DVDizzy Forum

DisneyDuster wrote:Everyone here will agree that Floyd Norman would NOT do something that was AGAINST what Walt would want, he would only do something that was FOR what Walt would want.

If Floyd Norman had said: “The idea of changing the title of a classic like ‘Rapunzel’ to ‘Tangled’ is beyond stupid, I’m still hoping that Disney will eventually regain their sanity and return the title of their movie to what it should be. I’m convinced they’ll gain nothing from this except the public seeing Disney as desperately trying to find an audience” and added "besides, Walt would never have agreed with changing the title" I would agree with you. But he doesn't, he makes no reference to Walt. Now, could he not simply be stating his opinion? Does he have to be crusading against Disney in the name of Walt's memory? I'm not saying Floyd doesn't love Walt, I've read articles in which he describes Walt as his hero, but that doesn't mean every opinion he has of Disney is governed by some sense of duty he has.

DisneyDuster wrote:He would not fight for the title (and I will call it fighting for the title whether anyone agrees or not) if he did not think Walt would approve.

I don't agree he "fought". He made a comment that he didn't like the title change and that he thought it was a desperate attempt by Disney to attract a larger audience, exactly like many people did on this forum. You yourself said you didn't like the title change, so did you "fight" for it to be reversed? Where is your evidence that he said that because he thought Walt would disapprove? Can Floyd Norman not have an opinion unless you think it would match Walt's?

DisneyDuster wrote:For Walt's company, he would not do just whatever he wants and not what Walt wants, because that would not be the logical doings of a man who worked for Walt.

Going by your logic, Walt would disapprove of Pixar and not like them, yet Floyd has done and is currently working for Pixar. So, again purely by your logic, Floyd is doing something that Walt would not approve of, yes?

SWillie! wrote:This, right here, is definition of "Disney Duster." You always adjust your argument so that it works around the legitimate flaws in your logic that other people point out.

Could not agree more with this.

Neal wrote:What is it about the Tangled marketing that includes Paschal with Rapunzel? Where is Cogsworth and Lumiere with Belle? Where's Flounder with Ariel? Et cetera... I don't understand....

because chameleons are awesome. that clip art is fine.

Let's try this again.

Floyd Norman is able to have his own opinions not having to do with anyone else. We all agree on this.

However, this time, he was talking about what should be done for a company that is not his, it is Walt Disney's. Since he worked for Walt and liked Walt, he would not want to do anything that went against Walt's approval. It is true we do not know for 100% sure if he actually would purposely do something against what he thought Walt would approve of, but it is very, very, very, very, very, very, very likely that he would only do something that he thinks Walt would approve that had to do with Walt's own company. And notice I did not say he thinks exactly like Walt, just that because he knew Walt, he is more likely than even the people that made Tangled to have an idea of what Walt would want.

And yes, I did fight for the title of Tangled. I signed robster's petition and spoke my mind as much as I good. I even protested the title. If you don't consider what Floyd Norman did fighting, fine, but I do, because speaking your opinion, especially in a news article many people will see, to try and get something changed is still a small amount of fighting. Not much, but it's still an attempt.

SWillie! wrote:This, right here, is definition of "Disney Duster." You always adjust your argument so that it works around the legitimate flaws in your logic that other people point out.

This one cannot be said to be opinion. Only I, the person you are talking about, can tell you what the true me is, what is truly going on in my mind, and I tell you that though I adjusted my argument there, in other times that you think I adjusted my argument, I did not. Sometimes people have to re-explain things in different ways to get across the very same argument they always meant. If you don't believe that ever happens well tough luck but it either has happened to you yourself already or it will someday.

Floyd is easy to contact, send him a message on Twitter or leave a message on his blog asking what he thinks and whether he said what he said because knows what Walt would think. Regardless, he has his own mind and I have no problem with Tangled as the title. Besides, the film came out last year so it doesn't make much difference now and this debate has become redundant.

Oiy, I do not mean he knows for 100% sure what Walt would think, just that he wouldn't say it if he thought Walt wouldn't approve. Stop changing what I say.

DisneyDuster wrote:just that he wouldn't say it if he thought Walt wouldn't approve.

Again, where was Walt Disney mentioned in Floyd Norman's statement? You're guessing here, making assumptions. Either way, you're right, like you're always right and the rest of us are wrong I just can't be bothered with this particular debate anymore.

DisneyDuster wrote:Stop changing what I say.

I didn't. You've spent the past day saying that Floyd Norman made that statement because he would worked with Walt, therefore he knew Walt, therefore he knows what Walt would want. Now, you're not 100% sure? Oh well, regardless I concede.

I don't bother to get in this discussion, with duster, anymore as it really goes no where. So I just sit back, relax and watch the debate with a smile on my face.

Super Aurora wrote:I don't bother to get in this discussion, with duster, anymore as it really goes no where. So I just sit back, relax and watch the debate with a smile on my face.

Oh and don't forget the the Milkbuds

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:Going by your logic, Walt would disapprove of Pixar and not like them, yet Floyd has done and is currently working for Pixar. So, again purely by your logic, Floyd is doing something that Walt would not approve of, yes?

No, I said that it is doubtful Walt would like them personally because they are completely CGI. However, it makes sense that Floyd would go to Pixar because he's not making CGI within Walt's company. And even if he did, if he worked on something like Rapunzel where it tried to look more like the old Walt Disney features, then that would make sense, too.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2011/time-a ... ted-films/

TANGLED IS LISTED #17 AS ONE OF THE BEST ANIMATED FILMS OF ALL TIME!!!!

And photos of Rapunzel's show on Disney on Ice




Is it me or the set looks WAY too much like the one in Princess Wishes? Unless she was on that show briefly.

Disney Duster wrote:No, I said that it is doubtful Walt would like them personally because they are completely CGI. However, it makes sense that Floyd would go to Pixar because he's not making CGI within Walt's company. And even if he did, if he worked on something like Rapunzel where it tried to look more like the old Walt Disney features, then that would make sense, too.

Yet I think you're forgetting Dusty, Walt was not the kind of man to just simply rest on his laurels. I think he would fully embrace CGI animation, because if you look at every one of his animated films, he was always interested in what new leaps animation could take: the multi-plane camera, the new stylized animation approach done by UPA that influenced Disney, the stop motion animation of the late 50s shorts.

Look at the theme parks. Walt was even more fickle there for wanting newer and better technology. I think the best story of this is the Viewliner. It was a futuristic looking train that ran on the ground for only about a year and a half. Why only a year and a half? Because Walt saw the monorail in Germany and instantly fell in love with how high-tech and interesting it was and immediately tore out the Viewliner and replaced it with the monorail. Not to mention Walt's push for the development of audio-animatronics. Because Disneyland opened with static figures like in the original Fantasyland attractions, should attractions such as Pirates of the Caribbean, Haunted Mansion, It's A Small World, Carousel of Progress all have been static too because they were not the original technology that was opened with the park?

The point is that Walt was very much a kid when it came to his big expensive toys. He loved technology and what pushed the boundaries of theme park design and animation even further. I don't doubt that he would still probably produce traditional animated films had he been alive today, but I doubt he would have hated something as new and innovative as CGI animation when he himself was all for utilizing the latest technology.

DisneyDuster wrote: However, it makes sense that Floyd would go to Pixar because he's not making CGI within Walt's company. And even if he did, if he worked on something like Rapunzel where it tried to look more like the old Walt Disney features, then that would make sense, too.

Seriously, how many more technicalities can you come up with to try and justify your opinions as facts? So what if he did work on a CG film at Disney? You say it makes sense and yet I have no idea what your point is supposed to be. Your entitled to your opinion as I am to mine, so lets leave it at that.

PrincePhillipFan wrote:Yet I think you're forgetting Dusty, Walt was not the kind of man to just simply rest on his laurels. I think he would fully embrace CGI animation, because if you look at every one of his animated films, he was always interested in what new leaps animation could take: the multi-plane camera, the new stylized animation approach done by UPA that influenced Disney, the stop motion animation of the late 50s shorts.

I don't doubt that he would still probably produce traditional animated films had he been alive today, but I doubt he would have hated something as new and innovative as CGI animation when he himself was all for utilizing the latest technology.

I'm getting awfully sick of Disney Duster's self-indulgent 'opinions' that lack any substance whatsoever.

have you got a link to the site where you found those photos of disney on ice please.. looks really good

disneyprincess11 wrote:http://www.firstshowing.net/2011/time-a ... ted-films/

TANGLED IS LISTED #17 AS ONE OF THE BEST ANIMATED FILMS OF ALL TIME!!!!

Akira is #17 on there. Tangled is #19.

That list is shit with exception of their #1 choice.

I find Paprika, and Akira WAY better than many of those listed there.



nice post Tim. Only you can probably talk sense into Mike.

disneyprincess11 wrote:And photos of Rapunzel's show on Disney on Ice

It looks nice! Where did you get the images?

Disney Duster wrote:No, I said that it is doubtful Walt would like them personally because they are completely CGI. However, it makes sense that Floyd would go to Pixar because he's not making CGI within Walt's company. And even if he did, if he worked on something like Rapunzel where it tried to look more like the old Walt Disney features, then that would make sense, too.

Dear Disney Enthusiasts,

Thank you for the images, disnyprincess11!

I think that the princesses look pretty, and I know that their dresses can't be too long, due to the ice, but I really don't like the fact that they look like a trio of starched-skirt Princess Barbie dolls from the latest Barbie princess movie toy lineup!

Thank you in advance for your replies.

DisneyDude2010 wrote:have you got a link to the site where you found those photos of disney on ice please.. looks really good

Sotiris wrote:

disneyprincess11 wrote:And photos of Rapunzel's show on Disney on Ice

It looks nice! Where did you get the images?

Ticketmaster (look up the show)

And

http://www.dunkindonutscenter.com/disne ... rovidence/