Originally Posted By Donald75 Ok Pixar has cars out and there is already talk about Ratatouille <sp?> but what is next for Disney Feature Animation? They had Chicken Little and that seems to be the last hyped thing.
Originally Posted By leemac Meet the Robinsons is due next March at present. After that we have American Dog (from the Lilo & Stitch team of Chris Sanders and Dean De Blois) and Rapunzel.
Originally Posted By cstephens They showed the trailer for "Meet the Robinsons" in front of "Cars" as well. It looked great. With that and "Ratatouille", that's at least twice we're going to the El Capitan next year. /cs
Originally Posted By mickey_ring Gotta be tough to be a Disney movie writer. What really is next? What original, G rated storyline can they come up with that will bring in the $$? Everything from bugs to people have been animated, and how many friendship, journey or proving oneself movies can there be?
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL >>>They showed the trailer for "Meet the Robinsons" in front of "Cars" as well. It looked great.<<< No way!! Totally have to disagree with you on that cs. Looked to me as if Disney took 5 steps backwards in the animation department. No where near the polish of the Pixar features. Especially in the renderings of the main characters.
Originally Posted By tcsnwhite ^Sorry, Have to disagree with YOU on this this one. Robinsons looks beautiful in its design, and the story looks very interesting. I am much more interested in this than Ratouille.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Robinsons looks beautiful in its design, and the story looks very interesting. >> Me too. I'm intrigued about it. <<No where near the polish of the Pixar features. >> That is precisely why I like the look of Robinsons. It has a neat look that is very distinctive. Not everything has to look realistic. The characterizations look so kooky.
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL ^^^Definately to each his/her own. But I really wont pay to see a cg-toon that looks no better than what you get on kid TV. While watching the trailer, just last night BTW, I couldn't help but think that it looks less detailed than Chicken Little. And that was pretty average at best. But I must say, I am looking forward to An American Dog.
Originally Posted By cstephens TMICHAEL wrote: > No way!! Totally have to disagree with you on that cs. That's ok - that means you won't be in our way when we're trying to buy tickets for the opening night at the El Capitan! > No where near the polish of the Pixar features. Pixar looks good, but I like different styles in my animation. Just because it's not Pixar doesn't mean it's not good. /cs
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: I just hope they don't mess up RAPUNZEL by going ahead with their original plans to make it a parody of itself. Someone recently told us Cauldron grils that they've gone back to re-do that one--just to make sure it doesn't flop the way it most surely would have if they tried too hard to modernize it. But who knows how it will actually turn out?
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORGOCH: What in the heck is a Cauldron gril, sister? ORDDU: Surely you know that by now. It's a series of metal wires you place over the top of your cauldron so you can gril your frog legs. Of all people, dear, you should know that! ORWEN: I'm sorry. I meant to say Cauldron girls. But I got carried away with the moment and said Cauldron grils instead.
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb Back before Beauty and the Beast came out I was EXTEMELY sceptical, and it turns out that was my favorite of the Princess movies
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: Oh, we were never skeptical about Beauty & the Beast. But, then, there were never any rumors floating around about how it might be a fractured fairytale, either. ORDDU: Beauty & the Beast was actually being considered way back in 1981--as a live action, non-musical adaptation. Thankfully, the project was shelved until Alan Menken and Howard Ashman came along.
Originally Posted By TMICHAEL >>>that means you won't be in our way when we're trying to buy tickets for the opening night at the El Capitan!<<< By all means, ENJOY! (Seriously, not just being an a--holio) Haven't wasted my time or gas heading up to Hellywierd since, oh gosh, Hercules maybe. The extra cost is just not worth it to me for the exact same movie playing near by. I don't get into all the pre-recorded character preshow junk. Plus, very doubtful I'd go see this one in a theater. Unless the reviews and word of mouth is stellar when it arrives.
Originally Posted By tcsnwhite "ORWEN: I just hope they don't mess up RAPUNZEL by going ahead with their original plans to make it a parody of itself. Someone recently told us Cauldron grils that they've gone back to re-do that one--just to make sure it doesn't flop the way it most surely would have if they tried too hard to modernize it. But who knows how it will actually turn out?" If I remember right, I don't think that was the way Glen originally wanted to go with this fairy tale. I believe it said he was seriously re-working the story, and that would especially seem to be true now that WDFA has new leaders who believe in what truly is best for the story and where the actual directors want to take it. Again, I could all be wrong.
Originally Posted By basil fan I totally agree about style. There's more to art than photo-realism. Bring on Meet the Robinsons. Phil's Hero Rules <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/disney/hero.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/ disney/hero.html</a>
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: We heard the same thing you did, tcsnwhite, duckling. An article we had read a while back mentioned that Glen Keane was at odds with the producer of RAPUNZEL because the silly producer had a bizzare way of looking at things in general and seemed to care more for his personal twist on the story instead of wanting to go with a more tradtitional approach. Hopefully that nasty producer has gone away by now and left Glen Keane alone to do what HE knows would be best.
