Cinderella and the Prince are destined to be together, but have you ever wondered what would have happened if the glass slipper that was left behind after the royal ball fit someone other than Cinderella? Cinderella's Stepmother and Stepsisters Anastasia and Drisella change history when Anastasia steals the Fairy Godmother's magic wand and her mother uses it to turn back time and then cast a spell on the glass slipper so that it will fit on Anastasia's foot. The Prince immediately realizes that something is amiss, but a quick zap from the magic wand convinces him that Anastasia is his rightful bride-to-be and it looks like nothing that Cinderella or her mouse friends Jaq and Gus can do will set things right. Two questions remain: what will become of Cinderella and can Anastasia ever find true happiness by marrying someone who will never love her for who she really is? This 74-minute animated tale follows the classic Cinderella and its sequel Cinderella II--Dreams Come True and features nice animation, new conflicts between familiar secondary characters like the evil cat Lucifer and mouse friends Jaq and Gus, lots of new songs, and a suspenseful story line.

Cinderella III - A Twist in Time Buy new: $19.99

Parents' Reviews:

very surprised
I was surprised that my wife bought this DVD for our kids, because Disney direct-to-DVD sequels are usually poorly animated, poorly written flops. I was surprised again when I happened to come into my kids' room while they were watching it, and I found myself getting pulled into the film and watching the rest of it with them. I vaguely remember seeing part of Cinderella II, enough to recall that it was rather poor.

It seems that some reviewers here will hate the film no matter what, because they are Disney purists and feel that no sequel could ever possibly do justice to the original. And then it seems that other reviewers want to love the film so much that they will rate it highly even if they movie is a stinker.

I have neither of these mindsets. I don't have any deep devotion to original Disney features, and I don't really care about the sequels. What I can say is that this movie has very good animation. I had to keep reminding myself that this was a direct-to-DVD production, because it looked so good. As for picky details like what Cinderella's foot looked like, I guess I've got too much of a life to keep replaying the movie over and over to focus on things like that. As alluded to above, the story was good enough to pull me in when I had other things to do. In fact, I agree with some other reviewers that Cindrella and the prince were both more engaging characters in this movie than in the original. The only characters in the original that were really entertaining were the stepmother/stepsisters, the king and duke, and the animals. The star couple were rather boring to watch, but not so in this sequel.

I gave this 5 stars not because it is worthy of any awards, but rather because among other direct-to-DVD releases (especially sequels), it really stands out.

Better than the second, not as good as the original
When I first heard that Disney was making a third Cinderella, I was a bit leary. I'd already purchased and watched the second one and was very disappointed. HOwever, once I heard the premise of the third Cinderella, I was intrigued and interested. So, once it came out, I purchased it.

I will say, it is better than the second Cinderella only in that it tells an actual story and isn't a collection of short episods. Of course, it isn't as good as the orginial. I liked the story idea and the animation is actually quite good for a Disney straight to video but sadly, as the sequels tend to do, the characters where kind of ruined. For some reason, the sequels feel the need to take serious characters and turn them into goofballs! I highly doubt Prince Charming would leap out the palace window just because his father told him he could not go down the stairs! And I really don't think Cinderella would blatently disobey the rules. She would not confront the Prince alone and practically force him to remember who she is! For starters, even without the spell cast on him, it is quite understandable for the Prince not to remember Cinderella. She was dressed up in a very fancy gown and it was rather dark at the ball and now she's dressed in her rags and looks quite different from when she was at the ball. Of course, I know this is Disney, but still! Cinderella should not be so confused as to why he doesn't remember her! They'd only met that one time! Sadly, this sequel also gives Cinderella an attitude that she doesn't have in the original and that kind of took away from her whole sweet innocence. The mice,step-sisters and step-mother were still in character for the most part so that was nice.

I'm also rather curious as to why Anastasia is the step-sister who has the side stories? She found a love in the second Cinderella (and where did that baker go in this third one? After all, the second Cinderella took place right after Cinderella and the Prince married while the third one takes place about a year later). The Baker shows up in a picture during the credits so he's obviously still a romantic interest, but still, why does Anastasia get to be the one to "marry" the prince when she should already be in love with the baker?

Now after reading this review, you're probably thinking if there was anything good about it. Well, as mentioned before the story line itself is cute, though a little too close to the scene in the Little Mermaid (and on a side note, Prince Charming is voiced by the same guy who voiced Prince Eric from Little Mermaid). I will say, my favorite scene was when the mice are trying to convince Prince Charming that he's in love with Cinderella and he thinks he's going nuts because birds and mice are talking attacking him. My favorite line has to do with Prince Charming telling his father that "the mice told him he was in love with someone else" and that he had to go get her but not to worry he'll be back in time for the wedding. The king then tells him that it's not the wedding he's worried about, it's the talking mice! I laughed quite at that, and I'm even giggling right now! I have to say, there were several silly bits and it was kind of refreshing to see Cinderella looking like she'd been rung through the ringer near the end. Not that I have anything against her, it's just nice to see her not looking so fresh all the time. I think she probably even looked her age when she was about to go on the ship near the end because her hair was down (not tied back) and since she's probably between 18-20, she looked that old during that scene.

So, for children, this is a very good movie because of the silliness, but it's just not the same as the original so don't expect it to be.

Great idea, typical Disney.
Disney movies in general are just better than everyone else's, but not so for sequels. Disney sequels are famously bad, with mediocre music and iffy plot. Bad enough to make one wonder: did they just throw this together to prey on the pockets of parents with little girls?

Because, really, little girls are the only ones who won't notice the gaping plot holes or massive inferiority of this to the original. What really gets me is that on every new, fresh Disney movie, you can tell how much time and effort went into it. But sequels just seem to be an attempt to ride the success of the first movie, and this is no different.

That said, I forced my husband to watch this because it was, indeed, an interesting plotline. It reminded me of a whole lot of anime fanfiction I've read -- cool but used idea, never quite lives up to expectations, but you kind of have to finish it anyway.

I maintain that the movie is watchable and probably very nice for kids, despite my husband's protests of "The fairy godmother just THREW her wand, and then she was a useless doddering old lady. Not magical at all. What kind of fairy godmother just THROWS her wand?!"

But what bothered ME most was the music -- I could deal with the "Perfectly Perfect" song at first, but then I realized that the songwriter didn't bother to come up with any other lyrics. The same songs were repeated over and over again, and not with the nice, thematic style that Pocahontas has -- they were actually just the same songs altered a WEE bit to fit the situation. Meaning either the notes or the words, but never both.

And is anyone else bothered by the fact that the prince doesn't seem to have a name? Or that the wicked stepmother keeps saying "Bippity Boppity Boo" in the most incongruous use of language since the last time President Bush spoke in public?

I watched it. I enjoyed parts, like how the prince had a personality or how Cinderella was willing to fight to get her man. But it's not the Cinderella of Walt Disney's day. Walt wouldn't have allowed this to be put on the market like it is. He had standards.

Comments (0)