DVDizzy Forum

Disney's Divinity wrote:

Kyle wrote:Going off model in a charming tasteful way is kinda their specialty.

This is the main reason I haven't cared about these storybooks and coloring books since I turned 10. They are colorful, but that's about it.

So do you not like any concept art that is made before character designs are locked down?

What does that have to do with off-model merchandise made after a film is done (for 23 years now)?

I don't think the term off-model is appropriate in this context. Little Golden Books and the like, intentionally employ a different and distinct visual style which does not intend to duplicate that of the film's. While something is off-model when there is a failed attempt to reproduce the exact style and design of something.

I think you may be putting too much into the definition there, off model should mean just that. If something isn't drawn exactly like the model sheets instruct, its off model regardless of intentions, no?

Its semantics really, I could say a style that intentionally employs a different and distinct visual style which does not intend to duplicate that of the film but that's a mouth full o words I don't need to get the point across. I just dont think going off model has to always be a bad thing. There's just this stigma surrounding it.

Disney's Divinity wrote:

Kyle wrote:Going off model in a charming tasteful way is kinda their specialty.

This is the main reason I haven't cared about these storybooks and coloring books since I turned 10. They are colorful, but that's about it.

I'm not sure I get what your saying, are you agreeing with me or just the opposite here?

I'm with Sotiris. They aren't "off model", they're just a purposely different style. Divinity, what I was saying is that the little golden are a lot like concept art in the sense that they are very stylized renditions of these characters. Half the time they are visdev artists that illustrate them. There isn't much difference between, say, Mary Blair's work and the illustrations Ina little golden book. It's not like they're trying to be "on model".

I'm unsure. I could go either way, there's a good argument for calling it off-model and there's a good argument for saying it's not the same thing. If I had to decided...I wouldn't call it going off-model. I would call it stylization.

... They honestly think that just a Blu-ray release is going to make (some of) us feel better about the theatrical re-release being canceled? Do they REALLY think that?!

Well guess. Freakin'. What?!

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Z-OPwLaAVOA" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Thanks, Disney. Thanks a lot. You just made a majority of your fans (including me) hate you.

Why are you assuming the theatrical is canceled? We know the 3D version is still coming. I see no reason to think they would spend all that money converting it only to release it to the niche audience that happens to own 3D tvs and players. They will want to get their moneys worth, a 2 week (at least ) theatrical release is the best way to do so.

Kyle wrote:Why are you assuming the theatrical is canceled? We know the 3D version is still coming. I see no reason to think they would spend all that money converting it only to release it to the niche audience that happens to own 3D tvs and players. They will want to get their moneys worth, a 2 week (at least ) theatrical release is the best way to do so.

BECAUSE...

They announced that it was scrapped! I just hope that's proven wrong before long. I don't want to wait till I'm fifty (which is how old the movie will be by 2039, should they do something for a 50th anniversary thing) to see it on the big screen.

Really, Disney should rerelease their older films in theaters so fans of all generations can know what it's like to see a Disney classic on the big screen.

Can you link me to where they said that? Ive only seen hearsay based on it being removed from the schedule, not official confirmation.

The most confirmation I got is this: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/en ... 9988.story

And this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/1 ... 81134.html

Right, that's the same unofficial stuff Ive seen, plus on the huffington post you have the user going by the name Ariel Mer who claims to be working on it and that the reports are totally false. I'm not worried. As far as I'm concerned nothing has changed, just the release date of both.

It was also rumored that the 3d star wars movies were cancelled, which has been said to be rescheduled as well. Seems Disney is just shuffling 3D releases around is all.

Well, do you have any official confirmation for that?

Plus, remember when one of the other UDers here called one of the Disney hotlines or something on the subject of the movie? The nice lady told them there were no plans of The Little Mermaid getting a theatrical rerelease.

Kyle wrote:Right, that's the same unofficial stuff Ive seen, plus on the huffington post you have the user going by the name Ariel Mer who claims to be working on it and that the reports are totally false. I'm not worried. As far as I'm concerned nothing has changed, just the release date of both.

It was also rumored that the 3d star wars movies were cancelled, which has been said to be rescheduled as well. Seems Disney is just shuffling 3D releases around is all.

People will say white is black to avoid facts they don't like. Suddenly an article from Huffington post is "unofficial" and a comment from a person named "Ariel Mer" is trustworthy? Are we serious? And do you honestly think that if the cancellation news were false Disney wouldn't have issued a statement saying so?

The Star Wars movies ARE cancelled (postponed to be more specific), there is even a press release about that.

Here, I doubt this will help, but...

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/the- ... e-release/

https://www.change.org/petitions/walt-d ... -rerelease

Lnds500 wrote:The Star Wars movies ARE cancelled (postponed to be more specific), there is even a press release about that.

Postponing is not the same thing as canceled, a delayed movie will eventually get released and that's what I believe is going on with mermaid here. there was also a time if I recall that we thought Beauty & the beast was canceled, at least here in the US. Seems par for the course by now.

How is the Huffinton post official? their generally reputable, sure, but they mainly aggregate stories from other sources and reword them. Their just another news outlet are they not? I want to hear it from the horses mouth. Disney hasn't released any official statement about mermaid being canceled, at least not that I can tell from either of these links, so I don't know what we're up in arms about here. Their just jumping to their own conclusions based on second hand information and release schedules.

And sure, I'll entertain the possibility that random commenter is just trolling us, but I dunno, he/she sounds just as believable as the many anonymous commenter you tend to hear real tidbits from at places like Floyd Norman's blog or similar blogs. People looking for attention pretending to be someone their not usually have bigger fish to fry. Call me crazy, and I'm sure you will, I just happen to think their telling the truth here. Until Disney releases an actual statement saying otherwise.

I signed the petition! If Disney executives or the marketing department bother to google 'TLM Re-release cancellation' they will see what a stink it has caused.

SWillie! wrote:I'm with Sotiris. They aren't "off model", they're just a purposely different style.

Perhaps it's the wrong term, but since I would buy merchandise to get the character from the film--it is off-model to me. Calling it a "different style” is a nice way of bypassing a more accurate description--“cheap and lazy." This isn't art noveau. They just aren't capable of giving the characters their accurate look, and often can't even take the time to remember and/or check their proper coloring. I'm not swallowing the "different style" defense.

There is no comparison to concept art made before the film's release.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Calling it a "different style” is a nice way of bypassing a more accurate description--“cheap and lazy." They just aren't capable of giving the characters their accurate look, and often can't even take the time to remember and/or check their proper coloring.

Are we talking about the same thing here? I'm talking about the stylized storybooks in the vein of Little Golden Book and not about generic storybooks or coloring books.

I'm talking about these:




Not these:

Thanks Sotiris, that's exactly what I thought when I read that post haha... Divinity, Little Golden Books are far from cheap and lazy. Like I said, they're often illustrated by visual development artists that worked on their respective films. I know PatF and Tangled were for sure, not sure about the Brave one Sotiris posted. But, since they are illustrated by the same artists that did much of the visdev for the film, I think there's an obvious comparison there.

Little golden books are fantastic little works of art. They aren't your average storybook, and they're certainly not cheap and lazy.