DVDizzy Forum

I think she's cute, but more in an E.T. sort of way than a Disney Princess

My God, you all sound brainwashed by the mass media's definition of beauty.

Beauty does not equal Victori'a Secret models.

PatrickvD wrote:My God, you all sound brainwashed by the mass media's definition of beauty.

Seriously. I think she looks great. You guys are way too picky. I can all see you by the time this movie comes out, going "the design has grown on me."

Swillie, I hope you don't get hard feelings for anything I am about to say, and if you do, I'm sorry, I don't mean to make anyone feel bad. It is true that you have been nice to be on here before and I don't want that to end. I also hope what I write isn't too confusing but unfortuanetly it's a a very tough subject to explain because it's about the "nature" of what Disney is an identity and stuff, something people don't like to talk about or sometimes not even believe because it's so hard, but something I won't give up on.

Alright then. Swillie, well the first thing is when I said "that shouldn't bear an attack" I meant that shouldn't be something that makes people attack my comment, not that my comment was an attack, because it wasn't.

In relation to that, you are right, I don't "need" someone to take back their comment, but I didn't say that, I simply asked for it. Don't make a bigger deal out of it than it is, please. Robster didn't even get a chance to say anything, and it was only he I was talking to! If he had a problem with it, then I would not continue requesting, as simply as that.

Now, something we agree on is that it is people that make the Disney feel (well, specifically, that people bring out the Disney feel that already existed from Walt Disney when he instructed his people to make things his way). But I think I can define it as well as this: that when people see a fair amount of Disney things, they get a sense of what Disney is, the feel of it, and they are able to make things that have that feel, by purposely intending to make something that is "Disney", or that has the "Disney style", etc.

It is when people are not particularly intending to make something Disney, or, they are merely trying to copy Disney to make a film as successful as Disney to make money, that I believe it can't be done, that the true Disney feel cannot exist there.

Now, everything you said about other people's opinions about what feels Disney to them, or feeling like other non-Disney things are Disney...I think that's just plain bad. Yes. This is the part where you may very well get mad at me, and you may very well think you were right about me not understanding or allowing the idea of opinions, but please bear with me.

I don't think you should just say everything's opinion on certain subjects. Like in the case of whether you should kill someone or not, if someone says "You shouldn't kill him! It's not right!" and someone else says "Well, that's your opinion..." and then just kills, that's bad. I mean, if we keep saying things are only opinion, I could just dismiss everything you said, even that certain things are only opinions, as just your opinion!

Now, I know that what is or isn't Disney is not as serious as killing people, but when you think about how that's about whether something should live or not, vs. what do we want to live for, and Disney is many people's (but mostly one man's) life work, what they lived for, and for some people on this forum, what they live for...you can see why me and other people do take it so seriously.

So yes, this may get you all mad, but I will never, ever agree that it should only be opinion that only Disney, or people intending to make something Disney, is the only way you can make the Disney feel. I can't believe it's just opinion.

I don't see how you don't think it's wrong that the essence of one man's work, that he hoped would be kept up by the artists at his studio, can so easily be stolen and used in a film that isn't Disney like How to Train Your Dragon, a film that even competed with Disney and was nominated for the Oscar instead of the Disney film released that year.

I don't see how people can see that as just opinion instead of flat out wrong. That such a thing should never happen. That it's bad.

I don't understand why not everyone is at least trying to believe that only Disney can be Disney, only when artists intend to make something be exactly Disney. I already understand that some of you might like the idea of checking out other things because they seem like Disney, but what I just explained, about how only Disney should have that exact Disney essence, should have people thinking about that, that maybe they like things that are kind of similar to Disney, but only Disney has the exact Disney feel.

Remember, I asked that question, how would you feel if someone told you that someone who wasn't you felt the same as you, to them? You know that would be impossible, that only you could feel exactly as you, only you have your exact identity.

So, I'm sorry if I bother everyone, but I am going to keep hold of my beliefs. I don't want certain things like this to be just down to "opinion". That skirts around the issue of what we think is actually seriously right or wrong.

And I am going to keep trying to write and explain why I think what I think is right, and I welcome anyone to disagree and debate with me, because then maybe we'll get somewhere instead of just saying something is someone's opinion so we'll let it go.

Now, sometimes I will concede and just say "Well, that's your opinion", but other times I won't. Other times, I will debate and try to explain why something is right or wrong, because I can, it's not hurting anyone, and if I ever did hurt anyone then I would apologize and stop. But this forum is for more than just saying "Well, that's your opinion, oh well".

Swillie! wrote:

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.

Notice the bolded part of your quote. Your feelings about Disney are yours, Duster. Not everyone else's. You said it yourself.

Well, not exactly. I said that Disney is personal to me. By that I meant the same way that a loved one is personal to me. My feelings of "what that person is" is not what I'm talking about, especially since only that person can truly tell me what they truly are! By "personal to me" I mean I love it so much that it personally hurts me when people say anything bad about it.

Swillie! wrote: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.

No, I do. What I do is I welcome, I allow, anyone to debate with me about a subject. Notice, all I said was that I welcome anyone to do it to me. That doesn't mean that I will change my mind, it means I welcome people to try to change my mind, to explain why they feel what they feel or think something's right.

Swillie! wrote:

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.

That may not be quite right. I unfortunately cannot find the exact quote, I think it was in one of the later Rapunzel/Tangled threads, but from what I remember, Glen didn't say a "Once upon a time..." story, but that to him Disney is "Once Upon a time..." The whole thing is up for some interpretation. To me, I think he means that every Disney film has this "once upon a time" feel, that is (or is part of) the Disney feel. Just because Pixar does a story set a long time ago is not the same thing. I mean, not all stories set a long time ago begin with the words "once upon a time" or are fairy tales. The Irish voicover in the trailer didn't feel like "Disney Once upon a time". Neither did the very, very first words in Tangled which is why I feel that part was un-Disney. Lots of people have done fairy tales, animated and musical no less, and yet they still don't feel the same as Disney. So while you can have your opinion on what Glen Keane meant (until we ask him someday to explain...?!), it is at least an undeniable fact that just because Pixar did a story set long ago it does not make it a fact that it is definately a "Once Upon a time" story or that that makes it Disney in Glen Keane's eyes...

Swillie! wrote: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.

Okay, so I got what you meant a little wrong. But in response to what you wrote here, I will admit that Ariel looks a good amount different than Cinderella, but she still looks Disney, while with Merida...there is a HUGE difference! I mean, as I said, the Pixar animation looks "looser" than Disney's, and that includes their character designs. The character of Merida looks absolutely nothing like the kind of characters Disney's done. And I will add that Walt Disney always tried to make his characters, even his villains or uglier ones, to all still look as beautiful and appealing as possible, and Merida is...ugh, she's distinctly not Disney. She's Pixar. The Pixar feel, what have you.

DancingCrab wrote:I think she's cute, but more in an E.T. sort of way than a Disney Princess

That picture is hilarious! (and true )

Duster, I just can't understand why you hold a company to the ideals of a deceased man who passed away nearly 50 years ago. I think you should appreciate the things that were but also try to open yourself up to what's new and changing.. "Disney," the company that was and the man, is dead and nothing will change that.

And back on topic, I'm pretty surprised at how many people don't like Merida's design. I think she looks great. I like that she isn't the typical heroine. I'm really curious as to what role the blue lights play and if they'll have a personality or not. They do have those little eyes..

PatrickvD wrote:My God, you all sound brainwashed by the mass media's definition of beauty.

Beauty does not equal Victori'a Secret models.

I don't think she has to be perfect. Unlike others, I don't mind the shape of her face. I just really don't like her eyes, they remind me to much of Owl eyes.



So they look very unrealistic to me. I know probably someone is going to say all Disney/Pixar characters have unrealistic eyes, but they're just super-sized not inhuman looking.

I like the character design! I have a feeling this will probably be my favorite Pixar film. It's more serious and epic in scope.

Disney Duster wrote:It is when people are not particularly intending to make something Disney, or, they are merely trying to copy Disney to make a film as successful as Disney to make money, that I believe it can't be done, that the true Disney feel cannot exist there.

Disney Duster wrote:So yes, this may get you all mad, but I will never, ever agree that it should only be opinion that only Disney, or people intending to make something Disney, is the only way you can make the Disney feel. I can't believe it's just opinion.

You've contradicted yourself; firstly you say something can't have the Disney feel if it is there to make money (which is why all movies exist by the way, including Disney movies), and then you say that something can't have the Disney feel if it isn't made by Disney.

Ignoring that contradiction, why do you even believe that another studio can't achieve this mythical 'Disney feel' you speak of? You haven't given any reasons why you think only Disney can do it, you've just rambled nostalgically. If a studio has great animators, writers, producers, directors, musicians and editors, a movie that could be mistaken for a classic Disney movie can be made; rare, yes, but it's still possible, and you're obviously clouded by your nostalgia.

I like Merida's frizzy hair, but I would've chosen a different eye color (maybe brown). The red-hair/blue-eyes bit was already done by Ariel.

Instantly got the visual of this 1980s cartoon character Maiden Curly Crown. True eye colour is different (and her head isn't a circle) but the colouring is so similar as is the design. There have been instances where Disney/ Pixar have designed characters who look a lot like lesser known cartoons but figure no one has seen them and therefore the design wont be recognised. Like Tiana's blue dress in Princess and the Frog- anyone else seen the Disney TV movie of Cinderella with Brandy? The design of her dress is almost identical to Tiana's making Tiana just look like a cartoon Brandy. lol. [/url]

Semaj wrote:I like Merida's frizzy hair, but I would've chosen a different eye color (maybe brown). The red-hair/blue-eyes bit was already done by Ariel.

It's very common for red heads to have blue eyes, though...

Duster, if this 'Disney Essence' is something not determined by personal feelings or opinions, then would you be so kind as to give us a list of what makes up a "Disney" movie?

PatrickvD wrote:My God, you all sound brainwashed by the mass media's definition of beauty.

Beauty does not equal Victori'a Secret models.

BEAUTIFUL!



.........






BEAUTIFUL!..............











BEAUTIFUL!..............









BEAUTIFUL!..............








SUPER DUPER BEAUTIFUL!!!!!..............







Beauty Incarnated!








Yep, I'm brain-washed. U Mad?

Dr. Frankenollie, you miss that I said specifically that it is both when people are not intending to make something Disney, and also when people are just trying to copy Disney's money-making success, that the Disney feel/essence cannot happen.

Also, Disney movies were primarily made to make art in Walt's day. Some of his movies were to make money...money that was to be used only to make more art!

And yes, it may be your and quite a lot of people's opinion that I am too clouded by nostalgia, but the fact is, when Disney made his movies, he made them a way that only he did them, the Disney way, and the people that work at Disney believe they can keep doing movies the Disney way, and that because they are intending to make them that way, it can really happen. I don't see why every Disney fan wouldn't want only Disney to be, well, Disney, but if you want other studios to be able to steal the Disney feel from Disney so that Disney is no longer special, then fine, whatever you want, you "fans". I hope you're not too mad, but I'm sorry, this is how I truthfully see it.

Heartless, haha, the Disney feel is something that cannot be perfectly described in words. If it was, it would be too easy for anyone to see that definition and just make a film that was exactly Disney and successful right away. The Disney essence is something hard to describe and hard to make. But you must believe that Disney, or people who want to make something Disney, can bring about that essence. Otherwise, we may just believe Disney is a soulless company with no identity. I don't want to believe that, I won't, and I don't see how any true fans would either.

Ok everybody lets drop the 'Disney feel' argument.

Disney duster and all others I respect your opinions but its all gone to far. Lets drop it now. Everyone has their own opinion and no one should have to take back their comment unless it is something rude and offensive.

Ok case closed. Let it go. Love you all. Just want to talk about Brave and have everyone adding to the conversation instead of arguing about something off topic.

Peace and love.

I think Merida is beautiful. All my best friends have been red heads. I think she looks great and I cannot wait for this film to come out!

I think Patrick’s point is that not only Victoria’s Secret models are considered beautiful. I just find it sad for people who think Merida is ugly, considering there isn’t even anything wrong with her. You must think at least 75% of world is ugly.

(Notice I’m differentiating between those who don’t like the character design because they think it’s bland vs. because they think she’s ugly)

And--you know what? Even if she was fugly, what does that have to do with anything? When do we say a male character can't be the lead because he's not handsome or buff enough? That's just stupid, sorry.

Disney Duster wrote:And yes, it may be your and quite a lot of people's opinion that I am too clouded by nostalgia, but the fact is, when Disney made his movies, he made them a way that only he did them, the Disney way, and the people that work at Disney believe they can keep doing movies the Disney way, and that because they are intending to make them that way, it can really happen. I don't see why every Disney fan wouldn't want only Disney to be, well, Disney, but if you want other studios to be able to steal the Disney feel from Disney so that Disney is no longer special, then fine, whatever you want, you "fans". I hope you're not too mad, but I'm sorry, this is how I truthfully see it.

I never said that I wanted other studios to 'steal' the Disney feel from Disney, all I was saying was that other studios can make a movie which has this nonsensical 'Disney feel' you are unable to explain. If another studio 'steals' the Disney feel as you said ( ) and that means I get to see a great movie (whether it's produced and distributed by Disney or not), then that's great, and I don't see your problem with it.

Disney's Divinity wrote: You must think at least 75% of world is ugly.

Which is true.