WARNING: I'm going to go on a huge theater/Disney/film nerd rant. If you don't want to read all 90 pages of this, basically I thought it was below average but had so much potential. I also think it shows how the studio has evolved in trying to package their old films for a new audience, although not well. Also if you do read this MENA stands for Middle Eastern North African.

What does the largest media conglomerate in the world do when they want to remake a popular property but they also know they are going to face significant pressure because said property had many problematic elements? Firstly, I'm probably one of five people in the world who thinks the original Aladdin is just alright. I watched it a lot as a kid because it was bright, colorful and had a half shirtless hunky dude running around for most of the movie. As an adult, and I rewatched it recently, I don't hate it but I'm not in love with it. It's fine.

Aladdin as a character is kinda flat. He's supposed to be a lovable rogue sort and I feel like they leaned more into the lovable part and not so much the rogue. The transformation of character he endures would have had more of a punch if he started out as more of a dick. As is he's basically just a wayward kid who happens to be poor and that's why he's a rogue. His circumstances define his actions not his character. I would have liked if he had a few more obvious flaws. But overall he's okay. Jasmine is boring but she's definitely more assertive than most other females in the Disney canon up to this point, except for maybe Ariel. But this also isn't her movie and the characterization she gets is minimal but they try to pack enough in there in the short time she's on screen. Jafar is fun as hell. No complaints there. The sultan is a character in the movie. The cute sidekicks range from mildly annoying to please remove this character from the screen.

The movie doesn't really crank into high gear until the Genie shows up. He's the part of the movie most people remember besides the songs. Even then when you think Aladdin you probably think of 'A Friend Like Me' before you think of 'One Jump'. The genie is the character that made the most impact on audiences which is kind of a problem in a movie titled 'Aladdin'. The Genie is what most of the marketing concerning the film centers on first and then by nature of being a Disney Princess, Jasmine. All of this is built upon Robin Williams giving his absolute all in the role. If they had gotten someone like Billy Crystal or Martin Short, who have very similar energy, I'm sure the film would be fine. But I doubt the film nor the character would be as iconic as they've both come to be. Nor do I think that the trend of casting celebrities in animated films would have become as normalized as it is today. Aladdin was the third hit in Disney's string of successes that continued in full force until The Lion King and it started to peter out sometime around Pocahontas. But if Aladdin had been just average I wonder if the renaissance would have continued as long as it did. The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan and Tarzan all tried to mimic the success of Aladdin by casting a popular comedian or entertainer in the role of a mystical helper character who largely serves as comic relief. Hell they still do that with Raya and Moana being the most recent examples. Moana is actually notable in that the funny mystical helper character actually gets an arc of his own, which rarely happens in these films.

Another thing that stands out to me now is the presentation of the Arabic and Middle Eastern culture in the film. And before I start, yes I know Agrabah isn't a real place. But the people and the cultures it pulls from are. As I mentioned in a post about Orientalism, western society has a bad history of portraying the Middle East and Asia as regressive, backwards, exotic, untamed and needing of western culture as a stabilizing force. So how does Aladdin do in that regard? Better than most but still flawed.

There aren't any white characters to speak of but everyone from the actors to the writers to the directors to many of the lead animators and designers were white or at the very least not MENA. Agrabah feels like Caesar's Palace presents Aladdin. It's very Vegas. Agrabah is exotic, it's mysterious and it's got an element of danger. Stealing bread can get your hand lopped off. There's a reference to dismemberment in the opening song. People do things like eat fire and swallow swords and snake charm. Women are dressed like harem girls. It's not 300 levels of fucked up but there are elements that are problematic. Agrabah is presented as a whole in a much more fantastical manner than Beauty and the Beast's France or Sleeping Beauty's England. The magic and mysticism in films like those along with Snow White and Cinderella, seems confined to specific individuals and is not inherent to the land itself. The mystery and exoticism lies solely in the magical characters themselves not where they live.

Let it also be noted that around this time we were already well into the First Persian Gulf war. American sentiments about the Middle East weren't at the hostility of post 9/11 America. But we did have the concept that this part of the world was kinda backwards and we were gonna help. We didn't see them as an existential threat but we also didn't see them as our cultural equals in the way we might view the United Kingdom or France. So Aladdin does some good in humanizing characters from an Middle Eastern/Arabic culture. But at the same time it leans into the Orientalism that previous works set in that region have also done. But it also presents Agrabah as relatively stable and not particularly war torn which is good. Even back then our media presented the idea of the Middle East/Arab World as politically unstable, constantly on the verge of collapse and in a state of constant war. Films like Death Before Dishonor and even True Lies portrayed the Arab World and those who come from it as barbaric, backwards, irrational and doggedly religious. Aladdin mostly, kinda doesn't do that. Although MANY people disagree with me.

But when it was announced that Disney was doing a live action remake the response was cautious but hopeful. Aladdin can lend itself to some very beautiful and striking sequences in live action if done right. MENA critics and cultural organizations were wary of the decision to hire yet another white director and a half Indian woman to play Jasmine. Many felt that the story itself was inherently Orientalist and unless there was active work in portraying the culture Agrabah is derived from with respect then it didn't matter who played Aladdin or Jasmine. Or as Khaled A Beydoun writing for Aljazeera puts it:

"To some measure, the demand to cast Arab actors to play the lead roles in Aladdin amounts to an endorsement that Agrabah is indeed an Arab land or an accurate representation of the Arab world. And accepting that sanctions a host of vile stereotypes that attach to and emanate from an imagined “barbaric” region where “they will cut off your ear if they don’t like your face”. Agrabah is not the Arab or Muslim world, but a spitting cartoon image of the Orient – a centuries’ old production of academics and artists, news media and filmmakers, which casts it and its inhabitants as the mirror opposite of everything modern, liberal, and Western. Agrabah is the Orient, plain and simple, in cartoon form"

On the other side, you had exhausted Disney fans who were tired of the iconic films of their youth being made into bland, uninspired live action shells of themselves. Some were optimistic that at least it'd be visually interesting but were confused why Guy Ritchie was picked to direct. Hell even Guy Ritchie seems surprised they picked him. One wonders why a director with experience in the musical genre wasn't selected but it was assumed that perhaps there were would be more of an emphasis on the action and not so much the singing and dancing. Speaking solely for myself, I am 100% percent down for an Aladdin that is closer to Atlantis: Lost Empire in tone than say a Bollywood film, which is what a lot of fans were expecting. At least they didn't bring on Tom Hooper. They cast an actor not known for comedy nor singing as Jafar, the second most popular character from the movie. But maybe he'd surprise us. The two twinks from La La Land and The Greatest Showman would be helping with the songs. Cool. Fine. Billy Magnusson was cast as a rival prince for some reason. Whatever. Fuck it. Roll with it.

Then it was announced Will Smith would be playing the genie.

Ruh-oh Raggy!

Let the record show that I like Will Smith. Men in Black, Independence Day, Ali, Hitch, The Pursuit of Happiness, I Robot, Hitchcock, I Am Legend and hell even Sharktale are all my shit. But all of those movies let Will Smith be essentially Will Smith. Even when he's giving an excellent performance he never fully disappears into the role. But neither does George Clooney. Neither does Brad Pitt. Neither does a good 40 percent of male movie stars these days. I can live with that. By why in the name of Black Lesbian God, would you put Will Smith in this movie and have him almost line for line act out Robin Williams' version of the genie? But we all had a tiny crumb of hope that perhaps they'd just be going with a different kind of genie. They did and they did not but we'll get to that.

The great tragedy of this film is that all of the pieces were there to make some solid out of it. I really wanted this film to be good not only because I would like Disney to actually start Disneying the right way again. But also because the last few years have been fucked up for MENA people and Muslims in The West and abroad. The president at the time was viciously attacking the first two Muslim congresswomen ever in America. Hate crimes against Muslims were spiking in western countries culminating in a lone gunman murdering dozens of people at a mosque in Christchurch, New Zealand months prior to Aladdin's release. Yemen was systematically being torn apart by like everyone. The United States had tried to ban Muslims from the country and succeeded for a while. We also pulled out of the Iran Deal and resumed a more hostile relationship with the country. It was announced that we would be pulling out of Syria leaving the Kurds who were aiding us to fend for themselves. The current president then tried to move the US embassy into Jerusalem and recognized it as the true capital of Israel thus inflaming tensions in the region.

MENA people in The West and those like myself who ally with them really needed something good. Mass media isn't the most high stakes thing in the world. But positive representation can help uplift a group of people who are actively being targeted. It can also help change perceptions around them. We had been seeing a lot of really good culturally specific and relevant mainstream films concerning minority groups around this time. Black Panther, Get Out, Moana, Coco, Crazy Rich Asians and others had all been released around the time of Aladdin or a couple years prior. It felt like it was time for MENA people to have their moment. There hasn't been a mainstream American film with a mostly Arabic/Middle Eastern cast in a while, if ever. So that was defintely something. No one was expecting it to be brilliant but hopefully it'd just be good. We wanted this to be the film that launched new diverse faces into the mainstream stardom the way Crazy Rich Asians, Black Panther and others had done for those groups. We were optimistic but cautious. That caution turned into 'fucking yikes!' when a report came out that many of the extras were just white people in brownface. Disney both denied this and then later apologized for it.

So what did we get? What was the end result of all these years of lobbying and pressuring Disney to not make a culturally insensitive film? What did the blood, sweat and possible hard drinking of Guy Ritchie result in? Was this movie any good?

No. Sorta, but mostly no.

The glimmer of a good movie is there but so many of the choices were just odd. I already brought up how Guy Ritchie was not the most natural fit for a fantastical Disney musical. But there are parts that almost work. 'One Jump' feels more like an action scene that someone shoved a song into. I wouldn't have minded if this was more of a straight action scene and maybe you can use 'Proud of Your Boy' as Aladdin's song later on. Will Smith is an okay genie when he gets to be Will Smith. Unfortunately they have him doing Robin Williams drag for a good 50 percent of the time.

Part of this is the fault of audience expectations. These things are thinly veiled nostalgia cash grabs so they don't want to stray too far from the original movie, unless it's Mulan then go nuts. The audience expects for Aladdin to behave a certain way. They expect the genie to act a certain way. They expect the musical numbers to flow a certain way. I can't fault Disney entirely because when they reinvent their films like with Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland some audiences responded too harshly. On some level we all do want the same old comfort food but with a little extra garnish. The company knows that this generates a lot of revenue and they'll keep doing it. But there are some things that go beyond 'we must do this to make money' and this is a bad creative choice because the director is out of his range here.

Not since Tom Hooper forcing Judy Dench do a slam poetry reading of a good song have we seen a director who so thoroughly misunderstands both the genre and the source material he's working with. This version of Aladdin feels more grounded. The colors are somewhat muted. The fantastical elements are there but aren't as grand. Jafar's magic in particular seems much more subdued but we'll get to him. The costumes, production design, etc all are competently done but it doesn't really have that spark a proper movie musical does. The lighting is flat and dim to the point where I had a hard time seeing what was going on. The camerawork is straightforward to a fault. 'Prince Ali' feels a taping of an actual parade. 'A Whole New World' lacks the grandeur and scale something like this could have. In The Heights has a similar segment with Nina and Benny where the camera does a lot of interesting stuff during their big duet. They never leave Washington Heights but the camerawork and the visual effects makes it feel like a fantasy. That movie also had nowhere near the budget this one does.

Going back to 'One Jump', Ritchie does this thing where he speeds up the footage just a bit and then slows it down only to ramp it back up. This is an attempt to toss some energy into the scene. But it seems like it wants to be more of a scene from Jason Bourne than anything from a Disney movie. Do that then. If you have to have him sing then go for it but embrace the action based nature of the scene. We know Ritchie can do this. We've seen him do it before. The only two of these that actually works is 'Friend Like Me' and 'Arabian Nights'. Ignoring that they autotuned the ever living shit out of Will Smith for both songs, they work because they embrace the genre they're in. 'Arabian Nights' is has some really slick camerawork and nicely introduces us to most of the characters we will be following around for this somehow two hour movie.

'Friend Like Me', despite Smith doing some of the same inflections and impressions Williams does, is a high octane blast of a number that takes full advantage of the medium it's in. The number feels huge. It feels glossy. It feels like this would be how this version of the genie would mostly introduce himself. The end credits version is much better in my opinion though. They actually let Will Smith rap and DJ Khaled's production is slick as hell. They should have recruited him to update the rest of the songs. Because the very traditional Broadway style jazz infused versions of the original movie do not match the more modernesque vibe of this movie.

The tone of the original movie felt very Vegas yes but more in terms of spectacle and not really in how the characters acted or spoke. The genie popping in and doing his pop culture thing was meant to act as a contrast to this more or less traditional fairytale land. In the new version, if you told me the story took place somewhere in the early 1900s I'd believe you. I'd just assume there was a lag in technology. The humor and the vibe feels very 2010's, which is fine. But the music should reflect that sensibility.

While we're here 'Speechless', the new song written by Paul and Pasek is fine but it's incredibly obvious that it was written for the movie. It doesn't fit in with the other songs even remotely. I get why they added a new song, gotta chase that Oscar gold, but why not adjust the existing songs so they fit stylistically with the new one you're hamfisting in there? Or modify your new one so it doesn't stick out like the human noses and hands in on a CGI cat? Again it's a matter of tonal dissonance that makes it really distracting to get enveloped into the story.

On that note, the humor here is so awkward. If you want this to be an action comedy, which is in Ritchie's wheelhouse, they for the sake of all that's holy then do it. But good figgity fuck some of the jokes here just do not work. The handmaiden character is so boring and never has an actual funny line. Nasim Perdad is hilarious and is great at ad libbing. She's amazing at delivering high energy performances that leave you in stitches. Why are they making her do Aziz Ansari style cringe humor? She feels more like a female version of Tom Haverford at times than anything else. Why not let her modify some of her own lines like you allowed with Tina Fey in Soul? Or hell they have a skilled comedian and screenwriter who is actually from the Middle East, why not let her co-write the script? There's like a five minute extended bit about jams. Will Smith does not have enough cocaine to keep up with the kind of energy Robin Williams had before him. Naomi Scott, who is very funny in interviews, is given so little in the way of personality in this movie. Mena Massoud is trying but it's clear this style of humor isn't his thing, or anyone's here. The only one truly having a good time is Billy Magnusson. He's also the only one whose lines feel like they were written for him and not some other movie.

I do not understand why they took Jafar, one of the most expressive and outlandish Disney villains, and made him just some guy. I don't need a complete line for line rendition of the animated version. Hell sometimes subdued villains can work. Elizabeth Debecki in The Man From U.N.C.L.E, a much better Guy Ritchie film, never even raises her voice but she's still enjoyable to watch. But in this kind of story for the villain to be a threat you need some kind of energy be it manic or menacing. Otherwise the central conflict does not matter. Jafar in the original was the catalyst for most of the shit happening in the movie. I guess you could say he is here too but A) he's not even in it as much B) even when he is directly impacting the plot you don't care because he's not doing anything interesting.

In the 90's remake of 101 Dalmatians, Cruella isn't actually onscreen a whole lot. She's the main catalyst for the plot and she drives most of what happens onscreen. But most of our time is spent with the titular dalmatians trying to not die or Jeff Bennett perfecting his everyman archetype that we love him for. However when she is onscreen you remember it because she's having the most fun of her life onscreen. When she's gone you want her back. Personally, I forgot Jafar was even a character for large chunks of the movie. He has almost no presence and I'm not referring to screentime here. Maybe Disney was uncomfortable with making their most prominent non-white villain an effeminate hot tempered murderous lunatic like he was in the original. But we loved Jafar for that. Maybe if there was actual MENA person involved in the writing process they could have figured out a way to tone down some of the problematic parts of Jafar, and I can see the argument as to why he's problematic, without sucking out all of the energy from the character. Iago isn't even as interesting anymore and this is coming from someone who doesn't even care for the original version of the character.

As far as how this version of the film handles the setting and culture, it's mostly ignored. The original tried to lean into it a bit too much to the point it felt a bit decadent and vouyeristic. This version makes it look like a Middle Eastern city pre the industrial era and that's about it. There's a distinct lack in cultural specificity or anything that really speaks to setting and era this pulls from. And that's a shame because I think if it lean onto that in a way that didn't feel shoehorned in it could have worked. I'll say it again: maybe if they hired a MENA screenwriter who has some familiarity with the culture this could have turned out a lot more interesting. Or at the very least they could have created an Arabic/Middle Eastern story trust like they've been doing with Moana, Soul and now Raya and Encanto.

Getting voices from the culture you are borrowing from is never a bad thing and could lead to some fresh ideas and perspectives and less extended bits about jams. It doesn't even need to overt but getting someone like DJ Khaled who is both familiar with Arabic culture and music and also hip hop, cause that kinda seems like what they were going for at points, would add a unique flavor to this. I'm wondering what a hip hop version of Prince Ali would look like. I'm wondering if there was a way to shoot some of the musical sequences more like a music video and not whatever it was. Bringing in MENA writers, musicians, costume designers, etc could have given this movie a really unique cultural flair that satisfied both the MENA community and Disney fans who wanted an actual good movie. They had a very charismatic lead actor known for his rap career and the rich history of the Arabic/Middle Eastern culture. They could have done something with that.

As long as these things make money Disney will keep churning them out, although we have seen them try to get somewhat creative with it. Mulan 2020 is very different from the original, I wouldn't call it good, but it's doing something else. Cruella is so goddamn fun and it's clear everyone making it wanted to make it. We're eventually going to be getting live action versions of Pocahontas, Lilo and Stitch, The Princess and the Frog and The Emperor's New Groove. I know they probably won't but a part of me hopes they involve people from those respective communities to help make them so at the very least we get something new from these properties and not Disney's warmed over scraps of storytelling.