# Disney rumour: a new Live Action “Black Cauldron”



## Tonguez (Jun 5, 2020)

Theres a new unconfirmed rumour about that Disney is looking to do a new Live Action version of The Black Cauldron.
Apparently Disney werent satisfied with the old animated version and in 2016 re-acquired the rights to The Chronicles of Prydain (by Lloyd Alexander) and will be adapting all five novels rather than just the first two as the animated version did. 

I really enjoyed the novels which are different and better to the animated movie, so am excited about this. What do you all think?









						Disney Developing Live Action Version of 'The Black Cauldron' - Inside the Magic
					

Disney is adding yet another film to the list of developing live action movies as the company is working on a live action The Black Cauldron.




					insidethemagic.net


----------



## Gradine (Jun 5, 2020)

The Chronicles of Prydain were my gateway into fantasy books. Hell yeah I'm excited if this turns out to be true


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 5, 2020)

Let’s say...I view this news with guarded optimism.


----------



## Theo R Cwithin (Jun 5, 2020)

I hope this is true. Of children's fantasy, the Prydain books seem to me to be well-suited to live action.
I'd certainly look forward to seeing this... whatever it turns out to be.


----------



## Dannyalcatraz (Jun 5, 2020)

I read the series soooooooooooooooo long ago that all I can remember is that I liked them.


----------



## Urriak Uruk (Jun 6, 2020)

Two things about this;

1. Loved the animated movie. It is really freaky for a kid to watch, I mean the Horned King easily outstrips any other animated one in how scary he is.






2. Seriously doubt this is actually true. People don't know this, but the animated Black Cauldron almost bankrupted Disney, and the movie is known as "The film that almost killed Disney." I highly doubt anyone wants to revisit a property that nearly destroyed them. 

Wikipedia section below;

_The Black Cauldron_ was released in North America on July 26, 1985.[3] The film was also screened at Radio City Music Hall in New York City.[32] While officially budgeted by Disney executives at $25 million,[10] the film's production manager, Don Hahn,[10] said in his documentary, _Waking Sleeping Beauty_, that it cost $44 million to produce the film.[5][6] The $44-million budget made it the most expensive animated film ever made at the time.[7] The film grossed $21.3 million domestically.[3] It resulted in a loss for Walt Disney Studios and put the future of the animation department in jeopardy (earning it the nickname "the film that almost killed Disney").[7] It was so poorly received that it was not distributed as a home video release for more than a decade after its theatrical run.[19] Adding insult to injury, the film was also beaten at the box office by _The Care Bears Movie_ ($22.9 million domestically), which was released several months earlier by Disney's much-smaller rival animation studio in Canada Nelvana.[33] The film was however more successful outside North America notably in France where it had 3,074,481 admissions and was the fifth most attended film of the year.[34]

The film was the last Disney animated film to be completed at the original Animation Building of the Walt Disney Studios in Burbank, California.[35] The animation department was moved to the Air Way facility in nearby Glendale in December 1984, and, following corporate restructuring, eventually returned to the Burbank studio in the mid-1990s at a new facility.[33]


----------



## Tonguez (Jun 6, 2020)

Urriak Uruk said:


> Seriously doubt this is actually true. People don't know this, but the animated Black Cauldron almost bankrupted Disney, and the movie is known as "The film that almost killed Disney." I highly doubt anyone wants to revisit a property that nearly destroyed them.




To be fair, that was 35 years ago - an entire generation - and technology and film marketing have changed from then. Also the fact that Disney re-acquired the rights just 4 years ago seems to indicate that they see some value in the property.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 6, 2020)

Urriak Uruk said:


> Two things about this;
> 
> 1. Loved the animated movie. It is really freaky for a kid to watch, I mean the Horned King easily outstrips any other animated one in how scary he is.
> 
> ...




It is true that they paid for the option to do it...time will tell if that goes anywhere.

The series is very popular and well known, for the book and not the movie, which would probably be forgotten if not for Disney keeping it alive in places like Disney+.


----------



## cbwjm (Jun 6, 2020)

TIL the black cauldron was adapted from a book. I've only ever seen/heard of the movie.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 6, 2020)

cbwjm said:


> TIL the black cauldron was adapted from a book. I've only ever seen/heard of the movie.




The books are fantastic. The movie is probably better if you haven't read the books, because it is a, uh, loose adaptation.


----------



## Nebulous (Jun 6, 2020)

Gradine said:


> The Chronicles of Prydain were my gateway into fantasy books. Hell yeah I'm excited if this turns out to be true



Me too, if done right, they are a masterful entry into fantasy stories.  I support a series of these books into film!


----------



## Sacrosanct (Jun 6, 2020)

So stoked if this is true. They were the books that got me into fantasy in the first place. And they were ahead of their time. Taran might be the main character technically, but it's Eilonwy who is the smartest and toughest character. Unusual at the time to make a girl like that in a fantasy series.


----------



## Nebulous (Jun 6, 2020)

Sacrosanct said:


> So stoked if this is true. They were the books that got me into fantasy in the first place. And they were ahead of their time. Taran might be the main character technically, but it's Eilonwy who is the smartest and toughest character. Unusual at the time to make a girl like that in a fantasy series.




The last book of the series was especially gut wrenching and adult, it was way ahead of Harry Potter in terms of such adult themes.  Lloyd Alexander is a name you don't hear anymore and it's a shame.

That's the cover I had! I remember it vividly, and was around the time I got into DnD as a kid.


----------



## Eltab (Jun 6, 2020)

What I had ever heard about _The Black Cauldron_ was that it was a flop and not well-received; no usual Disney songs in the animation; it cost (not made) money; a lot of disappointed parents with scared kids would not go see it a second time.
I was a teenager and "too cool for a Disney cartoon" at the time.
If Disney wants to try again and do it better, go ahead.  I'll have something new (to me) to consider going to see.


----------



## Zardnaar (Jun 6, 2020)

Barely remember them. Read them 1988 iirc. Remember the name Taran, and some sort of lunch like figure keeping his soul locked away. 

 Vaguely remember the Black Cauldron movie.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 6, 2020)

It would not surprise me at all if this turned into a series on Disney+, the same way they are doing a new series on there for the Percy Jackson books.


----------



## Urriak Uruk (Jun 6, 2020)

Parmandur said:


> It is true that they paid for the option to do it...time will tell if that goes anywhere.
> 
> The series is very popular and well known, for the book and not the movie, which would probably be forgotten if not for Disney keeping it alive in places like Disney+.




I actually do hope this rumor is true, as big-budget fantasy is always something I'm rooting for, and I was someone who really liked the look of Black Cauldron as a kid (even though the Horned King gave me nightmares).

I do think that Disney just buys a bunch of IPs, sometimes solely to sit on them so others can't use them. I'd be very surprised to see Disney return to that property, solely because I'm sure the legacy of the animated film's failure is considered a taboo warning for staff.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Jun 6, 2020)

I think it's possible. My suggestion for future titles would be an adaptation of the graphic novel "the sword of the swashbuckler" and a cartoon about version  of  batrachomyomachia  as a soft parody of space-opera sagas. 

* Spoiler: the heroes of Dragonlance will be in the third movie of Wreck-It Ralph and in Toy Story 5 as "guest artists".


----------



## Rygar (Jun 6, 2020)

Urriak Uruk said:


> Two things about this;
> 
> 1. Loved the animated movie. It is really freaky for a kid to watch, I mean the Horned King easily outstrips any other animated one in how scary he is.
> 
> ...




It's at least partially true.  Disney reacquired the rights to the Prydain Chronicles in 2016.  That said, Disney reacquired the rights in _2016 _and nothing's happened since, hence I'm saying partially.


----------



## Dioltach (Jun 6, 2020)

I'm just going to add what I've mentioned a few times on these pages: Gwyddion, not Strider, is the original spelcasting ranger.

(Also, having read and reread the Chronicles of Prydain as a kid, I was surprised to discover that the roles of good and evil are reversed in the Mabinogion: Arawn and Pryderi are good guys, and Gwyddion is a troublemaking trickster.)


----------



## Olgar Shiverstone (Jun 6, 2020)

Great series to adapt to live action -- though probably better as a TV/streaming series.

Speaking of series to adapt ... Lankhmar! Would love to see Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser on screen.


----------



## Eyes of Nine (Jun 6, 2020)

Loved the original book series. Re-read recently, and it still Stands Up. 

Can't remember if I saw the movie, but if it came out in 1985, I wasn't playing D&D and was in college so probably have never seen.

Let me throw a possible name out as director and see if its chum in the water or if folks have forgiven him his sins... Peter Jackson.


----------



## Blue (Jun 7, 2020)

Read and reread the original series many times when I was a kid.  Gave them to my youngest to read when she was old enough.  Now she's in two D&D campaigns.  (Mission: Accomplished.)

And Princess Eilonwy IS a bonafide Disney Princess, they just haven't acknowledged it.


----------



## Gradine (Jun 7, 2020)

Re-Watched the Black Cauldron movie fairly recently (within the past year or two) and it holds up surprisingly well. It gets a bad rap because it deviates so much from the source material, but it does the things it's supposed to and gets the characters pretty spot on.


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 7, 2020)

Gradine said:


> Re-Watched the Black Cauldron movie fairly recently (within the past year or two) and it holds up surprisingly well. It gets a bad rap because it deviates so much from the source material, but it does the things it's supposed to and gets the characters pretty spot on.




Yeah, I have a soft spot for it. Took some time to get over the adaptation and appreciate it on it's own terms, though.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 8, 2020)

Urriak Uruk said:


> I do think that Disney just buys a bunch of IPs, sometimes solely to sit on them so others can't use them. I'd be very surprised to see Disney return to that property, solely because I'm sure the legacy of the animated film's failure is considered a taboo warning for staff.




I have no trouble believing Disney bought the rights for this to sit on them.  It would be a black mark for them if someone else did a movie they failed at and made it better (and more successfully).  Also, since the first movie failed so badly, the rights were probably pretty cheap to get.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 8, 2020)

Deset Gled said:


> I have no trouble believing Disney bought the rights for this to sit on them.  It would be a black mark for them if someone else did a movie they failed at and made it better (and more successfully).  Also, since the first movie failed so badly, the rights were probably pretty cheap to get.




I doubt they are trying to bury anything, since the original movie is on their Disney+ service for a whole new generation to watch for the first time.


----------



## Tonguez (Jun 8, 2020)

Deset Gled said:


> I have no trouble believing Disney bought the rights for this to sit on them.  It would be a black mark for them if someone else did a movie they failed at and made it better (and more successfully).  Also, since the first movie failed so badly, the rights were probably pretty cheap to get.




Thing is, for its era, its not a bad movie, but it doesnt follow the book much and is a bit more scary than you’d expect from Disney (even compared to Snow White and the nightmare inducing Jumbo)


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Jun 8, 2020)

Yes, it was very dark for its age for the classic Disney standard. Lots of little children were not used to the undeads. Today it would be +7 or +10 years category.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 8, 2020)

Enevhar Aldarion said:


> I doubt they are trying to bury anything, since the original movie is on their Disney+ service for a whole new generation to watch for the first time.




I'm not so sure.

Disney definitely buried TBC the first time around. It didn't get a home video release until 1998, when the conventional "Disney Vault" timeline said it should have gotten one around 1992.  It also got a 25th anniversary version in 2010, buts still no Blu-ray.

Disney+ has thrown the entire "Disney Vault" ideology upside down, and it remains to be seen what their long term plans are.  The Vault has been a powerful tool for Disney to control the market, allowing them to strategically time re-releases to build their brand and take charge of revenue streams.  It will be interesting to see how it plays out.  If Disney did want to bury TBC, periodically releasing it on Disney+ would help keep the price of the DVD low in the used market (preventing if from becoming a sought after collectible) and let them avoid ever doing a Blu-ray release (or whatever next-gen hard copy exists).


----------



## Parmandur (Jun 8, 2020)

Deset Gled said:


> I'm not so sure.
> 
> Disney definitely buried TBC the first time around. It didn't get a home video release until 1998, when the conventional "Disney Vault" timeline said it should have gotten one around 1992.  It also got a 25th anniversary version in 2010, buts still no Blu-ray.
> 
> Disney+ has thrown the entire "Disney Vault" ideology upside down, and it remains to be seen what their long term plans are.  The Vault has been a powerful tool for Disney to control the market, allowing them to strategically time re-releases to build their brand and take charge of revenue streams.  It will be interesting to see how it plays out.  If Disney did want to bury TBC, periodically releasing it on Disney+ would help keep the price of the DVD low in the used market (preventing if from becoming a sought after collectible) and let them avoid ever doing a Blu-ray release (or whatever next-gen hard copy exists).




It's not just in Disney+, it's in 4K on Disney+! And for Disney+, they are committed (where legally possible) to not cycle through content. So it's out there in high definition.


----------



## Stormonu (Jun 8, 2020)

NO, just NO.  If this is true, Disney needs to back away slowly and leave this IP alone.  They _utterly ruined_ their last, botched attempt at this story and I for one do not want to see them within 50 miles of it.

On the other hand, I wish they'd (or someone would) redo Black Hole.  That movie has a lot of potential, it just needs some modernization (take out the cowboy elements, update the tech/visuals) and a weensy bit more suspense (delve deeper into the mystery of the humanoid "robots" and the crew's fate).


----------



## BookBarbarian (Jun 8, 2020)

Stormonu said:


> NO, just NO.  If this is true, Disney needs to back away slowly and leave this IP alone.  They _utterly ruined_ their last, botched attempt at this story and I for one do not want to see them within 50 miles of it.



I'm not sure I understand. It's not like it would be the same producers, director, animators, or even studio execs as the last time. It's been 35 years after all. At this point what would be the difference between another studio making it or Disney making it? It's new filmmakers either way.


----------



## aco175 (Jun 8, 2020)

I heard the remake is set in *Dark Sun*.  As soon as Disney buys Hasbro.  Actually, I could see something for Disney+ like a series.  Things have gotten darker and scarier for kids/teens these days with recent movies like Harry Potter and those vampire/werewolf movies.


----------



## Eyes of Nine (Jun 8, 2020)

aco175 said:


> I heard the remake is set in *Dark Sun*.  As soon as Disney buys Hasbro.  Actually, I could see something for Disney+ like a series.  Things have gotten darker and scarier for kids/teens these days with recent movies like Harry Potter and those vampire/werewolf movies.



Haha, are you saying the Black Cauldron remake is set in Athas? Didn't see that twist coming...


----------



## Stormonu (Jun 8, 2020)

BookBarbarian said:


> I'm not sure I understand. It's not like it would be the same producers, director, animators, or even studio execs as the last time. It's been 35 years after all. At this point what would be the difference between another studio making it or Disney making it? It's new filmmakers either way.



I have an aversion to the original on the level of suffering the Ralph Bakshi version of the Lord of the Rings and the more recent Peter Jackson Hobbit. 
I have no confidence that _Disney_ could do the series justice, especially with the rate their live action remakes are going downhill.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 9, 2020)

Stormonu said:


> I have an aversion to the original on the level of suffering the Ralph Bakshi version of the Lord of the Rings and the more recent Peter Jackson Hobbit.
> I have no confidence that _Disney_ could do the series justice, especially with the rate their live action remakes are going downhill.




Take that stupid rotoscoping out of it and it was just fine.


----------



## LuisCarlos17f (Jun 9, 2020)

Rumours about Disney buying Hasbro are old. After buying 20 century fox they are too busy. This will not happen in the next near years. But I feel a great curiosity about how would be the heroes of Dragonlance drawned with the Disney style.


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 9, 2020)

I want my live action Disney's Pocahontas dammit! Come on Disney, there's no way that could ever go wrong.


----------



## Ralif Redhammer (Jun 9, 2020)

I'd love for this to come true, and be done well. Not that I don't love the original movie and the books. If I recall correctly, Tim Burton worked on doing the animation. These days, alas, I would hope that he wouldn't be involved in remake.


----------



## BookBarbarian (Jun 9, 2020)

Stormonu said:


> I have an aversion to the original on the level of suffering the Ralph Bakshi version of the Lord of the Rings



To me that's like saying because of the Bakshi LOTR I don't want Fantasy Films to produce another movie when they did an excellent job with _One Flew over the Cuckoo's nest. _Ultimately I think it's the people themselves that matter more than the label of the company.



Stormonu said:


> and the more recent Peter Jackson Hobbit.



 Now those execs that are responsible for the hobbit mess, getting rid of Del Toro and forcing a terrible timeline on Jackson and also forcing him to make 3 movies instead of 2 (or 1), should never be allowed to work on a film again regardless of what studio they work for.



Stormonu said:


> I have no confidence that _Disney_ could do the series justice, especially with the rate their live action remakes are going downhill.



This makes more sense to me, judging an upcoming projects by recent projects I can very much understand. Also, I've never bothered with the Live action remakes anyway. I never saw the point.


----------



## Stormonu (Jun 9, 2020)

BookBarbarian said:


> To me that's like saying because of the Bakshi LOTR I don't want Fantasy Films to produce another movie when they did an excellent job with _One Flew over the Cuckoo's nest. _Ultimately I think it's the people themselves that matter more than the label of the company.




This is more saying I hate Black Cauldron as much as I hate the Bakshi LOTR (which is pretty intense, as you can probably tell).  

It's my confidence in Disney movies that's pretty low right now, primarily for their live action remakes of previous cartoons.  Coupled with the fact I don't have confidence they could keep the somewhat dark tone of the books.  It's been a while since I've seen the original (such negative memories I do have) that I found it laughable at the time, not dark as my memories of the book.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 9, 2020)

Stormonu said:


> It's my confidence in Disney movies that's pretty low right now, primarily for their live action remakes of previous cartoons.  Coupled with the fact I don't have confidence they could keep the somewhat dark tone of the books.  It's been a while since I've seen the original (such negative memories I do have) that I found it laughable at the time, not dark as my memories of the book.




I have not been in the mood to try watching the live-action Lion King or Dumbo, but I loved the live-action Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast. And Jungle Book was good too, just not as good as those two. And I am getting impatient waiting for Mulan.


----------



## Deset Gled (Jun 9, 2020)

Stormonu said:


> It's my confidence in Disney movies that's pretty low right now, primarily for their live action remakes of previous cartoons.




Between movies like Moana, Frozen 1&2, and Coco, but then also the live-action* remakes of Beauty and Beast, Lion King, etc, it really fells like Disney is simultaneously doing some of their best and worst work ever.

*considering the painful amount of awful CGI, I honestly have trouble considering these "live".


----------



## Gradine (Jun 10, 2020)

Live Action Aladdin was shockingly painless. And Malificent (at least the first, still haven't seen the second) proves they can actually make these good if they try.

I'd be happier with a legit adaptation of the book series (animated or otherwise) than a live-action adaptation of The Black Cauldron (the film) but I could even see that being perfectly passable.


----------



## Enevhar Aldarion (Jun 10, 2020)

Gradine said:


> Live Action Aladdin was shockingly painless. And Malificent (at least the first, still haven't seen the second) proves they can actually make these good if they try.
> 
> I'd be happier with a legit adaptation of the book series (animated or otherwise) than a live-action adaptation of The Black Cauldron (the film) but I could even see that being perfectly passable.




When I was typing that, I was sure I was forgetting one. But since Maleficent is not a remake of an animated movie, and are rather prequels/sequels, I did not think of them to include them. I enjoyed them both, though the second one was more over-the-top action than I expected.

And I am pretty sure the rumors are for a live-action series based on the books and not a live-action version of the original film, which may be what some people posting here are misunderstanding.


----------



## Imaculata (Jun 10, 2020)

While Maleficent was entertaining (and Angelina Jolie does a fantastic job), that movie was a bit of a mess. It bends over backwards to try and make the villain from Sleeping Beauty not a villain, and it just doesn't work. It abandons the plot of Sleeping Beauty halfway through, and simply forgets the stuff that it had set up.

Jungle Book was okay, but not as great as the animated version. It was really weird how they left out Kaa's song, and then put it over the end credits. Something clearly got left on the cuttingroom floor there. It was nice that they included some of the songs, and the CGI animals are really well done, but ultimately every song is worse compared to the original. Bill Murray does a fine Baloo, but he's not a very good singer.

I have yet to watch Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Dumbo or the Lion King. But I expect they will share the same flaws.


----------



## Tonguez (Jun 10, 2020)

Imaculata said:


> While Maleficent was entertaining (and Angelina Jolie does a fantastic job), that movie was a bit of a mess. It bends over backwards to try and make the villain from Sleeping Beauty not a villain, and it just doesn't work. It abandons the plot of Sleeping Beauty halfway through, and simply forgets the stuff that it had set up.
> 
> Jungle Book was okay, but not as great as the animated version. It was really weird how they left out Kaa's song, and then put it over the end credits. Something clearly got left on the cuttingroom floor there. It was nice that they included some of the songs, and the CGI animals are really well done, but ultimately every song is worse compared to the original. Bill Murray does a fine Baloo, but he's not a very good singer.
> 
> I have yet to watch Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Dumbo or the Lion King. But I expect they will share the same flaws.




I tend to agree with you, the live action remakes have not matched the quality of the original animations.
I was disappointed with what they did with Maleficent, the malice of the animated dark queen i
s what makes her a classic villain, and denying her the draconic transformation was also a mistake.I liked Jungle Book but agree with you about some of the changes and the singing,. 

The Lion King reanimation was drab, the scenes were the same but the animals were far less expressive (which considering they were cgi there was no excuse for)

Of all of the remakes Ive seen I liked Alladin, the two leads are fine in the roles, Jasmine is upgraded and gets a new song and Genie does a fine version of WIll Smith


----------



## Urriak Uruk (Jun 10, 2020)

Imaculata said:


> While Maleficent was entertaining (and Angelina Jolie does a fantastic job), that movie was a bit of a mess. It bends over backwards to try and make the villain from Sleeping Beauty not a villain, and it just doesn't work. It abandons the plot of Sleeping Beauty halfway through, and simply forgets the stuff that it had set up.
> 
> Jungle Book was okay, but not as great as the animated version. It was really weird how they left out Kaa's song, and then put it over the end credits. Something clearly got left on the cuttingroom floor there. It was nice that they included some of the songs, and the CGI animals are really well done, but ultimately every song is worse compared to the original. Bill Murray does a fine Baloo, but he's not a very good singer.
> 
> I have yet to watch Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Dumbo or the Lion King. But I expect they will share the same flaws.




Lion King I've heard is especially uninspired. Carbon cut copy of original except it lacks the facial responses of animation and the same quality of voice actors (Seth Rogen cannot sing!)


----------

