Thank you oh so much for sharing these stories and anecdotes with us Mr. Norman.  I can honestly say I've loved each and every article I've seen of yours that you've posted here.

I can't imagine how wonderful a thing it must've been to not only work for Walt Disney but to also work with him rather close-up (even if you did rarely speak).  The fact you were a storyman on the last animated feature he oversaw is both a beautiful and bittersweet thing.

At the same time, I think it was wonderful that Walt Disney had such talented individuals at his studio, like yourself.  From the Nine Old Men on through every department -- artists/animators/storytellers/musicians -- He couldn't have done it without you guys.. . .  Thank so much Mr. Norman for keeping the memory of Walt and all those artists alive!

This article is completely not true... John Lennon said no to Walt Disney

You can read more about it here.
http://www.rotten.com/library/culture/beatles/

As a big Beatle fan I can tell you this isn't true according to books on the Beatles.  At this time John Lennon didn't want to make any more movies and was tired of doing gimicks and etc.

Y'know, usually the truth is some odd combination of facts.  Perhaps John Lennon didn't want to do it...but perhaps Walt also thought the Beatles were a flash in the pan.  It doesn't have to be either/or.

Thank you, Mr. Norman, for the excellent article and series!  I wish it were a 100-part article!  It's so interesting "hearing" you tell what it was like behind the scenes.  It's amazing that you work(ed) for Disney!  I had no idea you worked on such recent movies as THOND and TTM.  Your career span and work is amazing!  In regards to the Beatles, I'm a Beatles fan, but I'm glad that their music or style of music wasn't included- Disney movies should have that "timeless" appeal.  Sure, the Beatles are timeless, but it's just not the same (I can't articulate any better, but I'm sure you know what I mean!).  
And, I don't want this to turn into an argument on these boards, but Mr. Norman knew Walt Disney, and he knew what he said in regards to the Beatles.  Walt was an older man and maybe didn't like that kind of music to begin with.  My point is is that Mr. Norman was there, so it's not fair for people to say "You're wrong" (in whichever way you put it).  I agree with Anonymouse.

You know, I have to say, I am a huge Beatles fan, but as I have grown older and researched more, I've found the luster on the Beatles as individuals has worn off a bit. I still think the music is brilliant, but the individuals were just people. People with their own set of faults. Now, I am not saying John Lennon was lying or Walt was lying. But people sometimes lie. It is just as likely John was lying (or reinventing the past) as Walt was.

And I don't think Walt Disney was alone in thinking the Beatles were a fad that would fade quickly. I think a lot of people thought that. It just makes it that much more impressive that they accomplished all they did.

If the Beatles had kept performing, "I Wanna Hold Your Hand," over and over, they would have been a flash in the pan. They kept changing, and more importantly, the public kept accepting them. I always got a kick out of marijuana connoisseur Paul McCartney being an acceptable wholesome Super Bowl replacement after Janet Jackson's assault on public morality.

I can't see a 64 year old Walt being impressed with a rock and roll band, and I can't see a 24 year old John thinking it would be cool to lend his voice to a Disney cartoon - especially in the mid 60's. I certainly wouldn't want to be in the position of getting them to record their lines. "My vulture wouldn't say that. Do I have to be a vulture? I'd rather be a bulldog. Why does Paul have more lines than me?"

Regardless of whose decision it was, it worked out well for the Jungle Book. Instead of the Disney publicists having to answer why they used voice actors who had declared they were "more popular than Jesus," they could promote it as Walt's last animated feature.

I might be wrong, but I read the article as saying that the Disney writers were thinking about using  a song with a "Beatles" beat, not that they were going to use the Beatles.

This has been an excellent series of articles - thank you! I look forward to seeing more of your writing.

I might be wrong, but I read the article as saying that the Disney writers were thinking about using  a song with a "Beatles" beat, not that they were going to use the Beatles.
-------
That's the way I interpreted it as well.  Maybe there were some discussions with the Beatles, even if they said no, the movie certainly could have had a rock song in a similar style without their cooperation.  Things like that happen all the time.

The article says the vultures wanted to SUGGEST the Beatles (like just about every other sitcom on TV was making the same "moptop" imitation-jokes about, in 1964-65)...

And althought Walt may have been no judge of musical longevity, think he also felt that vultures singing MerseyBeat would've made even less sense in the Indian jungle than the Frankie Fontaine rhino--
Walt had decided to throw out the Kipling on "Jungle Book" early on (probably because of all the more faithful versions they'd had to abandon), but the downside was that Story kept going off the rails with their own volunteer "funny animal" ideas that just didn't have anything to do with Mowgli, Baloo and Bageera...Give Walt credit that he still had his talent for knowing what to -cut-, and how to keep a story's focus from gettting too distracted.

I greatly appreciated and valued this series.


Wonderful insight, wonderful anecdotes.  


JimHillMedia at its finest.

Great read.

I too wonder what's the deal with so many people not getting screen credit for films, even with a significant contribution. I never would've known of your involvement on this film until just this year.

You gotta agree with Walt's decision to can The Beatles (who's idea was it to have them perform for the film anyway?). Though, his animated films were leaning in that direction during the 1960's; it's almost like today's Shrek, which INSISTS on incorporating every pop culture fad imaginable.

As for the final scene, it's truly awesome. Ollie Johnston was every bit as good at designing women as Marc Davis. In fact, I partially learned how to draw the human figure by trying to simulate the characters Davis and Johnston drew from some earlier films.

I could ask (for the millionth time) what Walt would've thought of the finished film, but since we can't get a definite answer to that question, it's still comforting to know that his repetoire went out with a bang.

Bill Peet has no story credit because Walt lost faith in Bill Peet after the abysmal THE SWORD IN THE STONE. After seeing boards for THE JUNGLE BOOK, Walt knew he had to step in to save the movie.

Bill Peet was no martyr. He failed. End of story.

Thanx again for an insightful article article, Mr. Norman!

The Jungle Book was the first movie I ever saw (and on it's initial realase, mind you!) I think I fell in love with that little Indian girl even at the tender age of 4.

- T

I'd have to agree with you Aunt Eye Bias, Judging from what I've read from Peet interviews as well as his own autobiography, The sucess of 101 Dalmatians as well as his new sideline in children's books made Peet a little too big for his britches around the studio. In his autobiography he seems almost pleased with himself that he derailed 'Chantecleer' (sp) after so many people (Marc Davis in particular) had labored over concepts for this film.

I think the Sword in the Stone suffered because there was some underlying animosity brewing between Bill and the animators. I think the movie suffers because nothing is really developed beyond the basic outline of a story, and it really seems like the animators just knocked it out out of obligation, without really trying to bring any "heart" to the proceedings. (I've always wanted to see the studio remake this one as a live action film, just to see if they could get it right on the second try)

Aparrently Peet's Jungle Book was closer in tone and storyline to Alexander Korda's classic film (the 40s film starring Sabu as Mowgli) and Walt found the whole thing too "dark". According to Peet's autobiography, his duties had expanded to making casting decisions as well, and this was where he and Walt seemed to reach an impasse. (Bill had cast an actual Indian actor for one of the voices and Walt said he sounded like he was from Brooklyn) While I think it would have been interesting to see what a Bill Peet Jungle Book would have looked like, I doubt that the end result would have been anywhere near as wonderful as the classic Walt gave us.

As for the ending sequence, I know Frank and Ollie wrote about how they hated it when it was first suggested, and I admit that on paper it doesn't seem like much, but it's one of those things that really brings weight to a mostly lighthearted romp in the jungle. Most us us parents live with the thought that someday our children are going to grow up and leave us, its the natural order of things, but that dosen't make the seperation any easier to bear. So that ending bit with Baloo and Baghera, playing the role of Mowgli's foster parents, Baloo saying "come back, come back" and Baghera saying" go on, go on" always makes me tear up like no other Disney film can.

As a fan and historian of both The Beatles and Disney, I will rely on a first-person account (Mr. Norman's recollection) rather than an unattributed anonymous Internet posting about whether Walt rejected the idea of a pop group performing in the movie, or whether John Lennon nixed any further "gimmicks" or movie appearances.  After all, 1965 - when the Internet article says Brian Epstein met with Disney - was a time when the Beatles were filming Help (which was released in 1966).  Perhaps Lennon was already tired of filming, although the group was still touring - a much bigger hassle.  
Epstein's promotional abilities are legendary.  So perhaps he met with Walt to pitch the idea, and both Walt and John had their doubts.  
It would be great if someone could come up with an appointment book or some other verification that Epstein actually met with Disney.  Until then, I'm sticking with Mr. Norman's account of my favorite band and one of my favorite movies.

Thank you for your "magic words" Mr. Norman.

Maybe it's just me, but it seems as though "Jungle Book" has had less visability than other Disney classics-even those of the same era.  I believe it is the next one to be released on Special Edition DVD and I look forward to owning it-especially after reading all these wonderful stories.

Thank you for all you have given us.