DVDizzy.com

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

It is currently Tue Aug 11, 2020 6:42 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 423 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 11:46 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 11287
Location: America
Goliath wrote:
Joe Grant thought otherwise. He thought Walt would have loved and embraced CGI animation. And he knew Walt. So, by your very own reasoning, he must be right. So Walt must've loved Pixar. There, we solved it.

It doesn't mean he would'v loved Pixar or that Grant was right. And I already agreed that it was likely Walt would like some CGI.

Dr. Frankenollie, you forget that I already pointed out Walt did nature and talking animals and fairy tales over, and over, and over, in many films.

And if you haven't deduced that I've been a member here long enough to see I'm not a troll...your certainly no doctor.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 7:19 am 
Offline
In The Vaults
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 6:19 am
Posts: 2704
Disney Duster wrote:
Dr. Frankenollie, you forget that I already pointed out Walt did nature and talking animals and fairy tales over, and over, and over, in many films.

And if you haven't deduced that I've been a member here long enough to see I'm not a troll...your certainly no doctor.


Yes, but fairy tales and nature don't make up what Disney is (and what the Disney Essence/Feel is, if there actually is one), the thing that Disney was and sometimes still is (thanks to Pixar and some recent efforts by the studio) is being innovative and bringing out the innocent child in all of us, as proven by the many quotes by Walt I used in my previous post.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 11:16 am 
Offline
Limited Edition

Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:00 pm
Posts: 1088
DisneyDuster wrote:
It doesn't mean he would'v loved Pixar or that Grant was right. And I already agreed that it was likely Walt would like some CGI


I'm sorry but what is the difference between Floyd Norman and Joe Grant? As far as I'm aware, Joe worked with Walt longer than Floyd did so if Floyd can somehow know that Walt would think, then surely so would Joe?

DisneyDuster wrote:
But Disney is doing really un-Disney things like hiring a foul-mouthed comic like Sarah Silverman and the Simpsons is not something Walt would approve (c'mon now, do any of you really think he would approve of that? I mean do any of you really truly think that?).


He might not have approved of a cocky, brash and untested young executive like Jeffrey Katzenberg taking charge of Disney animation but I have a feeling he wouldn't have minded the success of the films made under Katzenberg. Walt Disney readily admitted that he swore, drank and smoked with the best of them, so Sarah Silverman's casting is not a concern to me personally. As for Rich Moore, give the man a chance at directing a Disney film before you dismiss him or judge him too heavily by his past work.

DrFrankenollie wrote:
Firstly, I don't see why 'Mort' is still being discussed even though it's not happening


There are rumours that Disney are looking to resurrect the project if they can now make a deal regarding the rights.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 12:43 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 2377
Location: The Land of Lincoln
OMG PEOPLE! You are all fighting with Duster about nothing in 3 THREADS!!! On top of that it's an argument I feel like I've been reading over and over and over and over again for the past few years! I know I'm not a prominent member on the forum, but I visit the site daily to read whats new and I'm just getting mad at all of you for even remarking and feeding into this ridiculous argument. It's not as if he's saying anything new and shocking, we all understand how he feels about the disney company and how seemingly one sided his opinions are at times. Why do we need to constantly fill multiple threads with this back and forth garbage.

It makes all of you that argue against him look just as bad as you seem to think he does.

As for Mort, I cannot be more excited that this project may get produced. The whole idea of it seems so fresh for Disney, and I think its a good time for the company to try something new and little weird. After all, variety is the spice of life! :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:41 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:27 pm
Posts: 2841
DisneyAnimation88 wrote:
As for Rich Moore, give the man a chance at directing a Disney film before you dismiss him or judge him too heavily by his past work.

It's also worth mentioning that both Brad Bird and David Silverman have had hands at directing Disney-produced animated features. And what have they also worked on? That's right, The Simpsons. However, I don't recall the yellow family's brand of humour crossing over into Monsters Inc, The Incredibles and Ratatouille.

_________________
"There are two wolves and they are always fighting. One is darkness and despair. The other is light and hope. Which wolf wins? Whichever one you feed." - Casey Newton, Tomorrowland


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 1:51 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition

Joined: Wed Sep 22, 2010 1:00 pm
Posts: 1088
singerguy04 wrote:
As for Mort, I cannot be more excited that this project may get produced. The whole idea of it seems so fresh for Disney, and I think its a good time for the company to try something new and little weird. After all, variety is the spice of life!


I agree with you. If you haven't read the book yet, I would definitely recommend it; the beginning is a little slow but the story is excellent. I hope that the issues with the rights are eventually sorted out and the film is made because I think it really could be unlike any film Disney has produced before.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 3:08 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:17 pm
Posts: 6861
singerguy04 wrote:
OMG PEOPLE! You are all fighting with Duster about nothing in 3 THREADS!!! On top of that it's an argument I feel like I've been reading over and over and over and over again for the past few years! I know I'm not a prominent member on the forum, but I visit the site daily to read whats new and I'm just getting mad at all of you for even remarking and feeding into this ridiculous argument. It's not as if he's saying anything new and shocking, we all understand how he feels about the disney company and how seemingly one sided his opinions are at times. Why do we need to constantly fill multiple threads with this back and forth garbage.

It makes all of you that argue against him look just as bad as you seem to think he does.


I think this song pretty much sums it up....


<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/xz6OGVCdov8" frameborder="0"></iframe>

_________________
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below

http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 5:47 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:35 pm
Posts: 4749
Location: The Netherlands
Disney Duster wrote:
It doesn't mean he would'v loved Pixar or that Grant was right.

Okay, so when Floyd Norman says the title should've been 'Rapunzel', thatautomatically means that's what Walt would've thought, too, because he knew Walt and would never say anything that deviates from what Walt would think? But when Joe Grant, who also knew Walt, said something he thought Walt would think, this doesn't automatically mean Grant was right, because...? What's the difference between Norman and Grant? Why does Norman get a special status in your book? Because he agrees with you?

Disney Duster wrote:
And I already agreed that it was likely Walt would like some CGI.

Oh, I see, so now you have "adjusted your argument" to say that Walt liked *some* CGI. I guess that would have to be the special "Disneyfied" CGI with extra "Disney Essence"?

Disney Duster wrote:
Dr. Frankenollie, you forget that I already pointed out Walt did nature and talking animals and fairy tales over, and over, and over, in many films.

Yeah, but repeating things over and over doesn't make you right. Jeez, didn't you ever take a debate class in high school?

Disney Duster wrote:
And if you haven't deduced that I've been a member here long enough to see I'm not a troll...your certainly no doctor.

I'm sorry, but there's more intelligence in a single word Dr. Frankenollie writes than in all of your posts in this thread combined.


singerguy04 wrote:
OMG PEOPLE! You are all fighting with Duster about nothing in 3 THREADS!!! On top of that it's an argument I feel like I've been reading over and over and over and over again for the past few years! I know I'm not a prominent member on the forum, but I visit the site daily to read whats new and I'm just getting mad at all of you for even remarking and feeding into this ridiculous argument. It's not as if he's saying anything new and shocking, we all understand how he feels about the disney company and how seemingly one sided his opinions are at times. Why do we need to constantly fill multiple threads with this back and forth garbage.

Because this forum was almost DEAD until Duster started arguing again. So, debating this provides new life to a forum that had pretty much been ABANDONED the past few weeks. Besides, there's new members here who haven't had the chance to meet Duster, so why not just let them? I mean, I hate all the constant posting of rumors by anonimous nobodies from unreliable websites that cause page after page of unfounded speculation, but you don't see me harping on about that, now do you?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 6:27 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:02 pm
Posts: 4304
Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
Goliath wrote:
Besides, there's new members here who haven't had the chance to meet Duster, so why not just let them?

Yeah . . . sometimes people have to learn things for themselves. ;)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 7:49 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 2377
Location: The Land of Lincoln
enigmawing wrote:
Goliath wrote:
Besides, there's new members here who haven't had the chance to meet Duster, so why not just let them?

Yeah . . . sometimes people have to learn things for themselves. ;)


Then may I suggest someone writing an essay that combines all of Duster's posts, along with all your responses, so that people can catch up. I'd rather read speculation and rumors about different topics than read about Disney Essence and whether it exists or not in multiple threads. Is that really bringing new life to the forum? It just seems like a bunch of grumpy old forum members running around in circles. It's also been my observation that many of the people who argue with Duster are the same people who've been here for a while as opposed to newer members. So I guess the questions really lies into what brings Disney fans to a disney forum, and what makes them want to be a part of said community?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:08 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:17 pm
Posts: 6861
singerguy04 wrote:
enigmawing wrote:
Goliath wrote:
Besides, there's new members here who haven't had the chance to meet Duster, so why not just let them?

Yeah . . . sometimes people have to learn things for themselves. ;)


Then may I suggest someone writing an essay that combines all of Duster's posts, along with all your responses, so that people can catch up. I'd rather read speculation and rumors about different topics than read about Disney Essence and whether it exists or not in multiple threads. Is that really bringing new life to the forum? It just seems like a bunch of grumpy old forum members running around in circles. It's also been my observation that many of the people who argue with Duster are the same people who've been here for a while as opposed to newer members. So I guess the questions really lies into what brings Disney fans to a disney forum, and what makes them want to be a part of said community?




Image

I'm an honorary member due to health problems that usually don't have of others at the age of 24....the doctor told me one time I was SOB...not that sob....that's medical term for Shortness of Breath... :P

and to be totally random

Image

_________________
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below

http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 8:12 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 8:35 pm
Posts: 4749
Location: The Netherlands
singerguy04 wrote:
Then may I suggest someone writing an essay that combines all of Duster's posts, along with all your responses, so that people can catch up. I'd rather read speculation and rumors about different topics than read about Disney Essence and whether it exists or not in multiple threads. Is that really bringing new life to the forum? It just seems like a bunch of grumpy old forum members running around in circles. It's also been my observation that many of the people who argue with Duster are the same people who've been here for a while as opposed to newer members. So I guess the questions really lies into what brings Disney fans to a disney forum, and what makes them want to be a part of said community?

What exactly is your problem? Dr. Frankenollie is a new member and he's discussing with Duster. And I'm participating, because...

Well, because I *can*. I don't have to defend myself to you. If you don't like these posts, feel free to skip them. Just scroll past them. It'll take you two seconds out of your day, but is that so much that you need to bitch endlessly about this? No, we're not writing an essay for Duster; we're just going to continue discussing. And if you don't like it: goodbye! Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. :wave:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 10:57 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 8:02 am
Posts: 11287
Location: America
singerguy, sorry Goliath was a little mean to you, you didn't deserve that. : P Well, maybe Goliath was just joking...let's hope.

Dr Frankenollie wrote:
Yes, but fairy tales and nature don't make up what Disney is (and what the Disney Essence/Feel is, if there actually is one), the thing that Disney was and sometimes still is (thanks to Pixar and some recent efforts by the studio) is being innovative and bringing out the innocent child in all of us, as proven by the many quotes by Walt I used in my previous post.

Well, since nature, animals, fairy tales, and fantasy, were part of so, so, so, so many Disney things, I do think it could be called a big part of the Disney essence. At least a part of it, you know? And Walt did sometimes talk about "making the fairy tale fashionable again", wrhy he relied on "old tales" and other things about fairy tales and animals in other quotes, not just about innovation or the child in all of us and such. I can't dig every single one of them up right here right now, but Walt said things like that.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:
I'm sorry but what is the difference between Floyd Norman and Joe Grant? As far as I'm aware, Joe worked with Walt longer than Floyd did so if Floyd can somehow know that Walt would think, then surely so would Joe?

I never said that Floyd Norman was 100% right about what Walt would want, but that it was very likely he might know. If you can say that it doesn't mean Floyd was right, then I can do the same thing and say nothing means Joe Grant was right.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:
He might not have approved of a cocky, brash and untested young executive like Jeffrey Katzenberg taking charge of Disney animation but I have a feeling he wouldn't have minded the success of the films made under Katzenberg. Walt Disney readily admitted that he swore, drank and smoked with the best of them, so Sarah Silverman's casting is not a concern to me personally. As for Rich Moore, give the man a chance at directing a Disney film before you dismiss him or judge him too heavily by his past work.

But Walt never put any of that into his entertainment. But Sarah Silverman and all the others did. I know that Rich Moore could do something that wasn't so bad...what I don't understand is why the Disney studio is giving him the chance in the first place, because I thought it was about the priniciple of it all, that you don't hire people who make things that are so against what your company is about in their past work. As far as I know Walt never hired people who made such suggestive swearing violent anti-Disney entertainment in their past.

estefan wrote:
It's also worth mentioning that both Brad Bird and David Silverman have had hands at directing Disney-produced animated features. And what have they also worked on? That's right, The Simpsons. However, I don't recall the yellow family's brand of humour crossing over into Monsters Inc, The Incredibles and Ratatouille.

Ah...Pixar movies, not Disney. The people at Pixar doen't have to look to the practices of a man who was the original head of their company before they came along and the kind of people that man hired.

Goliath wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
It doesn't mean he would'v loved Pixar or that Grant was right.

Okay, so when Floyd Norman says the title should've been 'Rapunzel', thatautomatically means that's what Walt would've thought, too, because he knew Walt and would never say anything that deviates from what Walt would think? But when Joe Grant, who also knew Walt, said something he thought Walt would think, this doesn't automatically mean Grant was right, because...? What's the difference between Norman and Grant? Why does Norman get a special status in your book? Because he agrees with you?

You do this all the time. You exaggerate what I said, not saying what I really said, which was: that Floyd Norman worked with Walt and might know what he wanted in cases like the title of a film which might be the reason for his voicing what title he wanted because we know he wouldn't go against Walt but would be for Walt. None of that is this "never say anything that deviates from what Walt would think" stuff. I already explained above about the Joe Grant thing.

Goliath wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
And I already agreed that it was likely Walt would like some CGI.

Oh, I see, so now you have "adjusted your argument" to say that Walt liked *some* CGI. I guess that would have to be the special "Disneyfied" CGI with extra "Disney Essence"?

That's not an adjustment. You can find how I never before said anything like "Walt would never ever like CGI", just that he probably wouldn't like Pixar, as is the specific things Pixar does.

Goliath wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
And if you haven't deduced that I've been a member here long enough to see I'm not a troll...your certainly no doctor.

I'm sorry, but there's more intelligence in a single word Dr. Frankenollie writes than in all of your posts in this thread combined.

No, that's untrue. :)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:32 am 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:08 pm
Posts: 164
Location: Somewhere
Quote:
Ah...Pixar movies, not Disney. The people at Pixar doen't have to look to the practices of a man who was the original head of their company before they came along and the kind of people that man hired.

Yeah, because Pixar is so well known for producing movies with swearing, rude jokes and things not intended for the whole family.

You know, it is fun to have discussions with you, you just keep giving everybody chances to come with well thought up arguments that get taken out context quite easily.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 12:42 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 7:40 pm
Posts: 2377
Location: The Land of Lincoln
It's ok to derail multiple threads at once for the same argument, but not ok for someone to share how they feel about it? If I'd have to join the conversation I'd just think that both sides are right. Duster takes it kinda overboard while others, like Goliath, take their reactions kinda overboard. I understand it's all about opinions and so forth, and I'm not trying to say that you can't discuss it at all. I know I said I'm tired of it, and I am, but why does this one issue seem to take over so much of the forum. For years I HAVE been just scrolling over it and ignoring it all, but is it wrong for me to say that IMO it's a little silly? Especially when people are calling Duster names/crazy/whatever while "discussing" this issue with him. I feel that in my 2 earlier posts (which I'm still trying to understand constitutes as endless bitching) I clearly addressed that multi-thread thing as my problem.

Goliath, I will never ask you to defend yourself for your opinion. You have every right to it! :) But, then why does it seem that you are in response trying to make me defend mine? I don't agree with the endless posts that just repeat what's been said over and over in the same thread. Is that very different than you responding to Duster at all? Oh, and the whole "I can post whatever I want because I can" attitude really makes you seem a bit contradictory, especially when the whole post is geared at you basically telling me to shove it and exit the conversation. Now, this is going to be my last post on the matter but I needed to say something so that you, Goliath, weren't under the impression that I caved to your ignorant post above.

I respect the both of you, and find many of your posts very insightful. You are also two of the most enthusiastic Disney fans I've seen here, but there is absolutely no arguing with either of you because you both can seem increasingly thick-headed to what the other is saying. I just wish that you'd both see that and move on. I also hope that neither of you take offense to that statement, because I am honestly saying it as someone who generally likes the both of you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 1:07 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:28 am
Posts: 2564
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 5:45 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 1:34 pm
Posts: 4813
Location: The Netherlands
Disney Duster wrote:
Goliath wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
And I already agreed that it was likely Walt would like some CGI.

Oh, I see, so now you have "adjusted your argument" to say that Walt liked *some* CGI. I guess that would have to be the special "Disneyfied" CGI with extra "Disney Essence"?

That's not an adjustment. You can find how I never before said anything like "Walt would never ever like CGI", just that he probably wouldn't like Pixar, as is the specific things Pixar does.


OMG, did you read the news? I warn you, it's shocking: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general ... /1205.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 7:42 am 
Offline
In The Vaults
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 6:19 am
Posts: 2704
Disney Duster wrote:
Well, since nature, animals, fairy tales, and fantasy, were part of so, so, so, so many Disney things, I do think it could be called a big part of the Disney essence. At least a part of it, you know? And Walt did sometimes talk about "making the fairy tale fashionable again", wrhy he relied on "old tales" and other things about fairy tales and animals in other quotes, not just about innovation or the child in all of us and such. I can't dig every single one of them up right here right now, but Walt said things like that.


Personally, I don't think there really is the kind of Disney Essence you speak of the more and more I think about it. Walt's first five films were all different in terms of style, look and how they touched the audience emotionally. Snow White was his first traditional princess tale (whose traits are shared only by Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty), Pinocchio was a much darker, but also more whimsical and magical fantasy lacking the sort of romance Snow White had, Fantasia is obviously very unique in many ways, Dumbo was set in a much more contemporary time period and focused more on animals than many other DACs and Bambi was a very poignant piece telling the life story of its titular character.

Yes, some DACs have much in common with other DACs, but whilst for example Aladdin is very similar to Hercules, there are very few other movies with the same kind of style. Disney explored (and continues to explore through Pixar and their more recent work) all sorts of fantastical worlds, which could be under the sea or in deep space, from the dawn of time to the distant future. The ONLY possible thing the Disney Essence can be is the fact that Walt intended to make them all bring out the innocent child in all of us (along with, in some cases, being innovative and moving forward).

By the way, I love the fact that you say 'Walt said things like that' and provide no evidential quotes whatsoever to back up your point. It makes your arguments look even dumber. :)

Disney Duster wrote:
You do this all the time. You exaggerate what I said, not saying what I really said, which was: that Floyd Norman worked with Walt and might know what he wanted in cases like the title of a film which might be the reason for his voicing what title he wanted because we know he wouldn't go against Walt but would be for Walt. None of that is this "never say anything that deviates from what Walt would think" stuff. I already explained above about the Joe Grant thing.


Goliath didn't exaggerate a damn thing; everything that he's said so far makes perfect sense and is backed up well, whilst you contradict yourself in every post, repeating yourself over and over and then you blither about nonsensically over your idiotic opinion that you can't back up at all. Do you even know how to form an opinion?

Goliath wrote:
Disney Duster wrote:
And if you haven't deduced that I've been a member here long enough to see I'm not a troll...your certainly no doctor.

I'm sorry, but there's more intelligence in a single word Dr. Frankenollie writes than in all of your posts in this thread combined.


Thanks Goliath; you're the smartest guy here without a doubt.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 8:17 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:27 pm
Posts: 2841
Disney Duster wrote:
estefan wrote:
It's also worth mentioning that both Brad Bird and David Silverman have had hands at directing Disney-produced animated features. And what have they also worked on? That's right, The Simpsons. However, I don't recall the yellow family's brand of humour crossing over into Monsters Inc, The Incredibles and Ratatouille.

Ah...Pixar movies, not Disney. The people at Pixar doen't have to look to the practices of a man who was the original head of their company before they came along and the kind of people that man hired.

My main point was that there wasn't any Simpsons-style humour in those films, despite the background of the filmmakers, so I don't see why Rich Moore would bring that style of humour to Wreck-It Ralph. I mean, sure, there were jokes aimed at jokes, but they were subtle and not overt like on FOX's animated shows.

Hell, there are subtle adult jokes in Disney animated features, too. The Genie's dialogue in Aladdin is filled with them.

_________________
"There are two wolves and they are always fighting. One is darkness and despair. The other is light and hope. Which wolf wins? Whichever one you feed." - Casey Newton, Tomorrowland


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2011 11:36 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:02 pm
Posts: 4304
Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
singerguy04 wrote:
enigmawing wrote:
Goliath wrote:
Besides, there's new members here who haven't had the chance to meet Duster, so why not just let them?

Yeah . . . sometimes people have to learn things for themselves. ;)

Then may I suggest someone writing an essay that combines all of Duster's posts, along with all your responses, so that people can catch up.

I don't think it would be very productive to write such an "essay" on the Disney Essence Debates™ since this forum is already full of essays within the debates themselves; any effort to sum it up would either stir the pot and make things worse or blend in and eventually get buried with the rest of the posts in question.

While I still may occasionally throw in a related comment or hopeful distraction away from the subjects at hand, I hope I've never resorted to personal attacks within my posts. All I was trying to say here is that it's become pretty clear throughout my years in this community that Duster will never change his mind about certain concepts; nothing personal on my end but I've completely given up on having any real kind of debate with him when it comes to his ideologies on Disney. As anyone can see in the recent threads, it only runs around in circles. But of course we still have members that either haven't figured that out yet (whether they be veterans or newbies) or for whatever reason, actually enjoy the endless debate and/or find the concept of changing his mind to be some kind of personal challenge.

To be honest I can't even read through most of this jargon from either side anymore, but I was a little shocked when Duster expressed being so personally hurt by such an impersonal comment of someone simply stating that a Pixar trailer had the classic Disney feel. Maybe that's what set off the chain reaction this time?

I'd get out the Milk Buds, but people seem to have gotten sick of them.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 423 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 53 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