Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for Discussion of: <a href="http://www.LaughingPlace.com/News-ID510170.asp" target="_blank">3/7/06 Rhett Wickham: Burried Treasure</a>
Originally Posted By u k fan I couldn't agree with you more. I love Treasure Planet and would list at least 3 films from the last 10 years in my top 5 Disney films, for proof go find the thread! To call F2000 a failure for example is laughable. Over the last 10 years I have laughed, cried, been transported all over the known universe (and beyond), travelled in time over thousands of years, hated evil villians, cheered for heroes... the list goes on. To discount that is shortsighted at best, down right stupid at worst and either way highly direspectful, not only to the talented people who made these movies, but to the people like myself who enjoyed them. I also agree that it's Disney's fault these characters aren't out there in parades or on the front of lunchboxes. I have 2 pieces of TP merchandise, 2 pieces of merchandise for one of my favorite movies! I've got more for films I don't like! I commend the fact that Iger is obviously saying that he's ready to roll up his sleeves and churn out quality, but Disney already was. So while he's busy laying the last 10 years to rest, I'll be with my friends surfing in Hawaii, playing with a Yoyo, sailing through space, swinging through the trees, ringing bells, falling over waterfalls, discovering lost empires, defeating the Huns, fighting a Hydra or singing my own theme music!!!
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan As one of the lone voices in the wilderness about Treasure Planet, it made my day to read Rhett's comment: >>The pacing is tight and the characters are well developed and compelling, with superb performances – particularly Sergio Pablos’s Doppler, John Rippa’s complicated and extraordinary Jim Hawkins, and Glen Keane’s Silver (the most un-inhibited and joyful work he’s done since Ratigan.)<< I've said it before -- the character animation in Treasure Planet alone is worth the price of admission. There's a subtelty of movement and range of expression and body language in the three characters you mention that ranks up there with the best of any Disney feature animation.
Originally Posted By markedward I have mixed feelings about this interesting opinion piece. One thought: a movie doesn't have to be great to have something to offer the Disney mileau. Splash Mountain is based on a movie Disney pretends doesn't exist, for goodness sake. I've ridden Mr. Toad's Wild Ride and I've seen the movie it's based on, and I know that the value of an attraction is not predetermined by the movie it's based on. Has anyone even seen the movie the Matterhorn was inspired by? The fact is Long John Silver walking around Tomorrowland would be pretty cool, regardless of what you think of the movie. Pocahontas and Brother Bear have a lot to offer Frontierland, Animal Kingdom and DCA. Iger ought not think that only characters from huge movies have a role in the parks. Who can name Chip and Dale's big hit? If fingers need to be pointed, it shouldn't be at Animation for not making Toy Story, but at the Parks for not marketing Disney films as well as Pixar ones. Think about it: Monsters Inc has a ride. A Bug's Life has a whole land. Toy Story has a ride. And a restaurant. Nemo is getting a ride and already has a film experience. If you ignore live shows, because they have a way of disappearing, there are no similar attractions based on modern Disney films. Never mind the weak ones (IMHO) like Atlantis or the Emperor's New Groove. There's no Beauty and the Beast attraction. I think maybe there's a movie using the Lion King. There used to be a Tarzan show. I think Alladin got a walk through in Paris. And a Dumbo knock off. Oh, and Lilo and Stitch got to take over Alien Encounter - my guess is that someone thought it was a Pixar movie. If a movie has "Pixar" in the title, it gets an attraction. But the Disney hits of the 80s and 90s are very poorly represented. And twenty years from now, when every kids' DVD shelf (or whatever they'll be) has The Lion King, girls still want to be The Little Mermaid for Halloween, and every couple has rented Beauty and the Beast for a date, how many people will remember Monster's Inc? When was the last time you rented A Bug's Life. If Pixar's purchase brings Disney their brilliance, hurray. If it just brings their back catalog, it will be a sad day. But, as for the other side of the coin, in my humble opinion, only Disney animation enthusiasts seem to be oblivious to the fact that Lilo and Stitch was Disney's only home run in a LONG LONG time.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Lilo and Stitch was Disney's only home run in a LONG LONG time.>> Since when? What about Tarzan? Tarzan did more money internationally (ie. outside the US) than Lilo & Stitch did in its entire run (L&S grossed about $275m and Tarzan did almost $450m).
Originally Posted By leemac I'd also argue that Lilo & Stitch are about the most popular Disney characters in the theme parks created in decades. Significantly more popular than any Pixar characters.
Originally Posted By TheRedhead A lot of good points are brought up. I'm not ready to swing Iger from a tree yet. If anything, he's acting like a good CEO: he's offering one hand to Wall Street to be slapped for Disney's less than stellar decade (to the cheers of investors), while inviting folks responsible for the so-called dismal decade back into the fold (to the cheers of us fans). He might be even smarter than we thought. But the main point I wanted to make is...what's up with the word "burried" in the article title? You're driving this English teacher nuts.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA The Redhead is correct. It would be 'Buried Treasure' -- with one 'r' in 'buried.'
Originally Posted By actingforanimators DOH! uhmmm..it's a Scottish title. Yeah, that's it! Think of it as though John Silver were saying it...(at least until I can corrrrect the image and float a new one...)(sounds of the patter of sheepish little feet scampering off to load photoshop.)
Originally Posted By actingforanimators I want to be clear that I do not think Iger is an Ogre, and I think he's an exceptional CEO, or at least the record thus far proves him as such, but I do think that there was a slip here on a slope that could hurl him toward much worse if he's not careful. He's been a very stoic and fairly quiet CEO up until now, and I worry that he could tend toward sweeping sound bites now that he's in the spotlight more and more, and that would be very sad. Bottom line for me is that he grossly over-exaggerated the reality of the last ten years and I'm very much with Markedward and UKFan on this in-so-far as the lack of visibility plays a measurable role as to what makes a character "recognizable", and if they're not out there, then they don't brand (a word I'm hating more and more) with consumers (read fans.) And in the end, I think he's slighting a crew of people who did extraordinary work, some of which is far from being even remotely considered "failure" if you just look at numbers. Imagine if "Pinocchio"'s terrible box office failure had prevented Roy and Walt from pushing the characters in their product lines (what little of it there was in 1940 relative to now) Would Jiminy and Pinocchio have been as iconic now? I can not imageine Walt and Roy thinking "Oh, it lost money at the box office. Let's not put these characters out there so much, people obviously don't want to see them or the movie would have made more money."
Originally Posted By wilbear64 Just wanted to add my two cents... I LOVED TREASURE PLANET! It was POOR Disney marketing departments fault that it did not do well. Every bit of advertising played it as an action movie, and showed us nothing of the human elements of the story! Some one really show have lost their job of the misrepresenting of the wonderful touching film! I knew growing up just how Jimbo felt.
Originally Posted By basil fan I love Treasure Planet!! A lot!! Donald Duck's Family Tree <a href="http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/disney/donald.html" target="_blank">http://www.whatsitsgalore.com/ disney/donald.html</a>
Originally Posted By markedward leemac - I stand corrected. I just checked Tarzan's release date - summer 1999. That is certainly well after the "second golden age" of the 80s. Somehow, it seems longer ago than that. With its adventure, romance and music, it certainly fits solidly in the "second golden age" tradition of Beauty and the Beast and the Lion King. And only seven years ago. Maybe I need to revisit a Disney chronological filmography and rethink my assumptions about the last decade. But it still bugs me that A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc, Toy Story, and Finding Nemo have attractions in Disney's parks, and so many Disney greats are represented by shows or character meet and greets. I am more than happy to give Bob Iger and John Lasseter the benefit of the doubt. Honeymoons are great. But, three years from now, when Little Mermaid, Alladin, Lion King, etc., still are not represented by real permanent attractions, and THE INCREDI-COASTER opens, and Autopia gets its CARS overlay, then we should all tell Bob he's sleeping on the couch.
Originally Posted By Kuzcochik Treasure Planet's one of my absolute favorite Disney movies as with The Emperor's New Groove (obviously) actually looking at that list of the bottom 10 I laughed at the fact that most of them are movies I absolutely love (specifically TP, TENG, Hercules, Hunchback, and Lilo and Stitch). And why isn't Pocahontas considered in that bottom ranking (nothing personal to Pocha lovers but that was more the "beginning of the end") I feel like Disney did try to sabatoge itself especially when the glory of Lion King was the highest they thought they'd reach
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan No matter what you think of the final result, i don't think that anyone can accuse Disney of playing it safe following mega hits like Beauty and teh Beast, Aladdin and Lion King. They took chances in terms of storyline, character design, and music. I think that over time, some of the films that received less that box office blockbuster status will be discovered anew and appreciated much more than they are currently. Heaven knows it's happened before with Disney animated features.
Originally Posted By leemac <<But it still bugs me that A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc, Toy Story, and Finding Nemo have attractions in Disney's parks, and so many Disney greats are represented by shows or character meet and greets.>> I do think a lot of it has to do with the cuteness of the characters. The stars of those movies aren't human characters unlike many of Disney's recent offerings. I guess it is also that the stories easier overlay the work at hand. I never agreed that the Atlantis Subs project should have been dropped. I think it could have worked very well. It just seems that WDI/WDP&R (both or either I don't know) just don't have the confidence in the product from WDFA.
Originally Posted By jasmine7 Add me to the list of Treasure Planet fans. With the exception of Brother Bear, no movie in the last few years (post-Hunchback) has moved me like Treasure Planet. I recently watched it again, and I was utterly amazed anew at Silver and moved by his relationship with Jim.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA <It just seems that WDI/WDP&R (both or either I don't know) just don't have the confidence in the product from WDFA.> I think it's amazing that a Disney Feature Animation movie has to be 'popular' before it can be used in a theme park attraction. Or, that an attraction has to have a movie tie-in at all. On the other hand, WDI did produce 'Superstar Limo' which 99% of people here absolutely hate. <I do think a lot of it has to do with the cuteness of the characters. The stars of those movies aren't human characters unlike many of Disney's recent offerings.> I think the live 'face characters' are an important part of the experience. I always thought that Disney should have a 'Califia' character walking around Disney's California Adventure. Disney does seem to shy away from anything that can't be immediately absorbed and understood by an average park visitor in 2.3 seconds. Mickey Mouse wearing 'vacation' outfit? Good. 'Three Bags Full'? Bad. Goofy wearing 'vacation' outfit? Good. 'D'Vine' and her friends? Bad. Donald Duck painting a picture of Grizzly Peak? Good. Comedy troup 'D.U.H.'? Bad. Everything has to somehow be related back to a Disney Animated Character. Perhaps smart marketing, but boring too.
Originally Posted By leemac ^^ Add Chance to Shine to that list. One of the finest streetmosphere projects ever at DLR and unceremoniously axed.
