>Sexiest Disney princess design>Only in the movie for five minutes before she turns 3DPDIt's not fair.
I've never understood the whole "Disney doesn't use Giselle in things because then they'd have to pay likeness rights to Amy Adams" thing when they use characters from Pirates of the Caribbean and Tron all the fucking time, not to mention the MCU and Star Wars. Why is Giselle/Amy Adams the one likeness line Disney won't cross?
>>154205684They talked about this on tumblr back in the day.It's because theyd have to pay Amy Adams a small fortune for the Disney Princess line royalties
>>154205748That still doesn't really answer it, though, at least not the way you worded it. Why would they have to pay Amy Adams a small fortune for the merch but not Johnny Depp or Robert Downey Jr.? She doesn't even look THAT much like Amy Adams.
>>154205850Probably different contracts, I'd assume. Since Pirates of the Caribbean were a Disney property before the movie.
>>154205583Makes sense. Theyvleaned into all of their cliches because "it's just a joke" and "accidentslly" made a hyper optimized lrincess design.Imo Elsa is the peak expression of this, but she benefitted from another 10 years of innovation
>>154205583She's proto-Rapunzel if you think about it
>>154205583Wait, that movie was Disney? WTH?
>>154205583It’s hilarious to think 90% of films Amy Adams did after Enchanted were serious in tone, ie. the opposite of Enchanted
>>154205583I’m far more annoyed that they wasted the one time they chose to do an art nouveau inspired setting and style. That’s part of why Giselle’s design is so great, she’s supposed to look like a chick out of a Alphonse Mucha poster. But even the architecture was influenced by that style too. We shoulda had a whole movie like that!
>same fucking threads as the day beforeyou people are trying to convince me i've had a stroke
