Tangled (& Tangled Ever After) Discussion: Part VII

TheValentineBros · Post by **TheValentineBros** » Mon Sep 17, 2012 11:15 pm

ajmrowland wrote:
TheValentineBros wrote:*cue the vomit scene*
oh, seriously, what'll happen when you're in bed with a girl?

bradhig · Post by **bradhig** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 12:09 am

Stop with the stupid responses will you. Your making me mad.

TheValentineBros · Post by **TheValentineBros** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:42 am

bradhig wrote:Stop with the stupid responses will you. Your making me mad.

Why am I making you mad, I was also having a conversation with ajmrowland, I mean come on!

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 1:07 pm

bradhig wrote:Stop with the stupid responses will you. Your making me mad.

We'll stop making stupid responses, when you stop making stupid/bizarre statements.

bradhig · Post by **bradhig** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:29 pm

I am not making stupid statements.

TheValentineBros · Post by **TheValentineBros** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 4:48 pm

bradhig wrote:I am not making stupid statements.

Well, it was bizarre, you can admit that. I mean, I made stupid and bizarre statements too.

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 5:18 pm

Aaaaaaand we need some sort of real Tangled news.

bradhig · Post by **bradhig** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 6:50 pm

Doesn't it bother you that her white dress is showing?

Heartless · Post by **Heartless** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:22 pm

bradhig wrote:Doesn't it bother you that her white dress is showing?

You think the white part is an undergarment? I always thought it to be just another part of the actual dress.. Either way, why does it matter?

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 7:50 pm

bradhig wrote:Doesn't it bother you that her white dress is showing?

Does this bother you (0:20-0:40)?

<iframe width="480" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kmkZdhHu2A4" frameborder="0"></iframe>

That's "underwear" for girls in 1600's.

Semaj · Post by **Semaj** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 8:10 pm

He must mean Rapunzel's petticoat.

Doesn't bother me at all.

bradhig · Post by **bradhig** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 8:46 pm

Semaj wrote:He must mean Rapunzel's petticoat.

Doesn't bother me at all.

Yes that.

SWillie! · Post by **SWillie!** » Tue Sep 18, 2012 9:01 pm

For those just tuning in, this is actually the conversation right now.

Atlantica · Post by **Atlantica** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:10 am

Anyway, the whole reason why I dragged the thread back up was to ask if anyone had heard anything further about a Tangled II !

so ...... have they ?

Sotiris · Post by **Sotiris** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:19 am

atlanticaunderthesea wrote:Anyway, the whole reason why I dragged the thread back up was to ask if anyone had heard anything further about a Tangled II !

So ...... have they?

Currently, there're only some rumors about it. Nothing concrete yet.

qindarka · Post by **qindarka** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:22 am

atlanticaunderthesea wrote:Anyway, the whole reason why I dragged the thread back up was to ask if anyone had heard anything further about a Tangled II !

so ...... have they ?

If Disney does make a Tangled II and it is made by WDAS as part of their animated canon, the flames of my wrath will consume all of Burbank.

Fortunately, we haven't heard anything about it beyond a few words from Mandy Moore and I doubt she is privy to any inside knowledge. Disney also has a few films lined up or in production, none of which have anything to do with Tangled so I doubt there will be a sequel, at least in the foreseeable future.

(I'd still watch it)

Sotiris · Post by **Sotiris** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:25 am

qindarka wrote:If Disney does make a Tangled II and it is made by WDAS as part of their animated canon, the flames of my wrath will consume all of Burbank.

Do you just oppose to a Tangled sequel or any sequel in general? 'Cause there're already talks about a Wreck-It Ralph sequel.

Atlantica · Post by **Atlantica** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 3:30 am

Considering how well the first was received, and how much of a success it was, a sequel could happen. Plus, the short was just so darn charming!

Thank you Sotiris for helping out....is there anything you dont know ?!

qindarka · Post by **qindarka** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 4:33 am

Sotiris wrote:
qindarka wrote:If Disney does make a Tangled II and it is made by WDAS as part of their animated canon, the flames of my wrath will consume all of Burbank.
Do you just oppose to a Tangled sequel or any sequel in general? 'Cause there're already talks about a Wreck-It Ralph sequel.

I am generally not fond of sequels being made, though I will try to judge the film based on its own merits. I do like Shrek 2 more than Shrek and Cars 2 more than Cars, for example.

However, some movies are more suited to sequels than others. For example, I have little problem with The Rescuers Down Under being made as I think the premise of the original allowed for it. In the case of Tangled, there really is nothing more to do with the story and to make a sequel, they would have to bring the story into a completely different direction and I'd rather they use a different setting and characters if they want to go down that route.

I will reserve judgment on Wreck-it-Ralph as I haven't watched it yet and have no idea how the story will unfold and how it will end. Thus far though, the only sequels for any of WDAS's films that I would be comfortable with would be for The Great Mouse Detective and another Rescuers film, none of which are likely.

(I do not consider The Three Caballeros, Fantasia 2000 or Winnie the Pooh to be sequels.)

And I do like it that for all people's complaints about the cheapquels, WDAS has been the only major western Animation studio to avoid making sequels. If the cheapquels have prevented that, then I am glad for their existence.

Atlantica · Post by **Atlantica** » Wed Sep 19, 2012 6:40 am

I was going to say, out of all animation houses, Disney / Pixar produces the fewest sequels out of anyone!

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Tangled (& Tangled Ever After) Discussion: Part VII