A very simple and logical philosophy! It should be this boards hakuna matata so to speak
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Frozen
- Thread starter Sped2424
- Start date
I also wanted to add that many said this film copied the character designs from tangled, let me explain that because these films have similar styles the characters will share features and traits. Disney has had a history of doing this before in many of our beloved classics.
\
Rapunzel is basically cgi ariel but with a buck tooth and different features! Just thought this was interesting is all! As this film received a lot of crazed comments for it.
Rapunzel is basically cgi ariel but with a buck tooth and different features! Just thought this was interesting is all! As this film received a lot of crazed comments for it.
SpectroMan93
Well-Known Member
Man, I would honestly love to know who your source is, because the sites I go to didn't post that until just recently. But much agreed, every time I think Frozen can't do any better, it kicks it up a notch.
AllyInWonderland
Well-Known Member
Differences between Anna and Rapunzel
Last edited:
AllyInWonderland
Well-Known Member
ALICE AND WENDY ARE TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PEOPLE WHO IN NO WAY LOOK OR SOUND ALIKE!!!!I also wanted to add that many said this film copied the character designs from tangled, let me explain that because these films have similar styles the characters will share features and traits. Disney has had a history of doing this before in many of our beloved classics.
\
Rapunzel is basically cgi ariel but with a buck tooth and different features! Just thought this was interesting is all! As this film received a lot of crazed comments for it.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
I didn't watch Sped's video, so I might be out of the loop here. But I think we can disagree without name-calling. Or at least I can.
But I would like to hear you Frozen fans' explanation as to why Disney created a movie loosely based - it says - on the classic Hans Christian Anderson story "The Snow Queen", and yet in that movie there is not a single character from the source material, with the possible exception of the reindeer (who played a very different role in the story, and could talk as well). Why did the Disney writers jettison practically everything? And what other Disney movie also based on a classic story has done that? In its other book-derived movies, Disney has made changes to characters, up to and including changing a character's gender, but never before has it junked practically everything.
I'd also like to hear any of you refute my contention that Disney did what it did because of marketing considerations. Well?
AllyInWonderland
Well-Known Member
Disneyfanman
Well-Known Member
I agree that the name change was entirely due to marketing considerations. No one can convince me otherwise. As for the story changes, the film has been in development "heck" for years. It's nothing like the original source material due to a constant and continual changing of writers, producers, and directors. It isn't "The Snow Queen" any more. Not even close. They started with the story 20 years ago and it went wildly sideways. Anyone who wanted a direct story to screen version will have to wait for another movie.
From my standpoint, I don't care about any of that. I love the movie. I paid to see it 3 times, and enjoyed it immensely. The finished product make me happy. I'm familiar with the story, but don't even know if the version that I've seen is authentic. So I'm looking at the movie as almost an original story. And it really works for me.
Don't misunderstand, I do get irritated with films that destroy the original source in the name of art. But not when the source is hundreds of years old and in the public domain, and not when the studio openly admits that it was changed. Frozen is an original tale inspired by the story. Good enough for me.
From my standpoint, I don't care about any of that. I love the movie. I paid to see it 3 times, and enjoyed it immensely. The finished product make me happy. I'm familiar with the story, but don't even know if the version that I've seen is authentic. So I'm looking at the movie as almost an original story. And it really works for me.
Don't misunderstand, I do get irritated with films that destroy the original source in the name of art. But not when the source is hundreds of years old and in the public domain, and not when the studio openly admits that it was changed. Frozen is an original tale inspired by the story. Good enough for me.
You do know almost all disney animated films have twisted the source material greatly to where the source material is almost unrecognizable save a for a few elements. The reason they changed the story was cause they couldnt make the original work for them. You keep claiming it was a political move simply to make money, here is a hint all Disney films have that aim. I am a huge frozen fan, but the other half of these folks are people who went and saw a good movie which I know really gets under your skin for whatever reason. So much so you keep returning to this thread with no other purpose than to slam it and those discussing it which is why I posted the video (Which I recommend you watch). They have admitted several times that the only thing this film has in common with the snow queen is there is a queen who controls snow and that's about it. Which is fine, I agree with @Disneyfanman the film we got was still amazing and very much enjoyable, even if it wasn't the snow queen. Once again the characters all carry certain themes and issues from the original tale (Elsa being kai/ the snow queen and anna being the fearless optimist gerda). By Disney writer you mean Jennifer lee I assume, and what other films have changed the source material to fit a new script? Mhm let me see The little mermaid, beauty and the beast, Pocahontas (this one is the greatest offender), mulan, lion king (hamlet), treasure planet, Aladdin just name to name few. Simply put they re worked the story because the old one didn't work, the thing was in development hell for years simply because no one could crack it including Glen Keane. Again I suggest you give this article a read before shoving your fingers in your ears yet again. Also Spectro wasn't calling you anything he was reciting the video.
http://jimhillmedia.com/editor_in_c...queen-quot-s-decades-long-story-problems.aspx
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
If you don't want to be snarked at, refrain from it yourself. I was talking about the film "Saving Mr. Banks" and you jumped in and sniped at me about my reservations about "Frozen". So you got some back. Like it? No? Tough.
Years ago Russian animators managed to "crack" Anderson's story and make a damn good movie out of it without ditching all of the characters. Guess they weren't as concerned with merchandising and multi-platforming as Disney is. The bottom line, the TRUTH is this: Princesses make big money for Disney. That's a given. So the current Disney regime decided to dump the Snow Queen character, the Kai/Kay character, the Robber Girl, the female shamans, and replace them with two easily-merchandised, teenage princess tropes. Anybody who believes otherwise not only has his fingers in his ears but his hands over his eyes.
And that's what I find so ludicrous about "Frozen". It's a cynical, calculated marketing tool rather than a movie. But if you liked it, fine. A lot of other people do too, apparently, which means we'll likely get more of the same. Whee! Hey, maybe there'll be a POOP joke in the next one!
A booger joke sets you off one that lasted 3.0 seconds? Man you are hanging on your teeth for anything huh? And I came in that one because its funny how you denounced people for being predisposed against something based off a previous bias, maybe I thought you would say hey darn I did that not cool. That's way different than someone talking about something completely off topic and you jumpin in and denouncing everything (which btw you have been doing since post 1 of this film, we didn't start arguing because it was fun trust me..) Like it? No? Tough. I take it Kung fu panda didn't have anything like booger or fart jokesIf you don't want to be snarked at, refrain from it yourself. I was talking about the film "Saving Mr. Banks" and you jumped in and sniped at me about my reservations about "Frozen". So you got some back. Like it? No? Tough.
Years ago Russian animators managed to "crack" Anderson's story and make a damn good movie out of it without ditching all of the characters. Guess they weren't as concerned with merchandising and multi-platforming as Disney is. The bottom line, the TRUTH is this: Princesses make big money for Disney. That's a given. So the current Disney regime decided to dump the Snow Queen character, the Kai/Kay character, the Robber Girl, the female shamans, and replace them with two easily-merchandised, teenage princess tropes. Anybody who believes otherwise not only has his fingers in his ears but his hands over his eyes.
And that's what I find so ludicrous about "Frozen". It's a cynical, calculated marketing tool rather than a movie. But if you liked it, fine. A lot of other people do too, apparently, which means we'll likely get more of the same. Whee! Hey, maybe there'll be a POOP joke in the next one!
oops.
As for the rest we have already argued back on forth on, you keep calling it a marketing tool and again all disney films have some element to them that is, nothing new there.This film has heart, warmth and a several messages that are great, if anything they added over the original tale doubly so. Anyways I am done here no need for me to muck this thread up anymore I am sure you shall quote again, if so I leave you with this piece of advice once again
Last edited:
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
If you don't want to be snarked at, refrain from it yourself. I was talking about the film "Saving Mr. Banks" and you jumped in and sniped at me about my reservations about "Frozen". So you got some back. Like it? No? Tough.
Years ago Russian animators managed to "crack" Anderson's story and make a damn good movie out of it without ditching all of the characters. Guess they weren't as concerned with merchandising and multi-platforming as Disney is. The bottom line, the TRUTH is this: Princesses make big money for Disney. That's a given. So the current Disney regime decided to dump the Snow Queen character, the Kai/Kay character, the Robber Girl, the female shamans, and replace them with two easily-merchandised, teenage princess tropes. Anybody who believes otherwise not only has his fingers in his ears but his hands over his eyes.
And that's what I find so ludicrous about "Frozen". It's a cynical, calculated marketing tool rather than a movie. But if you liked it, fine. A lot of other people do too, apparently, which means we'll likely get more of the same. Whee! Hey, maybe there'll be a POOP joke in the next one!
I saw Frozen finally today. While I have to agree with most of your analogies I've got to say I rather enjoyed Frozen even with all the well supported data that I cannot disagree with. I am so not a princess fan. Hated most Princess films over the last decade or so. Heck, I am the biggest Pooh fan and hated the last movie too. I'm not a push over. Yet I've never found most films to follow novels or tales. They just don't lend themselves well to films so I'm not a critic when they don't. I'm fine with the spring board from novel to film vs replication in film.
I walked out entertained by this Princess movie, unusual for me. Money well spent this time, much the point of my movie going, entertainment. I am not likely to be a victim of Princess marketing beyond going to the movies on a Saturday night. Some things just don't need in depth analysis for me to be entertained for an hour or two.
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
And just seeing the film today. I followed the advice and stayed through the credits. And started to read the booger commentary. Unfortunately I couldn't read that fast. Anywhere in the 21 pages here is there a reprint of that final sign off?
Gabe1
Ivory Tower Squabble EST 2011. WINDMILL SURVIVOR
I got ya gabe
For anyone that missed it here is the disclaimer at the end.
hahaha Thanks for that!
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
A booger joke sets you off one that lasted 3.0 seconds? Man you are hanging on your teeth for anything huh? And I came in that one because its funny how you denounced people for being predisposed against something based off a previous bias, maybe I thought you would say hey darn I did that not cool. That's way different than someone talking about something completely off topic and you jumpin in and denouncing everything (which btw you have been doing since post 1 of this film, we didn't start arguing because it was fun trust me..) Like it? No? Tough. I take it Kung fu panda didn't have anything like booger or fart jokes
oops.
As for the rest we have already argued back on forth on, you keep calling it a marketing tool and again all disney films have some element to them that is, nothing new there.This film has heart, warmth and a several messages that are great, if anything they added over the original tale doubly so. Anyways I am done here no need for me to muck this thread up anymore I am sure you shall quote again, if so I leave you with this piece of advice once again
My cousin remarked the other day that Disney movies look like Dreamworks movies now. Which bugs me. I wish Disney would take the higher road and leave the snot and fart jokes alone. There was a stupid dung joke in "Wreck-It-Ralph" that was neither necessary nor funny, but it was in there anyway because Disney doesn't invent trends anymore, it just follows them.
I already knew that Disney had discarded most of the elements of The Snow Queen when it created Frozen before I wasted my money seeing it, but I couldn't imagine why. When I saw the film, I figured out why. Which, as you may notice, did not make me happy. I have no problems with changing a story for film if those changes improve on the source material, or at least do it justice. Frozen, IMO, didn't do that. Even leaving The Snow Queen out of the argument - to me, Frozen is a lackluster film that is doing well because there is virtually nothing else at the theaters right now for families, and it's Christmastime. Great timing by the Disney marketing department, and good for them, but I wish I could celebrate Frozen's quality rather than just its monetary success.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
Fair enough.
Well I like this argument much better than your other ones ^ Agree to disagree then.