अपने हैपी एवर आफ़टर के दस साल बाद, जिज़ैल अपनी खुशी पर सवाल उठाती है और असल दुनिया और ऐडलेसिया में रहने वाले लोगों के जीवन में उथल पुथल मचा देती है.अपने हैपी एवर आफ़टर के दस साल बाद, जिज़ैल अपनी खुशी पर सवाल उठाती है और असल दुनिया और ऐडलेसिया में रहने वाले लोगों के जीवन में उथल पुथल मचा देती है.अपने हैपी एवर आफ़टर के दस साल बाद, जिज़ैल अपनी खुशी पर सवाल उठाती है और असल दुनिया और ऐडलेसिया में रहने वाले लोगों के जीवन में उथल पुथल मचा देती है.
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 1 नामांकन
Alan Tudyk
- Scroll
- (वॉइस)
Griffin Newman
- Pip
- (वॉइस)
- …
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Was it as good as the original? No, but it was still highly entertaining. I liked that they actually did something new with the story. So many sequels just basically end up doing the same story as the first. And Amy Adams was clearly eating it up as a villain. She was **wicked** fun. Plot wise, I loved the focus on the mother-daughter dynamic, although I could foresee how the spell would be broken from a mile away. And although Patrick Dempsey gets to have a bit more fun by partaking in the singing and dancing I feel like he has a kind of useless B plot. He definitely isn't as important as he was in the first. I thought they did a good job casting with Morgan. I seriously didn't even realize that it wasn't the original actress. A lot of the sets and costumes actually reminded me a lot of the Brandy Cinderella movie. They definitely didn't look cheap and they were full of whimsy but also didn't look fully cinematic either. The songs were very good too. I don't know if they will be as iconic as the original movies, probably not. But still overall good. I think my favourite might be Idina Menzel's memory song. Also just like the first, there's lots of fun Disney Easter eggs to look out for. It was a lot of fun and a pretty good sequel in my eyes.
If it wasn't for the nostalgia I'd given this a 4.
Is a pity, because all the ingredients are there; great actors, a solid pitch, a massive budget...but no filling, only crust.
The concept of the plot is great; a magical wish goes wrong as it means fairy tale logic is applied to real people and our former heroine Giselle is turning to a villain! Will the almost grown Morgan be able to reach past her grumpy teen persona and find her faith in fairy tales again? Great pitch!
Only that it's not what the movie is about.
There's no gradient turn of the people, no slow realization for neither Giselle or Morgan. Everything is explained as it happens, the logic of magic made up as it shows, or at least that's what it feels like as they present the answer to a problem exactly one second after it's occurred and then take three whole minutes to actually carry out what ever they just figured out before the next one shows up.
There is no generational change; Giselle is still the heroine although she's also the villain (?) and Morgan and Robert simply become completely other characters instead of gradually turning into their fairy tale persona. Missed opportunity.
I'd have loved for this to be Morgan's and Giselles story. Have Morgan rediscover her love for magic and imagination and faith in "happily ever after" by finding her self as the heroine she didn't think she was - all while Giselle yet again find her way back to what made her want to leave her former life of imagined paths for an open world that may be full of strife and conflict, but where love and overcoming those conflicts tastes all the sweeter for it.
This was not that. This was a mess of musical numbers "for the sake of it", special effects because they can do them and focus on Amy Adam's, because she's the star.
Disappointing. But not unexpected.
Is a pity, because all the ingredients are there; great actors, a solid pitch, a massive budget...but no filling, only crust.
The concept of the plot is great; a magical wish goes wrong as it means fairy tale logic is applied to real people and our former heroine Giselle is turning to a villain! Will the almost grown Morgan be able to reach past her grumpy teen persona and find her faith in fairy tales again? Great pitch!
Only that it's not what the movie is about.
There's no gradient turn of the people, no slow realization for neither Giselle or Morgan. Everything is explained as it happens, the logic of magic made up as it shows, or at least that's what it feels like as they present the answer to a problem exactly one second after it's occurred and then take three whole minutes to actually carry out what ever they just figured out before the next one shows up.
There is no generational change; Giselle is still the heroine although she's also the villain (?) and Morgan and Robert simply become completely other characters instead of gradually turning into their fairy tale persona. Missed opportunity.
I'd have loved for this to be Morgan's and Giselles story. Have Morgan rediscover her love for magic and imagination and faith in "happily ever after" by finding her self as the heroine she didn't think she was - all while Giselle yet again find her way back to what made her want to leave her former life of imagined paths for an open world that may be full of strife and conflict, but where love and overcoming those conflicts tastes all the sweeter for it.
This was not that. This was a mess of musical numbers "for the sake of it", special effects because they can do them and focus on Amy Adam's, because she's the star.
Disappointing. But not unexpected.
In the new movie, "Disenchanted," the bulk of the actors and crew members from the earlier film are back. Everyone who is reprising their roles does an excellent job of ageing the characters while keeping them recognisably the same people they were in the previous film.
Giselle's over-the-top whimsy and the bustle and cynicism of New York City provided for a hilarious and effective cultural clash in the film Enchanted, which contributed to the film's popularity. Compared to the previous film, Disenchanted is missing a significant chunk of its personality due to the fact that Monroville has been transformed into Monrolasia. However, knowing that you've seen them done before in many of Disney's live-action remakes of its animation titles gives you a sense of déjà vu and changes the film from an appreciative but satirical tribute to more of a brand synergy exercise.
Disenchanted isn't horrible, and it serves its purpose if you're looking for light entertainment or want to see these actors and actresses again, but it's no match for the passion, energy, and freshness of the first movie in the series. Taking everything into consideration, I do not have any second thoughts about having seen it, but I also would not advise someone to go out of their way to do so.
Giselle's over-the-top whimsy and the bustle and cynicism of New York City provided for a hilarious and effective cultural clash in the film Enchanted, which contributed to the film's popularity. Compared to the previous film, Disenchanted is missing a significant chunk of its personality due to the fact that Monroville has been transformed into Monrolasia. However, knowing that you've seen them done before in many of Disney's live-action remakes of its animation titles gives you a sense of déjà vu and changes the film from an appreciative but satirical tribute to more of a brand synergy exercise.
Disenchanted isn't horrible, and it serves its purpose if you're looking for light entertainment or want to see these actors and actresses again, but it's no match for the passion, energy, and freshness of the first movie in the series. Taking everything into consideration, I do not have any second thoughts about having seen it, but I also would not advise someone to go out of their way to do so.
Disenchanted delivers a cliche story that loses the charm of the first film. It manages to siphon out everything that made Enchanted great, whilst adding a forgettable villain into the mix, and numerous plot holes, that had me scratching my head at times. Performances were as good as they could be with the lackluster script, and the climax of the film came off as shallow and underwhelming. This movie is just another Disney reboot and I wouldn't recommend watching it.
Best part of the film was James marsdens character, he's just the only funny person in the whole movie, and it looks like James is having a lot of fun playing him
5/10.
Best part of the film was James marsdens character, he's just the only funny person in the whole movie, and it looks like James is having a lot of fun playing him
5/10.
So I loved the first movie, it's one of my favourite movies and I think it's one of the best Disney contents ever. This is exactly anything but. I didn't have the highest hopes but this is just disappointing in another level. They really did the original movie injustice and I'm surprised they got all of the actors with this script.
-First of all I'm not sure how they managed to make the CGI actually worse. Even the animated parts look worse. Did they spend all the budget on actors and rushed everything else? Enchanted still holds up but this... Bad.
-Why are they breaking into a song every 5 minutes? They should've paid more attention to script and the character development rather than 10 mediocre songs. It's way better to have 3-4 actually good memorable songs than 10 that are meaningless and uninspired.
-It uses already done many times clichés and relies on previous Disney movies. It was literally Rapunzel and Cinderella with a bit of Snow White mixed in. Why not do something new? Why just rely on existing tropes. Little nuances and cheeky call backs are nice here and there but the whole movie was like that. Try a bit to be a little bit original at least.
-The set design looks very fake, costumes look meh. Hair was good though...
The only positive thing I can say was it was nice seeing the original cast back and they did the best they could with what they were given, especially Amy Adams.
TLDR uninspired, boring, will be forgotten by everyone who watches it after 2 hours.
-First of all I'm not sure how they managed to make the CGI actually worse. Even the animated parts look worse. Did they spend all the budget on actors and rushed everything else? Enchanted still holds up but this... Bad.
-Why are they breaking into a song every 5 minutes? They should've paid more attention to script and the character development rather than 10 mediocre songs. It's way better to have 3-4 actually good memorable songs than 10 that are meaningless and uninspired.
-It uses already done many times clichés and relies on previous Disney movies. It was literally Rapunzel and Cinderella with a bit of Snow White mixed in. Why not do something new? Why just rely on existing tropes. Little nuances and cheeky call backs are nice here and there but the whole movie was like that. Try a bit to be a little bit original at least.
-The set design looks very fake, costumes look meh. Hair was good though...
The only positive thing I can say was it was nice seeing the original cast back and they did the best they could with what they were given, especially Amy Adams.
TLDR uninspired, boring, will be forgotten by everyone who watches it after 2 hours.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाRachel Covey (who played Morgan in Enchanted) can be seen, and speaks to Giselle (Amy Adams) in the first town market scene of Monrolasia. She reminds Giselle that the festival is that night.
- गूफ़Robert's (Patrick Dempsey's) hair throughout the film goes from a dark short haircut. to gray curly hair, to gray short hair, and back again. This could be due to a re-shoot since the film received negative feedback during a test screening in April 2022.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटAfter the Disney logo fully appears, two birds fly over it and it becomes the Andalasia castle.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in AniMat's Crazy Cartoon Cast: The Rat of All My Dreams (2020)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 59 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें