|
Post by Trey_Vore on Feb 4, 2008 23:07:14 GMT -5
Well, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks so...
I will agree with RaceFanX and Two-Tone, I don't follow "Starlight Barking" or "102 Dalmatians", I would prefer to follow the movies and the series. Like RaceFanX said before, I don't think Starlight Barking would ever work as a movie.
I don't think they all exist in the exact same universe. There's the book continuity (Dodie Smith's original stories), the original animated movie and the sequel, the live-action movie and sequel and the series. Like the Sonic universe, there's like a whole mess of continuities. As far as Sonic is concerned, there's SegaSonic (the game continuity), AoStH (the Looney Tunes-derived world), SatAM (no explanation necessary), Underground (don't know about this one, though...what were they thinking?), Sonic X, the Sonic Comic book, I could likely go on and on...but there's no way they could all exist in the same world.
Anyway, that's my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Feb 5, 2008 3:22:28 GMT -5
Well, ignoring the time zones and the settings, that timeline makes the most sense, right?
1. 101 Dalmatians (book/animated movie/live-action movie) 2. 101 Dalmatians II (with "Home is Where the Bark Is" mixed in) 3. Cartoon Series (excluding first episode) 4. Starlight Barking 5. 102 Dalmatians
|
|
|
Post by Two-Tone on Feb 5, 2008 21:09:36 GMT -5
seems like a good one but since that has the series tied in that would mean Lucky would be mated with Two-Tone instead of Gay.
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Feb 5, 2008 22:25:25 GMT -5
Just for this board's sake and mine as well, I'm just going to pretend that Gay is Two-Tone.
|
|
|
Post by Two-Tone on Feb 6, 2008 4:17:34 GMT -5
Works for me Belchic ^^
|
|
Mixer
Full Member
Too many cooks spoil the broth
Posts: 248
|
Post by Mixer on Feb 6, 2008 7:23:24 GMT -5
Is Two-Tone gay ?
|
|
|
Post by Two-Tone on Feb 6, 2008 16:20:20 GMT -5
No mixer I am not gay I'm straight
|
|
|
Post by dalmationfanation on Mar 3, 2008 20:31:37 GMT -5
Angry Disney Nerd here, and here's my latest episode. Yes, I know, I'm not really the Angry Disney Nerd, but who cares? "101 Dalmatians" is one of the most well-made Disney Animated Classics of all time. It's also one of Disney's most popular franchises. There was so much stuff made to promote it. There was a sequel, a live-action remake, and a ton of merchandise. We got the board game, which was awesome. There were some computer games that were pretty nifty at the time. We had a line of clothing, gear, and a ton of plushies. Aww, how great it is to snuggle with one of these adorable dalmatians! We had Lucky, Patch, Jewel, but this one, I...wait, that's not mine, get that the f**k out of here! Being a child of the 90's, I was such a huge dalmatian fan, I just couldn't get enough of them, even though they were everywhere. This was back when dalmatians and cartoon shows were the best things ever. Cartoon shows, I don't think need an introduction, cos they define the word "classic". Now when the late 90's came around, there was a moment when I became just psyched. When I heard that there was going to be an animated TV series of "101 Dalmatians", I sh*t my pants! Literally! sh*t came out of my ass, and I sky-rocketed through the roof! I wasn't sure if this show was going to be good or not. Disney had a tendicie to fail when it comes to making animated series' based on their movies. That's what happened to "The Little Mermaid", "Aladdin" and "The Mighty Ducks", but "Timon & Pumbaa" was pretty good. I decided to check it out, and the minute it came on, I just glared at the TV screen and didn't look away for a second! This was the #1 cartoon that stole my heart and changed my life forever! The only real dissappoint ment about this show is the fact that it had a really short run. Only 65 episodes were made, and they aired them all in like 6 months. That's just because Disney had this stupid rule to have each of it's cartoon series' a limit of 65 episodes. Thankfully, the creators of this show were curteous enough to have a majority of the episodes contain 2 seperate adventures, so that made it feel more like the series had more than just 65 episodes. Yes, I know what you're thinking. Why am I psyched about this show? Well, let me ask you this. Who were the target audience of this series? Kids. Preferably younger kids. Well, I may be in my 20's, but heck, I'm still a kid at heart. I don't see anything wrong with that. One of the things that grined my sh*t about this show is that there was so much stuff I was expecting to see happen that didn't happen at all. Ever since I started watching the show, I constantly have been asking myself numerous questions about it. I asked myself stuff like: -Are the pups going to form a rock band? -Are the pups going to do a totem pole disguise? -Is there gonna be a video game based on the series? -Are they gonna make comics of the series to put in "Disney Adventures"? Well, guess what? The answer to all of those questions is "No". And that really pissed me off. It was like landing on the 0 in Roulette. Everyone loses. It seemed to me like it was just a big "f**k you" to all the fans of the show who were expecting something incredible like that to happen. And you know what else? This series had a lack of merchandising! That's why it was never as popular as "Rugrats" or "The Simpsons" or whatever the hell the biggest shows on the planet were at the time. I'll bet the creators of this show were payed minimum wage. How can anyone hate this show? It's so great. Cadpig is such an amazing character, while my favorite character is still Lucky, and ironically, he's a great character too! So anyway, you get the picture. Regardless of how popular it was or however many people knew it actually existed, Disney still managed to make a classic series that I will truly cherrish forever. So now, I'm gonna raise my glass and say, "Long Live the 101 Dalmatians!" Finally people with the same beliefs as me! I probably saw every single episode at least 2 times sadly my entire collection got wiped out by a flood and then the few I had on my hard drive fell victim to the Trojan Virus *wipes tear away* this show was basically one of only 5 shows that i could watch and enjoy, and I miss it dearly (no pun intended)
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Aug 18, 2008 14:14:25 GMT -5
WAIT A MINUTE!
I think I just found out something that makes sense now! I remember what I said about how the ending to the live-action 101 Dalmatians had an ending that contridicted all the other endings, but now it seems to come together now.
If I remember correctly, at the end of that movie, Roger and Anita have a baby and are living in a mansion. During this scene they say, "We have two great dogs...and our dogs have children...and their children have children...and their children have children." This makes sense now, because I just figured out that this particular ending actually goes way into the future! This specific ending is what goes at the very end of the timeline! When Anita says, "They're children have children," she could be referring to how Dipstick had Little Dipper, Oddball and Domino, as well as the other pups having their puppies.
So yeah, I know I've said it before, but I believe this is how the timeline goes:
The original "101 Dalmatians" obviously takes place at the beginning of the timeline, since it's where Pongo and Perdita first met, got married and had their 15 puppies. It also shows how they got the other 84 pups and brought them home with them, which gave Roger the idea to move out into the country.
"101 Dalmatians II" would come next in the timeline, since it starts with the Dearly's packing up and leaving to their country home.
However, the first episode of the series, "Home is Where the Bark Is", also starts that way. This is where the split in the timeline occurred. "Home is Where the Bark Is" and "Patch's London Adventure" occurred at pretty much the exact same time. After that, everything else in the series is straightforward all the way up to when Roger and Anita officially get married.
"The Starlight Barking" would come next since the puppies are all grown up and living their own lives. However, there's no mention of Cruella in the story.
"102 Dalmatians" would come after that, since there was no mention of Dipstick, Dottie or their puppies in "The Starlight Barking". It also showed pretty much what happened to Cruella in the end.
Finally, the ending of the live-action "101 Dalmatians" takes place after "102 Dalmatians".
Does that sound logically correct?
|
|
|
Post by babclayman on Aug 18, 2008 14:32:17 GMT -5
WAIT A MINUTE! If I remember correctly, at the end of that movie, Roger and Anita have a baby and are living in a mansion. During this scene they say, "We have two great dogs...and our dogs have children...and their children have children...and their children have children." This makes sense now, because I just figured out that this particular ending actually goes way into the future! This specific ending is what goes at the very end of the timeline! When Anita says, "They're children have children," she could be referring to how Dipstick had Little Dipper, Oddball and Domino, as well as the other pups having their puppies. "The Starlight Barking" would come next since the puppies are all grown up and living their own lives. However, there's no mention of Cruella in the story. "102 Dalmatians" would come after that, since there was no mention of Dipstick, Dottie or their puppies in "The Starlight Barking". It also showed pretty much what happened to Cruella in the end. Does that sound logically correct? Actually Cruella was mentioned in Starlight Barking; she moved to France and makes Metal rain macs Plus at the end of the live action movie they say their baby is a year old, Anita was pregnant during the original story events meaning the end takes place only 2 or less years after the events of the original story, so before 102 Dalmatians.
|
|
|
Post by Blitz on Aug 19, 2008 9:26:32 GMT -5
I try not to think too hard about it.... it's like the Zelda series, the time line will never make sense.
|
|
|
Post by Belchic on Aug 19, 2008 14:19:19 GMT -5
WAIT A MINUTE! If I remember correctly, at the end of that movie, Roger and Anita have a baby and are living in a mansion. During this scene they say, "We have two great dogs...and our dogs have children...and their children have children...and their children have children." This makes sense now, because I just figured out that this particular ending actually goes way into the future! This specific ending is what goes at the very end of the timeline! When Anita says, "They're children have children," she could be referring to how Dipstick had Little Dipper, Oddball and Domino, as well as the other pups having their puppies. "The Starlight Barking" would come next since the puppies are all grown up and living their own lives. However, there's no mention of Cruella in the story. "102 Dalmatians" would come after that, since there was no mention of Dipstick, Dottie or their puppies in "The Starlight Barking". It also showed pretty much what happened to Cruella in the end. Does that sound logically correct? Actually Cruella was mentioned in Starlight Barking; she moved to France and makes Metal rain macs Plus at the end of the live action movie they say their baby is a year old, Anita was pregnant during the original story events meaning the end takes place only 2 or less years after the events of the original story, so before 102 Dalmatians. Well, that just brings the confusion back. Unless there's no mention of Roger and Anita at all in 102 Dalmatians or The Starlight Barking.
|
|
|
Post by Dare on Aug 20, 2008 15:36:43 GMT -5
MY opinon is I think they make some of the 15 Pups have a starring role like for instance.Patch had his own adventure.And few other pups like Lucky,Cadpig and Rolly they have their own series now.And finally Dipstick he has his own movie now.
|
|
|
Post by biruka on Apr 16, 2009 11:10:20 GMT -5
To me there is five different continuitys:
My continuity Original novels continuity (The One Hundred and One Dalmatians and The Starlight Barking) Animated movies continuity (101 Dalmatians and Patch's London adventure) Live-Action movies continuity (101 Dalmatians Live-Action Remake and 102 Dalmatians) Series continuity
|
|
|
Post by Trey_Vore on Apr 16, 2009 13:17:59 GMT -5
Well, that just brings the confusion back. Unless there's no mention of Roger and Anita at all in 102 Dalmatians or The Starlight Barking. There's no mention at all of Roger or Anita in 102 Dalmatians. There is a review on the movie on ultimatedisney.com that says: The entire movie boasts the sensibilities of a made-for-TV or direct-to-video sequel. And yet, there is a 5-time Oscar-nominated actress in the middle of it all.
The strong attendance levels on the first live-action film and presence of Glenn Close guaranteed this one a theatrical release.
The reported budget of $85 million, quite unbelievable considering the polished but plain visuals, surely must have included a hefty payment to the actress. That high number is the only thing to justify Disney debuting the movie in theaters during the heavily-trafficked Thanksgiving week of 2000. Its box office performance might have impressed on another live-action sequel, but the $65 million domestic gross failed to earn back the expenses or qualify Dalmatians as anything but a flop. The film was much better received overseas, where it made $116.7 M, or nearly two-thirds of its $183.6 M worldwide sum. Nevertheless, 102 failed to match its predecessor despite its amplified costs.
Although 102 Dalmatians fared alright on home video, particularly in VHS sales where it did most of its business, its return to DVD this week is more the result of cross-promotional Disney strategy than public clamor.Along with a scroll over one picture, it has what I think is a fitting line: "Wait, you're shocked that Cruella's getting out and we're supposed to take it in stride that Roger and Anita let Dipstick go? That seems fair." www.ultimatedisney.com/102dalmatians.html
|
|