DVDizzy Forum

http://collider.com/how-to-train-your-d ... els/63170/

Here it is Disney fans. Jeffrey Katzenberg Talks DreamWorks Animation Sequels: Four MADAGASCARS, Three HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGONS and Six KUNG FU PANDAS

Polizzi wrote:http://collider.com/how-to-train-your-d ... els/63170/

Here it is Disney fans. Jeffrey Katzenberg Talks DreamWorks Animation Sequels: Four MADAGASCARS, Three HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGONS and Six KUNG FU PANDAS

And we see how well it worked out with their five planned Shrek films.

I don't want a second Tangled, and part of me doubts it, but then again, a sequel to Enchanted (a true one-movie movie, since it resolves everything in the last five minutes) is being planned.

Polizzi wrote:http://collider.com/how-to-train-your-d ... els/63170/

Here it is Disney fans. Jeffrey Katzenberg Talks DreamWorks Animation Sequels: Four MADAGASCARS, Three HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGONS and Six KUNG FU PANDAS

SWEET SANTA CLAUS, NO!

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7iMAvNWSuk4?fs ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7iMAvNWSuk4?fs ... 2=0x9461ca" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Polizzi wrote:http://collider.com/how-to-train-your-d ... els/63170/

Here it is Disney fans. Jeffrey Katzenberg Talks DreamWorks Animation Sequels: Four MADAGASCARS, Three HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGONS and Six KUNG FU PANDAS

The mere fact that he's still feeding into his sequel fetish is exactly why I shied away from seeing How to Train Your Dragon.

Which is a shame, because Chris Sanders worked on that one.

Hmm, a Tangled TV show...that could be fun. Me thinks that the pub thugs would be featured more than they were in the movie.

enigmawing wrote:And we see how well it worked out with their five planned Shrek films.

Well, if you count the Puss-in-Boots spin-off that's five.

Katzenberg has always gone overboard when discussing possible sequels to their films. I remember initial talk for 6-7 Shrek films, a Monster vs. Aliens sequel, even a SharkTale (then called SharkSlayer) sequel. When those films underperformed the sequels were never made. So it's quite simple, if people get tired of these sequels and stop watching them, they will stop making them...

Sotiris wrote:

enigmawing wrote:And we see how well it worked out with their five planned Shrek films.

Well, if you count the Puss-in-Boots spin-off that's five.

I know. That was when they were discussing four sequels plus Puss in Boots plus Shrek 4D . . . hmm, I think there was something more besides those and the TV specials but I don't remember anymore.

Sotiris wrote:Katzenberg has always gone overboard when discussing possible sequels to their films. I remember initial talk for 6-7 Shrek films, a Monster vs. Aliens sequel, even a SharkTale (then called SharkSlayer) sequel. When those films underperformed the sequels were never made. So it's quite simple, if people get tired of these sequels and stop watching them, they will stop making them...

Yeah, I guess it's a lot easier to be excited at the new success of each movie and think about the potential money a franchise can bring in before it's milked dry, and it's pretty impossible to know when it's milked dry until people stop coming to the theaters.

I doubt they will. They make lots of money off that line and of course, Rapunzel is a princess so she's screwed.

Mulan and Pocahontas shouldn't be listed though.

Pocahontas is actually the daughter of a Chief, so she should be listed. Mulan, though, isn't a Princess at all, which is one of the things that I like about her.

much as i love how to train your dragon, i hope they dont ruin it with sequels! i didnt enjoy kung fu panda much, so cant see how they will get another 5 movies out of it and the second madagascar wrapped things up nicely for me.

they will NOT make a theatrical sequal to Tangled. The most likely sequel will be a straight to dvd film like Cinderella 3, but seeing as Disney has promised not to make anymore sequals from that department that is highly unlikely. So the chances of a sequal are 0% ...

One question i would like to ask is .. Does anyone know the deleted scences on the blu-ray dvd / or is it to early to know? any answer will be gratefl



some storyboard ^^^
* hopefully a dress shop will be an extra scene
* and apparently the picture that looks like laterns is ment to be a firefly scene

(so sorry for spelling)

DisneyDude2010 wrote:they will NOT make a theatrical sequal to Tangled. The most likely sequel will be a straight to dvd film like Cinderella 3, but seeing as Disney has promised not to make anymore sequals from that department that is highly unlikely. So the chances of a sequal are 0% ...

Until, 50 years from now, new management decides it isn't such a bad thing to piss all over a classic for a quick buck.

Hope that wasn't too strong.

Hey guys, I'm going to the Q and A session screening of Tangled with the directors in two weeks (yay!!) and I was wondering, are there any questions you would like me to put to the directors, if I get selected ? More than happy to submit your questions, and see what they say

I was hoping to ask them something about if they were happy with the marketing of the film, as most people wernt expecting the movie to be that good, judging from the trailers. Most critics have been quite vocal about that fact, and how they have been wonderfully suprised by the filme. and if they could, would they have done the marketing differently.

Anything you guys can think of ?

Wonderlicious wrote:I think it's expected that the admissions for Tangled probably would be lower, due to inflation and the fact that a good portion of ticket sales were for 3D showings, which are more expensive and could put off some families with young children (from experience, most 3D showings have less kids in the audience than their 2D equivalents).

That said, even with Gulliver's Travels, Tron: Legacy, Narnia and Yogi Bear now taken Tangled's 3-D screens away, it still made $10 million this weekend. That is certainly something to commend it on.

If someone are interested in articles about Tangled, there are some linkes here:

http://feedraider.com/item/5313780/pixa ... making-of/

It looks like the animators got a lot of help this time:

"The approach was alien to most animators, though, and initially greeted with skepticism. “It was controversial at first,” Mr. Grinspun said, “but the strategy has paid off in the long run.” It significantly cut down the time it took to produce what the director wanted, to minutes from days, and provided better results. “You get more bang for the buck,” Mr. Grinspun said.

Mr. Grinspun enjoys working with studios, but he is not tempted to work for one full time, he said. At heart he is an academic. He does like contributing to the artistic enterprise, however.

As he sees it, his work frees the artists from worrying about a puffed sleeve so they can focus on what they do best, like capturing expressive emotion. His reward is different: “As long as you make pretty pictures, you get to keep learning all this math and physics.”


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/movie ... ted=2&_r=1

Other improvements were done as well, which seem to have paid off:

"Tangled's world felt organic in a way that no CG film I've seen has ever felt before. The modeling of the characters used shapes that were more sophisticated and natural than I've ever seen in a CG film. The translucency of the human skin felt more flesh-like than any other CG humans I've seen. (Actually, it had a waxy feel, which while not exactly flesh-like, is leaps and bounds beyond the plasticky skin in most CG films). The rendering has a soft painterly light that pushed it away from the harsh rendering that I find so off-putting in most CG. And finally, there's the animation.

The animation of the characters is jaw-dropping. All the leads - Rapunzel, Flynn, Mother Gothel, Maximus - were tremendous fun to watch. This is the closest I've seen an animated film come to capturing the looseness, assymetry, and caricature of hand-drawn animation. Look at the expressions above. It's as if every extreme was a custom-built expression or pose in the computer. The clarity of the acting in the eyes was also a notable achievement. I have no idea what they did that is so different from the way that Pixar, DreamWorks, BlueSky, et al. rig their characters, but Disney's approach is a gamechanger in my opinion. Disney is again leading the pack in technique and technical prowess, and it's been a very long time since they've done that."

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/disney/five- ... ngled.html

Patrick wrote:

Goliath wrote: How is Mulan a princess?

Because she had a crush on a military captain. Obviously you haven't seen Mulan. (I don't think Tangled meant to say Mulan is a princess, just going over the ethnicity of those included of the line. )

And he married him in the DVD sequel.

She's listed as an official Disney Princess, so I count her (even if I disagree.)

enigmawing wrote:

Mickeyfan1990 wrote:Already talk of a sequel!:

http://www.moviehole.net/201135303-excl ... alk-sequel

Seriously?

I doubt it. But then again, Disney sequels usually don't have a good idea. For example:

Little Mermaid 2: Ariel has a daughter (first Disney Princess to discover the miracle of birth (: )

Lion King 2: Simba has a daughter and she falls in love! (YAY!!! )

Lilo and Stitch 2: Stitch has a glitch! (No, really. It sounds stupid cause it rhymes. Thats the real title. It's exactly was the title says.)

Hunchback of Notre Dame 2: Give the main character a love interest because he didn't get the beautiful girl in the first movie. Yeah, because everyone HATES IT when the guy doesn't get the girl in the end. -_-

Yeah. I think I've proved my point (The Hunchback of Notre Dame
sequel really ticks me off though O_o)

Polizzi wrote:http://collider.com/how-to-train-your-d ... els/63170/

Here it is Disney fans. Jeffrey Katzenberg Talks DreamWorks Animation Sequels: Four MADAGASCARS, Three HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGONS and Six KUNG FU PANDAS

Madagascar could have sequel, but only one. I have no idea how they would make two.

How to Train your Dragon seems to be everyones current favorite Dreamworks movie, and there's an entire BOOK SERIES that they could pick ideas from. 4 Shrek movies were based off of one tiny picture book, so I could see them doing that.

Kung Fu Panda actually has a sequel that's coming out this year, and I have to admit it's one of my favorites (after HTTYD and Shrek 1) but SIX sequels? I'd get extremely bored, and the concept isn't that exciting after a while. No.



Anyways, I think either Megamind or Monsters vs Aliens could have sequels as well, just IMO.

I think the concept behind Kung Fu Panda's six sequels was to have each movie focusing on a different Kung Fu master, but the KFP2 trailer seems to suggest otherwise.

Anyhow, I would love a Tangled sequel because the world of Tangled is so beautiful and for the most of it, unexplored.

At least we got a guarentee that only sequels with storylines will be produced.

atlanticaunderthesea wrote:Hey guys, I'm going to the Q and A session screening of Tangled with the directors in two weeks (yay!!) and I was wondering, are there any questions you would like me to put to the directors, if I get selected ? More than happy to submit your questions, and see what they say

I was hoping to ask them something about if they were happy with the marketing of the film, as most people weren't expecting the movie to be that good, judging from the trailers. Most critics have been quite vocal about that fact, and how they have been wonderfully surprised by the film. and if they could, would they have done the marketing differently.

Anything you guys can think of ?

Could you ask them about previous incarnations of the film before they took over and whether they used any elements from those previous versions?

Also, could you ask them about the deleted song "You're My Forever" and why they decided not to use it? Was it because of new storytelling demands?

Could you ask them about initially having Flynn to be British (Zack Levi said so in an interview), and about aborted story ideas such as the wedding scene, and Rapunzel's pregnancy?

I've found some storyboards by artist Toby Shelton from the period Rapunzel was a much darker story and Glen Keane was still in charge of the film.

This movie was in pre-production for many years and was conceived in just about every way imaginable before becoming the "Tangled" movie that is currently in theaters. During my brief time on the movie, about 6 weeks, the storytelling was much darker and dramatic in tone than what is in the final movie. There were no songs, no slapstick -- and no horse! Mother Gothel was a sinister, brooding villain in the tradition of the Queen in Snow White.

These panels are from a sequence in which Mother Gothel begins to suspect that Rapunzel has had contact with the outside world. Rapunzel catches herself carelessly humming a tune she learned from "the intruder" and must quickly cover up. As Rapunzel beds down for the night, she takes comfort in knowing her secret is safe and that Mother Gothel's suspicions have been averted. Au contraire! Mother Gothel begins searching for clues around the tower.

To see the storyboards, visit the artist's official blog: http://tobyshelton.blogspot.com/