353 reviews
About what you'd probably expect
Once again Disney's live action remake of a classic animated movie hits the "well alright" mark. This definitely isn't an awful movie. The opening is actually pretty lovely, and overall the movie has a lot of nice aesthetic to it throughout. The few songs are honestly fine. Not really cringy or anything, they don't waste time on these really. The CGI of the dogs is kind of hit or miss. Some scenes it's actually pretty believable and looks great, others it can be a bit wonky. But the movie also lacks what visual luster an animated film brings, not to mention that this version is a bit longer than the animated, so the movie ends up feeling a bit laggy and drawn out. A few chuckle worthy moments, and it does pick up a bit near the end, but overall a very meh, good for playing in the background during casual night, movie. Remember this is a straight-to-video release, and you won't really face much disappointment.
- djones0305
- Nov 11, 2019
- Permalink
Yes, the original's better, but it's still not bad...
Lady and the Tramp is probably my favorite of the original batch of Disney animated movies (Aladdin's my favorite of the ones they made after I was born). However, I have to agree with some of the other criticisms of the movie. Based on the time in which they set the film, is kinda hard to believe that Jim Dear and Darling would've lived in such a nice house and had so many friends come over for the baby shower. Interracial couples just weren't a thing really in the early 1900s. They just weren't. Not in places where there were riverboats. And maybe it was because I was a kid when I saw the movie The first time, but I never realized that the Siamese cat's song was rude or offensive, but I'm also not Asian so that might contribute to it too. It would've been nice if they'd tried to fix the lyrics for the song rather than scrap it altogether. The thing they replaced it with, and what was UP with the animation of those cats, it was just weird, was unimpressive. I was also confused by their making Jock a girl, though I always thought it was spelled Jaques, I have no problem with it on the whole, it was just an "oh, I guess he's a girl now, ok." But what happened to Beaver?!
Otherwise, still a good movie. I enjoyed it. But I think I'll be sticking to my original animated version whenever I get the urge to watch Lady and the Tramp.
Otherwise, still a good movie. I enjoyed it. But I think I'll be sticking to my original animated version whenever I get the urge to watch Lady and the Tramp.
- mary-lyn007
- Nov 13, 2019
- Permalink
Ultimately pointless
Not a bad film, had a few nice moments and wasn't as awful as i expected. However, it is when you consider the amount of money wasted on making a beautiful but inferior remake of an already amazing film.
It is clear they had initially filmed this for theatrical release, as there's a real mishmash of cinematic scenes withTV show. Some of the scenes also looked incomplete. The cats looked incredibly fake and their new song was somehow both cringy and forgettable. I understand why they ditched the siamese song, but this new addition should've just been scrapped from the get go.
Imagine if Disney actually used their resources to make some original movies these days.
It is clear they had initially filmed this for theatrical release, as there's a real mishmash of cinematic scenes withTV show. Some of the scenes also looked incomplete. The cats looked incredibly fake and their new song was somehow both cringy and forgettable. I understand why they ditched the siamese song, but this new addition should've just been scrapped from the get go.
Imagine if Disney actually used their resources to make some original movies these days.
manifesto
The main impression - this live action version is only a multicultural manifesto, using as pretext only, the original Disney animation. I am not a fan of the live action versions because each of them is far by the poetry of the original. In this case, the sacrifices for a multicultural manifesto are too many and too much. And this is an obvious sin. In my case, for the lost of the beautiful - spices song of the Siamese cats. The virtues - the beautiful opening, F. Murray Abraham, Rose as the expected Lady and, sure, Yvette Nicole Brown performance.
- Kirpianuscus
- Dec 31, 2019
- Permalink
AHHHH why disney?
Honestly not that bad, buT THE SIAMESE CAT TWINS AREN'T EVEN SIAMESE CATS !!!!! :(
- kathrineheller
- Nov 12, 2019
- Permalink
Lady's voice
I'm sorry but whoever voiced Lady was the wrong choice. Lady was supposed to be be soft and gentle and this just bugged me the entire film!!! My 5yr old son however didn't care and loved it. He hasn't seen the original.
- dourpussdora
- Feb 25, 2021
- Permalink
Pales In Comparison To The Original And The Sequel, But Still Solid
They destroyed a classic
They changed everything. First of all, as many people say, they reflect a society that does not reflect the truth about the time where the story develops. On the other hand, they changed some characters. Why did they make the Scottish terrier a female when in the animated story it was a male and the cats were Siamese. Too many changes for a very disappointing version.
- juanmbustamante
- Jun 15, 2021
- Permalink
Good movie with some obvious problems
- noahthebruce
- Dec 7, 2019
- Permalink
not all fits the formula
Jim Dear brings home a dog for his wife Darling and they name her Lady. Street dog Tramp hides in her doghouse to escape the dogcatcher Elliott. He warns her that when "Baby moves in, the dog moves out." When the couple brings in newborn baby Lulu, Lady fears the worst. The family goes out of town leaving Lady in the care of Aunt Sarah. Lady is left on the street and rescued by the Tramp.
This is fun while it lasts. The ending goes on too long and I don't think the CGI is necessary. Back in the day, there were plenty of Disney dog movies. There is a charm to them and the real dogs are perfect for family films. They may not be cinematic greatness but they are fine if done right. The new Disney formula of reworking every animated classic with CGI may not be a good one-size-fits-all. They do the spaghetti scene again but it doesn't have quite the same magic. This is not a franchise that is most known for its action realism. It needs charm, romance, and joy. This movie needs to take this into the G-rated romantic Disney family fun area. That's why real puppies may actually be what's truly needed in this case. CGI dogs talking don't add anything important.
This is fun while it lasts. The ending goes on too long and I don't think the CGI is necessary. Back in the day, there were plenty of Disney dog movies. There is a charm to them and the real dogs are perfect for family films. They may not be cinematic greatness but they are fine if done right. The new Disney formula of reworking every animated classic with CGI may not be a good one-size-fits-all. They do the spaghetti scene again but it doesn't have quite the same magic. This is not a franchise that is most known for its action realism. It needs charm, romance, and joy. This movie needs to take this into the G-rated romantic Disney family fun area. That's why real puppies may actually be what's truly needed in this case. CGI dogs talking don't add anything important.
- SnoopyStyle
- Dec 2, 2019
- Permalink
Why????
- sharonu-58843
- May 7, 2021
- Permalink
Enjoyable Live-Action remake
I remember watching the cartoon as a kid and was kind of confused about them doing a live action version. This movie was pretty good, the actors chosen did a very good job on voice overs. I'm glad that they took out unnecessary racial undertones from the movie, it's a kids movie after all.
If you're upset that it's a interracial couple in 1900s because of "historical accuracy," just remember back in 1900s when dogs could talk.
If you're upset that it's a interracial couple in 1900s because of "historical accuracy," just remember back in 1900s when dogs could talk.
- hahafunny-86271
- Nov 13, 2019
- Permalink
It's really good, exactly what you expect.
I don't understand all the horrible reviews. It's almost exactly like the original. Yeah they change a few things but nothing crazy and it all still works.
Seriously Disney??
Remember lady and the tramp? The adorable tale of two dogs falling in love, a true classic that made up so many childhoods. Well forget all of that because Disney need to dumb down and trample on it for the sake of profit!
I remember rewatching the original over and over again and never getting tired of it. Although when it came to this I watched half of it (about 3 months ago) and have yet to get back to it!
I watched this with my mum - who doesn't mind these remakes - but even she couldn't defend this one!
I suppose the acting and visuals were passable, that's all.
I suppose the acting and visuals were passable, that's all.
- ellamsmith
- Dec 27, 2020
- Permalink
Way to ruin a classic.
- Eiriksterminator
- Dec 28, 2020
- Permalink
Needless? Yes. Enjoyable? Also, yes.
Needless? Yes. Enjoyable? Also, yes.
I'm not entirely sure 'Lady and the Tramp' was a film that needed remaking but here we are. This 2019 production is solid. I like the way it is shot and brought to life. It's rewritten in a few parts, to mostly positive effect - though the original film is still, by a fair distance, best.
I wouldn't say the cast are anything exceptional but they do what's needed. Tessa Thompson and Justin Theroux give good performances as Lady and Tramp respectively, while Adrian Martinez's Elliot is probably the character I'll remember most - away from the two dogs, of course. Janelle Monáe, Sam Elliott and Yvette Nicole Brown are decent too; even if it is difficult to picture the latter as a baddie.
They get rid of the "The Siamese Cat Song", though the replacement tune is actually fairly good. The other songs, like "La La Lu", remain but are obviously tinkered. The run time is longer, which I don't think was nessacary but they fill it well enough.
Solid attempt.
I'm not entirely sure 'Lady and the Tramp' was a film that needed remaking but here we are. This 2019 production is solid. I like the way it is shot and brought to life. It's rewritten in a few parts, to mostly positive effect - though the original film is still, by a fair distance, best.
I wouldn't say the cast are anything exceptional but they do what's needed. Tessa Thompson and Justin Theroux give good performances as Lady and Tramp respectively, while Adrian Martinez's Elliot is probably the character I'll remember most - away from the two dogs, of course. Janelle Monáe, Sam Elliott and Yvette Nicole Brown are decent too; even if it is difficult to picture the latter as a baddie.
They get rid of the "The Siamese Cat Song", though the replacement tune is actually fairly good. The other songs, like "La La Lu", remain but are obviously tinkered. The run time is longer, which I don't think was nessacary but they fill it well enough.
Solid attempt.
Disney+'s First Big Film is a Let Down
Lady and the Tramp is a remake of the classic animated film and is one of the first original films to air on Disney+. For the past several years Disney has been cranking out these remakes to much success, but with many wondering why these films are remade in the first place. Lady and Tramp's release on Disney+ may prove to be a new home for these remake films, though we might have to see what the future holds.
The Lady and the Tramp live action remake is for the most part just fine. It is a beautiful looking film and manages to look high budget but also looking like a mix between a TV film and a theatrical release. It is also very fun film. It retreads familiar territory and doesn't add much new, but it's still a fun time of you want to use up 2hrs and watch this. The cast is very good and play their roles well especially Tessa Thompson and Justin Theroux.
However, being so familiar maybe to the film's detriment as well as its Tv-esque quality, but it seems that might have been the point. The CGI with the dogs can be awkward at times with the way their mouths move as well as their CGI enhanced eyes, but it still is able to remain cute.
Overall, Lady and Tramp is perfectly fine, if not a little disposable. It doesn't add much in the way of new and doesn't boast anything that makes it a worth while watch, but it you want to take a few hours out of your day to watch it. It couldn't hurt.
The Lady and the Tramp live action remake is for the most part just fine. It is a beautiful looking film and manages to look high budget but also looking like a mix between a TV film and a theatrical release. It is also very fun film. It retreads familiar territory and doesn't add much new, but it's still a fun time of you want to use up 2hrs and watch this. The cast is very good and play their roles well especially Tessa Thompson and Justin Theroux.
However, being so familiar maybe to the film's detriment as well as its Tv-esque quality, but it seems that might have been the point. The CGI with the dogs can be awkward at times with the way their mouths move as well as their CGI enhanced eyes, but it still is able to remain cute.
Overall, Lady and Tramp is perfectly fine, if not a little disposable. It doesn't add much in the way of new and doesn't boast anything that makes it a worth while watch, but it you want to take a few hours out of your day to watch it. It couldn't hurt.
- imjaredross
- Nov 12, 2019
- Permalink
Decent remake but lacking real Disney magic
For the most part I have enjoyed the live action remakes, despite never being quite as good as their original counterparts. Lady and the Tramp is no exception. It is for the most part, an enjoyable movie, beautifully shot, with a wonderful cast and adorable dogs. Although the CGI for the animals talking was a bit subpar.
The real issue I had with the movie is that it just didn't seem to have any heart. It felt like it was just checking off a list based on what took place in the original and that was it.
Albeit you might feel a bit disappointed in the overall execution, I still recommend giving this movie a chance.
- RedFoxVertigo
- Nov 11, 2019
- Permalink
It's just not the same!
You might find this movie somewhat enjoyable, if you haven't seen the original; but in comparison, it is really lacking. Some of the best moments from the original, have been completely removed, while others have just been changed; unfortunately those changes are terrible.
For starters Jock is a girl, who wears stupid looking, human dresses and the wonderful siamese cat song, has substituted with a the boring, uninspired new song, called, "What a Shame". A title that is very apropos.
Do yourself a favor and just watch the original again. Because great movies are never outdated!
For starters Jock is a girl, who wears stupid looking, human dresses and the wonderful siamese cat song, has substituted with a the boring, uninspired new song, called, "What a Shame". A title that is very apropos.
Do yourself a favor and just watch the original again. Because great movies are never outdated!
It's Not 1955 Anymore
When Disney released lady and the tramp (1955) the majority of American households would not have excepted a mixed marriage being portrayed on the screen. However, New Orleans in the early 1900s was one of the most cosmopolitan cities in the world. Many people from the creole population (a mix of European and black peoples - especially French/black), we're frequently Part of the social elite. Mixed marriages, such as the one portrayed in this updated release, were not uncommon at this time and location.
Many of the reviews here are making claims that Disney is being "PC." Actually, they're being accurate to the reality of the time and location. However, based upon these reviews, I guess many Americans don't know the facts about this wonderful city and still have a lot of work left to do when it comes to racial acceptance.
Thank you Disney! It is a delightful movie!
Many of the reviews here are making claims that Disney is being "PC." Actually, they're being accurate to the reality of the time and location. However, based upon these reviews, I guess many Americans don't know the facts about this wonderful city and still have a lot of work left to do when it comes to racial acceptance.
Thank you Disney! It is a delightful movie!
Hmmm.
I wanted to love this, but I could only like it. The cartoon version is definitely a better version and will always remain a classic.
- melanielaidley
- Sep 29, 2020
- Permalink
Errrr....
Am I missing something but since when was it deemed acceptable for an interracial couple, in the 1900s, to marry, live together and furthermore have children without so much of a blink of an eye?
So historically inaccurate that I hardly noticed the dogs! I am getting ever so slightly annoyed that everything on tv has to be PC! Lives for the African-American communities were absolutely appalling back then (still are) and yet here they are being glossed over by the likes of Disney! Children need to be made aware how badly mistreated these people were.
So historically inaccurate that I hardly noticed the dogs! I am getting ever so slightly annoyed that everything on tv has to be PC! Lives for the African-American communities were absolutely appalling back then (still are) and yet here they are being glossed over by the likes of Disney! Children need to be made aware how badly mistreated these people were.
- jenny_mullin
- Apr 9, 2021
- Permalink
Super Sweet
Super sweet movie, yes it a remake, I get it, as everyone in this forum who is complaining. But come on, there are so much more bad movies out there and this one is nothing to complain about. It is sweet and cute, very well done and is time well spent watching a remake. I would absolutely recommend it for a nice evening. The world famous scene is nicely made! Enjoy the movie...
Decent but Confused
Seriously?
If you're going to call it a "re-imagination" then "re-imagine" the whole thing. Don't keep it virtually the same and then change only a few things to fit your agenda. And just in case you were wondering, a Siamese cat is a breed. That should not be offensive and is literally the equivalent of it being a French Bulldog singing "I am French, if you please". Seriously ridiculous. Stop trying to make everything PC and make a good movie for once like Walt used to.
- misspaigenelson
- Nov 15, 2019
- Permalink