fan of so many major movie studios bowing down to China for extra ticket sales (ghosts are taboo over there so Force Ghosts are used sparingly in Star Wars, Finn's shrunken presence on TFA posters, etc.) but I'm going to actually give Disney a pass on this one. If there was ever a time or film for Disney to actually take the opinions and cultural preferences of the Chinese into account, it is with this film. Mulan is a part of their culture, not ours, so it's important to present a representation that takes how they feel into account. Which is exactly what they did. Over there, "Kung Fu theatre" and big war movies with "impossible martial arts moves" are what they like to see and how they want to be represented. So the film team obliged.

So yes OP, it's perfectly understandable that you would be turned off by this version of the film especially after enjoying the original Disney animation so much. That first film was made with us in mind and I think it's important to note that this new one was made for a different target audience. I'm not trying to convince you or anyone else to suddenly say you enjoy it because of this, rather, I think it's just something that needs to be taken into account when trying to judge the work as fairly as possible. There are lots of films out there I don't watch or enjoy but a lot of them aren't made for me so that only makes sense. Where Mulan gets a little muddy with fans is that the title and source material from which it is derived is naturally going to bring in fans of the original.

I for one appreciate them trying new things/going in a different direction, even if I thought the end result was just "okay". I was actually more bored with the live action adaptations of Lion King and Aladdin (though I liked Aladdin's music) than this film because those former films were almost exactly the same as their animated counterparts and felt like they didn't need to be made. A question that creators generally need to ask themselves when going from book to animation or animation to live action is "what can be gained or be made different with this upgrade that the previous one couldn't accomplish?" If there is something new to be gained that wasn't there previously, then it's probably worth a shot. If the answer is "nothing" or "we aren't going to change much at all other than the format", then it probably doesn't need to be remade at all. Mulan has the familiar story of the animation but there was enough parts moved around to keep more of my attention, I guess.

The main takeaway would be to try and not let this version bother you too much if you didn't enjoy it. The unspoken reality of it is that the film wasn't made with us Westerners in mind. For our Mulan fix, we already have a lovely film made years ago that we can enjoy any time we want. This isn't like a theme park ride which is lost forever and replaced, we still have the original Mulan for ourselves and now Eastern audiences have this re-telling, too.

Im not saying that because Disney decided to either "go a different direction" from the original or cater to "Eastern Audiences" is not my big hang up with this film. All I am saying...and this is true (at least for me) that when a movie/story first hits the silver screen and then you watch that same adaptation of that story or film later on...Like a majority of movies that get released now a days, because it seems all the great story telling has already been done and movie Producers are constantly trying to make the re-make better some how, and most of the time they dont. It actually puts a bad taste in my mouth for that whole franchise and story as a whole. Think of all the movies that Hollywood/Disney has released...and now seriously think what percentage of those films were at all even on the same level instead of making them absolutely worse. Call it what is with Mulan (regardless of where it was filmed or who produced it) when you rip out the guts of the film, and replace it with something else...and especially with Disney movies...yea I want all the songs and characters that "we all know about" with Disney movies..not some other adaptation that was far worse then the original.

[stovk]

Blurr is spot-on, the only one here so far who gets it.

Sorry, but with all due respect, I don't think so.

And Blurr I appreciate your well thought out "thesis", but I think you are missing the point of the OP.

Some of your statements caught my attention...

...you felt like you were watching "Kung Fu theatre" and that was the point. Make no mistake, this new iteration of Mulan was not made with western audiences in mind as the primary audience.

...If there was ever a time or film for Disney to actually take the opinions and cultural preferences of the Chinese into account, it is with this film. Mulan is a part of their culture, not ours, so it's important to present a representation that takes how they feel into account. Which is exactly what they did.

...I think it's just something that needs to be taken into account when trying to judge the work as fairly as possible. There are lots of films out there I don't watch or enjoy but a lot of them aren't made for me so that only makes sense. Where Mulan gets a little muddy with fans is that the title and source material from which it is derived is naturally going to bring in fans of the original.

...The main takeaway would be to try and not let this version bother you too much if you didn't enjoy it. The unspoken reality of it is that the film wasn't made with us Westerners in mind.

That last part, "...wasn't made with us Westerners in mind." is what I will dovetail off.

Of course it wasn't and therein lies the problem with Disney calling it "Mulan". It may be adapted from the same source material as the animated version, but it's not "Disney's Mulan". No more than Disney's Pinocchio is the same as Carlo Collodi's Pinocchio. In my opinion, it's another Disney bait-and-switch. They market it to us "Westerners" as the Mulan we know, but tamper with it to make it appeal to the Chinese Communist Party.

Now, I don't care one whit if Disney wants to appeal to the CCP and produce films appealing to their culture. If that is what Disney's intent was, great. But don't pawn it off as a "live action Mulan" that "we" all know. They should have made a film - wait for it – that was new and original. If they wanted to follow the source material so much, then call it "Ballad of Mulan" or "Hua Mulan".

Of course Disney didn't. They did what they always do now; they take shortcuts. Because it appears at Disney (and the rest of Hollywood for that matter) is devoid of original thought. Disney's main business model now seems to be open up the archives, pull out a classic, inject modern relativism, massage your marketing to influence X demographic, wash, rinse, and repeat. So, what do we get? Crap like Lady and the Tramp, Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, Aladdin...and we the suckers get taken in everytime.

I wish that Dave Smith would have locked up the archives before he retired and lost the key.

[Blurr]

Im not saying that because Disney decided to either "go a different direction" from the original or cater to "Eastern Audiences" is not my big hang up with this film. All I am saying...and this is true (at least for me) that when a movie/story first hits the silver screen and then you watch that same adaptation of that story or film later on...Like a majority of movies that get released now a days, because it seems all the great story telling has already been done and movie Producers are constantly trying to make the re-make better some how, and most of the time they dont. It actually puts a bad taste in my mouth for that whole franchise and story as a whole. Think of all the movies that Hollywood/Disney has released...and now seriously think what percentage of those films were at all even on the same level instead of making them absolutely worse. Call it what is with Mulan (regardless of where it was filmed or who produced it) when you rip out the guts of the film, and replace it with something else...and especially with Disney movies...yea I want all the songs and characters that "we all know about" with Disney movies..not some other adaptation that was far worse then the original.

Sorry, but with all due respect, I don't think so.

And Blurr I appreciate your well thought out "thesis", but I think you are missing the point of the OP.

Some of your statements caught my attention...

That last part, "...wasn't made with us Westerners in mind." is what I will dovetail off.

Of course it wasn't and therein lies the problem with Disney calling it "Mulan". It may be adapted from the same source material as the animated version, but it's not "Disney's Mulan". No more than Disney's Pinocchio is the same as Carlo Collodi's Pinocchio. In my opinion, it's another Disney bait-and-switch. They market it to us "Westerners" as the Mulan we know, but tamper with it to make it appeal to the Chinese Communist Party.

Now, I don't care one whit if Disney wants to appeal to the CCP and produce films appealing to their culture. If that is what Disney's intent was, great. But don't pawn it off as a "live action Mulan" that "we" all know. They should have made a film - wait for it – that was new and original. If they wanted to follow the source material so much, then call it "Ballad of Mulan" or "Hua Mulan".

Of course Disney didn't. They did what they always do now; they take shortcuts. Because it appears at Disney (and the rest of Hollywood for that matter) is devoid of original thought. Disney's main business model now seems to be open up the archives, pull out a classic, inject modern relativism, massage your marketing to influence X demographic, wash, rinse, and repeat. So, what do we get? Crap like Lady and the Tramp, Alice in Wonderland, Dumbo, Aladdin...and we the suckers get taken in everytime.

I wish that Dave Smith would have locked up the archives before he retired and lost the key.

YeaDZNY and
stovk; I appreciate both of your responses.

I understand the frustration with the bait-and-switch concept. Probably just like you both, I'm also a bigger fan of version of Mulan with singing, Mushu, etc. I also mentioned that in this case, Mulan's release is a bit "muddied" by the fact that it, by nature of being "Disney + Mulan" is going to inherently at least interest those who were fans of the original and perhaps leave them out in the cold, so to speak.

It's a tricky thing to navigate. I wasn't "in the room where it happened" when they were deciding how to tackle this project so I've got nothing to go off of other than the information I find online. Disney had a few options here when tackling live action Mulan.. the first, would be to simply create a scene for scene or shot for shot remake akin to Lion King, Aladdin, etc. This would have probably made a lot of folks who were fans of the original happy by giving them an extra dose of Mulan in their lives but I think once they came off of it, we'd end up with similar thoughts as the other films like, "Why did this need to be made?" In that case, the answer is that it probably didn't. Just like the other live action adaptations.

Another option they have, as you said stovk, would be to re-build the story of Mulan from the ground up with an entirely new film. This has it's advantages because as you've stated, it oozes more originality. But the concept of movie-goers being "bait and switched" still remains here. By virtue of Disney's name simply being attached to the project, the general audience is going to have a certain level of expectation going into the film having already fallen in love with the original animation. Once they got their hands on the film, they could have also felt "bait and switched" despite not having anything explicitly promised to them (which, in fairness, I don't think anything was explicitly promised in this case, either?). See the Star Wars fandom for examples of this and what it might lead to when people think they know exactly how things should play out with a film that technically promises them nothing other than good time. In this whole scenario, maybe they find something even better than the original animation. I guess we'll never know.

Then we have the option they likely arrived at. An "adaptation" of the Disney animation. Maybe Disney felt they were trying to appeal to both sides of the spectrum as best they could. Maybe they pictured something "familiar yet new" in order to make the Disney fans not feel entirely cheated and yet something with enough parts shifted around that it can be more true to Chinese culture and what the East wants to see represented of themselves and their tales. -and yes, to bring in some more overseas money while they're at it. This choice is not super original, as you have stated stovk, but still affords them a level of "safety" and still gives them a chance to maybe in their eyes, "patch" the original formula for a different audience (much in the way some video games receive post-launch patches to tweak the base game but in this case, without affecting the original).

I generally agree that there isn't much originality to be had with many of these live action releases but again, I didn't think the film (assessed purely on its own) was overly terrible. Maybe it wasn't far enough into the "new" territory. It certainly didn't totally re-invent the wheel. But you know what? Disney at least dipped their toes into that water to test it. Maybe they wanted to see how people would respond. I can't tell if what I've seen online represents the silent majority of film-goers or not but if it does, then they will likely be frightened off from trying too may new things once again, a frustrating notion, I think.

We've seen it before and we will see it again. Folks clamor for Disney to do something original or unexpected but then when they even try to lean a little bit in that direction, they are met with heavy resistance and criticism (see, The Last Jedi, Galaxy's Edge, Mulan, etc.) but when they swing the other way into the familiar, they are also met with much of the same (see, The Rise of Skywalker, Aladdin, The Lion King, etc.). The result? A Disney that will likely learn long term that they can't make everyone happy in either case. -and if you can't make folks happy in either case, why go the route that is more work? Instead, I worry they'll keep sticking to the safe and the mediocre as long as it puts people in seats so they can get a quick nostalgia fix then forget about things until the next fix comes along.

Thus, the cycle of an unoriginal Hollywood continues. For the record, I agree this is an issue. Hollywood nowadays doesn't seem super willing to take too many chances. They don't want to take risk, generally. They want a "for sure" monetary return. Why are new ideas so risky financially? Because people like to knock them down or not give them the support. Folks want the familiar but they also want it to be good, often times forgetting that in order for things to stay good without becoming stale or mediocre, they need to at least try to experiment or dabble in new things to move the evolutionary process along. But these new things need to prove themselves in the kiddie pool before they can full blown swim and too many times they're drowned before things can move on to the next phase. I hate to go into Star Wars again, but if folks had taken the time to look at something like the Last Jedi, give it a little more faith and support or analyze it as a film with all it's themes and what exciting prospects it set up, we might not have ended up backtracking so hard with the Rise of Skywalker and instead we may have ended up in a totally new, better place for Star Wars. The next evolution. Sadly, that was not to be.

-and such a fate will likely be the outcome of Disney's live actions with Mulan. It's honestly not that terrible of a film, albeit nothing overly special. Could it have maybe some day lead into a true Ballad of Mulan or Hua Mulan type of film? Maybe. If folks were more receptive to the changes. I read a sequel was to be in the works but who knows if Disney will use this film's response and the COVID situation to outright cancel it. Maybe we'll never know.

All I know is that it's a tricky thing. Disney faced issues no matter which route they chose to go with this adaptation. Maybe the correct answer was to never adapt it at all. But maybe someone along the chain saw some potential there other than the chance to make money. While there is certainly a money hungry cooperate giant funding these films, there are actually some artists working on it and giving it their all.

In any case, this films release doesn't erase the existence of the one we already love so much. No one has to like this one more than the original. But there are some positives to be gained from it's existence; some things the original didn't have and for folks who may enjoy said things.

[YeaDZNY]

Well...whatever the reason to do what they did. Its crap..nothing more, nothing less :-)
Actually...$30 less bucks in my wallet as well. Still think this is the worse "live action" to date that they have released.

[Blurr]

Well...whatever the reason to do what they did. Its crap..nothing more, nothing less :-)
Actually...$30 less bucks in my wallet as well. Still think this is the worse "live action" to date that they have released.

I am sorry you did not enjoy the film. Thankfully, there's still a lot of other things out there to enjoy while we wait for the parks to re-open.

Edit: Just pretend you went out to a nice dinner and "lost" your $30 on that, that's what I usually do when I regret a purchase that I can't undo, haha!

[stovk]

Well...whatever the reason to do what they did. Its crap..nothing more, nothing less :-)
Actually...$30 less bucks in my wallet as well. Still think this is the worse "live action" to date that they have released.

Need not worry. After all the suckers...uh, err...subscribers pay their $30, it'll be free with the standard subscription in 3-6 months.

[Blurr]

Need not worry. After all the suckers...uh, err...subscribers pay their $30, it'll be free with the standard subscription in 3-6 months.

3 months. They’ve said Dec. 4th is when it becomes available for all subscribers at no extra fee. Which I’d definitely recommend to anyone with a Disney+ account whose “meh” about the whole thing.

[Eagleman]

Need not worry. After all the suckers...uh, err...subscribers pay their $30, it'll be free with the standard subscription in 3-6 months.

Paying more for a movie on standard subscription .......IMO is wrong