"Happily N'Ever After"

Post by **Ben** » May 11th, 2007, 7:08 am

I don't think <I>ANY</I>thing in that picture was an homage. After reviewing the DVD and listening to the director's comments, it's pretty clear they just stole whatever ideas they thought worked.

Nothing in there is meant to be a reference...they're just pulling out other movie moments to try and make theirs work.

Post by **wendy** » May 11th, 2007, 7:51 am

Oh, well that's just sad ...

Post by **ShyViolet** » May 11th, 2007, 8:25 am

Ben wrote:I don't think ANYthing in that picture was an homage. After reviewing the DVD and listening to the director's comments, it's pretty clear they just stole whatever ideas they thought worked.

I've only seen the trailer, but I had that exact same vibe.

Post by **Ben** » May 11th, 2007, 9:16 am

Did you read my comments, Vi?

Pretty much says it all...

Post by **Daniel** » May 11th, 2007, 11:35 pm

Oooh, I didn't listen to the audio commentary! But yeah, I don't think I want to.

Anyway, finally read your review, Ben! Very good, and I pretty much agree with everything you said. It was kinda weired, seeing things I mentioned in your review, ie, The Emperor's New Groove stolen reference, and Cindy III (Totally agreed with that part!

)

Again, great review!

Post by **Ben** » May 12th, 2007, 8:14 am

I think that's just because the lifts are so obvious. I've seen those comments elsewhere too. It just wasn't original.

Oh, if it had only been traditionally animated. They could have beaten Disney to the punch.

Post by **Daniel** » May 15th, 2007, 2:50 am

Can't say that I have though, yours was the first review I read. Didn't want to spoil it for myself, you know.

I know, if only.

Post by **ShyViolet** » May 15th, 2007, 6:18 am

Ben wrote:Did you read my comments, Vi?

Pretty much says it all.

Yeah, I actually printed out your review so I could read it later--I like reading things from paper better.

Totally agreed with all of it.

And that pic of Sigorney--she just had this really "bland" annoying look on her face, so "Oh, I grew up watching Disney cartoons so of course I said yes when asked to do this...." blah blah blah. These stars either don't know or don't care about the quality of animation--it's all the same to them.

Kind of a shame as she was in this HBO-made Snow White live-action film years ago where she played the evil stepmother/witch and did an AWESOME job. So....

There you go.

Post by **Ben** » May 15th, 2007, 6:45 am

Yes, she was good there. Actually quite a scary take on the story!

I think the prob with stars/animation is that they mostly record up front. There's a good chance that they thought going in that this would be a Disney-style traditional movie until the producers went CG with it for not other reason than to help try and sell it. Yep, that's sticking to your guns!

So they might have seen those vivid, early character designs and thought they were voicing something that ended up getting changed, but I do agree that many of them are so in awe of "becoming animated" that they can't see the qualities...

Post by **Meg** » May 15th, 2007, 6:49 am

Ben wrote:Oh, if it had only been traditionally animated. They could have beaten Disney to the punch.

*Shrug* a bad movie is a bad movie no matter what the medium.

Post by **ShyViolet** » May 15th, 2007, 7:58 am

I somewhat agree with that but there have been quite flawed (IMHO) traditionally animated movies (Thumbelina, Swan Princess, Fern Gully) that are still fun to watch and give you a good vibe even with all the story problems. And even though I love Land Before Time and All Dogs Go to Heaven, I acknowledge that yeah, they're flawed. There's things that just don't work.

But I love to watch them. I get that "good animation feeling"--I don't know how else to describe it--afterwards.

I doubt I would get it from this movie. Or a lot of the bad CGI ones.

I think what Ben is saying is that even if the story isn't good, actually seeing a traditionally animated fairy tale/theatrical feature would galvanize 2d in a good way. (Then maybe Frog Princess would be an even greater priority for Disney and the Powers That Be might hype it more.) People would notice it in a way they wouldn't notice CGI. 'Specially since we haven't seen it, IN A MOVIE THEATER, in so long.

(Yes, story IS King--but like I've said before, it doesn't exist in a vacuum either. Well, just my opinion.

)

Post by **ShyViolet** » May 15th, 2007, 8:55 am

Ben wrote:Nothing in there is meant to be a reference...they're just pulling out other movie moments to try and make theirs work.

Kind of like "The Family Guy of Animated Features"!

Post by **Ben** » May 15th, 2007, 10:10 am

The few-second pencil test shown in the extras mark this up as something that would have been on a Disney quality. If anyone has seen bits of "Help, I'm A Fish!" or the recent "Asterix And The Vikings", or Berlin Film's own "Jester Till", then you'll know what I mean.

Even with a lousy script, the look of the movie in traditional colors would have made more of an impact. Even a CG movie with MUCH better animation than what we got here would have helped.

Part of the reason I started thinking more about the lame-o story was because the animation was so insipid...there was <I>nothing</I> to draw away from the plot, and nothing in the script to draw away from the bad animation.

As I said in the review, given even a slightly tighter script, much better direction, and the look of traditional animation, I'll bet we'd be sitting here typing "hey, it wasn't a knock-out, but that movie was a fun little try" instead of "stay-away! Stay-away! Protect you children from this madness!!"

Post by **ShyViolet** » May 17th, 2007, 12:52 am

Ben wrote:"stay-away! Stay-away! Protect you children from this madness!!"

Ben wrote:Yes, she was good there. Actually quite a scary take on the story!

Yeah, and wasn't it also really weird how the "Seven Dwarves" were really full-grown huntsmen?

Post by **Daniel** » February 12th, 2009, 3:58 pm

Here's the cover for the, um, sequel:

I still can't believe they're are making a sequel to THAT. I didn't even know about 'till Ben mentioned on the front page. I totally didn't expect it, what with all the bad reviews and such. The original is so bad, my little review a page back doesn't even scratch the surface, ugh!!

Of course this being a sequel, I have to see it. Although I may not care for some movies, I always make it a point to at least give the sequel a chance. And in this instant, this is one of those RARE opportunities where the sequel can be a huge improvement over the original. So far it doesn't seem to have Patrick Warburton... that alone is promising and since this hasn't been sitting on the shelves for years, the color hue might not be an issue.

And seeing Snow White with a cell phone, gotta love it! Hopefully they casted a good voice for her. By the looks of it, three characters are returning, yay the purple one. Can't wait for the trailer!