DVDizzy Forum

This is from the Disney Princess Annual 2004 write-up on the Amazon.co.uk site:

This year sees the launch of 2 new Spring / Summer releases, Theatrical DVD / Video, for Belle and Princess Diaries II, as well as Sleeping Beauty in the Autumn. Plus....more new product launches in toys, cosmetics, clothing etc.

The question is, does 'This Year' refer to 2003 or 2004? Princess Diaries isn't out in 2003 and really Sleeping Beauty didn't come out to DVD/Video in the Autumn of 2003 - it was out in the UK in March 2002 (single disc) and early-2003 (double disc)! So it looks like 'This Year' could be taken as 2003 (Princess Diaries II slipped?) or 2004 (new Sleeping Beauty DTV?)

Eeeck. Let's hope its no sequel.

While they would have a logical reason for making a Sleeping Beauty sequel story-wise, with the original only covering part of the story, I would be very dissapointed to see them continue it. It would never match up to the artistry of the original - and plus, Walt Disney cut out the last half of the story for a reason: it made it a better movie.

I think it means 2003, and PD II slipped back.

Everything else fits - Belle's Magical World came out in the spring, and Sleeping Beauty (notice no sign of a cheapquel is mentioned, just the original title) came out in a generally perceived "autumn" period - September. I think that write-up might've been taken from an American release - unless they do make internationally-specific reports... I dunno. *shrug*

I think you're right Paka, but it was obviously a UK press release because (1) they said 'Autumn' not 'Fall' and (2) The Annual is not available in the US.

So was Princess Diaries II scheduled for 2003? It seems a tad optimistic. Aren't they still filming it now?

There should be a Sleeping Beauty 2.The story was left in the middle,so it wouldn't be a violent movie.

BasilOfBakerStreet427 wrote:There should be a Sleeping Beauty 2.The story was left in the middle,so it wouldn't be a violent movie.

Excuse me? A Sleeping Beauty sequel? Story-wise, yes. Animation, voices, music, quality, no.

I don't remember any version of the Sleeping Beauty story that goes beyond what Walt did. Could somebody elaborate please?

If you look in the Story section of the "Sleeping Beauty" DVD, then you'll see that the story of Sleeping Beauty (the Charles Perraunt version) continued after Briar Rose wakes up. The prince goes off to war and leaves Briar Rose and his children in the care of his mother, who is really a child eating ogress. In the end, the prince comes home, and the mother throws herself into a pit of snakes that was meant for the children.

Jake Lipson wrote:I don't remember any version of the Sleeping Beauty story that goes beyond what Walt did. Could somebody elaborate please?

Do you have the dvd? in the History of the Story, they talk about how her and the prince had 2 children, and he left and went on some kind of adventure and while he was gone, a trolless (female) tried to kill the children, but he saved them just in the knick of time!

hope that helps

Yucko. I think I prefer the happily ever after, thanks.

Fletcher wrote:If you look in the Story section of the "Sleeping Beauty" DVD, then you'll see that the story of Sleeping Beauty (the Charles Perraunt version) continued after Briar Rose wakes up. The prince goes off to war and leaves Briar Rose and his children in the care of his mother, who is really a child eating ogress. In the end, the prince comes home, and the mother throws herself into a pit of snakes that was meant for the children.

You mean Aurora commits suicide? Or the Prince's mother? And so did they originally plan to give King Hubert a child-eating wife? was this what Walt cut from the movie? If so, thank goodness! That would have traumatized us!

Prince Adam wrote:

Fletcher wrote:If you look in the Story section of the "Sleeping Beauty" DVD, then you'll see that the story of Sleeping Beauty (the Charles Perraunt version) continued after Briar Rose wakes up. The prince goes off to war and leaves Briar Rose and his children in the care of his mother, who is really a child eating ogress. In the end, the prince comes home, and the mother throws herself into a pit of snakes that was meant for the children.

You mean Aurora commits suicide? Or the Prince's mother? And so did they originally plan to give King Hubert a child-eating wife? was this what Walt cut from the movie? If so, thank goodness! That would have traumatized us!

No. But is the ending to the original fairytale which the film was based on. Just like other Disney fairytale movies have different endings:

Snow White: The Wicked Queen was forced to dance to death

"Then a pair of red-hot iron shoes was brought into the room with tongs and set before her, and these she was forced to put on and to dance in them until she could dance no longer, but fell down dead, and that was the end of her."

Cinderella: The Ugly Stepsisters multilated their feet in an attempt to make the glass slipper fit them (some accounts are the multilation is from trying to cram the feet into the slipper, others are that the sisters deliberately cut off some of their toes first)

Little Mermaid: The little mermaid sacrifices herself for her prince, and is condemmed to spend the rest of her existance as foam on the sea.

Yeah I think the disney version are better!

But if they made a sequel, I don't think it would be Phillip's mom, it would just be an orgress or troll or something, that would emerge from the forest or something, maybe from the Forbidden Mountain ooooooooooo...

2099net wrote:
Little Mermaid: The little mermaid sacrifices herself for her prince, and is condemmed to spend the rest of her existance as foam on the sea.

This is the only one of the ORIGINAL fairy-tales I read in their original entirety. It was so sad! I cried!

But what part of the story did Walt Disney cut from the film (Sleeping Beauty)?

In the Sleeping Beauty fairy tale, she also slept 100 years before being awakend.
The fairy tales are folk tradition, and there are often many different versions of them. In one version of Sleeping Beauty when the prince found her sleeping in the tower, he didn't wake her up but made love to her and left. She became pregnant and gave birth to the child, still sleeping. She woke up when the child started sucking her finger and by doing so removed the poisoned pin which had put her to sleep.

Billy Moon wrote:In the Sleeping Beauty fairy tale, she also slept 100 years before being awakend.
The fairy tales are folk tradition, and there are often many different versions of them. In one version of Sleeping Beauty when the prince found her sleeping in the tower, he didn't wake her up but made love to her and left. She became pregnant and gave birth to the child, still sleeping. She woke up when the child started sucking her finger and by doing so removed the poisoned pin which had put her to sleep.

So did Walt originally want her to sleep for 100 years before waking up? And then he realized if he did that the Prince Phillip storyline wouldn't work?
Because in the film, there's a small hint at that. Maleficent tells Phillip that Aurora's in an ageless sleep, and reveals that she'll keep him locked up for 100 years (but with love, that's but a day ).

Prince Adam wrote:So did Walt originally want her to sleep for 100 years before waking up? And then he realized if he did that the Prince Phillip storyline wouldn't work?

I think the 100-year-sleep was changed already in the Tchaikowsky ballet. The Disney version is based much on the ballet storyline, afaik.