Futurama   Planet Express Employee Lounge
The Futurama Message Board

Design and Support by Can't get enough Futurama
Help Search Futurama chat Login Register

PEEL - The Futurama Message Board    It's got a TV!    Wish upon a star - Disney animated films « previous next »
Author Topic: Wish upon a star - Disney animated films  (Read 12816 times)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Print
coffeeBot

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #160 on: 09-08-2011 03:09 »

Disney, why must you take a good thing and rape it until it bleeds?

EDIT: TOTP-out-of-context!
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #161 on: 09-08-2011 03:10 »

Because they use blood for lube.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #162 on: 09-08-2011 03:54 »

Also, what kind of half-assed rapists would they be if it didn't bleed?

And isn't that just a short? I don't know how much raping could be done of a perfectly enjoyable movie with such a compressed run-time.
Smarty

Professor
*
« Reply #163 on: 09-08-2011 03:56 »

I freaked out, then I found out that indeed, it is a short. I'm not as bothered now, although it'll probably be predictable.

I'm just getting sick of Disney and Pixar making sequels that I don't want and are afraid to watch.
homerjaysimpson

Space Pope
****
« Reply #164 on: 09-08-2011 04:16 »

Am I the only person that hates all of plain Disney's CGI films. I couldn't get past 20 mins of Tangled and Bolt had a ok story but they did it so crappy. Same with Blue Sky films.
Smarty

Professor
*
« Reply #165 on: 09-08-2011 04:17 »

I've never seen Bolt...but I don't really have the urge to. It just didn't look interesting to me.
coffeeBot

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #166 on: 09-08-2011 04:19 »

Tangled was good, but I actually preferred The Princess and the Frog.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #167 on: 09-08-2011 04:25 »

I agree with Smarty, Bolt never looked interesting to me. Maybe as a kid it would have but not so much now. And I think since this follow up to Tangled is a short it shouldn't be bogged down by sequel troubles. On the website I found the picture on a lot of people were complaining at how 'Shrek-esque the poster is. Not gonna lie that does ruin the feeling for me. But I don't consider Tangled and Shrek to really be in the same ballpark. A wedding between Rapunzel and Flynn shouldn't be too bad. I mean if they end up making a 3rd sequel where Rapunzel goes back in time or something, then yes the dead horse will definitely be beaten. Let's hope it doesn't get to that point.
Professor Zoidy

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #168 on: 09-08-2011 04:41 »

Bolt is pretty forgettable and if you've seen any other film with a human/animal companion who gets lots you've seen Bolt. It's kinda like Chicken Little; nobody remembers it ten years later or sooner.
Smarty

Professor
*
« Reply #169 on: 09-08-2011 04:45 »

Tangled was good, but I actually preferred The Princess and the Frog.

Oh my goodness, same here. I loved the return to classic Disney animation, and at this moment, it is my favorite traditionally animated Disney film. Yeah, there are the classics, but this just overwhelmed me with happiness. And the music was great, too. Randy Newman is a genius...They need more hand drawn animation!  
coffeeBot

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #170 on: 09-08-2011 06:22 »

The music was indeed awesome, probably my favorite part. I also loved the characters, though. In particular, Dr. Facilier is probably my favorite villain since Scar.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #171 on: 09-08-2011 11:31 »

I didn't much care for The Princess in the Frog (it had some good songs, and the characters were intriguing enough, but something didn't quite work for me), but was shocked at how much I loved Tangled. I don't usually go for CG stuff (not even Pixar's, so I am one of the few people alive who doesn't give a damn one way or the other about, say, the Toy Story franchise), but Tangled was just so vivid and well-done, and funny as hell. And I love Mandy Moore. There, I said it...albeit in small-voice.
GossenPrinz

Poppler
*
« Reply #172 on: 09-08-2011 13:03 »

Tangled was really fine.

Like Gorky said, it was well done. And vivid, too.

The lanterns reminded me of my cousin's wedding where some of his friends did that sort of thing, too.

And the music was okay.

And I simply *love* Aristocats and the Disney Robin Hood.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #173 on: 09-08-2011 13:52 »

I preferred The Princess and the Frog to Tangled although I liked both -but both felt lacking in some department for me. They were so close to being films I would adore and just, somehow, missed the mark.
A big part of this was definitely how flat all of the music was. Friends on the Other Side started out as a brilliant song but soon turned into boring exposition set to music -and that's the musical highlight of The Princess and the Frog which was better than any of the songs in Tangled. It was all functional, but none of it's really lasted with me.

That said and done, Wreck-It Ralph is one of my most-anticipated films at the moment, far ahead of the likes of Brave and Monsters University.
coffeeBot

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #174 on: 09-08-2011 23:51 »

GossenPrinz, I love the Disney version of Robin Hood. I used to watch it obsessively as a kid, and it's one of the two DVDs I have in my room right now- the other is Disney's Alice in Wonderland.
Nutmeg1729

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #175 on: 09-08-2011 23:53 »

I watched Aladdin recently. Gotta love that one.

Disney's Robin Hood really is a wonderful movie as well. I have that on video somewhere smile
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #176 on: 09-09-2011 01:14 »

On the website I found the picture on a lot of people were complaining at how 'Shrek-esque the poster is. Not gonna lie that does ruin the feeling for me.

Dreamworks' marketing has always relied on, to quote Megamind, "the taunting power of [the publicity shots of the characters] eyebrow." Given that this not only works, but also that Dreamworks is well-known for making fun of Disney films, Disney used Tangled as an opportunity to blatantly rip off Dreamworks' marketing style without modifying their actual product one bit.

The Nostalgia Chick discusses it here, I think.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #177 on: 09-09-2011 02:08 »
« Last Edit on: 09-09-2011 06:47 »

I think that Tangled could probably survive a full-lengh sequel. It's one of those films that has a rich and detailed background world we could explore another part of without feling like we were re-treading old ground. Yet, it would have to be very well done. Disney would probably ruin it by trying to put too many elements of the first film in there.

The witch's vengeful ghost prowling the countryside stealing the breath of sleeping people and turning them to stone or something is probably the simplest method of bringing a new threat to the kingdom, but there are tons of other ways that they could pull a second film together - if for example it were widely known that the princess could cure fatal wounds with her tears, then she could end up being kidnapped by some vicious villains and a rescue party headed by Flynn has to explore more of fucked-up-fairytale-land to find her.

There's a lot of stuff that Disney could do to get more mileage out of the world they've built here, and a lot of potential for a sequel or two that are just as entertaining as Tangled was.

Trouble is, Disney have never done sequels particularly brilliantly.

Edit Spelling corrected. Thanks Spacedal.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #178 on: 09-09-2011 05:44 »

TNUK you're teasing me with stories that I know will ever happen. Ah gee-wiz, I'd watch everything you just said in a heartbeat. (I take it you meant ghost not ghast). But I agree unless they get the writing team behind the Toy Story movies, there is no chance that Tangled could get a good, even adequate sequel. Disney doesn't do sequels, something I really do admire, although that is considering I'm only talking theatrical films. When it comes to straight-to-video that's completely different. The animation alone sets all of their sequels back, let alone plot or characterization. I would hate to see Tangled go this root, so seeing this short-film in its glorious animation is a real happy pleasure for me.

On the website I found the picture on a lot of people were complaining at how 'Shrek-esque the poster is. Not gonna lie that does ruin the feeling for me.

Dreamworks' marketing has always relied on, to quote Megamind, "the taunting power of [the publicity shots of the characters] eyebrow." Given that this not only works, but also that Dreamworks is well-known for making fun of Disney films, Disney used Tangled as an opportunity to blatantly rip off Dreamworks' marketing style without modifying their actual product one bit.

The Nostalgia Chick discusses it here, I think.

Oh don't worry, I've watched that video plenty of times. I love Nostalgia Chick, her analysis on the industry always gets me hooked.
Professor Zoidy

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #179 on: 09-09-2011 07:09 »
« Last Edit on: 09-09-2011 07:10 »

On the website I found the picture on a lot of people were complaining at how 'Shrek-esque the poster is. Not gonna lie that does ruin the feeling for me.

Dreamworks' marketing has always relied on, to quote Megamind, "the taunting power of [the publicity shots of the characters] eyebrow." Given that this not only works, but also that Dreamworks is well-known for making fun of Disney films, Disney used Tangled as an opportunity to blatantly rip off Dreamworks' marketing style without modifying their actual product one bit.

The Nostalgia Chick discusses it here, I think.
Entirely covered. Also I'd like to mention the girl in the black? Totally how I act when I'm at Disneyland/World. Also I'd like to say that the eyebrow marketing DreamWorks uses has failed on me. I only saw Megamind because a friend saw it and liked it. The trailer looked God-awful.
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #180 on: 09-09-2011 23:34 »

I think that Tangled could probably survive a full-lengh sequel. It's one of those films that has a rich and detailed background world we could explore another part of without feling like we were re-treading old ground. Yet, it would have to be very well done. Disney would probably ruin it by trying to put too many elements of the first film in there.

I hate sequels a whole bunch, mostly because I have never seen a sequel that did not in some way sully or cheapen what came before it (then again, I say this as an infrequent moviegoer at best). Sometimes you're lucky enough to make a movie or write a book or embark on some other artistic endeavor, and it's so well-done the first time that you simply won't be able to top it. And in that case, the creator has to be honest with him- or herself and say, "Shit, man, I'm really awesome, and I'm really lucky to have gotten such a great reaction to my awesomeness. I ought to just quit while I'm ahead, and try something new and unrelated to this project."

I loved Tangled but would hate a sequel for precisely that reason. You spoil the magic of your initial effort when you try to one-up yourself with a second go-around.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #181 on: 09-09-2011 23:49 »


I hate sequels a whole bunch, mostly because I have never seen a sequel that did not in some way sully or cheapen what came before it

Terminator 2, The Empire Strikes Back, Short circuit 2, Tremors 2, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Harry Potter and the Chamer of Secrets, Gremlins 2, The Dark Knight.

All excellent sequels that added to and built on the preceeding films without cheapening them. It's possible to do, and it does happen. It's just rare.
Spacedal11

Space Pope
****
« Reply #182 on: 09-10-2011 00:41 »

Short Circuit 2? You're really comparing Empire Strikes Back and the Dark Knight with Short Circuit 2? Bitch you crazy.
totalnerduk

DOOP Ubersecretary
**
« Reply #183 on: 09-10-2011 05:03 »

I'm not comparing these films at all. Just pointing out that Short Circuit 2 is a sequel, and that it doesn't cheapen or sully the original.
hobbitboy

Sir Rank-a-Lot
Urban Legend
***
« Reply #184 on: 09-10-2011 14:05 »


 I'd even go so far as adding Shrek 2 to that list.

Don't hate me, Trinity.  I'm just the messenger.
Beanoz4

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #185 on: 09-10-2011 14:16 »


 I'd even go so far as adding Shrek 2 to that list.
Shrek 2 isn't that bad in fact I used to love it even more than the first because it was full of magic and it felt more modern

3 and 4 are the worst tough
Gorky

Space Pope
****
« Reply #186 on: 09-10-2011 14:17 »

Terminator 2, The Empire Strikes Back, Short circuit 2, Tremors 2, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Harry Potter and the Chamer of Secrets, Gremlins 2, The Dark Knight.

All excellent sequels that added to and built on the preceeding films without cheapening them. It's possible to do, and it does happen. It's just rare.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but aren't some of those movies (Star Wars, Indiana Jones, and Harry Potter) part of franchises? Like, the creators knew going in that they would be producing more movies with these same characters and the basic setting or premise?

In that case, I suppose I should qualify my original comment about sequels: I think something that is preconceived as a franchise has the potential for the individual movies to get better as they go along. A franchise, to me, is in some ways analogous to a TV show (you follow the same characters as they grow and develop and find themselves in new and cuh-razy adventures; you add to a fictional world incrementally and in layers), and not as problematic as having one successful stand-alone film and then deciding after the fact that you could make a few more and maybe they'd be all right.

But, again, some movies get it right the first time and don't leave much wiggle room for a sequel. I thought Tangled was great as it was, and I don't need Disney to add to that story and tell me what happens with the characters. In some ways it's more satisfying to use my imagination and picture where Rapunzel and Flynn Eugene will be however many years from the end of the movie, and to fill in the blanks.

So, yeah. Forcing what was obviously a standalone film into a franchise is different from adding more films to the original in what was always intended to be a franchise--the latter usually has a greater success rate than the former.
cyber_turnip

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #187 on: 09-10-2011 20:41 »


I hate sequels a whole bunch, mostly because I have never seen a sequel that did not in some way sully or cheapen what came before it

Terminator 2, The Empire Strikes Back, Short circuit 2, Tremors 2, Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Harry Potter and the Chamer of Secrets, Gremlins 2, The Dark Knight.

All excellent sequels that added to and built on the preceeding films without cheapening them. It's possible to do, and it does happen. It's just rare.

Temple of Doom is utter garbage. Now The Last Crusade, there's a good sequel.
Tofu_Lion

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #188 on: 09-10-2011 21:16 »

1) Lion King
2) Brave Little Toaster
3) Beauty and the Beast
4) Fantasia
5) Little Mermaid
Tedward

Professor
*
« Reply #189 on: 09-10-2011 21:23 »

2) Brave Little Toaster
3) Beauty and the Beast
4) Fantasia

I like the way you think.
Tofu_Lion

Starship Captain
****
« Reply #190 on: 09-10-2011 21:40 »

2) Brave Little Toaster
3) Beauty and the Beast
4) Fantasia

I like the way you think.

I like that you agree with me wink
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #191 on: 11-16-2011 18:52 »
« Last Edit on: 11-16-2011 18:55 »

Update on the new movie Brave:




And the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEHWDA_6e3M







Looks pretty damn awesome. And finally a female lead that isn't a princess but rather seems like a strong person on her own.
Beanoz4

Liquid Emperor
**
« Reply #192 on: 11-16-2011 19:40 »

That looks pretty cool..
Dosn't really interest me so far, I'll have to see more trailers when they come out
hopie4ever

Bending Unit
***
« Reply #193 on: 11-16-2011 20:27 »

Update on the new movie Brave:



And the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEHWDA_6e3M






Looks pretty damn awesome. And finally a female lead that isn't a princess but rather seems like a strong person on her own.


first born of the leader of the clan, that's princess by another name
Kelly Macdonald is great, so that bodes well
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #194 on: 11-16-2011 20:29 »

Not every leader's daughter is a princess.
Xanfor

Moderator
DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #195 on: 11-16-2011 20:58 »

Tell that to the Disney Princess franchise. Yes, I mean you two, Mulan and Pocahontas!
Bend-err

DOOP Secretary
*
« Reply #196 on: 11-16-2011 22:58 »

And even worse, leaving out Princess Eilonwy.
Tastes Like Fry

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #197 on: 11-22-2012 12:27 »
« Last Edit on: 11-22-2012 12:37 »

This thread is relevant to my interests... but talk about old. I renew it, with a classic!

Just watched my newly acquired Pinocchio DVD (platinum edition) $15 - thank you kmart!  love  It was my favourite Disney movie as a child and I knew exactly how the story went. What I didn't realise was the subtle (and some not so subtle) sexual references...


No regard for political correctness


And some really dark and depressive moments


But I'm glad it's got all this, cause otherwise it wouldn't be much of a story. I think this movie is very underrated.

Also... YOLO?!



le edit: Couldn't help myself.

SpaceGoldfish fromWazn

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #198 on: 11-23-2012 06:36 »
« Last Edit on: 11-23-2012 06:42 »

I would say my favourite Disney films are Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty and Snow White, in that order.

I would say my favourite thing about Sleeping Beauty is that it's essentially Snow White featuring the Dwarfs as the protagonists, rather then the goofy sidekicks.  I love how it's about three old lady heroines and their heroic attempts to save their adopted daughter, her true love and an entire kingdom from an evil Sorceress who could easily fry the three of them at once in terms of raw power.  Plucky doesn't even begin to cover it.

As for Tangled... Flynn Rider has ruined me for all flesh and blood human males.  I have to admit, I would have liked Tangled to have been a traditionally animated film (if it had been animated the way the Princess and the Frog had been, maybe it would have been Disney's better bet on winning back the crowd?)  I'm also very excited for Frozen, even though I would have rather they had animated it traditionally as well (and picked a less goofy name, I know they are worried with good reason about The Snow Queen scaring off boys, but c'mon now).

I'm just wondering, now that's Disney has finally done Rapunzel and the Snow Queen, what other fairy tales are left?  I can only think of Vasilissa the Beautiful (and other Baba Yaga tales) or East of the Sun and West of the Moon. 
Tastes Like Fry

Urban Legend
***
« Reply #199 on: 12-03-2012 03:34 »

Hansel and Gretal
Thumbelina

There's another princess one I know of that I don't remember the name of that they could do. It's fitting for Disney as it has evil step-mothers and step-sister, a fairy and a prince. (lol, I  made a type when first writing this, 'prince' came out as 'ponce') There's blessings and cursings and all very moral-like.

I'm sure there's lots more and I'm sure Disney has a research team so they can keep pumping out classics.


I love Tangled! And I don't see why they couldn't animate it the way they did. The laterns in particular give me chills whenever I watch it.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines | some icons from famfamfam
Legal Notice & Disclaimer: "Futurama" TM and copyright FOX, its related entities and the Curiosity Company. All rights reserved. Any reproduction, duplication or distribution of these materials in any form is expressly prohibited. As a fan site, this Futurama forum, its operators, and any content on the site relating to "Futurama" are not explicitely authorized by Fox or the Curiosity Company.
Page created in 0.173 seconds with 18 queries.