DVDizzy Forum

farerb wrote:Aladdin/Sleeping Beauty/whatever theory

What SB/Aladdin theory?! I know of the "Tarzan is Elsa's/Anna's brother" theory...

blackcauldron85 wrote:

farerb wrote:Aladdin/Sleeping Beauty/whatever theory

What SB/Aladdin theory?! I know of the "Tarzan is Elsa's/Anna's brother" theory...

That the book Belle reads is Aladdin or Sleeping Beauty or another Disney film. I don't really believe that, especially Aladdin because it was probably still in early story developments when Ashman wrote "Belle". I just think it was just a foreshadowing.

^ Oh, I gotcha. Thank you!

farerb wrote:In the end anyone can choose whatever they wish to follow. I only shared that video of Don Hahn that I found. I personally give more gravitas to the people who made the films than whoever works in the merchandise department, which is why I don't subscribe to the Aladdin/Sleeping Beauty/whatever theory and don't consider any of the sequels/TV shows/books/remakes to be canonical. So to me The Beast doesn't have a name, Atlantica and Corona don't exist, Ariel never had a daughter, Simba and Nala had a son at the end, Scar didn't get his scar from an evil snake, Maleficent and Hades don't have a thing, etc, etc...
But again these things are subjective and that's just my personal preference.

I completely agree with you. I also give more credit to what the creators of the film say than to any other source, but even if they provide some extra info that's not in the film like the name of a character, to me it's only official if it's mentioned in the movie. Personally, I don't mind if a character doesn't have a name, but I understand people like to be able to have a way of referring to them, so I don't mind if they call the Beast Adam, for example. To me, though, he has no name.

Mooky wrote:The Kingdom of Atlantica was never named as such in the original Little Mermaid.

Where was it given that name? Was it in the TV series?

Disney's Divinity wrote:I don't mind Adam. I admit it's not a French name, but the Bible is old as time, so I'm sure the French had a copy.

Yeah, Adam may not be a typical French name, but it has to exist there, so it's not inaccurate for the place the film's set in.

Yes, Atlantica is from the TV show. Corona as well.

farerb wrote:Yes, Atlantica is from the TV show. Corona as well.

OK, thanks.

Disney's Divinity wrote:I don't mind Adam. I admit it's not a French name, but the Bible is old as time, so I'm sure the French had a copy.

I don't mind it either. It's not like they were consistent with naming. Cogsworth, Mrs. Potts, and Chip aren't French names either so Adam is not outside the realm of possibility.

farerb wrote:I personally give more gravitas to the people who made the films than whoever works in the merchandise department, which is why I don't subscribe to the Aladdin/Sleeping Beauty/whatever theory and don't consider any of the sequels/TV shows/books/remakes to be canonical.

What is your stance on things not mentioned in the movie but revealed by the creators in interviews like Kristoff's last name being Bjorgman or the name of Hans' horse being Sitron?

farerb wrote:I just think it was just a foreshadowing.

Exactly. Theories and Easter eggs are fun, but let's not throw our literary analysis skills out the window to accommodate them. This was a clear case of foreshadowing.

farerb wrote:Yes, Atlantica is from the TV show. Corona as well.

I don't know about Atlantica, but Corona wasn't named by the TV series. It was out there long before the show same along, around the time of the movie's release. Not sure where it originated though.

Sotiris wrote: What is your stance on things not mentioned in the movie but revealed by the creators in interviews like Kristoff's last name being Bjorgman or the name of Hans' horse being Sitron?

Depends on the type of information I guess. If they came up with something convoluted like how Rowling said that Wizards reliving themselves wherever then I'm going to ignore it. I know that Chris Buck joked about that Tarzan theory and people took him seriously, but I dismissed it because the British flag is still Britain's flag and not Norway's. Frozen II debunked that theory anyway. Minor things like family names is fine I guess, though it doesn't really add anything, and why does Kristoff gets a last name but not Anna and Elsa? I hope that no one will call Anna, Anna Bjorgman cause as the Royal Queen she's going to keep her name, their children will take her name as well.

I think one of the best examples where I'd choose the directors even though it's not literally in the film itself is the peddler in Aladdin. Musker and Clements said that the peddler is the genie while that contradicts the ending of The King of Thieves. In that case I choose what they said because like I said I don't really consider the sequel canon.

Sotiris wrote: Exactly. Theories and Easter eggs are fun, but let's not throw our literary analysis skills out the window to accommodate them. This was a clear case of foreshadowing.

Yes, and Easter egg in Disney films are usually visual (that character from that other film appear briefly in this film) but I don't think the films referenced each other, or if that happens it's rare (like Zootopia's bootlegs).
There was a theory I used to like which was the connection of the stars between Pinocchio and The Princess and the Frog, but I realized that it doesn't really make sense because New Orleans isn't in the same latitude as Italy. I know that some liked to add Peter Pan but Peter Pan takes place in Edwardian era while The Princess and the Frog is in the 20's so the timeline doesn't fit.

Sotiris wrote: I don't know about Atlantica, but Corona wasn't named by the TV series. It was out there long before the show same along, around the time of the movie's release. Not sure where it originated though.

Regarding Atlantica, according to the wiki:

Although the kingdom is known as Atlantica, it was never referred to as such in the original film. It was not until a Mouseworks novelization was released in 1993 that the term was coined. The TV series was the first animated medium to utilize that name. The name would stick in the sequel and other Disney media afterwards.
In large part because of this, the Disney Comics serial for The Little Mermaid, most notably the story arc Serpent-Teen, utilized the name Mermaid City.

https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Atlantica

So I was actually wrong, D82, it wasn't originated in the series.
They don't specify the origin of Corona, so I'll have to do a research.

farerb wrote:Regarding Atlantica, according to the wiki:

Although the kingdom is known as Atlantica, it was never referred to as such in the original film. It was not until a Mouseworks novelization was released in 1993 that the term was coined. The TV series was the first animated medium to utilize that name. The name would stick in the sequel and other Disney media afterwards.
In large part because of this, the Disney Comics serial for The Little Mermaid, most notably the story arc Serpent-Teen, utilized the name Mermaid City.

https://disney.fandom.com/wiki/Atlantica

So I was actually wrong, D82, it wasn't originated in the series.
They don't specify the origin of Corona, so I'll have to do a research.

Thanks for the new info about the origin of the name of Atlantica! Regarding Corona, I've found the following article from before the film's release in which it's already mentioned:

To establish the look of Corona, the fictional kingdom that serves as the setting of the story, the film’s directors credit Disneyland, namely the Fantasyland section, as the inspiration for the village’s look and feel.

Source: https://allears.net/2010/09/03/disney-a ... d-studios/

I guess that info was probably taken from press material provided by Disney, so Sotiris is right that its origin wasn't the TV series.

D82 wrote:

farerb wrote: So I was actually wrong, D82, it wasn't originated in the series.
They don't specify the origin of Corona, so I'll have to do a research.

Thanks for the new info about the origin of the name of Atlantica! Regarding Corona, I've found the following article from before the film's release in which it's already mentioned:

To establish the look of Corona, the fictional kingdom that serves as the setting of the story, the film’s directors credit Disneyland, namely the Fantasyland section, as the inspiration for the village’s look and feel.

Source: https://allears.net/2010/09/03/disney-a ... d-studios/

I guess that info was probably taken from press material provided by Disney, so Sotiris is right that its origin wasn't the TV series.

I checked my copy of The Art of Tangled looking for a specific instance of the kingdom being named Corona, but nothing, it's only been referred to as "The Kingdom".

Disney's Divinity wrote:I don't mind Adam. I admit it's not a French name, but the Bible is old as time, so I'm sure the French had a copy.

And as we know, so is the tale of Beauty and the Beast, so it's a full circle I guess

Regarding continuity and references: I agree it's all subjective and that's the beauty of it. I for example have a somewhat wide view of what constitutes a continuity (for me, it's the original film and its sequels/spin-offs, even if they sometimes transcend media formats), but I draw the line at all DACS being interconnected especially when there's no concrete evidence for it (that Frozen/Tarzan theory was just silly; Aladdin/Hercules I don't mind but I still see the two franchises as separate entities). So I believe a franchise's continuity begins and ends with the original work and its subsequent derivatives. But at the same time, whenever a movie or any work of art is released to the general public, it takes on a life of its own and it's hard to contain it to what the original creators intended it to be. Sometimes it'd even be a damn shame to confine it to a singular interpretation, because there are cases when a sequel helmed by different people does better things with the material than the original work.

My canon is the original film, and then I have a seperate canon for the original film combined with official sequels, spin-offs, specials, TV series, and, occasionally, books, including comics. But for the original film, I only acknowledge that film and what the original creators say went into that film even if it's not known. For example, I thought they original Tangled filmakers named the kingdom Corona, they just chose not to reveal it in the film, or perhaps just changed their minds, because of it being associated with the beer (of course, that beer thing could just be a rumor). My canon and continuity is very similar to farerb's.

Since I'm watching the films again in order I noticed that Beauty and the Beast is the only film out of those they changed the intro (The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King and Hercules) that had the WDAS intro (Steamboat Willie) added as well.

Let's talk about Belle's animation. I'm putting screenshots of her throughout the film. Some look good, some not so much, but my main question is why couldn't they have her on model throughout the film unlike other heroines, is she that hard to draw? Or does that have more to do with the limited time they had to work on the film?
I think the scene where she looks most off is the first scene with Maurice.

I honestly have trouble picturing Belle in my mind’s eye because she is so off-model all the time. Which Belle is meant to be the real Belle?

UmbrellaFish wrote:I honestly have trouble picturing Belle in my mind’s eye because she is so off-model all the time. Which Belle is meant to be the real Belle?

Marce82 posted this in the covers thread so I guess this is how she is supposed to look on model:

I think the reason there are so many "different Belles" as Andreas Deja put it, is that they were in such a rush to finish the animation. The animation in Beauty and the Beast, or rather, the on-modelness of Beauty and the Beast, is really bad. The actual movement and acting is amazing. Also, farerb, Belle's father's name is spelled "Maurice", not "Morris", but I agree with you completely that that is where she looks the worst and the most off-model.

Disney Duster wrote:I think the reason there are so many "different Belles" as Andreas Deja put it, is that they were in such a rush to finish the animation. The animation in Beauty and the Beast, or rather, the on-modelness of Beauty and the Beast, is really bad. The actual movement and acting is amazing. Also, farerb, Belle's father's name is spelled "Maurice", not "Morris", but I agree with you completely that that is where she looks the worst and the most off-model.

I didn't notice I wrote his name wrong. Fixed that. Thank you.
Yes I agree that the animation itself is fine and the design and backgrounds are gorgeous.

I actually think Beauty and the Beast's designs, animated acting and animated movement are the very best of all Disney or any movie! I mean, you know, overall! Hands down the best.

Disney Duster wrote:I actually think Beauty and the Beast's designs, animated acting and animated movement are the very best of all Disney or any movie! I mean, you know, overall! Hands down the best.

Even more than Sleeping Beauty?

I'm going to quickly chime in here... so yes, they made this movie in a crazy short amount of time. Belle is also the character with the most screen time.

You guys should also keep in mind, that the studio was growing fast at that time, and they probably had a lot of new artists who were probably not the best, at times. I think i once read somewhere that they were so hard pressed for time on this one, they got some students from CalArts to help with the cleanup.

That's another issue. Sometimes, an animator may not have been great... at times, a cleanup artist may not have been the best. If you watch the Work-in-progress version, at times the rough animation on Belle is... well... not pretty. And once again, human figures are hard to animate in general.

I personally think Mark Henn's Belle is the most on-model, followed by Tony Baxter's.