The Lion King is still tops at the box office, which I feel handcuffs me a little bit from a joke perspective. I don't know why. I could have made a Moneyball joke, I guess. But I know nothing about sports. So why pretend?
I was trying to kick around comic ideas on Twitter last night for The Lion King and several people recommended a play on it's central theme - The Circle Of Life. I kind of intentially avoided it last week because I was certain other people have made those kind of jokes and done it better. But then I hit on something that I thought was authentic and kind of bittersweet at the same time.
I think we all know that Disney will release and re-release their films into infinity. They've done it in the past and they'll continue to do it. But what does that mean to me, the consumer, over the long haul.
A lot of people my age were THRILLED that The Lion King was back in theaters because it meant they could take their kids. Stands to reason these same people will probably take their grandkids when it rolls around again. After that, we'll be worm food. So... y'know. Get in as many screenings as you can before Disney puts their film BACK IN THE VAULT!TM
Heartfelt and cynical at the same time. See what I mean? Bittersweet.
Take a moment to reflect on your mortality and then leave some comments below, why don't you?
Or, even better, share this comic with your friends! See the ShareThis app at the bottom of this post? You can share this comic ALL OVER THE PLACE now. I think it's gonna ring true with a lot of people and you can be the one to introduce it to them. Facebook it, Twitter it and more!
As it's 50th animated feature film, Tangled is very much the summation of Disney's previous output. Depending on your opinion of the House of Mouse, that could be either a good or bad thing.
Personally, I think it's a good thing. Disney has finally figured out a way to align itself with current animation trends and attitudes similar to what Dreamworks and their contemporaries at Pixar are doing without sacrificing the traditional story elements that make a film uniquely Disney. The animations has a snappy feel, a fairy tale princess is front and center and the dialogue is wry without sailing completely over the heads of children.
Most importantly, it's entertaining. It's easy for me to say that Tangled is the most fun I've had watching a Disney movie since Aladdin. Frankly, its wit and pop makes it one of the few Disney movies I can imagine watching proactively instead of through the filter of nostalgia.
By now you're probably familiar with the premise behind Tangled. It's basically a modified take on the German fairy tale of Rapunzel. But, smartly, what directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard did was expand the mythology and gave us a much more satisfying reason why Rapunzel was locked away in that tower lo' so many years ago.
While pregnant, Rapunzel's mother, the Queen becomes very ill. The kingdom sets out in search of a golden flower rumored to have healing properties. The flower has been hidden away by the selfish crone Gothel, who uses the flower to keep her young. But once the magical flower is found, it restores the queen to health - and infuses its healing abilities in the strands of the young princess's hair. Gothel steals the child away in the night and locks her in a secluded tower, cut off from society, as she continues to use the healing magic to keep her young.
"Why dat hair gotta be so long?" the audience demands. Easy. Cut the hair and it loses its magical power. Well played, Greno and Howard. Well played.
Of course, the problem with writing a movie about an isolated character is that there has to be some drama or change in the status quo for the plot to move forward. Meet Flynn Rider, a thief and a rouge looking for a place to hide after stealing the kingdom's crown jewels.
Cynically, critics complained that Flynn the Adventurer was introduced as a marketing tool to attract boys (who would be otherwise turned off by a "princess" story) to the film. Considering the disappointing box office on The Princess and The Frog, it's easy to see why some might jump to that conclusion. Certainly the flim's marketing and Disney's decision to name the movie Tangled and not "Rapunzel" would seem to support this theory.
But it actually makes a great deal of sense to have the smarmy and charismatic Flynn as Rapunzel's guide in the real world. It's Rapunzel's dream to investigate the floating lanterns she sees in the distance every year on her birthday. She doesn't realize that it's actually a symbolic ceremony from her kingdom longing for the return of the kidnapped princess.
Rapunzel, despite her wonder, is so closed off from the outside world she doesn't even wear shoes. You need a fast-talking character like Rider to essentially provide both sides of the dialogue. Otherwise you'd be left with a movie where the heroine walks around, clutching a frying pan and looking confused for two acts.
Despite being the Disney movie with the longest running time since Fantasia, Tangled's 100 minutes never lags or bores. In fact, if anything, it almost feels short. Time flies by as Rapunzel and Flynn explore the soft, rounded, painterly world developed by Disney animators using techniques they were tasked with inventing in order to achieve their look. Typically, whenever Disney sets out to create techniques to develop their films, the results are always memorable.
If I could be critical of Tangled at all, I think they almost made the process too easy. This familiarity with the traditional fluidity of Disney's style probably made audiences feel as Tangled was something they had seen before. Considering some of the visual cues the film picks up on from Disney's past (the romantic kiss in the boat from The Little Mermaid or Flynn "surfing" down the trench of a water wheel like Tarzan "surfed" across mossy tree branches) it's understandable.
As a Disneyphile, I found the references endearing and appropriate for Disney's 50th animated feature. In fact, these references were very similar to the visual cues producers of the James Bond films did for their 20th franchise film, Die Another Day back in 2002.
In terms of Blu-ray extras, I found them a little light on substance. A short behind-the-scenes feature called "Untangled: The Making of a Fairy Tale" played more like a bunch of bumpers ported from the Disney Channel and were stitched together with narration from the film's stars, Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi.
There are a handful of "deleted scenes" (or, rather, slightly enhanced animatics), a couple of extended songs and two alternate versions of the film's opening sequence. They're interesting, but not substantive.
Most entertaining are the "9 Tangled Teasers" - a collection of parody commercials made for the theatrical release of the films that utilize the film's characters.
Ultimately, the success of Tangled relies in its unique ability to be respectful of the Disney fairytale tradition while also keeping it pliable enough to have fun with it. The movie keeps things snappy, but never looks down its nose at you for enjoying traditional storytelling. The movie is a fine addition to any animation fan's library.
It's probably been decades since I've seen the Disney animated classic Bambi. So, when the opportunity arose to review the film's Diamond Blu-ray release, I must confess that I merely curious by the prospect and not exactly anticipating it.
By that I mean I wasn't waiting by the mailbox for the review copy to arrive. I don't mean to be cruel. I'm thankful for the chance. It's just that, well... Bambi was never one of those movies that connected with me as a child.
I don't know if it's the pro-nature theme, the gender ambiguous names of the characters like Bambi and Flower or if it has something to do with one of animation's starkest bummer scenes. And if you know the story of Bambi, you know what I'm talking about.
What I discovered rediscovered instead was a very thoughtful, organic and beautifully composed film that rightly deserves its revered status among the Disney classics.
Watching Bambi as an adult, I was struck by its painterly style. Specifically, I'm talking about the lush watercolor backgrounds that allude to nature without ever overpowering the scenes.
They characters, too, remind the audience of the raw power and delicate grace of nature in a way that is practically uncanny. The ability for the animators to infuse human characteristics and personality traits into the mix demonstrates the raw talent in the pool during production of what was only their fifth film.
So why is there such a profound disconnect in my mind? I actually blame Disney for that. To a point.
Having marketed the film to the home video audience on and off for the last 30 years, Disney has reduced the scope of the movie to the cute, stumbling fawn that we are introduced to in the first half of the movie. Slipping on the ice, learning how to say the word "bird," yelling "FLOWER!" at a skunk so forcefully he rolls back into a bed of daisies. I'm sure you can easily envision these scenes just from reading my brief descriptions.
However, the marketing completely ignores the second half of the movie where Bambi, now mature, takes a mate and confronts the scourge of Man. Incidentally, it never occurred to me how heavily The Lion King borrows from Bambi in this regard.
Now, granted, if I were going to pick a theme to push to unindoctrinated audiences, I'd probably go with the happy, fuzzy, lighter first act. All I'm saying is that the second act is so thematically jarring to me - largely due to my own hazy memory - that Bambi almost feels like two completely different movies.
In fact, the environmentalist theme in the second act is so profound, those who criticized Wall-E for having an agenda would probably explode from outrage watching this film. Disney's message pulls no punches. "Nature is beautiful and should be preserved. Man ruins everything he touches."
Wisely, is never shown in the film. But the brilliant musical score tells you exactly when he's near. But when the swirling, pacing strings of "Man's Theme" rise from the background, there's no confusion that danger is present. In fact, it's so simple, even a 4 year-old could recognize it. Watching the film with my son, nervously he would ask "What does that bad sound mean?"
I can think of no clearer example of how Disney pushed the medium of animation and film to communicate emotion without clubbing you over the head with it. That deft and steady hand is felt throughout the film.
The Diamond Edition Blu-ray is stacked with features that are exceptionally thorough - especially when you consider the film is over 65 years old. Probably the most interesting extra feature included on the disc is "Inside Walt’s Story Meetings-Enhanced Edition." Reading from notes taken during story meetings, voice-over artists bring life to the words of Walt Disney, his writers and animators as they pitch ideas on how scenes will play out before one frame of animation was ever completed. The care and attention to detail these artists paid to the story is evident in these re-enactments.
In fact, the feature plays almost like an audio commentary. But instead of the actors and directors sitting around the room talking about what they thought worked and what they would have tried differently, Walt and his team talk about what will be and stay alarming true to their vision. Animation junkies and/or historians will be facinated by this opportunity to be a fly on the wall.
The Blu-ray also includes two "deleted scenes," cobbled together from discarded storyboard drawings as well as a deleted song - "Twitterpaited" - which is basically about springtime and falling in love. Additional features made previously available in the DVD release of the film are also included.
Going back to the point I made previously about Bambi being two films and the softer pallet that has been sold to us by Disney over the years... I guess what brought this into focus for me was a specific bonus included with extras - the original trailer for the film from 1942. View it for yourself.
Now compare it to this advertisement for the Diamond Edition Blu-ray.
I don't mean to make a mountain out of a molehill, but I find it interesting that audiences in 1942 were tantalized with promises of romance, action and heroism with nary a reference to Bambi as a child. Meanwhile, today's audience is set up for an entirely different experience.
Bambi IS both films and it is a credit to Disney's storytelling that the film works for both children and adults alike.
But if you were anything like me and was convinced that Bambi was a Technicolor cliche, you owe it to yourself to watch the film and reintroduce yourself to the splendor and refined artistry of Disney's Halcyon days. You won't regret it.
Since I'm in a Disney mood lately, I thought I would pass along a press release I received about Disney's 50th animated feature Tangled, announcing plans to release the film on 3D Blu-ray, Blu-ray and DVD on March 29.
Grossing over 400 million dollars in global theatrical sales to date, TANGLED, The Walt Disney Studios blockbuster animated feature that takes a modern twist on the famous hair-raising fable Rapunzel, debuts as the ultimate 4-Disc Disney Blu-ray Combo Pack (3D Blu-ray + Blu-ray + DVD + Digital Copy in a single package) on March 29, 2011. As the 50th full-length animated feature in The Walt Disney Studios’ celebrated library and the first animated feature film to ever debut day-and-date on Disney Blu-ray 3D, TANGLED’s uniquely packaged home entertainment release ensures that viewers of all ages can enjoy this film on a variety of superior, hi-def media platforms while diving further into the history and quirky details behind the making of this film via amusing and informative bonus features.
BONUS FEATURES
Blu-ray
Untangled: The Making of a Fairy Tale – Exactly how long is Rapunzel’s hair? How many lanterns were used? Where did Pascal’s name come from? Which Disney animated feature first utilized CG animation? These and more will be answered when Mandy Moore and Zach Levi take viewers on a kooky behind-the-scenes tour to learn how the filmmakers styled this film’s ―Golden Tresses.‖
Deleted Scenes – Co-directors Byron Howard and Nathan Greno introduce three scenes and illuminate why they were ultimately cut.
The Jaunty Moose
Chemistry Develops
Vigor The Visionary
Extended Songs – The complete versions of two great songs are shared in a unique feature that explains the co-directors decision to scale them down.
When Will My Life Begin
Mother Knows Best
Two Original Storybook Openings – Two alternate versions of the film’s opening sequence described by co-directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard.
50th Animated Feature Countdown – A video montage celebrating Tangled as the 50th film to join The Walt Disney Studios’ prestigious lineup of classic animated features.
9 Tangled Teasers – A collection of the most unique and quirky commercials made for the theatrical release of ―Tangled.‖ Some are spoofs based off of infomercials and/or breaking news, some are teasers and others are simply just funny filmstrips.
DVD & Movie Download
Two Original Storybook Openings - Versions 1 & 2
50th Animated Feature Countdown
AAAAAND, for your enjoyment, a YouTube clip announcing the release.
Tangled was a movie that I thoroughly enjoyed and, despite its success, didn't get the recognition it deserved in theaters. Everyone I talked to who saw it loved it. But I think Disney mucked up the marketing a little by making it appear to be a boy-centric action-adventure flick.
Tangled is actually much smarter than that. Lots of humor, a female lead worth looking up to and a painterly style unseen from the House of Mouse since The Lion King or Sleeping Beauty.
If you missed Tangled in theaters, do yourself a favor and pick it up on Blu-ray. It's a very worthy addition to your collection. If you're thinking about pre-ordering it, here are a few links on Amazon:
Empire Magazine recently published a very thorough and interesting article called "Your Guide To Disney's 50 Animated Features." If you're a Disney-phile or an animation buff like I am, it's well worth your time to read. The list includes a few behind-the-scenes production details that help flesh out your understanding of the films.
In particular, I was fascinated to revisit the films from the early 2000's. Specifically films like Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear and Home on the Range. I've given those films their fair share of guff, but it's important recognize that they weren't the flops that some people made them out to be and - perhaps - aren't as terrible as you remember.
Compiled as a whole, Disney's cinematic accomplishments are astounding. It's easy to heap praise on the standouts like Peter Pan or The Lion King. But I am much more interested in how the so-called "lesser" films have been woven into the tapestry of the venrible studio's history.
Check out the article and chime in with your thoughts about The House of Mouse in the comments below!
In 2001, the proposition of Monsters, Inc. must have been a scary one for Disney / Pixar.
Coming fresh off the success of Toy Story 2, A Bug's Life and the original Toy Story (all directed by Pixar King John Lasseter)Pixar put an unproven director in the driver's seat for Monsters, Inc. - Pete Docter.
Of course, time would prove that Docter's madcap vision of a world inhabited by monsters who collect the screams of human children to power their communities proved to be a smash hit. But it's interesting to learn about the behind-the-scenes hand wringing that occurred at Pixar before the release of the film.
One of the bonus features of the movie is a film makers round table with Docter, co-director Lee Unkrich, producer Darla Anderson, and script supervisor Bob Peterson (who also lent his voice to the surly clerical worker Roz in the movie). In their round table, they discuss not only their uncertainty over the somewhat complex idea of a world powered by screams, but also the real-life intrusions that threatened the success of the film.
For example, I had completely forgotten how Monsters, Inc. had come out one short month after the terrible events of 9/11. An even that lead Pixar to wonder if they should push the film back. Ultimately, according to the feedback they received, the film became a refuge for families looking to steer themselves away from the unending and horrible coverage of that day. The insight that the round table provides certainly adds a layer of enjoyment to hard-core fans of the film.
Eight years after its theatrical release Monsters, Inc. holds up incredibly well and the Blu-ray transfer gives the film a candy-coated shot in the arm. Colors are richer, details are more pronounced. Even the hair on Sully's arms looks more refined. A more perfect version of the film I can't imagine unless you were sitting in Pixar's offices, watching it over the shoulder of one of the animators.
In terms of extras, the Blu-ray doesn't bring much that's new to the table. A short documentary about a Monsters, Inc. ride at Disneyland Toyko made me want to hop a flight to Japan immediately and an interactive game featuring over 100 doors intimidates more than it inspires gameplay.
Additional features include those already packaged on the Collector's Edition that was released in 2002. The animated shorts "Mike's New Car" and "For the Birds", storyboards, a database of monsters featured in the film, and multiple gag reels.
However, the Blu-ray package gives you a bevy of formats including a digital copy of the film as well as a DVD copy of the film, which are nice bonuses.
As a Pixar fan, I have no problem replacing all of my DVD copies with Blu-ray editions of the film. I believe they are the most authentic reproductions of the movies possible and a visual treat. However, it would have been nice to see a few more extras with the film and I probably wouldn't have minded waiting another 2 years for a 10th anniversary edition if it meant getting additional content.
Unless you've been completely cut off from the internet today (in which case, I'm glad Theater Hopper was your first stop after being plugged back in to The Grid), then you might have missed the news that Disney has acquired Marvel Entertainment for $4 billion.
There aren't a lot of details at the moment, but the news pretty much set the internet on fire this afternoon. Since I'm a bit of a movie nut AND a bit of a comic book nut, I feel a responsibility to comment.
A lot of people are responding to the news Chicken Little-style. They swear up and down that the sky is falling and that the House of Mouse is going to ruin their favorite super heroes by flattening their appeal, making them more mainstream and toothless.
As much as I have enjoyed portraying Disney as the Evil Empire in the past (and it is likely I will continue to do so in the future), I'm optimistic about this deal with Marvel.
People forget that roughly 15 years ago, Marvel declared bankruptcy. Getting in bed with Disney means the likelihood of that happening again are slim to none. Anything that protects Marvel's solvency at this point is a-okay in my book.
Some people claim that Disney can be careless with the properties they acquire - citing Mirimax and The Muppets as examples. I don't know if I see a lot of evidence supporting that. If anything, Marvel being associated with Disney gives them far more opportunities to cross-pollinate their characters into other media outlets than they would have been able to do otherwise.
Never mind the distribution advantage they now have with their movies. What other studio besides Disney can put a movie on 3,000 screens opening weekend every single time? Not many.
I guess I'm trying to be more pragmatic in my response to the acquisition rather than gloom and doom. If Spider-Man could survive The Clone Saga, he'll survive this.
What are your thoughts about the Disney / Marvel merger? Are you a fan of the comics, movies or both. How do you think this will affect Marvel's output in the coming years? What was your first reaction to the news?
You'd think for as much as our 2 year-old son makes us watch Mickey Mouse Clubhouse, I'd have a better idea of how to draw Mickey Mouse. I guess I was in a rush. To see Mickey as the leader of a post-apocalyptic dystopia, vote for Theater Hopper at Top Web Comics.
Under the branch of their new Disneynature studio, the planetary documentary Earth comes out today. I'm actually very excited to see it despite the fact that it was originally released internationally 2 years ago as an accompanying cinematic experience to the popular television series Planet Earth The series, which was shot by the BBC, aired on The Discovery Channel during that time as well.
I don't know. Maybe I'm just a sucker for for animals. Maybe I fell in love the minute they played "HoppÃpolla" from Sigur Ros in the trailer. Either way, it looks great. A fantastic cinematic experience.
Disney is catching a little guff from critics, believe it or not. Jesse Ellison from Newsweek suggests that the film is too harsh to be rated G because it implies (but doesn't show) the death of a few animals at the hands at of the elements.
I guess I fall somewhere in the middle. Certainly I don't derive much entertainment value from watching wild animals die on screen. I wouldn't seek it out. As the parent of a young child, I can see how such scenes could be upsetting.
But at the same time, I agree with Wells that you can't shield children from everything. The challenge of being a parent isn't measured by your ability to protect them from everything that might upset their limited world view. Rather, I feel it's my responsibility to arm my kids with information in context so they can make sense of their own feelings and opinions to interact properly with the world at large.
But I shouldn't presume to tell anyone how to raise their kids. Fundamentally, you have to be aware of what you think your kid can and can't tolerate and be prepared to help them make sense of things if it's too intense for them.
At least, that's what my common sense tells me.
Is anyone else excited to see Earth this weekend or do you think it's redundant 2 years after Planet Earth aired on The Discovery Channel? Are you concerned about the realities of nature being toned down or "Disney-fied" to meet the standards of being a family friendly film?
I'm not as adverse to Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson making kids movies as I depict myself in this comic. But I have to admit scratching my head in puzzlement when I first saw the trailer for The Game Plan. THIS was the guy that was supposed to replace Schwarzenegger? It might be a moot point. Truthfully, I don't think we'll ever see another era in action movies quite like what we had in the early 80's. To that end, The Rock is smart for doing a kids movie - if it's well crafted. As my good friend Joe pointed out, "one needs only sayThe Pacifierto know that even a successful family vehicle can stall an action heroes career."
I think The Rock will emerge unscathed. I think that he moves quickly enough from role to role that audiences aren't associating him with any one chracter - and that's good. Plus, the guy has enough natural charisma, he won't have trouble finding work.
People hold up Schwarzenegger as the pinnacle of action movie heroism but they kind of overlook the fact that action movies were all he was good for until he became bankable on name-recognition alone. Let's face it - there's not a lot of work for a near-mute, extremely musclebound guy in leading man roles. In many respects, Schwarzenegger had to pay his dues first.
Not much else going on at the moment. Although I want to remind you about the DVD giveaway I have happening right now. Two copies of Stargate Atlantis: Season Three. All you have to do is bookmark you three favorite Theater Hopper strips using the social bookmarking network of your choice and then e-mail me either a screen cap or a link to your profile page for the proof along with your name and mailing address to be entered. I can tell you right now that so far only FOUR people have entered the contest. So if you want some free stuff, your odds are pretty good. It's a small way to help promote Theater Hopper and get something for yourself to boot.
I realize that Stargate Atlantis is probably a niche interest for some of you. But the next opportunity I get, I'm going to try this with a more popular selection and see if it sticks. Stay tuned.
I kind of got some bad news this week in regard to a site redesign I had been planning. I was trying to work with a local web design firm to help me impliment some air-tight comic archiving, blogging and content systems as well as helping me more fully integrate the site with social bookmarking networks. We had a few conversations over the phone, I met with them in person and outlined my thoughts, even the president of the company got involved to oversee things.
Then I get a note from them this week saying that they really aren't equipped to partner with me in this way. Typically they design a site from concept to completion and don't do much in terms of consulting. I was kind of pissed. I spent a month waiting for them to steer the ship in a certain direction and they totally bailed.
I'm very interested in taking Theater Hopper to the next level and I think a lot of that will rest of me elevating the design and interactive elements of the site to a competitive level. I need outside help to do this because I've been stewing in my own juices for too long.
Does anyone have suggestions? I want to work with a company. Not a freelancer. I need someone who will be accountable and on the clock if something breaks.
I've been fortunate enough to have some great people help me keep things running around here for a long time. I'm not discounting their efforts. But I want to build on their foundation and I don't know where to go.
Part of me wonders if I should just switch everything over to WordPress and use the ComicSpace mod. I know a few people who have tried it and liked it. But the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced I need a customized buisness solution to meet my needs.
