tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post1495559944436309521..comments2024-03-26T22:42:06.412-07:00Comments on TAG Blog: Early Morning LinksSteve Huletthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05537689111433326847noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-66136367129974235782010-03-16T18:16:19.734-07:002010-03-16T18:16:19.734-07:00audiences got the message
No, the Dis-fans got th...<i>audiences got the message</i><br /><br />No, the Dis-fans got the message. The general movie audience didn't connect Eisner leaving to PatF, and didn't care about anything other than whether they wanted to see the film or not.<br /><br />All this talk about release dates and expectations is mostly baloney. Audiences go see the films they want to, and they skip the ones they don't want to see. December 25 has NOT traditionally been a great release date. People should actually do some research before spouting their opinions as "facts."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-3477644626842291282010-03-16T11:41:18.995-07:002010-03-16T11:41:18.995-07:00I read that Cook set it up so that the movies A Ch...<i>I read that Cook set it up so that the movies A Christmas Carol and Old Dogs were set in November and The Princess and the Frog in early December.</i><br /><br />Generally, there are only two times you can put a major animated movie in Nov.-Dec: Nov. 1-7, and the week of Dec. 25th.<br />Obviously, if you're doing Christmas Carol, the second option's a bit late...But first-November is usually the most valuable for an animated or Xmas-themed (like Tim Allen's Santa Clauses), since mall crowds are still light, kids want to start getting in a holiday mood, you're one week ahead of the mid-November big-studio offerings, and you've got a whole month of business to play with.<br />And since, as noted, Alvin grabbed the Dec. 25th slot, PATF didn't have many scheduling options left, unless they pushed back to spring '10 (which might've helped).<br />As for "comedies" like Old Dogs (note the quotation marks), that was counted as mainstream-adult, for which Dec. rules don't apply.<br /><br />Also, PATF had been announced almost the same week as Eisner departing; audiences got the message, and wanted to treat it as a "historical event" rather than a movie.<br />Which raised expectations a little <i>TOO</i> unrealistically hopeful for what should've been a harmless little piece.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-11086736524624007732010-03-16T03:34:58.515-07:002010-03-16T03:34:58.515-07:00I kind of blame, The Princess and the Frog's l...I kind of blame, The Princess and the Frog's lukewarm performance on the scheduling date for the film.<br /><br />I read that Cook set it up so that the movies A Christmas Carol and Old Dogs were set in November and The Princess and the Frog in early December.<br /><br />Though it probably seemed like a good idea at the time to schedule a "princess" movie during the holiday season; it really wasn't in the end. So I guess Disney learned this by putting Tangled in November, but they're still facing the first-half of the final Harry Potter. So maybe they're setting themselves up to fail.<br /><br />Anyway so my point is it looks like as soon as Eisner left his influence on the company stayed. First he bought the dying Muppet franchise, liked them as a kid don't think this generation likes puppets anymore. Second the Disney Princess franchise, a sort of clever way to recycle iconic Disney heroines, but it also poisoned any future films featuring a female protagonist. Finally, cheap Disney sequels. Enough said.<br /><br />Sorry for the rant needed to get it out.<br /><br />-Aurora<br /><br />PS: Please no more ranting about Lasseter or Iger. They're just trying to fix the mess Eisner left and set in motion. They're just stuck with it.Aurora Dawsonnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-626685846122748172010-03-15T19:17:45.724-07:002010-03-15T19:17:45.724-07:00wow.. the reasons i'm hearing that Princess an...wow.. the reasons i'm hearing that Princess and the Frog did poorly are seriously inflated. Disaster is so far from the case. First, The movie did well. Not good, not great, it did well. Second, Disney did overstep the marketing basically telling everyone this is something you've seen before and enjoyed but it's pretty much the same thing. Last, Disney was expecting a turn-around far greater then they should have. They were pitting it against the likes of The Lion King, and Beauty and the Beast, and without releasing a traditionally animated film with an expected turn around for quite a few years, they were expecting it to do as well as recent computer animated movies. <br /><br />The real test for Princess and the Frog will be to see how much merchandise it sells. That's the real bank for Disney here.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-60560635136002076652010-03-15T15:59:56.342-07:002010-03-15T15:59:56.342-07:00It IS part of the whole fabric of what made this f...It IS part of the whole fabric of what made this film feel "seen it". <br />It wasn't children staying away from this film that made it do poorly. It was the film not bringing in the evening dating audiences. That's what is necessary to make a film a hit. If every child and family went to see the film that would only account for a small part of the Box Office necessary to make this film a hit.<br /><br />Can you clearly say that if the film had looked fresh and different (not trying to steal the look of L&T and Bambi and numerous character designs from other films) it wouldn't have helped draw audiences in - even before they discovered the story was a warmed over mess?<br />My guess is that instead of trying to compete with Pixar and DW there was a conscious decision to try and go nostalgic and recycle the past and miraculously people would long for the good old days of 2D (before it got bad). They even hired two directors that hadn't had a hit since 1992.<br /><br /><br />This was not what a return to 2D needed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-79027730875447413172010-03-15T14:42:43.792-07:002010-03-15T14:42:43.792-07:00"None of these things helped evoke New Orlean..."None of these things helped evoke New Orleans, the South or the Bayou.<br />One more reason why this film was a disaster and couldn't bring audiences into the theaters."<br /><br />Yes. Every child who saw the trailer immediate thought "Wow, that background really doesn't evoke New Orleans for me. Let's see Alvin instead!"<br /><br />Stop over analyzing.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00371226910263445843noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-15948548957527555072010-03-15T11:13:32.630-07:002010-03-15T11:13:32.630-07:00"Alice in the Palace is the best version avai..."Alice in the Palace is the best version available. With Meryl Streep, nonetheless."<br /><br />Palace was based on an off-Broadway musical that went uptown and closed overnight. It's hard not to see why. (I remember a friend watching the actor-improv, and asking "...Are they tripping?")<br />If you want a good stage version, PBS did an all-star version in '83, with Richard Burton appearing in a bit part with daughter Kate. (Who tends to read Alice's lines as if they're grim Shakespearean soliloquies.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-42447058361785114982010-03-15T11:02:48.365-07:002010-03-15T11:02:48.365-07:00I just think that they were trying too hard this t...I just think that they were trying too hard this time and it simply did work in the box office because of that noisy publicity but actually it really is not that overly outstanding...Andre Martinhttp://www.monbeausapin.org/rocket-french-review/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-12970438447112534592010-03-15T11:01:01.967-07:002010-03-15T11:01:01.967-07:00None of these things helped evoke New Orleans, the...<i>None of these things helped evoke New Orleans, the South or the Bayou.</i><br /><br />Ever read E.D. Baker's book the movie was supposedly "based" on? There's virtually <b>no</b> resemblance whatsoever except for the kiss.<br />The setting is the basic cute-fairytale pastiche, the princess <i>is</i> a generic princess, and the "story" is just an episodic character-encounter hop from point A to swamp-witch point B. No jazz, no gumbo, no proactive female empowerment--The New Orleans stuff all came out of R&J's head, and boy, did it need it. (The "Not a princess" plot, however, came out of Eisner-era panic.)<br /><br />And if the main line of attack is "Sure, it made money, but it must be a disaster if people THINK it is", well, y'see, that's the point some of us defenders had been making all along...Not that it doesn't sound a little desperate, mind.<br />Still, with the Alice link at the top, it's more original to talk about how Walt's '51 cartoon wasn't quite as "evil" as it's been painted over the years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-1921426826538211952010-03-15T10:55:54.562-07:002010-03-15T10:55:54.562-07:00Alice in the Palace is the best version available....Alice in the Palace is the best version available. With Meryl Streep, nonetheless.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-29092003876979711862010-03-15T10:28:43.696-07:002010-03-15T10:28:43.696-07:00As for the Alice article, it sounds as if the repo...As for the Alice article, it sounds as if the reporter went boldly went out of his way to watch <i>three</i> versions (the 60's and the cheesy Syfy) before proclaiming the weirdo 30's version as "the most faithful".<br />(Leaving aside the West Coast image of "Betcha didn't know there were others besides Tim and the '51 cartoon!")<br />I see no mention of the '72 live-action British version that court-transcripted about 90% of the book dialogue, put Peter Sellers and Spike Milligan in cameos, and <i>still</i> got the jokes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-48863074343614501702010-03-15T10:04:12.447-07:002010-03-15T10:04:12.447-07:00Really. Do you think Disney looked at other animat...Really. Do you think Disney looked at other animated films to help create the look of Lady and the Tramp or Bambi? Is there any wonder why audiences weren't excited to go see it?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-55188297724305263052010-03-15T10:02:17.156-07:002010-03-15T10:02:17.156-07:00Not in thi day and age and NOT what Disney needed ...Not in thi day and age and NOT what Disney needed to bring back 2D.<br />It's a disaster if the entertainment community consider it an underacheiver. It's a disaster if the people in charge of Disney think it's a failure. It's a disaster when JL looks to lay blame on someone else.<br />It's a disaster when they have backtracked on committing to go forward with 2D and lay off crews.<br /><br />The only one it's not a disaster for is Pixar. They may very well end up being the default Disney animation studio.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-40233228664845168032010-03-15T09:53:04.120-07:002010-03-15T09:53:04.120-07:00One more reason why this film was a disaster and c...<b>One more reason why this film was a disaster and couldn't bring audiences into the theaters. </b><br /><br />A $250 million worldwide gross is a long way from "disaster."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-91656368332035699982010-03-15T09:36:41.307-07:002010-03-15T09:36:41.307-07:00I'll make the necessary correction to my stoop...I'll make the necessary correction to my stoopid typo.Steve Huletthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05537689111433326847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-12925146180467273892010-03-15T08:32:55.908-07:002010-03-15T08:32:55.908-07:00btw, that's Sanjay PATEL. Not "pantel.&q...btw, that's Sanjay PATEL. Not "pantel."<br /><br />And it's a brilliant book.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-25801463133624460412010-03-15T06:33:18.126-07:002010-03-15T06:33:18.126-07:00So this is Ron and John admitting they were the wr...So this is Ron and John admitting they were the wrong people to make the first new Disney 2D film?<br />"The painterly lush look of Bambi..." worked for Bambi and that film's pastoral forest/eden. " our New Orleans French Quarter cityscapes were influenced by Lady and the Tramp" worked for L&T because it helped give a sense of smalltown America in the early 1900s.<br />None of these things helped evoke New Orleans, the South or the Bayou.<br />One more reason why this film was a disaster and couldn't bring audiences into the theaters.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-14816142358730304862010-03-15T00:14:35.726-07:002010-03-15T00:14:35.726-07:00early morning indeed.early morning indeed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com