DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:58 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1391 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:54 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 5:33 am
Posts: 4264
Location: UK
Any more news on the box office for Britain ?

EDIT: Just read IMDB and Tangled is #1 !!!! With £5.11 milion !!!! I'm not good with box office .... is that good ?

I seriously can't remember the last time a Disney Animated Classic was the UK no.1 .... pretty sure TPATF wasnt ?

_________________
… The Film That Gave Voice To A Whole Generation …

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:01 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:02 pm
Posts: 4196
Location: one with the wind and sky
Disney Duster wrote:
Enigmawing, I didn’t say it was a fact Tangled was sh*ting all over Walt’s legacy, I said it was a fact that previous versions of Disney films felt like the real versions of those stories to people.

Disney Duster wrote:
But this time, they broke it, they did something un-Disneyfied but called it Disney, but I'll keep defending the Disney way that's getting s*** upon these days.

*feels confused*

_________________
Image Blu-rays! The artist formerly known as enigmawing.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:08 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 4471
Location: The Netherlands
enigmawing wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
Enigmawing, I didn’t say it was a fact Tangled was sh*ting all over Walt’s legacy, I said it was a fact that previous versions of Disney films felt like the real versions of those stories to people.

Disney Duster wrote:
But this time, they broke it, they did something un-Disneyfied but called it Disney, but I'll keep defending the Disney way that's getting s*** upon these days.

*feels confused*


I was wondering why it took DD so long, but naturally an essay was in the works. This time conveniently ignoring my point: stop ranting. Not happening.

But as can be seen above, it's also confusing.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:33 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:59 am
Posts: 4790
Big One and I are also confuse by the long ass rant. Enigmawing's point is one in particular is confusing and contradictory.

_________________
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Tangled
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:35 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 4471
Location: The Netherlands
Disney Duster wrote:
Tangled is not as bad as those other things you said, but in a way it’s worse because it takes Disney’s old traditional subject matter and then twists it, like twisting what Disney is and stood for. In other words, I can think of Chicken Little as it’s own thing, not the original story. But Tangled makes me think, “So it’s supposed to be the original story, but it’s not, and it doesn’t feel like it? What?!” Anyway it doesn’t matter because it’s all bad, Tangled just came out now, so that’s what I’m talking about now.


:lol: I don't even know what to say here. Is there an argument in here somewhere? I can't tell. For now we'll just keep Beauty and the Beast: Enchanted Christmas in place as the more offensive film in regards to Walt's legacy. Whatever that even means.

I'll let the Nostalgia Chick explain what's wrong with it. A reminder of a time, not so long ago, when the Disney legacy was actually (and almost literally) being shit on: http://thatguywiththeglasses.com/videol ... 5171-ep022

_________________
Image


Last edited by PatrickvD on Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:45 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 1:33 pm
Posts: 1546
Location: New Jersey, USA
Was P!nk's song "Trouble" in the movie Tangeled? Or only in the trailer?? :?

_________________
Check Out My Disney Music Videos now in HQ! :mickeyface:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:46 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 4471
Location: The Netherlands
Matt wrote:
Was P!nk's song "Trouble" in the movie Tangeled? Or only in the trailer?? :?


just the trailer. :)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 5:50 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 9:59 am
Posts: 4790
Matt wrote:
Was P!nk's song "Trouble" in the movie Tangeled? Or only in the trailer?? :?



Image

_________________
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:10 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:06 am
Posts: 7966
<iframe title="YouTube video player" class="youtube-player" type="text/html" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/pCadsU20gkI" frameborder="0" allowFullScreen></iframe>

_________________
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:11 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:35 pm
Posts: 4749
Location: The Netherlands
Disney's Divinity wrote:
I’m actually rather ambivalent towards Pixar, if you can believe that. The hostility isn’t directed towards them, but a general atmosphere that people can’t possibly find fault with them [...], and, if they do, there must of course always be some bias involved. [...] You can’t genuinely dislike Pixar/a Pixar film without being questioned, lambasted, or distorted; there's no "everyone can have opinions" when it comes to them. [...]

Hmm... I don't know that's true. Or did you ever criticize Pixar, found people disagreeing with you for just reasons and therefore you think *any* criticism of Pixar is treated in an unfair way? I'm not saying this is the case. Fanbases can be annoying. God knows I have experience with it. Try to say on a forum dedicated to Disney comics that you dislike the artist Don Rosa. Soon, you'll be battling one flamewar after another. So, I can understand your attitude, but one must be careful not to confuse the behavior of the fan community with the actual films (like some member of UD has done with e.g. The Godfather).

Disney's Divinity wrote:
Besides, that comment was just my way of defending DDuster from having his other ideas discredited on the basis that he doesn’t like Pixar.

Believe me, Duster gets his ideas discredited for a whole plethora of other reasons and rightfully so. :D


Rapunzel wrote:
Snow White is not 100% like the Snow White stories being told before Disney made his film. During the renaissance all of the films are modified from the original or from the well known versions of the stories. The Little Mermaid is completely changed. Beauty and the Beast is changed. I will try not to touch on Hunchback, but my goodness gracious it is NOT the tragic novel that Victor Hugo wrote.

I don't think people should complain about changes in one movie (Tangled) when every single other movie made also has HUGE changes.

Duster's complaints are completely arbitrary! (Is that a word in English?) I mean that he only complains about story changes on films that he personally didn't like; and he's okay with story changes on Disney films he does like or which were made by Walt personally (because, as we all know, Walt was infallible, like the Pope). It's personal preference disguised as 'objective' criticism. He then desperatly seeks 'arguments' to support his claims, but they're far-fetched and 'made up'.

Disney Duster, reading your posts makes it look like you're 'afraid' to admit you like a current Disney films; it makes it look like you're 'afraid' to admit you like anything to doesn't fit the "traditional" Disney mold. Why is that a bad thing? Honestly, I would like to know. Why must everything stay exactly the way it was when you were a kid? Why can't you enjoy Rapunzel for what it is?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 02, 2011 10:49 pm 
Offline
Special Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:28 pm
Posts: 305
I hear ya about not being able to get a semi-negative word in edgewise re: Pixar, DDivinity. I love most of Pixar's work, but I despise UP with a passion and am constantly told I am "soulless" because I don't like it. Yeah, the beginning made me cry....but the rest of the film ruined it for me. :roll:

_________________
<a href="http://s1116.photobucket.com/albums/k567/phan258/?action=view¤t=sig2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i1116.photobucket.com/albums/k567/phan258/sig2.jpg" border="0" alt="Photobucket"></a>


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:26 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 7037
Location: America
enigmawing wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
Enigmawing, I didn’t say it was a fact Tangled was sh*ting all over Walt’s legacy, I said it was a fact that previous versions of Disney films felt like the real versions of those stories to people.

Disney Duster wrote:
But this time, they broke it, they did something un-Disneyfied but called it Disney, but I'll keep defending the Disney way that's getting s*** upon these days.

*feels confused*

THIS must be used as an example for people not reading what I say the correct way, or more probably, not carefully enough. Here is the sentence with extra emphasis to show you:

"I didn’t say it was a fact Tangled was sh*ting all over Walt’s legacy, I said it was a fact that previous versions of Disney films felt like the real versions of those stories to people."

If you still don't get it, that's you guys.


Goliath wrote:
Duster's complaints are completely arbitrary! (Is that a word in English?) I mean that he only complains about story changes on films that he personally didn't like; and he's okay with story changes on Disney films he does like or which were made by Walt personally (because, as we all know, Walt was infallible, like the Pope). It's personal preference disguised as 'objective' criticism. He then desperatly seeks 'arguments' to support his claims, but they're far-fetched and 'made up'.

Disney Duster, reading your posts makes it look like you're 'afraid' to admit you like a current Disney films; it makes it look like you're 'afraid' to admit you like anything to doesn't fit the "traditional" Disney mold. Why is that a bad thing? Honestly, I would like to know. Why must everything stay exactly the way it was when you were a kid? Why can't you enjoy Rapunzel for what it is?


Ah, here is finally the proof you're wrong about that. I did like some of Tangled. When I was watching it, I was sad and happy at the same time. The title instantly dampened my mood. I felt highs and lows during the whole thing, and it was because of the humour or no Rapunzel plant and Flynn being a thief or Rapunzel being a princess or Mother Gothel not doing what she did in the original. I wanted to like it so badly, but I couldn't. I don't see why Disney had to do this to it's fans and what it is. What's the point of the company name surviving if who they really are dies?

So I'm not doing what you said I'm doing. I can honestly tell you that.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:03 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:02 pm
Posts: 4196
Location: one with the wind and sky
*shrug*

Which lead to you saying it's why Disney is being s*** on in your matter-of-fact tone. If I'm not being "correct" enough in how I've read your posts, perhaps your self-proclaimed authority on Walt's modern day opinions has finally gotten to me.

_________________
Image Blu-rays! The artist formerly known as enigmawing.
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 1:20 am 
Offline
Special Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 8:39 am
Posts: 471
Disney Duster wrote:
Ah, here is finally the proof you're wrong about that. I did like some of Tangled. When I was watching it, I was sad and happy at the same time. The title instantly dampened my mood. I felt highs and lows during the whole thing, and it was because of the humour or no Rapunzel plant and Flynn being a thief or Rapunzel being a princess or Mother Gothel not doing what she did in the original. I wanted to like it so badly, but I couldn't. I don't see why Disney had to do this to it's fans and what it is. What's the point of the company name surviving if who they really are dies?

So I'm not doing what you said I'm doing. I can honestly tell you that.


Hm... well would you have wanted Flynn to have his eyes scratched out and Rapunzel to bare two children that she took care of in a distant desert until Flynn stumbled upon her? The original story was really dark and inappropriate for a Disney flick. On top of that, the entire original story happens in a tower.. and that's it. I don't see how they would make a movie like that.

Disney made a movie full of wonder and magic, just like they were supposed to. It was charming and had a ton of endearing characters. I can not believe you would go into a movie and instantly dislike it because of the title. I also think it's a bit strange that you're complaining about the humor of Rapunzel when many of the films from the 90's had the same. On top of that, most of the witty puns and gags were only in the trailers and didn't even make the final cut.

I know people have argued this with you before, but the majority of DAC's that are based on fairytales are actually nothing like them. As a company, they've taken several liberties and deviated from every one of the original plots to adapt it to flow well as a film rather than a work of literature. The fact the Rapunzel was not a peasant is so insignificant to the moral of the story that I find it strange it would bother you. Both the message of Rapunzel as well as the classic Disney "Love concurs all" theme have been displayed prominently in this film.. It's a true tribute to the most warmly accepted DAC's, taking bits of each to make one heartfelt, modern but classic film.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:14 am 
Offline
Limited Edition

Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Goliath wrote:
Duster's complaints are completely arbitrary! (Is that a word in English?) I mean that he only complains about story changes on films that he personally didn't like; and he's okay with story changes on Disney films he does like or which were made by Walt personally (because, as we all know, Walt was infallible, like the Pope). It's personal preference disguised as 'objective' criticism. He then desperatly seeks 'arguments' to support his claims, but they're far-fetched and 'made up'.


This sums it up perfectly for me. It always seems that Disney Duster is happy to rewrite history in a way that he think backs up his arguments.

enigmawing wrote:
Which lead to you saying it's why Disney is being s*** on in your matter-of-fact tone. If I'm not being "correct" enough in how I've read your posts, perhaps your self-proclaimed authority on Walt's modern day opinions has finally gotten to me.


I think it's gotten to a lot of people now. Once again, Disney Duster your argument makes you seem like you think your the guardian of Disney tradition and have an insight into Walt's mind. I don't think you believe that but I think now it's time to stop telling the rest of us that we're wrong and accept that on some points, we simply don't have to agree with you.

_________________
We're not going to Guam, are we?


Last edited by DisneyAnimation88 on Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:49 am, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:40 am 
Offline
Special Edition

Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 5:06 pm
Posts: 249
Tomorrow, tomorrow.........I CANT WAIT¡¡¡
:shock:

_________________
VISITTTTT, SPANISH DISNEY FORUM
http://animacionud.mforos.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:47 am 
Offline
Collector's Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 7:22 am
Posts: 948
Location: Buffalo
Disney Duster's logic, or lack thereof is like that of other classic cartoon fanatics where they over-romanticize the past and hold the present to a ridiculous standard. Whatever point they are out to prove too often gets blurred in the sport of winning an argument.

If you read David Koenig's "Mouse Under Glass", he provides listings of nearly all the animated features up to Hunchback that compares the final Disney screenplays to their original source material. Pinocchio is a heavily remixed morsel of the original Collodi story. Alice in Wonderland was the result of Walt spending 15 years trying to make a workable movie out of Carroll's two stories, only to get skinned for "ruining a literary classic" anyway. The Jungle Book has almost nothing to do with the Kipling tales, largely because Walt rejected Bill Peet's screenplay.

Just as a few examples. To those who might've seen those films back in the day, and were perhaps already familiar with the source material, and might've also seen a few previous movie adaptions, Disney's relatively new brand of storytelling must've taken some getting used to.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 11:58 am 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 1:21 pm
Posts: 90
Goliath wrote:
Duster's complaints are completely arbitrary! (Is that a word in English?) I mean that he only complains about story changes on films that he personally didn't like; and he's okay with story changes on Disney films he does like or which were made by Walt personally (because, as we all know, Walt was infallible, like the Pope). It's personal preference disguised as 'objective' criticism. He then desperately seeks 'arguments' to support his claims, but they're far-fetched and 'made up'.


I think I am going to have to agree with you.


Ariel is not at all like the mermaid in the original story. Her wants and desires are very different. A soul vs life on land. The original little mermaid wanted a soul and had no restrictions as to her visitations to the surface after her birthday. She is an entirely different character and the story is very different.

However, the change in Rapunzel's and Flynn's statuses really have no bearing on the story itself. All you need do is have her mother be the queen who wants rampion from the witches garden and who cares what the prince is. Thief or prince, as long as he finds and falls in love with Rapunzel it doesn't change the story. I don't know why anyone would make a big deal out of Rapunzel not being a peasant.

What about The Princess and the Frog? That story isn't the same in any way whatsoever from the frog prince fairy tales. Did we get a big argument about this too? The girl in that story was ALWAYS a princess. But Disney made her a regular girl. In America. Who turns into a frog.



I think this whole argument is silly when every single Disney film has many changes and often drastically modified story lines and characters.

_________________
"you came for your darling, but the sweet bird sits no longer in the nest, and sings no more"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:47 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 6674
Location: North Carolina Gender: Male
Rapunzel wrote:
What about The Princess and the Frog? That story isn't the same in any way whatsoever from the frog prince fairy tales. Did we get a big argument about this too? The girl in that story was ALWAYS a princess. But Disney made her a regular girl. In America. Who turns into a frog.
Yes. Yes, we did.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 03, 2011 3:26 pm 
Offline
Gold Collection

Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 12:45 pm
Posts: 82
New tangled pics:

the real back of the Tangled combo pack!:

http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/4347 ... omboar.jpg

A article about tangled:

http://fotos.miarroba.es/fo/7ca3/1E4DAB ... 45D03B.jpg

http://fotos.miarroba.es/fo/467f/254DAB ... 45D054.jpg

http://fotos.miarroba.es/fo/67ee/1D4DAB ... 45D070.jpg

http://fotos.miarroba.es/fo/6532/204DAB ... 45D085.jpg

http://fotos.miarroba.es/fo/f841/274DAB ... 45D0A7.jpg

http://fotos.miarroba.es/fo/82e3/244DAB ... 45D0B6.jpg


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 1391 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Avaitor, Baidu [Spider], Yahoo [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group