Disney Sequel Marathon - First time watching!
-
Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
He said he will soon put up Fox and the hound 2 review soon. he's busy with other things irl atm.
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
-
disneyboy20022
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 6868
- Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 2:17 pm
Super Aurora wrote:He said he will soon put up Fox and the hound 2 review soon. he's busy with other things irl atm.
Like recovering from a coma for doing these reviews due to just the stress of watching some of the crappy films in a row and reviewing them would put anyone in a coma..it's enough to drive one insanely madder than the Mad Hatter
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below
http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx
http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx
-
Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
He currently dealing with a lot of school work hence the delay.disneyboy20022 wrote:Super Aurora wrote:He said he will soon put up Fox and the hound 2 review soon. he's busy with other things irl atm.
Like recovering from a coma for doing these reviews due to just the stress of watching some of the crappy films in a row and reviewing them would put anyone in a coma..it's enough to drive one insanely madder than the Mad Hatter
He told me the fox and Hound 2 is longest review he wrote up.
after that he'll continue finishing off the rest of the sequels.
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
-
singerguy04
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2591
- Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 4:40 pm
- Location: The Land of Lincoln
I don't think I'd really blame him for giving up all together. I own them all, just for collecting purposes, and I haven't watched most of them more than once. I'm really interested to see what he thinks of Belle's Magical World, Pocahontas II, and Atlantis: Milo's Return because for me they're up there with Cinderella II and Hunchback II for some of the worst.
Some of my favorites that he hasn't gotten to are Kronk's New Groove and The Lion King 1 1/2. Hopefully they can help him cling to sanity.
Some of my favorites that he hasn't gotten to are Kronk's New Groove and The Lion King 1 1/2. Hopefully they can help him cling to sanity.
-
Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
He's not giving up, you idiots. He has other stuff to do. He will get back to it. Just be patient.
Semaj, go back to fapping to your Alice x Pinocchio porn. LOL
Semaj, go back to fapping to your Alice x Pinocchio porn. LOL
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
I'm not giving up. 
I'm busy with school, more recently family, and some video games have sucked me into their little world. I should be open soon, however.
But to be honest, I have been lazy too, not going to lie. I kind of want to take a break...but a week ago I was working pretty hard on The Fox and the Hound 2 review. That doesn't mean I will be giving it up, however.
I'm busy with school, more recently family, and some video games have sucked me into their little world. I should be open soon, however.But to be honest, I have been lazy too, not going to lie. I kind of want to take a break...but a week ago I was working pretty hard on The Fox and the Hound 2 review. That doesn't mean I will be giving it up, however.
-
BelleGirl
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1174
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:36 am
- Location: The Netherlands, The Hague
I'm really enjoying your reviews of the Disney sequels, Big One, but for me they also comfirm that I was right to avoid these DTV's like the plague (well, I did see 'Return of Jafar" on VHS in they grey past and "Tarzan II"on TV more recently)
I'm looking forward to your review of Fox and the Hound 2
I'm looking forward to your review of Fox and the Hound 2
See my growing collection of Disney movie-banners at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/78256383@N ... 651337290/
I had to laugh a lot while reading your reviews, like when you said "pixie dust bukkake"! 
Oh, and that review for Cinderella II! I thought I would DIE laughing! Holy crap, that was some hilarious shit! And without having ever seen the piece of drivel, I can relate exactly to everything you wrote.
But, reviewing these films and pointing out all their bad sides and shortcoming is kind of redundant. I mean, they were not made to add to the already exisiting original. They were not made to add anything to the characters. They were not made because anything needed to be told, or because the writers had really good ideas. Any 'potential' you think you see in these sequels are there entirely by accident. These are not meant as works of art to be enjoyed as such, like the Classics. The sequels are just there to cash in on the Classics and to function as cheap babysitters to toddlers.
So, why would you continue to punish yourself, while at the same time, you could watch actual GOOD films?
Oh, and that review for Cinderella II! I thought I would DIE laughing! Holy crap, that was some hilarious shit! And without having ever seen the piece of drivel, I can relate exactly to everything you wrote.
But, reviewing these films and pointing out all their bad sides and shortcoming is kind of redundant. I mean, they were not made to add to the already exisiting original. They were not made to add anything to the characters. They were not made because anything needed to be told, or because the writers had really good ideas. Any 'potential' you think you see in these sequels are there entirely by accident. These are not meant as works of art to be enjoyed as such, like the Classics. The sequels are just there to cash in on the Classics and to function as cheap babysitters to toddlers.
So, why would you continue to punish yourself, while at the same time, you could watch actual GOOD films?
No, he shouldn't and no, they aren't. If you really believe that, you never got what's so special about the original movie.StitchExp626 wrote:I saw the list and think that you should also watch the other two Lilo and Stitch sequels:
Stitch! the Movie
and
Leroy and Stitch
These are well worth watching.
-
ajmrowland
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 8177
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
- Location: Appleton, WI
-
ajmrowland
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 8177
- Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:19 pm
- Location: Appleton, WI
-
DisneyJedi
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3737
- Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 2:53 pm
- Gender: Male
Okay, the next few paragraphs will contain my personal opinion about this thread and Big One's posts.
I thought the reviews were hilarious! Yes, all of them and yes, every bit of them. I was not offended or disturbed at any point. I think the over-the-top approach is a big part of the humor, and it wouldn't be half as much fun to read them if all the 'foul' language and references to all those horrible acts were deleted. Big One uses them to make a point, to show the awfulness of the sequels can't be described in a conventional way. Honestly, I don't understand what's not funny at placing Cinderella II in the same list as child rape and shooting your dog. That's so absurd that it becomes funny! I was sad to see the humor decline substantially after some people have complained. Or is that just a coincidence and did the reviewed movies become better?
Or do people maybe think Big One *really* believes Cinderella II is as bad as all those horrible acts? Do they think Big One is meaning to belittle them by placing the sequel in the same list? Setting personal tastes in humor aside (you don't have to find his posts funny to see he's just joking), I wonder how many forum members are taking his posts too literally. That wouldn't be the first time. A lot of forum members take a lot that's being said here (not only in this thread, but in all the threads) far too seriously or personal. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that nine out of ten members have some kind of autism or aspergers? (Please read all the way through to where I get to Big One's responsibility before you start writing angry replies. I'm already regretting getting into this minefield.)
Now, I don't mean that as an attack or insult *at all*! I have never treated anyone on this forum differently because of that, even though other members have sometimes asked me to. But I have never done that, because I don't view people with autism/aspergers as 'different' or 'special'. I don't know a hell of a lot about the subject, but I have a general grasp on it. But I do think it accounts for a lot of the drama we have seen on UD lately. Maybe it's an elephant in the room and it's potentially painful to talk about it (and maybe people are offended by the suggestion, which is *not* my intention at all), and maybe it's easier to blame Big One, Super Aurora or me or other members for the drama, because we are very outspoken. But things like going ballistic over an animated alligator, saying Lasseter caused Roy Disney's cancer and more of that kind of drama didn't come from us.
I'm not 'incriminating' anybody and my intention is not to throw 'blame' around, because I think that would be unfair. But, like I said, maybe it accounts (partially) for the fact that Big One's posts get taken so seriously and/or personally around here. Maybe people get offended personally because their favorite films are being attacked. It wouldn't be the first time on UD. That's just a fact and we should be able to point that out. I've been accused of 'personal attacks' or even 'having an agenda' against certain people just because I said I hated a certain type of music. So yeah, this is a really *great* forum, but it's also kind of a special forum, in that regard.
On the other hand, Big One should also acknowledge that this is not the forum that Super Aurora and he also frequent. It's a whole other place, with its own rules, its own history and its own posting etiquette. What flies over at the other forum, doesn't neccesarily have to fly here. And even if what you're posting wouldn't be against some UD rules, there's also something like 'posting environment'. There has been established a certain way of posting at UD and when new members come in and start posting in a whole other way, it's understandable UD veterans could get upset. Nobody is obligated to accept your style of posting, even though I find it hilarious. Your contributions have clearly violated some official UD rules, but then again, they have been violated a lot in the past by others, including me. Moderation is fairly loose here, and I think that's a good thing, but *formally*, the rules are still broken.
I've seen some longtime members expressing their disapproval over Big One's posts. Whether or not he changes his tone, is up to the moderators and himself. I'm not asking he does, because I enjoy his posts. I would hate to see forum members leave or take a break because of this, like enigmawing announced. I'm not saying that to put pressure on Big One, but it's just my opinion. I would hate to see enigmawing go, because I always enjoy her posts. But maybe enigmawing could just not come into this thread anymore, if it bothers her? I know that's what I would do. I don't go into threads that I don't care for. Or maybe she's just not pleased with the principle that this kind of posting is allowed on UD? Again, I can't tell. But she has to decide for herself what she'll do, as Big One has to do.
Time for me to wrap up this novel-lenght message. To summarize: I don't blame forum members for being offended by Big One, but I wonder if they're taking his posts too seriously/literally/personally, like we've seen more of recently. On the other hand, I don't blame Big One for writing what he did, but I wonder if it fits comfortably with the general tone on UD. His kind of humor seems too far-off for UD. People like Milk Buds jokes over here.
I've seen some Disney-porn before, but this shit is extreme! Holy crap, that has to be the most extreme thing I've ever seen!
I thought the reviews were hilarious! Yes, all of them and yes, every bit of them. I was not offended or disturbed at any point. I think the over-the-top approach is a big part of the humor, and it wouldn't be half as much fun to read them if all the 'foul' language and references to all those horrible acts were deleted. Big One uses them to make a point, to show the awfulness of the sequels can't be described in a conventional way. Honestly, I don't understand what's not funny at placing Cinderella II in the same list as child rape and shooting your dog. That's so absurd that it becomes funny! I was sad to see the humor decline substantially after some people have complained. Or is that just a coincidence and did the reviewed movies become better?
Or do people maybe think Big One *really* believes Cinderella II is as bad as all those horrible acts? Do they think Big One is meaning to belittle them by placing the sequel in the same list? Setting personal tastes in humor aside (you don't have to find his posts funny to see he's just joking), I wonder how many forum members are taking his posts too literally. That wouldn't be the first time. A lot of forum members take a lot that's being said here (not only in this thread, but in all the threads) far too seriously or personal. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that nine out of ten members have some kind of autism or aspergers? (Please read all the way through to where I get to Big One's responsibility before you start writing angry replies. I'm already regretting getting into this minefield.)
Now, I don't mean that as an attack or insult *at all*! I have never treated anyone on this forum differently because of that, even though other members have sometimes asked me to. But I have never done that, because I don't view people with autism/aspergers as 'different' or 'special'. I don't know a hell of a lot about the subject, but I have a general grasp on it. But I do think it accounts for a lot of the drama we have seen on UD lately. Maybe it's an elephant in the room and it's potentially painful to talk about it (and maybe people are offended by the suggestion, which is *not* my intention at all), and maybe it's easier to blame Big One, Super Aurora or me or other members for the drama, because we are very outspoken. But things like going ballistic over an animated alligator, saying Lasseter caused Roy Disney's cancer and more of that kind of drama didn't come from us.
I'm not 'incriminating' anybody and my intention is not to throw 'blame' around, because I think that would be unfair. But, like I said, maybe it accounts (partially) for the fact that Big One's posts get taken so seriously and/or personally around here. Maybe people get offended personally because their favorite films are being attacked. It wouldn't be the first time on UD. That's just a fact and we should be able to point that out. I've been accused of 'personal attacks' or even 'having an agenda' against certain people just because I said I hated a certain type of music. So yeah, this is a really *great* forum, but it's also kind of a special forum, in that regard.
On the other hand, Big One should also acknowledge that this is not the forum that Super Aurora and he also frequent. It's a whole other place, with its own rules, its own history and its own posting etiquette. What flies over at the other forum, doesn't neccesarily have to fly here. And even if what you're posting wouldn't be against some UD rules, there's also something like 'posting environment'. There has been established a certain way of posting at UD and when new members come in and start posting in a whole other way, it's understandable UD veterans could get upset. Nobody is obligated to accept your style of posting, even though I find it hilarious. Your contributions have clearly violated some official UD rules, but then again, they have been violated a lot in the past by others, including me. Moderation is fairly loose here, and I think that's a good thing, but *formally*, the rules are still broken.
I've seen some longtime members expressing their disapproval over Big One's posts. Whether or not he changes his tone, is up to the moderators and himself. I'm not asking he does, because I enjoy his posts. I would hate to see forum members leave or take a break because of this, like enigmawing announced. I'm not saying that to put pressure on Big One, but it's just my opinion. I would hate to see enigmawing go, because I always enjoy her posts. But maybe enigmawing could just not come into this thread anymore, if it bothers her? I know that's what I would do. I don't go into threads that I don't care for. Or maybe she's just not pleased with the principle that this kind of posting is allowed on UD? Again, I can't tell. But she has to decide for herself what she'll do, as Big One has to do.
Time for me to wrap up this novel-lenght message. To summarize: I don't blame forum members for being offended by Big One, but I wonder if they're taking his posts too seriously/literally/personally, like we've seen more of recently. On the other hand, I don't blame Big One for writing what he did, but I wonder if it fits comfortably with the general tone on UD. His kind of humor seems too far-off for UD. People like Milk Buds jokes over here.
OMFGBig One wrote:She has all of the traits to not only appeal to all pedophiles but to normal men too. Disney is trying to tempt us to fall to the dark side and it's quite effective here. If you don't believe me just look up "Melody Paheal" in Google and you'll see tons of proof.
I've seen some Disney-porn before, but this shit is extreme! Holy crap, that has to be the most extreme thing I've ever seen!
Hmmm... who's the pedophile now?Big One wrote:The sisters are pretty damn cute too:
<center>
I'd let them play with my wang, if you know what I mean.</center>
-
Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
Absolutely! Then again I usually use this type of humor.Goliath wrote: I thought the reviews were hilarious! Yes, all of them and yes, every bit of them. I was not offended or disturbed at any point. I think the over-the-top approach is a big part of the humor, and it wouldn't be half as much fun to read them if all the 'foul' language and references to all those horrible acts were deleted. Big One uses them to make a point, to show the awfulness of the sequels can't be described in a conventional way. Honestly, I don't understand what's not funny at placing Cinderella II in the same list as child rape and shooting your dog. That's so absurd that it becomes funny!
There were some really bad stuff he wanted to put in the interview but I suggested him not to since it would really make the UD members go bonkers
and go bawwwing.
It was little of both actually.Goliath wrote:I was sad to see the humor decline substantially after some people have complained. Or is that just a coincidence and did the reviewed movies become better?
Most likely the case.Goliath wrote:and maybe it's easier to blame Big One, Super Aurora or me or other members for the drama, because we are very outspoken.
......WHAT THE FUUUUCK??!Goliath wrote:But things like saying Lasseter caused Roy Disney's cancer
True. though would make it little boring imo. Hence why he and I spice stuff up. SpringHeelJack and Duckburger though also make good witty posts too.Goliath wrote:On the other hand, Big One should also acknowledge that this is not the forum that Super Aurora and he also frequent. It's a whole other place, with its own rules, its own history and its own posting etiquette. What flies over at the other forum, doesn't neccesarily have to fly here.
I always hate that word and find it as a bunch of BS. Rank up there with Disney Essence©Goliath wrote:And even if what you're posting wouldn't be against some UD rules, there's also something like 'posting environment'. There has been established a certain way of posting at UD.
She has been post quite a bit in other threads so most likely it's this thread she's avoiding.Goliath wrote: I would hate to see forum members leave or take a break because of this, like enigmawing announced. I would hate to see enigmawing go, because I always enjoy her posts. But maybe enigmawing could just not come into this thread anymore, if it bothers her? Or maybe she's just not pleased with the principle that this kind of posting is allowed on UD? Again, I can't tell. But she has to decide for herself what she'll do, as Big One has to do.
I would thought people would be use to his stuff considering they're used to my way of posting. He and I are similar(not mention good pals too).Goliath wrote:Time for me to wrap up this novel-lenght message. To summarize: I don't blame forum members for being offended by Big One, but I wonder if they're taking his posts too seriously/literally/personally, like we've seen more of recently. On the other hand, I don't blame Big One for writing what he did, but I wonder if it fits comfortably with the general tone on UD. His kind of humor seems too far-off for UD. People like Milk Buds jokes over here.
Welcome to the internet.Goliath wrote:OMFGBig One wrote:She has all of the traits to not only appeal to all pedophiles but to normal men too. Disney is trying to tempt us to fall to the dark side and it's quite effective here. If you don't believe me just look up "Melody Paheal" in Google and you'll see tons of proof.
I've seen some Disney-porn before, but this shit is extreme! Holy crap, that has to be the most extreme thing I've ever seen!
I've seen even worse shit though with Disney characters.
But nothing is worse than Pinocchio x Alice porn.
They never said how old the girls are. They could be 19 or in their 20's for all we know.Goliath wrote:Hmmm... who's the pedophile now?Big One wrote:The sisters are pretty damn cute too:
<center>
I'd let them play with my wang, if you know what I mean.</center>
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
They look awfully young (and flat) to be in their twenties. Oh, and have you seen more extreme things done to Disney characters than having a pre-teen being knocked-up by her father, like they did to Melody? (Good thing Big One didn't add a direct link!)Super Aurora wrote:They never said how old the girls are. They could be 19 or in their 20's for all we know.
-
Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
If you know anything about Asians (I would know since I fap to few japanese celebrity idols.) Asian girls look way younger than they actually are. This why many people love Asians girls. You can have a 25 yr old Asian girl look like she's 14. Seriously.Goliath wrote:They look awfully young (and flat) to be in their twenties.Super Aurora wrote:They never said how old the girls are. They could be 19 or in their 20's for all we know.
Yes I have seen really fuck up shit. the example you gave is a tame compare some of the more risque stuff I encounter(unfortunately) lolGoliath wrote:Oh, and have you seen more extreme things done to Disney characters than having a pre-teen being knocked-up by her father, like they did to Melody? (Good thing Big One didn't add a direct link!)
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
-
Disney Duster
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 14017
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: America
I don't know if you alreay thought of this, but I think the Genie just does so many pop references because he has all-knowing, all-time powers. Yes, he strangely can't predict when certain characters in his time are going to do things, but I think his powers simply see only a certain amount. Like, limited glimpses into the past and future.
Also, none of the sequels, not even Cinderella III, has animation exactly the same quality as the originals. One way you can tell is Cinderella III actually re-animated some scenes and you can tell it's a little off. And Lady Tremaine sometimes looked really bad. But I do admit it was almost the same quality, it was really close.
Change "shitty life" to "being the best person she could be even dealing with a shitty life".Big One wrote:I also thought it was interesting cause it made Cinderella work for her Happily Ever After rather than receiving it for having such a shitty life.
Also, none of the sequels, not even Cinderella III, has animation exactly the same quality as the originals. One way you can tell is Cinderella III actually re-animated some scenes and you can tell it's a little off. And Lady Tremaine sometimes looked really bad. But I do admit it was almost the same quality, it was really close.
