Enchanted

[Once Upon A Dream]

Ben-Yeah,Ben ,then I"ll wait for a 2 discs version thanks for helping me .

[James]

Show the people who worked on the film you appreciate their work and buy the disc. Enjoy it for a year or two until a new version comes out. Buy the new disc if it's better.

Assuming the current disc is $15 and assuming they release a new version in 2 years, you've only spent $0.63 a month before having to double-dip.

[Dusterian]

Thank you for informing me, James.

But Ben, you didn't explain to me that the reason you didn't respond was because you were busy. You just responded in one sentence and sounded like you didn't want to think I was right or my opinion was worth thinking might be right. And I think that is rude.

Anyway, as for right or wrong, yes you're right, opinions aren't right or wrong. But points and facts and evidence are.

[Ben]

Ben, you didn't explain to me that the reason you didn't respond was becuase you were busy.

I think the very first time you questioned my "tardiness" in replying to you I explained that I just didn't have the time to always respond in full. Naturally, that carries over from time to time...I shouldn't have to keep replying "I'm too busy to reply right now, but..." because I would then take <I>that</I> time to actually think about a reply!


Unfortunately, text on the page or screen does not carry inflection, which can mean that some comments are not always read as intended. I read what you wrote...didn't have the time to go into it (my review makes it pretty plain how I feel) and wasn't going to get into a drawn out conversation about it, at that time. I love Enchanted, it's been on three or four times since the DVD came out...I keep seeing new things in it. Is it perfect? No. But good for you that you loved the film without question or any problems with it first time out.


"Points and facts and evidence", as history has often shown us, aren't always right or wrong either.

[Dusterian]

You had a good, point. But you also said things like "One day I'll go right into this reply" and "I've a load of remarks I want to reply to surfnspy and your own points, but they'll have to wait until I get a free afternoon!" Well, they never came, but because of all that, I thought maybe by the time you wrote youre review you may have noted the animals in the original films weren't ever used to helping humans clean, either, and you're feelings would have changed. Basically, there was nothing to keep me from feeling that you ignored what I said and you never explained why what a wrote wasn't enough to change your feelings.

For the record, I have lots of my own problems with Enchanted and don't think it's perfect, either. But the first time we talked about this, I just went through your whole post, and responded directly to everything I didn't agree with and explained why I didn't agree with it. I was hoping to get something similar in return.

So now, after all this time, I guess I have to accept it still wasn't enough time. If you really read everything I said, and still weren't convinced, I'll let it go. It'd be nice to know why some day, but if you really can't do that in the near future, I'll let it go. So I'm letting you know how I feel. I'm feeling rather low.

[Ben]

I'll reply to each paragraph in turn here, instead of quoting...

1) Thanks. I guess I still haven't had the kind of free afternoon I'll need to address all your points. I have around six screeners piled up here that need reviewing. There are more on the way. I have to write the front page as much as each day allows. I have to check in on these forums and read <I>every single message</I> to make sure we're keeping to our PG-rated aim. I need to reply to emails that come in. We have several news agencies sending us stuff and that needs sorting and passing on to the right people to post. I often edit, format and give final approval to other stories that we post, and at the very least read <I>everything</I> that goes up on each page so as to try and catch any mistakes. This week has been particularly heavy getting all that Enchanted content out there - content that, for a lot of the time, responds to things people may have had issues with and explains why certain goals may not have been met. ON TOP OF THAT...I have a full-time real world job. I have two other, personal projects I'm working on. I'm helping out another group with some design work. I'm organising a Film Festival and 80th Anniversary celebrations for the studio I'm based at this year. Someone close to us died recently and I'm spending as much time with family as possible as it's not been easy. We're looking at moving house. Once you take all these things into consideration, amongst other things I'm not going into, the <I>last</I> thing on my list is to come in and spend two hours going over your points and replying to them. As I said, nothing that has been written has made me change my mind on some of the issues that I had with Enchanted. If anything it's the <I>film itself</I> that has altered my perception, and even then there are some things that I don't feel were quite right - things that seem to be budgetary concerns more than anything and that I feel sure will be "corrected" if any sequel comes along.

2) Okay, so you also had problems with Enchanted. Just goes to show it's not a perfect film, even if it's vastly entertaining. You'll note above why I haven't been able to take your points and reply to them. As for something similar in return, well, why make me repeat what I said in my original post? Or, better yet, why not take my review as my final word on what I thought of Enchanted and its elements?

3) Nope...I haven't had time. I quickly scanned your original post, which I previously mentioned, and though I took in all your points, there was nothing I agreed with or disagreed with strongly enough to make me jump in with a reply. I respect your opinions, but ultimately, I just don't have the time to reply to each and every lengthy post that comes along. Right now, I should be finishing a review for Horton Hears A Who, but I'm using that time to make my reasons clear. I don't want you to "feel low". But you need to get out more and stop taking some anonymous person's comments on an internet message board so close to heart, because ultimately you should stand by your convictions and not place so much life emphasis on something like this.

Please link to your original post again - I'll go through it - and if any one or two points <I>really</I> strike me as something to generate discussion over, or not, I'll <I>briefly</I> comment on them.

[Dusterian]

1) I read all the things you had to do. You're right, that's way to busy to respond to my long post. The main problem was that it sounded like you would get to my points soon and I thought the time from being in theaters to being on DVD would have been enough. I had no idea, (and I guess you didn't either) all this stuff was going to come up in between, and be so much. So the film itself changed you. I guess that's actually a good thing.

2) Like I did say, if you really weren't changed by what I said, I'll let that go. I just want to know why. I came up with reasons for why I thought your complaints were unessecary. I just wanted to know your reasons for why they were, and why what I said wasn't good enough to let those parts of the movie be.

3) Well, thank you for taking time out of Horton for me, then. It's not so much that I felt bad because you didn't discuss the film with me, it's more that I felt pointless, like all that I did wasn't effective at all, wasn't worth anything. So, since you asked, here's my post: http://www.animated-news.com/forum/view ... &start=435 and it would be nice to have reasons why you don't agree with what I said, but now I see you're really too busy. I know my post may be too long, but sometimes it takes a lot of explaining to be convincing. This was all about one post, one movie. I'll know better next time.

[Ben]

Please don't stop posting your opinions and own views...there are many other people here who respond (and have done!), all with their own takes.

I <I>will</I> take a look at your post again and reply appropriately. It's just so darned long and overly involving though! Just peeking at it again and feeling that I've addressed many of those points in comments here or in the review makes me feel tired before I've even begun!

[Dusterian]

Dangit Ben, why do you have to be so nice.

Sorry for any of the hard feelings I caused you. I know I was pushing it but that was because I felt ignored. Now I see I wasn't.

I really hope you can tell me why you didn't agree with what I said, but I'll wait for it. It will mean a lot.

Thanks Ben. Once again, sorry for any hurt feelings. When I said the little comment about being unchanged was rude, I only meant it felt rude to me, but really, you weren't trying to hurt or be uncaring at all.

[Ben]

S'ok...I'm always nice!

If I had <I>wanted</I> to ignore you, I wouldn't have even posted the "sorry, can't reply now but will do some time", would I? And, at that time, I fully intended to come back and post something.

No hurt feelings here - life's too short to take what should be a hobby so much to heart. When I get a day (or two) out to respond, I'll address your points, by which time we'll probably be arguing over a sequel!

[Dusterian]

Well, yea, that was a way of letting me know you cared.

What exactly did you mean is a hobby? Animation (no, it's a job and a life-fulfilling passion!) or this Web site? I don't think a news site can just be a hobby, maybe a fan site.

Yea, I don't get why everyone seems on board with a sequel. Can the same jokes be funny twice? It was all about the fairy tale world against the real world.

I do want to know, what is your opinion (and I will let you keep it!) on the whole "fairy tales characters are flat and become more developed in the real world" premise? I think it's kind of an insult to the past Disney fairy tale films, and those princesses had more development than Giselle (none of them get married the same day they meet the prince, and we don't know if they'd plan to, either). In a way, the film is forgetting the concept of love at first sight, it's not about falling in love with the first person you meet, but fate and unbelievable circumstances bring you together with [i[the one[/i]. One thing I liked that you said in your review was that the film was still rather 2-D, proving it's harder than they thought to make someone come off as well rounded and what everyone thinks is enough is different.

I will always have problems with Enchanted knowing what they were going for. But if I forget about all that (since the movie doesn't outright say all fairy tales are inferior in the development department), I can like the film.

I tried to make that short, and if you can't answer that is fine!

[Ben]

This whole website is supposed to be a hobby! But it often takes more time up than my real job!

A sequel would only work if they can make it work, if that makes sense. It'll start off real world, but y'know Giselle still hasn't gotten the full case of tools to live life this way. Before we know it, Narissa is back - well, we didn't see her "die" and Chris Chase has hinted he'd love to get her singing - and scheming again. But where's the animated counterpart to all this? You just know at some point they'll all have to jump into the sewer for a big action sequence in Andalasia. Maybe Narissa reverses the plot (usually what happens!) and kidnaps Robert?

I do agree that fairy tale characters - especially in Disney versions - are never flat or boring, but Giselle, I think, clearly comes from the Snow White/Sleeping Beauty school of damsels (note: Giselle is <I>not</I> and <I>never</I> a princess in Enchanted). In a word, they didn't do much. I think Giselle's arc takes her from Snowy or Aurora and makes her an Ariel or a Belle. How I meant the film was still kind of 2D is that her arc is, basically, a very shallow one - despite the changes, she's never a fully three dimensional personality even at the end, and the "get tough" attitude at the end is just that: an attitude, not a personality change, which would also be too obvious.

There.

[Dusterian]

Well, uh...if you didn't want to write all that, I'm still glad you did. I agree with everything, I think you're right, Snowy and Aurora are the most personality-less, that even Disney knew people had problems with them through reviews back in the day. Even though it's hard to judge when Aurora isn't seen much and Snow White has to be kind all the time. Some people also said the movie was about how a girl grows up, which would be alright with me as long as it's not about growing a personality.

The attitude line was perfect, never could place what was wrong, so we actually agree this time on everything.

Thanks for the info on the sequel. If everyone really wants to do this, I guess I don't see the harm. It would be cool if Giselle grows up even more, like starts questioning life or exploring her identity. It would be interesting if she started wondering what reality is since she knows two different ones. They said they would write Narissa a song, didn't they, and her theme as she comes out of the sewer is from that? And maybe Idina Menzel will get to sing this time, which people really wanted.

[Once Upon A Dream]

I don't think that Snow White or Aurora are flat at all,and neither Giselle,there's nothing flat about Andalasia.
There will be a sequel?.
I think it will be great if they"ll a series about Giselle's life in Andalasia and Giselle does things with the animales and they"ll also shows Edward.

[Ben]

Whoa! My sequel comments are just that: <I>my</I> comments. I have no idea what direction the film will take, but that's an educated guesstimate.