There is often a lot of talk about “twin films,” which are movies with essentially the same concept that are produced by different studios, released around the same time, and then pitted against each other to see which comes out on top. Some of the most famous examples of this areAntzvsA Bug’s Life,The PrestigevsThe IllusionistandDeep ImpactvsArmageddon. Well, 2022 saw the idea of “twin films” reaching a new peak, with three different film adaptations of the classic Italian children’s storyPinocchiobeing released over the course of the year. Granted, one of those films was an animated film from Russia, titledPinocchio: A True Story, which featuredthe voice of Pauly Shoreand had almost zero impact beyond the initial absurdity of its trailer. However, the other two adaptations ofPinocchiowere, for very different reasons, some of the most talked about movies of the year.
The first of these two versions ofPinocchioto be released was the Disney live-action adaptation for Disney+. That iteration, directed by Robert Zemeckis, was a remake of the classic animated Disney film from 1940. It took immense inspiration from the 1940 version and attempted to update some of the material for a modern audience. It features a stellar cast, with Tom Hanks starring as Geppetto, alongside the voices of Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Keegan-Michael Key as Jiminy Cricket and Honest John, respectively. The film also stars Cynthia Erivo as the Blue Fairy and Luke Evans as the coachman. This live-actionPinocchiowas initially intended to be a theatrical release, but in late 2020 it was announced that the film’s release would be transitioning into a Disney+ Original.
The other majorPinocchioreleased in 2022 was the stop-motion animated version directed by Guillermo del Toro and Mark Gustafson.Guillermo del Toro’sPinocchiocame a few months after Disney’s, with a brief run in theaters before releasing as a Netflix Original in early December.Pinocchiohas been a passion project of Del Toro’s for a while, with the director talking about the film as far back as 2008. Gustafson, on the other hand, is a stop-motion pro who had previously worked on the 2009 filmFantastic Mr. Fox. The voice cast of the film is just as impressive as the Disney movie, with David Bradley voicing Geppetto, Ewan McGregor as Sebastian J. Cricket, and the rest of the cast being rounded out with the likes of Tilda Swinton, Cate Blanchett, Christoph Waltz, Ron Perlman, John Turturro, Finn Wolfhard, Tim Blake Nelson and Tom Kenny (who coincidentally was also part of the English-language cast of the aforementioned Russian adaptation).
Considering both of these versions ofPinocchiowere released only a few months apart, it’s only natural to want to compare the two of them. Thankfully, these two stories could not be more separate. They are vastly different films that serve as an excellent example of how much a story can be shaped by the tone and approach taken by the creative team behind the project. Now that both of thesePinocchioadaptations are available to watch whenever you want, here’s how the two of them hold up against one another.
Related:Guillermo del Toro Says his Pinocchio is Not Made for Kids
Visual Presentation
The first and most noticeable difference between these two versions ofPinocchiois the manner in which the story is presented visually. The new Disney film tells the story in live-action while taking a lot of visual inspiration from the look and feel of the 1940 animated film. The design of the titular wooden boy is nearly identical to that of the original cartoon, and many of the sets directly recreate those of that film as well. However, despite this being a “live-action” film, a considerable amount of the film was created digitally. A significant portion of the characters and environments of Disney’s 2022Pinocchiowere created entirely on a computer, taking much of the tangibility out of the film.
It’s no wonder why this was the case, as it seems to be the approach Disney takes to nearly all of their films these days. The actors shoot on a basic set and then 90% of what actually ends up on-screen is digitally added during post-production. It makes sense in some situations, but then in others, it’s kind of baffling. This is mainly true in the case of Geppetto’s cat and goldfish, which were, for some reason, not actually real. Instead, they were bad CGI creatures that somehow felt even more cartoony than the talking puppet at the center of the film. If it’s supposed to be a “live-action” adaptation of the story, one would think they would want to incorporate as many tangible and real elements as possible, but that’s plainly not the case. This leads to thisPinocchiofeeling like it wascreated almost entirely in a machine, as it was digitally created, assembled, and packaged. Even though the film is technically “live-action,” it feels about as lifeless as any poorly animated direct-to-DVD Disney sequel.
Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio, on the other hand, is full to the brim with energy, charm and color. It’s almost ironic, as this version of the film, which is actually animated, has so much more personality and feels so much more real than the Disney live-action version. Stop-motion animation can be hard to get right, but this film features some of the most beautiful uses of the medium to ever grace the screen. Whether it be the immense detail etched into the texture of everything, the elaborate movements of the characters, or the intricate twinges of emotion on the characters’ faces, every aspect of the animation is truly awe-inspiring.The film is so meticulously crafted, that you can’t help but be blown away by it all. The stunning cinematography and lighting only help to accentuate just how beautiful the film is.Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchioisn’t just infinitely more visually interesting than the live-action film from Disney; it’s one of the most striking and well-crafted films of the year.
Related:What Disney Can Learn From Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio
Approach to the Story
The new Disney film is one of a slew ofmodern live-action retellingsof the Mouse House’s most recognizable and classic animated films. The film was preceded by the likes ofThe Jungle Book,Beauty and the Beast,The Lion King,Mulan,Cinderella,Lady and the Tramp,Dumbo,Aladdin, and more. While some of those adaptations have been good, they have largely been uninspired attempts at capitalizing on nostalgia. The same can be said for the live-actionPinocchio.
When watching Disney’s 2022 version ofPinocchio, it’s painfully apparent that the film was not produced because someone had an outstanding love for the original story or film. It was produced simply because it could be, and Disney was just looking for another entry in their live-action remake canon. They were attempting to make a quick buck off the love that people have for the film they made 80 years ago. It reeks of a studio executive’s decision to throw money at the wall, rather than somebody’s genuine artistic desire to tell a story they are passionate about. The result is a bad script that panders to its audience by shooting as many references at them as possible in the hopes that they won’t notice the frailty and lack of depth in the story actually being told. There’s a reason that the 1940 film is one of Disney’s all-time classics. There’s actually heart, creativity, and passion poured into it. The same cannot be said of this live-action iteration, which is little more than a failed attempt to copy off someone else’s homework.
As forGuillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio, the approach to the story is essentially the exact opposite. Firstly, there’s a clear passion for the material in it. Care and effort are put into the screenplay, as it is crafted intoan emotionally resonant and complex story. It respects the source material from Carlo Collodi while still bringing new life and ideas to it. One of the story threads that stands out as a major change is the decision to set the story during amidst the rise of fascism in Europe in the lead-up to the Second World War. The team behind the film knew that the heart of thePinocchiostory is a conversation about what it means to be human, and by including the fascist regime of Mussolini in the film, they are able to play even further into those themes with a real-world sensibility.
Some people have been saying that this approach toPinocchiomakes Del Toro’s version not a children’s film, and they are correct. Asthe director has been sayingall year, the medium of animation can be used for so much more than just children’s stories. Serious stories can be, and have been, told through animation.Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchiois one of the best recent examples of this. That’s not to say that the film cannot be watched by children; it certainly can be. But it doesn’t shy away from some pretty big ideas and conversations, such as the fragility of life and the evils of prejudice.Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchiois one of the most finely crafted, well-written and satisfying film experiences that 2022 had to offer. It’s the kind of stuff that can only be achieved through a genuine passion and love for filmmaking and storytelling.
