Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 14:35:17 GMT

I'd love to know a bit more about American Dog. Is Lasseter dissatisfied with the quality of the film or is that he just finds it too odd? Oh and is Hollywood Dog Movie the proposed title or just a 'code name' so to speak. Cause it's one heck of a dodgy title.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:12:23 GMT

So, Cruella was supposed to go from "101 Dalmatians" to "The Rescuers", and Penny was supposed to go from "The Rescuers" to "Oliver and Company". That'd be confusing.

I had read that there was to be a remake of "Bedknobs and Broomsticks". I really hope nothing ever comes of it. Why not just re-release the original? Are they going to remake "Mary Poppins" next? Or how about "Snow White" in CGI? Why bother? It just makes me mad. There's no need to remake any Disney movie.

When I read the title of this article, I thought it was going to be about how Disney has reused animation from animated films (wasn't the snow from "Bambi" used elsewhere? And wasn't the dancing in "Robin Hood" recycled from "Snow White"?).

Medusa has always reminded me of Cruella. Their body types are similar, I guess, and they're both mean...

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:32:48 GMT

Actually, I like HD better (and no, Frank, it's not "Hollywood Dog Movie"):
The unhelpful "American Dog" still conjures up that "Family Guy" character, not to mention "Family Dog" (which was a nice short to start Brad Bird's career, but became one of the most infamous flops of the post-Simpsons rush).
Here, if they're just going for the Route 66 "Chris Sanders does 'Cars'" idea, I want to know that bit of safety going in, and be assured of a nice clear plot from the get-go.

And while we're talking about "Rescuers" doing a lot of Ron Miller-era borrowing, wasn't the whole "Bayou critters to the rescue" section of the film basically salvaged from the old "Robin Hood in the South" idea for Disney's earlier film?
(Along with much of the animation for the critters running across screen.)

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 15:38:08 GMT

If they're going to do a remake of "Bedknobs", let's give it an edgy, modern title, haha, you know, something along the lines of "Herbie Fully Loaded".
I like "The Bedknobs Reloaded", "The Bedknobs Revolutions", or something else ridiculous like "Bedknobs Forever"!

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:16:54 GMT

I like the idea of revisiting abandonded ideas.

I "love" la_resistance28's proposed titles! LOL!

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 16:42:36 GMT

Bravo! This is the Jim we all know and love. Great article (among several recent great articles). And great to see you back to form.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 17:27:36 GMT

blackcauldron85 said:
So, Cruella was supposed to go from "101 Dalmatians" to "The Rescuers", and Penny was supposed to go from "The Rescuers" to "Oliver and Company". That'd be confusing.

"I had read that there was to be a remake of "Bedknobs and Broomsticks". I really hope nothing ever comes of it. Why not just re-release the original? Are they going to remake 'Mary Poppins' next?"
----
Well--back in the '88-'92's, when Disney honestly thought "But how will we ever make a sequel to anything??", there was a long-delayed "Mary Poppins II" on the boards, for Sarah Brightman and Robert ("Me and My Girl") Lindsay, which would've reportedly "been closer to the P.L. Travers". (Er, hehh, yeah, like the stage musical? ;) )

===
"Why bother? It just makes me mad. There's no need to remake any Disney movie."
---
Probably because the original adaptation of the books was a mess--
This was back during the Ron Miller days of "What would Walt do?...Of course, he'd make Jungle Book or Mary Poppins again!"
There were no fish in the books, and no jungle soccer game (check out the DVD for Richard Sherman's story of how the soccer game got in there).

Once in a while, someone will get on their high horse about how Disney or an old 70's kiddie-musical didn't do "the REAL book", and we get things like that Tim Burton "Chocolate Factory" (to bring it back to Pettler), or that live-action Disney "Jungle Book"...Just have to let the fever pass.

=====
"So, Cruella was supposed to go from '101 Dalmatians' to 'The Rescuers'
Medusa has always reminded me of Cruella. Their body types are similar, I guess, and they're both mean.."
----
As long as Medusa was -intentionally- supposed to be Cruella, guess I can go a little easier on the Ron Miller era, in this one case--
They've done a lot worse self-cribbing that WASN'T meant to be intentionally returning characters, and for years I'd always thought this was one of them.
(Now, if there was just a plausible alibi for "The Aristocats"...)

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:27:40 GMT

"Bedknobs and Broomsticks" is a highly underrated film. Overall it's a bit darker than "Mary Poppins", but with so much going for it, including a wonderful score and that substantial animated sequence. I fondly recall seeing it 4 times at the theatre in 1971 just to experience that great Disney animation, though I find the whole film very satisfying the older I get and the more I understand its context within the wartime era in Britain.

I am aghast that they would be looking to remake the film in any form. It seems like a blatant attempt to cash in on the ongoing success of the similar "Harry Potter" films. I hope Disney does not follow through with such a dumb idea - it smacks of "Eisner-think" and is not worthy of the creative staff who are capable of bringing new and equally exciting ideas to the screen if given the chance.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:31:52 GMT

"Your thoughts?"

My thoughts are that there is nothing in this article that people who own the DVDs for Mulan, The Rescuers, and Mary Poppins don't already know. Nice pot shot at John Lasseter yet again.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:32:18 GMT

Recylcing good ideas, the ones originally rejected from previous films, is a good practice, especially to appease the story artists and directors who worked so hard on those sequences.

Just as long as they don't:

Overuse good ideas. We all know how this became a Disney tradition during the 70's when they were taking notes from Walt's grave. I mean, people probably got sick of seeing Phil Harris in all of Disney's animated films beyond The Jungle Book. David Koeing describes this as "reusing the same tea bag for the seventh time."

or...

Make those lousy sequels that we've seen on video for the past decade.

Having just recently seen the Alice in Wonderland DVD, there is an overflow of rejected concepts from that film that could probably find, or COULD HAVE FOUND their way into subsequent films. NOBODY thought of using the Cheshire Cat's "Im Odd" in The Aristocats. ;)

Also, I don't have a problem with remakes, as long as they're GOOD and have a purpose BESIDES making money. That said, I enjoyed the 1998 remake of The Parent Trap, as well as Tim Burton's Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. They both serve the purpose of improving their pre-existing films.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 18:36:35 GMT

I think Bedknobs and Broomsticks is RIPE for a remake, seeing as how the original was so flat-footed and awkward when it should have soared. Same thing with Pete's Dragon. Both of these Disney musicals deserve a talented director to realize their potential. They're an example of greatness waiting to be realized -- greatness in limbo, as it were. So bring on the remakes -- and let these properties flower.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:13:32 GMT

"Late last year, the trades reported that Pamela Pettler had been hired by Mouse House managers to write a "B & B" remake."

John Lasseter has shown some real promise keeping with Walt's idea of no unnecessary sequel... he should really apply that same principle to no unnecessary remake. Or better yet.... no remakes.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 10 Oct 2006 21:19:10 GMT

If they remake Pete's Dragon, they have to use the Disney's Dragons version.

And here's another reused idea: Originally, The Prince in Snow White was put in the dungeon. That idea ended up in Sleeping Beauty.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 00:16:44 GMT

I still feel that the ultimate Disney "recycle" is "Golieth II" for using not just characters, but the original animation drawings re-shot "Xerox-style" for the film. A cute enough featurette with an early Roger Rabbit-type "reunion" of jungle approprate characters including Jungle Book's Col. Hathi and Tick-Tock the Croc from Peter Pan.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 07:05:16 GMT

Ponsonby Britt said:
"I am aghast that they would be looking to remake the film in any form. It seems like a blatant attempt to cash in on the ongoing success of the similar "Harry Potter" films. I hope Disney does not follow through with such a dumb idea - it smacks of "Eisner-think" and is not worthy of the creative staff who are capable of bringing new and equally exciting ideas to the screen if given the chance."
I completely agree. What's done has been done, and they should move on. I've always loved "B&B", and it's a great movie. Kids of today would like it. I love owning the movies on VHS and DVD, but I miss the re-release days. I wonder if Disney will ever re-release another film (If "The Nightmare Before Christmas" does well in theaters, I wonder if they'll consider it. Although I'm not sure if I'm ready for a 3D "Snow White".).

semaj86 said:
"I mean, people probably got sick of seeing Phil Harris in all of Disney's animated films beyond The Jungle Book"
Disney has always reused voice actors- not only Phil Harris, but, one of my favorites, Sterling Holloway (Mr. Stork, Pooh, Roquefort, just to name a few), and Paul Winchell (Tigger, Boomer), and I'm sure many more.

semaj86 also said:
"NOBODY thought of using the Cheshire Cat's "Im Odd" in The Aristocats. ;)"
Sorry that I'm gullable, but are you kidding? No one is that odd in that film, except for maybe Edgar.

Aunt Eye Bias said:
"Same thing with Pete's Dragon."
I don't think you're kidding? People need to give these films a chance! I love "B&B", but I absolutely love "Pete's Dragon". I do not want to see a CGI Elliott, except in maybe Philharmagic II (hey, it could happen). The original has been made. It is out there for people to see. It exists already. This discussion topic reminds me of Robert Benchley (sp?) in "The Reluctant Dragon" (*spoilers*)-
he has a book, "The Reluctant Dragon" and he brings it over to the Disney Studios to show Walt, since Robert (and his wife) think that it'll make a good Disney film, but, before he gets to tell Walt his idea, the lights go down and Walt, his crew, and Robert watch a screening of the new Disney cartoon, "The Reluctant Dragon".
These movies already exist- get over it.

Original 19 said:
"John Lasseter has shown some real promise keeping with Walt's idea of no unnecessary sequel... he should really apply that same principle to no unnecessary remake. Or better yet.... no remakes."
I hope Mr. Lasseter understands that remakes are not necessary. Please let him understand!!!

Sorry if this is long, but I really care about this subject!!!

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 09:09:13 GMT

I'm just wondering if a remake of Bedknobs and Broomsticks would fall under Lasseter's control? After all, he is only responsible for the animation department and there's no guarantee that a re-make would combine live action and animation like the original did.

I do agree however that a re-make would be a very bad idea. Films should only be re-made if they can improve upon the original. Even if you don't like Bedknobs and Broomsticks, you can't deny that it is an iconic film. It would be like remaking The Shining... I hate that film, but it nevertheless has a classic look and feel to it which transcends being just another film.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 10:18:19 GMT

Frankenollie said:
"Films should only be re-made if they can improve upon the original."

Everyone says that about remakes...shouldn't people take a film for what it is? The story has been told...When Disney remakes their films, I think they only do it for a profit, not to improve on the original. George Lucas, for example, didn't totally remake "Star Wars"- he made the Special Editions, adding 'stuff' that wasn't technologically possible in the 1970s/1980s, but he didn't remake the films. Although I don't necessarily believe in that, it's a lot better than totally remaking a film.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 12:30:06 GMT

The Shining was remade as a tv mini-series almost 10 years ago, going in the direction of "closer to the original novel." Granted it was awful, particularly when it veered from the book in a cheesy ending. Kubrick took the material completely in his own direction, and it would be a loss if no one else could approach it- particularly when the original author wasn't happy with the film. The original's always going to be there, and more likely than not gets a new DVD version with the remake's release.

Are remakes driven by profit? Sure, but that's commercial enterainment as a whole. When it comes to investing, something that can be googled is considered a safer bet. And really, it's gotten to the point of stretching in recent years. Almost anything done before with the scantest of "marquee value" is movie, remake and musical fodder. I do think some of the studios have become aware that remakes won't suffice- that something new has to be added, addressed, etc. That's what was done with Batman's latest movie and it sounds like the Casino Royale remake is going there as well. I also thought the latest King Kong remake was great in how it harkened back to the original in places. It wasn't designed to replace the original, but complement it.

I'm more annoyed by the idea of remaking films from other other countries just because *gasp* there's no Americans or white people in them. And yet, you do get good remakes from time to time. It's all a matter of what direction it's taken in, who's working on it, etc. Because criticizing money-driven projects is missing the point. It's Show-Business. Just don't keep putting out the same show, because it'll hurt business in the long run.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:32:41 GMT

Marc Davis' designs for "Renyard the Fox" & "Chantecleer" ultimately found their way into "Robin Hood".

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 13:54:21 GMT

I would love to hear "Tiki Town"
with the success of "Narnia" I bet Bedknobs could be very interesting if done in the same style.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 14:22:17 GMT

"Everyone says that about remakes...shouldn't people take a film for what it is? The story has been told...When Disney remakes their films, I think they only do it for a profit, not to improve on the original. George Lucas, for example, didn't totally remake "Star Wars"- he made the Special Editions, adding 'stuff' that wasn't technologically possible in the 1970s/1980s, but he didn't remake the films. Although I don't necessarily believe in that, it's a lot better than totally remaking a film."

Dear Black Cauldron -- many of Disney's own films were remakes. Snow White, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, Treasure Island, The Jungle Book, etc. I'm glad Walt made them.

As for "getting over it" -- Pete's Dragon is a film with sub-standard production values, stiff choreography, limp editing, and poor photography. A good movie can be made from that material, and *should* be made. You get over it.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:06:05 GMT

A bigger point for me than remakes in general is a studio remaking their own movie. True, Disney 'remade' "The Jungle Book" into a live-action film (I don't really think it was necessary, though).

I mean, if "Bedknobs and Broomsticks" or "Pete's Dragon", or any Disney live-action film were to be remade, how would it be different? Yes, Elliott could be CGI, but how would the story, which is the most important element in a film change?

What if Disney started "remaking" their animated classics, whether in animated or live-action form?

I'm not trying to start an argument, and I didn't mean harm by saying what I did. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:31:01 GMT

Ugh. Let's address a few things.

* Ron Miller: He was a producer back in the days of these things and was under the constraints of Donn Tatum and Card Walker. While it's somewhat his responsibility that these films come across as lackluster, it's hardly fair to pin the blame squarely on him.

* The Star Wars movies were not "re-made." They were updated with new scenes and effects.

* Snow White, 20K, Peter Pan, etc. were also not re-makes. They were/are adaptations. Parent Trap 1998 is a re-make, Herbie: Fully-Loaded is a re-make. Anything with Lindsay Lohan in it is a re-make ;)

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:35:40 GMT

"George Lucas, for example, didn't totally remake "Star Wars"- he made the Special Editions, adding 'stuff' that wasn't technologically possible in the 1970s/1980s, but he didn't remake the films" - that's what I said- he didn't remake the films!

And, you're right, those fairy tales/stories are adaptations. I didn't see "Herbie: Fully Loaded", but wasn't it just a sequel (like "Herbie Goes Bananas" or "Herbie goes to Monte Carlo"?)?

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 19:15:58 GMT

I'm in agreement here with Blackcauldron85 once again. It is one thing for Disney to make a film based on a property that has been filmed before by another studio, such as "The Jungle Book" or "Beauty and the Beast", thereby creating their own "Disney Version", as author Richard Schickel would call it. It is quite another for Disney to be simply remaking their own library of films like "The Parent Trap", "101 Dalmatians", "The Absent-Minded Professor", etc. for a younger generation. The former are most often works based on famous pieces of literature which can and should be interpreted by various studios, while the latter are either based on very minor literary works or more likely, original properties that had been developed entirely in-house by Disney to begin with.

In the case of "Bedknobs and Broomsticks", the creative staff at Disney saw the potential in the book as a springboard to producing a musical fantasy extravaganza that might serve as a worthy follow-up to their success with "Mary Poppins". Whatever one's opinion of the film, it should be acknowledged as the "Disney Version" of that particular story. I really can't imagine there is any huge audience for another crack at it, and if there were, I would rather it be attempted by another studio who might interpret the source material in a vastly different manner. Admittedly, though, I don't see that particular story as being enough of a literary classic to merit another version. Classic novels and plays by the likes of Shakespeare, Dickens, Bronte, Conan Doyle, Verne, and a host of others, are famous enough to justify various interpretations on film, but I don't think minor works necessarily do. If the only reason for remaking a film is to appeal to the "hip" sensibilities of today's audiences, I say leave it alone.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 20:26:15 GMT

I've got to imagine Disney's library films present more appealing remake options, though. They own all the elements from their previous version, they can sell DVDs and merchandise relating to the original, etc. It's not just one product source with a remake. Whereas something like "Return to Oz" ended up costing license fees because the public domain silver slippers were too obscure for an audience more versed in the MGM version.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 20:53:42 GMT

Does anyone remember back when Eisner wanted to remake Peter Pan in CGI? Imagine the uproar THAT would have caused!

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:35:35 GMT

"What if Disney started "remaking" their animated classics, whether in animated or live-action form?"

There would be precedent for that -- Walt Disney remade the black and white "Orphan's Benefit" in color, updating the Donald Duck animation while still retaining the original audio track. Walt made two adaptations of "Jack and the Beanstalk" starring Mickey Mouse (they were "Giantland" and "Mickey and the Beanstalk", to say nothing of "The Brave Little Tailor").

And yes, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Treasure Island, Snow White, Peter Pan etc. were all remakes. In fact, some of these directly paid homage to the original film by using similar shots. Leagues was even filmed in the same waters as the original silent version.

Was last summer's Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory a remake? Yep. Is the upcoming Charlotte's Web a remake? Yep. 20,000 Leagues, Island and the rest I mentioned had all been filmed prior to Disney's adaptations. He remade them. He did so in his own way, of course, but then, Tim Burton did Wonka in his own way, and the remake of Planet of the Apes in his own way, with controversial results in both instances.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:23:52 GMT

"Does anyone remember back when Eisner wanted to remake Peter Pan in CGI? Imagine the uproar THAT would have caused!"

Sure do. Another website speculated something about a CGI Pinocchio! Yikes!

Like I said, there's nothing really wrong with remakes, as long as they serve the purpose of reinterpreting a classic story for a new generation. Personally, I'd love for someone to remake The Black Cauldron. Hopefully then, the artists will have their artistic freedom.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 07:00:25 GMT

I've heard of people wanting a series, kind of like LOTR, of "Black Cauldron" movies, but I don't want another Disney animated "The Black Cauldron". I just don't understand the point. "20,000 Leagues", "Snow White", etc., weren't remakes of Disney films, though- they weren't remakes at all, but interpretations of existing stories, as jimiscrazy pointed out. Didn't Eisner want all of the animated classics to be remade in CGI (funny thing is, I was just thinking about this this morning, before I came online).
Even with "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" or "Planet of the Apes", both of which I have seen, I don't see the point. I didn't like "Planet of the Apes" at all (but I don't like the original, either, I guess), and I prefer the orignal "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". The newer one sure was weirder; I like the wholesomeness of the original, I guess, and the fact that it's the movie I grew up with, and it's such a great movie.

A thought about 'remaking' "The Black Cauldron"- how about they put it out on 2-Disc DVD, maybe do a restoration, but not touch it in any way. Then, maybe Disney can make another adventure movie (I know that they don't seem to make as much money as other films, but that's another point).

Isn't this a bit like, for example, some ancestor of Charles Dickens rewriting "A Christmas Carol" because it's not edgy enough? How about Marley and Marley go to the Cratchets' home and murder them all in their sleep. Talk about edgy. New technology and more modern story lines doesn't make a movie, book, whatever, better. Just different.

I don't have a problem with studios making films on already existing stories. My friend and I took her nephew a few years ago to see the new live-action "Peter Pan" (I'm not sure which studio it was off the top of my head). I'm such a Disney fan, I didn't think it was near as good as Disney's animated classic. But I'm not offended that they made it. I don't like how companies produce cheap imitations of Disney's animated films (like GoodTimes). I've never seen one, and I don't want to, but they're just trying to make some money on Disney's popularity. But I doubt they're completely copying Disney's movies. I grew up with, for example, the story of "Beauty and the Beast" in my big fairy tales book. I knew the story before Disney came around with its version. Belle (not Beauty) didn't have any sisters in Disney's version like she does in the book version. And there are other differences, too. Disney didn't invent the story. If another studio wants to come around and make a "Beauty and the Beast" movie, go ahead. There are different ways the story can be told. Heck, there was even a "Beauty and the Beast" live-action TV show in the late '80s/early '90s. I never really watched it, but there surely were differences there. But I just don't want Disney saying, B&tB isn't hip enough- let's remake it with live actors (I don't think Lasseter or Iger are dumb enough to remake it in animation!), bring in some explosives, and have Gaston live and hide out somewhere- we could make a trilogy! No thank you.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 12:32:26 GMT

""20,000 Leagues", "Snow White", etc., weren't remakes of Disney films, though- they weren't remakes at all, but interpretations of existing stories."

Remakes of existing stories previously filmed by other filmmakers. Jim is wrong and so are you.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:16:30 GMT

"A thought about 'remaking' "The Black Cauldron"- how about they put it out on 2-Disc DVD, maybe do a restoration, but not touch it in any way. Then, maybe Disney can make another adventure movie (I know that they don't seem to make as much money as other films, but that's another point). "

I wouldn't mind a documentary on the film's fourteen-year production history.

The Black Cauldron wouldn't have to be remade by Disney, or even animated (though that'd be my preference), but then you have to look at that film's history. It nearly killed off Disney animation at the time of its debut, and unlike Fantasia and Alice in Wonderland, going twenty-one years into the future, it's still no closer to being considered a classic.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:54:51 GMT

They totally should have a TBC 2-disc set. They could have a great documentary, seeing as how the majority of the people who worked on it are still alive. And they could have a feature on the attraction that recently closed in Tokyo, which featured the Horned King.
I want a 2-disc TBC set so bad!!!!! If petitions helped get TBC on video in 1998, I wonder if one was started for a 2-disc DVD if that would work...

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 15:17:21 GMT

Regarding "Bedknobs," I agree with Ponsonby that it's one of Disney's most underrated films. I can understand the rationale of reinterpreting the book as a new film -- any fine piece of literature is bound to inspire repeated versions over the years -- but I am a little sad that the Sherman Brothers and their wonderful musical score is being discarded. According to a book called THE DISNEY LIVE ACTION PRODUCTIONS, Bedknobs fell victim to "group think" at Disney, and the Shermans watched in horror as many of their songs and ideas were eliminated. Rather than remaking it without the songs, why not remake it as the musical they intended it to be, much like ANNIE was improved in its TV version? On the sound track CD, there are two songs that would have changed the tone of the film tremendously, including a music hall-style number for Eglantine and Emelius. I've also read that Angela Lansbury herself was at odds with director Robert Stevenson about how to embellish her role -- she wanted Eglantine to be more eccentric, but he apparently restricted her. Why not make the film everyone really wanted to make, instead of throwing the Bedknobs out with the bathwater?

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:24:49 GMT

There's definitely a distinction between remaking a movie and making another movie based on the same book (same goes for plays and other source material).

Nobody would call Lord of the Rings or Wizard of Oz or Peter Pan a remake, they are just new takes on a book. I wouldn't consider the new Charlie & the Chocolate Factory or Batman remakes either. Along those lines, a B&B or even a new Mary Poppins movie wouldn't be a remake (unless they base it on the old movies and not the books).

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Tue, 17 Oct 2006 11:48:09 GMT

"They totally should have a TBC 2-disc set. They could have a great documentary, seeing as how the majority of the people who worked on it are still alive. And they could have a feature on the attraction that recently closed in Tokyo, which featured the Horned King.
I want a 2-disc TBC set so bad!!!!! If petitions helped get TBC on video in 1998, I wonder if one was started for a 2-disc DVD if that would work... "

I understand, blackcauldron85! My favorite Disney movie is The Great Mouse Detective, and people just don't want a special edition. We'll start a petition for these two wonderful movies! Re-releases are the way I think Disney needs to go (for now anyway). People are much more receptive to these than to remakes or sequels. I was just so excited to hear about a re-release of Nightmare. There are so many great classics that most kids today haven't even seen. Talk about a great cash cow. The parents say, "Ooh, B&B! I loved that movie! I bet little Joey will love it, too!" They all go see it and, sure enough, little Joey loves it, and wants to buy the DVD next time they go to the store.

re: Toon Tuesday: Recycling, Disney Feature Animation-style

Jim Hill — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 05:57:34 GMT

There's definitely a distinction between remaking a movie and making another movie based on the same book (same goes for plays and other source material).[/i]

Maybe you make that distinction. I don't. Next time someone produces a version of Silence of the Lambs, it will be a remake of the Demme film based on the novel. Call them what you want. I'll stick to facts and call them remakes.

cellulardefenseteam.com » Blog Archive » Christopher Michael Sanders

Jim Hill — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 23:29:35 GMT

PingBack from http://cellulardefenseteam.com/?p=2197