2019年迪士尼有四部主打懷舊牌的真人翻拍電影上映，上周末的新片《阿拉丁》便是其中一部。迪士尼希望票房大賣，好讓股東們滿意。

今年迪士尼翻拍電影數量比旗下另兩大賺錢機器——漫威和《星球大戰》系列還要多。而之前作為主力作品的動畫片方面今年只有兩部新作：《玩具總動員4》和《冰雪奇緣2》。

翻拍和重映已成為迪士尼業務的重心。自2010年蒂姆·波頓拍的真人版《愛麗絲夢游仙境》上映后已推出一系列真人化電影。票房統計網站Box Office Mojo的數據顯示，老動畫片真人化電影的全球票房總收入已經超過53億美元。盡管之前的《小飛象》表現不佳，但分析師預計即將上映的新片成績會很不錯。關鍵原因？懷舊。

“肯定會掀起懷舊情緒。”BoxOfficeReport網站的丹尼爾·加里斯表示。他預計瞄準暑期檔上映的《阿拉丁》和《獅子王》票房都將大賣。兩部電影均是根據迪士尼佳作爆發時期的動畫片改編，在20世紀80年代末和90年代，動畫部門制作的影片接連爆紅。而且當年這些片子票房就很好，也是第一批發布家庭錄影帶的電影，很多影迷可以看很多遍。

“這些電影之所以能激起懷舊情緒，部分原因是很容易能看到。”加里斯表示。

不過加里斯認為，《小飛象》的粉絲本來就不多。1941年原版電影票房僅為160萬美元，早幾年上映的《白雪公主》票房曾經高達6600萬美元。2019年翻拍版的票房剛剛超過3.39億美元，如果不是制作成本高達1.7億美元，票房也不算太糟。

《小飛象》票房遠不如2017年真人翻拍的輝煌時期老電影《美女與野獸》，該片預算1.6億美元，全球票房高達12.6億美元。《美女與野獸》充分體現了千禧一代對經典老片的懷舊之情。根據《綜藝》雜志（Variety）報道，首周末觀影人群的兩大主力分別是26至34歲的千禧一代和12歲以下的兒童。

“去看電影的是什么人？絕大部分是千禧一代。”視頻評論家林賽·埃利斯表示。她制作了一條針對迪士尼的視頻，片中主要表達了對《美女與野獸》翻拍版的厭惡，口號是“不好意思，我就是討厭這部片子！”該視頻的瀏覽量已經達數百萬。

迪士尼輝煌時期的電影問世時，千禧一代還是孩子，現在可以帶著孩子去看自己以前喜歡的故事。

“沒有孩子的千禧一代肯定會去看，因為片子迎合了他們心中懷舊的情緒。”埃利斯說。“即使是看《獅子王》，也像是‘哦，這是我以前喜歡的片子，就是現在加了碧昂絲。也挺好的。’”

千禧一代小的時候對媒體的消費方式，與父母和看《小飛象》的一代明顯不同。有了錄像帶，他們可以一遍又一遍地看經典電影，背歌曲，詼諧的臺詞銘記在腦中。輝煌時期也發行了一些經典影片例如《奇幻森林》，意味著千禧一代也能反復觀看迪士尼的老電影。這或許可以解釋為何2016年《奇幻森林》翻拍版的總收入能接近10億美元，畢竟20世紀90年代的原版錄像帶一直躋身暢銷榜前列，榜上其他影片包括《阿拉丁》、《美女與野獸》和《小美人魚》。《小飛象》都沒有擠進前十名。

“千禧一代對童年看過的內容感覺非常親切。到現在仍然在看。”埃利斯說。“千禧一代可能是小時候擁有體驗良好且值得反復觀看的內容的第一代人。”

迪士尼正在指望用這種強烈的懷舊情緒來吸引觀眾。埃利斯說，懷舊的力量十分強大，電影甚至不必拍得很好（水平比不上原作都行），也能收入豐厚。

“只要重拍一遍就行。”她表示。“看看《美女與野獸》，音樂跟原作一樣，其他也差不多。動畫片和新版電影并沒有明顯區別。”

盡管該片在票房上表現出色，但評論界褒貶不一。爛番茄網站上2017版《美女與野獸》支持率為71%，而原作“新鮮度”高達94%。

“看起來《獅子王》會一個鏡頭不改地重拍。”埃利斯補充說。他還指出，1994年原版中為木法沙配音的詹姆斯·厄爾·瓊斯將在翻拍版中給同一角色配音。

雖然加里斯不愿說具體的預測數字，但預計《獅子王》將是“年度最賣座的電影之一”。拋開懷舊因素，其實《獅子王》之前就已經證明其票房價值。1994年原作是當年票房第二高的電影，如今還有碧昂絲等全明星配音演員助陣，估計所有年齡段的粉絲都會蜂擁而至。

《阿拉丁》也很有可能大賣。《綜藝》雜志報道，初步跟蹤調查顯示，首周末該片的美國票房可能至少達8000萬美元。

由于《阿拉丁》的多元化演員陣容和中東故事背景，加里斯很看好全球大賣。2016年的《奇幻森林》翻拍曾經是印度有史以來票房最高的好萊塢電影，迪士尼似乎也希望能在利潤豐厚的電影市場上再獲成功。

“不管《阿拉丁》的美國票房表現如何，在國際上一定成績不錯。” 加里斯說。

迪士尼仍然有龐大的動畫片儲備，可以進一步挖掘翻拍為真人電影。2020年將推出真人版《花木蘭》，還有《奇幻森林》續集。但公認為動畫王國的迪士尼推出的原創動畫電影越來越少。

沃特·迪士尼動畫制作公司的最新一部非續集電影是2016年的《海洋奇緣》。皮克斯的最新原創電影是2017年的《尋夢環游記》。在2021年和2022年將上映的電影中，迪士尼列出了四部未公布名稱的真人電影，兩年里每年只有一部動畫。

如果迪士尼繼續翻拍比原創動畫多的趨勢，最終可能陷入找不到懷舊IP可拍的境地。

但可能也不需要。

“我覺得迪士尼在想‘也許不需要新IP？也許每10年左右重新包裝一次之前的IP就行。’”埃利斯說。之前迪士尼一直采取該策略，原版上映幾十年后，迪士尼在影院重新上映了經典電影《白雪公主》。

加里斯說，迪士尼可能更進一步：給翻拍片制作原創續集。

“有些翻拍片確實可能會有續集。”他表示。“嚴格來說也屬于原創。”

2016年的《愛麗絲夢游仙境2：鏡中奇遇記》是2010年波頓拍的《愛麗絲夢游仙境》續集，雖然票房不佳，但迪士尼還是要嘗試重拍戰略，今年秋天將推出《沉睡魔咒2：惡魔夫人》，由安吉麗娜·朱莉繼續出演主角。該片是基于1959年《睡美人》翻拍的《沉睡魔咒》續集，2014年《沉睡魔咒》全球票房7.58億美元。加里斯表示，如果票房不錯可能有更多續集。

迪士尼還可以依托新的流媒體服務，為《小飛象》等粉絲群更小眾的老電影找到新去處。舉例來說，11月由泰莎·湯普森和賈斯汀·塞洛克斯主演的《小姐與流浪漢》翻拍就將在流媒體平臺Disney+首映。

不管在電影院里還是電影院外，迪士尼都非常了解如何利用人們熱愛的角色賺錢。之前就有過實踐。輝煌時代期間，迪士尼就開始制作大量直供錄像帶的續集。《阿拉丁》、《獅子王》和《大力士》等電影的續集主要由獨立公司或迪士尼電視動畫公司制作，成本大大降低，最終制作中均有體現。

埃利斯認為，直供錄像帶的電影帶來了不錯的利潤，但也有代價。此類制作導致令人尊重的迪士尼品牌有所貶低。如果迪士尼仍然不惜代價采取翻拍策略，也可能發生同樣的情況。

“過度飽和或者不賺錢都不會導致翻拍作品失敗。”她說。“一旦開始讓人感覺很廉價而且削弱品牌，才說明失敗了。”（財富中文網）

譯者：馮豐

審校：夏林

Disney is hoping to grant its shareholders’ wishes by delivering another box office hit with last weekend’s Aladdin, one of four live-action nostalgia-based adaptations set for 2019.

The remakes make up more releases than the studio’s other two big money-making franchises, Marvel and Star Wars. The Mouse House is only releasing two animated features, previously a significant part of its business, in 2019—Toy Story 4 and Frozen 2.

The pivot to remakes and reimaginings is big business for Disney. Since the current spate kicked off in 2010 with Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, remakes of older animated features have grossed more than $5.3 billion worldwide according to Box Office Mojo. Even though the most recent remake, Dumbo, underperformed, analysts expect upcoming releases to be big business. The key ingredient? Nostalgia.

“Nostalgia definitely comes into play,” says Daniel Garris of BoxOfficeReport, who expects significant box office numbers from Aladdin and The Lion King, both coming out in time for the summer movie season. The films are based on originals released during the Disney Renaissance—a period in the late 1980s and 1990s where the studio’s animation department cranked out hit after hit. Those movies performed well in theaters and also were among the first to have prompt home video releases, meaning fans could watch them again and again.

“We’re nostalgic for these films in part because they were a lot more accessible for us,” Garris says.

Dumbo, Garris argues, never had a huge fanbase. The 1941 original grossed a mere $1.6 million, compared to Snow White’s $66 million at the box office a few years earlier. The 2019 remake has made just over $339 million so far, which wouldn’t be so bad if it wasn’t for a sky-high $170 million production budget.

Dumbo’s ticket sales are a far cry from 2017’s Beauty and the Beast—also a remake of a Disney Renaissance movie—which grossed $1.26 billion worldwide on a $160 million budget. Beast shows the power of millennial nostalgia for that era’s films: the two largest demographics groups who saw the movie opening weekend were millennials aged 26 to 34 and kids under 12, according to Variety.

“Who is seeing these movies? Millennials, overwhelmingly,” says Lindsay Ellis, a video essayist and author whose videos on Disney—including one expressing her dislike for the Beast remake with the slogan “Thanks, I hate it!”—have millions of views.

Millennials were kids when the Renaissance movies came out, and now they’re taking their own kids to see the stories they loved.

“But childless millennials will absolutely see this because it hits that nostalgia thing in their brains,” Ellis says. “Even with The Lion King, it’s like ‘oh, it’s that thing I liked—but Beyoncé is in it. Which makes it good.’”

As children, millennials consumed media much differently than their parents or the Dumbo generation. Thanks to VHS tapes, they could watch the Renaissance movies again and again, memorizing songs and burning witty lines into their brains. The Renaissance period also saw the home release of classics like The Jungle Book, meaning millennials watched older Disney movies on repeat as well. That might explain why the 2016 Jungle Book remake grossed nearly a billion dollars—the original was consistently a top-seller among video releases in the 1990s, along with Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, and The Little Mermaid. Dumbo didn’t even crack the top-10 list.

“As a generation, millennials have retained this intense affinity for their childhood media. They still watch it,” Ellis says. “Millennials might have been the first generation that had decent enough childhood media that it’s worth revisiting.”

Disney is banking on this intense nostalgia to draw audiences. The power of nostalgia also means that the movies don’t actually have to be good (or even as good as the originals) to make a ton of money, Ellis says.

“I think they just need to be remakes,” she says. “Look at Beauty and the Beast, it uses the same music and everything. There’s no appreciable difference between the animated movie and the new movie.”

Even though the remake performed well at the box office, the critical consensus on the remake was far from unanimous: the 2017 Beast has a 71% favorable rating on Rotten Tomatoes compared to 94% “certified fresh” for the original.

“The Lion King looks like it’s going to be a shot-for-shot remake,” Ellis added, noting that James Earl Jones, who voiced Mufasa in the 1994 original is reprising the exact same role in the remake.

While he wouldn’t share concrete predictions, Garris expects Lion King to be “one of the biggest films of the year.” Along with the nostalgic draw, Lion King has proven box office value: the original was the second-highest grossing film of 1994. It also features an all-star voice cast including Beyoncé, whose fans of all ages are expected to turn up in droves.

Aladdin is also a likely hit: early tracking surveys show the movie will probably make at least $80 million domestically over its opening weekend, according to Variety.

Garris additionally expects Aladdin, with a diverse cast and Middle Eastern setting, to break out globally. After The Jungle Book remake became the highest-ever grossing Hollywood film in India in 2016, Disney seems to be aiming for similar success in the lucrative movie market.

“Regardless of how Aladdin does domestically, it’ll be huge internationally,” Garris says.

Disney still has a huge back catalog of animated features to mine for live-action films: there’s both a Mulan remake and a sequel to the Jungle Book remake set for 2020. But the company, still thought of as an animation powerhouse, is releasing fewer original animated movies.

Walt Disney Animation Studio’s last non-sequel film was Moana in 2016. Pixar’s most recent original film was Coco in 2017. In a schedule of upcoming releases, Disney listed four untitled live-action films slated for release in both 2021 and 2022, along with just one animated feature for each of those years.

If the studio keeps making more remakes than original animated features, it could eventually run out of nostalgia-heavy intellectual property to remake.

But it may not need it.

“I think Disney’s thinking ‘well, maybe we don’t need new IP? Maybe we just need to repackage the IP we have every 10 years or so,” Ellis says. Disney has relied on that in the past, re-releasing classic films like Snow White in theaters decades after the original release.

Garris says that could go a step further: with original sequels to the remakes and reimaginings.

“Some of these films could get sequels,” he says. “That would be original, technically.”

Though Alice Through the Looking Glass, the 2016 sequel to Burton’s billion-dollar-grossing 2010 Alice in Wonderland remake, underperformed, Disney is trying the sequel-to-remake strategy again with this fall’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. Angelina Jolie will reprise the title role after 2014’s Maleficent—based on 1959’s Sleeping Beauty—grossed $758 million worldwide. If that does well, Garris says we can expect even more sequels.

Disney could also find a different home for remakes of older movies with a smaller built-in fan base—like Dumbo—on its new streaming service. For instance, a Lady and the Tramp remake starring Tessa Thompson and Justin Theroux will premiere when Disney+ launches in November.

The company knows how to make money on beloved familiar characters, both in and out of movie theaters. And it’s done it before: in the middle of the Renaissance era, Disney began to produce a glut of direct-to-video sequels. The sequels to films like Aladdin, Lion King, and Hercules were largely produced by a separate studio or Disney’s television animation studio and had significantly lower animation costs, which showed in the final production.

The direct-to-video movies made a healthy profit, but they came at a price, according to Ellis: they cheapened the sacred Disney brand. The same could happen if the studio pursues a strategy of remakes at all costs.

“What does the remakes in won’t be oversaturation or if they stop making money,” she says. “It’ll be when it starts feeling cheap and starts degrading the brand.”