Pocahontas Blu-ray (2012)

[PatrickvD]

I love that you just read what I and others say and run with it. Absolutely hilarious.

Sometimes I just can't resist.

Keep it up!!

On a side note. What's up with Pocahontas' necklace? It's as if some pre-schooler got the job and was like "today her necklace will be green, yaaaaay"

[Elladorine]

Keep it up!!

On a side note. What's up with Pocahontas' necklace? It's as if some pre-schooler got the job and was like "today her necklace will be green, yaaaaay"

Maybe they use preschoolers as consultants . . .

"Ok kids, which cover looks the prettiest?"
"Can we make her necklace green all over? The grey part's boring!"
"Ok, green it is!"
"Yay!"

Well . . . at least it's not as bad as the Ferngully cover (not Disney, but still). And perhaps it's unfortunate I've seen it since it makes all other covers look amazing by comparison.

[PatrickvD]

Keep it up!!

On a side note. What's up with Pocahontas' necklace? It's as if some pre-schooler got the job and was like "today her necklace will be green, yaaaaay"

Maybe they use preschoolers as consultants . . .

"Ok kids, which cover looks the prettiest?"
"Can we make her necklace green all over? The grey part's boring!"
"Ok, green it is!"
"Yay!"

Well . . . at least it's not as bad as the Ferngully cover (not Disney, but still).

And perhaps it's unfortunate I've seen it since it makes all other covers look amazing by comparison.

That Ferngully cover was beyond hideous. I would actually love to meet the person who made it so I could give him/her some sort of restraining order from photoshop and art supplies in general.

[Sotiris]

So, the Gold Collection cover is real for the stand-alone movie?

Yes.

[Elladorine]

That Ferngully cover was beyond hideous. I would actually love to meet the person who made it so I could give him/her some sort of restraining order from photoshop and art supplies in general.

Open up! It's the Photoshop police! Surrender your art supplies and come out with your hands up!

[PatrickvD]

In all seriousness. I like that they're going with that original artwork for Pocahontas. I mean, she's on-model. How refreshing.

[Lnds500]

I'm one of the few who hate the single release's cover then?

SHE NEARLY DOESN'T HAVE A NOSE!!

i think this is much better

[Elladorine]

In all seriousness. I like that they're going with that original artwork for Pocahontas. I mean, she's on-model. How refreshing.

Well, I do wish they hadn't replaced the head of the original poster as seen in the next post . . .

I'm one of the few who hate the single release's cover then?

SHE NEARLY DOESN'T HAVE A NOSE!!

i think this is much better
[photo snip]

Her expression is better there and more suited to the overall picture, but I've heard people complain that it's off-model.

I think the other (new) head might work better if tweaked a little and given the right color (it's less saturated than the rest of the image).

[MJW]

I wonder if they'll do the single release and double release in North America and only offer the DMR coupon on the double. Kind of like how they do know with the 3D combo vs. 2D.

[Sotiris]

Here's a close-up of the characters:

[monorail91]

Now that I've gotten used to it, I think the cover would be fine if it were just Pocahontas and all the other characters got out of the way. Too much clutter.

[ProfessorRatigan]

Yeah, it isn't so much the cover that bothers me as the idea that I may be forced to buy a 2-movie collection as my only way to own the film on blu-ray. The cover itself looks...decent. Certainly much better than, say, the more recent Lady and the Tramp, Lion King and even Beauty and the Beast Diamond Edition covers. (I can't stand those. They look so...uninspired to me. Bambi's was rather appealing, though.)

Honestly, I don't know why Disney *doesn't* use the theatrical posters as their covers. Those are so wonderful and classy looking especially the ones that include all the major characters in some way. I hate *only* seeing the title character's huge face on the film cover. And I notice that more recently, the villains have been stripped from the artwork. Which is why I loved the VHS covers as a kid: they always usually had the villain on there somewhere. (Usually hovering over the title, menacingly) Heck, even the DVD releases stuck them on there somewhere, but smaller. It seems blu-ray shuffled them off completely. I was down right upset that Scar was nowhere to be found on the Lion King's. More room for Simba's gigantic freakin' head, I guess.

Anyway, sorry for the mini-rant and for going off on a tangent. I just hope we get standalone releases of these films (and Fox and the Hound!) in the U.S.

[Disney Live On]

Here are some awesome tid bits I found regarding the events of Pocahantas 2 in comparison to what is known about the real Pocahantas' travels to England:

Pocahontas did travel to England in 1616, although at the time of her journey she had already been baptized and taken the Christian name Rebecca. Furthermore, she was already married to John Rolfe at the time, as well as the mother of his son, Thomas. She traveled to England accompanied by Rolfe, her son, Uttamatomakin, and a retinue of Native American women. While in the film she appears to have stayed in England for about a week or two, she actually remained in England until her death in March 1617. John Rolfe was certainly in love with her, as expressed in letters he wrote, but it is unknown whether Pocahontas loved him in return, or if she simply saw their marriage as a political alliance.

The return voyage was halted before the ship made it to open sea as Pocahontas was too ill for them to continue; she died soon after and was buried at Gravesend, Kent on the Thames. Her son, Thomas, was also very sick but managed to survive and remained in London while his father continued on to Virginia. Rolfe died before he saw his son again.

In real life, Ratcliffe died in 1609, three years before Pocahontas came to England.

She did encounter John Smith during her stay, but was angry with him for betraying the kin relationship that her father had established with him.

During the "What A Day In London" sequence, a character appears who is evidently intended to be William Shakespeare. In reality, Shakespeare died on April 23, 1616; preceding Pocahontas arrival in London by two months on June 12,1616. In the film, Shakespeare is depicted getting the idea for the line "to be, or not to be," but the play Hamlet had already been written by the time Pocahontas came to England.

[Victurtle]

That's from wikipedia isnt it

I'm actually looking forward to watching the sequel. Are the songs not total atrocities?

[PatrickvD]

That's from wikipedia isnt it

I'm actually looking forward to watching the sequel. Are the songs not total atrocities?

Trust me, they are.

[DancingCrab]

That's from wikipedia isnt it

I'm actually looking forward to watching the sequel. Are the songs not total atrocities?

Trust me, they are.

I enjoyed some of the songs, but than again, I would enjoy hearing Judy Kuhn sing the damn phone book.

[Elladorine]

For the heck of it . . . the first one is artwork for the currently-posted Blu-ray and the Gold Collection DVD, the second is what the original theatrical poster looks like, and the third is sort of my compromise between the two.



I've always hated how the head on the first one is just plastered on to the old artwork; the color and shading don't even match, plus it looks oddly somber. The original poster is based on one of the film frames of course (and I prefer it), but as I've mentioned before I remember people complaining that it was way off model (I honestly don't mind so much in this case).

And just for fun, here's the Blu-ray cover we've been given, plus one with the theatrical poster substituted, one with my tweaking, and one that's altogether different. And yes, I ignored adding any Blu-ray logos . . . I'm entitled to laziness right now.

[jinkinquackers]

I've always really liked that picture you chose for the "altogether different" cover (I even used to have a mouse pad of that picture). Your pictures always look great enigmawing. Too bad Disney isn't using something like that.

On a side note, since I'm already writing a comment to you: Congratulations on the growth of your little family! Sorry I am so late in saying so.

[Lnds500]

For the heck of it . . . the first one is artwork for the currently-posted Blu-ray and the Gold Collection DVD, the second is what the original theatrical poster looks like, and the third is sort of my compromise between the two.



I've always hated how the head on the first one is just plastered on to the old artwork; the color and shading don't even match, plus it looks oddly somber. The original poster is based on one of the film frames of course (and I prefer it), but as I've mentioned before I remember people complaining that it was way off model (I honestly don't mind so much in this case).

And just for fun, here's the Blu-ray cover we've been given, plus one with the theatrical poster substituted, one with my tweaking, and one that's altogether different. And yes, I ignored adding any Blu-ray logos . . . I'm entitled to laziness right now.

thanks! I sooo prefer the one in which she's smiling!

[Elladorine]

I've always really liked that picture you chose for the "altogether different" cover (I even used to have a mouse pad of that picture). Your pictures always look great enigmawing. Too bad Disney isn't using something like that.

I've always loved that picture, especially since it was the cover for the "Art of" book. We didn't really have an internet to rely on back then and I really treasured the books and magazines that would tide me over until the theatrical and eventual home video releases. I just wish Disney could keep these covers simple and classy, and not clutter the heck out of them, lol.

On a side note, since I'm already writing a comment to you: Congratulations on the growth of your little family! Sorry I am so late in saying so.

Aw, thank you! We're very excited over here. The baby will have plenty of Disney films to grow up on.

thanks! I sooo prefer the one in which she's smiling!

No prob! I used to have that theatrical poster back in the day and I've always loved it.