rocklobster (post: 1361538) wrote:I already did that a year ago. I guess I could do it again.
Radical Dreamer (post: 1360874) wrote:It's too bad Snow White's voice is absolutely grating. XDD I can't stand watching that movie, just because of how horrid her voice is. XD
That Dude (post: 1385194) wrote:When God made Gelka, he decided to mix bubbles, rainbows, sharks, cupcakes, chocolate chips, puppies, kitties, and fun all into one bunch.
goldenspines (post: 1360669) wrote:Giselle. (both cartoon and human form)
rocklobster (post: 1360712) wrote:I also don't like the fact that some princess characters are completely omitted. In the book version, Eilonwy from The Black Cauldron is a great character--she's very assertive and will literally fight tooth and nail if any of the villains try to subdue her. then there are the animal princesses, like Nala and Maid Marian. Why are they also excluded? Simply because they're animals?
Yamamaya (post: 1380634) wrote:The lack of Esmeralda in this thread offends me.
Awesome for the following reasons
Kicks butt and takes names
Is Hot
Shouts the word, "JUSTICE!" during the movie.
<modsnip: See above>
rocklobster (post: 1380884) wrote:1. Singing gargoyles. And they weren't even the cool ones from the Gargoyles cartoon!
Oh, and there weren't any singing gargoyles in the book
Now this I can understand, but I'd take it with a grain of salt. Disney was probably already pushing the envelope with Frollo, who is certainly one of the darkest villains they've ever done (and done well). Really, there are any number of practical reasons to change Philemon's character, though a valid complaint.rocklobster (post: 1380884) wrote:2. In the book, Philemon (or whatever his name is. The dude that's sweet on Esmerelda) is a jerk who only wants Esmeralda for her body. He's not supposed to be likeable.
But you like the Little Mermaid.rocklobster (post: 1380884) wrote:3. It's not supposed to be a happy ending. I think ending the story sadly gives it more impact. Giving it a happy ending makes it cheap. Did you know Disney's the only company that gave the story a happy ending? That should tell you something.
Oh, and there weren't any singing gargoyles in the book
rocklobster wrote:1. Singing gargoyles. And they weren't even the cool ones from the Gargoyles cartoon!
Oh, and there weren't any singing gargoyles in the book
2. In the book, Philemon (or whatever his name is. The dude that's sweet on Esmerelda) is a jerk who only wants Esmeralda for her body. He's not supposed to be likeable.
3. It's not supposed to be a happy ending. I think ending the story sadly gives it more impact. Giving it a happy ending makes it cheap. Did you know Disney's the only company that gave the story a happy ending? That should tell you something.
rocklobster wrote:No, because those were faithful. Hunchback of Notre Dame wasn't faithful, imho.
rocklobster (post: 1380884) wrote:3. It's not supposed to be a happy ending. I think ending the story sadly gives it more impact. Giving it a happy ending makes it cheap. Did you know Disney's the only company that gave the story a happy ending? That should tell you something.
What is this I don't even-rocklobster (post: 1381018) wrote:OK, I didn't like The LIttle Mermaid's original ending. That's why I like the Disney version better. The mermaid deserved a happy ending.
Return to General Entertainment
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 322 guests