DVDizzy Forum

Ugh, Film Divider confirmed that they're trying to add a new name to Moana.

https://twitter.com/FilmDivider/status/ ... 7401085952

Ugh, Film Divider confirmed that they're trying to add a new name to Moana.

https://twitter.com/FilmDivider/status/ ... 7401085952

why Disney? everybody already knows it as Moana...what good will it do to change it now?

If they have to change it though i hope its something poetic and descriptive and not some cheesy one word exclamation. I kinda like "The Wave Rider" or "Wave Rider." Though knowing them theyll just call it "Waves!"

Yeah, I don't get it. What's wrong with Moana? It doesn't sound "girly" or "princessy" to me.

If it is being altered because of the 'girlie' aspect of it, then that is just beyond stupid and beggars belief after the success of Tangled and Frozen, but if its being changed as Ron and Jon want to change the title then thats fine by me.

Moana isn't exactly a thrilling name or title, so could maybe slightly see if from that aspect, but its known for being called that now, so why mess with it ?

Though again I have said before, Disney hasn't ever really had brilliant names for any of their films; they are all pretty much simply named after the lead. Yes, that is a good reason to name the film after the lead character to notability, but not exactly 'artsy-fartsy' in any way.

Atlantica wrote:If it is being altered because of the 'girlie' aspect of it, then that is just beyond stupid and beggars belief after the success of Tangled and Frozen, but if its being changed as Ron and Jon want to change the title then thats fine by me.

Moana isn't exactly a thrilling name or title, so could maybe slightly see if from that aspect, but its known for being called that now, so why mess with it ?

Though again I have said before, Disney hasn't ever really had brilliant names for any of their films; they are all pretty much simply named after the lead. Yes, that is a good reason to name the film after the lead character to notability, but not exactly 'artsy-fartsy' in any way.

Though let's be fair here. Some of those titles were from the original source materials upon which they were based.

Yes they were, after the lead character which I acknowledge above. Which makes complete sense for sure, but again they aren't very fancy names to begin with at all.

Atlantica wrote:If it is being altered because of the 'girlie' aspect of it, then that is just beyond stupid and beggars belief after the success of Tangled and Frozen, but if its being changed as Ron and Jon want to change the title then thats fine by me.

This is so Lasseter or/and the Disney executives. And it seems like this time, they have Musker & Clements by the leashes. For example, it is clear that Musker & Clements wanted this to be 2D, like Mort. Nope, it's CGI. The only win/win they seem to have is the "2D over CGI", just like allegedly the opening number & the ocean. If they wanted a different name for Moana, believe me: Moana would be called a completely different title. It would not shock me at the least if the alleged casting of Dinah Jane for Moana (To be confirmed in 2 weeks if true) is all the doings of executives, trying to be safe and cool for a bunch of tweens. Look how there was an open call for newcomers, just like how Jodie & Linda were. Look at the casting for their past princesses and how they turned down the likes of Tyra Banks, Alicia Keys, & even Beyonce for a random Broadway star, whose big break was a flop and instantly forgotten, for Tiana.

Ugh. I am SO damn tired of people saying The Princess and the Frog "flopped".

DisneyJedi wrote:Ugh. I am SO damn tired of people saying The Princess and the Frog "flopped".

So am I. What I watched for myself was a darn good movie, but now Disney won't acknowledge it cause they want to act like they're ashamed of it's existence and unfairly label it a failure for being, *gasp*, NOT CGI!

Princess and the Frog wasn't a good movie because it was hand-drawn.

Frozen wouldn't have been a good movie unless it was CGI (and had it's title changed).

Such is the mindset of the Disney studio of today.

It didn't flop. It just "didn't do Lion King numbers". oh wait I guess that technically means it flopped.

But then again, critics and some people have pretty much gone with some post-LK films that "it was good but just not as good as Lion King."

This was the highest grossing WDAS feature of the 2000s, with just under $350 million worldwide. Chicken Little "$314 million" & Bolt "$310 million" were the only other features that decade to cross $300 million worldwide. Lilo & Stitch, the studio's highest grossing 2D feature of that decade with $273 million worldwide made $100 million less than Blue Sky's Ice Age 1 that same year! Was that Disney's fault or the audience fault?

DisneyEra wrote:This was the highest grossing WDAS feature of the 2000s, with just under $350 million worldwide. Chicken Little "$314 million" & Bolt "$310 million" were the only other features that decade to cross $300 million worldwide. Lilo & Stitch, the studio's highest grossing 2D feature of that decade with $273 million worldwide made $100 million less than Blue Sky's Ice Age 1 that same year! Was that Disney's fault or the audience fault?

The audiences, haha!

Either way, "Dinosaur" has become forgotten (unsurprisingly enough, because of it's trite story). However, I do have a soft spot for it, despite it's flaws. It has grown on me and I like the film despite it's flaws. I thought the film did have some great visuals and great soundtrack.

Tristy wrote:It didn't flop. It just "didn't do Lion King numbers". oh wait I guess that technically means it flopped.

But then again, critics and some people have pretty much gone with some post-LK films that "it was good but just not as good as Lion King."

Not really "flopped". Besides, it's not like Disney pretends this movie doesn't exist. They actually do acknowledge it, just not as much as they do Tangled or Frozen.

The one movie they really pretend doesn't exist is Song of the South. I'd say The Black Cauldron, but at least that got released on VHS here in the states, along with a remastered DVD eons later.

DisneyJedi wrote:Not really "flopped". Besides, it's not like Disney pretends this movie doesn't exist. They actually do acknowledge it, just not as much as they do Tangled or Frozen.

Yup. "The making of Frozen" acknowledges just "Tangled" and not "TPATF" (shall we blame Lasseter for this? Ha!). A friend of mine was on Disneyland at the fall of 2013 and found zero merchandise for it. But it was nice to see Tiana on some of the new Princess ad-clips.

DisneyJedi wrote:Ugh. I am SO damn tired of people saying The Princess and the Frog "flopped".

I didn't say it flopped in my post, though. I just used Tiana's voice actress as an example for the huge casting difference between Tiana and Moana. And of course, 2D for obvious reasons

disneyprincess11 wrote:I didn't say it flopped in my post, though. I just used Tiana's voice actress as an example for the huge casting difference between Tiana and Moana. And of course, 2D for obvious reasons

And that's a compelling comparison. Though Anika Noni Rose is known, she's never been a huge star (it's funny how she competed with Beyonce, since she actually starred with her on "Dreamgirls").

Only one more week until we found out who the lucky voice actress for Moana is. Even though it's pretty obvious that's her based on the proof, I really hope it's not that 5th Harmony Girl.

Be reassured disneyprincess11...

I hope you're right, PrinceKido. If it's the FH girl, I'll just resign myself to another Lasseter movie with M&C's names slapped on for window dressing.