Page 7 of 11
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 5:47 pm
by Vince
GORDON wrote:But after they bought Pixar Disney still made Tangled, which was better than anything Pixar has made lately. Not sure if that is a good argument or not.
Tangled wasn't bad. Didn't realize they didn't do that one under their Pixar property. It may not be fair to Disney, but only about half of what they did when Walt was alive and next to nothing they do now is original. Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, etc. are all old fairy tales or fables given catchy tunes and marketable children toys (Same as Tangled).
Old Yellar, Bed-knobs and Broomsticks, Witch Mountain... there hasn't been anything original like that from Disney in a while that I can remember.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 6:01 pm
by GORDON
I have heard good things about Frozen but haven't seen.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 6:25 pm
by Vince
GORDON wrote:I have heard good things about Frozen but haven't seen.
Corrected. One movie in 20 or so years.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 6:51 pm
by TheCatt
Tangled was solid. Since Tangled was release, Pixar has only made 3 films: Cars 2 (meh), Brave, and Monsters University. Tangled was certainly better than Cars 2 or MU (haven't seen Brave).
Frozen was just OK. Not as good as Tangled. A lot of the characters felt borrowed from that film. Did not care for Olaf at all. And, yet another movie based on a fairy tale.
Back to the subject, I don't think Star Wars can get worse than Episodes 1-3. Disney can only make it better, or keep it the same. Either way, a risk worth taking.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 7:21 pm
by Vince
TheCatt wrote:Back to the subject, I don't think Star Wars can get worse than Episodes 1-3. Disney can only make it better, or keep it the same. Either way, a risk worth taking.
I guess for me, I can take bad decision making with a franchise a lot better when it's just a crappy idea based on the creators vision (however flawed that may be). I fear Disney is going to make crappy decisions based only on profit. And the way they're talking, they're going to be pumping out films every couple of years or so. If they keep the same level of suck, but one turd every year or two, that's much worse than the poor 3 movies in the last 20 years.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 7:35 pm
by TheCatt
Yeah, but it's easy to ignore crap. Crap shouldn't impact your life, just don't watch it. If Disney makes turds, so be it.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 7:52 pm
by Vince
TheCatt wrote:Yeah, but it's easy to ignore crap. Crap shouldn't impact your life, just don't watch it. If Disney makes turds, so be it.
Good advice 
Hopefully in a few years I'll be living in the woods somewhere and they will just be added to my growing list of movies I don't have time to stream as it is.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 8:53 pm
by Leisher
Disney does a LOT more than just kid movies.
You hear mostly about this stuff, and that list alone should be "Oh fuck yeah, they don't lean on Marvel, Lucas, or Pixar..."
However, they also distribute films, and they're behind some of the bigger "indy" companies, like Miramax (until recently).
They also own ABC and ESPN.
They also run some mildly successful amusement parks that are considered to be the shining example of the entire planet when it comes to customer service.
I won't even get into their marketing, toy manufacturing, etc. because we're trying to stick on the creative end?
Point being, Disney is doing great and has been doing great since Eisner, a guy who should be running EA because he loves the bottom line, was ousted.
And again, I have to point you to their treatment of their new additions, which is a completely hands off approach. That's not the EA way.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 9:47 pm
by Vince
Leisher wrote:You hear mostly about
this stuff, and that list alone should be "Oh fuck yeah, they don't lean on Marvel, Lucas, or Pixar..."
That list also includes Pixar flicks. And a whole lot of turds (John Carter and The Lone Ranger).
And again, I have to point you to their treatment of their new additions, which is a completely hands off approach. That's not the EA way.
As soon as GLAAD threatens to boycott "The Mouse" we're getting a gay Spider-man. Nothing is more important than The Mouse.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:14 pm
by GORDON
I thought John Carter was slightly underrated.
Posted: Sat Feb 15, 2014 10:33 pm
by TPRJones
Vince wrote:Old Yellar, Bed-knobs and Broomsticks, Witch Mountain
Nope, nope, and nope.
I don't know that any Disney film has ever been made that wasn't based on some pre-existing book or children's story or what have you.
EDIT: Not that I'm saying there's anything wrong with that, mind you. All art is theft. But raw originality is not Disney's strong suit.
Edited By TPRJones on 1392523058
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 7:57 am
by Vince
GORDON wrote:I thought John Carter was slightly underrated.
I agree. Taylor Kitsch was a better Mike Murphy than John Carter, though.
Posted: Sun Feb 16, 2014 8:30 am
by Vince
TPRJones wrote:I don't know that any Disney film has ever been made that wasn't based on some pre-existing book or children's story or what have you.
EDIT: Not that I'm saying there's anything wrong with that, mind you. All art is theft. But raw originality is not Disney's strong suit.
I agree and not surprised that they bought those stories, but at least those were a little more obscure than Tarzan or Beauty and The Beast.
I don't trust Disney. Too many stories of them being jerks about things. While I'm sure many are false and blown out of proportion, it goes to the whole, "where there's smoke" argument.
Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 4:43 pm
by WSGrundy
Final season of Clone Wars before Rebels starts.
<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="//www.youtube.com/v/Hpd501LM6T8?version=3 ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="//www.youtube.com/v/Hpd501LM6T8?version=3&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>
Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:02 pm
by GORDON
Gonna have to watch the entire series one of these days. The 3 or 4 episodes I have seen have been decent.
Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:09 pm
by Malcolm
The Clone Wars cartoon gives me vague hope the franchise can still breathe.
Posted: Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:11 pm
by WSGrundy
GORDON wrote:Gonna have to watch the entire series one of these days. The 3 or 4 episodes I have seen have been decent.
All of them are coming to netflix.
It seemed like they didn't know what they wanted to be in the beginning. One episode would have goofy robots and then the next had guys sacrificing themselves and getting kinda dark. It evened out and got cool. Not the best thing ever made but worth my time.
Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2014 4:15 pm
by Malcolm
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 10:28 am
by Leisher
You know all that Star Wars expanded universe stuff?
It's now "legend". In other words, no longer canon.
I honestly don't care too much about this, and in fact, it allows Disney to use cool characters like Thrawn without him being tied to canon that doesn't fit their new direction.
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2014 11:20 am
by TPRJones
As long as they realize that's something they can do only once. I'm sure they still want to sell video games and books and comics and everything else Star Wars that they can put a price tag on. And all of that material will have to count, to be at least semi-acknowledged as sort-of canon. And each time they reset after this first big one they'll lose a big percentage of their customers.
But I think most people will give them this one. Hell, if we could go ahead and erase Eps I, II, and III while we are at it I don't think anyone (besides Lucas) would mind.