Disney Films

[BetterButter]

Disney developing Hocus Pocus 3 after sequel success

[Sarah 103]

20 hours ago, BetterButter said:

Disney developing Hocus Pocus 3 after sequel success

For me, the absolute best part of Hocus Pocus 2 was the flashback at the start of the movie, so if you told you me the entire 3rd movie would be an adventure with the young Sanderson Sisters, I would be totally on board with that. 

[rmontro]

On 4/30/2023 at 8:10 PM, Spartan Girl said:

I loathe how idiots are calling this movie “too woke” all because there’s more diversity in the cast, Wendy wears bloomers instead of a nightgown, and they actually give Tiger Lily some overdue respect as a character.

I don't care about this one way or the other, but I think the main "woke" complaints were changing the title to include Wendy and putting girls in the Lost Boys.  Particularly with the backstory of the Lost Boys and how there were no Lost Girls because they were too clever to fall out of their prams (that actually sounds like misandry).

Edited June 8, 2023 by rmontro

[Sarah 103]

I have another idea for Hocus Pocus 3-The Dennison siblings (Max and Danni) now adults facing off against a different group of witches.

[BetterButter]

Moana is dated for 6/27/25 

[Sarah 103]

Adding to my idea for Hocus Pocus 3, after high school Max and Allison drifted apart. (I'm not sure when). Needing to deal with/defeat supernatural forces somehow brings them together again and they realize they were meant for each other/supposed to be together. Danni may or may not be shipper on deck. 

[BetterButter]

Sarah Polley In Talks To Direct Live-Action ‘Bambi’ For Disney

[Katy M]

13 hours ago, BetterButter said:

Sarah Polley In Talks To Direct Live-Action ‘Bambi’ For Disney

Seriously?  I don't get the animal "live actions."  They're CGI.  They're not going to train a bunch of deer.

[dmeets]

Maybe they'll do a twist and it'll be a villain origin story for the Hunter.

I'm only mostly kidding.

[JustHereForFood]

On 3/27/2023 at 10:45 PM, BetterButter said:

Questlove To Direct Live-Action/Hybrid Adaptation Of ‘The Aristocats’ For Disney

 

On 6/14/2023 at 11:12 PM, BetterButter said:

Sarah Polley In Talks To Direct Live-Action ‘Bambi’ For Disney

 

I like the live action versions of the movies with human characters, but why remake the animal ones? When I want to see animals behaving like animals, I watch a documentary, when I want to see them having fun adventures, I am not looking for a realistic look.

 

On 4/28/2023 at 1:14 AM, BetterButter said:

 

This one looks great.

[kiddo82]

I've been watching/re-watching all the Disney studios animated films in order.  Slowly making my way through the canon and I just did The Princess and the Frog.  I really, really hope that the art form of hand drawn animation doesn't go the way of the dinosaur because this movie and these characters have so much personality and I can't imagine that being any better if done via computer.  Compare that to say Wreck It Ralph which is enhanced by the 3D animation style because the goal is to make things look like video games.  The two styles can absolutely co-exist and I would love to see a return to hand drawn every now and then.  

[Sarah 103]

On 6/16/2023 at 1:15 PM, JustHereForFood said:

I like the live action versions of the movies with human characters, but why remake the animal ones? When I want to see animals behaving like animals, I watch a documentary, when I want to see them having fun adventures, I am not looking for a realistic look.

YES! I saw a side by side comparison of a scene from the hand animated Lion King with the CGI Lion King and the animals had so much more life and expression in the original animated movie.

 

I think the live action have been hit or miss. There's really only one of the human ones that I absolutely loved and thought was brilliant (Aladdin) the others have been only okay. There were many I skipped because I wasn't interested in them. 

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, Sarah 103 said:

YES! I saw a side by side comparison of a scene from the hand animated Lion King with the CGI Lion King and the animals had so much more life and expression in the original animated movie.

Say what you want about the new Under the Sea, but it actually looked like a musical number, in stark contrast to the new Lion King’s “I just can’t wait to be king” number which was basically all the animals running around. So lame.

[Browncoat]

I went to see Elemental last night.  Not Pixar's best outing, but far from their worst (Good Dinosaur).  It's sort of a hybrid Romeo & Juliet plus Zootopia, with

a little Frosty the Snowman thrown in for good measure

.  I enjoyed it, and the animation, of course, was gorgeous.  I could stare at the Fire people for days. 

 

[Sarah 103]

I saw Elemental as well. I enjoyed it. It was a classic love story about immigrants and the next generation. The visuals were impressive.

I have a strong belief that if you introduce a ticking clock, that is an implied contract with the audience that the deadline imposed by the ticking will be the climax of the movie, so I am still not sure how I feel about them subverting expectations with that.

Overall, I would reccomend the movie. 

[heatherchandler]

On 3/3/2023 at 12:37 AM, andromeda331 said:

Jamie Lee Curtis and Owen Wilson's are in it. I'm going to have to watch it.

And Lakeith Stanfield.  This is on Disney+ now?  I haven’t heard anything about it until scrolling through here.

eta it’s not out yet but still, I hadn't heard anything.

Edited June 22, 2023 by heatherchandler

[kathyk24]

I think Disney should put all of the movies that were released during Covid in movie theaters. I think Disney hasn't done enough to promote Elementals. When the Minions movie came out they were featured in numerous commercials. The only movie Disney has promoted heavily is the Little Mermaid reboot.

[Sarah 103]

I am not asking this question to be a jerk or a troll. I genuinely/honestly want to know if other people picked up on something that I just totally missed, because that it is a very real possibility.

Minor spoilers for Elemental, but nothing that is important to the plot, so I am not using spoiler tags. One of Wade's relatives is non-binary, but I did not pick up on that in the movie. It was revealed in a book/novelization, and then some people online freaked out over it.

Did anyone realize/know/figure out that one of Wade's relatives was non-binary just from watching the movie? 

[Spartan Girl]

On 6/21/2023 at 12:06 PM, Browncoat said:

I went to see Elemental last night.  Not Pixar's best outing, but far from their worst (Good Dinosaur).  It's sort of a hybrid Romeo & Juliet plus Zootopia, with

  Hide contents

a little Frosty the Snowman thrown in for good measure

.  I enjoyed it, and the animation, of course, was gorgeous.  I could stare at the Fire people for days. 

 

I just saw it tonight and I enjoyed it too. I’m glad it’s getting more at the box office.  You can’t just whine about the Disney sequels and remakes if you won’t go support their new and original stuff for whatever stupid reason you have.

[twoods]

I also enjoyed Elemental and cried a few times. 
No idea that one of Wade’s relatives was non-binary, but I think one of them said “they” instead of he or she so it makes sense. So much was going on in the scene where we saw Wade’s relatives that I’m sure most people would have missed it if it wasn’t for all the minority fussing.

[kiddo82]

I did 2011's Winnie the Pooh yesterday.  I have so much appreciation for the Pooh movies now.  There is both an innocence and a low key sophisticated humor about them at the same time.  (I never read the book as a child but now I want to.)  And I don't know if it was intentional or not but Toy Story owes a lot to the first one when we consider the heart of it is a boy and his relationship with his toys.  Biggest realization as an adult:  I feel Rabbit and all his exasperation.  My man just wants to live in peace and tend to his garden but his neighbors are constantly messing things up, bouncing around, eating his food, etc.    

[Wiendish Fitch]

5 minutes ago, kiddo82 said:

I did 2011's Winnie the Pooh yesterday.  I have so much appreciation for the Pooh movies now.  There is both an innocence and a low key sophisticated humor about them at the same time.  (I never read the book as a child but now I want to.)  And I don't know if it was intentional or not but Toy Story owes a lot to the first one when we consider the heart of it is a boy and his relationship with his toys.  Biggest realization as an adult:  I feel Rabbit and all his exasperation.  My man just wants to live in peace and tend to his garden but his neighbors are constantly messing things up, bouncing around, eating his food, etc.    

2011's Winnie the Pooh ain't half bad (lots of Eeyore, I approve), and I adored Sebastian Cabot as the narrator from the originals, especially this 4th wall breaking exchange:

Tigger: Say, who are you?

Narrator: I'm the narrator.

Tigger: Oh, well, please, for goodness' sakes, narrate me down from here!

 

Did you know Clint Howard was the original voice of Roo??

[kiddo82]

13 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Did you know Clint Howard was the original voice of Roo??

I did not!  And that's usually the type of thing I look up after I watch.  

I like lots of Eeyore too.  And this one was pretty light on Tigger which I'm fine with.  He's fun for the kids but for an adult, well, like I said I feel Rabbit.  I liked the new voices in this one okay, but other than Jim Cummings who apparently can make himself sound a lot like Sterling Holloway, I was taken out of it because I grew up with the original. 

One of my favorite bits of trivia that I learned so far from doing all the animated movies is that Corey Feldman was the voice of young Copper in Fox and the Hound.  Once I learned that I could totally hear it.    

Edited July 16, 2023 by kiddo82

[Wiendish Fitch]

4 minutes ago, kiddo82 said:

One of my favorite bits of trivia that I learned so far from doing all the animated movies is that Corey Feldman was the voice of young Copper in Fox and the Hound.  Once I learned that I could totally hear it.    

And Mickey Rooney was adult Tod! Proof once again that Rooney was best utilized in animation (because then he couldn't obnoxiously mug for the camera).

I took Mr. Fitch to see the 2011 Pooh and he had never watched the cartoons growing up (I know, I'm as shocked as you), and he was deeply amused by the honey fantasy sequence. 

Like you, I've never been much of a Tigger fan. Eeyore was always my favorite. 

[kiddo82]

2 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

And Mickey Rooney was adult Tod! Proof once again that Rooney was best utilized in animation (because then he couldn't obnoxiously mug for the camera).

This x 100.

 

2 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

I took Mr. Fitch to see the 2011 Pooh and he had never watched the cartoons growing up (I know, I'm as shocked as you), and he was deeply amused by the honey fantasy sequence. 

The honey fantasy sequence is definitely one of the highlights.  I also loved Eeyore and Pooh talking to Owl and misunderstanding him saying "Issue" thinking he said "Achoo" and the three of them going back and forth wondering if Owl was sick.  But my favorite part was the gang trying to get out of the pit and the not/knot conversation.  It's very Who's on First.  

[Spartan Girl]

52 minutes ago, kiddo82 said:

Biggest realization as an adult:  I feel Rabbit and all his exasperation.  My man just wants to live in peace and tend to his garden but his neighbors are constantly messing things up, bouncing around, eating his food, etc.    

LOL I feel the same way about Squidward on SpongeBob.

 

40 minutes ago, Wiendish Fitch said:

Did you know Clint Howard was the original voice of Roo??

No!!! Holy crap!

I’ll always have a soft spot for Tigger.

Edited July 16, 2023 by Spartan Girl

[tv echo]

Destination D23: Celebrating 100 Years of Disney, September 8-10, 2023 (Walt Disney World Resort, FL)
https://d23.com/d23-event/destination-d23-2023-presented-by-lug/

Quote

Celebrate 100 years of Walt Disney Animation Studios with legendary animators and guests, and get a sneak peek at their highly-anticipated upcoming feature film, Wish!

Exclusively in theaters Nov. 22.

[kathyk24]

On 5/31/2019 at 9:05 PM, starri said:

But why does Disney in particular get this level of ire?  How many different Shakespeare adaptations have there been?  Or Dickens?  

I guess where I'm coming from is that I'd rather see the story told well, even if it is adapted from an earlier work.

I think there are movies you love from childhood and a remake is unnecessary. I love the original Muppet Movie from the 1970's and thought the recent remake was trash. I don't think anyone would make major changes to Dickens or Shakespeare. Nobody will remake a Christmas Carol where Tiny Tim dies or Romeo and Juliet where they survive.

[Trini]

30 minutes ago, kathyk24 said:

I think there are movies you love from childhood and a remake is unnecessary. I love the original Muppet Movie from the 1970's and thought the recent remake was trash. I don't think anyone would make major changes to Dickens or Shakespeare. Nobody will remake a Christmas Carol where Tiny Tim dies or Romeo and Juliet where they survive.

I agree that most of these remakes are unnecessary. The most recent Muppet movies don't fit the definition of a remake, though.

Here's one version where Romeo and Juliet survive (spoiler?); major changes are made to Dickens and (especially) Shakespeare ALL the time. Most of the time can roll with that if it actually improves something, but I just have to accept that adaptations aren't going to be exactly the same as the source material in 98% of cases.

[MadyGirl1987]

13 hours ago, kathyk24 said:

Nobody will remake a Christmas Carol where Tiny Tim dies or Romeo and Juliet where they survive.

You obviously haven't seen FX's Christmas Carol a few years back which starts with somebody peeing on Jacob Marley's grave and, if I understand correctly since I never made it through the first episode, they made Mrs. Cratchet a witch?

I think people would have a lot less hatred towards the remakes if they actually did more creative things with the movies, as opposed to "Look at the same shot from the original, just live-action!" It's clear they aren't trying to do new or exciting things, just doing a cheaper version, since live action is much less cost then animation, though CGI might impact that... Also; I am more open to remakes of stories that have been around for years, like Dickens and Shakespeare. I would even be happier if they did remakes of their less-loved live action films, like "The Great Mouse Detective" "Atlantis" or even "The Black Cauldron." Shine light on those films that didn't get the recognition they deserved.

Edited July 24, 2023 by MadyGirl1987

[Trini]

58 minutes ago, MadyGirl1987 said:

... I would even be happier if they did remakes of their less-loved live action films, like "The Great Mouse Detective" "Atlantis" or even "The Black Cauldron." Shine light on those films that didn't get the recognition they deserved.

Yes! re-do some of the low-key ones that would benefit from some expansion in the story or better special effects.

[chitowngirl]

On 7/24/2023 at 1:49 AM, kathyk24 said:

Nobody will remake a Christmas Carol where Tiny Tim dies or Romeo and Juliet where they survive.

Well, in West Side Story, one of them survives….

[tv echo]

These 4 Disney Movies May Be Delayed Due to the Hollywood Strike
By David Thompson  July 25, 2023
https://thedirect.com/article/disney-movies-delayed-hollywood 

Quote

A new report by Bloomberg indicated that four 2023 Disney-distributed films could all be delayed due to the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes.

These possible schedule changes would mainly happen because the talent attached to each project won't be able to promote the film if the SAG-AFTRA continues.

1.) Wish
...
Set to hit theaters on November 22, Wish is Disney Animation Studios' latest attempt to draw a crowd in the post-pandemic theater climate.
*  *  *
2.) Magazine Dreams
...
Jonathan Majors stars in Magazine Dreams, set to release on December 8. Majors' name has been clouded with controversy since he was arrested back in March.
*  *  *
3.) Poor Things
...
Poor Things stars Emma Stone, Mark Ruffalo, and Willem Dafoe, and is set to release on September 28. It is based on a 1992 novel of the same name.
*  *  *
4.) Next Goal Wins
...
Next Goal Wins stars Michael Fassbender and is directed by Taika Waititi. It's set to release on November 17.

Edited July 25, 2023 by tv echo

[andromeda331]

On 7/24/2023 at 1:29 PM, MadyGirl1987 said:

You obviously haven't seen FX's Christmas Carol a few years back which starts with somebody peeing on Jacob Marley's grave and, if I understand correctly since I never made it through the first episode, they made Mrs. Cratchet a witch?

I think people would have a lot less hatred towards the remakes if they actually did more creative things with the movies, as opposed to "Look at the same shot from the original, just live-action!" It's clear they aren't trying to do new or exciting things, just doing a cheaper version, since live action is much less cost then animation, though CGI might impact that... Also; I am more open to remakes of stories that have been around for years, like Dickens and Shakespeare. I would even be happier if they did remakes of their less-loved live action films, like "The Great Mouse Detective" "Atlantis" or even "The Black Cauldron." Shine light on those films that didn't get the recognition they deserved.

I agree. So many of them are just identical to the animation version. Or they take out what was great about story or characters. They took out everything that made Mulan so great. Mulan really didn't know anything about fighting or war but she went to save her dad from going. She learned and got better. She saved the Emperor with her own clever ideas. Or Cinderella where live version where she has the freedom to walk around with friends and hang out with the prince. They forget to show how and why Cinderella is stuck. Ever After did a great job to show Danielle strong, and brave while also completely stuck in her situation. She had no where else to go and she was even for Marguerite ending up with the Prince at first because they'd leave. There's also a couple moments where her stepmother is nice to her and she treats her other daughter like crap too so Danielle thinks its normal. Ludmilla is an awesome but also smart villian. So was animation Lady Tremayne. She had no magical powers but she was still terrifying. The live action missed the boat on all of it.

Edited July 26, 2023 by andromeda331

[Spartan Girl]

20 hours ago, tv echo said:

These 4 Disney Movies May Be Delayed Due to the Hollywood Strike
By David Thompson  July 25, 2023
https://thedirect.com/article/disney-movies-delayed-hollywood 

HOW ABOUT JUST PAYING THE WRITERS AND ACTORS?!

[kiddo82]

I'm watching Frozen.  I like this movie but something has always held me back from loving it.  I just had this thought.  Is Let it Go misplaced?  I love the song and the moment.  It's ubiquitous and memed out, yes, but it achieved that status for a reason.  It's the ultimate "eff you" song and the button at the end with the look on Elsa's face and slamming the door and turning away is perfection.  That said, she hasn't really learned her lesson yet.  She's still terrified of her own power and the reactions of others and thinks the only answer is isolation.  She says she's free at this point but is she really?  Does it work better if you rework the middle of the movie, have her have this epiphany, and use it in the third act as she makes her way back to Arendelle with a different outlook than when she left?  And then you're saving one of your more epic songs for closer to the end of movie so it doesn't feel so frontloaded anyway.

I'm not married to this idea but for me I think it makes  more powerful statement and I was curious what others might think.

[Trini]

On 6/21/2023 at 2:32 PM, Sarah 103 said:

I saw Elemental as well. I enjoyed it. It was a classic love story about immigrants and the next generation. The visuals were impressive.

<...>

Which one wouldn't know from the marketing; especially the immigrant part. Well, Pixar has a history hiding the actual plot when it comes to marketing; that might have been a mistake in this case?

However, it seems it's not as big of a flop as people thought.

[proserpina65]

On 6/16/2023 at 1:15 PM, JustHereForFood said:

 

 

I like the live action versions of the movies with human characters, but why remake the animal ones? When I want to see animals behaving like animals, I watch a documentary, when I want to see them having fun adventures, I am not looking for a realistic look.

 

This one looks great.

It worked out well for The Jungle Book but I think that was because of having a human character to interact with the animals.  So of course Disney thinks that means they need a live action version of every animal cartoon they've ever made.

Of course, the live action thing hasn't worked out so well for them this year.

On 7/24/2023 at 2:44 AM, Trini said:

Here's one version where Romeo and Juliet survive

It's not a straight adaptation of Shakespeare, though.  It's a cute riff on the story, but an actual film of the play where R&J survive would suck.

On 7/24/2023 at 3:29 PM, MadyGirl1987 said:

I would even be happier if they did remakes of their less-loved live action films, like "The Great Mouse Detective" "Atlantis" or even "The Black Cauldron."

I want Disney to step the fuck away from The Black Cauldron and give up the rights to someone who would do justice to The Chronicles of Prydain.  Foremost by actually following the damned books rather than making shit up and ruining the entire point of the story.

12 hours ago, Trini said:

Which one wouldn't know from the marketing; especially the immigrant part. Well, Pixar has a history hiding the actual plot when it comes to marketing; that might have been a mistake in this case?

However, it seems it's not as big of a flop as people thought.

It looks like the film has finally made back costs, so it'll probably eke out a small profit.  Still quite the comedown from the glory days of Pixar, though.

[Spartan Girl]

I liked the new Haunted Mansion movie. It was fun. So what exactly did the trolls find so offensive about this one? Or are they just crapping on any remake without even watching it now?

[andromeda331]

5 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

I liked the new Haunted Mansion movie. It was fun. So what exactly did the trolls find so offensive about this one? Or are they just crapping on any remake without even watching it now?

Probably

[MadyGirl1987]

I really enjoyed the Haunted Mansion movie. What does it say about me when the whole internet seems to be talking about Barbie and Oppenheimer that this is the movie I was looking forward to this month?

While I agree people hate on things without giving them a chance, I get why people hate on the remakes. After seeing a couple I pretty much avoid them. I let my guard down with Pinocchio last year. Was bored one day and thought, how bad can it be? It was bad. I think the difference with this is they aren't trying to fix something that wasn't broke, which is how I feel about the remakes as a whole. Find new, interesting stories to tell. There is a whole world of mythology and fairytales they could use! Why not fairy tales from outside Europe? Folklore from Asia, Africa or indigenous Americans? Live action or animated.

This film, however, is different, since the first film was such a letdown for fans of the ride and the concept had such potential. And they did it well! They do a great job of capturing both the spooky and fun aspects of the ride(they call them "grim grinning ghosts" after all) and it has so many references and call backs to things from the ride without hitting you over the head with it.

Some fun deep cuts from Haunted Mansion History;

Spoiler

The Hatbox Ghost's name, Krump, is from Imagineer Rolly Krump who was one of the lead designers of the ride.

Krump Manor is designed on the Florida version of the ride, which has a different exterior design then the original California version. 

Danny DeVeto's character's last name is Davis, which is the last name of another lead designer of the ride Marc Davis

 

 

[Spartan Girl]

2 hours ago, MadyGirl1987 said:

This film, however, is different, since the first film was such a letdown for fans of the ride and the concept had such potential. And they did it well! They do a great job of capturing both the spooky and fun aspects of the ride(they call them "grim grinning ghosts" after all) and it has so many references and call backs to things from the ride without hitting you over the head with it.

Plus the cast/characters were so much fun. I totally knew 

Spoiler

Owen Wilson wasn’t a real priest, he was way too chill.

 

[kiddo82]

7 hours ago, MadyGirl1987 said:

I agree people hate on things without giving them a chance, I get why people hate on the remakes. After seeing a couple I pretty much avoid them. I let my guard down with Pinocchio last year. Was bored one day and thought, how bad can it be? It was bad. I think the difference with this is they aren't trying to fix something that wasn't broke, which is how I feel about the remakes as a whole. Find new, interesting stories to tell. There is a whole world of mythology and fairytales they could use! Why not fairy tales from outside Europe? Folklore from Asia, Africa or indigenous Americans? Live action or animated.

  Reveal spoiler

The Hatbox Ghost's name, Krump, is from Imagineer Rolly Krump who was one of the lead designers of the ride.

Krump Manor is designed on the Florida version of the ride, which has a different exterior design then the original California version. 

Danny DeVeto's character's last name is Davis, which is the last name of another lead designer of the ride Marc Davis

 

 

I enjoyed the new Haunted Mansion as well.  It was fun and it knew how to use its very talented cast.  Hopefully it gains an audience on Disney+.  I don't consider it a "remake" as much as a "re-do."  I believe the first one made money but I don't know anyone who is particularly attached to it.  And most of all, it's not a beat by beat retread of something we've already seen.  

Total agreement about the live action remakes and fixing something that isn't broken.  (Ironic that that was a joke in Beauty and the Beast.)  Every time I see one I'm not particularly mad about it (The Lion King not withstanding) but nothing is significantly improved upon.  As I told my friend after I saw Aladdin, "I enjoyed my time in the theater, and then almost immediately after, the entire thing fell out of my head.*"  And it's hard to do a showstopper like Be Our Guest, Friend Like Me, or Under the Sea, replace the animations with a bunch of CGI, and have it not feel like a let down.  It's probably the same reason why stage musicals don't always translate well to the screen.  Something in the spectacle just doesn't quite carry over.  And it's a Catch-22, change too much and people complain that it's not the movie they remember.  Change too little and people ask "why bother?"  They either need to go the Ever After route and tell an old story in a different way** OR take something like the Rescuers or Great Mouse Detective and have them go on completely different adventures than their original movies.  You could pretty much do anything with crime solving mice.  For the record, I have no problems with these remakes existing.  And if someone prefers the newer version then that's cool.  The two movies can absolutely co-exist.  But it's also apparent that Disney might want to think about pivoting.  

*Except why isn't Naomi Scott a bigger star?

**I don't really remember the Alice in Wonderland remake.  I didn't particularly care for it but at least it wasn't a moment for moment retread.  

Edited August 8, 2023 by kiddo82

[voiceover]

On 6/15/2023 at 10:47 AM, dmeets said:

Maybe they'll do a twist and it'll be a villain origin story for the Hunter.

Oh crap.  Why’d you put it out there? 🤣

 

On 7/16/2023 at 12:06 PM, Wiendish Fitch said:

I've never been much of a Tigger fan

AYFKM??  But they’re bouncy trouncey flouncey pouncey funfunfunfunfun!!

[PurpleTentacle]

On 7/24/2023 at 9:29 PM, MadyGirl1987 said:

I would even be happier if they did remakes of their less-loved live action films, like "The Great Mouse Detective" "Atlantis" or even "The Black Cauldron." Shine light on those films that didn't get the recognition they deserved.

Uh the black Cauldron would be awesome. I always thought that one got a bad rep. I think that could make a really good live action movie. But Disney would have to go PG-13 for that and I don't think they like doing that with their originally animated properties.

On 7/29/2023 at 8:20 PM, kiddo82 said:

I'm watching Frozen.  I like this movie but something has always held me back from loving it.  I just had this thought.  Is Let it Go misplaced?  I love the song and the moment.  It's ubiquitous and memed out, yes, but it achieved that status for a reason.  It's the ultimate "eff you" song and the button at the end with the look on Elsa's face and slamming the door and turning away is perfection.  That said, she hasn't really learned her lesson yet.  She's still terrified of her own power and the reactions of others and thinks the only answer is isolation.  She says she's free at this point but is she really?  Does it work better if you rework the middle of the movie, have her have this epiphany, and use it in the third act as she makes her way back to Arendelle with a different outlook than when she left?  And then you're saving one of your more epic songs for closer to the end of movie so it doesn't feel so frontloaded anyway.

Frozen is a bit of an uneven mess. "Let it go" was originally a villain song, before they rewrote the movie to make Elsa not the villain.

It's still a great movie, with a nice ending and great songs, but it shows in a few places, that they completely changed the story at some point during development.

On 8/3/2023 at 7:37 AM, Trini said:

Which one wouldn't know from the marketing; especially the immigrant part. Well, Pixar has a history hiding the actual plot when it comes to marketing; that might have been a mistake in this case?

However, it seems it's not as big of a flop as people thought.

I guess word of mouth was positive.

It was very "meh" for me. Lot's of great visuals as expected from Pixar, but a story we've seen about a million times and I thought it was a bit bullshitty that they just handwaved the problem with fire and water never being able to touch, away, without any real explaination.

On 8/3/2023 at 8:23 PM, proserpina65 said:

It looks like the film has finally made back costs, so it'll probably eke out a small profit.  Still quite the comedown from the glory days of Pixar, though.

If you take the usual formula of the same budget again for marketing, which would make it 400 million, and consider the theaters cuts, especially internationally, it didn't make its money back. But then again, Disney didn't really market it at all, so maybe it was only 300 millionen total. In that case, it would have turned a profit.

It will also earn a good amount on home video. So it's certainly not an overall loss.

[Bill1978]

On 7/30/2023 at 4:20 AM, kiddo82 said:

I'm watching Frozen.  I like this movie but something has always held me back from loving it.  I just had this thought.  Is Let it Go misplaced?  I love the song and the moment.  It's ubiquitous and memed out, yes, but it achieved that status for a reason.  It's the ultimate "eff you" song and the button at the end with the look on Elsa's face and slamming the door and turning away is perfection.  That said, she hasn't really learned her lesson yet.  She's still terrified of her own power and the reactions of others and thinks the only answer is isolation.  She says she's free at this point but is she really?  Does it work better if you rework the middle of the movie, have her have this epiphany, and use it in the third act as she makes her way back to Arendelle with a different outlook than when she left?  And then you're saving one of your more epic songs for closer to the end of movie so it doesn't feel so frontloaded anyway.

 

I was about to respond with the origin of Let It Go, but Purple Tentacle beat me to it.

8 hours ago, PurpleTentacle said:

Frozen is a bit of an uneven mess. "Let it go" was originally a villain song, before they rewrote the movie to make Elsa not the villain.

The film makers after hearing Let It Go, basically said a villain can't have the best song so changed the story. But if you listen to the lyrics through the lens of Elsa being a villain, the lyrics work much better than the 'I Want...' song it's presented as in the movie. Sang angrier and more sinister, than hopeful and happy and it's a classic Disney villain song.

I think they still could have kept Elsa the villain of the movie and still give her the redemptive arc by saving Anna and Hans no longer needs to be a WTF villain. He can still try to save Anna with a genuine kiss, but it doesn't work where BOTH learn that perhaps they did rush getting engaged and there is nothing wrong with just being friends, allowing Anna to still be with Kristoff. And instead of Olaf helping Anna escape the room, Hans encourages Anna to save her sister and the movie's climax remains the same.

It will never happen, because Disney has decided he needs to be the punching bag, but in Frozen 3 I would really love for them to redeem the character of Hans.

 

[PurpleTentacle]

That's not quite  how I understand it. The writers were struggeling to make the story work, as they had always intended all along that Elsa would be redeemed at the end and true love would be found between the sisters. "Let it go" was written to give Elsa a few redeeming qualities, but also still clearly make her the misguided villain, but I guess it went a little too far with the redeeming qualities and so inspired the writers to rethink the whole thing and make Elsa a good person at heart, who was just struggeling really hard in that moment.

https://www.cinemablend.com/movies/frozen-how-elsa-was-almost-the-movies-villain-before-disney-let-it-go

Not wanting the villain to have the best song wouldn't make the most sense anyway. The villain songs tend to be amoung the best if not the best in the animated Disney movies anyway. "Be Prepared", "Hellfire", "Poor Unfortunate Souls".

I also really don't mind Hans being the surprise villain. I think it was exactly the point that it came completely out of the left field. Because Anna just didn't know him, at all. His biggest hobby could have been to torture puppies, for all she knew. I think the writers set it up well enough. He was like the 8th son. So his original plan was to marry this princess that would at least get him second place, but when he saw the opportunity to take first, he took it.

Still the script could have done with one or two more passes to smooth things out. For example Anna could have been so head over heels that she just eloped with Hans, giving him an actual claim to the throne. How it was in the movie, with Anna dead, he would have been back to square one, no matter how much the people thought he was a hero. But I assume at that point the production was already way behind schedule.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Bill1978 said:

I think they still could have kept Elsa the villain of the movie and still give her the redemptive arc by saving Anna and Hans no longer needs to be a WTF villain. He can still try to save Anna with a genuine kiss, but it doesn't work where BOTH learn that perhaps they did rush getting engaged and there is nothing wrong with just being friends, allowing Anna to still be with Kristoff. And instead of Olaf helping Anna escape the room, Hans encourages Anna to save her sister and the movie's climax remains the same.

Personally, I love that Hans was the surprise villain and the way that played out because it turned a lot of the Disney tropes about true love on their head. I feel like Anna’s journey with Hans and Kristoff was an important message to little girls. Because sometimes the guy who seems perfect is actually the villain. One of the things that really impressed me with Frozen was the Hans plot. 

[proserpina65]

13 hours ago, PurpleTentacle said:

I always thought that one got a bad rep.

Have you read any of Lloyd Alexander's books?  Because the Disney film bore almost no resemblance to the book and that's why it got a bad rep.  Something more faithful to the author's work would be fantastic.

[PurpleTentacle]

3 hours ago, proserpina65 said:

Have you read any of Lloyd Alexander's books?  Because the Disney film bore almost no resemblance to the book and that's why it got a bad rep.  Something more faithful to the author's work would be fantastic.

To be honest, I'm probably the worst judge of this. I was 4 months old when this movie came out and I eventually first experienced it through a german audio cassette (back then movies being released on audio was a thing, I don't even remember if they added narration). So the movie was all imagination in my head, way before I eventually saw it.

Writing this made me wonder if there were pictures of it online and sure enough:

And somebody even put it on Youtube:

All that is to say, no I didn't read the books and I probably have way too much early life nostalgia for that movie. But I still think there are good bones. I'm not sure if those are from the books or not. Either way I think this would be good material for a remake and yeah, stick more closely to the books. Go for it. I won't complain.