Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for discussion of the November 22 article: Jim on Film at <a href="News-ID180510.asp" target="_blank">http://LaughingPlace.com/News-ID180510.asp</a>.
Originally Posted By tcsnwhite It couldn't have been said any more eloquently. This is exactly what the Disney company needs to realize.
Originally Posted By Imagineer This It is even worse than that! The lines are so blurred that people think some none Disney films were made by Disney. I have heard some people think that "Ferngully", "Ice Age", and other non Disney movies were created by Disney. The blurring continues!
Originally Posted By CuriosWolfSo Not only that..some people think that some of Don Bluth's (an ex-Disney animator) movies were made at Disney! "Anastasia", anyone?
Originally Posted By basil fan I think Anastasia gets the Disney treatment the most. But could this be a boon for Disney? Sort of free advertising their name no matter who makes the movie? I forgot to post this in the other thread: some years ago, the Disney Store carried a Sleeping Beauty music box that played Once Upon a December, an Anastasia tune! I thought that was a bit much. Disney Villains <a href="http://www15.brinkster.com/wtstsgalor/villain/villain.html" target="_blank">http://www15.brinkster.com/wts tsgalor/villain/villain.html</a>
Originally Posted By Sapphire Jim Hill's point he well-taken, but it makes a crucial error: he doesn't acknowledge the dwindling entertainment value of the Feature Animation output. It's streching things to call "Treasure Planet" and "Brother Bear" masterpieces; even if they had been box-office smashes, it wouldn't have changed the mostly lukewarm-or-worse reviews they got. (In fact, much as he hates the "Teacher's Pet" movie, it actually got better reviews than those films in some circles - possibly because it didn't take itself so seriously.) While Disney has not helped its case with its blurring of lines between DTV, Pixar, etc. and their core films, it has to be understood that many (often less-fannish) people who know the difference and do see the new Feature Animation films aren't terribly impressed by them. I was disappointed by most of the Feature Animation output from "Pocahontas" onwards. Many of the films are enjoyable, but not true "masterpieces" in the way the best Disney films are. Some were pretentious ("Pocahontas"), some dropped chances at greatness by not having the courage to follow their dramatic convictions ("Hunchback of Notre Dame", "Mulan"), some were too strained ("Hercules"), some were just half-baked ("Treasure Planet", which was almost unbearable until John Silver arrived). Simply put, I think there's serious overrating going on with regards to many of the more recent Feature Animation films.
Originally Posted By TheRedhead Piggybacking on what Sapphire said, Jim's argument took a major plunge when he started holding up Teacher's Pet as the crap that WDFA isn't responsible for. WDFA WISHES they got the reviews Teacher's Pet got, especially when you glance at the horribly embarrassing ones Treasure Planet and Home on the Range got. He should have used Jungle Book 2, as it was released theatrically, was an ugly cheapquel, and was unanimously regarded as a steaming pile. At least THAT film got the same terrible reception that Treasure Planet got. Of course I am biased, as Teacher's Pet rules and everyone should run out and rent it and then buy it and if you complain that it's ugly at least it's not as ugly as Polar Express and there are no robot-zombie children singing about hot chocolate.
Originally Posted By narkspud >>I think Anastasia gets the Disney treatment the most. But could this be a boon for Disney?<< Lessee: Anastasia, HOTR. Anastasia, HOTR. Yeah, I'd say it's to their advantage for people to be confused. Wonder what they'd have to do to convince people that HOTR is a Don Bluth movie?
Originally Posted By Doobie Just for the record, the author of this piece is Jim Miles, not Jim Hill. Doobie.
Originally Posted By electra >>>Simply put, I think there's serious overrating going on with regards to many of the more recent Feature Animation films.<<< thats intersting cuz I think its just the opposite. I think the Big 4(Mermaid B&B Aladdin & LK) are overrated...I just watched Aladdin today for the first time since the mid 90's & I was underwhelmed thruout, well alot of it...maybe its cuz Ive recently become obsessed with anime & the Disney style's polish is rubbing off of me..or that Ive saw the movie a ton of times when i had it back in the 90s & it doesnt seem as fresh as it used too..I dunno... but anyway, I still think those 4 fims are way too overprasied...yeah theyre great, but I dont think theyre really all that better than some of the stuff that came after...I think most people put them on a pedestal due to nostalgia & sentimental reasons, same way I consider Oliver & Co one of my favorites(due to it being the first Disney animation I fell in love with), even though I know its considered by most people to be the bottom of the barrel... JMHO...
Originally Posted By Sapphire I understand, electra. "Aladdin" has aged rather poorly, and "Lion King" and "Little Mermaid" don't rank on my top Disney flicks either. "Beauty and the Beast" I dearly love (and I think "Oliver and Company" is underrated these days) but yes, there was too fast a rush to acclaim these films back in the day. More cripplingly, the success they had led to the overhyping of the subsequent efforts, and too much of a desire to apply the same formulas that made those movies so popular to stories that did not call for them.
Originally Posted By aladar Hi. I worked at Feature Animation for 5 years following the release of Lion King. The made for video sequels were painful for everyone at FA. I've never seen any of them. What a short-sighted way to make a quick buck. As far as I know Feature Animation is DEAD. There are only a handful of people there, working on a CG feature and Toy Story 3.
Originally Posted By nish221 True that the blurrying has been intentional and going on for a while now. Really sad to see this kind of cannibalistic marketing. However, I don't agree that all of these non FA movies have been terrible (although IMHO the majority are; did you see Cinderella 2?!?) The exceptions that I have seen are: * Mickey Mouse: 3 Mouseketeers. Not a "great" classically Disney movie but definitely entertaining with lots of homages to other Mickey Mouse shorts * Lion King 1 1/2 Again, not "great" but definitely interesting and entertaining. Even "Return to Neverland" was not horrible and in some scenes the art surpassed that in the original. BTW. an aside, but the art lately has been very, very good. Last weekend, I slowly went over Atlantis & Brother Bear just looking at the art. It was gorgeous. Too bad for the terrible/weird character development. Another example, my son just got the Winnie the Pooh ABCs. Just a kids educational DVD, right? Well, all the voices and mannerisms are right and the art surpasses anything that was on TV. (yeah, we have all of those videos, too!)
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>More cripplingly, the success they had led to the overhyping of the subsequent efforts, and too much of a desire to apply the same formulas that made those movies so popular to stories that did not call for them.<< Wow, I really disagree. I think the feature animation output was anything but formula when it would have been easier to do so. Stylistically, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas, Lion King, Hercules, Hunchback, Tarzan, Mulan, Treasure Planet, Fantasia 2000, Atlantis were all very different. It would have been so easy to follow the Beauty and the Beast formula, and they simply didn't do it. Instead, they took risks and were amazingly inventive for a company of their size. Throughout the 1990s, I thought it was a treat to watch the artists involved stretching themselves, challenging themselves with a range of storylines and artistic styles.
Originally Posted By basil fan I think Treasure Planet & Atlantis are fabulous. I prefer both to Beauty & the Beast. I like Brother Bear, too, but not nearly as much. I've never equated greatness or "masterpiece" status with box office receipts or reviews. So many big hits that I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole. But that's just me. The Tarzan Equation <a href="http://www15.brinkster.com/wtstsgalor/tarzan.html" target="_blank">http://www15.brinkster.com/wts tsgalor/tarzan.html</a>
