Disney/Pixar In General

Disney's been working on subtle improvements to Disneyland and are about to drop an entire new land. EPCOT's also getting some major changes to its front gate and a new pavilion.

Not sure where this idea of neglect is coming from.

And while those live action remakes are annoying, Disney has done also a number of "new" adaptations. With little success overall, but they did.

> When the Jim Henson Company was selling the Muppets to Disney, Sesame Workshop did everything they could to buy their Muppets so they'd never wind up in Disney's hands - and thank God they did!

All of Jim Henson's shares were sold to the Sesame Workshop when they were purchased by Disney too.

I can kinda see where they’re coming from actually. The reason EPCOT’s Future World needs a redo so badly, is because it has been neglected for years now, the monorails desperately need replaced, and other things like that.

The reason they are putting money onto it, is because of the upcoming 50th.

Edited by megaeliz on Mar 1st 2019 at 12:05:27 PM

Well, EPCOT (and Tomorrowland-related lands in general) need a lot more love just due to the concept. 'THE FUTURE' is always changing and being updated. Either they need more regular funding and project approval/dedicated imagineer teams or they need to SUPER commit to the 'Future of Yesterday/The Imagination' idea and stick with it.

And, sure, Disney has done a few original adaptations... While funding a lot of money and marketing into the remake properties. Maybe if they weren't doing the remakes and instead tried to put quality development and time into the original I Ps, maybe those original I Ps could have been classics.

Some of the Original Stuff feels doomed to fail at a certain point if they don't care about it enough.

[looks at Star Darlings and sighs]

What would give Disney a wider field of opportunity for originality?

Embracing a bit of the Darker and Edgier route.

The same route that Nick once embraced to create Avatar.

The same route that Cartoon Network once embraced to create Clone Wars and several Transformers series.

The same route that allowed their own Winnie the Pooh franchise to flourish with the first (and still the best) of the television series, The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh.

Anyone else remember Tomorrowland?

The intriguing but ultimately disappointingly forgettable movie, that promised to tie science fiction and secret societies working to build a Utopian City of Tomorrow into the history of Walt Disney and the company, while being heavily inspired by Walt’s opmistic vision of the future, but instead was a somewhat preachy Road Trip Plot with our main characters trying to get there, and spends all of ten minutes actually exploring the said Utopian City of Tomorrow.

Edited by megaeliz on Mar 1st 2019 at 2:11:42 PM

I rather liked that movie.

Speaking of movies, as I watch Sleeping Beauty, Merryweather makes a good point. Who would want to invite Maleficent to their party? Good and evil can't mix. Union rules. -holds up his copy of the Neverwinter Nights game manual to illustrate his point- ;)

Then again Maleficent is an entitled prick, who doesn't take being slighted.

. It’s not a bad movie by any means. The acting and special effects were great, and is a fun watch.

For me, it’s more that I see and appreciate what they were trying to do, but it just doesn’t quite seem to hit the mark.

there was this whole backstory that was teased in this elaborate Alternate Reality Game, where you had to go trace Walt’s footsteps, that took you to his favorite diner, to the park, to discover the backstory of the Optimist Society, and how Walt himself played into it. they even had a Stop Plus Ultra conspiracy theory website! (that might be a bit less conspiracy theory within the context of the game, than usual..

Like, why couldn’t have any of this been incorporated in the movie? Like have our main character stumble on some of this, when she’s trying to research the history of the pin? (I was excited for this movie)

Edited by megaeliz on Mar 2nd 2019 at 4:39:06 AM

x5

I mean, I see Avatar as less 'dark and edgy' and more just... emotionally honest. Its grounded. It has its comedy and its wacky moments, but it takes itself seriously.

I'd like to see more movies where Disney... kind of deals with a serious issue. And maybe tries to explore that using the years and years of tropes and trends they've always done. Like, cool, Disney Parents are always supportive and loving and take care of their children!

What about the parents who aren't? And not even in some extreme 'I come home and punch my children and let them sleep in the cat's litter box' or something like that but... No, let's genuinely explore some problems that kids actually do face and what that means? If you want to talk to a children's audience and have them learn something, sure, 'Be yourself' and etc are great lessons, but they aren't the only things that kids need to hear sometimes.

One thing I commend Treasure Planet on is that the dad outright abandoned the family and that's never forgiven or given some sympathetic reasoning. He leaves and is never mentioned again and that devistated Jim. Lilo and Stitch has an older sister who is suddenly having to be a parent. And that's hard. That's complicated. That's interesting.

And something I wish Disney did more of. It felt more honest.

There's a hard writing lesson about 'likable characters' and it changed how I saw things.

Stop writing "likable" characters. Write characters that are honest. Write characters that are flawed and complicated. But never write them 'to be likable' or solely to have your audience like them. Because no one does anything purely 'to be likable'. They do things because that's who they are and that's a different thing. If you have a character who is flawed, honest, and motivated (and, obviously, not kicking puppies) they'll probably be relatable and likable by extension.

Of course, there are obvious limits to that (i.e. Flaws are not acknowledged as flaws or something to be engaged with), but its a concept of how to approach writing characters.

Edited by InkDagger on Mar 2nd 2019 at 3:57:35 AM

Their commitment to making movies appropriate for a family audience means that tackling hard issues is something they'll do on occasion( Treasure planet,Stitch) but not something they want to do if they think it will discourage their family audience from watching

I will never get how The Hunchback of Notre Dame got rated G.

They got lucky

It was? Then again, I haven't seen the movie in ages. ^_^;;

Not as surprising as Finding Dory getting a PG.

Easy: It's animated. There are a lot of movies which got away with a lot simply because they are animated (see Watership down).

PG has pretty much become the default rating for kids films now. Even the My Little Pony movie got a PG rating, albiet there was slightly more peril than the tv show, but nothing that would traumatize a kid (though the Hanazuki short that was attached to the movie was rated G).

What’s the point of the G rating, then?

Ratings have been "sissified" over the decades, for better or worse.

The original Planet of the Apes was a G.

Jaws, the early Star Trek movies, and TMNT (1990) managed to get PG simply because the PG-13 didn't exist back then.

x9

Darker and Edgier, or emotionally honest, whatever people want to call it or classify it.

Those are things that modern Disney could use a bit more of, to be honest.

I'm still bitter about Ducktales 2017 trading in all of its grounded elements to cater to modern kids. (It started brilliantly, but now it seems that the writers are afraid to deal with serious issues that have lasting consequences.)

x8

And yet Pixar and Dreamworks (for movies) and the aforementioned networks (for TV shows), tend to have higher ratings for their own products because they're less fettered by the little kids in the family audience and more focused on appealing as well to the older kids and the adults.

Disney+ TV Series starring Disney Villains officially titled "Book of Enhancement". Will be based on the "Villains" book series by Serena Valentino

'Emotionally Honest'/dealing with some serious problems AND being committed to entertaining kids aren't mutually exclusive ideas.

Lilo and Stitch clearly showed they could when they try and that film is considered by many to be classic at a time when Disney wasn't doing so hot. Or, Inside Out. I realize that's Pixar, but any adult watching that film can easily say "Oh, that's depression." and there is 100% something Disney is engaging kids on a pretty serious topic.

Sure, you probably need to put in a little more work and creativity, but I think its the better way to expand your work than... reliving the glory days.

Heck, you could get away with more in a PG-13 film back when it first came out as well. Red Dawn was considered one of the most violent films of the 80s, and National Lampoon's European Vacation had plenty of nudity and sex jokes that would undoubtedly get it an R rating today.

Winnie the Pooh I always thought was one of Disney's most organic attempts at a light hearted but still emotionally honest franchise. New Adventures especially goes for more poignant subjects but never really feels like it betrays the roots of the original material too much (at least the Disney interpretation anyway).

Grand Adventure and The Tigger Movie are quite similar (even if some think the more actionized premise for both are a bit too hashed in, still the latter made me adore Roo).

They never really quite screw up Pooh's character or try to turn him into something he really isn't for the sake of a more compelling story, it feels like they do genuinely just have these takes to give depth and charm to the whole thing, giving things a greater 'edge' feels more the means than the aim. It maybe helps that all the characters by default are incredibly flawed but still endearing.

Edited by Psi001 on Mar 2nd 2019 at 11:42:22 AM