DisneyJedi wrote:
.... You're kidding, right? A movie with amazing concept art like this would have been comedic in the spirit of Shrek??
Its kinda of like getting a date with a hot guy and he acts like a complete slob throughout the date.
Now c'mon, let's not take shots at Shrek, it's not Dreamworks fault that only Pixar actually bothered to tell stories instead of just copying what was popular at the time for the past 10 years.
And who says comedies can't have amazing concept art?
Shrek's artwork isn't bad at all! It beats the hell out of Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and in some ways Bolt.
Not to get too far off subject, but I do think Bolt's visuals are awesome! It was in that film that we really got a sneak peak into the lush environments we saw in Tangled. I've always been impressed with it's background animation.
singerguy04 wrote:Shrek's artwork isn't bad at all! It beats the hell out of Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and in some ways Bolt.
Not to get too far off subject, but I do think Bolt's visuals are awesome! It was in that film that we really got a sneak peak into the lush environments we saw in Tangled. I've always been impressed with it's background animation.
It reminds me of the fact that Tangled was almost the total trainwreck called Rapunzel Unbraided.Say all you want about the title change at least it wasn't going to be a bad Shrek rip off.I think I am seeing a pattern here because of the fact both Tangled and now Frozen were once supposed to be Shrek like comedies.Which means maybe there is a reason they called it Frozen it was to dissociate it with the comedy trainwreck it was going to be.
singerguy04 wrote:Shrek's artwork isn't bad at all! It beats the hell out of Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and in some ways Bolt.
Not to get too far off subject, but I do think Bolt's visuals are awesome! It was in that film that we really got a sneak peak into the lush environments we saw in Tangled. I've always been impressed with it's background animation.
It reminds me of the fact that Tangled was almost the total trainwreck called Rapunzel Unbraided.Say all you want about the title change at least it wasn't going to be a bad Shrek rip off.I think I am seeing a pattern here because of the fact both Tangled and now Frozen were once supposed to be Shrek like comedies.Which means maybe there is a reason they called it Frozen it was to dissociate it with the comedy trainwreck it was going to be.
I know Tangled rocked and I would welcome any similar type of movie visually..however..
I find it difficult to process that the makers of such great drawings were passed up or ''re-schooled'' to provide a possible barbielike snowqueen.
I still wonder if Disney is not leading us on with this one and is still secretly continuing this movie in 2-d..let's just hope Menken still provides the soundtrack.
When it comes to brains, I got the lion-share,
but when it comes to bruth strength, I'm afraid I'm at the shallow end of the gene pool
REINIER wrote:With so much 2-d stuff at hand why choose 3-d???
The visuals created are so rich..
Why rape this with 3-d???
I know Tangled rocked and I would welcome any similar type of movie visually..however..
I find it difficult to process that the makers of such great drawings were passed up or ''re-schooled'' to provide a possible barbielike snowqueen.
I still wonder if Disney is not leading us on with this one and is still secretly continuing this movie in 2-d..let's just hope Menken still provides the soundtrack.
Rape is a very strong word to use in this situation, and it would be an overly complicated publicity stunt if they said it was CGI but they were actually animating it traditionally, specially when you take it in account that the regular audience doesn't really care about that stuff.
Also, the last time this project was canned it was going to be CGI too, why is people so surprised that this one will be CGI too?
REINIER wrote:With so much 2-d stuff at hand why choose 3-d???
The visuals created are so rich..
Why rape this with 3-d???
I know Tangled rocked and I would welcome any similar type of movie visually..however..
I find it difficult to process that the makers of such great drawings were passed up or ''re-schooled'' to provide a possible barbielike snowqueen.
I still wonder if Disney is not leading us on with this one and is still secretly continuing this movie in 2-d..let's just hope Menken still provides the soundtrack.
Rape is a very strong word to use in this situation, and it would be an overly complicated publicity stunt if they said it was CGI but they were actually animating it traditionally, specially when you take it in account that the regular audience doesn't really care about that stuff.
Also, the last time this project was canned it was going to be CGI too, why is people so surprised that this one will be CGI too?
Because we are all aching for our childhood for when Disney did all 2D animation.
However,on a more serious note we are all aching for more 2D films that resemble the Disney Renaissance period.Sadly,it will take time for us to accept that sometimes things change.However,it doesn't mean CGI films can't have the heart of a 2D Renaissance movie.
Seeing the concept art for "The Snow Queen", I think Disney would've had a hit on their hands had they made it a big Christmas release in the 2D style. Looks magical.
"Princess and the Frog" didn't fare well because word of mouth wasn't strong enough and they relied too much on the medium to sell the film when they should've focused on creating a stronger story.
megustajake wrote:Seeing the concept art for "The Snow Queen", I think Disney would've had a hit on their hands had they made it a big Christmas release in the 2D style. Looks magical.
"Princess and the Frog" didn't fare well because word of mouth wasn't strong enough and they relied too much on the medium to sell the film when they should've focused on creating a stronger story.
The story wasn't that bad. I think the thing that worked against them however is that it's not enough to bring back 2D animation if you don't do anything innovative with it. What made "The Little Mermaid" a huge success and started a renaissance was that it did things with animation and storytelling that have never been done before be in in visuals, writing, music, etc.
The only thing that could make The Snow Queen successful aside from a good story is doing new and innovative things with the 2D format. Otherwise you just have another standard Disney film.
megustajake wrote:Seeing the concept art for "The Snow Queen", I think Disney would've had a hit on their hands had they made it a big Christmas release in the 2D style. Looks magical.
"Princess and the Frog" didn't fare well because word of mouth wasn't strong enough and they relied too much on the medium to sell the film when they should've focused on creating a stronger story.
The story wasn't that bad. I think the thing that worked against them however is that it's not enough to bring back 2D animation if you don't do anything innovative with it. What made "The Little Mermaid" a huge success and started a renaissance was that it did things with animation and storytelling that have never been done before be in in visuals, writing, music, etc.
The only thing that could make The Snow Queen successful aside from a good story is doing new and innovative things with the 2D format. Otherwise you just have another standard Disney film.
Now that you think about it Tangled probably is the Little Meremaid for Disney's CGI movies because of the fact it combines a great story,visuals,and characters.If the Snow Queen comes out on CGI it will be the "Beauty and The Beast" of Disney's CGI films.
jazzflower92 wrote:It reminds me of the fact that Tangled was almost the total trainwreck called Rapunzel Unbraided.Say all you want about the title change at least it wasn't going to be a bad Shrek rip off.I think I am seeing a pattern here because of the fact both Tangled and now Frozen were once supposed to be Shrek like comedies.Which means maybe there is a reason they called it Frozen it was to dissociate it with the comedy trainwreck it was going to be.
Tangled's title change was to make more boys see the movie. Frozen is just trying to replicate that success. Those are the only real reasons why they did it.
A classic non-Shrek movie should have a classic non-Shrek title. The movie was called Rapunzel for a long time when it was changed from the Unbraided Shrek rip-off.
jazzflower92 wrote:It reminds me of the fact that Tangled was almost the total trainwreck called Rapunzel Unbraided.Say all you want about the title change at least it wasn't going to be a bad Shrek rip off.I think I am seeing a pattern here because of the fact both Tangled and now Frozen were once supposed to be Shrek like comedies.Which means maybe there is a reason they called it Frozen it was to dissociate it with the comedy trainwreck it was going to be.
Tangled's title change was to make more boys see the movie. Frozen is just trying to replicate that success. Those are the only real reasons why they did it.
A classic non-Shrek movie should have a classic non-Shrek title. The movie was called Rapunzel for a long time when it was changed from the Unbraided Shrek rip-off.
I don't know why they named it Frozen but in my opinion they should have gone with Ice Queen because that sounds more powerful. Or they could have named it "Frozen Heart" then it would have sound like a action-thriller movie.
Disney Duster wrote:
Tangled's title change was to make more boys see the movie. Frozen is just trying to replicate that success. Those are the only real reasons why they did it.
A classic non-Shrek movie should have a classic non-Shrek title. The movie was called Rapunzel for a long time when it was changed from the Unbraided Shrek rip-off.
I think Frozen Heart will possibly make sense.
I don't know why they named it Frozen but in my opinion they should have gone with Ice Queen because that sounds more powerful. Or they could have named it "Frozen Heart" then it would have sound like a action-thriller movie.
megustajake wrote:
"Princess and the Frog" didn't fare well because word of mouth wasn't strong enough and they relied too much on the medium to sell the film when they should've focused on creating a stronger story.
Well, I suppose word of mouth could be a factor, along with these:
1) The movie should have been released nationwide during Thanksgiving break.
2) Some people are still prejudice against African-Americans and there were about.... eight or more African-American actors/characters in the movie. I mean, it could have been a factor. My mom said that Red Tails (that new movie with the mostly African-American cast set in WWII) might not fare well because of some people being prejudice against African-Americans.
3) The movie's competition got more attention...
Well, that's how I see it now that I think about it.
TPatF had a budget of $105 Mio and made worldwide $264 Mio in cinemas. On top of that the DVD/ BD releases and merchandising were bestsellers. I don't see, that TPatF didn't fare well at all.
Scamander wrote:TPatF had a budget of $105 Mio and made worldwide $264 Mio in cinemas. On top of that the DVD/ BD releases and merchandising were bestsellers. I don't see, that TPatF didn't fare well at all.
Corporates only care mostly about the first few days domestic BO income. That's why those numbers is what they mostly care about and why they were disappointed.
Scamander wrote:TPatF had a budget of $105 Mio and made worldwide $264 Mio in cinemas. On top of that the DVD/ BD releases and merchandising were bestsellers. I don't see, that TPatF didn't fare well at all.
Corporates only care mostly about the first few days domestic BO income. That's why those numbers is what they mostly care about and why they were disappointed.
You know, this is why corporates are morons. They don't just wait and see how it all turns out in the long run. True, the movie was no 'Lion King' in terms of box office numbers, but come on! At least it managed to gain most of its budget back domestically and that doesn't even include foreign numbers or merchandise!
I mean, come on. It's not like this is the first big Disney movie to not do so hot at the box office. Look at Pinocchio, Bambi, Alice in Wonderland and Sleeping Beauty. Those didn't turn a profit in their initial runs, but they did as time went by. Of course, the only difference between those and TPatF is that the chance of a theatrical re-release for the latter is about as much as frogs learning how to solve math problems. But you never know, really. Maybe they might surprise us. According to atlanticaunderthesea on another thread...
atlanticaunderthesea wrote:I think that's what Disney doesn't get; fans are just happy to see these movies back in the cinema more than anything, 3D or no 3D.
I think that if they didn't bother with a 3D conversion (which I gather is very expensive), and pumped maybe just half that money into a decent advertising campaign, it would still be a success. Just because people are nuts to see Disney Classics on the big screen again.
Case in point; I saw most of the movies at the cinema this past year at the BFI Southbank in London, as part of the 'Disney 50'. The tickets for even the most obscure Disneys were sold out, and the response from the audience was immense with each showing.
singerguy04 wrote:Shrek's artwork isn't bad at all! It beats the hell out of Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and in some ways Bolt.
Not to get too far off subject, but I do think Bolt's visuals are awesome! It was in that film that we really got a sneak peak into the lush environments we saw in Tangled. I've always been impressed with it's background animation.
Shrek's artwork was not good, it was too uncanny, or "realistic". dreamworks didn't start to address this until puss in boots, which admitedly I havnt seen but just going off what Ive seen it looks more imaginative as far as overal design.
I still miss the art style of unbraided and really wish that's what the final movie could have looked like. Both the animation test and concept had a better aesthetic to me than what I got.
As for the art we've seen of Snowqueen, kinda hit or miss with me from character to character. I have to cut them some slack though being made that far back when Disney wasn't really doing humans in computer animation yet.
