The Little Mermaid

Post by **ShyViolet** » October 11th, 2006, 4:22 pm

Actually...haven't seen it yet,

but I thought it was cute-looking....my positive impression came from Droosan's affection for it and praise of the director.

Post by **Dacey** » October 11th, 2006, 4:34 pm

Ben wrote:Basically, the animation has been outsourced and is being done in Japan, si it's not the Australian crew, which has been getting better and better.

Well, that explains everything.

Post by **Daniel** » October 11th, 2006, 5:40 pm

ShyViolet wrote:Actually...haven't seen it yet, but I thought it was cute-looking....my positive impression came from Droosan's affection for it and praise of the director.

Aww that's a shame

but that's what I think of the film as well. Not to mention the commercials were hilarious

Post by **Dacey** » October 22nd, 2006, 2:28 pm

Okay, after watching some of his interviews on the "Little Mermaid" DVD, I must say, "Katzenberg, what's wrong with you?".

He says that TBC is "Way too violent" and seems to believe even today that they should've "Edited" it.

He was actually going to cut "Part of Your World" just because a school kid dropped his popcorn during a preview screening? Good Lord! I mean, I know he's embarassed by it now. But still...

This man's always trying to make animation more appealing to adults, and look at how he started. Amazing.

I also noticed that he seemed rather uncomfortable when giving the interviews, not at all like his usual "Loose" self when you see him on the DW DVDs.

The man still seems to hold a grudge. And I really doubt that he wants to ever return to this company.

Post by **Meg** » October 22nd, 2006, 5:09 pm

Eh. What's TBC again?

Post by **ShyViolet** » October 22nd, 2006, 5:30 pm

The Black Cauldron.

I just want to point out that the animation on POYW was not anywhere near completed when that film was screened. The scene didn't have the depth it did later on when it was animated. And anyway, he finally did agree to put it in...AND he was directly involved in hiring Howard Ashman (whom the animators rejected at first, since he was a "Broadway" not animation guy) and developing the music with him and Menken. (at least in a "supervising" sort of way.)

Also, you have to remember that this...was....1985!

Things were completely different then as far as media content (live-action and animated, but especially animated) "Cartoons" were seen as invariably chid-friendly. And yes, K later on went to make films more for adults, but this is the point that Disney was pretty much at during this time, as well as animation. It was K that eventually steered it towards a more adult level. (and even on the commentary they say that he told them to make the final confrontation with Ursela scarier, more "Die Hard," and that over and over again he stressed the emotion of the story and at one point said: "I don't believe he loves her, and without a love story you don't have a movie."

Plus, as far as thinking Little Mermaid would basically be aimed at girls...(I know you didn't mention this, but there have been those who brought it up ) back then yes, animation was supposed to be child-safe and was OFTEN aimed at boys OR girls, separately. Of course things have changed since then; in fact it was encouraging the animators to make Beauty and the Beast a good film, not just an animated movie, that helped it get nominated for Best Picture. (Animators actually laughted when K suggested that they make the film good enough so it had a chance to be nominated for Best Pic.) It's all well and good to say that he should have done this or that...but you can say the same thing to those who made other Disney or even Pixar films. There were probably lots of great scenes that might have helped the films but maybe were too risky or too long. It's how the entertainment business works. You can't damn K without damning everyone else.

He says that TBC is "Way too violent" and seems to believe even today that they should've "Edited" it.

You don't know exactly what he did cut or what it consisted of. Very few people actually do. It might have been disturbing, especially for very small children. (Who are a big part of Disney's target audience) Also, wasn't the film rated PG-13?
Also, it wasn't just the violent stuff, it just didn't flow all that well and was confusing, from what I understand. ( I think that film was actually in production for over a decade!

)

I'm sorry if I jumped too quickly on this, but...I wish people wouldn't villify Jeffrey so much. He's a human being and he's made mistakes....just like John Lassetter has made mistakes, Steve Jobs has made mistakes, and Musker, and Clements. None of these people are perfect but we think of the GOOD they have done, not the dumb things they messed up 20 or so years ago.

I don't know if he has a grudge towards Disney anymore, but it's his business. He has gone out of his way to praise them and to say that he has no regrets about the years he was there.

Hey, maybe he was a bit uncomfortable on camera, but who can blame him? He hasn't officially associated with or endorsed ANTHING to do with the Walt Disney company for more than a decade!

The company put him through litigation hell for five years. They basically denied his existence in their corporate history for 12 years. I think he might be a bit uncomfortable after all that.

Post by **ShyViolet** » October 22nd, 2006, 9:13 pm

I just want to apologize to WJ if I came off too harsh; it's just that I read the whole POYW thing in many commentaries of this DVD....like just because Katzenberg might have messed up 20 years ago by wanting to cut a scene that wasn't even fully animated yet, he's some kind of monster.

Not that WJ was saying this,

but that's what some commentators have kind of implied. I guess I got too emotional about the whole thing...

But even if you do think K messed up big time, you have a right to your opinion.

Post by **Dacey** » October 24th, 2006, 6:12 pm

Vi, you don't have to worry about offending me. Believe me, I expected a response from you after I wrote that.

But...

You don't know exactly what he did cut or what it consisted of. Very few people actually do. It might have been disturbing, especially for very small children. (Who are a big part of Disney's target audience) Also, wasn't the film rated PG-13?
Also, it wasn't just the violent stuff, it just didn't flow all that well and was confusing, from what I understand. ( I think that film was actually in production for over a decade! )

No, from my understanding, TBC was NEVER rated PG-13. Also, what I got from that interview was that they didn't actually edit it at all, and JK seemed to think (even now) that it would've done better if they had.

I like JK, Vi, but the man was too ambitious for his own good and that's one of the many reasons he left the Walt Disney Company. At least that's what I believe.

Post by **ShyViolet** » October 25th, 2006, 9:11 pm

No, from my understanding, TBC was NEVER rated PG-13. Also, what I got from that interview was that they didn't actually edit it at all, and JK seemed to think (even now) that it would've done better if they had.

I checked IMDB and it was actually rated PG. "for some scary scenes."

(the first and only Disney animated film to be rated above a G, unless you count The Incredibles)

I think he did cut about 7 or 8 minutes from it. He took it to the editing machine because it was basically "a mess". That caused a lot of controversy, especially with Roy Disney and TBC Cauldron director Joe Hale, but he did eventually get his way. This was documented in The Keys to the Kingdom as well as many articles.

What he was trying to say in the interview was that "of course" you can edit an animated movie, it's a film like any other. Maybe it wasn't clear in the interview.

I like JK, Vi, but the man was too ambitious for his own good and that's one of the many reasons he left the Walt Disney Company. At least that's what I believe.

I know where you're coming from WJ.

I understand that many perceive JK this way. But the truth is, yes, he was ambitious, but not unreasonably so. This is just the story that Disney tried to spin out.

In my opinion....these are all myths. I'll keep this REALLY short and this is the LAST I'll say about this topic on this thread and the forum for now, unless there's a specific thread about it.
(I'm hiding this 'cause it's a bit long)

He didn't leave. Eisner fired him. Months before Wells' death, Eisner and Katzenberg discussed K's future...and, according to K's story, Eisner promised him the title of president and #2 if Frank Wells was for "any reason" gone, since Wells often went off on mountain climbing trips and considered leaving Disney for other things.

Later, after Wells was killed in a freak helicopter crash, Eisner denied that he said anything like this and of course tried to spin it like K is a liar, I never said that, he just want's Frank's job the day after he's dead, whatever. But in the notes that his autobiographer/ghostwriter Tony Schwartz took when interviewing Eisner around this time, Eisner basically admitted that this was true.

K trusted Eisner to keep his promise and he went back on it, making it look in the media like Katzenberg is this greedy, insensitive guy who only cares about advancement and not that this poor guy just died....which was not the truth at all. (at least I don't believe it was.) What if someone broke a promise to you? Wouldn't you be upset and try to get them to own up to it? Up until his very last day at Disney Katzenberg tried to work things out with Eisner and come to some kind of agreement, even though he mostly knew it was hopeless. Eisner strung him out for weeks, knowing all along that he was going to fire him.
Then in late August '94 he did.

K accepted it. He asked that his Disney contract be honored and that he get the money he was owed. Eisner hedged and then refused, hedged and then refused, hedged and then refused. This went on for two years, BTW. During the ABC merger it looked like they would make up. Eisner made some concilatory gestures, then again went back on them. By then it was early 1996. Katzenberg put off suing for two years because he wanted to settle. Finally he realized he had no choice. There was a partial settlement in late 1997, then a complete settlement after a VERY nasty trial in 1999 which the media had a field day with. (That's how the whole "midget" story occured)

The trial was about to go into its third phase when David Geffen of all people struck some kind of deal with Stanley Gold, who put pressure on Disney to own up, mostly because it would cost them even more to continue and their image was so utterly tarnished anyway. Katzenberg agreed to settle, even though it was for less than he'd hoped for. The trial was extremely hard on him and something that he tried very hard to avoid.

So....I really don't think it was his "ambition" which caused him to leave Disney. He was basically pushed out. But Disney is extremely powerful and has tried to perpetuate the story that he left, he wanted money, he was greedy, he took credit for things he didn't do, etc...etc....After all who would doubt Disney? That's why so little of this is actually understood by the general public, and it's basically all you hear about. You have to really dig deep to get a clear picture because there's so many stories going back and forth. But after reading an ***-load of stuff on this issue, it's so, so clear (at least to me) that Disney/Eisner were the ones who were consistently lying.

That's all I'm going to say!

But either way...you're entitled to your opinion about JK and I respect it!

Post by **James** » October 25th, 2006, 10:13 pm

ShyViolet wrote: I checked IMDB and it [The Black Cauldron] was actually rated PG. "for some scary scenes." (the first and only Disney animated film to be rated above a G, unless you count The Incredibles)

Also PG: Atlantis, Lilo and Stitch, Treasure Planet, and Home on the Range.

Post by **ShyViolet** » October 25th, 2006, 11:25 pm

Guess I missed those!

Post by **James** » October 26th, 2006, 12:08 am

While Ben is away on holiday someone has to take over the role of "all-knowing animation übergeek"! Just take it easy on me - I'm just a temp!

No seeing the future or mind-reading from me though; you'll have to wait for Ben for that!

Post by **Daniel** » October 26th, 2006, 1:08 am

Um....are you kidding James?

If your not, how sad

. Why didn't Ben say bye or something? Well I'm sure you'll be a great temp!

If I'm misinterputing this, I must be looking rather foolish huh?

Post by **Josh** » October 26th, 2006, 1:44 am

Ben will be right back! He'll just be gone for a few more days.

Post by **Daniel** » October 26th, 2006, 2:25 am

Oh so it wasn't a joke, haha

silly me.

Anyway hope to see Ben around here soon. It won't be the same without him