Disneycember Month by Doug Walker of TGWTG

[Rose Dome]

Okay. I'm sorry I went bonkers. I crossed the line into trollishness, and I'm not proud of myself.

Goliath - I meant not to criticise your opinion, but the way you were expressing it, yet the truth is that you were being perfectly reasonable. You didn't curse, or personally insult Beauty & The Beast fans. You just said how you feel about the film, and I took it upon myself to be an oversensitive git. The only explanation I can offer for being so pathetic is my insecurity. I didn't feel that I could adequately defend Beauty, so rather than getting some counter arguements in line, I let your criticism of it get to me. I was too lazy and timid to get in there and discuss, and I shouldn't be that way if I'm going to be on a discussion forum.

I can't apologise enough.

[Elladorine]

Then I defy you to take a look again at the scene in BatB in which Maurice's invention explodes and Belle hurries home to check up on him and comfort him. The movie was on tv today and I happened to catch that part and I almost got tears in my eyes because of how badly animated it was.

Perhaps not the greatest animation, but not as outright sloppy as The Little Mermaid scene I was referring to. I stand by my opinion . . . it made me cringe when I saw it for the first time at age 13 and it makes me cringe to this day; even one of the cels of the scene has a painting error. But animation quality tends to be somewhat subjective; for example, I don't mind characters going a little off-model from scene to scene (especially when it reflects an individual artist's style) but I know that it can drive others completely nuts. What bothers me is when characters change volume, when main features slide around, when the proportions are way off, or when line art inconsistently flickers. But once again, it's subjective. Some claim that animation needs to be shot on ones to be any good, but the motion of such shots can be superfluous; I'd rather see strong poses with less frames in between. But I'm rambling here, so I digress . . .

Say what you want about the so-called 'Dark Age' Disney-films, but their animation was always good. In BatB, I also don't like the much too bright colors that make it look like a tv cartoon --but that's more of a complaint about the DVD than the actual movie. I like the animation in TLM better, but I feel Aladdin did it the best.

I hadn't said anything about the "Dark Age" yet, but now that I'm here . . . it wasn't always good animation-wise, but it usually was.

And I'm not even going to start about Beauty and the Beast's colors.

I'll agree that Aladdin was probably the most consistent of the three just mentioned, although I think it lacked the emotional intensity that was seen in Mermaid.

[qindarka]

To be fair, the Something There sequence is hardly the only scene developing their relationship. Its not like they hated each other before the sequence and are madly in love after it. There are quite a number of scenes after that that develop their relationship.

And from an earlier comment you made, could you explain in more detail how Belle is suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and how well that interpretation fits in to the actual events in the film. This does annoy me a little because I have seen many people on the internet say this and it always seems as if they are just trying to make themselves sound clever .

[Goliath]

Goliath - I meant not to criticise your opinion, but the way you were expressing it, yet the truth is that you were being perfectly reasonable. You didn't curse, or personally insult Beauty & The Beast fans. You just said how you feel about the film, and I took it upon myself to be an oversensitive git. The only explanation I can offer for being so pathetic is my insecurity. I didn't feel that I could adequately defend Beauty, so rather than getting some counter arguements in line, I let your criticism of it get to me. I was too lazy and timid to get in there and discuss, and I shouldn't be that way if I'm going to be on a discussion forum.

I can't apologise enough.

You don't have to apologize at all. Had you insulted me or attacked me, sure, I would have expected an apology, but since you never did... forget it, it's not neccessary. You're one of my favorite members on UD, you know that, so if I made you feel bad with my comments, I find that unfortunate. But then again, by now, you should be familair with my trademark hyperbole. So yes, I could easily have worded my problems with the film in a more nuanced way, like you proposed. I just wouldn't have had as much fun doing so.

[Rose Dome]

^ ^ ^

I didn't attack you or insult you, but let's face it; Would I have been on here taking issue with your use of hyperbole if you had been criticising Home On The Range?

My gripe was posted the moment I read your comment about the basement scene. I didn't take the time to think about your writing style, or the respect you have shown for me.

Please know that you are still one of my favorite members on here, and that you did absolutely nothing to deserve my thoughtless huff.

[Rose Dome]

Goliath - I thought I would come up with some counter points in regards to Beauty & The Beast. It's time I told you why I like the film

The Animation - I agree that the character animation can be quite clumsy, but I can't think of a single frame where the environment isn't beautifully rendered. There's so much depth and clarity. The lighting and shading are also superb.

Belle - I know that her goal at the beginning is vague, but some people just don't know how to realise their dreams. To be fair she doesn't become a world leader or anything, in the end, but she can still be commended for how she acts during the course of the story. She thinks of others, and refuses to be bossed around by The Beast; only showing respect for him when he shows her some. Her defiance of Gaston can also be admired. On top of that, there are numerous indications that she doesn't have Stokolm Syndrome, which I will happily list.

The Romance - Something There isn't all we see of Belle's and The Beast's romance. Belle's first line is "There's something sweet, and almost kind...". That's not love. Sure, there is Lumiere's line:"They'd fall in love and come together on their own", but this could easily be seen as hopeful. Their relationship is developed beyond that, especially during the climax. Regarding the "Maurice was lost in the woods for months" plothole; Doug was wrong about that. The film takes place over the course of a few weeks if the weather depicted is anything to go buy.

I can elaborate on these points, I just decided it was time to give you something.

[Dream Huntress]

It's like people dislike a woman in charge of her desires; while they like passive do-nothings like Belle.

Tiana works hard to achieve her dream of owning a restaurant, how is that passive do-nothing? And Belle turned down Gaston, went to save her father, exchanged herself for her father, went to the west wing, escaped the castle, helped Beast, went back to help her father again, standed up to Gaston, and went back to help Beast, so, again, how is that passive do-nothing? Did we even watch the same movies? I understand that you don't like the character, but now it seems like you're making up stuff to support your argument.

The way you're wording the whole argument is like you're saying that it was okay for Ariel to be selfish, okay, fine, just please, explain to me how is she a better person after the whole ordeal.

[Goliath]

Tiana works hard to achieve her dream of owning a restaurant, how is that passive do-nothing? And Belle turned down Gaston, went to save her father, exchanged herself for her father, went to the west wing, escaped the castle, helped Beast, went back to help her father again, standed up to Gaston, and went back to help Beast, so, again, how is that passive do-nothing? Did we even watch the same movies? I understand that you don't like the character, but now it seems like you're making up stuff to support your argument.

Basically, Belle was sitting in the castle all the way through the film. Let's be honest about that. She even had to saved by Chip in the end. "Standing up to" and "turning down" Gaston (= the same thing, not two things), going to the West Wing and going out of the castle, I don't count that as 'active' at all. An active character wouldn't even have stayed as long in the castle as she did and surely wouldn't have gone back once she finally got away. The point I was making is that (and I'm not saying you personally feel that way) the only time Ariel (who is generally liked as a character) is being criticised, it's only for the fact that she actually acts on her own emotions and desires, rather than just being there for other characters (like Mulan was there for her father; Esmeralda was there for Quasi; Belle was there for Maurice etc.) I find that strange.

The way you're wording the whole argument is like you're saying that it was okay for Ariel to be selfish, okay, fine, just please, explain to me how is she a better person after the whole ordeal.

I'm not saying she's a better person persé. But I also don't need her to be a better person to like her regardless. I don't think "selfish" is the right word to describe Ariel. I just don't judge her actions that way. "Selfish" has a negative connotation; one that I wouldn't want to apply to her breaking free from a world she didn't want to be in.

Belle - I know that her goal at the beginning is vague, but some people just don't know how to realise their dreams. To be fair she doesn't become a world leader or anything, in the end, but she can still be commended for how she acts during the course of the story. [...]

I can see how those things you listed are all wonderful character traits/actions, but they don't match the fantasy image that so many have build up of Belle as a 'woman in charge' --because she is not. She willingly returns to the castle with her captor who, up until that point, had been nothing of abusive of her. How is that 'not being bossed around'? I'll give you she defied Gaston, though showing the Beast in the mirror may not be the smartest thing she ever did, as it gave Gaston the idea to go hunt for him. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Belle is being seen by many as a great feminist, active character, but there's little more there than "she reads books" or "she thinks for herself". That's setting the bar awfully low. And even if we accept all that, how interesting is she, really? Especially compared to Ariel, the previous leading female character of Disney? Does Belle strike a chord with you, emotionally?

Passiveness doesn't have to be a negative character trait, persé. Look at Snow White. I'm totally rooting for her everytime I watch that movie, and I love the character. But at least she (and the movie with her) is not pretending she's something she's not. She's a damsell in distress, but she's sweet and cute and endearing in that. Belle is not; she doesn't have that appeal.

The Romance - Something There isn't all we see of Belle's and The Beast's romance. [...] Their relationship is developed beyond that, especially during the climax.

But what else is there? The song 'Beauty and the Beast' with the ballroom scene? But by then, they're already in love. I'd rather see Disney do a good 'love at first sight' story than a 'developing relationship' that ultimately doesn't convince.

Regarding the "Maurice was lost in the woods for months" plothole; Doug was wrong about that. The film takes place over the course of a few weeks if the weather depicted is anything to go buy.

So Maurice was lost in the woods for weeks? (I didn't need Doug for me to pick up on that, by the way.) Still sounds like a plot hole to me. How did he stay alive?

I hope I haven't ruined your favorite movie now. Though it would be presumptious of me to think I could ever do that. Keep on enjoying your favorite movies, no matter what others say.

[DancingCrab]

Wow...I am getting the impression from some people, that their idea of a happy ending in The Little Mermaid would be for Ariel to serve time behind bars and spend the rest of her life suffering and forced to dwell on her mistakes. Pardon my French, but WHAT THE FUCK?

Mermaid (like Pinocchio) is a cautionary tale, people. She's not meant to be a politically correct role model..she's the protagonist of a fairy tale musical adventure. After much thought, I've figured out that one of the reasons she is my favorite Disney heroine is because I am allowed to simply go on a journey with her without being preached to. While I certainly don't dislike Belle and the "princesses" who've followed, Disney started playing it more and more safe as the movies progressed (Meg being an exception) with making sure there was at least one moment where the female lead gives a PC lecture of some sort. I have never met a real girl who does this, so for me, Ariel is just a little more identifiable than the others. I think Meg and Rapunzel are the only other two (I can think of) that come close to her level of sincerity.

[Dream Huntress]

Wow...I am getting the impression from some people, that their idea of a happy ending in The Little Mermaid would be for Ariel to serve time behind bars and spend the rest of her life suffering and forced to dwell on her mistakes. Pardon my French, but WHAT THE FUCK?

Pardon my english, but who ever said that? Seriously, there is a difference between "earn your happy ending" and "go all Lars Von Trier on the protagonist".

Mermaid (like Pinocchio) is a cautionary tale, people. She's not meant to be a politically correct role model..she's the protagonist of a fairy tale musical adventure.

I'm sorry, what? In a cautionary tale a lesson would be learn, Pinocchio learns that is wrong to lie and fall into vice, what does Ariel learn? Whine, lie, runaway and you'll get what you want?

Basically, Belle was sitting in the castle all the way through the film. Let's be honest about that. She even had to saved by Chip in the end. "Standing up to" and "turning down" Gaston (= the same thing, not two things), going to the West Wing and going out of the castle, I don't count that as 'active' at all. An active character wouldn't even have stayed as long in the castle as she did and surely wouldn't have gone back once she finally got away. The point I was making is that (and I'm not saying you personally feel that way) the only time Ariel (who is generally liked as a character) is being criticised, it's only for the fact that she actually acts on her own emotions and desires, rather than just being there for other characters (like Mulan was there for her father; Esmeralda was there for Quasi; Belle was there for Maurice etc.) I find that strange.

I'm not saying she's a better person persé. But I also don't need her to be a better person to like her regardless. I don't think "selfish" is the right word to describe Ariel. I just don't judge her actions that way. "Selfish" has a negative connotation; one that I wouldn't want to apply to her breaking free from a world she didn't want to be in.

I see how you didn't adress the Tiana issue, or referred to any other Disney leading lady for that matter, nice try there.

I get it that not all characters are meant to go on and commit great acts of self-sacrifice, some of them just want to fulfil their dreams, I just think there are better and more interesting stories that deal with that than The Little Mermaid (Aladdin, Treasure Planet and Tangled are the ones that come to my mind).

Passiveness doesn't have to be a negative character trait, persé. Look at Snow White. I'm totally rotting for her everytime I watch that movie, and I love the character. But at least she (and the movie with her) is not pretending she's something she's not. She's a damsell in distress, but she's sweet and cute and endearing in that. Belle is not; she doesn't have that appeal.

I honestly can't stand Snow White (the character, not the movie), so I guess this a matter of personal preference, let's put it that way, and leave it at that.

But what else is there? The song 'Beauty and the Beast' with the ballroom scene? But by then, they're already in love. I'd rather see Disney do a good 'love at first sight' story than a 'developing relationship' that ultimately doesn't convince.

Then The Little Mermaid also fails in this aspect, at least on Beauty and the Beast they're alluding they spent more than three days together

So Maurice was lost in the woods for weeks? (I didn't need Doug for me to pick up on that, by the way.) Still sounds like a plot hole to me. How did he stay alive?

Why are we even arguing about this? I thought that it was common knowledge that even the directors aknowledged Maurice lost in the woods was a plot hole.

I hope I haven't ruined your favorite movie now. Though it would be presumptious of me to think I could ever do that. Keep on enjoying your favorite movies, no matter what others say.

Good sir, you are over-estimating yourself too much, it's not like you're the first person that looks at a classic movie and says "Is overrated". Aren't we on the thread discussing the very same man that is making videos about that?

Honestly though, I like having this discussions, that's the beauty of this boards, and it may not sound like it, but I do like The Little Mermaid, I just think it's a heavily flawed movie, probably in the same way you think Beauty and the Beast is a heavily flawed movie. So I guess we can agree that we disagree.

[DancingCrab]

I'm sorry, what? In a cautionary tale a lesson would be learn, Pinocchio learns that is wrong to lie and fall into vice, what does Ariel learn? Whine, lie, runaway and you'll get what you want?

Ariel: "Daddy, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to..I didn't know"

And as Goliath pointed out, she turned on Ursula and attacked her, so I think it was pretty damn clear that she learned her lesson, as far as anything she did that caused harm to others. Also, the scene when she is sitting on the rock looking at Eric on the beach as Triton and Sebastian are commentating, she is sitting there solemnly resigned to the cost of her actions, she is NOT whining or lying to Trition or anyone at that point. I don't know how anyone can interpret that any differently unless they are blind and can't come to conclusions without detailed dialogue between characters.

[Rose Dome]

She willingly returns to the castle with her captor who, up until that point, had been nothing of abusive of her.

He had just saved her from the wolves. It didn't excuse the abuse, but it can't be said that she took him back to the castle for no reason.

I'll give you she defied Gaston, though showing the Beast in the mirror may not be the smartest thing she ever did, as it gave Gaston the idea to go hunt for him.

Maybe not, but she did accept responsibilty.

Does Belle strike a chord with you, emotionally?

I like her maturity, and I identify with her bookishness. I personally find these to be the least of the reasons she's a good heroine, but they're good access points for anyone who considers her to be passive.

But what else is there? The song 'Beauty and the Beast' with the ballroom scene?

There's also the scene where he opens the library up for her, to say nothing of him allowing her to see and rescue Maurice, and her defending him against Gaston, and coming back for him.

But by then, they're already in love.

More or less, but this is near the end. He hasn't yet told her that she is no longer his prisoner, and she hasn't yet declared her love for him.

So Maurice was lost in the woods for weeks? (I didn't need Doug for me to pick up on that, by the way.) Still sounds like a plot hole to me. How did he stay alive?

I guess that still is a plot hole (as I should have realised), but the directors have admitted to it, as Dream Huntress mentioned, and as I had forgotten.

I hope I haven't ruined your favorite movie now.

Don't worry. You haven't. It was me who came foreward with these counter points

Keep on enjoying your favorite movies, no matter what others say.

Aww! Thanks for the kind words

[Super Aurora]

your quotes are kinda messed up Disney Geek. might want to fix that cause I had hard time wondering who said who and that you put Goliath's quotes in yours

[Rose Dome]

^ ^ ^

I have done an edit. Is my post alright now?

[Goliath]

@ Disney Geek: Thanks for your reply. You make some good points. I guess in the end, it's all a matter of taste. Most of it all, it's about movies striking an emotional chord in you, and that differs greatly from person to person. A lot of people think Snow White is whiny and irritating, yet I find her endearing and cute. Same with Rapunzel: some can't stand her naievité or her innocence, yet I find it charming. It's the same with me and Belle: I don't connect with her, yet you do.

It's not like the movie doesn't have strong points. I cannot praise the music and the songs enough, and there's a really good voice cast too. I just think a lot of potential was wasted and this could've been a better film than it ultimately became. It's nowhere near the bottom of my list of Disney Classics, though.

I see how you didn't adress the Tiana issue, or referred to any other Disney leading lady for that matter, nice try there.

"Nice try"?! I'm sorry, I didn't know this was a contest or a fight, was just discussing an issue here. And I didn't mention Tiana, I was just commenting on the fact that the criticism of Ariel is always the same and doesn't come any further than "she's spoiled" or "she whines" without ever paying attention to the fact that she's much more than that. But I explained that already a few times and don't feel the need to repeat myself. If you're going to get stuck in overly simplistic descriptions like that, I guess you'll never get my point...

I honestly can't stand Snow White (the character, not the movie), so I guess this a matter of personal preference, let's put it that way, and leave it at that.

Snow White has appeal; she speaks to the viewer; she calls out emotion in the audience; she has a plight we can symphatise with. Belle, in contrast, strikes me as plain and dull. Not only doesn't she have the spunk of Ariel, Jasmine or Rapunzel, but she also doesn't have the appeal of Snow White or Cinderella.

Then The Little Mermaid also fails in this aspect, at least on Beauty and the Beast they're alluding they spent more than three days together

But I already explained why that's different. because TLM isn't telling a "mature" story about a "realistic" relationship. TLM is telling a 'love at first sight' story and pulls it off brilliantly.

Why are we even arguing about this? I thought that it was common knowledge that even the directors aknowledged Maurice lost in the woods was a plot hole.

We're arguing about it because you tried to downplay this enormous plothole.

Good sir, you are over-estimating yourself too much, it's not like you're the first person that looks at a classic movie and says "Is overrated".

Er... I already acknowledged that myself. That's why I added the winking face. Don't take everything so seriously.

[Dream Huntress]

Nice try"?! I'm sorry, I didn't know this was a contest or a fight, was just discussing an issue here. And I didn't mention Tiana, I was just commenting on the fact that the criticism of Ariel is always the same and doesn't come any further than "she's spoiled" or "she whines" without ever paying attention to the fact that she's much more than that. But I explained that already a few times and don't feel the need to repeat myself. If you're going to get stuck in overly simplistic descriptions like that, I guess you'll never get my point...

But you still didn't mention Tiana, or any other Disney princess before or after Ariel and Belle, you say that Ariel is the only one with drive when compared to Belle, but you don't compare her to any other princess outside her and Walt's princesses.

Snow White has appeal; she speaks to the viewer; she calls out emotion in the audience; she has a plight we can symphatise with. Belle, in contrast, strikes me as plain and dull. Not only doesn't she have the spunk of Ariel, Jasmine or Rapunzel, but she also doesn't have the appeal of Snow White or Cinderella.

Again, this falls into personal preference, I see why people prefer different princesses, but the way you're wording this is like it is a fact that only certain princesses have appeal, even though they all have different personalities that appeal to different people, for example, I think Snow White and Aurora are bland, Ariel is spunky but nothing more, and Rapunzel is Ariel done right.

But I already explained why that's different. because TLM isn't telling a "mature" story about a "realistic" relationship. TLM is telling a 'love at first sight' story and pulls it off brilliantly.

That really doesn't excuse poor storytelling, and in any case "Aladdin" pulls the love at first time trope way better.

We're arguing about it because you tried to downplay this enormous plothole.

Who is downplaying it? I was merely stating a fact, that the directors were aware that Maurice's wereabouts during Belle's time at the castle is a plot hole, but they couldn't work around it. They say so themselves during the audio commentary of the movie.

Er... I already acknowledged that myself. That's why I added the winking face. Don't take everything so seriously.

Did you even read what I wrote after that? I'm guessing not, because it didn't suit your response, much like your previous comments.

[Rose Dome]

@ Disney Geek: Thanks for your reply. You make some good points.

Those were well made points? I'm flattered

I guess in the end, it's all a matter of taste. Most of it all, it's about movies striking an emotional chord in you, and that differs greatly from person to person.

A lot of people think Snow White is whiny and irritating, yet I find her endearing and cute. Same with Rapunzel: some can't stand her naievité or her innocence, yet I find it charming. It's the same with me and Belle: I don't connect with her, yet you do.

Bravo! I guess Beauty & The Beast is higher up my list than yours, but variety is the spice of life

I know this post is quite empty and wishy washy, but there's nothing more I can add to what you have said

[Disney's Divinity]

Rapunzel is Ariel done right.

You mean--less passionate and more passive? I would consider that an Ariel clone without the appeal.

[Dr Frankenollie]

Bringing this thread back on-topic...

I was rather irked by Doug's review of Aladdin; I don't think he knew what he was babbling about, and as slave2moonlight said, I don't think he fully believed his own weak reasons against it.

As for Lion King, Pocahontas and Hunchback - I more-or-less agree with him on all of those. But the fact that he doesn't recognise films like Dumbo and Aladdin as masterpieces makes me value his opinion a lot less.

[disneyboy20022]

Update from Doug Walker regarding lack of Disneycember, and the Nostalgia Critic reviews...

<iframe src="http://blip.tv/gbk7guWpfwI.html?p=1" width="480" height="392" frameborder="0"></iframe><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://a.blip.tv/api.swf#gbk7guWpfwI"></embed>