DVDizzy Forum

Great find, Disneynerd! I agree with you and MoonMarc21, it was better as live-action, so it feels less canon.

Disney Duster wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2024 10:08 pm Great find, Disneynerd! I agree with you and MoonMarc21, it was better as live-action, so it feels less canon.

Thank you, Duster They had at least some amount of dignity back in the 2000s when they left those sequels and prequels for Disneytoonstudios or live action, now they do it themselves with Ralph2, Frozen 2, but I try to stay Optimistic with F3, Moana2 or Zootopia 2 as they have still potential.

MoonMarc21 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2024 9:47 pm WOAH! Great find Disneynerd! You're the GOAT when it comes to finding lost media regarding Disney. For some reason, I can see you and friendoftheotherside working together...BAHAHAHAHA

Anyways, I actually agree that Maleficent was better off as a live-action movie rather than being part of the Disney Animated Canon. If it was, that would've been in Disneytoon Studios territory. Seriously, how they pitched it really feels so in line of what Disneytoon did in the late 2000s onward with the TinkerBell movies already popping up on my head when I read it. But I guess because they really wanted to copy Wicked's success, they made it in a studio that made features that were more theatrical instead of one that has their movies only relegated to straight to dvd, given that they were so confident in it at first as an animated movie. Now I'm curious of those 3d test animation they made for this movie. But yeah, it would be so jarring if it switched styles just like what you said in that last sentence.

Thank u Moonmarc <3 Im  I was sceptical at first because I found the article at the cancelledmovies.com which is usually filled with fanmade stuff.. but aside of that fanwebsite DenofGeek and lostmediawiki are the main sources and are actually really trustworthy.

And yeah, they were desperate with preexisting disney property in the 2000s, giving that they were thinking of remaking the Disney classics in 3d starting with Pinocchio, yikes. Glad they left that to the live Action department.

I'm glad it happened as a live-action film, too, but perhaps it might've been a little better if it had been made by WDAS instead. It would've been very weird if that had happened though.

In a new interview, Don Hahn revealed that Kenneth Branagh was initially approached to direct the film, before even Tim Burton.

Branagh's a favorite director of mine, even outside of his involvement with Cinderella. I think he might have given the film a more regal feel to it, but the real problem was the screenplay, as well as the central directive behind the movie. I don't think he would have taken away from that.

AM I still a little curious to know what he would have done with the property? A little. In much a similar way that I'm curious about "Okay, but COULD a hundred men take on one gorilla?"

I can't decide if Cinderella is a good film or not. My initial reaction was that it was good but not as good as Walt's. Over time...I have thought it has amazing visuals and a great feeling of romance, but that's pretty much it. It's boring. So in the end...I'll say it's between ok and good.

Could Branagh have turned Maleficent into a film that's not a disaster but instead between ok and good? No. That screenplay turning Maleficent into a good guy and changing the story so much just prevents such a thing.

I have seen Branagh's Hamlet. That was...ok. I didn't get major feels from that either.

Are good, classic movies just sometimes ok? I dunno. The 1968 Romeo and Juliet was a masterpiece. 'Course Branagh was not a part of that.

Still, Branagh's Cinderells is my favorite live-action film. It's the definitive live-action version despite the boredom. I watched it twice last weekend. I fell asleep to it on the first watch but gave it all my attention the second watch. It's a boring, ok, masterpiece lol.

Sotiris wrote: ↑Sun Nov 02, 2025 7:21 pm In a new interview, Don Hahn revealed that Kenneth Branagh was initially approached to direct the film, before even Tim Burton.

Glad that didn't happen. The film as-is is imperfect, but I expect I'd have enjoyed it much less with him involved, tbh.

For some reason, it totally blanked my mind that Tim Burton was a part of this film. So he made two of the older properties successful then, between this and Alice. A shame Dumbo wasn't very good, he might've been the one who made Snow White.

Disney's Divinity wrote: ↑Fri Nov 07, 2025 8:36 amFor some reason, it totally blanked my mind that Tim Burton was a part of this film. So he made two of the older properties successful then, between this and Alice.

Tim Burton didn't direct Maleficent. Robert Stromberg did. Burton was just attached as director at some point during the film's development like Kenneth Branagh and David Yates were. His only contribution to the film is that he brought on to the project Linda Woolverton and Robert Stromberg who had worked with him on Alice as screenwriter and production designer respectively and who remained on the film even after his exit.