This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Adventure Time with Mario and Sonic at the Sochi 2014 Olympic Winter Games.

#471colormecrazyPosted 4/3/2014 7:35:26 AM
Maybe strong was the wrong word. Believable, maybe? Relateable, not caricatures.
---
Every thousand years, this metal sphere ten times the size of Jupiter floats just a few yards past the Earth.
http://i.imgur.com/6iJV1H9.jpg
#472Mistress_Zelda_Posted 4/3/2014 7:37:03 AM(edited)
Tangled: 9/10
Frozen: 9.5/10
Wreck It Ralph: 9.5/10
How To Train Your Dragon: 9/10
Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs: 6/10
Despicable Me: 7/10
Fantastic Mr Fox: Never seen it.

I agree that Cloudy was a bit above average. It was a fun watch though and I don't regret seeing it. It was pretty funny and it was a movie mostly for humor.

However, the funniest animated movie has still not changed for me. Emperor's New Groove is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. The humor is constant, and they still develop characters during funny parts.
---
And I know it is totally crazy to dream I find romance,
But for the first time in forever, at least I've got a chance!
#473colormecrazyPosted 4/3/2014 7:54:35 AM
I liked the TV show better than the movie.
---
Every thousand years, this metal sphere ten times the size of Jupiter floats just a few yards past the Earth.
http://i.imgur.com/6iJV1H9.jpg
#474brawl__08Posted 4/3/2014 8:17:15 AM(edited)
most important note that i forgot to add:

http://www.gamevoices.co.uk/profiles/blogs/april-s-gamevoices-interview-is-with-the-extremely-entertaining-m

Is there a game franchise you'd particularly like to appear in?


Let me think about that. Well the Metal Gear series is always coming in and out of my ‘field’. We have put bids out on it a couple of times. Raiden was always a character that I had wanted to play. I did end up playing him on Super Smash Bros; so I did end up playing him eventually. NOT to the extent that he is in the other games.

RAIDEN CONFIRMED FOR SMASH BROS?

Jubilation_Lee posted...
That's where things fall apart. The characters are one dimensional and have trouble convincing us that their actions are decided upon by anything other than the scriptwriter trying to finish this thing. The villain is revealed far too late into the film despite being obvious the second they arrive because out of the two young males, he's the one without a comic relief reindeer.


Is there any actual examples you have for the characters there? I could probably explain the majority of their actions as being based on pure emotional reactions to things around them, seeing as when people complain about something there, that's generally the reason why.

The tweest is dependent on what exactly you'd expect between the two options set before you.

We are forced to suffer an unfunny, ugly designed comic relief snowman who reminds us of the unwanted mascot character in every jrpg since 2005.


I'm not sure how he's so different compared to past Disney sidekicks like Timon and Pumba or Mushu. In fact I wonder why anyone would complain about him when you had Pumba making fart jokes.

The driving force of the movie is a superpower that is never explained and similarly its conclusion is a hand waved "magic did it". We are never shown an emotional growth of our characters, we are simply told that "they are all better now."


But the concept of a supernatural element just existing is old as hell and applies to a ton of Disney films. Hell, not even sure how you can like Tangled without wondering why that flower with the healing properties existed in the first place, unless they actually explained that and I missed it.

Really though, the biggest slap in the face is that this is the movie they gave us when they adapted the Hans Christian Andersen classic, "The Snow Queen".
Imagine what a great movie we could have had if they'd finally have given us the one evil queen that could genuinely rival Maleficent.


I might be inclined to agree with you on this to a degree. The idea of a direct adaption (or at least something closer) would be extremely interesting to say the least, but Disney has never been one for close adaptions. Something like Hercules was extremely far off from the source, for instance.

The female protagonist saving the dude is also more indicative of the girl power motif that Frozen cack-handedly tries to deliver us.


the f*** are you even talking about here? this stupid "hurr it's gurl power s***" is almost as bad as actual "hurr gurl power" s***.

Really every one of your complaints boils down to something I could pin on another Disney movie (mostly Tangled, amusingly enough). I'm actually inclined to agree with blaze that you seem like you're just nitpicking.
---
http://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/Brawl08.gif
#475brawl__08Posted 4/3/2014 8:08:31 AM
colormecrazy posted...
Fantastic Mr Fox was designed to appeal to hipsters. I hated it. It wasn't funny, the art style was ugly, and the dialog was much too self indulgent.


Acquired taste, I guess? Still wouldn't make it 1/10 though. Hipster is the one term I see being used but never explained though.

Jubilation_Lee posted...
They didn't though. One is only strong because of a superpower and the other one goes gooey for the first dude she meets and spends the rest of the movie relying on a reindeer.


But Anna actually spends her time trying to get s*** done, right down to the end of the film. I thought she was a better example of a proactive heroine than Rapunzel, who tried doing things but at the end of the movie required being saved, taking away from the whole "independence" aspect of the movie and cheapening her value there.

Mistress_Zelda_ posted...
Tangled: 9/10
Frozen: 9.5/10
Wreck It Ralph: 9.5/10
How To Train Your Dragon: 9/10
Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs: 6/10
Despicable Me: 7/10
Fantastic Mr Fox: Never seen it.


I can work with this.

However, the funniest animated movie has still not changed for me. Emperor's New Groove is one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. The humor is constant, and they still develop characters during funny parts.


Good taste.
---
http://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/Brawl08.gif
#476FvPPosted 4/3/2014 8:18:11 AM
Tangled: 10/10
Frozen: 9.5/10
Wreck It Ralph: 9.5/10
How To Train Your Dragon: 9/10
Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs: 7/10
Despicable Me: 7.5/10
---
FvP | falco_vs_peach | *^*"The Shinies" Member*^* | Adventure Time Member
PBWSB PDPSB /pdpsb/ PBWSB User Tournament Winner: DiabIo
#477Jubilation_LeePosted 4/3/2014 9:21:54 AM
brawl__08 posted...
Is there any actual examples you have for the characters there? I could probably explain the majority of their actions as being based on pure emotional reactions to things around them, seeing as when people complain about something there, that's generally the reason why.


Anna spent her life in a caste despite being able to exit at any time. Kristoff decides to get rid of the ice despite his main export being ice. Hans acts nice too far into the film when he could have won by simply sabotaging his own attempt to rescue Anna.

brawl__08 posted...
I'm not sure how he's so different compared to past Disney sidekicks like Timon and Pumba or Mushu. In fact I wonder why anyone would complain about him when you had Pumba making fart jokes.


He's unfunny and unnecessary when we have the reindeer. He has a poor character design. If I had a kid and had to buy the merchandise, I wouldn't want that thing in my house.
Pumbaa was a smelly warthog, so fart jokes made sense. And there was about two of them so they didn't really detract from anything when he was a likeable and pretty well developed character. The snowman has one shallow plot point about not knowing he'll melt which was a massive waste of our time when it was solved without him noticing.

brawl__08 posted...
But the concept of a supernatural element just existing is old as hell and applies to a ton of Disney films. Hell, not even sure how you can like Tangled without wondering why that flower with the healing properties existed in the first place, unless they actually explained that and I missed it.


In other Disney films there is at least a throwaway line to tell us what's going on with magical stuff and it usually exists as a secondary thing to the story.
Pinocchio has a fairy, fairies do magic.
Tangled has a healing flower, herbal medicine is a thing.
Beast gets cursed by a witch. Genie is a genie. Just simple explanations for why they're there. It's fine, doesn't need to be complex.
Frozen just has a chick start blasting ice with no explanation as the main plot of the story. Is she a witch, should she be joining the X-Men? No one tells us.
---
I am the one and only
Nobody I'd rather be
#478Jubilation_LeePosted 4/3/2014 9:22:00 AM
brawl__08 posted...
I might be inclined to agree with you on this to a degree. The idea of a direct adaption (or at least something closer) would be extremely interesting to say the least, but Disney has never been one for close adaptions. Something like Hercules was extremely far off from the source, for instance.


As long as an adaptation manages to be good in its own right, you can get away with changing things and just using elements from the story. Aladdin is great, for example.
Frozen just takes the ice powers and does some other bollocks as if the rest of the source material wasn't worth it.

brawl__08 posted...
the f*** are you even talking about here? this stupid "hurr it's gurl power s***" is almost as bad as actual "hurr gurl power" s***.

Really every one of your complaints boils down to something I could pin on another Disney movie (mostly Tangled, amusingly enough). I'm actually inclined to agree with blaze that you seem like you're just nitpicking.


They beat us around the head with the idea that the men were pointless and that they didn't need them because their sisterly bond was powerful enough to save the day. Except this was all shoehorned into the last ten seconds and didn't really make any sense. Sometimes simpler is better, just have the chick save a dude, female hero, yay, done.

brawl__08 posted...

But Anna actually spends her time trying to get s*** done, right down to the end of the film. I thought she was a better example of a proactive heroine than Rapunzel, who tried doing things but at the end of the movie required being saved, taking away from the whole "independence" aspect of the movie and cheapening her value there.


Tangled has them save each other, promoting a theme of equality and teamwork which was what made it so fresh compared to just the hero doing the saving the day business again.
Frozen has gone too far the other way. And while it's perfectly fine to have a woman save the day, you don't have to be massive smug feminists about it by trying to do a shocking twist we weren't supposed to see coming. All it achieved was A: wasting our time by setting up a character arc for Kristoff and then literally telling us he was worthless and B: insulting our intelligence by suggesting we didn't know the women would save the day despite the main character being two chicks.
---
I am the one and only
Nobody I'd rather be
#479colormecrazyPosted 4/3/2014 9:55:00 AM
brawl__08 posted...
Acquired taste, I guess? Still wouldn't make it 1/10 though. Hipster is the one term I see being used but never explained though.

It was an animated movie for people who don't like animated movies.
---
Every thousand years, this metal sphere ten times the size of Jupiter floats just a few yards past the Earth.
http://i.imgur.com/6iJV1H9.jpg
#480brawl__08Posted 4/3/2014 1:51:04 PM
Jubilation_Lee posted...
Anna spent her life in a caste despite being able to exit at any time. Kristoff decides to get rid of the ice despite his main export being ice. Hans acts nice too far into the film when he could have won by simply sabotaging his own attempt to rescue Anna.


Much of the time she spent there was when her parents were alive, and they didn't want anyone leaving the castle. Never mind the fact that she didn't really want to leave her sister even if their relationship became strained due to the separation. They make this pretty clear, and that's like the entire reason why Anna would even bother going after her sister.
Man, you serious? Supply and demand, they straight up say that in the film. It's like the second or third thing that Kristoff says to Anna when they first meet.
Hans needed to act as if he was still going to marry Anna, otherwise obtaining the kingdom would be difficult. He basically needed to eliminate both sisters in a way where it'd seem natural and that he wasn't just killing them in cold blood as well as still being deemed acceptable as the new ruler of the kingdom.

He's unfunny and unnecessary when we have the reindeer. He has a poor character design. If I had a kid and had to buy the merchandise, I wouldn't want that thing in my house.
Pumbaa was a smelly warthog, so fart jokes made sense. And there was about two of them so they didn't really detract from anything when he was a likeable and pretty well developed character. The snowman has one shallow plot point about not knowing he'll melt which was a massive waste of our time when it was solved without him noticing.


Olaf was basically a personified creation of Anna and Elsa's from when they were kids. He's essentially that one factor from the happier times they shared together showing that Elsa still cared deeply about Anna. The melting thing wasn't really pushed as a major plotpoint anyways, it was treated as a joke considering the song he had for it.

In other Disney films there is at least a throwaway line to tell us what's going on with magical stuff and it usually exists as a secondary thing to the story.
Pinocchio has a fairy, fairies do magic.
Tangled has a healing flower, herbal medicine is a thing.
Beast gets cursed by a witch. Genie is a genie. Just simple explanations for why they're there. It's fine, doesn't need to be complex.
Frozen just has a chick start blasting ice with no explanation as the main plot of the story. Is she a witch, should she be joining the X-Men? No one tells us.


They refer to it as the cursed power or something along those lines several times. Offhand, I believe the troll elder, the duke, and Elsa herself mention it.

As long as an adaptation manages to be good in its own right, you can get away with changing things and just using elements from the story. Aladdin is great, for example.
Frozen just takes the ice powers and does some other bollocks as if the rest of the source material wasn't worth it.


An entirely subjective point so I'll just leave this alone (and yeah, I know opinions in general are subjective but I'm only touching on the stuff where I think you just somehow missed the point).
---
http://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/Brawl08.gif