Disney's Frozen

[EricJ]

My god! How could the 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of the rest of the world have missed this!

(Well, they were rather distracted by other issues at the time; it sort of slipped their notice, and nobody bothered to correct the memos afterwards...That's generally how Mass-Manias work.)

God, PATF hasn't been released yet, and already I'm looking forward to The Snow Queen. I used to watch the Russian animated film all the time as a kid. But now that I'm older, I've always wondered...why did they make her a villain, whereas in the book, she wanted to save Kay, and said she'd let him go once he was cured. Were they copying the evil queen from Disney's Snow White?

She's fairly ambiguous in the story, more of a Threat than a Villain, but without overtly evil motives--Snow is her job, whether human beings can handle it or not.
More like a sympathetic version of Narnia's White Witch, back when Edmund thought she was being nice.

(And like most fairytales that Shelley Duvall got to first in the 80's, there was a respectable "Faerie Tale Theater" version that kept the SQ as dangerous-but-comforting, who just wanted to help Kay either way.)

But...I am intrigued...what's this "Ben and The Lion King" thing?

(Since you asked: "B&B must be good because it was NOMINATED!" is probably the second most frustrating, brick-wall-bashing, anal-retentively stubborn, unkillable-cockroaches of Urban Legend that the more balanced animation fans are still trying to hammer with the bedroom slipper of History--
If it weren't for the dedication that some fans still have for the myth that unlike about two-thirds of his own generation, that not only had Jeffrey K. had never, ever seen a pop-nostalgic Tezuka series in his life--and wanted to spend his tenure at Disney edifying us with the Immortal Bard, 'cause, there's like an evil brother in it--but that it must logically follow that Timon & Pumbaa sequels were actually based on Tom Stoppard plays...
Sometimes, we wonder if the longtimers knew the truth all the time anyway, and are still doing either of them just to Annoy the Rest of Us.)

[robster]

yeah, BatB got a pitty nomination at the Oscars. The academy actually felt sorry for it so they decided to give it a nod.

No, it got a jump-the-gun "What're we gonna nominate in November" nod at the GG's (the Globes hadn't yet cemented their reputation as the Most Gullible Major Awards in the pre-Oscar canon), because the December big-guns hadn't opened yet--
Every pundit knew for a fact that nobody would EVER remember a poor lil' critically acclaimed Jodie Foster/Anthony Hopkins movie from February (February, that's like freakin' forever!), so a lot of columnist handwringing started salivating the West Coast voters for "What do we have to nominate this year, a Disney movie?"...
At that point, the bottle had been opened, and it wouldn't have mattered what Disney movie came out that year: B&B was still coattailing on Mermaid's new applause from a year before, the "work-in-progress" Festival stunt had gotten critics noticing how hard New-Disney was working again (ie., that Mermaid wasn't just an isolated fluke), and spilled over all the critics' "Disney movies are the new Broadway!" about New-Disney In General. One year off, and it could've been Aladdin up for Best Picture, and don't think the Westies didn't try.

And why do I bring this up?--Well, we got started on T&W basing their entire reputation on one picture, and never having directed a good one since.
And if you're asking me to say that an aggressively mediocre movie made by well-meaningly mediocre directors is "good" on no other bases than its own audience--in that it created a zombie-cult who worships it on pedestal for getting a largely false bit of praise based on historical timing and LUCK--I'm sorry, that's not how the process works.
It technically works when we say things like "Give one artistic defense for B&B that does not use the words 'Nomination', 'Ballroom', 'Books' 'CGI', or 'Broadway'."

I'm sorry, but this theory is [EXPLETIVE DELETED - <b>robster, please watch the language, even in well constructed arguments, thanks</B>]! I mean, do you honestly think people are that gullible to think BATB is good JUST because it was nominated in the best picture category? That is nonsense! The sympathy vote theory sounds like pure paranoia! If your statement were true you are basically saying that anyone who likes the movie is brainwashed because of that fact and that fact alone, a mediocre movie made special by an award nomination...

You seem to forget that the movie was one of the most intricate Disney animated features storywise. Were limits of good and bad were tested, the Beast comes across as bad in the beginning (a villain) but then turns out to be the good guy and the handsome man doesn't have an honest bone in his body and dies a villain. This entire concept of not judging a book by it's cover is woven through the movie, along with other themes, like allowing yourself to dream big and believe in your dreams, longing for love, etc. It's one of the most layered Disney animated features and the story works perfectly with the art direction, directing, animation, songs, score, etc, etc. This is why BATB was handed that nomination, combined with the fact that the academy happens to like grand, epic drama's (animated or not) BUT.... even without a nomination this movie would still stand out in Disney's canon of animated features! Of course we can never test what would have happened to it's reputation and importance in Disney history had it never been nominated, but to judge this movie based solely on the fact that it was nominated, wether it be to it's advantage or disadvantage is preposterous and an insult to anyone's intelligence!

Btw, you suggest that BATB was riding the wave of Mermaid the year before, when there was in fact a good two years inbetween Mermaid and BATB... inbetween we got the modest succes of the Rescuers Down Under, which hardly helped cement the concept of Disney returning big. It wasn't untill BATB and Aladdin untill people really spoke of a second Golden Age in animation!

[Ben]

So, Eric...what's with this "Ben and The Lion King" thing?

Because the answer you gave didn't actually make any sense or tell me anything I didn't already know. There was only one Timon & Pumbaa sequel, by the way, so need for the plurals.

[EricJ]

(Why are you making me go this far off-topic?--Okay, so it is, but on your head be it, and no complaining later--Let's try to find the trail of bread-crumbs back to the topic:
A) Someone thought Gary & Kirk would be good directors because they made one ambitious but overpraised film that got lucky, and another one that flopped but had good intentions and cult defenders, even though they constantly spoiled their own atmospheres with goofy kiddy-shtick.
B) I tried to counter that they weren't really that good as directors, and the one film they were known for wasn't what it was, through artificial fortune or circumstance, cracked up to be.
C) When I accused the movie of having "a zombie-like cult" based on the Neato historical artifact of getting a symbolic "stunt nomination" from the mania at the time, fans responded "Whaddya mean 'cult', and that 'we only like it because of its Oscar'?--It's only the greatest movie of all time, and it got NOMINATED!"
D) My sense of losing grip on a rational world tried to find an illustrative metaphor, and the closest onsite comparison I could make was to one of the last human beings on the planet who still believes--almost contrarily and petulantly so--that JeffK based his one reputation-maker movie on a Shakespeare play, on no other citation than He Told Us He Had, so why would he lie?
A name now synonymous with plagiarism lawsuits, a criminal record that reaches back nearly twenty years, the recent Astro Boy movie making us aware of how old studio executives only remember 60's Tezuka series, and our webmaster still believes that JK wanted to give Shakespeare because he was so Cultural.
It was not a thread about B&B, Oscars, LK, JK, Kimba or Shakespeare, just about stubbornness...Don't have to take it to e-mail, but why do you still believe that; it really does seem like you're still doing it just to get a rise out of the rest of us? And again, that Tom Stoppard comparison was just scary, and go find us one Toon Studio exec who's even heard of him.)

Whew. Right now in the northeast, we've already got a foot of snowdrift. I hate to have to shovel Thread Drift as well.

[James]

I gotta admit I didn't follow that at all! What does it have to do with Ben? And on a side note, you do know that Shakespeare didn't just write movies, right?

[robster]

So... aaaaaanyway, Chris Buck is directing Snow Queen and now we can all get over this and move on

[Ben]

I don't think I've ever suggested anything to do with JK and Shakespeare on these boards. The Hamlet parallels on Lion King were, if anything, actually attributed to Don Hahn, while the analogy was continued in the DTV Lion King II as basically being Romeo And Juliet. The "sidequel" of Lion King 1.5 was very much based on the Rosencratz And Guildenstern concept, whether the DisneyToon people had ever heard of Tom Stoppard or not. My guess: having actually met some of them, is that they're not the imbeciles you obviously imagine, Eric.

As for the rest of your rant...I'm sure I really don't know what the heck you're going on about and honestly think you have lost the plot.

[ELIOLI]

ELI

I am 15 here. lets please make this understandable for me and everyone else...I have no idea what is going on here rather that lets just talk about Snow Queen. This is making it less enjoyable for me to read. I want exciting news..not rants...

[James]

I am 37 here. lets please make this understandable for me and everyone else...I have no idea what is going on here!

[Ben]

As far as I can make out, what is going on here is that Chris Buck is directing Disney's "The Snow Queen" hand-drawn animated feature.

On a tangent, Eric is suggesting I said something about something else entirely, which I don't believe I ever did, and has seemingly gone nuts.

Up to speed now?

[ELIOLI]

I am very pleased for 2d comeback, traditional animation is what got us interested in an imation in the first place I just hope we never have a dry spell for 5 years again, and that hopefully they would be as successful and as anticipated as CGI has become.

[Rosengeist]

Not to bring up any Katxenbergian era stuff by saying this, but the pacing for these films reminds me a little of the early late 80's early 90's release slate they had for theatrical productions.

I can't help but imagine "The Snow Queen" will be a little bit darker as a picture, simply because the fairy tale itself is a little dark and really incredibly complex.

So you have "The Princess and the Frog" in 2009, which reminds me a lot of "The Little Mermaid" just in the sense that it feels like a bit more jovial and fast paced film with a heavy emphasis on music.

Then in 2011, you have the new "Winnie the Pooh" film which is based on one of their pre-existing properties like "Rescuer Down Under" was (Though I certainly hope it does better in theatres.

And in 2013 you're suppoused to get "The Snow Queen" which as i said earlier, I can't help but feel would be a little bit darker.

I'm not trying to make any 'accusations' or anything like that, I don't think Iger is trying to mimic Eisner and Katzenberg's era totally, so much as he's trying to make a good business plan. Still, the realease slate feels similar. I just hope that it helps to make people as excited about animation as they were in the early 90's, and help to excite a new generation of children about the artform

[Ben]

So, could Rapunzel be their B&TB?

[EricJ]

So, could Rapunzel be their B&TB?

Y'mean, in that it gets spillover praise from the first movie because we were treating the first one at the time as "Oh, it's a nice fun surprise, and all, but not like it's deep enough to start changing any industries singlehandedly, or anything"--
And then, once we got the second film to see the pattern emerge, suddenly realized later it was changing industries, and started falling all over ourselves to start making up for it by wildly symbolic-overpraising the one that DID happen to be in theaters at the time?
(Now, you're gettin' it... )

Well, hope Rapunzel isn't THAT bad, looks like it actually might deserve some of its compliments.
Given that SQ is the third one (if P&TF is their studio-changing Mermaid, Rapunzel is their "Cute romantic story, and the movie gets the credit for it even if they destroyed the spirit of the original by trying to liberate the heroine" B&tB, and the Pooh remake is their "Old movie from the earlier producers trying to dig a marketable title franchise out of the Old Days, that arrived late and looked like a dinosaur now that the new productions were up to speed" Rescuers Down Under that "didn't count"), that would technically make SQ their Aladdin:
The "Now, y'see, here's the kind of Disney animated you can make when you can balance the cute stuff with a rip-roaring A-B plot" one.

(Unfortunately, that means we'll get some crappy original project as the "Overconfidently crappy non-classic project that starts taking all the bows for the first three movies, after it makes a rampant opening box-office weekend after audiences innocently rushed in hoping fourth time was the charm" Lion King.
And we don't need another one of those, do we? )

[Vernadyn]

Hmm, I liked Beauty and the Beast. I must have been brainwashed, then. Or delusional. That may also explain why I chose to major in English.