Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<Change of heart, stimulated and demonstrated by what? At what point has he learned anything from his experience, from his failings, to become a better "person"? He hasn't. He's gotten peptalks, including a couple of guilt trips, from dad and from his quasi-girlfriend.>> There are plenty of stories where the hero gets sense knocked into him through some conversations. <<You have? This is why movies fail their second week. Word of mouth gets out that the story doesn't work, doesn't hold their interest, isn't compelling, or is ridiculous. People scrutinize movies, just the way they enjoy their theme parks - they don't articulate it - they just know what they like, and they stay away from what they think or hear they WON'T like.>> I think is getting into what you define as scrutinize. In my opinion, people don't delve into plots and and bring up plot holes on a regular basis unless the plot holes are blaringly obvious. And there have been loads of movies with huge plot holes and ridiculous storylines that have great second weeks. <<So yes, I hold films up to a high standard... since I kinda have to, in order to make a living.>> I hold movies to a high standard too, higher than the general public I think. I don't think the Lion King is an unqualified masterpiece, but I also don't think it's completely shallow. <<To you, perhaps, but those MAKING the movie knew differently, and made a huge effort to overcome any sensitivity to the lightweight-quality of their story's forward motion elements.>> Could the Lion King had been made more maturely and with more emotional depth? Certainly. I still argue that it's about average for the genre. <<Katzenberg certainly knew. There's a reason that Pumbaa and Timon get so much screen time.>> And the same thing goes for Mushu, Genie, the Dwarfs, etc, etc. Sidekicks that add little to character development besides humor have been a staple of the format since the beginning. <<THE IRON GIANT deals with very deep issues of loss and mortality. LILO AND STITCH deal with issues of kids having to raise themselves, isolation, ostracization, and how children act out in times of grief.>> I agree that those movies are deep. But they are particularly deep for the genre. There's also plenty of other films like Shrek 2 for instance (the highest grossing animated movie, how's that for scrutiny) that has nearly no depth at all. <<THE RESCUERS, while a simple story, dealt with every parent and child's nightmare - kidnapping (and essentially abuse), as well as tough self-esteem issues.>> I don't really agree with that entierly. Yes Penny suffers from extreme self-esteem problems, but the only thing that solves it is for her to have something happen to her. Penny never stands up to Medusa or tells Bernard and Bianca that she's wrong and that she is a beautiful girl and so on and so forth. Is Rescuers completely shallow? No, but I don't think it's particularly deep either. I certainly do not think it's radically more deep than the Lion King. <<There's plenty of other films that deal with serious issues either tangently or as a major focus of story. BAMBI is a terrifically deep film in its own right.>> Again, you picked one of the most deep stories in animation. But what about Robin Hood, Aristocats, Sword in the Stone,Atlantis: The Lost Empire and Peter Pan? <<TARZAN is another such film, dealing with issues of identity, loyalty, love and the nature of sacrifice.>> Not sure if I see nearly that much going on in Tarzan. Tarzan to me suffers from some pretty bad characters, really only Jane, Tarzan and Tarzan's Mom (Kala I think?) have rounded characters. <<TREASURE PLANET's themes are very heady, a shame considering the other blather that was thrown into that movie.>> I agree, Treasure Planet did throw in some themes. However I don't think that they were dealt with all that well anyway. <<Mary Poppins and Bedknobs both dealt with serious issues of their own, even though the subject matter/framing material was very light and frothy. You can have both. Just treat that material with respect.>> Bedknobs? I suppose there were some serious issues in there, but certainly the movie did not carry the emotional weight of Mary Poppins. <<Ariel's father wouldn't be the first to sacrifice the world for his beloved child. It's very much a resonant theme in literature throughout the ages.>> But it's a complete botch job of a story that actually dealt with real issues such as sacrifice and paying a penalty for your mistakes. <<Mowgli goes back to his kind... It's where he belongs, and it's not an entirely happy ending - which makes it gutsy, along the lines of THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK.>> Jungle Book and gutsy? Mowgli goes back to his own kind because that's where he belongs. Honestly, Mowgli's a big pill who makes incredibly stupid decisions and never has to pay for any of them. A bold and gutsy ending would be for his stupidity to lead to Baloo's death. <<I don't know what else you're trying to get from it, but as endings to movies go, it's pretty emotionally satisfying, and you can feel the very human emotions between Mowgli, Bagheera and especially Baloo. This is what happens when kids grow up... they leave the nest.>> While I agree to some extent, I think it's the culmination of a fairly bland movie. <<And as for Neverland - that place really ISN'T supposed to make sense - that's the nature of Neverland. Anything goes.>> Which is fine when it has a point. Alice in Wonderland's anything goes attitude parodies real life in fun and sometimes bitting ways. Peter Pan's indians and pirates just seem like fun for the sake of fun. Not that's there's anything wrong with that, it's just not particularly deep either.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy <Most Overrated: 'Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' Sorry, kids. I recognize the historical significance, it was the first animated feature et al, but man is this one a snoozer.> Funny, Snow White isn't my favorite, but I always feel defensive for it when someone knocks it. I guess that's because I think of all of Walt's films, SW really seems to have the best pacing. Out of curiosity Jim, did you see the film when you were a kid? Because usually nostalgia will have you like a film that much more, even if it seems "not up to snuff" to others.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA Saw it as a kid, TDG. Used to go to see the animated features, since they were part of my Disney Fandom, but I much preferred Disneyland.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy Ahhh...see, I did not have that luxury. So seeing the animated features meant a great deal to my sister and me, especially with special ties like old vintage Disney volume books at our grandparents' house (the GPs we didn't get to see as often) with stories of the old Disney features in them, and vintage pictures from The Walt Disney Studios. Good magical stuff.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>Could the Lion King had been made more maturely and with more emotional depth? Certainly. I still argue that it's about average for the genre.<<< Well, that's far more than you were admitting to before, so I'll take it. <<Katzenberg certainly knew. There's a reason that Pumbaa and Timon get so much screen time.>> And the same thing goes for Mushu, Genie, the Dwarfs, etc, etc. Sidekicks that add little to character development besides humor have been a staple of the format since the beginning.<<< They're used to varying degrees of effectiveness, but you're lumping together various sidekicks and saying they're equal. Genie certainly is not. The Dwarfs are a chorus - they're not really functional as individual characters, but collectively they're a brilliant portrayal of one complex "sidekick" or friend for Snow White. Pretty complex device in that regard. <<THE IRON GIANT deals with very deep issues of loss and mortality. LILO AND STITCH deal with issues of kids having to raise themselves, isolation, ostracization, and how children act out in times of grief.>> >>>I agree that those movies are deep. But they are particularly deep for the genre. There's also plenty of other films like Shrek 2 for instance (the highest grossing animated movie, how's that for scrutiny) that has nearly no depth at all.<<< Oh, no argument on Shrek2 and some of the others you mention. However, I'd suggest you go back and watch some of the films you're dismissing so readily. Penny actually DOES have her moments in THE RESCUERS where she tries to stand her ground. She gets shot down, but she increasingly plays a part in her own rescue. She also knows enough to put in practice a maxim taught her by Rufus the cat, which keeps her from despair. There's an awful lot going on in that movie... my guess is you've not watched it in a while. It's actually got some significantly mature threads amid all the silly lightness. That's the achievement of the best of Disney's films. Though they can be light and frothy and enjoyed as such, they're often invested, in their components and themes, with great humanity and resonance. I'll agree that LION KING has SOME of that, which is why it works. But Simba's core arc - it's shallow. That component is shallow and artificial, and it's tough to prove it's not, by saying that many movies have protagonists changed by a conversation... in my business, that's regarded as a very weak device. The rule is SHOW, don't tell. And Lion King gets Simba to change by "telling" him to. Then he changes. I'll admit that it's about average - but Disney often hits way above average, and for me, considering Simba is the star of that particular film, it's kind of an unforgivable stumblingblock for me in that movie.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<The Dwarfs are a chorus - they're not really functional as individual characters, but collectively they're a brilliant portrayal of one complex "sidekick" or friend for Snow White. Pretty complex device in that regard.>> It's complex in a comedic way, but I don't see how it is in a storytelling way. The dwarfs don't seem to change Snow White at all, and while she manages to soften Grumpy a bit, it certainly isn't any big emotional difference on the part of the other dwarfs. And I don't think all sidekicks are equal and I would agree I should not have lumped Genie in that list. Genie does manage to have a major impact on Aladdin's life and does provide some emotional arc. However, I would also argue that Timon and Pumbaa do help with Simba's arc somewhat. Maybe not as much as Genie, but I would argue about as much as the Dwarfs in Snow White do. I agree there are plenty of sidekicks that do a great job of fleshing out the main character, Jiminy Cricket of course comes to mind as does Thumper, the enchanted objects in Beauty and the Beast and even Flit and Meeko to some extent. <<It's actually got some significantly mature threads amid all the silly lightness.>> I would agree with that. But I also think that The Lion King has some mature threads as well. Dealing with loss, do you just ignore it and act like it never happened? Do you have the right to forgo your responsibilty when life gets to hard? How does rejecting responsibilty affect your family/community etc. Now none of these topics are dealt with in more than a fairly shallow way, but they are touched on. <<I'll admit that it's about average - but Disney often hits way above average, and for me, considering Simba is the star of that particular film, it's kind of an unforgivable stumblingblock for me in that movie.>> I can understand that. I can handle something that's good that's packaged as well as The Lion King. Sure there's not as much meat under the surface as there could be (and wow would that movie be something if there was) but it still is a very good movie. I would say it's a way above average movie with an average storyline. That's good enough for me.
