DVDizzy Forum

pap64 wrote: Did anyone thought he died at the end of the movie? Most importantly, do you think a fall like that could've killed Lucifer?

I sometimes thought he did, but have you ever heard that cats always land on their feet? Part of my mind thought the fall was too much, but I also thought that he could have made it. It was probably played out in this way to let the audience decide whether or not he lived.

Maybe the original plan was to have him die, but when the sequels were made, they decided to bring him back.

Instead of making a whole new thread for this, if anyone has not yet bought Cinderella 3 and wants to test it out, Toon Disney is playing this movie the third at 5 o'clock.


I think it's intresting they're already playing this movie, though. They usually wait a couple of years to air the sequels.

Now I can bother everyone in real life who hasn't seen it to watch it!

Might be good to buy your C-III copy before end of year because that's when Diz is supposedly putting the whole C franchise (save for upcoming enchanted tale) back in da vault!

C III's still rattling around various retailers up here in Portland, OR.

FYI, if I did not mention it already, the artist who illustrated the Cinderella III storybook (and he had tons of references to work with) liked the flick so much he's watched it over 10 times. Ironically, there's a much bigger version of that CIII book he did (roughly 3 times as many pages) that has yet to be published.

You know? Its been exactly a year since Cinders 3 was released and its still lingering in my mind. Its might be the most successful Disney sequel in terms of story, presentation and writing. What could have been a major disaster ended up being a very solid entry in the Cindy legacy.

I think its the idea of Cindy fighting to get her happy ending that makes the movie so endearing. While Cindy worked hard to get it in the first she had it pretty easy when compared to what she went through in the third movie.

They also managed to turn an obnoxious antagonist into a likable character. Of course I am talking about Anastasia. I still think the original intention was to make her mean through and through during the production of the first movie, but the way I see it Anastasia started to change when she saw Cinderella get her happy ending not through a rotten attitude but with a lot of heart and charm. It makes sense when you see her lusting over the royal life.

All in all, Cinderella III proved that you can make a good sequel if you put the time and effort into it rather than to rush it to market for a quick buck.

pap64 wrote:All in all, Cinderella II proved that you can make a good sequel if you put the time and effort into it rather than to rush it to market for a quick buck.

I'm not even going to tell you what's wrong with this sentence...

obviouly a typo.....

lord-of-sith wrote:

pap64 wrote:All in all, Cinderella II proved that you can make a good sequel if you put the time and effort into it rather than to rush it to market for a quick buck.

I'm not even going to tell you what's wrong with this sentence...

What's wrong with it?

Cinderella II was clearly a sequel masterpiece and...Wait

*Looks at number

Oh crap...

Actually I think Cinderella II is great.
Well,it's just cute stories about Cinderella,it's not that bad,there's much more worse sequels (The Little Mermaid II,Pocahontas II and more).

Ariel'sprince wrote:Actually I think Cinderella II is great.
Well,it's just cute stories about Cinderella,it's not that bad,there's much more worse sequels (The Little Mermaid II,Pocahontas II and more).

Do you know, I think this may be a first. But I actually agree with Arial'sPrince 100%

Oh wait. He says The Little Mermaid II is a worse sequel. I disagree. Oh well, for a brief moment, I thought we were a glorious whole, united in mind and body.

They made Ariel an old mother .
The Little Mermaid II for many more reason is the worse sequel ever.

pap64 wrote:

lord-of-sith wrote: I'm not even going to tell you what's wrong with this sentence...

What's wrong with it?

Cinderella II was clearly a sequel masterpiece and...Wait

*Looks at number

Oh crap...

MY EYES MY EYES!!!!!

Ariel'sprince wrote:They made Ariel an old mother .
The Little Mermaid II for many more reason is the worse sequel ever.

I just think it was one of the 'better' ones...
That is more because I didn't see Ariel as a 'old mother', but like the same old Ariel (only older). But if someone mentions the animation was crap, I have to agree..

Ariel is probably under 30 years of ago during TLM2, when Melody is already a pre-teen. But in fairytales, age doesn't always mean the same thing as IRL! Plus, she may still have those longevity genes from her mermaid heritage.

Ariel'sprince wrote:They made Ariel an old mother .
The Little Mermaid II for many more reason is the worse sequel ever.

Haha thats exactly how I see it I lost alot of respect for Ariel after I saw that movie (I just pretend its Ariels evil twin in it) O___O

MadameGaston wrote:

Ariel'sprince wrote:They made Ariel an old mother .
The Little Mermaid II for many more reason is the worse sequel ever.

Haha thats exactly how I see it I lost alot of respect for Ariel after I saw that movie (I just pretend its Ariels evil twin in it) O___O

It is her evil twin! that movie sucks .
Well,we didn't get Cinderella III over here but the storybook did came,it's called Cinderella:True Love.