Topic: The Magically Flawed World of Disney (Read 32737 times)

Smiler · « **Reply #160 on:** June 04, 2009, 06:32:46 PM »

Disney just needs to make a female cartoon version of Rambo so everyone will get off of their backs about this issue.

Mongrel · « **Reply #161 on:** June 04, 2009, 08:15:27 PM »

Quote from: Smiler on June 04, 2009, 06:32:46 PM

Disney just needs to make a female cartoon version of Rambo so everyone will get off of their backs about this issue.

Isn't that what the video game and comic book industry have been hard at work doing for years now?

Büge · « **Reply #162 on:** June 04, 2009, 09:03:20 PM »

And look how progressive they are!

Kashan · « **Reply #163 on:** June 08, 2009, 07:28:07 AM »

Wasn't the last successful animated Disney movie Lilo and Stitch? In which the main character was as far from a princess as possible?

Arc · « **Reply #164 on:** June 08, 2009, 07:52:20 AM »

Since Lilo & Stitch (2002 - $273 million), they've released The Jungle Book 2 (2003 - $135 million), Brother Bear (2003 - $250 million), Home on the Range (2004 - $103 million), Chicken Little (2005 - $314 million), The Wild (2006 - $102 million), Meet The Robinsons (2007 - $169 million), and Bolt (2008 - $291 million).

So, two bigger successes since, and others that could be qualified as successes and flops. And Princesses? Princess Diaries (2001 - $165 million), Princess Diaries 2 (2004 - $135 million), and Enchanted (2007 - $340 million), topping them all.

Büge · « **Reply #165 on:** June 08, 2009, 08:12:33 AM »

You forgot Valiant.

Of course, we'd all like to forget Valiant...

Arc · « **Reply #166 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:16:42 AM »

Not produced by Disney (2005 - $61 million), but neither was The Wild.

Others missed include Treasure Planet (2002 - $109 million), Piglet's Big Movie (2003 - $63 million), Return to Never Land (2003 - $109 million), Teacher's Pet (2004 - $6 million), and Pooh's Heffalump Movie (2005 - $52 million).

Lady Duke · « **Reply #167 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:37:19 AM »

I think it's just obvious most things Disney puts out now suck so fucking hard, they could tear open rifts in time and space. I feel like they stopped making good movies once they got lazy and started using a lot of computer animation. Pixar movies are good, but I don't count them as regular Disney movies because they aren't like, say, any of the older movies like Aristocats, Sleeping Beauty, 101 Dalmatians, etc. So they started sucking aboooouuuut.....1995.

Mongrel · « **Reply #168 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:40:30 AM »

Well, they're just a media congomerate now. There's nothing really left of the original studio or culture.

Pixar has largely taken it's place as the land where 'magic happens'. That's why Disney bought them out: They were smart enough to realize that if they didn't, then Pixar would have been the company that superceded them.

Lady Duke · « **Reply #169 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:44:13 AM »

My only problem with Pixar movies is that they often re-use the same plot of Friends fight, they suck a lot without said friends, and then they make up, happy ending.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #170 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:45:01 AM »

Home on the Range, though, is the one to look at. It's the last 2D, big screen release from Disney. And it did abysmally compared to Brother Bear, which actually did better pretty well, and then cleaned up in DVD sells. Range was kind of a clumsy exit for the animation powerhouse - though not their only failure - which then devoted all of its attention to producing 3D animation to tap into the Pixar market.

In that context, the traditional 2D animation department's last big-screen success was Brother Bear. But nobody around these parts talks about Brother Bear with the affection I see lavished on Lilo & Stich or even Emperor's New Groove.

Lady Duke · « **Reply #171 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:46:50 AM »

Hey hey hey hey, The Princess and the Frog will be the last traditionally animated film they make. And it looks astounding.

But you know what, Lilo & Stitch was awesome, but generally I find their animated movies to be pretty crappy and disappointing. And Emperor's New Groove was pretty funny, but I don't find myself wanting to watch it very often like I do with old movies.

Mongrel · « **Reply #172 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:50:03 AM »

Quote from: Lady Duke on June 08, 2009, 09:44:13 AM

My only problem with Pixar movies is that they often re-use the same plot of Friends fight, they suck a lot without said friends, and then they make up, happy ending.

There's a reason I'm not particularly looking forward to Toy Story 3.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #173 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:52:26 AM »

I, too, want my movies without conflict. Why can't the story be about two people who come together, become friends, and then never stop being friends? That would be so pleasant and undramatic.

Lady Duke · « **Reply #174 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:53:46 AM »

My point was that they reuse plots instead of trying to be original in every movie. What a crappy complaint huh? To be novel and original? Yeah, no one needs that.

Royal☭ · « **Reply #175 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:55:20 AM »

Yeah, like when Nemo discovered the lava base of an old fan and then had to save his friends from an evil toy collector.

While there is usually a point in Pixar movies where the characters have a slight breaking up, this is usually for dramatic tension and is rarely the focal point of the movie. You have to remember, these are family movies and thus bring a kind of simplistic structure and series of conflicts to them. The protagonists having a schism is a part of Pixar films, but it's rarely ever detrimental to the stories overall.

Mongrel · « **Reply #176 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:56:16 AM »

I'd say Pixar's doing a pretty good job of being original so far.

I don't agree with the Lady Duke view that all of Pixar's stuff is like that, but her claim is not entirely without merit.

Lady Duke · « **Reply #177 on:** June 08, 2009, 09:57:57 AM »

Jesus, I said often re-use. I didn't say every Pixar movie was like that. There are probably 4 I can think of right off the top of my head that do re-use it.

Catloaf · « **Reply #178 on:** June 08, 2009, 11:11:38 AM »

Quote from: Constantine on June 08, 2009, 09:52:26 AM

I, too, want my movies without conflict. Why can't the story be about two people who come together, become friends, and then never stop being friends? That would be so pleasant and undramatic.

You do know that conflict and drama can occur between things other than the main and supporting characters, right?

All drama needs is an important event that needs to be done, and a time limit on how long one has to spark said event.

And friends don't always need to get back together after they fight either.

Mr. Wonka · « **Reply #179 on:** June 08, 2009, 11:28:47 AM »

Pixar is Disney's Crackwhore!

But lets face it, none of the large film companies are doing anything original these days.
The focus on recycling is ridiculous.
All the good films, with good ideas are being remade and reused.
Drop dead fred, Total Recall, It, a sequal to a remake which is also a remake of the Friday the 13th movies.
Disney Pixar is suprisingly good in comparison to Universal or Warner because they, at least, attempt to repackage it.

News:

Author Topic: The Magically Flawed World of Disney (Read 32737 times)