Underrated Movies

Off-topic discussion forum. Talk about movies, contemporary animation, and other non-classic cartoon topics with fellow GAC members here.
User avatar
J. J. Hunsecker
Junior Member
Posts: 2819
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:23 am
Location: California, USA

Postby J. J. Hunsecker » Sun Jul 17, 2011 4:37 pm

FleischerFan wrote:I think changing the cantina scene so that Hans Solo now shoots in self-defense is tip-toeing pretty close to the same kind of PC changes mandated at Disney.:tweety:


The decision to go public as a company was made by Walt & Roy, so they accepted all the consequences that go with becoming a public corporation.

I don't consider anyone employed in the company to be an "outsider" any more than I would consider myself an "outsider" at the various companies that have employed me through the years.

That is a huge supposition. Walt always had great concern for the mainstream American audience. In my opinion, he would have no problem with those changes, but neither of us can really know for certain.


Again, this is another supposition. I know it's vogue now to criticize Eisner, but I also remember what bad shape Disney was in before he took over. Eisner brought in Frank Wells & Jeffrey Katzenberg who are credited with turning the company around. The renaissance of Disney animation that began with The Little Mermaid began under Eisner's watch.


IMO, the Disney Studio has ALWAYS been concerned with being "PC." It's just that our notin of what is "PC" has changed through the years.

When "The Three Little Pigs" was made, a negative Jewish stereotype was not considered "un-PC" (so also for many racial & ethnic sterotypes). As mainstream tastes changed, Disney changed to conform to those changes.

Remember Walt was the guy who instituted the "no mustache or beard" rule for employees at Disneyland (when he himself had a mustache!) because he feared his mainstream audience associated such facial hair with "hippies."

Eisner is long gone and we still have such digital alterations and no Song of the South release, so to me, being PC is, was, and always has been a part of the Disney Company's policies.

I didn't see this reply when it was posted nearly a month ago, so sorry for the delay in answering it.

Eisner was definitely an outsider, considering he knew nothing of the business he was hired to run. Disney could have gone with someone who worked at the studio for years, for instance. Eisner, along with Frank Wells and Jeffrey Katzenberg, did help the studio in revitalizing the animation department. However, originally Eisner wanted to shut down that department! If you read the book "Keys to the Kingdom", the author paints a picture of Frank Wells keeping Eisner in check. Once Wells died in that plane crash, the troubles for the company started. (Apparently, in the book Eisner is portrayed as the type of manager who constantly came up with ideas and decisions based on impulse and whims, then change his mind, which would cause several costly delays and changes.) Katzenberg, according to the animators at the time of his reign at Disney, really was the one who oversaw the animation department.

Walt Disney definitely would have been upset by the number of "Cheapquels" to his classic movies like Bambi that were pumped out by the studio under Eisner's reign. Disney was against the sequels to The Three Little Pigs, for instance. ("You can't top pigs with pigs.") He only did it because he had to please RKO.

The heavy handed PC control over the older cartoons eased once Eisner left the studio. The Walt Disney Treasures included some cartoons that would have been verbotten under Eisner.
"I'd hate to take a bite outta you. You're a cookie full of arsenic."

User avatar
Thad
Junior Member
Posts: 4496
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2004 11:00 am
Location: Ithaca, NY

Postby Thad » Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:02 pm

J. J. Hunsecker wrote:Walt Disney definitely would have been upset by the number of "Cheapquels" to his classic movies like Bambi that were pumped out by the studio under Eisner's reign. Disney was against the sequels to The Three Little Pigs, for instance. ("You can't top pigs with pigs.") He only did it because he had to please RKO.


Two corrections:

- There is endless documentation of a Bambi sequel being planned in the 1940s, based on the original book's own sequel. So he wasn't as adverse to sequels as the legend goes.

- All but the last of the pigs cartoons, The Practical Pig, were done while United Artists was distributing the shorts.

User avatar
Matt the Y
Junior Member
Posts: 3305
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:55 pm
Location: Truro, Nova Scotia

Postby Matt the Y » Sun Jul 17, 2011 6:32 pm

Thad wrote:Two corrections:

- There is endless documentation of a Bambi sequel being planned in the 1940s, based on the original book's own sequel. So he wasn't as adverse to sequels as the legend goes.

- All but the last of the pigs cartoons, The Practical Pig, were done while United Artists was distributing the shorts.


I had heard that Fantasia originally had a sequel planned but it got dropped by the wayside as well. Is there any truth to this?

User avatar
OriginalGagBonkers
Junior Member
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 10:53 pm
Location: None of ur bussiness!

Postby OriginalGagBonkers » Sun Jul 17, 2011 7:15 pm

This should be mentioned. Walt Disney originally had a sequel planned to Snow White. The blu ray of the film has the information of it within the special features.

User avatar
FleischerFan
Junior Member
Posts: 1246
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:32 pm
Location: Cape Coral, Florida

Postby FleischerFan » Mon Jul 18, 2011 7:48 am

Matt the Y wrote:I had heard that Fantasia originally had a sequel planned but it got dropped by the wayside as well. Is there any truth to this?
Partially correct.

The original plans for Fantasia called for the film to be in semi-perpetual release with new segments replacing older segments. The working title for the film was "The Concert Feature." Walt envisioned it like going to a musical concert - every time you would go to the concert, they would play different music. And of course, every once and awhile they would also play an old favorite - meaning older segments could be restored to the film as well.

That was something of the guiding spirit behind Fantasia 2000 and the reason that "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" was still a part of the feature.

BTW to return to the topic, I also feel that Fantasia 2000 is something of an underrated movie. I thought the criticism leveled at it was very similar to the contemporary criticism leveled at the original Fantasia back in the day.

The sequence with the flying whales was outstanding. The short piece with the flamingos was brilliant, I thought the experiment with the Hirschfield-style illustration interesting. The only part I really didn't like was the corny celebrity introductions.
"To speak without thinking like shooting without aiming." - The Hon. Charles Chan, American Law Enforcement Figure & Philosopher

User avatar
Ben-the-looney
Junior Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:53 pm

Postby Ben-the-looney » Mon Jul 18, 2011 5:19 pm

Brother Bear: A lot of Disney fans don't like this movie, but I don't see why. I think the story is great, the animation is pretty good, and it's very heartwarming. Not to mention, Phil Collins music for a soundtrack is always a win.

User avatar
MarioSonic94
Junior Member
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 11:25 pm

Postby MarioSonic94 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:45 pm

Robin Hood Prince of Theives
Robin Hood (Disney)
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Back to the Future part II & III
Batman Forever (sort of)
Cars (1 & 2)
Spider-Man 3
Fantasia 2000

User avatar
Paulie J. Waddle
Posts: 963
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: Wackyland

Postby Paulie J. Waddle » Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:07 pm

Fantasia. By far. The blood, sweat, and tears that went into making this masterpiece is truly astounding. Of course, this has developed somewhat of a cult following, and therefore, can't really be considered underrated (but definitively NOT overrated) as much as Fantasia 2000 is. I especially liked how this film tried to incorporate some not-so-familiar composers and pieces. (Shostakovitch and Pines of Rome for example) This film is also as much of a technical achievement for Disney (and animation itself) as the original film was. :donald:
Take that, Phineas and Ferb Wiki!

User avatar
FleischerFan
Junior Member
Posts: 1246
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:32 pm
Location: Cape Coral, Florida

Postby FleischerFan » Wed Oct 19, 2011 9:11 am

MarioSonic94 wrote:Robin Hood Prince of Theives
Robin Hood (Disney)
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
Back to the Future part II & III
Batman Forever (sort of)
Cars (1 & 2)
Spider-Man 3
Fantasia 2000
Interesting list.

Disagree with:
Robin Hood Prince of Thieves (only like Alan Rickman's performance)
Batman Forever (not bad, but it did well at the box office so I don't think it's underrated)
Cars 1 & 2 (Any film that made so much money they cranked out a sequel is not "underrated." Haven't seen the sequel.)
Spider-Man 3 (easily the weakest of the 3)

Agree with:
Indiana Jones & the Temple of Doom (my favorite of the Indy pictures for reasons too numerous to go into on this post)
Back to the Future Part II & III (This is my favorite film trilogy after Lord of the Rings)
Fantasia 2000 (for reasons I've already stated)


Paulie J. Waddle wrote:Fantasia. By far.
Fantasia is NOT an underrated movie.

It was underrated when it was originally released, but that was more than half a century ago.

It has enjoyed tremendous popularity since its re-release in 1969. It is not a "cult" film. Its place in animation & film history is well secured. Its mainstream appeal was the reason Disney went ahead with Fantasia 2000. Mickey as the Sorcerer's Apprentice is perhaps his second best known incarnation (after the classic red pants & yellow shoes look). There is a wealth of books and merchandise based on this film.

A great movie, yes. But underrated? Hardly.
"To speak without thinking like shooting without aiming." - The Hon. Charles Chan, American Law Enforcement Figure & Philosopher

User avatar
Paulie J. Waddle
Posts: 963
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:51 pm
Location: Wackyland

Postby Paulie J. Waddle » Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:20 pm

FleischerFan wrote:
Fantasia is NOT an underrated movie.

It was underrated when it was originally released, but that was more than half a century ago.

It has enjoyed tremendous popularity since its re-release in 1969. It is not a "cult" film. Its place in animation & film history is well secured. Its mainstream appeal was the reason Disney went ahead with Fantasia 2000. Mickey as the Sorcerer's Apprentice is perhaps his second best known incarnation (after the classic red pants & yellow shoes look). There is a wealth of books and merchandise based on this film.

A great movie, yes. But underrated? Hardly.


Sorry. I've been on a Fantasia sting lately! :o
Take that, Phineas and Ferb Wiki!


Return to “The GAC Forums Water Cooler”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests