Wikia

The Disney Wiki

Rapunzel in Frozen

  • Will it isn't the Penguin Waiters from Mary Poppins (maybe they will (if yes, then maybe not yet) or not) but there's still a cameo in Frozen and it's Rapunzel. Maybe both Tangled and Frozen are part of the same universe, it happened for Lilo and Stitch meeting characters from other Disney Shows (American Dragon: Jake Long, The Proud Family, Kim Possible and Recess).

      Loading editor
    • i watched Frozen, and i didn't see or hear Rapunzel.

        Loading editor
    • There was someone who looked like her during the first First Time In Forever song. She was attending the coronation. Blink and you'll miss it.

        Loading editor
    • Rtrr121 wrote:
      There was someone who looked like her during the first First Time In Forever song. She was attending the coronation. Blink and you'll miss it.

      It's not someone who looks like her, she has the dress and the exact same hairstyle that Eugene had made when cutting her hair in Tangled. And you see Eugene as well! Just go to Rapunzel, and you'll see. Or to be more specific, here's the image link: http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131130030754/disney/images/6/65/Rapunzelflynn_Frozen.jpg

        Loading editor
    • Huh, true. So I guess that it is Rapunzel.

        Loading editor
    • I think they appear as becaused it said in the poster by the creaters of Tangled and all of that.

        Loading editor
    • PrincessCharmingShy1 wrote:
      I think they appear as becaused it said in the poster by the creaters of Tangled and all of that.

      I don't think so, because the Disney Princesses make cameos in other films and television episodes too, and they're not of the same animation that they originally were, such as in Sofia the First.

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      PrincessCharmingShy1 wrote:
      I think they appear as becaused it said in the poster by the creaters of Tangled and all of that.
      I don't think so, because the Disney Princesses make cameos in other films and television episodes too, and they're not of the same animation that they originally were, such as in Sofia the First.

      Okay i agree with that.

        Loading editor
    • I think that happens because this movie is the first where two princesses meet, they decided to throw in rapunzel and flynn to trip you up and make you think also because one of the creators is from tangled

        Loading editor
    • Found a funny joke on Tumblr! :)

      • Rapunzel: Of course
      • Rapunzel: The one time my parents send me to do royal stuff
      • Rapunzel: My cousin freezes everything
      • Eugene: Hey I found a crown lol
      Rapunzelflynn Frozen
      Maximillion93Added by Maximillion93
        Loading editor
    • Freeze417 wrote:
      I think that happens because this movie is the first where two princesses meet, they decided to throw in rapunzel and flynn to trip you up and make you think also because one of the creators is from tangled

      Anna didn't look at Rapunzel, and I still agree with my statement to PrincessCharmingShy1. Ooh, and the co-director for Tangled asked the creators for Frozen about the "blink-and-you'll-miss-it appearance", and said he didn't even know about it until he was asked about it by a fan on Facebook.

        Loading editor
    • Well, the Penguin Waiters didn't appear in Frozen after all for there were no penguins at all

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Rtrr121 wrote:
      There was someone who looked like her during the first First Time In Forever song. She was attending the coronation. Blink and you'll miss it.
      It's not someone who looks like her, she has the dress and the exact same hairstyle that Eugene had made when cutting her hair in Tangled. And you see Eugene as well! Just go to Rapunzel, and you'll see. Or to be more specific, here's the image link: http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131130030754/disney/images/6/65/Rapunzelflynn_Frozen.jpg

      oh, ya!!! now i see her! i do think it is Rapunzel, but she is shown after her "extreme hair make-over" (lol!!!)

        Loading editor
    • yea!

        Loading editor
    • I caught them at a preview screening.

        Loading editor
    • Disney confirmed that is Rapunzel today(12/10/13) so it is offical that Rapunzel, Elsa and Anna movies all take place in the same time period :) it is on their offical facebook page

        Loading editor
    • Rob52xbhs wrote:
      Disney confirmed that is Rapunzel today(12/10/13) so it is offical that Rapunzel, Elsa and Anna movies all take place in the same time period :) it is on their offical facebook page

      YYou're late. Tangled co-director already mentioned it a few days ago

        Loading editor
    • so then the timeline would be Tangled, Tangled Ever After, then Frozen, right?

        Loading editor
    • Mistyswirl2495 wrote:
      so then the timeline would be Tangled, Tangled Ever After, then Frozen, right?

      Basically, yes. You see Eugene in there too...

        Loading editor
    • yup, i did see him in there

        Loading editor
    • There was also some sort of cameo of Wreck-It Ralph (although of the Sugar Rush candies but no actual characters) along with the Mickey cameo as a doll in that store.

        Loading editor
    • They seem like their in the same time place so I'm not surprised

        Loading editor
    • Its pretty cool that these movies(and other disney princess) take place in the same time peirod/century. According to The Art of Frozen(pg 65) the movie takes place in the 1840s

        Loading editor
    • Rob52xbhs wrote:
      Its pretty cool that these movies(and other disney princess) take place in the same time peirod/century. According to The Art of Frozen(pg 65) the movie takes place in the 1840s

      O, really??

        Loading editor
    • There's a blog called look-what-we-found-in-frozen.If you guys are interested.

        Loading editor
    • cool! i'll check it out

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Rtrr121 wrote:
      There was someone who looked like her during the first First Time In Forever song. She was attending the coronation. Blink and you'll miss it.
      It's not someone who looks like her, she has the dress and the exact same hairstyle that Eugene had made when cutting her hair in Tangled. And you see Eugene as well! Just go to Rapunzel, and you'll see. Or to be more specific, here's the image link: http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131130030754/disney/images/6/65/Rapunzelflynn_Frozen.jpg

      Except for Anna and Elsa, no Disney Princesses have ever made eye contact or acknowledged each others prescence, although it appears so in the link. I think that Anna didn't actually make eye contact or acknowledge Rapunzel's prescence.

        Loading editor
    • I kinda think of it as Frozen, Tangled, Bolt, Dinosaurs, Meet the Robinsons, Big Hero 6 and Wreck-It Ralph all take place in the same world but different time periods (like Frozen and Tangled take place around the same time while Wreck-It Ralph and Bolt take place at the exact same time in a far off future from Frozen and Tangled, since a "wanted dog" sign is spoted outside Litwak's in Wreck-It Ralph). Like it starts with Dinosaurs and currently goes up to either Big Hero 6 or the untitled Teen Space Race movie. I've titled "Disney's CGI World" to represent all current and future CGI projects from Disney, though it doesn't include anything that takes place in an alternate world (like Zootopia or Chicken Little).

        Loading editor
    • Nerdybutcool wrote:

      InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Rtrr121 wrote:
      There was someone who looked like her during the first First Time In Forever song. She was attending the coronation. Blink and you'll miss it.
      It's not someone who looks like her, she has the dress and the exact same hairstyle that Eugene had made when cutting her hair in Tangled. And you see Eugene as well! Just go to Rapunzel, and you'll see. Or to be more specific, here's the image link: http://static3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131130030754/disney/images/6/65/Rapunzelflynn_Frozen.jpg

      Except for Anna and Elsa, no Disney Princesses have ever made eye contact or acknowledged each others prescence, although it appears so in the link. I think that Anna didn't actually make eye contact or acknowledge Rapunzel's prescence.

      Anna didn't, but Rapunzel did. Didn't you see Rapunzel look at her in that one-second scene?

        Loading editor
    • Sorta related, but is Eugene the only man without gloves in Frozen?

        Loading editor
    • PersonJe wrote:
      Sorta related, but is Eugene the only man without gloves in Frozen?

      I think so, because I didn't see another male character with gloves on. 

        Loading editor
    • Why is rapunzel is in? Frozen VS Tangled Who is better? Tangled - long hair Frozen - Ice power Frozen is better!

        Loading editor
    • Alya soffeya wrote:
      Why is rapunzel is in?

      Frozen VS Tangled Who is better? Tangled - long hair Frozen - Ice power Frozen is better!

      i agree! all my friends just saw it about a month after i saw it for the second time (lol) and THEY LOVED IT TOO!!! ALMOST AS MUCH AS I DID!!!!!

        Loading editor
    • Well that pretty much proves to me why I think the staff at Disney today are complete idiots. Making refernces to movies that they had no business doing in CGI like they should be proud of it. Wake up, Disney! You're not supposed to be making movies like Tangled, and you're not supposed to be modeling this movie off of Tangled either. Princess and the Frog was like a return to the true Disney for me, and exactly like the kind of movies that they should be making, but where's that movie's adnowledgement?!

        Loading editor
    • Alya soffeya wrote:
      Why is rapunzel is in?

      Frozen VS Tangled Who is better? Tangled - long hair Frozen - Ice power Frozen is better!


      I hate both.

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      Well that pretty much proves to me why I think the staff at Disney today are complete idiots. Making refernces to movies that they had no business doing in CGI like they should be proud of it. Wake up, Disney! You're not supposed to be making movies like Tangled, and you're not supposed to be modeling this movie off of Tangled either. Princess and the Frog was like a return to the true Disney for me, and exactly like the kind of movies that they should be making, but where's that movie's adnowledgement?!

      If you hate Disney, why are you here? By the way, I don't like Princess and the Frog. Most of it is because of the storyline, which is a definite part to success. That's what makes Tangled and Frozen so great; the storyline and everything else. And who are you to say Disney shouldn't be making movies like Tangled? Every Disney Princess movie is very different than the original story, and are still loved by many.

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Well that pretty much proves to me why I think the staff at Disney today are complete idiots. Making refernces to movies that they had no business doing in CGI like they should be proud of it. Wake up, Disney! You're not supposed to be making movies like Tangled, and you're not supposed to be modeling this movie off of Tangled either. Princess and the Frog was like a return to the true Disney for me, and exactly like the kind of movies that they should be making, but where's that movie's adnowledgement?!
      If you hate Disney, why are you here? By the way, I don't like Princess and the Frog. Most of it is because of the storyline, which is a definite part to success. That's what makes Tangled and Frozen so great; the storyline and everything else. And who are you to say Disney shouldn't be making movies like Tangled? Every Disney Princess movie is very different than the original story, and are still loved by many.


      Because Disney is a hand-drawn studio, and they seem to be forgetting that. Anyway, my feelings for Disney now are very two-sided. I still love the 2D Disney of before, which I consider to be "The REAL Disney" and the one that I've loved all my life, but I abosultely hate this stupid New Age, CGI only Disney era of today and would love nothing more than to see this Disney die and go back to what it's supposed to be.

      But you do ask a good question. Even I wonder why I keep wasting my time arguing about today's Disney with what I always think are such blind "Disney fans". It's probably because I have to keep getting reminded of their stupid movies all the time.

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Well that pretty much proves to me why I think the staff at Disney today are complete idiots. Making refernces to movies that they had no business doing in CGI like they should be proud of it. Wake up, Disney! You're not supposed to be making movies like Tangled, and you're not supposed to be modeling this movie off of Tangled either. Princess and the Frog was like a return to the true Disney for me, and exactly like the kind of movies that they should be making, but where's that movie's adnowledgement?!
      If you hate Disney, why are you here? By the way, I don't like Princess and the Frog. Most of it is because of the storyline, which is a definite part to success. That's what makes Tangled and Frozen so great; the storyline and everything else. And who are you to say Disney shouldn't be making movies like Tangled? Every Disney Princess movie is very different than the original story, and are still loved by many.

      Because Disney is a hand-drawn studio, and they seem to be forgetting that. Anyway, my feelings for Disney now are very two-sided. I still love the 2D Disney of before, which I consider to be "The REAL Disney" and the one that I've loved all my life, but I abosultely hate this stupid New Age, CGI only Disney era of today and would love nothing more than to see this Disney die and go back to what it's supposed to be.

      But you do ask a good question. Even I wonder why I keep wasting my time arguing about today's Disney with what I always think are such blind "Disney fans". It's probably because I have to keep getting reminded of their stupid movies all the time.

      Even CGI has some hand-drawn in it. In fact, Frozen has some hand-drawn stuff in it. And there's nothing wrong with the animation. 0therwise there wouldn't be believable snow, which is what they wanted. And then there was the hair and hairstyles of that culture/era, clothes, etc

        Loading editor
    • Oh please. They waste all their efforts and time trying to push 2D qualities into what is clearly CGI instead of actually doing REAL 2D. That's the only reason they had 2D animators doing these incredibly pointless hand-drawn animation tests for Wreck-It Ralph when it wasn't even supposed to be a 2D movie. But more than that, they just keep using CGI to push for all this "CGI realism" stuff that I'm almost sick of after having to see it all the time from the dozens of other computer animated movies from other studios. The fact is, CGI movies do not impress me anymore. I don't care how realistic the water/ice looks, or how detailed the hair or clothes look. These kind of animated movies are like a fad that's gone on for way too long.

      And as for 2D qualities, Paperman and Get a Horse are the only things I've seen out of the current Disney that manage to do that properly, because they actually look like 2D animation to the point where you feel like you haven't lost anything at all.

        Loading editor
    • Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      Oh please. They waste all their efforts and time trying to push 2D qualities into what is clearly CGI instead of actually doing REAL 2D. That's the only reason they had 2D animators doing these incredibly pointless hand-drawn animation tests for Wreck-It Ralph when it wasn't even supposed to be a 2D movie. But more than that, they just keep using CGI to push for all this "CGI realism" stuff that I'm almost sick of after having to see it all the time from the dozens of other computer animated movies from other studios. The fact is, CGI movies do not impress me anymore. I don't care how realistic the water/ice looks, or how detailed the hair or clothes look. These kind of animated movies are like a fad that's gone on for way too long.

      And as for 2D qualities, Paperman and Get a Horse are the only things I've seen out of the current Disney that manage to do that properly, because they actually look like 2D animation to the point where you feel like you haven't lost anything at all.

      I heard someone said that it'd be years before Disney would be able implement the hybrid techniques used in Paperman for a full feature film.

      Can we please just stop and accept people have different opinions and views? Even if they're "illogical" or something.

      ~Forum's a good place to grin and be curious. But push your opinions and we'll be-- happy Disney fans!~

        Loading editor
    • Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.


      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.

        Loading editor
    • In my opinion, Frozen wouldn't of looked nearly fantastic if it ended up being made in 2D.

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.

      Why should Disney give up a realistic animation as CGI? And that's so arrogant to think they shouldn't be doing something. That was very judgmental. How is realism bad? The way the hair flows is so human and not cartoonish, and it's the same with the clothes and even the breathing. In real-life, in winter, a small cloud forms when you breath into the cold air. In Frozen, you can see that. And when the characters walked, you can see footprints in the snow. How is that bad?

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.
      Why should Disney give up a realistic animation as CGI? And that's so arrogant to think they shouldn't be doing something. That was very judgmental. The animation is, in a way, like Shrek the Third, because of everything being realistic. The way the hair flows is so human and not cartoonish, and it's the same with the clothes and even the breathing. In real-life, in winter, a small cloud forms when you breath into the cold air. In Frozen, you can see that. And when the characters walked, you can see footprints in the snow. How is that bad?


      Remeber when cartoons and animation were an art that didn't have to look real? Because I sure do.

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      Alya soffeya wrote:
      Why is rapunzel is in?

      Frozen VS Tangled Who is better? Tangled - long hair Frozen - Ice power Frozen is better!


      I hate both.

      =O *gasps... dies*

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Well that pretty much proves to me why I think the staff at Disney today are complete idiots. Making refernces to movies that they had no business doing in CGI like they should be proud of it. Wake up, Disney! You're not supposed to be making movies like Tangled, and you're not supposed to be modeling this movie off of Tangled either. Princess and the Frog was like a return to the true Disney for me, and exactly like the kind of movies that they should be making, but where's that movie's adnowledgement?!
      If you hate Disney, why are you here? By the way, I don't like Princess and the Frog. Most of it is because of the storyline, which is a definite part to success. That's what makes Tangled and Frozen so great; the storyline and everything else. And who are you to say Disney shouldn't be making movies like Tangled? Every Disney Princess movie is very different than the original story, and are still loved by many.

      also, Disney can't hang back in the 19th century! in order to keep producing good movies, they hav to modernize their themes and make their movies more relatable to all the age groups that tend to b fans of Disney. and i agree with InspiredAndNatural. if u don't like Disney anymore, WHY R U STILL HERE?!?!

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Well that pretty much proves to me why I think the staff at Disney today are complete idiots. Making refernces to movies that they had no business doing in CGI like they should be proud of it. Wake up, Disney! You're not supposed to be making movies like Tangled, and you're not supposed to be modeling this movie off of Tangled either. Princess and the Frog was like a return to the true Disney for me, and exactly like the kind of movies that they should be making, but where's that movie's adnowledgement?!
      If you hate Disney, why are you here? By the way, I don't like Princess and the Frog. Most of it is because of the storyline, which is a definite part to success. That's what makes Tangled and Frozen so great; the storyline and everything else. And who are you to say Disney shouldn't be making movies like Tangled? Every Disney Princess movie is very different than the original story, and are still loved by many.

      Because Disney is a hand-drawn studio, and they seem to be forgetting that. Anyway, my feelings for Disney now are very two-sided. I still love the 2D Disney of before, which I consider to be "The REAL Disney" and the one that I've loved all my life, but I abosultely hate this stupid New Age, CGI only Disney era of today and would love nothing more than to see this Disney die and go back to what it's supposed to be.

      But you do ask a good question. Even I wonder why I keep wasting my time arguing about today's Disney with what I always think are such blind "Disney fans". It's probably because I have to keep getting reminded of their stupid movies all the time.

      i could write another five essays arguing with u, but i just wrote about three explaining other things. besides, it seems InspiredAndNatural is keeping u busy enough with this ongoing debate. a few words: DUDE, WELCOME TO THE 21ST CENTURY WHERE THERE IS A NEW GENERATION OF YOUNG PEOPLE WHO R LOOKING FOR THINGS THEY CAN RELATE TO. for the older generation, i take it, that u like, that's y they make more adult movies. the Disney Animation of today is EXACTLY in style with what my generation ADORES about Disney. so far, 14 of my friends hav gone to c Frozen and they LOVED IT!! almost as much as i did (and i <3 it so much that i saw it TWICE!). what u say Disney is "supposed to be", well this is it. this is a show of Disney's flexability and adapting to the change of time and interest. this is Disney evolving to a new environment called THE MODERN AGE. if u don't like it, then i guess u could just keep watching the old stuff that u like. maybe u'll grow into liking this modern style as well!

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:

      Even CGI has some hand-drawn in it. In fact, Frozen has some hand-drawn stuff in it. And there's nothing wrong with the animation. 0therwise there wouldn't be believable snow, which is what they wanted. And then there was the hair and hairstyles of that culture/era, clothes, etc

      i agree; u can't get that cool ice effect in hand-drawings

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      Oh please. They waste all their efforts and time trying to push 2D qualities into what is clearly CGI instead of actually doing REAL 2D. That's the only reason they had 2D animators doing these incredibly pointless hand-drawn animation tests for Wreck-It Ralph when it wasn't even supposed to be a 2D movie. But more than that, they just keep using CGI to push for all this "CGI realism" stuff that I'm almost sick of after having to see it all the time from the dozens of other computer animated movies from other studios. The fact is, CGI movies do not impress me anymore. I don't care how realistic the water/ice looks, or how detailed the hair or clothes look. These kind of animated movies are like a fad that's gone on for way too long.

      And as for 2D qualities, Paperman and Get a Horse are the only things I've seen out of the current Disney that manage to do that properly, because they actually look like 2D animation to the point where you feel like you haven't lost anything at all.

      i'm just not even gonna say anything, cause otherwise i'll get so angry that i will say a lot of things 2 u that i will dearly regret...

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.

      if that's ur way of thinking, then most the public will NOT VOTE TO GET RID OF TANGLED!

        Loading editor
    • DonyarktheKungFuMinion wrote:
      In my opinion, Frozen wouldn't of looked nearly fantastic if it ended up being made in 2D.

      IKR? nuff said

        Loading editor
    • InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.
      Why should Disney give up a realistic animation as CGI? And that's so arrogant to think they shouldn't be doing something. That was very judgmental. How is realism bad? The way the hair flows is so human and not cartoonish, and it's the same with the clothes and even the breathing. In real-life, in winter, a small cloud forms when you breath into the cold air. In Frozen, you can see that. And when the characters walked, you can see footprints in the snow. How is that bad?

      that's what i wanna know. >:(   if i were Elsa right now, u'd probably b frozen urself, Nick.

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.
      Why should Disney give up a realistic animation as CGI? And that's so arrogant to think they shouldn't be doing something. That was very judgmental. The animation is, in a way, like Shrek the Third, because of everything being realistic. The way the hair flows is so human and not cartoonish, and it's the same with the clothes and even the breathing. In real-life, in winter, a small cloud forms when you breath into the cold air. In Frozen, you can see that. And when the characters walked, you can see footprints in the snow. How is that bad?

      Remeber when cartoons and animation were an art that didn't have to look real? Because I sure do.

      could we PLZ stop arguing before i explode and start swearing and stuff?!?!?!?

        Loading editor
    • i canNOT believe how a disscustion about Rapunzel's cameo turned into one about Disney's animation choices. if something looks REALISTIC it's more REALATABLE to which is what the modern, REAL Disney fans are looking for. it keeps the REAL money rolling in at a REALISTIC rate. u see how all of those REAL statements share the root REAL Nick?

        Loading editor
    • Nick102 wrote:
      InspiredAndNatural wrote:
      Nick102 wrote:
      Poninefreak wrote:
      Just because a movie is CGI doesn't automaticly make it bad, you know.

      It's bad for Disney to even be doing them. It's continually making them throw out their own hand-drawn division for no good reason at all. They may have claimed at one point that they could do both kinds of movies, with respect for both mediums and with the kind of equal treatment that they deserve, but after changing Frozen from a 2D movie to a CGI one, I was completely convinced that they can't. Movies like Princess and the Frog and Tangled can never truly co-exist peacefully and both be Disney movies as far as I'm concerned. One of them has to go.
      Why should Disney give up a realistic animation as CGI? And that's so arrogant to think they shouldn't be doing something. That was very judgmental. The animation is, in a way, like Shrek the Third, because of everything being realistic. The way the hair flows is so human and not cartoonish, and it's the same with the clothes and even the breathing. In real-life, in winter, a small cloud forms when you breath into the cold air. In Frozen, you can see that. And when the characters walked, you can see footprints in the snow. How is that bad?

      Remeber when cartoons and animation were an art that didn't have to look real? Because I sure do.

      I kinda agree with your opinion, but at the same time it does sound a little overly harsh. I love BOTH The Princess and the Frog (mainly for the songs, and the character Tiana and the fact she is the first African-American Disney Princess, and a few other characters) and Tangled. As for Frozen, I haven't seen it yet, don't really want too until it comes on TV for free years from now or a friend happens to have the DVD of it, and wasn't really looking forward to it from the moment I heard the plot. To me, it sounded too much like Tangled which was a great film, but it made it seem like Disney was loosing their creativity and originality. And because I heard it was in CGI. It reminded me way too much of how the current generation at the Disney Studios are completely forgetting their 2D roots. I don't know much about Frozen, but I'm sure it would've worked fine as a 2D film. It's sad to see an art form, an art form that Disney reinvented and changed A LOT in the earlier days, like with the reinvention of the multiplane camera (which I bet half of the people who post here have never heard of, despite being a big part of Disney history), an art form that people worked extremely hard on by hand before there was computers to help them out, be forgotten by the same company! It's so sad! I mean just look at the dimension and detail in these scenes that were all made before computers and CGI: http://youtu.be/R5yJCncdiAc

      And then again... the legacy has still been in the newer films taken from the older ones, like Tangled and Wreck It Ralph. Every animated Disney film has some part of it's legacy from the time when Walt was alive and a little after in them, in my mind. Sure, the newer films are not in 2D, but they still have the same cartoonish and whimsical elements, the same humor, the same heart, the same amazing and colorful animation, despite it being in a different medium. It's not wrong for Disney to make a few CGI films, if they stick to those things. They don't have to make only 2D films. If you know anything about Walt Disney, you would've known he said things like: 

      "We keep moving forward, opening new doors, and doing new things, because we're curious and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths."

      "I do not like to repeat successes, I like to go on to other things."

      "We have created characters and animated them in the dimension of depth, revealing through them to our perturbed world that the things we have in common far outnumber and outweigh those that divide us."

      "I am not influenced by the techniques or fashions of any other motion picture company."

      I'm sure he would've be interested in CGI. I mean... his company was known for making animated movies when he decided to make his first live action film, another medium of story telling. And he was one of the first to combine animation and live action, and not just with Mary Poppins but waaay back in the 20's in the Alice Comedies. But anyway, if Disney does do all CGI... then that would be stupid, like you said, and a tragedy.

      And I just wanted to add... there's realism 2D films too. Well, it's like this: 2D films can have realistic elements, and CGI films can have cartoonish elements (besides... that's the reason why no humans in Pixar films (except Tin Toy... which was how they learned) look exactly like photorealisitic humans like in Mars Needs Moms or The Polar Express... it would be too creepy. At the same time, you can relate to the characters and find realism in them, like in The Incredibles). There's no either or. This whole debate you caused, Nick102, isn't really making your side of the argument seem better, even if I agree with part of what you said. Accept that some people do have different opinions.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah Jay makes a good point, what's the point of fighting about this? Lets just respect each other's opinions and move on, not everyone needs to like Frozen.

        Loading editor
    • Yeah Donyark, that sounds good.

        Loading editor
    • i agree. Jay, thank u for helping me find my balance point between CGI style and 2D style. i almost blew it for myself; i was on the verge of starting a new thread entirely for debating the filming style of Disney. so thank u Jay for helping me find the middle ground and understanding other perspectives. -Misty

        Loading editor
    • also, while we're on the topic of Frozen, Frozen won a Golden Globe Award for "Best Animated Feature Film" at 9:53-9:54 pm (ya, i know, i kept track of the time) amoung The Croods and Despicable Me 2. also, the song "Let it Go" was nominated for "Best Original Music", amoung Catching Fires's "Atlas" and Mandela's "Ordinary Love" (the latter of which took the prize). while we're on the subject of Jennifer Lawrence (i'm a HUGE fan!!!), she won the FIRST Golden Globe Award of the night for her role in American Hustle. a good while latter, the movie she was in, American Hustle, won an award for "Best Comedy" (COMEDY?? SERIOUSLY?!?).

        Loading editor
    • My brother said he saw Rapunzel, But i didn't O_O

        Loading editor
    • TaylorILOVEYOUSwift
      TaylorILOVEYOUSwift removed this reply because:
      This was an accident, too
      07:00, February 1, 2014
      This reply has been removed

      Nevermind, saw her O_O

        Loading editor
    • Yeah, Here she is

      Vlcsnap-2014-02-01-14h34m08s46

        Loading editor
    • yup! and Eugene too!!

        Loading editor
    • I love all the Disney movies except the live action ones (that doesn't include Enchanted).  I don't know why, I just never enjoyed them.  Back on topic, I believe my brother read on a website a theory behind Rapunzel and Flynn's attendance to Elsa's coronation.  Rapunzel is Anna and Elsa's cousin, and I'm going to guess through their mothers because they looks the most alike.  The reason Anna and Elsa's parents were travelling by ship was they had heard their lost niece had returned and were going to represent their side of the family (whether it was because she was home or for her wedding), but the ship was caught in the storm and Anna and Elsa's parents lost their lives.  Rapunzel and Flynn show up and Rapunzel looks like she's looking at Anna as if to say hello in the few seconds you see her, because they are representing their side of the family at Elsa's coronation.  The theory also said something about the storm being caused by Ursula and the ship they're standing on at the end (SPOLIER: when Anna punches Hans) is Eric's wrecked ship which he is sailing when Ariel first saves him and they fall in love.  I'm not so sure about the last bit, but the first bit certainly seems plausable.  To be honest, I thought it was just a ship that had been sunken because the fjord froze over.  I hope it's all true.  Connecting Disney movies and making up a Disney family is so cute!  I also want to know if Nancy from Enchanted (Idina Menzel plays her too) is related to Cinderella, as her surname is Tremaine also.  Before anyone complains, yes, it is, because Lady Tremaine only inherited that name from Cinderella's father before he died.  I read on IMDB (I think) that in Eric's dining hall there is a painting of a couple that look like Aurora and Phillip, and that it is a hint that they are ancestors of Eric's.  I'm not very good at guessing time periods, so I don't know if they could be his parents or grandparents or something.  You never see Eric's parents, so you never know.  If someone does know please correct me!

        Loading editor
    • Hmmmm... that's an interesting theory.

        Loading editor
    • not sure bout the second half, but i certainly think that the Rapunzel-Anna&Elsa theory could be true. its worth the time to go find a pic of both their mothers and compare them

        Loading editor
    • I make them cousins just because I feel like making more of the Disney characters related to each other. I just can't help it XD

      It opens up so many crossover opportunities!! //is a greedy and psychotic fan fiction writer//

        Loading editor
    • Me too, I hope it's true!   It would be kinda cool if all the Disney characters were related in some way.  What I think would be cool (and totally goes against what I said earlier) is a live action movie with all the Disney characters together in our world.  There are so many actors and actresses that look like them!  I know I have way too much time on my hands since I've thought of this, and came up with teaser trailers.  Most would feature the princesses about to do something iconic from their movie, then their cellphone would ring, and they'd say something like "Yeah, I'll be there!" and ditch whoever they were with, leaving that person totally dumbfounded.  The only problem would be the age of the princcesses, so many of them are meant to be young.  I mean, the age gap between Elsa and Snow White is 7 years!  I'd just make them all about 18, except Elsa, she'd be 21 (like me).  I'd probably set it in a sorority or something where Elsa, being a queen, is president of their chapter, who would be so happy that her sister (and possible cousin) is pledging.  I think this idea is because I'm from Scotland and we have nothing like this here.  I know that some sororities can be elitist and exclusive to one certain people, but so is Glasgow University.  This sorority would obviously be the opposite of this, seeing as so many of the characters are different.  I know, I'm crazy and once again have too much time on my hands! <3

        Loading editor
    • I tend only to crosover things that are similar in story and animation, like Tangled and Frozen are.

      I combine them with Brave, and a few non disney CGI

      I also combine Frozen with Beauty and the Beast, Sleeping Beauty and Snow White a/t 7 Dwarves, but I haven't gotten into writing any of that yet.

        Loading editor
    • I know, it's weird when you see the picture of all the Disney princesses standing together, and some of it looks irregular because of the difference in animation, which I believe is why they "glamified" Merida's cartoon, to make her look less CGI and to "fit in" with the others.  I think the new look is awful and they should just have kept them all the way they were.  Cinderella's hair sucks, Rapunzel looks like she has something wrong with her, and Pocahontas's face is ridiculously wide.  It reminds me of Joe from Family Guy!

        Loading editor
    • On the contrary, I like the new designs for the artistic opportunities it presents me with because I am also a fan artist, but of course I do love their other designs but... For the sake of the line up you know hahaha

        Loading editor
    • Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with the new line up, I just preferred it when the picture had them as they were in their films.  What I would love to see is some Art Deco or Art Nouveau princess designs.  Rapunzel would be easy to do in Art Nouveau because of her long hair and the swirling organic shapes of the art (I say easy, but really I can't draw), and I just love Art Deco because of Midnight in Paris.

        Loading editor
    • I think we should all make our own line ups hahaha, and I would put Rapunzel and Anna and Ariel all in the same category together in a group XD

        Loading editor
    • Thats a great idea!:-) 

        Loading editor
    • Mine would have every Disney girl, princess or not.  Mulan isn't technically a princess, so the likes of Meg and Kida (who is a princess/queen) would be there too.

        Loading editor
    • Wait, Hercules was a prince, since his dad was a king. And Merida married him, so she's technically a princess. But why didn't Disney add her to the line-up? She and kids should be in it, since they were royalty. I want every girl to be in it. That would be great.

        Loading editor
    • lol cool

        Loading editor
    • I haven't seen Rapunzel's mom and Elsa and Anna's mom to see the resemblance. If maybe someone could post a picture of them together, I could maybe see it. But I see the resemblance between Anna and Rapunzel, though.

        Loading editor
    • there are comparison pictures online i think but since we only see Anna's mom a few times it's hard to say from screent shots alone.

        Loading editor
    • I just think the mums looks more alike than the dads.  I could be wrong, in fact, there is no telling what the truth is behind Rapunzel's appearance.  I just think it would be cool if they were related.

        Loading editor
    • I think Rapunzel's dad and Elsa/Anna's mom are the siblings.

        Loading editor
    • Well, they do have the same hair colour. Maybe I should watch Tangled again and see if I can find the resemblance.

        Loading editor
    • Does anyone think that Anna/Elsa's mom is the sister is rapunzels dad?

        Loading editor
    • Lovefiction wrote:
      Does anyone think that Anna/Elsa's mom is the sister is rapunzels dad?

      yes I do lol I just wrote that above !!)

        Loading editor
    • I love it when we can find how disney princesses are related.

        Loading editor
    • I think you might be right.  Either way, I'm pretty sure all Disney movies are connected in some way or another.  It would be cool if they did a Rapunzel/Frozen crossover though.  Maybe something like Rapunzel and Flynn showing up for Anna and Kristoff's wedding?

        Loading editor
    • I'm now going to do a Disney movie marathon to see if I can spot any more relations.

        Loading editor
    • Good luck! Tell us how it goes when you're done! ;)

        Loading editor
    • 71.86.64.187
        Loading editor
Give Kudos to this message
You've given this message Kudos!
See who gave Kudos to this message
Advertisement | Your ad here

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki