blackcauldron85, on 2/10/07 wrote:Just like what I wrote in the "Aladdin" thread, I don't feel a need to make live-action versions of Disney animated films. The Mickey Mouse version is so beloved, I can't see this being anywhere near as good as the segment from "Fantasia". They should use their money on brand-new projects.
I went to Page 1 of this thread, and Bobby was right here, and he read my post, and he asked if I still feel this way after having seen the film (I just came back from seeing it), and so I figured I'd quote myself. It was very different from Mickey's version...it was really, really well done- it was a lot better than I thought it would be- so, while yes, I would like Disney to get more original ideas, this was a good idea. Maybe reimagining shorts isn't nearly as bad as remaking full-length films.
blackcauldron85, on 2/12/07 wrote:They've already told this story- come and tell us a story you haven't told us yet.
Oh
The Sorcerer's Apprentice...you're changing my world upside down. Okay, okay, Disney hadn't told us quite this story in quite this way before. I still want Disney to be more creative in its future choices of stories to tell, though.
Siren wrote:No offense, but people, media, critics, etc need to get their heads our of their arses and realize its okay to adapt an existing story WITHOUT it being an official remake of another movie.
Maybe someday I'll heed this advice...
dvdjunkie wrote:but there is truly a great moment in the film when they give us a 'live-action' sequence of the animated brooms and buckets of water' that we all know from "Fantasia"
That scene was done really, really well. It was exciting and funny...good job, Disney!
disneyboy20022 wrote:Spoiler about the ending and the Scene after the credits
I wasn't sure who it was, but my friend told me...I mean, it was short, so it didn't give much away...
Oh, and the theater was almost packed...I was pretty high up, and the theater was situated weirdly, so I couldn't see many lower rows, but it was definitely pretty packed, which was great.
Escapay wrote:The narrated prologue in the beginning felt like an epic movie that should've been made. Seriously, I think I would've been more interested in a period fantasy film than in a modern-day one.
While I didn't dislike that part, it was actually my least favorite part of the film.
Escapay wrote:The scenes with Young Dave and the antique store also felt like another movie entirely. And that becomes a recurring problem throughout the entire thing. There are pieces of scenes that feel out of place because it feels like another movie. I wasn't sure if this was an action-comedy or a fantasy-action or a fantasy-comedy or whatever. There was no common ground that the movie focused on, it kept shifting.
I don't agree. I didn't feel like anything seemed out of place...
Escapay wrote:It's a lot of flash-in-the-pan effects, some longer than they needed to be (though
admittedly, the dragon was quite good). The broomsticks scene that was supposed to be reminiscent of the original "Sorcerer's Apprentice" tale was comedic, but also a nice convenient way of saying "This is serious. Magic is not for games." It's a fitting homage to the Fantasia version, but doesn't do much else. The car chase scene was overtly long, ultimately served no purpose, and could have been cut out.
Again, I disagree. I
thought that the effects were really great and they definitely kept me entertained. I liked the broom scene- it was fun and, as you said, it served a purpose for Dave. And I liked the car chase scene- it was really exciting to me.
Escapay wrote:The passage of time in the film is confusing. How many days does Dave spend being trained? He went from "OMG, my hallucinations were real!" to "OMG, I'm doing magic without the ring" far too quickly. But I guess that's the price you pay in storytelling when the bad guys are so quick to act, and so the good guys must be quicker.
I didn't think about this once- well, I think one time I thought,
"Hey, he's wearing the same clothes..." but besides that, the time thing wasn't an issue at all to me. I just enjoyed the movie.
Escapay wrote:One thing I did like was the bumbling nature of Dave. Awkward, reluctant, clumsy. He's the likable nerd that you know is going to get the girl at the end. Of course, it's not much of a stretch for Jay Baruchel, who's more or less played the same type of character in "Undeclared", Tropic Thunder, Fanboys, and She's Out Of My League. But it works for him, and he makes the audience root for him.
Yes, he was great. But Jay always is. <3
Escapay wrote:Becky... more or less was useless, just there to be the girl that Dave is distracted by and falls in love with. Then again, so was Veronica (a role Monica Belluci is gorgeous in, but ultimately a waste to add to her resume). The women in this movie really are poorly-realized. Even Morgana had no purpose other than to be the root of all evil in the film, without ever explaining why.
I agree, but
Becky did help out in the end. 
And how Dave felt about Becky helped him realize how Balthazaar felt about Veronica, and vice versa; they could relate to each other in that way. And love stories are always nice.
When the film first started, I was skeptical, but it got better. I really was into the film- I really, really, really liked it. I liked the 2 main characters. The villain was pretty good. I'm not familiar with Alfred Molina, so I comment on his past work, but I thought that he was pretty good. The special effects were awesome. I loved Dave most of the time. And I had no problem with Nic Cage at all. I'd recommend seeing this- it's better than it seems!!!
