Started By
Message
locked post

Disney's animated features going downhill?

Posted on 8/12/08 at 10:59 am
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
35910 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 10:59 am
Okay, Pixar has been good sans Ratatouille. But I think that Disney peaked with the Lion King (1994) and haven't gotten to that level again. Without Pixar, the Disney animated films are pretty much coming to theaters and leaving just as quick. Which explains why they are coming out with all these sequels to their old great movies. How many extra Winnie the Pooh's will they have? How many Little Mermaids can you do?

Let's take a look.

Pochahantas (1995) Good, but certainly not on par with Beast or Lion King.

James and the Giant Peach (1996) Good movie. Not at the box office very long.

Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) This is an exception. This movie was a good one and I believe it was a commercially successful one.

Hercules (1997) Good movie. Still not as big a hit as previous ones.

Mulan (1998) Very good movie. Still though, not the lasting legacy of previous movies.

Tarzan (1999) I liked it. Same as Mulan. No lasting legacy.

Dinosaur (2000) Came and went.

Atlantis (2001) Sucked.

Return to Neverland, Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet (2002) Not bad movies. Quantity is not better than quality.

Piglet's Big Movie (2003) Some things are best left unchanged.

Brother Bear (2003) Came and went.

Home on the Range (2004) Stunk.

Chicken Little (2005) I really liked this movie. But it just came and went also.

Valiant came out around this time. I liked it. No big success.

The Wild (2006) Anyone see this? Me Neither.

Meet the Robinson's (2007) A great movie. Maybe they are turning it around.





This post was edited on 8/12/08 at 11:01 am
Posted by Towelie
America's Wang
Member since Aug 2007
19257 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 11:01 am to
The nemo movie was pretty big
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
35910 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 11:02 am to
Disney with Pixar = success. Disney without Pixar, not happenning.
Posted by CTexTiger
Austin, TX
Member since Jul 2008
4988 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 12:03 pm to
quote:

Disney with Pixar = success. Disney without Pixar, not happenning.


Disagree... this is Disney after all.
Posted by Freauxzen
Washington
Member since Feb 2006
38633 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 12:33 pm to
quote:

Okay, Pixar has been good sans Cars.


Fixed.

Has Disney stunk it up since 94? They've been average...but....

LINK

quote:

As part of the deal, expected to be completed this summer, two Pixar veterans will head Disney's animation efforts. Ed Catmull, who had served as Pixar's president, was named president of the combined Pixar and Disney Animation Studios. John Lasseter, the Pixar executive vice president who is widely regarded as the studio's creative leader, was named chief creative officer. Pixar will remain in its San Francisco Bay Area headquarters.


This only happened two years ago. They re-tooled what was a problematic (rumored) film in Bolt and started work on "The Princess and the Frog," which looks a lot like an older Disney animated film.

LINK

quote:

It is being directed by John Musker and Ron Clements, directors of The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, with songs and score composed by Randy Newman


Given Pixar's crazy success and interviews from Lasseter about his love for hand drawn animation, I think we'll see a good effort from Disney starting next year.
This post was edited on 8/12/08 at 12:35 pm
Posted by udtiger
Over your left shoulder
Member since Nov 2006
114967 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 1:27 pm to
Okay, Pixar has been good sans Ratatouille. But I think that Disney peaked with the Lion King (1994) and haven't gotten to that level again. Without Pixar, the Disney animated films are pretty much coming to theaters and leaving just as quick. Which explains why they are coming out with all these sequels to their old great movies. How many extra Winnie the Pooh's will they have? How many Little Mermaids can you do?

Let's take a look.

Pochahantas (1995) Good, but certainly not on par with Beast or Lion King.

James and the Giant Peach (1996) Good movie. Not at the box office very long.

Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) This is an exception. This movie was a good one and I believe it was a commercially successful one.

Hercules (1997) Good movie. Still not as big a hit as previous ones.

Mulan (1998) Very good movie. Still though, not the lasting legacy of previous movies.

Tarzan (1999) I liked it. Same as Mulan. No lasting legacy.

Dinosaur (2000) Came and went.

Atlantis (2001) Sucked.

Return to Neverland, Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet (2002) Not bad movies. Quantity is not better than quality.

Piglet's Big Movie (2003) Some things are best left unchanged.

Brother Bear (2003) Came and went.

Home on the Range (2004) Stunk.

Chicken Little (2005) I really liked this movie. But it just came and went also.

Valiant came out around this time. I liked it. No big success.

The Wild (2006) Anyone see this? Me Neither.

Meet the Robinson's (2007) A great movie. Maybe they are turning it around.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I disagree with the premise here for a number of reasons.

First, you can't look at the "lasting" nature of a body of work after such a short time.

Second, Disney somewhat's inhibits the process of movies becoming ingrained in the conscisouness of the fans because of their tendency to take their movies out of distribution and "put them in the valut" (a perfect example...my kids absolutely LOVE Nightmare Before Christmas, but you can't buy a new copy of it because Disney has it locked up).

Third, I disagree with a number of the entries on your list as not being "lasting". I base this on the fact that my own kids love these movies and will be the ones truly "making the call" as to whether they are classis when they get older:

Pocahantas
Mulan
Lilo & Stitch

I think these movies will attain the level of "classics" in the future.

I do agree that Home on the Range absolutely sucked.

I also think that Enchanted (which started with 10 minutes of "classical" Disney animation) showed there is still a "market" for 2-D animation.

Posted by iwyLSUiwy
I'm your huckleberry
Member since Apr 2008
42107 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

Mulan


great movie. it definitely is a classic

quote:

Treasure Planet (2002)


this was a great movie. very underrated.


still you are going to have hit and miss movies. most of the movies you listed were good except for a few.
Posted by CocomoLSU
Inside your dome.
Member since Feb 2004
156405 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 4:35 pm to
quote:

udtiger

1142 posts and you still can't use the quote function?
Posted by Fun Bunch
New Orleans
Member since May 2008
129986 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 7:03 pm to
quote:

Okay, Pixar has been good sans Ratatouille


Fail.

Ratatouille was amazing.

Cars is there worst film by a long, long way.
Posted by TigerTree
Member since Nov 2005
4757 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 7:11 pm to
quote:

The Princess and the Frog


quote:

The film, which began production under the working title The Frog Princess, will be an American fairy tale musical set in New Orleans during the 1920s Jazz Age, and Tiana will be the first Black Disney Princess.[2]



I can't wait to never see this.
Posted by Proejo
Dallas
Member since Oct 2007
5889 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 7:35 pm to
quote:

Ratatouille was amazing.

Cars is there worst film by a long, long way.


You guys miss the point. My kids LOVE both these movies, but Cars the most! Great movie for KIDS!!! Remember? The reason they make these movies?
Posted by Freauxzen
Washington
Member since Feb 2006
38633 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 8:07 pm to
quote:

I can't wait to never see this.


All they have to do is make it look natural, rather than like some statement. Tough to do, but its Disney.

And for what it's worth, the Jazz period in New Orleans is pretty good choice, could work well with that kind of atmosphere. Has potential at least.

quote:

You guys miss the point. My kids LOVE both these movies, but Cars the most! Great movie for KIDS!!! Remember? The reason they make these movies?




When Disney is at its best, they make movies for everyone, not just kids, and that is why they were/are successful.
This post was edited on 8/12/08 at 8:11 pm
Posted by coloradoBengal
Member since Sep 2007
32608 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 8:16 pm to
quote:

Mulan




great movie. it definitely is a classic



Definitely one of my favorites.
Posted by Freauxzen
Washington
Member since Feb 2006
38633 posts
Posted on 8/12/08 at 8:18 pm to
quote:

Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996)


I know I've said it before on here before, but this one is underappreciated, especially for a Disney movie.

quote:

Brother Bear (2003) Came and went.


Commentary on the DVD is worth it alone, one of the funniest out there.
This post was edited on 8/12/08 at 8:19 pm
Posted by baytiger
Boston
Member since Dec 2007
46978 posts
Posted on 8/13/08 at 2:30 am to
quote:

Mulan



great movie. it definitely is a classic


was good, but it was no Lion King
Posted by xiv
Parody. #AdminsRule
Member since Feb 2004
39508 posts
Posted on 8/13/08 at 3:23 am to
The animated features' quality has some really clear-cut eras:

1. The Beautiful Beginning (1937-1942). Every film in this era gets ****. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Dumbo, Bambi.
2. World War II Killed Our Budget, So We'll Do Documentaries and Compilation Films (1942-1949). No really great ones here, but they're pretty cool considering their historical context. Saludos Amigos, The Three Caballeros, Make Mine Music, Fun and Fancy Free, Melody Time, The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.
3. The Golden Bad-arse Age (1950-1967). These are the best movies ever made, period. Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Lady and the Tramp, Peter Pan, Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmatians, The Sword in the Stone, The Jungle Book.
4. So Disney Decided To Make Some Shitty Movies in Order To Pay Tribute To the Recently Dead Walt Disney (1970-1988). These movies aren't very good. The Aristocats, Robin Hood, The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, The Rescuers, The Fox and the Hound, The Black Cauldron, The Great Mouse Detective, Oliver and Company.
5. The Last Gasp at True Greatness (1989-1994). These movies are great. The Little Mermaid, The Rescuers Down Under, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King.
6. The Current, Really, Really, Really Shitty Period That Features Movies That I Refuse To Mention (1995- ).
Posted by baytiger
Boston
Member since Dec 2007
46978 posts
Posted on 8/13/08 at 3:43 am to
Wow, I completely agree with that post.
Posted by alajones
Huntsvegas
Member since Oct 2005
35910 posts
Posted on 8/13/08 at 9:27 am to
I agree with you for the most part. A lot of those movies you mentioned as shitty are still being sold on DVD and replayed in Children's Theater around the country. Aristocats, Winnie the Pooh, The Fox and the Hound, are still viewed and enjoyed today.

Besides maybe Hunchback, Mulan, and Pocohantas, I doubt anything made since Lion King will still be showing in the afore mentioned outlets 20 or 30 years from now.

These movies (except Pixar) are just not destined to be classics.
This post was edited on 8/13/08 at 9:28 am
Posted by blueboy
Member since Apr 2006
65215 posts
Posted on 8/13/08 at 10:01 am to
quote:

Great movie for KIDS!!! Remember? The reason they make these movies?

bullshite. You take that back.

And I'm with the noob on this one too. Ratatouille was pretty good.
Posted by simmons2112
Member since May 2008
3184 posts
Posted on 8/13/08 at 11:00 am to
quote:

Hercules (1997) Good movie. Still not as big a hit as previous ones.


I quit reading after this. Hercules was horrible and was ignored then and will be completely ignored forever.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram