Why is it that when people talk about Disney's live action remakes, they often only talk about Cinderella, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Little Mermaid?
Don't get me wrong, I love all four of those!
But there are two (technically three, since one if them got a sequel) that are often left out!
Cruella!!
Maleficent!!
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil!
Those three were amazing!!
75 notes
·
View notes
Ariel
Originally posted on: November 15th, 2019
Despite my love for Disney Princesses, this was my first time drawing one. The dress Ariel is wearing is actually a commissioned piece based on her pink ballgown.
8 notes
·
View notes
(Ariel anon here again) ! I'd love to know your thoughts on that upcoming series called Ariel that's supposedly coming out and will be aimed toward a pre-K audience, in the vein of an Alice's Wonderland Bakery! Just read this and wow, I wasn't aware there was going to be a new Ariel series! I google'd a bit on it and to be honest, I don't there's a need for it? I feel the TV series for all it's flaws was enough (and it was aimed for a younger audience), and along with the comics and the prequel already told us enough about Ariel's life under the sea, unless this new series is going to feature a child Ariel - which it's not unplausible considering is aimed to pre-schoolers - but even so it wouldn't be the same for me? Most of the original cast is dead (Kenneth Mars, Samuel E. Wright and recently Pat Carroll) and I don't believe replacements would be able to replicate the same energy these actors put into the characters, and Ariel's original creators (John and Ron) left Disney, so it's up only to Jodi to keep her in character now. I expect this Ariel to be sanitized in a way to make her more like a "good role model" who teaches lessons to little children in each episode, which is not bad, but I personally feel that the original TV series already filled that purpose, but who knows, maybe I'm wrong and they end making a sweet show while keeping Ariel in character. Just my two cents.
I'm conflicted, because on one hand, I love The Little Mermaid so much that it's hard for me to resist expansions upon the franchise...however, as I mentioned in my previous asks, there were certain projects that were so damaging to Ariel's character integrity that I'm also a little resistant? It's nice to have new content, but when that content just continually takes us further and further away from the core of the film...I'm not sure.
I'm a huge fan of the original four princesses, and I have yet to see any of the first three be successfully adapted into anything outside of their original films. Ariel had more luck, but I think it was by virtue of the entire voice cast still being alive to maintain their characterizations and to add authenticity to their projects. Of the cast that's regularly used, Jodi's the only one left, and she's majorly shifted in her personality as of the past few years. The more and more I look back on certain things I was dissatisfied with, the sequels especially, I see that she wasn't enough to save Ariel from bad writers and creative talent who misunderstood her.
For what it's worth, it seems the Junior Ariels how will be innocuous though, given its target demographic...but I feel like that's going against the company? Walt wanted the animated features to hold their own against the contemporary films they were going up against. He didn't want Snow White to be viewed as Sesame Street or Barney- he wanted it to be able to hold a candle to Gone With the Wind and Casablanca, and it does. While I understand that there's a sector of Disney that appeals directly to an extremely younger audience, I feel like they should leave the classic movies out of being incorporated in this way, because it's a bad look for the brand. The old Disney movies- and those of the Renaissance- pushed for reality and adult stories and mass appeal. The newer Disney movies now, like Frozen and Tangled and Moana, are extremely infantilizing the artform and having a show like Junior Ariel is just going to perpetuate that and the ideology that "The Little Mermaid" is only for babies instead of the deeply complex, adult story it actually is. That's not even getting into how all of the queer-coding will be removed, the way it has been in the sequels, because it would be considered "too inappropriate" for the camp they're trying to pitch this project to.
4 notes
·
View notes
Thanos #1 (2019) Variant Ariel Olivetti Cover & Ariel Olivetti Pencils, Tini Howard Story, 1st Team Appearance of the Butcher Squadron & Origin of Thanos and Gamora
#Thanos #1 (2019) #ArielOlivetti Variant & Pencils, #TiniHoward Story, 1st Team Appearance of the #ButcherSquadron & Origin of Thanos and #Gamora THANOS IS DEAD! Executed by the deadliest assassin in the galaxy…his daughter, Gamora. SAVE ON SHIPPING COST - NOW AVAILABLE FOR LOCAL PICK UP IN DELTONA, FLORIDA https://rarecomicbooks.fashionablewebs.com/Thanos.html#1 #RareComicBooks #KeyComicBooks #MarvelComics #MCU #MarvelUniverse #KeyIssue
0 notes
I love the idea of the "Disney Princess", simply because the public's idea of a Disney Princess and Disney's idea of a Disney Princess don't actually match up.
Because to the public, a Disney Princess is a type of character in Disney movies. And to Disney, "Disney Princess" is a specific brand with specific characters.
The Disney Princess brand was set up in 2001 after the head of Disney Consumer Products went to a Disney on Ice show, saw hundreds of little girls in generic princess halloween costumes, and went "Wait, why the hell don't we sell Princess dresses?"
Rather than trying to give a dozen movies, many over a decade old, their own individual marketing pushes, they come up with the overarching Disney Princess brand, and launched it featuring ten initial characters:
Snow White, Aurora (Sleeping Beauty), Cinderella, Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Pocahontas, Mulan, Esmerelda, and Tinkerbell.
Esmerelda was soon dropped, probably because Hunchback is a pretty dark Disney movie; and later so was Tinkerbell because they'd started production on her own line of straight-to-DVD movies, leaving the line with eight Princesses.
And now here's the clever part of the branding: when they release a new movie with a new Princess, they don't immediately fold her into the Disney Princess brand. That would cannibalise sales from the movie-specific merchandise. So they wait a year or two for merchandise sales to slow down, before having an official coronation ceremony to add the new Princess to the group.
(And presumably they cab recycle unsold merch under the Disney Princess brand.)
So Tiana got added in 2010, Rapunzel in 2012, Merida became the first Pixar entry in 2013, Moana took three years to be inducted in 2019, and the most recent is Raya in 2022.
So that's the official Disney Princess lineup: Snow White, Aurora (Sleeping Beauty), Cinderella, Ariel, Belle, Jasmine, Pocahontas, Mulan, Tiana, Rapunzel, Merida, Moana and Raya.
Now I know what you're thinking: there's a pair of very famous names missing there.
And like I said before: they wait for the merchandise sales to slow down before bringing new characters under the umbrella. Moana seems to have been quite popular, taking three years for Disney marketing to feel comfortable folding her into the brand.
But Frozen still sells like fuckin' hotcakes, even a decade later.
So we have a funny scenario where the two most popular Disney Princesses aren't actually Official Disney Princesses because they're too popular.
5K notes
·
View notes