Moana

[DisneyJedi]

I'd hate to see another well-known fairy tale get butchered like The Frog Prince, Rapunzel and The Snow Queen.

That's not fair, especially in Frozen's case. The movie isn't even out yet!

And honestly, I am so sick of everyone claiming Disney "butchers" the stories they adapt, which makes it even more unfair. I don't care if it's all opinion, bad mouthing something is still bad mouthing, no matter HOW you look at it.

[qindarka]

Well, Disney does butcher their source material. Often, plots are completely changed, so are characterizations, themes, tone etc. Whether this is inherently wrong is another matter. I'd argue that it isn't because fiction isn't sacred. People, though, are naturally attached to stories they like and want their adaptations to do them justice.

I don't really consider Disney versions of their source material to be adaptations at all, especially their movies after The Jungle Book. It often seems that Disney are taking elements that they like from the source and using them to tell their own story with the objective, not to translate the source (often literary) into a visual medium, but to create their own distinct product.

[DisneyJedi]

Excuse me qindarka, but why do you have to be negative? You're making it sound as though you have a vendetta against Disney just because their films aren't completely the same as the source material.

Not all films are completely true to the source material. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Mary Poppins and The Wizard of Oz (the latter to some degree) aren't completely true to the books they're based off of. You gonna accuse MGM or Disney of "butchering" them too?!

[Sotiris]

Are you sure it's debunked?

100% certain. Indiewire was fooled by some anonymous comments at the TAG blog a long time ago. Steve Hulett had confirmed it's not Rumpelstiltskin.

[qindarka]

Excuse me qindarka, but why do you have to be negative? You're making it sound as though you have a vendetta against Disney just because their films aren't completely the same as the source material.

Not all films are completely true to the source material. Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, Mary Poppins and The Wizard of Oz (the latter to some degree) aren't completely true to the books they're based off of. You gonna accuse MGM or Disney of "butchering" them too?!

Negative? I'm probably one of the most positive and non-cynical members of this site in regards to Disney films.

I know its probably that 'butchering' is a harsh term. I've already mentioned that its up for debate whether it's inherently wrong and that I personally had little problem with it, especially when it comes to works in the public domain.

Can't speak about the other films you mentioned but I believe that Mary Poppins was rather unfaithful. Remember there were a lot of complaints from the author, P.L. Travers. The characterization of the title character seems to have been much changed and the story is also completely unrecognizable.

It is not that I dislike the movies or blame Disney for their choices they made in adapting the work, but it is indisputable that Disney movies are not especially faithful to the source material.

[Avaitor]

You know you can enjoy Disney's adaptations while acknowledging that they're butchered, right?

Because they are.

[DisneyJedi]

It is not that I dislike the movies or blame Disney for their choices they made in adapting the work, but it is indisputable that Disney movies are not especially faithful to the source material.

Yeah, but you make it sound as though you hate Disney's films because of how different they are from the source material.

[REINIER]

It is not that I dislike the movies or blame Disney for their choices they made in adapting the work, but it is indisputable that Disney movies are not especially faithful to the source material.

Yeah, but you make it sound as though you hate Disney's films because of how different they are from the source material.

I have to agree with Quindarka on this. Any resemblance to well known stories, be they fairytales or other wellknown works is mostly coincidental. Much liberties are taken to bring across a disney movie. That being said.. I for one applaud Disney's Aladdin, which,in arab tales, was vastly different from what disney eventually saw fit.

[Disney's Divinity]

It is not that I dislike the movies or blame Disney for their choices they made in adapting the work, but it is indisputable that Disney movies are not especially faithful to the source material.

I don't think anyone has ever tried to dispute that. Unlike you, however, I don't use that as a free pass to excuse Disney of out-and-out ridiculous or unnecessary changes. Why even attach the name of a story to one of your films if you aren't going to borrow anything from it, not even the title (like with The Jungle Book )?

I think most people on here are positive, tbh. Speaking just of myself, I am positive about things that are worth being positive about. I laugh through most of what I don't like about modern Disney, but it's true that I don't expect much to like out of the company anymore except a character here, a song there.

You know you can enjoy Disney's adaptations while acknowledging that they're butchered, right?

Hercules is one of my favorite films. And Tarzan is a good film, if not a favorite of mine.

[qindarka]

I don't think anyone has ever tried to dispute that. Unlike you, however, I don't use that as a free pass to excuse Disney of out-and-out ridiculous or unnecessary changes. Why even attach the name of a story to one of your films if you aren't going to borrow anything from it, not even the title (like with The Jungle Book )?

Perhaps I don't think the changes are ridiculous or unnecessary, especially not in comparison with other Disney films? And really, the title is pretty much meaningless when evaluating faithfulness. Does the Disney film taking the title of The Jungle Book make it any more faithful an adaptation to Kipling's stories? I'm not giving a free pass to anything, just applying my standards consistently.

Not that I like the title 'Frozen' or 'Tangled'. They do sound stupid.

Anyway, I can't speak for Frozen because it isn't out yet but to some level at least the wholesale changes made in Tangled were unnecessary. There was too little material in the original fairy tale to work with, it would not have filled a feature length movie without much padding. Same goes for TPATF, thought it wasn't really a direct adaptation of the fairy tale but of a book based on it.

[DisneyEra]

Look at this pic:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/370e2f7818c7 ... o1_500.png

I'm trying to find a spot for Ron & John's original film but I just can't find it. I can cleary see where Frozen & Big Hero 6 would go on this pic, but no spot for R&J's film. I think you all can understand where i'm going with this.

[qindarka]

Look at this pic:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/370e2f7818c7 ... o1_500.png

I'm trying to find a spot for Ron & John's original film but I just can't find it. I can cleary see where Frozen & Big Hero 6 would go on this pic, but no spot for R&J's film. I think you all can understand where i'm going with this.

I don't understand.

[DisneyJedi]

Umm... No, I don't?

[DisneyEra]

Look at this pic:

http://24.media.tumblr.com/370e2f7818c7 ... o1_500.png

I'm trying to find a spot for Ron & John's original film but I just can't find it. I can cleary see where Frozen & Big Hero 6 would go on this pic, but no spot for R&J's film. I think you all can understand where i'm going with this.

I don't understand.

What I mean is that R&J's film is not apart of any of Disney's major franchises, as you see in that pic. How will Disney market R&J's original film? It doesn't have a Disney Princess, It's not from Pixar or Marvel, it won't have cameos of characters from other companies. And the next 3 animated films from Disney, Planes "a spin-off of Pixar's Cars" Frozen "will have not 1 but 2 new Disney Princesses & Big Hero 6 "the 1st CGI Marvel movie". R&J's flick is possibly the only original animted film WDAS has in development at the moment & it's atleast 3yrs away. At WDAS it seem Original has been replaced by Franchise.

[qindarka]

Or it could be that since R&J's film won't be out until 2015 at the earliest, they don't want to market it yet and want to focus on their earlier films first. We don't even have a title yet. You don't see Pixar marketing their 2015 film(s) yet either, or Dreamworks, Blue Sky etc.

Wouldn't consider Frozen to be a franchise film either. Are all the previous 10 films in the DP line part of a franchise? And Big Hero 6 may be Marvel but it is based on an obscure property that next to nobody knows about. Not like they are making a film with the Avengers or anything.

Planes isn't a WDAS film either. If you are just talking Disney in general, then you would have to mention Monsters University (which is a franchise film and doesn't help my case at all).

Not sure what you mean about original but WDAS has seldom dealt with 'original' films in the sense that few films are not based on any existing source material, even if they are so loosely adapted they may as well be original stories. It's the last decade which has seen the most 'original' films (Dinosaur, Atlantis, Lilo and Stitch, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Bolt, Wreck-it-Ralph).

You really do read far too much into these sort of things.

[DisneyEra]

Or it could be that since R&J's film won't be out until 2015 at the earliest, they don't want to market it yet and want to focus on their earlier films first. We don't even have a title yet. You don't see Pixar marketing their 2015 film(s) yet either, or Dreamworks, Blue Sky etc.

Wouldn't consider Frozen to be a franchise film either. Are all the previous 10 films in the DP line part of a franchise? And Big Hero 6 may be Marvel but it is based on an obscure property that next to nobody knows about. Not like they are making a film with the Avengers or anything.

Planes isn't a WDAS film either. If you are just talking Disney in general, then you would have to mention Monsters University (which is a franchise film and doesn't help my case at all).

Not sure what you mean about original but WDAS has seldom dealt with 'original' films in the sense that few films are not based on any existing source material, even if they are so loosely adapted they may as well be original stories. It's the last decade which has seen the most 'original' films (Dinosaur, Atlantis, Lilo and Stitch, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Bolt, Wreck-it-Ralph).

You really do read far too much into these sort of things.

I'm not reading much of anything, i'm just stating facts. You say Pixar & Dreamworks don't market their films early, then why did Pixar release new concept art of The Good Dinosaur & The Inside Out this past January? Those films are not out until May 2014 & June 2015. As for Dreamworks, you can find images/posters of Mr. Peabody & Sherman & Me & my Shadow doing a basic Google search.

Frozen will expand the Disney Princess franchise by adding 2 more. Since 2009 they've added 5 princesses to the line up, even including Pixar's Merida.

And no matter how obscure BH6 is, it's still from Marvel. In the summer of 2014, Disney will release another live-action film based on another obscure Marvel group, "Guardians of the Galaxy". Anything that has to do with Marvel will make $$ obscure or not. I'm not even gonna mention Star Wars! Just wait til that gets going in about 2 years.

Planes went from a direct to dvd film to a major theatrical release. The only reason it was made was to expand the Cars franchise by adding new characters.

[PatrickvD]

Okay and how do you know there isn't a princess in their film?

Here's what we know about Ron & John's new film:

[qindarka]

Or it could be that since R&J's film won't be out until 2015 at the earliest, they don't want to market it yet and want to focus on their earlier films first. We don't even have a title yet. You don't see Pixar marketing their 2015 film(s) yet either, or Dreamworks, Blue Sky etc.

Wouldn't consider Frozen to be a franchise film either. Are all the previous 10 films in the DP line part of a franchise? And Big Hero 6 may be Marvel but it is based on an obscure property that next to nobody knows about. Not like they are making a film with the Avengers or anything.

Planes isn't a WDAS film either. If you are just talking Disney in general, then you would have to mention Monsters University (which is a franchise film and doesn't help my case at all).

Not sure what you mean about original but WDAS has seldom dealt with 'original' films in the sense that few films are not based on any existing source material, even if they are so loosely adapted they may as well be original stories. It's the last decade which has seen the most 'original' films (Dinosaur, Atlantis, Lilo and Stitch, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Bolt, Wreck-it-Ralph).

You really do read far too much into these sort of things.

I'm not reading much of anything, i'm just stating facts. You say Pixar & Dreamworks don't market their films early, then why did Pixar release new concept art of The Good Dinosaur & The Inside Out this past January? Those films are not out until May 2014 & June 2015. As for Dreamworks, you can find images/posters of Mr. Peabody & Sherman & Me & my Shadow doing a basic Google search.

Frozen will expand the Disney Princess franchise by adding 2 more. Since 2009 they've added 5 princesses to the line up, even including Pixar's Merida.

And no matter how obscure BH6 is, it's still from Marvel. In the summer of 2014, Disney will release another live-action film based on another obscure Marvel group, "Guardians of the Galaxy". Anything that has to do with Marvel will make $$ obscure or not. I'm not even gonna mention Star Wars! Just wait til that gets going in about 2 years.

Planes went from a direct to dvd film to a major theatrical release. The only reason it was made was to expand the Cars franchise by adding new characters.

Disney is generally slow when it comes to releasing info for their films. We still don't know shit about Big Hero 6, which going by your logic Disney would be keen to advertise for being a franchise movie. Not to mention that Big Hero 6 wasn't mentioned in that image you linked to.
And of course, you've complained multiple times about Disney not promoting Frozen enough.

I concede that you do have a point about Disney pursuing franchises too much, especially when you look at the company as a whole. I just think that you are reaching when it comes to looking at this bit of marketing and making conclusions about their enthusiasm for R&J's new film.

[Disney's Divinity]

Perhaps I don't think the changes are ridiculous or unnecessary, especially not in comparison with other Disney films?

That's fine. But some people do, which is the point. And using TJB, TLM, TP&TF, etc.'s changes as a discussion-ender doesn't work.

As for the M&C film, I'm still skeptical that they actually have a film that will come to fruition. Everytime something is brought up about them before, Disney has turned it down. Even if they do have a film--and I hope they do--it will be even more influenced by management than TP&TF already was, so I'm not sure whether to be excited or not.

[DisneyEra]

I'm not reading much of anything, i'm just stating facts. You say Pixar & Dreamworks don't market their films early, then why did Pixar release new concept art of The Good Dinosaur & The Inside Out this past January? Those films are not out until May 2014 & June 2015. As for Dreamworks, you can find images/posters of Mr. Peabody & Sherman & Me & my Shadow doing a basic Google search.

Frozen will expand the Disney Princess franchise by adding 2 more. Since 2009 they've added 5 princesses to the line up, even including Pixar's Merida.

And no matter how obscure BH6 is, it's still from Marvel. In the summer of 2014, Disney will release another live-action film based on another obscure Marvel group, "Guardians of the Galaxy". Anything that has to do with Marvel will make $$ obscure or not. I'm not even gonna mention Star Wars! Just wait til that gets going in about 2 years.

Planes went from a direct to dvd film to a major theatrical release. The only reason it was made was to expand the Cars franchise by adding new characters.

Disney is generally slow when it comes to releasing info for their films. We still don't know shit about Big Hero 6, which going by your logic Disney would be keen to advertise for being a franchise movie. Not to mention that Big Hero 6 wasn't mentioned in that image you linked to.
And of course, you've complained multiple times about Disney not promoting Frozen enough.

I concede that you do have a point about Disney pursuing franchises too much, especially when you look at the company as a whole. I just think that you are reaching when it comes to looking at this bit of marketing and making conclusions about their enthusiasm for R&J's new film.

All i'm saying is how is Disney going to market R&J's film if it's not apart of a franchise.

We don't know anything about BH6 now, but i'm sure during this summer's Comic Con & D23 events, some info could come out.

And I did complain about the lack of images for Frozen, but that was over a month ago. I posted a while back that I understood that WDAS was not ready to release any new images for Frozen at this point. I'll just wait til the trailer comes out this June. Remember last week when someone on here posted an image of the Rich Moore/Samsung commerical, highlighting blurry images of Frozen on the back walls. If that's what it's come to regarding Frozen info, i'm more than willing to wait til June.