DVDizzy Forum

Posted: **Sat Feb 05, 2011 10:07 pm**

enigmawing wrote:She seems so mature and serious (Rey says she looks bad-ass, lol)! I'm happy with the darker colors for her dress.

Ooh, the darker colors look soooo much better. Much less Easter egg-y. You can actually see the prettiness of the design and all the detail.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:00 am**

Mobje wrote:Just thought i'd share these Dutch (and Belgian?) DVD/Blu-ray covers

Now that is something I like to buy. For Disney's, "Tangled," I'll rent it at Redbox, but for Disney's, "Rapunzel," I'll buy it from the Internet. Sorry to be picky Disney fans. Say, can anyone of you send me an Amazon site to buy that brand, besides in the US? It is optional.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:03 am**

I don't have the time or the patience to actually get wrapped up in my opinions about all the drama, but I have to put my two cents in.

To be honest, Big One, I think on the a-hole scale you're actually on the same level as Duster right now, if not higher. All your rants about "you are an offensive poster" and the like make it seem as if you believe Disney Duster is ACTUALLY a BAD HUMAN BEING because of the things he says. But what you need to realize is that there is a difference between "offensive" and "annoying".

Yes, everyone here knows Duster gets annoying with his essay-rants that all repeat the same thing and make his opinions sound like facts. But until this completely ridiculous nonsense started when you came in, the rest of us were able to dismiss those rants for the silly ramblings that they are.

In no way have I ever been actually "offended" by anything Duster has said, and I doubt many, if any at all, have felt that way (anyone please feel free to chime in if I'm wrong). And the fact that you seem to be taking his overly-extreme love for what "Disney" means to him, personally... well I think that's kind of pathetic. It's like you feel this need to come on here and make him feel like a horrible person. Does it make you feel better knowing that there are a ton of people on this forum that have stopped bothering to look at and read this thread? At this point, no one gives a shit what you two are saying to each other, and it should be taken to private messages if you would like to continue your utter nonsense.

The sad part is that we all know exactly what Duster means about everything he says, but it's just that none of us feel the same way, or at least not nearly as passionate as he does, and so everyone acts as if he's some raving lunatic. That seems really unfortunate.

Duster - For the record, I do feel that "Tangled" is what you call "The Real" story of Rapunzel, as I'm sure many people will. Especially ten years down the road. I understand why you don't, but just know that there are those of us out there that do.

___________________________________________________________

Now back to the real world.

EnigmaWing - NICE JOB on the rendering. Like, seriously... really nicely done.

And I love that those covers say Rapunzel. Now, if only one of the countries that have that title would make a steelbook for this... I'd be one happy fan.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 3:21 am**

Disney's Divinity a lot I want to say has already been said by Super Aurora, so I'll skip a lot of what you said, cause I don't feel like repeating the same arguments.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Um...no, it isn't. Both Quasi and Cinderella have a lot of respect and/or love for Frollo and Tremaine at the beginning of those films. If Quasi didn't, he wouldn't have been as easily manipulated by Frollo, or even try to save him at the end after he's just tried to stab him multiple times.

There is a difference between love and respect, my friend.

In any form or fashion, we never saw Quasi or Cinderella hug onto their parent, or express genuine happy moments with their parent. This is completely different in Tangled, when Rapunzel was practically all over Mother Gothel when it came to the lovey-dovey stuff, and Mother Gothel was all over her.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Also, btw, I don't think you could ever read too "deep" into anything. You must come from the school of thought that fairy tales and Disney movies are just simple, little, superficial stories. In fact, there is a lot more going on under the surface, more often than not. Of course, you're free to think that. Doesn't mean we all do though.

You're putting words in my mouth, this isn't what I'm saying whatsoever. Disney movies have a lot of depth in them at times, but I think you're looking into depth that isn't there with Cinderella. Her attachment to Tremaine is of a slave rather than a loved daughter. Same with Quasi. This is what makes Rapunzel and Gothel's relationship quite different, and heartwarming in a lot of ways. Though I realize "heartwarming" is opinionated, the movie doesn't nearly establish Gothel as being as vile as Lady Tremaine or Frollo.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Um...could you stop talking down to every one? If you had any sense of context, you would know I was making a joke on the assumption that "opposites attract"--I wasn't saying that's how all relationships are. I'm not sure why you're attempting to be so antagonistic, when all I'm doing is trying to have a drama-free discussion.

You really didn't come off as joking, so sorry if I misunderstood anything. I wasn't talking down to you, I didn't really see any indication that you were joking...

Disney's Divinity wrote:So development only actually happens if the characters are human?

No, that's not what I'm saying.

Disney's Divinity wrote:And Pascal and Maximillian don't interrupt the movie for their humor (in fact, Pascal does just that when Rapunzel's hair glows in the fireside scene)?

Yeah but they're infinitely more likable and fun that such characters as Louis the Alligator and Ray, mainly due to the fact that they don't have to rely on dialogue to express themselves and are awesome characters in general. Their humor fits in because Rapunzel is such a cutesy character, while with Tiana you're meant to take her character more seriously due to her background and then all a sudden we have these two really dumbass talking stereotype animal characters hogging spotlight that they don't deserve. I know it's just my opinion, but I think most people will agree that the animal characters in Tangled > the animal characters in Princess and the Frog.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Um...you do realize the frogs were...really human, right? They change back at the end. Also, you have seen Lady & the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians, The Lion King, The Rescuers, and so on, where two anthropomorphic animals fall in love?

As I've said in another thread, I don't like Lady and the Tramp (for reasons that aren't because they're animals), but the other movies are great. They stay in their own realms of quality, and make animal characters the focus of the film. In particular I love the animal characters in 101 Dalmatians and The Lion King.

With Princess and the Frog, the unfortunate fact is that the very few moments when the movie focused on human characters, it was REALLY good. Like so good that if it stayed (mostly) that way the movie could've far eclipsed many Disney classics. Unfortunately they had to ruin this by bringing in a twist on the old story by making the princess turn into a frog too, and go on this really boring, pointless, and painful bayou adventure. But I honestly think the human characters in the movie are some of the best Disney's ever done, and that's how I feel about Tangled too with it's two central characters. Mind you that despite these flaws, I really enjoyed Princess and the Frog, but I don't think it's anywhere near Tangled. It may take a few years for people to accept Tangled, but in the long run people are going to find it more memorable than Princess and the Frog.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Of course, all the fairy tale films have similar ideas (SB being kissed just like Snow White), but they usually do it in a rather different way each time. Where this felt like they were just trying to copy past '90s successes for ideas.

I don't really feel this way. Much like the Sleeping Beauty scene when Aurora was sleeping, that was a LOT like when Snow White was in her casket. It's the same concept in general, but was done different. This is how I feel about Tangled, and the backstories for the plot device that caused the resurrection are drastically different. In truth, however, that both original stories have really similar endings, and they pretty much adapted them accurately according to the world each movie is set in. You can't really blame Disney for that.

SWillie!:

SWillie! wrote:To be honest, Big One, I think on the a-hole scale you're actually on the same level as Duster right now, if not higher. All your rants about "you are an offensive poster" and the like make it seem as if you believe Disney Duster is ACTUALLY a BAD HUMAN BEING because of the things he says. But what you need to realize is that there is a difference between "offensive" and "annoying".

There is a difference, but Duster's comments are downright offensive. I don't say the word lightly, but going around saying everyone else is wrong without giving an actual reason with paragraphs and paragraphs of text is the very definition of shit-posting. Think of me as an a-hole I suppose, but it's time for someone who fights for the people.

SWillie! wrote:In no way have I ever been actually "offended" by anything Duster has said, and I doubt many, if any at all, have felt that way (anyone please feel free to chime in if I'm wrong). And the fact that you seem to be taking his overly-extreme love for what "Disney" means to him, personally... well I think that's kind of pathetic. It's like you feel this need to come on here and make him feel like a horrible person.

That is my intention, yes. I lurked this forum before, and have been keeping track of Duster's posting for a while now. Now that I have the gall to respond to him, it's time to end his ranting once and for all. No, people do not ignore him, despite what you believe, you seem to be missing all of the responses he gets when he posts here. I want to understand what he thinks "Disney essence" is.

SWillie! wrote:Does it make you feel better knowing that there are a ton of people on this forum that have stopped bothering to look at and read this thread? At this point, no one gives a shit what you two are saying to each other, and it should be taken to private messages if you would like to continue your utter nonsense.

I agree it should be brought to a new thread, but this discussion is about Tangled.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:13 am**

Super Aurora wrote:Forgive me but I gotta stick for my bro here. While you are cool person, Divinity, I can't help but think with all the "Umm... [insert respond]", seems come off a bit...obnoxious... whatever. To the responds.

Oh, yes, I agree. I kind of did that part on purpose, because I was being responded to as if I was a nostalgic, 5-year old, illogical idiot.

Overall, I still disagree about the Gothel-Rapunzel thing. Although Rapunzel might actually consider herself a "daugher," that's only a label difference. She is treated as an object by Gothel just as much as Quasi and Cinderella, and Rapunzel (and the audience) know from the beginning that she has no real say-so in her life.

Also, you do remember that Gothel ruled Rapunzel by fear, too? Nearly all of "MKB" is about scaring her about the Plague, murderers, rhinos, etc. "Don't ever ask to leave this tower again." "Don't forget it, you'll regret it...." "You will NOT leave this tower EVER!!!!!!!!!"

Also, the reasons against Tiana & Naveen in TP&TF are fine, but they are opinions, and I don't agree with them (for reasons I've already given).

SA wrote:
Disney's Divinity wrote:Where this felt like they were just trying to copy past '90s successes for ideas.
On contrary, if anything, tPatF does that actually.

I never said it didn't. But let's not keep this illusion that Tangled is innocent here.

SA wrote:
Disney's Divinity wrote:Um...could you stop talking down to every one? If you had any sense of context, you would know I was making a joke on the assumption that "opposites attract"--I wasn't saying that's how all relationships are. I'm not sure why you're attempting to be so antagonistic, when all I'm doing is trying to have a drama-free discussion.
Even I couldn't tell you were joking. and your last sentence make you sound like BellePrince, LOL.

You're right. People can just completely talk down to everyone, but if we mention it we're just drama queens.

Either way--yes, I'm stepping out. I'm not looking for a battle to the death here.

Partly the whole reason I started posting in this thread at all was to direct the attention away from DDuster to something less dramatic--partly because I felt DDuster was getting picked on far too harshly (more than Goliath has ever done, and that's saying something)--but Big One just wants to talk down to everyone, and I have better things to do than be treated like I'm an idiot. Like go edit that KHU article that's due.

Besides, what little discussion there was is just going in circles now. Because it's mostly come down to "IMO, I disagree." So there's not much left to say anyway.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:10 am**

Disney's Divinity wrote:I never said it didn't. But let's not keep this illusion that Tangled is innocent here.

It pretty much is, it's been in developed for a really long time now, while Princess and the Frog was pretty much exclusively bank on the idea of a black Disney princess. Tangled definitely has a lot more passion put into it, as it actually innovates in new ways to animate with CG animation, so there was a visual artistic interest in developing it.

Disney's Divinity wrote:but Big One just wants to talk down to everyone, and I have better things to do than be treated like I'm an idiot.

Not trying to do this... I'm sorry if I offended you or got off on a bad start.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:35 am**

Big One wrote:There is a difference, but Duster's comments are downright offensive. I don't say the word lightly, but going around saying everyone else is wrong without giving an actual reason with paragraphs and paragraphs of text is the very definition of shit-posting. Think of me as an a-hole I suppose, but it's time for someone who fights for the people.

If you can find me someone else on this board who really believes that Duster's comments are downright offensive, then please, be my guest. This does not include the few people on here that I'm sure will come on and say "I'm offended" just to see the drama continue. If you've "lurked" here long enough, you know who they are. You're right that it is "shit-posting"... but again, "shit-posting" is simply annoying. There's nothing offensive about it. If he was coming on and putting down individuals or groups of individuals, then it would be getting into "offensive" territory. But he simply comes on, speaks his peace, and leaves it at that. Just because he doesn't have facts to back up his opinion does not make him a horrible person.

But do you hear what you just said? "It's time for someone who fights for the people"? If you were an average person and were saying that in a joking manner, it would be entertaining. But the fact that you're using that saying seriously is absolutely pathetic. You're on a Disney fanboy forum, FOR GOD'S SAKE. We're talking about a movie with a freaking make-believe princess that has glowing magical hair, and you're worried that it's time for someone that fights for the people.

Big One wrote:That is my intention, yes. I lurked this forum before, and have been keeping track of Duster's posting for a while now. Now that I have the gall to respond to him, it's time to end his ranting once and for all. No, people do not ignore him, despite what you believe, you seem to be missing all of the responses he gets when he posts here. I want to understand what he thinks "Disney essence" is.

I never once said that people ignore him. I see all the responses. What I said was that others are able to dismiss them for the silly ramblings that they are. Those that respond to him don't lose sleep at night over Duster's antics. Sure, people try and prove him wrong, or try to make him back himself up with facts, but they don't come here and feel the need to make him feel like a horrible person.

You actually want that. You want to make someone else feel like a horrible person because of what they like or don't like about a DISNEY MOVIE. I don't care how annoying he is... that's just pathetic.

Regardless. Why does he need to back himself up with "facts"? We're on Ultimate Disney, not the damn astrophysics forum. We like talking about talking animals, fairy tales, magic, and all sorts of impossible things, and you want facts to back up someone's opinion about all this?

We're all fans here. Some of us are just bigger/crazier fans than others. If that's offensive to you, I feel sorry for you.

BigOne wrote:Not trying to do this... I'm sorry if I offended you or got off on a bad start.

Well, I hate to break it to you, but everyone here already thinks you're an asshole. If we thought Goliath treated Duster unfairly, he doesn't have anything on you.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 8:42 am**

Big One wrote:
Disney's Divinity wrote:I never said it didn't. But let's not keep this illusion that Tangled is innocent here.
It pretty much is, it's been in developed for a really long time now, while Princess and the Frog was pretty much exclusively bank on the idea of a black Disney princess. Tangled definitely has a lot more passion put into it, as it actually innovates in new ways to animate with CG animation, so there was a visual artistic interest in developing it.

That's simply not true. Like Rapunzel, The Frog Prince has been dabbled into since the mid-'90s, not only by Disney, but by Pixar. Plus, it's a little insulting to say that PatF was just a heartless merchandise promoter, when many people their time, energy, and souls into the movie. Just as much effort goes into every film, both flop and success and everything in between. Sorry, I just don't like how people make PatF as a horrible movie when it's far from it.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:27 am**

Dragonlion wrote: That's simply not true. Like Rapunzel, The Frog Prince has been dabbled into since the mid-'90s, not only by Disney, but by Pixar. Plus, it's a little insulting to say that PatF was just a heartless merchandise promoter, when many people their time, energy, and souls into the movie. Just as much effort goes into every film, both flop and success and everything in between. Sorry, I just don't like how people make PatF as a horrible movie when it's far from it.

My thoughts exactly, Dragonlion.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:04 am**

SWillie! wrote:
Well, I hate to break it to you, but everyone here already thinks you're an asshole.

LOL speaking on everyone's behalf.

I'm not one of "everyone" then.

people who took everything of his post that personally deserve to be made fun of. He drop hints here and there that some of it wasn't serious. LOL

While some of things he said may come off "offensive" By no mean was he hating duster either. he did exaggerate the dramatization a bit but by no mean was it intended as personal feud per se.

So guys, just chill, relax and enjoy yourself.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:22 am**

Tangled OW in Spain (Estimates)

Primeras estimaciones en ESPAÑA (via twitter)
Cita:

ESTIMADOS FIN DE SEMANA (04/06.02.11)

ENREDADOS (Disney): 3.960.000€
MÁS ALLÁ DE LA VIDA: 1.030.000€
PRIMOS (Warner): 895.000€

Fin de semana por fin por encima de los 10 millones aunque por muy poco (10,25).

ENREDADOS promedia 6.100€ por copia (649) y se queda, en recaudación total, entre los 2.7 millones de TIANA Y EL SAPO y los 4.34 de TOY STORY 3. El 49% de la recaudación (1,9 millones) proviene de las 298 copias en 3D (un 46% de todas las estrenadas).

Remember:
Shrek 4 3.4M (euros)
Princess and the Frog 2.7 M (euros)
Toy Story 3 4.3 M (euros)
Tangled 3.9....almost 4 M (euros)

So....Tangled 5.37 M (dollars) Spanish OW

Excellent

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:35 am**

Super Aurora wrote:LOL speaking on everyone's behalf.

I'm not one of "everyone" then.

I know what I said was an overstatement, but I'm not surprised you don't mind him.

How can you say "by no means was he hating duster" when just a post ago he says that his intention is to "make him feel like a horrible person."

If you can show me where he's not serious, please do. Because I never have a problem picking up sarcasm (you being a case in point - if everyone took everything you said seriously, they'd all be crying in a corner), and there isn't a word that doesn't seem serious coming from him.

So let me ask you directly - do you agree with what he's saying? Are you personally offended by all of Duster's opinions?

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:04 am**

SWillie! wrote: I know what I said was an overstatement, but I'm not surprised you don't mind him.

Cause I'm friends with him. I was the one who introduce this forum to him.

SWillie! wrote:How can you say "by no means was he hating duster" when just a post ago he says that his intention is to "make him feel like a horrible person."

Over exaggeration. Basically his core point is he can't fully understand, like most of us, Duster's mind. He's not that much different from Goliath, if you actually break down the key componets of his arguments. Just that his approach is bit more unorthodox. Just like how I make very unorthodox remarks and comments but you guys all know I'm good heart man.

SWillie! wrote:If you can show me where he's not serious, please do. Because I never have a problem picking up sarcasm and there isn't a word that doesn't seem serious coming from him.

Look at troll image he post. That should be the one big clue

SWillie! wrote:(you being a case in point - if everyone took everything you said seriously, they'd all be crying in a corner),

LOL

SWillie! wrote:So let me ask you directly - do you agree with what he's saying? Are you personally offended by all of Duster's opinions?

I'm not offended by Duster's stuff mainly cause I'm friends with him ironically. He and I talk over in PM. Though despite that even I can't really understand much about Duster's logic or reasoning behind his claims.

The offensive part Big One saying isn't so much Duster as a person but rather his use of poor arguments and how it seems he ignore any advice of fixing so up. Even Goliath would agree with this. Like Goliath, and even my self sometimes, Big One also like good argumentative debates. To types like them, I would imagines poor arguments and excessive repeats that Duster uses a lot(though unknowingly), would "offend" heavy debaters types like those two. I also pointed to Duster numerous times about fixing his arguments and how to construct them properly so it doesn't drive people nuts. I'm not sure if he took it to consideration or not.

Sorry making this off topic. Pm me if want to continue discussion, my bro.
Now, back to Tangled....

Let's talk about Rapunzel's bust size. What you think it is?
I think, her being very petite, she has a A cup. B cup is probably the furthest we can guess. but she definitively has small boobies so I'm going to go with A cup. I also think her boobs are perky too.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:45 am**

I think we're starting to the cross the lie a bit here in criticisms. Please stay away from personal attacks. It should be common sense.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 12:22 pm**

Super Aurora wrote:Cause I'm friends with him. I was the one who introduce this forum to him.

So you're the one to blame!

j/k

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:58 pm**

Disney Animation's Tangled claimed in its 11th week of overseas play the foreign theatrical circuit's No. 1 box office position for the third time this year, roundly besting Sony's The Green Hornet, which opened abroad more recently on Jan. 12.

Weekend overall for the durable 3D animation version of the long-haired Princess Rapunzel tale drew $23.7 million from 5,159 locations in 50 territories for an overseas gross total so far of $285.1 million, with the worldwide cume at $477.2 million. That makes Tangled the 23rd largest-grossing animation title ever released. A South Korea opening is due this Thursday (Feb. 10).

Tangled opened No. 1 in Spain, grossing $5.6 million from 472 venues, while maintaining its first-place rank in its second U.K. stanza with $7.2 million from 434 sites – down just 11% from the opening weekend -- for a market cume of $17.1 million. Strong weekend openings in Sweden and Norway were also logged.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 2:59 pm**

Sotiris wrote:You're kidding, right? They are like polar opposites.

I think SA was comparing Goliath to Big One, not Goliath/Big One to Duster.

Either way, I agree that the whole debate thing has got a bit bellow the belt. I don't personally agree with a lot of what Duster has been posting, but making claims of his posts being offensive is a step too far. And as a message to everyone and anyone (not just Duster or Big One); this whole dispute is over an animated fairy tale made with the intention of being a form of light entertainment; it's not a serious political or social topic, so let's stop giving it such levels of drama.

------

By the way, what's with The Art of Tangled being OOP so soon? A great deal of the other Disney "Art of" books are all in print, despite being a good few years old. Amazon UK still have it, so I've placed a quick order (though it says 7-10 days delivery, so I'm not 100% sure if I'll get it, as from previous experience that has been a cover up for being unavailable

). I saw a whole stack of The Art of Tangled books when I was back home a few days before Christmas, but I held myself back from getting it due to being shortish on cash till the 25th, and by the time I went back, they'd all gone. I hope I get it when all's said and done.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 3:03 pm**

The Tangled displays have gone up in my local HMV ! HUUUUUGE window display, and lots of pop up displays in the shop, esp (and obviously) in the Disney section

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 3:23 pm**

SWillie! wrote:If you can find me someone else on this board who really believes that Duster's comments are downright offensive, then please, be my guest.

I'm not going to tally up a vote of people who finds Disney Duster's posts offensive. But offensive isn't necessarily what applies to this forum than it applies to me. I'm not sure what you're getting at, are people not allowed to argue now? Do you really feel like the need to white knight on Disney Duster's parade that much?

SWillie! wrote:This does not include the few people on here that I'm sure will come on and say "I'm offended" just to see the drama continue. If you've "lurked" here long enough, you know who they are. You're right that it is "shit-posting"... but again, "shit-posting" is simply annoying. There's nothing offensive about it. If he was coming on and putting down individuals or groups of individuals, then it would be getting into "offensive" territory. But he simply comes on, speaks his peace, and leaves it at that. Just because he doesn't have facts to back up his opinion does not make him a horrible person.

The bolded part: That is approximately what he's doing, you should pay attention to his posts more often. Every word he says, offends the intelligence of people on these boards, for the very reason that he writes wall of text in response to them without giving them an actual response. Am I wrong to challenge him to give me an actual response? Duster really needs to improve on this if he's ever wants his opinion taken seriously.

SWillie! wrote:But do you hear what you just said? "It's time for someone who fights for the people"? If you were an average person and were saying that in a joking manner, it would be entertaining. But the fact that you're using that saying seriously is absolutely pathetic. You're on a Disney fanboy forum, FOR GOD'S SAKE. We're talking about a movie with a freaking make-believe princess that has glowing magical hair, and you're worried that it's time for someone that fights for the people.

You fell for that one, I put it in italics for a reason.

SWillie! wrote:I never once said that people ignore him. I see all the responses. What I said was that others are able to dismiss them for the silly ramblings that they are. Those that respond to him don't lose sleep at night over Duster's antics. Sure, people try and prove him wrong, or try to make him back himself up with facts, but they don't come here and feel the need to make him feel like a horrible person.

Neither do I, you're taking the tone of my posts wrongly. I mean I only respond once or so in a day, that is barely losing sleep over it. I make other, similar responses at other forums I go to! Shocking people discuss things on a public forum, huh?

SWillie! wrote:Regardless. Why does he need to back himself up with "facts"? We're on Ultimate Disney, not the damn astrophysics forum. We like talking about talking animals, fairy tales, magic, and all sorts of impossible things, and you want facts to back up someone's opinion about all this?

Oh? Well it's about time we change that!

SWillie! wrote:Well, I hate to break it to you, but everyone here already thinks you're an asshole. If we thought Goliath treated Duster unfairly, he doesn't have anything on you.

For one, stop comparing me to another user to this forum, I'm not trying to be like Goliath or anyone on this forum.

Secondly I don't really see what you mean by being an asshole. I'm being rather nice to Duster, actually, I just want him to make better posting habits! If you take offense to it you may have some more personal issues of your own. I'm not sure what else to tell you other than that, but you have to remember that this is a forum where people debate and discuss things. If you take my own posts out of context and believe I'm trying to antagonize anyone (I was being sarcastic about saying I'm trying to make Duster "feel bad") then that seems to be your problem, not mine.

I think Duster's heart is in the right place, or otherwise I would not have a great need to challenge him to patch up the problems he has.

Posted: **Sun Feb 06, 2011 3:53 pm**

I personally don't find Disney Duster's posts insulting but more frustrating that anything else. I can see what Big One means though; often I think that the way DD phrases his arguments makes him sound as though he's trying to educate us and that is the thing that annoys me. Sometimes, I think he makes very good points, at other times I think his passion for Disney causes him to say things that could be seen as offensive, depending on different viewpoints. I don't have any personal issue with him, I just think there wouldn't be any problems if he were simply a little more understanding and accepting of other people's opinions.

DVDizzy Forum

Tangled Discussion Part VI: Let the Drama continue...

Re: The box!