DVDizzy.com

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.

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

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

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

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

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."

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



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

Damn it!

Where was this confirmed?

_________________

Groan.

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

Great minds think alike

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

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.

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.

_________________


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

^ Here we go again

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 CLUCK

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.

_________________

That's true.


Wasn't it a false rumor/statement?

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.

_________________
Support To Belong
Hullabaloo