DVDizzy Forum

I wasn't very keen on Merida's design first either, but I really like it now. I think it rather unique too and I like that's she's not a typical beauty.

But is her face really that wide? I don't have a problem with it..

I was a bit shocked that she ended up looking so young. I was really expecting an adult heroine, aged about 18 or 19.

Her design, with her big round face makes her look about 12. Now while that's not a bad thing, it would be nice to see a human in Pixar who hasn't got a big wide face.

I still love her overall design though.

DisneyDude2010 wrote: I've heard rumors that that scene of her is Merida as a teen or just not actual movie animation (like in the tangled trailer)
I hope this is true ...

Also does anyone find it funny that when Pixar first opened John Lassetter said pixar didn't want to copy disney's fairytale roots and be completely original .... oh and if they make anymore signals have Monsters 2 is released i will go MAD!

I cant recall any Pixar teaser that had actual animation from the finished film. Maybe the very first toy story, but thats about it.

As for the fairytale thing, the reason they said that initially was because thats all Disney was doing in the 90s and Pixar was bored of that formula. But they were focusing more on the fact that it was musical fairytale specifically, not just fairytales in general. Sure they avoided it altogether for years just to stand out the best they could, but Disney has been doing a lot less of those these days. And its not like Brave is a musical anyway.

Thank you for what you said DDivinity, that was a really kind thing to come out and defend a member like me getting flack.

SWillie! wrote:robster16 - I totally agree, it has a VERY classic Disney feel. This is the kind of movie that animation studios should be making.

Duster, he shouldn't ever have to take anything back. Does someone on a message board on the internet saying "I take back my comment" really make you feel better about something? Pretty pathetic if you ask me.

I wish EVERY company could make movies that feel like Disney movies. Classic Disney movies are your favorite things, right? Then why do you not want other studios to make movies that are up to those standards?

Well, first, I COMPLETELY disagree with you and robster. The movie does NOT have a classic Disney feel. There, that was a comment that matched yours in style, that shouldn't bear an attack now.

Second, I want all films to have high quality standards. But I was talking about the feel of films. How would you feel if someone told you that how another person was, in their being, "felt the same as you"? I care about the identity of Disney, it should have its own identity that no one else has.

Don Bluth and many have imitate Disney, but they have never been able to feel the exact same, they never quite made that Disney feeling. And no one but Disney ever will be able to, but some people may wrongly use words to describe their thinking that other things do feel like Disney, as the unable-to-discern mainstream masses who think Anastasia is Disney so wrongly think that.

SWillie! wrote:Well, whether I'm pathetic or not is of no concern to me. To act personally hurt by a non-personal comment on the internet, and ask to have that comment taken back, even though it has literally nothing to do with you, is pathetic in my opinion.

I did not act personally hurt. I truly was hurt, and it was not personal but it was about something I love, Disney, which I suppose is also personal to me. I was hurt because what was being said was that Disney's feel could be easily copied into something that wasn't Disney, like it wasn't special or unique. I think many things are special, but leave Disney to be the only Disney, don't say something else is the same, like it doesn't even matter Disney exists if anyone can be the exact same as them. That truly hurts me.

DisneyDuster wrote:Well, first, I COMPLETELY disagree with you and robster. The movie does NOT have a classic Disney feel.

If you had just said that in the first place there wouldn't have been a problem. At the end of the day, it's not for anyone here to try and govern how someone else feels or how they put those feelings into words. I agree with you, Disney is unique, but if someone else sees a similarity in Pixar I don't understand why that's a problem. True, Disney and Pixar are in competition but that's a good thing; Pixar have raised the standards of quality in animation and in turn, Disney have to raise theirs. Sometime's I think your passion causes you to say things that seem to always provoke this kind of reaction so maybe you should just try to be a little bit more sensitive when you respond to people. I'm not criticising you, it would just be a shame to see other boards on the forum divulge into the same argument.

Your point is taken, but what can I say, I was hurt by something, I asked someone to reconsider their comment that hurt me, I got attacked for it, so now I said something different. That is what I did, because I didn't think people were going to be so mean in response to the first thing I said.

Remember, another part of this board is to debate with people and, yes, it is to sometimes convince people of other points of view, of what you think is right, because you feel other points of view may actually be wrong or even bad. And to talk about and explain why we think something is right. Please, no one give me flack for this, I see everyone do it all the time, and I'm okay when people do it with me as I with them, I accept it done to myself.

The only thing I will now disagree with is that Pixar made Disney get better. I think if all the other animation studios (mainly Pixar and Dreamworks) hadn't done so well, Disney would be able to be more like their old selves instead of think they have to change things to appeal to the audiences going to other films. Thus things like Chicken Little and names like Tangled.

I take your point but I can see why others think it unreasonable to ask someone to change their opinion, one thing all of us are entitled to have. Your opinion is that nothing comes close to the quality of Disney; fine, there's no problem with that, but others don't have to agree. Just try not to take it too personally.

Back on topic, I think Pixar have been a good thing for Disney. I think in the past ten years, Disney have made some of their most underrated films (The Emperor's New Groove, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Meet the Robinsons) that were of a very high quality. Competition is healthy and I hope Disney look to create more original stories as Pixar have done in the past. Next year it will be interesting to see how Wreck-It Ralph compares to Brave.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I take your point but I can see why others think it unreasonable to ask someone to change their opinion, one thing all of us are entitled to have. Your opinion is that nothing comes close to the quality of Disney; fine, there's no problem with that, but others don't have to agree.

When you say "quality" to you mean "standard"? Because I already explained that what I meant is not that it is the high standards of Disney that other studios cannot have, it is the feel and identity of Disney that other studios cannot have.

No I know what you meant, I was referring to the quality in the films, that the quality of Pixar films has challenged Disney to maintain and improve the quality in theirs, in my personal opinion. I understand what you're saying about Disney's identity and I think in the past, animators like Don Bluth have tried to tap into that but I don't think Pixar have. Pixar's identity that was established in Toy Story was for me based on more original stories, contemporary ones that other studios were not doing. Disney's identity has always been concerned with classic stories and fairytales and adapting them in a way that I agree is very unique.

Ok, good. Even Glen Keane said that Disney was to him "Once upon a time..." and Pixar was to him "What would happen if..." That they were two very different things.

I still think there is the very good possibility Disney would at least still make films more like themselves (like more like their older movies) if other studios didn't make such successful animated output though. I see your point and agree about other studio's quality being good in raising the standards Disney should achieve, but I feel it has also made Diney change who they are to be like them, like make more whacky animal stories and computer animation and a more wacky adventure story and title like Tangled et cetera.

SWillie! wrote:Well this is a case of personal preference. It isn't a given that the characters in Tangled are more appealing. I, for one, think Merida's design is gorgeous. It's new, unique. We haven't seen it all before like we had with Tangled. Don't get me wrong, I loved Rapunzel and Flynn's designs... but just because Merida doesn't have that same old Disney look and proportions doesn't mean it's not appealing. Not appealing to you, more like.

Aha! So you do see that Disney has it's own identity no one else can have! And you gave me flack and said another film could have an old Disney feel! You!

I avoided this thread cause this movie wasn't interesting me. After looking at the lead female's design, make me want to kick it in the face for some reason. She's not my cup of tea.

Tangled's designs were appealing, but bland as heck.

I remember that I wasn't particularly impressed by Rapunzel or Gothel's designs at first, but they grew on me. I always liked Flynn's designs, though.

Dear Disney Enthusiasts,

XXX!

Disney Duster wrote:Well, first, I COMPLETELY disagree with you and robster. The movie does NOT have a classic Disney feel. There, that was a comment that matched yours in style, that shouldn't bear an attack now.

That isn't an attack, Duster, you're right. You're allowed to say that. Because that's an opinion. Just like the first comment by robster. An opinion, that shouldn't be taken personally and shouldn't personally hurt anyone.

Disney Duster wrote:Second, I want all films to have high quality standards. But I was talking about the feel of films. How would you feel if someone told you that how another person was, in their being, "felt the same as you"? I care about the identity of Disney, it should have its own identity that no one else has.

Don Bluth and many have imitate Disney, but they have never been able to feel the exact same, they never quite made that Disney feeling. And no one but Disney ever will be able to, but some people may wrongly use words to describe their thinking that other things do feel like Disney, as the unable-to-discern mainstream masses who think Anastasia is Disney so wrongly think that.

I know you were talking about the feel of the films. I entirely understand that, and I get the whole "Disney Essence" thing that you always bring up. I've stood up for you regarding it before. But here's the thing you don't seem to understand - After Walt Disney died, "Disney Animation" was simply a title. Artists have come and gone for generations. Which means, the "Disney Essence" happens when certain aspects in a film come together perfectly in a way that gives off that "Disney" feel that you are so attached to. Which means that the artists who made the film actually made that happen.

For instance, in the 1980s, when the Animation Department was kicked off the lot and moved into storage buildings and trailers, and most of the staff were newer artists, and all the older "Disney guys" were gone, they still managed to create The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast. Because those artists came together and created those films themselves. Not because they were Disney artists, or because they worked in the "Disney Animation" building. They created movies that had that "Disney Feel" by coming together, bringing their own experiences and talent from their personal lives, and doing the best job that they could.

What I'm saying is this: A movie with the "Disney" feel is created by people. Not Disney employees, just because they are Disney employees, or because they work in a certain building or on a certain lot. If that were the case, we wouldn't see ANY films from Disney Animation that didn't have that feel to them. Yes?

So, if we can agree that a movie with the "Disney" feel is created by people, then by logic that means that a movie with the "Disney" feel can be created ANYWHERE. By any group of people. By any studio. By any technique.

Now, that doesn't mean that it has happened, or will happen. Then we would be discussing opinions again. For example, in my opinion, How To Train Your Dragon reached that "Disney" feel. I know you will most certainly disagree, but that doesn't matter, because that's your opinion.

But to claim that "the unable-to-discern mainstream masses who think Anastasia is Disney so wrongly think that" is arrogant. Those people each have a definition of their own as to what makes a movie have that "Disney" feel, just as you do, and they are entitled to think that. If Anastasia makes them feel the same way a Disney movie does, then why is that a problem? You do not personally own the one and only definition of a "Disney" movie.

You need to start understanding that.

Disney Duster wrote:I did not act personally hurt. I truly was hurt, and it was not personal but it was about something I love, Disney, which I suppose is also personal to me. I was hurt because what was being said was that Disney's feel could be easily copied into something that wasn't Disney, like it wasn't special or unique. I think many things are special, but leave Disney to be the only Disney, don't say something else is the same, like it doesn't even matter Disney exists if anyone can be the exact same as them. That truly hurts me.

Notice the bolded part of your quote. Your feelings about Disney are yours, Duster. Not everyone else's. You said it yourself. Also, not a single person claimed that Disney's feel "could be easily copied in to something that wasn't Disney, like it wasn't special or unique." I think most here would agree that Disney is special and unique, or we probably wouldn't be a big enough fan to come here in the first place. So, since a lot of us do consider it special, it is all the more exciting when we see something like Brave, that, to us, somehow manages to give off that feeling. If you don't think that, fine. But I, and many others, do.

Disney Duster wrote:Remember, another part of this board is to debate with people and, yes, it is to sometimes convince people of other points of view, of what you think is right, because you feel other points of view may actually be wrong or even bad. And to talk about and explain why we think something is right. Please, no one give me flack for this, I see everyone do it all the time, and I'm okay when people do it with me as I with them, I accept it done to myself.

You're right about the fact that sometimes the point of these conversations is to try and show others why we disagree with them. It's what we're doing right now. But you are wrong when you say that you "accept it done to myself". You do not. You will nitpick my entire response apart and argue the same argument that you always do. You'll find one sentence of my novel that is in agreement with your point of view and say "AHA! SEE? EVEN YOU THINK...!" (See below) You won't listen to the fact that your opinion is your opinion, and everyone is allowed to feel differently as to what makes a "Disney" movie. You just won't do it. You can't do it. You've proven that for years on these boards.

Disney Duster wrote:Ok, good. Even Glen Keane said that Disney was to him "Once upon a time..." and Pixar was to him "What would happen if..." That they were two very different things.

You are right about this. But while I loved that quote with Glen, Brave mixes things up. Because Brave is a period piece. Which means that Brave is a "Once upon a time..." story. Bringing Pixar into Disney territory, even in Glen Keane's mind.

And finally,

SWillie! wrote:Well this is a case of personal preference. It isn't a given that the characters in Tangled are more appealing. I, for one, think Merida's design is gorgeous. It's new, unique. We haven't seen it all before like we had with Tangled. Don't get me wrong, I loved Rapunzel and Flynn's designs... but just because Merida doesn't have that same old Disney look and proportions doesn't mean it's not appealing. Not appealing to you, more like.

Disney Duster wrote:Aha! So you do see that Disney has it's own identity no one else can have! And you gave me flack and said another film could have an old Disney feel! You!

This is so typical of you Duster. You realize that I meant "same old" Disney look, right? Not the same, "Old Disney" look, as shown in your bolded section. Regardless, I do indeed see that Disney has had a style over the years, a look that means "Disney". But if we're looking at the big picture like that, then Merida does fit into that category. She is as different from Rapunzel as Ariel is from Cinderella. Yes, there are differences, but just because Ariel is different from Cinderella doesn't mean that The Little Mermaid isn't "Disney". While Tangled has more traditional character designs, and Brave uses a more stylistic approach, that does not mean one has the almighty "Feel" and one does not.

Looking forward to your response.

Sorry to butt in with an on-topic statement to this off-topic debate, but boy did that trailer send chills down my spine. Critics have heralded Pixar for years for being adult but I always felt they had this need to hide their maturity behind silly jokes (ala Incredibles, Ratatouille). It seems this time around they're tackling things head on, not trying to appeal to the kiddy within with unneccessary jokes. Just amazing music and a chilling narrative. I for one am excited!

Super Aurora wrote:I avoided this thread cause this movie wasn't interesting me. After looking at the lead female's design, make me want to kick it in the face for some reason. She's not my cup of tea.

Well, you can watch the trailer and then decide.

Disney Duster wrote:I did not act personally hurt. I truly was hurt, and it was not personal but it was about something I love, Disney, which I suppose is also personal to me. I was hurt because what was being said was that Disney's feel could be easily copied into something that wasn't Disney, like it wasn't special or unique. I think many things are special, but leave Disney to be the only Disney, don't say something else is the same, like it doesn't even matter Disney exists if anyone can be the exact same as them. That truly hurts me.

I think you're overreacting a lot here. When somebody says a Pixar movie feels like old Disney, or anybody else says a non-Disney movie feels like the old Disney, you're 'truly hurt'? As SWillie! excellently posted:

SWillie! wrote:What I'm saying is this: A movie with the "Disney" feel is created by people. Not Disney employees, just because they are Disney employees, or because they work in a certain building or on a certain lot. If that were the case, we wouldn't see ANY films from Disney Animation that didn't have that feel to them. Yes?

So, if we can agree that a movie with the "Disney" feel is created by people, then by logic that means that a movie with the "Disney" feel can be created ANYWHERE. By any group of people. By any studio. By any technique.

Just as SWillie! said, a movie can be made anywhere by anyone and still achieve the classic Disney feel that you speak of.

Was really disappointed they didn't show the trailer before Cars 2 in my cinema

Mmmadelon wrote:I wasn't very keen on Merida's design first either, but I really like it now. I think it rather unique too and I like that's she's not a typical beauty.

But is her face really that wide? I don't have a problem with it..

I never liked her design til I saw this screenshot. Quoting it for its purdiness

Victurtle wrote:

Mmmadelon wrote:I wasn't very keen on Merida's design first either, but I really like it now. I think it rather unique too and I like that's she's not a typical beauty.

But is her face really that wide? I don't have a problem with it..

I never liked her design til I saw this screenshot. Quoting it for its purdiness

Yeah, she's pretty, but I hate her eyes. It's too round.

no, her head is too round. look like i can kick it around like a ball.