This is literally just baby Moana

Disney you lazy fucks

It's got the word "Disney's" in the title. Who in corporate fucking cares if it's crap, it will make a billion.

Am I going to get banned?

Yeah, it's called building up a database of CGI assets.

they didn't have to make it so obvious

Your argument for this is the inherent fucking problem with cgi you autist.

It's either a cameo, or Disney is so lazy and incompetent that they reused an easily recognizable model from the main character of their most recent film to cut corners, then released a trailer with the model on full display and thought no one would notice. I'm going with the former.

That's only useful if you plan on actually releasing your CGI's engine to the public

Rectum Rank Doo doesn't look like it's going to be a good movie anyway.

>In which The Internet obsesses over & critiques a single frame from a single scene of a movie. Again.

This is literally just Pongo
Disney you lazy fucks

I don't think there is any problem with Disney reusing a character model. They've had character make cameos in other movies since forever.

I think the trouble comes putting a cameo in the trailer.

I am the internet

>Moana has an ancestor that looks exactly like her.

P cute desu. glad she fugged.

...

I fucking hate disney drones, why do so many people like this company? All they touch or make is shit.

If you were a dog you could tell the difference. You're not, so you can't. Get over it, ya fuckin monkey.

It's useful for their own internal use.

This is getting out of hand

>Ancestor
Progeny, you lamebrain

I got a co-worker that takes 3-4 trips to Disneyworld with her family every year and has since she was a kid. For those who really, REALLY like Disney, it's likely because they grew up with a heavy dose of it.

>it's baby Moana but that's not her mom from the movie
??

Which is good. That means she ain't no fucking lesbian and someone actually fucked her.

To be fair, Disneyland is pretty good. It can't be compared with the mediocre movies they churn out.

But to still like something because nostalgia glasses, the thing has to have been good in the first place and not something you grow out of after 10.

But they told us to look out for every Disney Princess making a cameo as a fun treat!

These were definite cameos though, they weren't meant to look like a different person like it is here. Still, I'm inclined to think this is a cameo too, no problem with it.

You gotta admit it's a pretty damn cute model.

Even then it would be a weird choice for them to put that part in the trailer... especially considering baby Moana was in the Moana trailer too.

I read that they were going to have Disney princess cameos, maybe that's what they meant?

See I don't understand how you could think that except out of sheer contrarianism or maybe butthurt over Star Wars. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that Disney makes masterpieces these days, or that they have artistic integrity, or even business integrity for that matter, but their overall output is just better than their direct competition.

>being efficient with time and money is bad
jobless(or wageslaves) kids

They specified in her movie though that, despite being the inheritor of a monarchial government position for life, she isn't a princess.

Fuck you, i always hated their overly cherry and so safe its boring movies. They dont have the balls to make anything of any actual artistic merit or greatness because theyre too afraid to make something that will offend soccer moms or scare 5 year olds.

...

Technicality. Also it was a lazy, ill-fitting, anachronical throw-away joke that was basically just "we're not your grandma's Disney movie" and while it had some good things, it very much was a princess movie.

You realize they produced Tarantino's movies back when he was good, right?
And if you're strictly talking cartoons you're comparing that to what? Aside from Bakshi the rest of the American output in kids cartoon movies has been just about as cheery and often more mindless than Disney.

>You realize they produced Tarantino's movies back when he was good, right?
A subsidiary doing one thing right doesn't mean the original company and its output are great by relation

>Bakshi
I'm an idiot, I meant Bluth.

I hate bluths films too, theyre just as bad and for the same reasons. Movies like rango and heavy metal are better animated films that more animators should strive for

>A subsidiary doing one thing right doesn't mean the original company and its output are great by relation
When your only argument is "they don't do anything edgy ever", it just defeats that argument is all.

The main business of Disney, the parent and original company, is to make children's entertainement. Again, comparing children's entertainment, which competitors would you say have been consistently better than them?
Calling Disney shit for making children's films rather than edgy whatever it is you want is like calling Volkswagen shit for making cars instead of helicopters.

Im not saying that their problem is not making edgy childrens films. Im saying they make bad childrens films. Also, they water down every franchise they buy and effectively kill it.

I love cartoons aimed at adults but this isn't what we're talking about here.

She's probably not Polynesian but some kind of Amerimutt

No dude, you're literally saying "they're shit because make children's films".
Again, what other company consistently makes better childrens' films?

>Also, they water down every franchise they buy and effectively kill it.
So it was Star Wars butthurt after all.

Rango isnt an adult film, even then things like coraline or the spongebob movie are much better animated films then disney has ever made

>Again, what other company consistently makes better childrens' films?
Laika, warner bros animation, hell even dreamworks is better

> things like coraline or the spongebob movie are much better animated films then disney has ever made
Really nigga? How old are you?

>Laika
Arguable but they're not even trying to make money, they're entirely passion projects.
>WB
>Dreamworks
15 years ago sure, these days not so much.

>Really nigga? How old are you?
Is that the only comeback you could come up with? Whatever, my point stands

>>WB
>>Dreamworks
>15 years ago sure, these days not so much.
Sure theyre shit now, but even then its STILL better then disneys movies. You really thing emoji movie 2 electirc boogaloo or wrinkle in time will be well liked?

La goblia...

Its not a comeback, it's a question, it just seems a lot of your taste (aswell as strong dislike for things innocent and positive) speaks to someone younger than me. But that might be me projecting, I had a phase like that in early adulthood, but maybe for you it's just how you see things as an adult.
You didn't make a point, you just voiced your opinion, if I just answered "I disagree" I'd have made as much of a point as you. I could cite Disney movies that I consider better than those but what exactly would be the point?

>You really thing emoji movie 2 electirc boogaloo or wrinkle in time will be well liked?
I gotta admit Disney's next few years really don't look appetizing. I hate sequels, I'm not even excited for Incredibles 2. But hey even on those they usually execute decently so we'll have to see. I wasn't excited for Moana or Zootopia either and they were fairly decent.
And no I'm not excited for Oprah in space.

I dont even hate things that are overly positive or cute, i just think disney films arent entertaining and rely too much on bad cliches left over from walts years.

They actually made her look slightly older.

>rely too much on bad cliches left over from walts years.
Princess movies sure, they can, other than that I don't really agree.
But I'm not sure how you'd even make a non-cliché princess movie.