i saw wreck it ralph in the theather and was so pleased with it. then the oscar's came out and gave it to brave so i had no choice but to see it.
i watch it last night for the first time and was stunned by what i had just saw. it started off good, but just really didn't do it for me...
anyway the whole time i'm thinking, who's brave? is it the daughter? is it the mother? if the daughter, how is she brave? she was the one who cursed the mom. was it the mom for fighting the evil bear?
i asked this question to a few friends of mine and they said the triplets were brave... to that i said EL OH EL! those boys were pure comic relief. in no way shape or form do they deserve the title of the movie.
The original title was 'The Bear and the Bow', but Disney heads wanted it changed to be more gender-neutral (same as they did with 'Rapunzel'/'Tangled' and 'The Snow Queen'/'Frozen'). This trend started when 'The Princess and the Frog' apparently "failed" because it couldn't attract the male audience.
So, no, there's no sense to it. I guess Brenda Chapman - the lady behind the story who was kicked off the director's chair - apparently hates the new title, and for good reason.
Another fun tidbit; the boys apparently weren't in early versions of the film, but were forced in by the higher-ups to drive toy sales or some *beep*
Gob, everything about this film is such a mess, from production to final product. Surprising we got as good a movie as we did, but not surprising that it wasn't up to Pixar standards.
---------- I used to want you dead but Now, I only want you gone.
The brothers are the only serious complaint I have about this film - they don't add anything and, by existing, they damage the stakes of the narrative. I'm pretty sure the rule of succession would have been in effect - Merida's brothers would have been in line to the throne ahead of her because they were male. Even if that wasn't the case, why pressure Merida into something she has little interest in when there are three other candidates available?
I feel like they weren't clear about what Merida's role as a married woman would be. They did make it seem like she would be queen, but you're right about the rule of succession. She did say she would be like her mother, who supposedly became queen by marrying the king. It's interesting that she would have to marry beneath her, though, in order to keep the clans together. She'd never be queen; she'd be married to the leader of a clan.
No one said she'd have to marry beneath her. The way it works is that the King is the one who rules, not the Queen. That's how it always works. And her marriage is mainly to ensure peace amongst the different tribes.
All that stuff where Merida is practicing how be a noble lady is all making clear what her role as a married woman would be. How much more of that did you want exactly?
Merida is a princess because the is the daughter of a king. Her three possible husbands are the sons of lords, not kings. I was referring to the status of the candidates. I was also referring to Merida's future status, not her duties per say. Was she training to be a queen? Or a lady (as in, the wife of a lord)? I didn't think that was made clear.
I'm pretty sure the rule of succession would have been in effect
If you mean the primgeniture system (i.e `Eldest son inherits`) then not for several hundred years if the setting is late Dark Age/Viking period Scotland. They use the `Tanist` system where the King chooses his heir from amongst his family then the new king has to be voted into office by the next level of social status, in this case the Clan Lords before he can take over. Under this system a son-in-law has equal status with any son of the king to claim the throne. So who Merida marries is of enormous importance as he could be Fergus`s successor! It would be unusual but Merida could even claim the throne in her own right if her father and the clan lords agreed, there are plenty of examples of warrior women found in Celtic mythology and a good number of real historical queens holding power in their own right from this culture!
"Any plan that involves losing your hat is a BAD plan.""
reply share
the boys weren't in it originally? HA that's why the boy-bear section was shoehorned into it. good god i wish they'd have left brenda alone to make the movie good
"The original title was 'The Bear and the Bow', but Disney heads wanted it changed to be more gender-neutral (same as they did with 'Rapunzel'/'Tangled' and 'The Snow Queen'/'Frozen')."
Not to mention to get an adjective in the title.:)
This trend started when 'The Princess and the Frog' apparently "failed" because it couldn't attract the male audience.
That's one reason. Another was because, like "Empereror' s new Groove","Hercules","Aladdin", or "Tangled", it was a spoof of fairy tales which is a concept that at least as a Disney commodity doesn't match up with the way Uncle Walt's films were done --- i.e., they didn't include "contemporary"1950-era references to silver screen stars in 1950's "Cinderella", or break the fourth wall to the narrator,etc. This is best done by and was specialized in by Jay Ward's "Fractured Fairy Tales" (and they were great at it and in character for the studio!)> Disney's different and the satire element of "The Princess and the Frog" well have maybe what turned off audiences in general. "Enchanted",ironically, I didn't put, comic intent aside because it was truly enchanting as well as humorous and didn't use the modern day approach I mention.
In short, I'm pretty sure Princess & The Frog failed completely due to the tone given, the one since Alladin and Who Framed Roger Rabbit and parts of Little Mermaid, though that worked much better in those earlier years as novelties.....Pixar has done their own stories and has had many different elements and HASN'T constantly (a la Princess and Frog or that David Spade llama in 2000's Emporer's New Groove tell the film to go back to a previous scene. Again...AGAIN..this is flor other filmmakers of old cartoons (Clampett, Frank Tashlin,etc.) at other studios. Not that it was taboo all the time for Disney in the 30s maybe, or in the 40s-50s Goofy shorts (beautifully narrated by John McLeigh of the story dept.) but feature films at Disney are generally supposed to take themselves more seriously and getting back to films like Princess and the Frog, after Hercules and Aladdin, perhaps people had had enough of that.
in a nutshell..Princess and Frog failed maybe because folks wanted much more straightforward fairy talres and Princess was overdoing the Aladdin thing. (Well, the same people worked on it..)
Noooooo. It is because Disney put the movie within around the same time frame as Avatar, the Chipmunks Sequel, and Sherlock Holmes. I do not think any of what you said had to do with it not doing as well as it did. No. Disney wants us to think that but that's their way of not admitting that they screwed up.
So that's where these ridiculously bland titles are coming from eh? I wonder what The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast would be called nowadays, Wet and Hairy?
So that's where these ridiculously bland titles are coming from eh? I wonder what The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast would be called nowadays, Wet and Hairy?
I know, right? Disney has never been this gender-conscious before..
Don't be calling me no bitch! If I'm a bitch, then your mama is a bitch, BITCH!
reply share
Hmm..... Firing two arrows into a huge predator despite the fact that you KNOW they are not going to have any effect in order to distract it and prevent it from killing your father. Standing your ground armed only with a spear against it later though you`ve seen it brush seasoned warriors aside without much effort and know the thing intends to rip you to shreds. Hoping that if you can just keep it fixated on you and have it take its time moving forwards the falling stone might just crush it to death if it falls in the right place. Isn`t that `Brave` enough for most people? I suspect that most modern teenage boys of about Merida`s age would be ****** in their pants if they had to face something like that for real!
"Any plan that involves losing your hat is a BAD plan.""
Those aren't examples of bravery... an 11 year old shot a bear off his porch: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/15/boy-kills-bear-that-would_n_3 58602.html. Boys have been sent to war as young as 10, to include a British boy in WW1 who was 12 years old. It's one thing to deal with a dangerous situation it's another thing to endure constant threat of death and the horror of war every waking minute for months even years on end.
People alive back then hunted bears and wolves like they were bunny rabbits. Men and Women had balls of iron and had no problems with breaking the neck of any animal that got in their way.
oh my gosh, not ANOTHER THREAD ABOUT HOW MUCH THIS MOVIE SUCKS!! WHY CAN'T YOU VOICE YOUR OPINION ON A SIMILAR THREAD, INSTEAD OF STARTING ANOTHER DAMN THREAD ABOUT THE SAME TOPIC???
If you don't want to start threads about what YOU want to talk about, then you have no right to flip at people who start threads about what THEY want to talk about. It's a public board. If you'd rather talk about how much you like the movie, feel free to start a thread about that.
---------- I used to want you dead but Now, I only want you gone.
How in the hell is this another "this movie sucks" post? I thought the OP asked a valid question, and really was kind of an interesting debate till your dumb ass showed up again.
because clearly you're such an egomaniac that you check to see if someone responded to something you wrote a year ago. That's why. You've said that line a ton of times on this board, along with "stop starting new threads about blah blah blah when there already is one".
Dunno, guess I just like calling out egotistical trolls. I've read your history, and you never contribute to a single discussion, all you do is troll peoples' threads. maybe find your happy place and actually join in a discussion rather than just say the same three lines over and over and over again?
Sure, as soon as you stop acting like a 11 year old everywhere on the message boards. Hell you're the one that started it with that smart ass "Why are you responding to something I posted a year ago" comment. Um, because I didn't look at the date. IS that so hard for you to understand?
Please let me know when you start contributing to conversations instead of just shooting down every one elses just because you are upset that theres "OH GOD SO MANY THREADS ABOUT THE SAME THING". You know why you're wrong? Because I've read your post history, and that's basically all you ever say, EVEN when the thread brings up a valid point about why they didn't like the movie.
Dude, you need to chill out and listen to this advice. Are you ready to maybe open your mind a little? When someone posts an opinion, answer with a valid response that adresses why you think they are wrong, not just say "OMG ANOTHER THREAD!!!!!" Trust me, you'll become more liked and won't have old timers like me giving you crap about being a troll.
And since i'm bored. Here's your past 6 or 7 posts (besides these two) in the past few days.
The Lion King - Thread no disney movie today can top this. someone said that they could your response. "that's because you prefer and adore hunchback, rescuers down under and pocahontas. i know that you love those films and so do i! they are perfect and flawless." and you meant it as a sarcastic insult.
Or how bout the one before that.....Frozen Demi Levato "perhaps you should change your tagline op. and her name is demi lovato, not demi Levato" (GEE...someone had a typo on the internet...way to put them in their place man. by the way, her name is Demi Lovato. (Capitalized, it's a name....)
or how bout this gem..."perhaps you should change the tagline, op" wait sorry different movie same line though. way to be creative.
(then we have 4 posts saying OMG STOP MAKING NEW THREADS BLAH BLAH BLAH and then this jewel.
On a thread asking why doesn't elsa ask the trolls to help her with her powers. Everyone else gave good answers. Your contribution "was you know, you could ask the screenwriters. no need to start an own thread about it." UM THAT"S THE POINT OF A MESSAGE BOARD KID! To ask questions because you want other people's opinions. But in your world, I guess she must be like best friends with the screen writers and has them on speed dial. Seriously, do you ever contribute anything positive, or are you just a tiny little man with a Napoleon complex that thinks he's being funny and does not realize that you're not funny, you're a troll and not even a good one.
And that my friend, is the definition of getting pwned on the internet, but you'll probably put up some whiney OMG LEAVE ME OR BRITNEY ALONE crap afer this so you're going to totally miss the point anyway. After all, you have enough of an ego to check a thread you posted a year ago and then call me out for posting on it? What the hell do you care if i responded to something you posted before, and why are you so eager to point out it was a year ago. It's still up there for people to RESPOND to, you know, like a message board is designed for? You started this crap, I just ended it. this is why every website should require a drivers license, so we don't have to listen to tweens like you. Sorry I just destroyed your fragile ego by pointing out that you are the reason for the ignore button.
Originally posted by nizzy79: then the oscar's came out and gave it to brave so i had no choice but to see it.
Really? So if a movie wins an Oscar, you are literally required to see it? Someone holds a gun to your head and tells you that if you don't watch the movie he will kill you? "Hey, here's a movie I have no interest in... oh, the Academy likes it? MUST FREAKING SEE IT!!!!" Yeah... that makes no sense.
I have no enemies, but am intensely disliked by my friends.
Oh wow, get a load of this guy. Who let the five-year-old on the computer? Don't worry, you'll learn what a "figure of speech" is when you hit grade school.
---------- I used to want you dead but Now, I only want you gone.
what was said was that ralph was awesome, so when something beat it i had to see how and why it was given an award cause i didn't think ralph would lose.
why are you so angry? you sounds like a non-logical tool :)
I dnt think this movie qualified for winning the best movie by any chance. The story was passable,Animation was so-so( I mean compare it to Tin-Tin) & you'll know. The curse part where the mother turns into a Bear was too kiddish ... even for a kids movie. I've seen Shrek1, Tin-Tin,Wrekh-It-Ralph, Hugo to name a few... but BRAVE doesnt even come close to them.
'Hugo'? The recent film? That wasn't aniamted, was it? Why compare it?
And to be fair, 'TinTin' was mo-cap, a different animation technique from 'Brave'. Still comparible on that grounds - it make more sense than comparing to a hand-drawn of stop motion film - but I think the difference should be understood. Actually, I'd compare it to 'Rango' if you want to bring up a more realistic-looking movie, but the styles of all three are so different I'm not sure why you would.
But 'Brave' by no means had weak animation, and the level of detail was some of the best Pixar has produced by far.
---------- I used to want you dead but Now, I only want you gone.
I've always assumed that "brave" meant Merida's courage to swallow her pride at the end and apologize to her Mother. While it's also brave to defy tradition and cut your own path, it's much harder to admit you're wrong and tell someone who you're angry with that you still love her.
And the reason that you were assuming that the title necessarily refers to a character being brave, just one character, and that the character in question will necessarily only perform brave actions is?
(The answer I have in mind for you is "Because I'm a nitwit", but maybe you can come up with something better than that.)
Yes, naming this movie "Brave" is a bit of a stretch there. Personally, I think the movie should've stuck with its original title, "The Bear and the Bow".
"A Decepticon never retreats" -Starscream (G1) [Formerly CosmosX9]