DVDizzy Forum

Apparently Disney is planning a CGI prequel to Peter Pan, based on the new novel Peter and the Starcatchers (found at animated-news.com).

I've already posted my opinion on the Animated News Forum. I am not a happy bunny about this.

I think that the only way this sort of film would work would be if Disney completely put aside their previous interpretations of Peter Pan and created entirely new character designs. Although still very unnecessary (I've been using that word a lot lately in response to Disney's newer projects), I would be more willing to accept this film if the classic Disney Peter Pan characters weren't being used (think along the lines of what was done with Return To Oz).

Besides, CGI Tinker Bell scares me a little.

pinkrenata wrote:I think that the only way this sort of film would work would be if Disney completely put aside their previous interpretations of Peter Pan and created entirely new character designs. Although still very unnecessary (I've been using that word a lot lately in response to Disney's newer projects), I would be more willing to accept this film if the classic Disney Peter Pan characters weren't being used (think along the lines of what was done with Return To Oz).

Besides, CGI Tinker Bell scares me a little.

I agree, if done in CG, create something totally new. But then again, a new disney version of Peter Pan would completely conflict with the original. Conclusion: leave Peter alone

Augh... I was hoping this would be only a rumour but I've been seeing this news more and more. I'm not happy. I say make a live-action prequel. Make a bunch of live-action movies! I'm sure many wouldn't agree with me on this but I'm never satisfied with the live-action Peter Pan movies that are out now.

There's only one thing for me to say: No

Isn't there a third movie coming to Peter Pan in the next two years, or am I just too confused with all these spin-offs and sequels? Whatever it is, I don't like this idea at all. If the CGI looks good I'm happy, but the storyline might suck in that case.

It sounds interesting, though.

Ugh.

WHY!
I don't understand why they'll do this...they'll end up ruining a classic!

Maybe they will finally introduce their technology they wanted to use for Bambi II? CGI that looks like handdrawn animation... The technology wasn't good enough for Bambi II back then, maybe they thought otherwise for this Peter Pan prequel?

May I borrow some pitchforks?

I'm afraid if you want them back though you will have to retrieve them yourselves!

They will be lodged in the foreheads of the Disney executives!

Hey at least that stupid shot for shot CGI Pinocchio remake has dropped of the slate! I hope it has at least!

Jens wrote:Maybe they will finally introduce their technology they wanted to use for Bambi II? CGI that looks like handdrawn animation... The technology wasn't good enough for Bambi II back then, maybe they thought otherwise for this Peter Pan prequel?

Hmmm that would be more tolerable. I'm more for CGI that looks like hand drawn animation, like what we are to see with 'Repunzel Unbraided'.

Here they go again, whining and complaining. You don't want to see it or buy it, then don't. I'll see it and I'll buy it. I'd bet all the tear dropers here don't own half of the Disney movies.

reyquila wrote:Here they go again, whining and complaining. You don't want to see it or buy it, then don't. I'll see it and I'll buy it. I'd bet all the tear dropers here don't own half of the Disney movies.

Geez we are just stating our opinions. We aren't under a Nazi regime now are we? We can speak without a feuhrer being angry and killing us?

orestes. wrote:Hmmm that would be more tolerable. I'm more for CGI that looks like hand drawn animation, like what we are to see with 'Repunzel Unbraided'.

I don't think Rapunzel Unbraided is going to have handdrawn imitating CGI...

reyquila wrote:Here they go again, whining and complaining. You don't want to see it or buy it, then don't. I'll see it and I'll buy it. I'd bet all the tear dropers here don't own half of the Disney movies.

Can you please post some more interesting stuff on these boards? Other than always saying that people that don't LIKE sequels, are poor? Come on! You are WAY un-critical. It's our right to be a little critical. Not too much though...

orestes. wrote:

reyquila wrote:Here they go again, whining and complaining. You don't want to see it or buy it, then don't. I'll see it and I'll buy it. I'd bet all the tear dropers here don't own half of the Disney movies.

Geez we are just stating our opinions. We aren't under a Nazi regime now are we? We can speak without a feuhrer being angry and killing us?

Au contraire. I'm not a Nazi feuhrer. It's just that you want to steer everyone to think bad about sequels. Me, I just respect that you don't like them. But stop your propaganda, its boring.

reyquila wrote:Here they go again, whining and complaining. You don't want to see it or buy it, then don't. I'll see it and I'll buy it. I'd bet all the tear dropers here don't own half of the Disney movies.

I own all of the Disney sequels and I am still critical of them. Are we not allowed to be?

As Disney fand we only want the best and if something sounds like it is ruining Walt's legacy or it appears to just be a way of making money, the first and natural reaction is to be against it

As the quote goes "Fans are the harshest critics"!

My biggest problem with the suggestion of this movie is not the thought of a prequel or the idea of CGI. My biggest problem is I am sick of Peter Pan movies!

Within th past decade we have had "return to Neverland", "Hook", "Peter Pan (the live action version)" and "Finding Neverland" (well the last one, sort of, you know what I mean! And there are probably more I have forgotten!

if the story doesn't suck and the CGI isn't to.... CGI i might like it. i just don't understand why. is this the tinkerbell movie? as far as whinning and such, i think we are all just tired of disney making movies that are just being made to produce more profit and not really made to be awesome great disney quality entertainment.

oh well i'll prolly buy it anyways, lol

reyquila wrote:

orestes. wrote: Geez we are just stating our opinions. We aren't under a Nazi regime now are we? We can speak without a feuhrer being angry and killing us?

Au contraire. I'm not a Nazi feuhrer. It's just that you want to steer everyone to think bad about sequels. Me, I just respect that you don't like them. But stop your propaganda, its boring.

I don't want to steer people away from sequls. I like a couple of them! "Stop my propaganda'? Oh boy... this can get outta hand... I'm sure no one wants to see that though so I'll just keep my mouth shut and not talk to the crazies.

ichabod wrote:

reyquila wrote:Here they go again, whining and complaining. You don't want to see it or buy it, then don't. I'll see it and I'll buy it. I'd bet all the tear dropers here don't own half of the Disney movies.

I own all of the Disney sequels and I am still critical of them. Are we not allowed to be?

As Disney fand we only want the best and if something sounds like it is ruining Walt's legacy or it appears to just be a way of making money, the first and natural reaction is to be against it

As the quote goes "Fans are the harshest critics"!

I agree with you. But some people here bad mouth sequels for being sequels. In fact, there are some very bad ones, but I own them too. The thing is that some people here have a religious approach to this movies, please, get a life.

reyquila wrote:I agree with you. But some people here bad mouth sequels for being sequels. In fact, there are some very bad ones, but I own them too. The thing is that some people here have a religious approach to this movies, please, get a life.

WHAT are you talking about? I haven't seen ANY posts on this board from people that have a religious approach to the sequels... Really, I defend sequels all the time, but you are really going to far here... Critism is needed in this world, just not too much...