Disney General - The saddest fandom on Earth

  • Thread starter Thread starter KO 864
  • Start date Start date
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

Which is Better

  • Chicken Little

    Votes: 433 27.4%

  • Hunchback 2

    Votes: 57 3.6%

  • A slow death

    Votes: 1,088 68.9%
  • Total voters
    1,578
GeneralFriendliness said:
Aside from Treasure Planet, I find it surreal that Disney is so desperate for new content that they'll now be making movies based on their direct-to-vhs sequels from the 90s and 00s starting with Aladdin. I mean, all their sequels were shitty or meh at best with the exception of Return of Jafar, Kronk's New Groove and maybe (just maybe) Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas. Those three were the only ones with any real effort put into them, whilst the others were just meh, garbage or left you asking "did this really need to exist?". Especially the Little Mermaid sequels, with the third film being such a boring piece of shit that its impossible to endure for more than 10 minutes.
Click to expand...
What's the over/under on these going the way of the Star Wars Story movies? I think that's the only way this will end. Disney releasing a bunch of crappy direct to video sequels was different because they were meant to make meager profits and their failure didn't matter because they were cheap by design. These live action remakes are expected to be blockbusters and with the reception to them worsening sooner or later we're going to end up with a Solo-tier bomb.

I really, really doubt we're getting all these live action remakes that they're planning.
 
Xerxes IX said:
I really, really doubt we're getting all these live action remakes that they're planning.
Click to expand...
At this point, I am too. A while back, there were rumors of a Nightmare Before Christmas live-action movie as well as Lilo and Stitch, but there really hasn't been too much news about those. I especially doubt the Nightmare Before Christmas one since I can't see how that could translate to live-action or realistic 3D animation at all. At least The Lion King centered around real animals and realistic environments.
 
GeneralFriendliness said:
Aside from Treasure Planet, I find it surreal that Disney is so desperate for new content that they'll now be making movies based on their direct-to-vhs sequels from the 90s and 00s starting with Aladdin. I mean, all their sequels were shitty or meh at best with the exception of Return of Jafar, Kronk's New Groove and maybe (just maybe) Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas. Those three were the only ones with any real effort put into them, whilst the others were just meh, garbage or left you asking "did this really need to exist?". Especially the Little Mermaid sequels, with the third film being such a boring piece of shit that its impossible to endure for more than 10 minutes.
Click to expand...
It's really worth mentioning that Return of Jafar was originally the first four or five episodes of the TV series. They just made some tweaks so that it ran smoothly without the obvious bookends for commercials and episode endings. This is why there was effort put into it: the TV show is also regarded as good as well for kids in that age group when it first aired.
 
MysticMisty said:
It's really worth mentioning that Return of Jafar was originally the first four or five episodes of the TV series. They just made some tweaks so that it ran smoothly without the obvious bookends for commercials and episode endings. This is why there was effort put into it: the TV show is also regarded as good as well for kids in that age group when it first aired.
Click to expand...
That would explain some things. I don't remember much from the cartoon series but what little I do remember is that the episodes I saw were really good and had really excellent world-building. On a related note, I've actually never seen the third Aladdin movie but I remember reading that it was originally supposed to be a finale for the TV series before being turned into a direct to VHS movie that would tie up a bunch of loose ends from the show and reveal that one of the major bad guys from the show (a sorcerer who somewhat resembles Aladdin) was actually Aladdin's brother, but they cut out its ties to the series to make it more marketable supposedly.

Did doing that actually improve or worsen the movie? Would it have been better if they had gone with the original plan?
 
GeneralFriendliness said:
That would explain some things. I don't remember much from the cartoon series but what little I do remember is that the episodes I saw were really good and had really excellent world-building. On a related note, I've actually never seen the third Aladdin movie but I remember reading that it was originally supposed to be a finale for the TV series before being turned into a direct to VHS movie that would tie up a bunch of loose ends from the show and reveal that one of the major bad guys from the show (a sorcerer who somewhat resembles Aladdin) was actually Aladdin's brother, but they cut out its ties to the series to make it more marketable supposedly.

Did doing that actually improve or worsen the movie? Would it have been better if they had gone with the original plan?
Click to expand...

I mean, overall despite getting rid of that plot point, the third movie was actually pretty alright in terms of being a bookend to the series. Though a few things were slightly different: instead of it being Aladdin's brother, it was reworked to be that (spoilers for the movie) Aladdin's father is not only alive, but also the King of the Forty Theives whom were only established in this movie, as the series didn't really have any loose threads from episodes that needed tying up. That wasn't really a change by Disney, but more so the call of the director (and producer of the animated series) Tad Stones, as he wanted to tell an original story that fit slightly better into the original movie tonally.

That's also why they added more Broadway-style numbers and, after Joe Roth (the Disney chairman at the time) sent a written apology to Robin Williams, completely scrapped and reworked the movie's plot in order to account for Robin William's role in it. It wasn't too much work, granted, as the Genie was a minor supporting character by that point, but the gesture was still nice. It's not gonna win any Emmy's, it's not the hilarious or vibrantly animated thing out there, and it certainly ain't ever gonna dethrone Aladdin's status as the better film, but for what it was: it was alright.

I mean, if it was beloved enough that Disney allowed callbacks to those two DtVHS movies' characters in the 2019 remake, they must've done something right.
 
OmnipotentStupidity said:
I mean, overall despite getting rid of that plot point, the third movie was actually pretty alright in terms of being a bookend to the series. Though a few things were slightly different: instead of it being Aladdin's brother, it was reworked to be that (spoilers for the movie) Aladdin's father is not only alive, but also the King of the Forty Theives whom were only established in this movie, as the series didn't really have any loose threads from episodes that needed tying up. That wasn't really a change by Disney, but more so the call of the director (and producer of the animated series) Tad Stones, as he wanted to tell an original story that fit slightly better into the original movie tonally.

That's also why they added more Broadway-style numbers and, after Joe Roth (the Disney chairman at the time) sent a written apology to Robin Williams, completely scrapped and reworked the movie's plot in order to account for Robin William's role in it. It wasn't too much work, granted, as the Genie was a minor supporting character by that point, but the gesture was still nice. It's not gonna win any Emmy's, it's not the hilarious or vibrantly animated thing out there, and it certainly ain't ever gonna dethrone Aladdin's status as the better film, but for what it was: it was alright.

I mean, if it was beloved enough that Disney allowed callbacks to those two DtVHS movies' characters in the 2019 remake, they must've done something right.
Click to expand...
Interesting. Kinda makes me wish I had actually watched it when I was younger. Last Aladdin-related thing I ever saw was some sort of weird crossover with Hercules ages ago.
 
From what I’ve heard Galaxy’s Edge has been such a bust they’re dropping in a Vader walk around despite the land being set in the sequel timeline to garner some attention to the area. So much for “let the past die”.
 
Kurosaki Ichigo said:
From what I’ve heard Galaxy’s Edge has been such a bust they’re dropping in a Vader walk around despite the land being set in the sequel timeline to garner some attention to the area. So much for “let the past die”.
Click to expand...
We have been talking about this in the Star Wars thread(please, join us). One of the theories is they could retro fit the whole thing into Mos Eisley. I'm thinking thats going to happen much sooner than later.

Interestingly enough, the First Order walkers in the Age of Resistance Ride, are AT ATs. So, they could just retro fit that as well. Just change some helmets on stormtroopers and have another video...

I feel sorry for the 'prettier Daisy Ridley' Rey Disney actress. She seemed pretty cool.
 
Ihavetinyweewee said:
We have been talking about this in the Star Wars thread(please, join us). One of the theories is they could retro fit the whole thing into Mos Eisley. I'm thinking thats going to happen much sooner than later.

Interestingly enough, the First Order walkers in the Age of Resistance Ride, are AT ATs. So, they could just retro fit that as well. Just change some helmets on stormtroopers and have another video...

I feel sorry for the 'prettier Daisy Ridley' Rey Disney actress. She seemed pretty cool.
Click to expand...
Wasnt even aware, that thread moves so quickly tbh. I’d love to see your guys’ opinion if you could give me the page?
 
GeneralFriendliness said:
Aside from Treasure Planet, I find it surreal that Disney is so desperate for new content that they'll now be making movies based on their direct-to-vhs sequels from the 90s and 00s starting with Aladdin. I mean, all their sequels were shitty or meh at best with the exception of Return of Jafar, Kronk's New Groove and maybe (just maybe) Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas. Those three were the only ones with any real effort put into them, whilst the others were just meh, garbage or left you asking "did this really need to exist?". Especially the Little Mermaid sequels, with the third film being such a boring piece of shit that its impossible to endure for more than 10 minutes.
Click to expand...
....There was a third?
 
CheezzyMach said:
....There was a third?
Click to expand...
Sadly yes... Despite the name, its actually prequel/origin story for Ariel, despite that the 90s cartoon did a better job depicting that apparently.
849488

The whole plot revolves around King Triton banning music so Ariel has to stop him and the main villain who is another Ursula wannabe (except she's not an octopussy) with a goofy animal sidekick. "Bring back music and restore finny fun!"
 
So I saw the Lion King reboot. Remember that scene where Rafiki finds out Simba was alive?

Well for some reason they changed how he went about finding out.

Instead of a leaf that had Simba's scent on it, instead, a clump of hair comes off of Simba.

Said hair ends up with a bird who uses it as part of a nest. Another bird throws it out. It lands on a branch and gets eaten by a giraffe. The giraffe shits it out and a dung beetle rolls it all up in a ball. Hair falls off and gets grabbed by an ant. Said ant and his colony climb up Rafiki's tree, Rafiki grabs the hair, looks at it for only a second and instantly recognizes it's Simba's.

I suppose they were trying to link it to the whole "Circle of Life" theme, but the whole thing just came off as contrived. Why fix something that wasn't broken?

Also, the Luau scene was taken out. Most likely because current year.
 
Last edited:
scorptatious said:
So I saw the Lion King reboot. Remember that scene where Rafiki finds out Simba was alive?

Well for some reason they changed how he went about finding out.

Instead of a leaf that had Simba's scent on it, instead, a clump of hair comes off of Simba.

Said hair ends up with a bird who uses it as part of a nest. Another bird throws it out. It lands on a branch and gets eaten by a giraffe. The giraffe shits it out and a dung beetle rolls it all up in a ball. Hair falls off and gets grabbed by an ant. Said ant and his colony climb up Rafiki's tree, Rafiki grabs the hair, looks at it for only a second and instantly recognizes it's Simba's.

I suppose they were trying to link it to the whole "Circle of Life" theme, but the whole thing just came off as contrived. Why fix something that wasn't broken?
Click to expand...

Did the music sound just as hokey?
 
I'm watching the original Pirates of the Caribbean movie, before the series turned it to shit, and it's still a fun and entertaining movie.


I miss that Disney.
 
Kurosaki Ichigo said:
From what I’ve heard Galaxy’s Edge has been such a bust they’re dropping in a Vader walk around despite the land being set in the sequel timeline to garner some attention to the area. So much for “let the past die”.
Click to expand...
I imagine that pushing back the Rise of the Resistance ride they hyped up so much over six months past the opening of the rest of the land really doesn't help a lot. I've also heard that Disneyland is unusually quiet this summer so that's going to be a major factor as well. I'm guessing that people anticipated massive crowds for Galaxy's Edge and decided it'd be a bad time to go, while the fans are just plain uninterested (the old fans because they feel spurned, the new "fans" because they never actually gave a shit outside of using it for pushing politics).

GeneralFriendliness said:
Sadly yes... Despite the name, its actually prequel/origin story for Ariel, despite that the 90s cartoon did a better job depicting that apparently.
Click to expand...
I forgot this existed. Yes, as someone who was a kid in the 90's, the TV series was a much better prequel that fit in with the movie much, much better.
 
Honestly live action Cinderella was the best out of all of them despite confirmed thot and possible bisexual Richard Madden looking creepy because they seem to have CGI'd his eyes
Cate Blanchett serving up Joan Crawford looks.
Holliday Grainger should have been Cinderella. Tbh she needs to do another thing with Francois Arnaud

Also Cinderella dress wasn't shit like Belle
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom