Coolness Bears Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 It felt too much like Shrek, only without all the brilliant references. ...and the fact that it is much better. Yay! for Toy Story 3 though but I wanted Tangled to get the song. Stayed up and watched this with my Best Friend. It's a tradition. Anyway the entire show was ridiculous as usual. Hathalulz wore some good dresses and James Franco was bored out of his mind. The different variety of hilarious oldmen on display made the evening for me also Halle Berry. Kings Speech winning stuff was predictable but really shouldn't have got director. It's the obvious safe choice. It's good but like all the other choices are infinitely better. I wanted True Grit and Black Swan to win more stuff (and True Grit to win anything) but alas it was not meant to be. Rawr, Kings Speech its just so blah la la. Maybe I'm just bitter because I lost to my friend and owe him 3 vanilla cokes.
Oxigen_Waste Posted February 28, 2011 Author Posted February 28, 2011 I'm not happy that Hans Zimmer didn't win for Best Score, either. Well, if we're being honest, as much as I absolutely loved the Inception Soundtrack, the clear winner was Social Network, there (and heaven knows why Tron Legacy didn't get nominated...). *awaits the internets hate for king's speech because the internet hates anything that is popular* Not really, the internet tends to hate unfair popularity... ie Avatar, Titanic, King's Speech... films that aren't in any way bad but get coherced into being "great" just because they follow a given set of narrative rules. It's called oscar baiting! Entertainers that will be forgotten come the test of time. You'll see little to no hate for Inception or Toy Story 3 and those were the real popular blockbusters this year.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 It felt too much like Shrek, only without all the brilliant references. I disagree entirely. It felt nothing like Shrek to me. Shrek was a hilarious parody on the fairy tale genre, whereas Tangled embraced the genre and produced something much more fresh and great than I've seen in a long time. The amount of personality in the characters astonished me. And Inception won 3 Oscars last night, Danny, more than I think it would have been expected to win! :p Yeah, but expectations mean nothing to me. Personally, I'd rather have seen it win for Best Director (or even Writer) and Score.
Cube Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I disagree entirely. It felt nothing like Shrek to me. Shrek was a hilarious parody on the fairy tale genre, whereas Tangled embraced the genre and produced something much more fresh and great than I've seen in a long time. The amount of personality in the characters astonished me. It was good, but didn't come close to the quality of Bolt.
Cube Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Gnomeo and Juliet greater than all. I've never heard of it, but based on the name alone it sounds like the worst thing ever.
ipaul Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I win? Iron Giant right? I really like that film, I actually saw it at the cinema when it first came out - remarkable considering it apparently didn't do that well and I see very few films. Caught it again a few months ago, there's something very endearing about it.
Beast Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 I've never heard of it, but based on the name alone it sounds like the worst thing ever. You'd be mistaken to think this, it's actually quite a nice and funny film. Nowhere near the quality of Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs or Pixar but it's still cool. Definitely not the worst thing ever.
Paj! Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Social Network's score was better than Inception's. I liked Inception's too though. Black Swan should have been nominated for something sound-related too.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 It was good, but didn't come close to the quality of Bolt. Haven't seen that so can't comment.
darksnowman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 It felt too much like Shrek, only without all the brilliant references. I've never heard of it, but based on the name alone it sounds like the worst thing ever. Cube! What's wrong with you dude? Both Tangled and Gnomeo & Juliet are great films. In Tangled you get a retelling of the Rapunzel fairytale, in Gnomeo & Juliet you get a retelling of Capulet vs Montague... both are quality but Tangled edges it.
Hamishmash Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Tangled is Disney back on form. Great songs, jokes, Princess Rapunzle is easily one of the best, most realistic Disney princesses and you should see it just for Maximus the Horse alone.
darksnowman Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 you should see it just for Maximus the Horse alone. And the chameleon!
Ganepark32 Posted February 28, 2011 Posted February 28, 2011 Black Swan should have been nominated for something sound-related too. Oh definitely. Clint Mansell did a fantastic job with scoring Black Swan and putting his own spin on the classic music used for the ballet. Even the club music was a dance version of the ballet's music. So yeah, there should have at least been a nomination for Black Swan in the Original Score category. As for my thoughts on the awards, pretty much as expected. Some I agree with, some I don't but it doesn't matter. Was a bit disappointed that Biutiful didn't win Best Foreign Film but I haven't seen the Danish film that won so it may have been more worthy but Bardem was really good in Biutiful and the film was great. Yes, The King's Speech was the easy choice and very Oscar friendly for members of the Academy and it would have been nice to have seen them actually step away from the typical kind of things they give Best Picture to but it'll never change.
Cube Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Cube! What's wrong with you dude? Both Tangled and Gnomeo & Juliet are great films. In Tangled you get a retelling of the Rapunzel fairytale, in Gnomeo & Juliet you get a retelling of Capulet vs Montague... both are quality but Tangled edges it. I never said they were bad films, only that Tangled isn't as good as Shrek or Bolt (I still really enjoyed it), and that the name Gnomeo & Juliet makes it sound terrible (I didn't even know it existed until this thread).
mcj metroid Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 Tangled was great but felt rushed in parts. A lot of cop out parts to the movie. It isn't as good as shrek and that's the movie it wants to be I feel.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I disagree entirely with people likening Tangled to Shrek. It was the trailer that tried to imitate Shrek and have us believe it would be like that. The movie itself, I feel, is first and foremost a classic fairytale. The thing that makes it so great is the fantastic (not to mention actually existent) personalities of the characters. It has action and humour, yes, and it plays with the stereotypes and clichés, but it does so in order to enhance the genre, not to make a parody of it. Note that I absolutely love Shrek as well, but the two films are entirely different. Seriously.
Coolness Bears Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 The trailer was only like that to entice more boys which is why they changed the name of the film from Rupunzel to Tangled to get a broader audience.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 The trailer was only like that to entice more boys which is why they changed the name of the film from Rupunzel to Tangled to get a broader audience. I agree on the trailer (and the general promotion), but the name change didn't have anything to do with it if I recall correctly.
Paj! Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I've heard about the name change meant to appeal to boys too. Coolness didn't just make it up. :p
Coolness Bears Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 From Wikipedia: When first put into production, the film was promoted as having the title Rapunzel Unbraided, which was then changed to Rapunzel. Disney's previous animated feature The Princess and the Frog in 2009, while being highly critically acclaimed and taking in nearly $270 million worldwide, was not as successful as Disney had hoped. Disney expressed the belief that the film's emphasis on princesses may have deterred young boys from seeing the film. In order to market the film to both boys and girls, Disney changed the film's name from Rapunzel to Tangled, while also emphasizing Flynn Rider, the film's prominent male character. Disney was criticized for altering the classic title as a marketing strategy. Floyd Norman, a former Disney and Pixar animator and story artist, said, "The idea of changing the title of a classic like Rapunzel to Tangled is beyond stupid. I'm convinced they'll gain nothing from this except the public seeing Disney as desperately trying to find an audience."Justin Chang of Variety compared it to changing to the title of The Little Mermaid to Beached.[11] On November 24, 2010, the day of the film's release, directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard disputed reports that the title change was a marketing decision. They said they changed the title from Rapunzel to Tangled because Rapunzel is not the only main character in the film. They went on to say that you can't call Toy Story "Buzz Lightyear," and they really needed a title that represented what the film is, and that it’s a duo, and it stars Rapunzel and Flynn Rider. Okay from that it may not be or they claim it isn't and they just changed it to encompass Flynn as a character as well.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted March 1, 2011 Posted March 1, 2011 I've heard about the name change meant to appeal to boys too. Coolness didn't just make it up. :p Nor did I accuse him of doing so, since I've read that theory, too, but I also believe I've explicitly read somewhere that it wasn't the case. From Wikipedia: When first put into production, the film was promoted as having the title Rapunzel Unbraided, which was then changed to Rapunzel. Disney's previous animated feature The Princess and the Frog in 2009, while being highly critically acclaimed and taking in nearly $270 million worldwide, was not as successful as Disney had hoped. Disney expressed the belief that the film's emphasis on princesses may have deterred young boys from seeing the film. In order to market the film to both boys and girls, Disney changed the film's name from Rapunzel to Tangled, while also emphasizing Flynn Rider, the film's prominent male character. Disney was criticized for altering the classic title as a marketing strategy. Floyd Norman, a former Disney and Pixar animator and story artist, said, "The idea of changing the title of a classic like Rapunzel to Tangled is beyond stupid. I'm convinced they'll gain nothing from this except the public seeing Disney as desperately trying to find an audience."Justin Chang of Variety compared it to changing to the title of The Little Mermaid to Beached.[11] On November 24, 2010, the day of the film's release, directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard disputed reports that the title change was a marketing decision. They said they changed the title from Rapunzel to Tangled because Rapunzel is not the only main character in the film. They went on to say that you can't call Toy Story "Buzz Lightyear," and they really needed a title that represented what the film is, and that it’s a duo, and it stars Rapunzel and Flynn Rider. Okay from that it may not be or they claim it isn't and they just changed it to encompass Flynn as a character as well. Yeah, it doesn't really prove it either way, but the official explanation from Disney sounds more like what I've heard: That as the story took shape and deviated from the original fairytale (which the inclusion of Flynn Rider was part of, obviously), they decided to change the title to something more fitting since it wasn't really the classic tale about "Rapunzel" any more. But we'll probably never know for sure.
jayseven Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Pft. Blates proves it. It was a marketing ploy, pure and simple.
Ashley Posted March 2, 2011 Posted March 2, 2011 Let's clear this up once and for all; Shrek is nothing more than shite toilet humour. Its entertaining yes but its far removed from the boundaries of 'good cinema'.
Recommended Posts