Disney Moving Forward with Live-Action Cruella de Vil Movie

Published 11 months ago by

cruella de vil disney movie Disney Moving Forward with Live Action Cruella de Vil Movie

“If she doesn’t scare you, no evil thing will,” or so claims the most famous tune featured in Disney’s 1961 animated feature 101 Dalmatians (which ranks #11 on the adjusted all-time U.S. box office list – see for yourself). The “she” in question is Cruella de Vil, the fur-loving villainess who smokes like a chimney and schemes to kill over a hundred puppies – in order to make what she believes would be the most marvelous of spotted coats.

Disney is planning to revisit the 101 Dalmatians property (based on Dodie Smith’s 1956 novel The Hundred and One Dalmatians), with a live-action movie based around its antagonist. This marks the second occasion on which the Mouse House has revisited this section of its animation vault – having previously adapted 101 Dalmatians into a live-action film in 1996 (which proved lucrative enough to warrant a sequel, 102 Dalmatians, four years later), starring multi-Oscar-nominee Glenn Close as the infamous fashionista with symmetrical black and white hairs.

THR is reporting that the project, titled Cruella, is being scripted by Aline Brosh McKenna, who also co-wrote the studio’s upcoming Cinderella live-action retelling from director Kenneth Branagh and starring Lily James and Cate Blanchett (which is currently in production). Of course, McKenna remains best-known for writing the film adaptation of Lauren Weisberger’s novel The Devil Wears Prada, which stars Meryl Streep (in – what else – an Oscar-nominated role) as the antagonist: an icy and cutthroat fashion magazine editor, loosely inspired by Vogue editor Anna Wintour.

In other words: it should be plain as day, with regard to why Disney has recruited McKenna to write the script for Cruella (Charlie Kaufman was a close second choice – kidding, folks… sadly).

Angelina Jolie as Maleficent Disney Moving Forward with Live Action Cruella de Vil Movie

This newly-established Disney trend – crafting movies based around the studio’s most iconic villainesses – began with the upcoming Maleficent (starring Angelina Jolie in the title role), which arrives in 2014. Screenwriter Linda Woolverton is reported to have envisioned the Sleeping Beauty revisionist film’s script along the lines of author Gregory Maguire’s re-appopriation of the Wicked Witch of the West character in the Wizard of Oz book, Wicked (for short) – wherein the infamous magic-caster serves as the protagonist – and thus, is cast in a more sympathetic light.

Will McKenna favor a similar approach in her Cruella script – bearing in mind that it’s difficult to imagine how Miss de Vil could be “misunderstood” - or, might she go with a reformation story, where Cruella either begins to abandon her vile ways (a la Despicable Me) or proves that she’s not so terrible (a la Devil Wears Prada)? Of course, Cruella may just be the antagonist in her own movie. That’s assuming that McKenna wasn’t hired to be more innovative and try to make Mis de Vil a dodgy, yet charismatic, baddie, along the lines of a (male) character like Captain Barbossa from the Pirates of the Caribbean movies (probably not the case, but still…)

Do you think Cruella can work as anything but the antagonist in a story? Are you interested in seeing a movie focused on her? Or were the 101 Dalmatians live-action films starring Glenn Close – including the sequel, where Cruella was psychologically-conditioned into giving up her evil ways – (more than) enough for you?


We’ll keep you posted on the status of Cruella as more information becomes available.

Source: THR

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: Cruella


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

  1. Do we really need this?

    I like my villains to be ambiguous, not fully explained in a solo movie. It takes away the mystique.

    It’d be like creating a solo film all about Moriarty and why he became the villain we all know and love from the Sherlock Holmes books. Why would anyone want to potentially ruin him by coming up with reasons for his villainy?

  2. They did this already twice with Glenn Close.

    • Don’t remind me. Hated the live action movies. There are some things that are best left either on the page or in animated form, no need to go live action with everything.

      Then again, this is Disney. They made four live action Narnia movies and none of them were as good as they could’ve been.

      • Four? What was the fourth?

        • I’m pretty sure there are only 3 Narnian movies, Dazz. Unless you’re thinking of the BBC serials?

  3. Why?

  4. I don’t get why Disney is remaking all their fairy tales in live-action. Cinderella and now this? I mean… I guess its cool, I would really like them to relate very closely to the animated films, I think if I would ever want Disney to remake something like Milan or Beauty And The Beast in live-action, it would HAVE to feel like the animated movie. Otherwise it ruins my childhood lol.

    • That’s why I refuse to watch the live action version of The Tick, just in case it ruins the pure genius of the comic books and animated series of my childhood.

    • “Oh Bulwinkle…that trick never works!” {Rocky}

  5. Starring one of the bosses at Wal-Mart where I work (short-list narrowed down to about a half dozen contenders….!).

    • I had a night shift boss at one job that I nicknamed Shrek because she looked just like him.

  6. I’ve always thought Cybill Shepherd would make a great live action Cruella. Jean Smart could pull it off too, I think. They both have they right type of bone structure for the part.

    • Jean has the kind of crazy in her resume that could make it work.

  7. No.

    • No, God, no?

  8. With Maleficent is enough. this sounds like crap.

  9. As long as they do it right and keep away from this kiddie friendly crap, these are villains after all.

  10. It’s like I don’t think it could work but then again you never know it could turn out to be a good movie, Disney could make this movie into a prequel showing how she turned into this mad crazy woman who hate animals because I don’t think she was born that way, so let not judge so quickly.

  11. I was cool with Maleficent because that was a colorful, dark character from a story that hasn’t been told in the longest time. Wicked too, because it was so original.

    But it feels like they’re going overboard now. There’s nothing that particularly interested or interest me about Cruella, with no earnest rise or tragic fall due to some character flaw or (pure pretty priuncess who snatches her world away). No hidden story that will help lend perspective or depth to the fact that she’s just a normal woman with no sympathy for animals when it comes to fashion.

    I think a Ursula from Little Mermaid would have been much more interesting. Pirates of the Caribbean & Calypso style.

Be Social, Follow Us!!