DVDizzy.com

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

It is currently Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:32 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 702 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 36  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 11:36 am 
Offline
Special Edition

Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 12:42 pm
Posts: 438
MeerkatKombat wrote:
In a way kinda surprised they went for Tangled over a Frozen TV show. Really surprised. Not that Tangled doesn't deserve it but it seems weird that Disney wouldn't want to milk more money from Frozen.

I think it makes sense. Frozen has a sequel film in the works already, so perhaps they don't want to dilute demand by having a TV show on the air. Some people attributed the box office decline of How to Train Your Dragon 2 to having a TV show on the air prior to its release. While nobody can know for sure, that is definitely a factor to consider. And though Tangled has been a bit overshadowed by Frozen, it's still a mega-popular property, so the show would still probably do quite well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 12:44 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:00 pm
Posts: 1728
you know what would be cool? if they have episodes where they visit other princess, kinda like how STF has Disney princess on the show, but the other way around, instead of them appearing in Rapunzel's kingdom, Rapunzel and her friends travel to theirs. I would looove that!

also the reason they are doing a tv show for this and not any of the boy films is b/c with Star Wars and Marvel they dont need to worry about using their own material as much to make shows aimed at boys, sad but true. And they probably feel the SW/Marvel characters are going to be safer bets for a series than anything they made themselves. :( Its also why they didn't bother with the 3rd Tron sequel.

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:33 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 2923
unprincess wrote:
you know what would be cool? if they have episodes where they visit other princess, kinda like how STF has Disney princess on the show, but the other way around, instead of them appearing in Rapunzel's kingdom, Rapunzel and her friends travel to theirs. I would looove that!

That's a good idea! :) But not only traveling to each kingdom, but having crossovers as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:53 pm 
Online
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 15, 2013 7:29 pm
Posts: 3311
Rapunzel is set in 1780. The only princess she could possibly crossover with would be Belle. The others are nowhere near her time period. Not to mention Disney refrains from crossing the princesses over in their canon. It would never happen.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 1:55 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 2923
JeanGreyForever wrote:
Rapunzel is set in 1780. The only princess she could possibly crossover with would be Belle. The others are nowhere near her time period. Not to mention Disney refrains from crossing the princesses over in their canon. It would never happen.

No, but you could always dream ;)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 4:10 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:00 pm
Posts: 1728
1-its Disney, not the greatest when it comes to accuracy, especially these days
2 its probably not canon anyway so they wouldt worry about it. Disneys motto: money>integrity


I thought Tangled took place in one of those generic undefined era/European countries anyway...
you could probably get away with:
Snow White
Cinderella
Little Mermaid
Belle
Jasmine
Mulan
Frozen sisters

Aurora, Merida & Pocahontas are too early(middle ages & 1600's) and Tiana too recent(1920's.)
Im not sure about Jasmine & Mulan as I dont know much about those areas of the world and their history to be sure. The others are generic enough that they could fit.

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 4:43 pm 
Offline
Special Edition

Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2014 12:42 pm
Posts: 438
Well, I don't figure that this show will be considered canon, but I still personally wouldn't be too fond of the crossover idea. It just seems too fan-fictiony. Though I wouldn't be against some Easter eggs.

Plus, it seems that they actually may be aiming to go about this with some integrity, judging from the fact that they are bringing in Menken/Slater, Claire Keane, the rumored "well-known veteran Disney animator."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 05, 2015 6:35 pm 
Online
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 10:46 am
Posts: 4212
Location: Maryland, USA
Claire Keane has confirmed that the animation style in the teaser picture is going to be what the show will look like. I hope that they change Rapunzel because she looks awful

https://twitter.com/claireonacloud/stat ... 8185705472

MeerkatKombat wrote:
In a way kinda surprised they went for Tangled over a Frozen TV show. Really surprised. Not that Tangled doesn't deserve it but it seems weird that Disney wouldn't want to milk more money from Frozen.


Same! I swore that we would have gotten an announcement about a Frozen TV show later this year. Delighted to see that it's Tangled. But, yes! I would LOVE to see Wreck-It Ralph and Big Hero 6 TV shows. Big Hero 6 would be perfect for a superhero show and they could do so much with the world of Wreck-It Ralph. TBH, I kind of expect them by the late of this decade


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Jun 06, 2015 8:48 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 2923
disneyprincess11 wrote:
Claire Keane has confirmed that the animation style in the teaser picture is going to be what the show will look like. I hope that they change Rapunzel because she looks awful

Damn it!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 5:15 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 1:19 am
Posts: 8177
Location: Appleton, WI
JeanGreyForever wrote:
Rapunzel is set in 1780. The only princess she could possibly crossover with would be Belle. The others are nowhere near her time period. Not to mention Disney refrains from crossing the princesses over in their canon. It would never happen.


Where was this confirmed?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 7:54 am 
Offline
Collector's Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 08, 2013 2:48 pm
Posts: 672
Location: UK
DisneyFan09 wrote:
disneyprincess11 wrote:
Claire Keane has confirmed that the animation style in the teaser picture is going to be what the show will look like. I hope that they change Rapunzel because she looks awful

Damn it!


Groan.

_________________
Settling Soul mates? That is grim. And I've played Monopoly alone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:29 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 2923
MeerkatKombat wrote:
Groan.

Great minds think alike :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 9:42 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:23 pm
Posts: 1185
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Alan Menken composing? Count me interested! Although I am sceptical about the animation style, it looks awkward. They should have done a style similar to the movie, but I guess that would be to costly for greedy Disney Company? Also, I would much prefer a second Tangled movie to a TV show.

_________________
Favorite Disney-movies: Snow White, Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, Tangled, Frozen, Pirates, Enchanted, Prince of Persia, Tron, Oz The Great and Powerful


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:10 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:47 pm
Posts: 2970
I'm skeptic of the animation style myself, but geeze guys have you no sense of taste? I know, I know, opinions and all. I just dont see what's so bad about this. The only reason I'm skeptic is that it looks like something that will be stiffly animated. Something that works in stills but not necessarily in motion. But I'll keep an open mind.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 7:22 pm 
Offline
Special Edition
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 4:02 pm
Posts: 452
Kyle wrote:
Image


Oh, so NOW it can be 2D? Well even though I'd like to be happy that it is, it almost feels like it's too late for me to like this, because now it's just a 2D spin-off of a movie that should have been 2D in the first place. Say what you will about some of Disney's old TV shows and direct-to-video sequels having more TV budget looking animation than their original hand-drawn features, but at least back then the true "Disney Style" as I call it of 2D animation was consistent through both their movies and spin-offs. This makes me think of all the official Disney Princess artwork that depicts Rapunzel in 2D as if Disney wants to pretend that their movies are still 2D, when the truth is all the hand-drawn sides of production are being regulated to hiding behind CGI since it seems to be considered not good enough to be out in the open so people can experience quality hand-drawn art like we used to from Disney movies.

Besides, Tangled already did it's damage to the Disney studio, since they foolishly decided to make it CGI at a time when they were just starting to go back to hand-drawn animation again (and the kind of animated movies they're supposed to make), and were continuing on with CG movies when they should have already known to quit after Princess and the Frog and it wasn't too late yet to fix their misguidedness. But they didn't quit, and by letting CGI have a foothold in their work, it corruptly turned them away from hand-drawn more than ever, and they now think that they can get their success from CG movies when they have no business trying to do so as a 2D studio. It's even this movie's fault that Frozen wasn't allowed to be hand-drawn either, because Disney modeled it off of the wrong movie when Princess and the Frog was the one that reflected what they were really supposed to be doing. Tangled was an accident, like all their CG movies have been to this day.

On the subject of the show's art, it does look pretty good based on that image alone. It's too bad I'm not willing to say the same about the original movie or any of Disney's CG movies, since I don't consider them to be true Disney animation.

_________________
Image

Love traditional Disney animation? Send your art to: http://2disney4ever.deviantart.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 7:53 pm 
Online
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 10:46 am
Posts: 4212
Location: Maryland, USA
^ Here we go again :roll: :roll: :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jun 10, 2015 10:46 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 6:10 pm
Posts: 1020
Location: New York
I like that the 2D will distinguish the show from the movie (and 3D on a tv budget would have looked painful). I actually like the style too, or at least am intrigued to see more. It's somewhat storybookish.

_________________
LADY Image CLUCK


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:45 am 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 11078
2Disney4Ever wrote:
It's even this movie's fault that Frozen wasn't allowed to be hand-drawn either
That’s true. I hate that we didn’t get Frozen as the hand-drawn The Snow Queen, like it originally began, especially considering how much I ended up liking it. Even as a TP&TF fan, adapting a story like 'Rapunzel' or 'The Snow Queen' would’ve more sense to “save” hand-drawn animation.

Rather odd to think about it now, how for a moment there Disney even considered axing all "princess" films before Frozen made them realize how lucrative they still are. It shows how idiotic executive thinking is. The public still responds to fairy tales and they would still respond to hand-drawn animation if they made a film like Frozen using it.

_________________
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Katy Perry ~ “Harleys in Hawaii"
Normani ~ "Motivation"
Utada Hikaru ~ "Don't Think Twice"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2015 10:14 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure

Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2009 4:28 pm
Posts: 2923
2Disney4Ever wrote:
Say what you will about some of Disney's old TV shows and direct-to-video sequels having more TV budget looking animation than their original hand-drawn features, but at least back then the true "Disney Style" as I call it of 2D animation was consistent through both their movies and spin-offs.

That's true.

Quote:
Rather odd to think about it now, how for a moment there Disney even considered axing all "princess" films before Frozen made them realize how lucrative they still are. It shows how idiotic executive thinking is. The public still responds to fairy tales and they would still respond to hand-drawn animation if they made a film like Frozen using it.

Wasn't it a false rumor/statement?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 11, 2015 12:38 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2013 7:00 pm
Posts: 1728
this being 2d has me more interested in the Tangled story/characters than when it was CGI. Im gonna think of this as what the movie would have looked like if Disney decided to continue hand drawn animated films but with a smaller budget and a more streamlined look to the art. I know its silly... but Im a silly person. :P

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 702 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 36  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: disneyprincess11, JeanGreyForever and 36 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