Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for discussion of the September 22 article: Toon Talk: Sleeping Beauty DVD at <a href="News-ID114990.asp" target="_blank">http://LaughingPlace.com/News-ID114990.asp</a>.
Originally Posted By MouseBear Salutations Kirby, Great review! I've always found Sleeping Beauty wonderful to look at, but a bit cold. Prince Philip is the most interesting of the Princes, but for some reason the movie seems to lack an emotional core. But Aurora is my daughter's favorite Princess, so we've already bought the DVD. Thanks again for the review, MouseBear
Originally Posted By Kayoss I like how cold this movie is. I also liked how cold the attraction at Disneyland felt. Now that it's gone, at least we still have the movie.
Originally Posted By Byronnic "Disc 2 offers a telling split-screen Widescreen to Pan-and-Scan Comparison that should answer the question of which version to watch … why anyone would want to chop off the sides of this masterpiece is beyond me." I'll tell you why. 1) I didn't pay several thousand dollars for a large screen TV so that I could watch movies utilitzing only half of my screen. 2) Even if I could deal with the loss of of half my screen, watching widescreen movies with a 50% ratio feels like I'm watching it through the slats of a fence. I keep squiggling around trying to see the complete picture all the while knowing that this is it.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: Well, I never thought of Princess Aurora as being 'cold'. She just doesn't have as much screen time as all the other Disney heroines. But, when you consider the original storyline by Charles Perrault or Brother's Grim, Aurora/Briar Rose was truly fleshed out by comparison. For that matter, the whole STORY was. If it weren't for the Disney version of this tale, I wouldn't be interested in the original at all...
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: I have to agree that SLEEPING BEAUTY was a film way ahead of it's time. But it's actually a good thing that it was. If the film were being made for the first time by THIS era's current crop of animators and screen writers, they'd be so concerned about making it 'hip & hop'--in order to attract the current teenagers--that the entire project wouldn't be timeless, nor would it do justice to the true spirit of the legend. They most likely wouldn't choose any sort of classical music for the score, assuming that only 'pop' or 'rock' would work for the 21st Century It is for this same reason that I cringe when I read articles about what's intended for RAPUNZEL. Apparently there are plans to make that fairy tale so comical that I fear it may lose a lot in the translation and never quite capture the true core and meaning of the original story.
Originally Posted By ToonKirby Byronnic: While I certainly understand and respect your point of view, for me, in regards to this *particular* movie, watching it in pan and scan would be a travesty, akin to hacking of the sides of da Vinci so that it will fit into an atrium.
Originally Posted By Waltsicle "Lady and the Tramp" was not shot in 70 mm. It was Cinemascope (compressed 35 mm). Also, it was entirely reformatted and re-shot for a 1:33 screen as well--seeing as how most cinemas at the time did not have the capability of projecting Cinemascope (or the wide screen to project it on!). Sleeping Beauty DVD is beautiful--and while I certainly respect the film, it's hardly one of my favorites. I hope when they get around to a special edition DVD of Bambi that they do it with the same love and attention!
Originally Posted By wilbear64 I love Sleeping Beauty! Not for the Prince and Princess, but for the 3 Golden Girl Fairies, and the Wild Drag Queen of a villian! It's thier movie. I mean come on, let's be real! And Kirby, I LOVE Disney's Pop Mania Music! "No Secret" is cool with me! I guess I'm still young at heart, and not jaded yet.
Originally Posted By ToonKirby >"Lady and the Tramp" was not shot in 70 mm. It was Cinemascope (compressed 35 mm).< Thanks for the clarification. A lot of terms (70 mm, Cinemascope, Technirama 70) were tossed around during the commentary and other supplementals, thus my error.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy Terrific review, Kirby---it's so wonderful to see SB gettin' so much PRAISE and ADORATION now!! <:-D I have one question... "Two familiar voices can be heard as Maleficent’s goons: Pinto Colvig (a.k.a. Goofy, Grumpy, Sleepy)"... Candy Candido's voice is obvious, as he has the only real individual lines, but where you can pick out Pinto Colvig?? I'll have to listen for him... Thanks again, Kirby! Byron
Originally Posted By ToonKirby Yes, Candy's was a very distinctive voice to say the least! There are 3 actors officially credited with the voices of the goons, and Candy's character was the only one that had individual lines. Pinto's may not be distinguishable amongst all the chattering, but let us know if you can hear him. And thank you all for the great feedback!
Originally Posted By hightp I like Sleeping Beauty, but have yet to buy it on DVD. I liked the review, so I think I'll pick it up this week. Though I haven't seen it for a year or so (I have the last video release) I'd like to know if anyone else thought the 'Drunk Minstrel' looked like Paul McCartney. I guess it's just a coincidence, as the Beatles weren't around at that time, but he does bear a striking resemblance to Sir Paul (in my opinion).
Originally Posted By DisneyDude81 I don't like the flickering in the picture! if snow white doesn't have it then why would sleeping beauty not been 50 yrs old yet would have it? i dont like it!
Originally Posted By basil fan Did anybody watch The Peter Tchiakovsky Story? Did you see the 2 Hogan's Heroes actors in it? Only 3 months 'til Christmas <a href="http://www15.brinkster.com/wtstsgalor/etc/christmas.html" target="_blank">http://www15.brinkster.com/wts tsgalor/etc/christmas.html</a>
