Re: Zootopia
Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2015 6:22 pm
I'm no Shakira fan, but for some inexplicable reason I have been listening to "Whenever, Wherever" on repeat for the past 3 days, so now I'm convinced I have some kind of Disney intuition.
If it's any consolation, I didn't like the teaser either.PatrickvD wrote:The trailer made me wonder if I was going crazy, since most people seemed to enjoy it, but seriously, I'm not going to defend this.
The pop star Gazelle angle totally reminded me of it!PatrickvD wrote:Also, does this remind anyone else of Disney's canned Wildlife?
Sorry, but there are a lot of Shakira fans out there. Not to mention I really disagree with this opinion that it will be a turd.PatrickvD wrote:Shakira plays a popstar named 'Gazelle', also providing a new song for the film:
https://www.facebook.com/DisneyAnimatio ... =1&theater
I'm sorry, but this movie looks like a complete piece of shit. The trailer made me wonder if I was going crazy, since most people seemed to enjoy it, but seriously, I'm not going to defend this. If these are the kind of 'original' films Disney has in mind they will soon have me begging for Cars 3. There are some awful sounds in the universe.... Shakira's voice is quite up there.
I've been quite easy on Lasster's era at WDAS, but I'll call something a turd if that's what I see. This looks like one of the most unappealing Disney animated films since Home on the Range.
Also, does this remind anyone else of Disney's canned Wildlife? Which reportedly had Roy Disney running screaming out of a storyboard screening.
I seriously cannot get over how off putting this whole thing looks.
It's not. They said during the panel that the missing animal was an otter.jazzflower92 wrote:Hey, I wonder if the character that Shakira is voicing is the missing animal.
I think thankfully its not going be like Shark Tale in tone.
They'd REALLY have to screw up to get to that level of s***.jazzflower92 wrote:I think thankfully its not going be like Shark Tale in tone.
Hmmm...a really tiny baby elephant? I think?disneyprincess11 wrote:Mystery character at 0:21.
Like we need another Chicken Little from Disney. They've never really been their true selves ever since that movie came into existence. Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh really seemed to be bringing Disney back again, but alas, they're now further away from themselves than ever before.Matt wrote:This reminds me of Chicken Little. Anyone else get that feel from the movie?
I get what you mean given the humanoid animals, but I think in terms of animation and design, it looks better. Story-wise and in terms of entertainment value, we'll have to wait until March (given that the current trailer is so ambiguous), but I think something would really have to go amuck for it to get to the nadir of Chicken Little. What an awful piece of sh!t that was...Matt wrote:This reminds me of Chicken Little. Anyone else get that feel from the movie?
2Disney4Ever wrote:Like we need another Chicken Little from Disney. They've never really been their true selves ever since that movie came into existence. Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh really seemed to be bringing Disney back again, but alas, they're now further away from themselves than ever before.
The thing is, both movies would have looked far more appealing (and would truly be Disney) in hand-drawn animation, because anthropomorphic cartoon animals were practically made for 2D. And since there's no known record of Chicken Little ever being developed as a hand-drawn feature, I'm still convinced that it was deliberately developed by Disney as a replacement for it.Wonderlicious wrote:I get what you mean given the humanoid animals, but I think in terms of animation and design, it looks better. Story-wise and in terms of entertainment value, we'll have to wait until March (given that the current trailer is so ambiguous), but I think something would really have to go amuck for it to get to the nadir of Chicken Little. What an awful piece of sh!t that was...
Not sure whether to laugh or be offended.Wonderlicious wrote: