Disney redesigns the Seven Dwarfs

[Magenta Panther]

I wish this was a joke, I really do...

They're for a Disney preschool show. Apparently the all-knowing accountants running Disney thought that the original designs weren't good enough for today's kids. Where's the barf smiley when you need one?

EDIT: Here's the link to the story: http://www.deadline.com/2012/06/disney-jr-orders-seven-dwarfs-toon-series/

 

[spectromagic04]

What the heck!

 

[Californian Elitist]

EEEEWWWWW!

 

[nepalostparks]

Keep in mind that the 1937 Disney version of the dwarfs aren't "original", they are simply Disney's first version of the characters.

There's a version of the dwarfs/dwarves from the early 1900s by a German illustrator.

I can't really form an opinion based on the one still in the original post, but it is an artist's representation of the dwarfs... If it wasn't a Disney production, would you still have the same distaste?

 

[Magenta Panther]

Keep in mind that the 1937 Disney version of the dwarfs aren't "original", they are simply Disney's first version of the characters.

There's a version of the dwarfs/dwarves from the early 1900s by a German illustrator.

I can't really form an opinion based on the one still in the original post, but it is an artist's representation of the dwarfs... If it wasn't a Disney production, would you still have the same distaste?

I think so, because those drawings aren't very good in my opinion. They all look like lawn gnomes. Besides, Disney set itself up for criticism by coming up with these awful new designs but keeping the old names. Of COURSE people are going to compare - how could they avoid it - and so the new version of the Dwarfs is going to fall short (no pun intended). To me, this is still more evidence that there are people within the Disney organization who actually have no appreciation or respect for Disney. I bet whoever greenlit this atrocity are the same people who thought that Disney had to look outside its own studio to find a counter to Universal's Harry Potter ride. Disgraceful. It makes me sick!

 

[nepalostparks]

I bet whoever greenlit this atrocity are the same people who thought that Disney had to look outside its own studio to find a counter to Universal's Harry Potter ride. Disgraceful. It makes me sick!

Not likely, as they are two different business units.

I don't watch pre-school geared shows, so I don't think it will bother me in the long run. But if it makes you sick, I would suggest avoiding it.

 

[Magenta Panther]

Not likely, as they are two different business units.

I don't watch pre-school geared shows, so I don't think it will bother me in the long run. But if it makes you sick, I would suggest avoiding it.

I admire your indifference; I wish I cared as little for Disney's legacy as you do. I guess you're right, though, it's for pre-school, so what the heck! Let this new version of Walt Disney's first classic suck! The little monsters won't know the difference.

 

[nepalostparks]

I admire your indifference; I wish I cared as little for Disney's legacy as you do. I guess you're right, though, it's for pre-school, so what the heck! Let this new version of Walt Disney's first classic suck! The little monsters won't know the difference.

It's not that I don't care for Disney's legacy. But I doubt that a pre-school show version of the dwarfs will have any long term impact on the earlier Disney version of the dwarfs.

I was just pointing out that it's a little melodramatic to get so worked up over a new version of a set of characters that has had literally dozens of interpretations in different art forms.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Did they learn nothing from My Friends Tigger and Pooh?

 

[bubbles1812]

Did they learn nothing from My Friends Tigger and Pooh?

What happened with them? Just out of curiosity...I'm not pre school age nor do I have pre school age children so I'm slightly indifferent to this. I'd just probably let them watch and also make sure they watched Disney's Snow White version. I do think it's weird they kept the names considering the such radically different design.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What happened with them? Just out of curiosity...I'm not pre school age nor do I have pre school age children so I'm slightly indifferent to this. I'd just probably let them watch and also make sure they watched Disney's Snow White version. I do think it's weird they kept the names considering the such radically different design.

My understanding is the it was a total flop. Parents did care that Pooh had been changed so much, so they did not have their kids plopped down in front of the tv watching or, more importantly, they were not buying the merchandise.

 

[bubbles1812]

My understanding is the it was a total flop. Parents did care that Pooh had been changed so much, so they did not have their kids plopped down in front of the tv watching or, more importantly, they were not buying the merchandise.

Hah... and why does that not shock me? And ok, I just watched a short clip on youtube...had seen that advertised and I remember thinking it was weird they didn't use Christopher Robin when he's so integral to the Pooh series. It did seem very different. I grew up on The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh and I loved that, but I felt that show was keeping with the original spirit of the original books/movie. Tail Spin, Goof Troop, Duck Tales, Chip and Dale Rescue Rangers or even originals like Darkwing Duck, Bonkers and Gummi Bears...those were my shows. I wish they'd utilize their characters like they used to and you know, make cartoons that even adults wouldn't mind watching instead what Disney Channel has become these days.

 

[Can we go yet?]

No...just no.

 

[ellie-badge]

It's not supposed to be related to Disney's film. It's supposed to be a different take on the seven dwarfs from the original fairy tale. Yes, they have the same names... so what? The dwarfs in Once Upon a Time (hell, most of the characters in Once Upon a Time) have the same name as the Disney characters, but they're in no way related to Disney's films. A name is a name.

It's just a different adaptation of the old fairy tale. Sheesh.

 

[Magenta Panther]

It's not supposed to be related to Disney's film. It's supposed to be a different take on the seven dwarfs from the original fairy tale. Yes, they have the same names... so what? The dwarfs in Once Upon a Time (hell, most of the characters in Once Upon a Time) have the same name as the Disney characters, but they're in no way related to Disney's films. A name is a name.

It's just a different adaptation of the old fairy tale. Sheesh.

Interesting. I can refute two of your arguments using the exact same reasoning:

It's not supposed to be related to Disney's film? Really? Then why do the dwarfs in this new version HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? Sheesh.

It's supposed to be a different take on the seven dwarfs from the original fairy tale? Really? Then why do the dwarfs in the new version HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? Sheesh.

Your logic, if it can be called that, is puzzling. Sounds like you're making excuses to me.

And as for the characterizations in the "Once Upon A Time" TV show..well, in case you hadn't noticed, that show isn't animated. So some change in appearance and characterization is understandable. But once again, your "logic" doesn't hold up. If the dwarfs in that show aren't supposed to be related to the Disney film, WHY DO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? In point of fact, the show "Once Upon A Time" has TONS of allusions to Disney films. Some are obvious, some you have to really look for, but that's part of the fun.

In case you didn't know it, the dwarfs in the original Snow White fairy tale didn't have names. Ever. Walt and company GAVE them names for their film version of the story. Those names AND THE DWARFS' APPEARANCES are what make those characters memorable. Changing their appearance to make them look like the crappy squiggly drawings used in some modern TV cartoons is akin to changing Sleeping Beauty Castle into White Castle. At least to those of us with the ability to appreciate the classic Disney aesthetic. Sheesh.

 

[Powerline]

Why not recreate the Ariel with blonde hair, a black tail and red eyes? It's only the artist's rendition, not Disney's fault.

 

[lebeau]

In case you didn't know it, the dwarfs in the original Snow White fairy tale didn't have names. Ever. Walt and company GAVE them names for their film version of the story. Those names AND THE DWARFS' APPEARANCES are what make those characters memorable. Changing their appearance to make them look like the crappy squiggly drawings used in some modern TV cartoons is akin to changing Sleeping Beauty Castle into White Castle. At least to those of us with the ability to appreciate the classic Disney aesthetic. Sheesh.

I think you have really answered your own question. Obviously, the dwarfs need names. Why come up with new ones?

If Disney had kept the look from Snow White, fans would have complained.

It's a TV show for pre-schoolers. Anyone who gets worked up over that really needs to rethink their priorities in life.

 

[threeyoda]

Interesting. I can refute two of your arguments using the exact same reasoning:

It's not supposed to be related to Disney's film? Really? Then why do the dwarfs in this new version HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? Sheesh.

It's supposed to be a different take on the seven dwarfs from the original fairy tale? Really? Then why do the dwarfs in the new version HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? Sheesh.

Your logic, if it can be called that, is puzzling. Sounds like you're making excuses to me.

And as for the characterizations in the "Once Upon A Time" TV show..well, in case you hadn't noticed, that show isn't animated. So some change in appearance and characterization is understandable. But once again, your "logic" doesn't hold up. If the dwarfs in that show aren't supposed to be related to the Disney film, WHY DO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? In point of fact, the show "Once Upon A Time" has TONS of allusions to Disney films. Some are obvious, some you have to really look for, but that's part of the fun.

In case you didn't know it, the dwarfs in the original Snow White fairy tale didn't have names. Ever. Walt and company GAVE them names for their film version of the story. Those names AND THE DWARFS' APPEARANCES are what make those characters memorable. Changing their appearance to make them look like the crappy squiggly drawings used in some modern TV cartoons is akin to changing Sleeping Beauty Castle into White Castle. At least to those of us with the ability to appreciate the classic Disney aesthetic. Sheesh.

There has to be 100 different drawings, films, book, etc. of the Cinderella story. Do they all have the same name? Yes. Are they all the same? No.

Saying they should be judged the same because they have the same names makes absolutely zero sense. I don't know if you trying to be sarcastic, or if your really being serious, but either way, it makes just no sense at all.

 

[unkadug]

There has to be 100 different drawings, films, book, etc. of the Cinderella story. Do they all have the same name? Yes. Are they all the same? No.

Saying they should be judged the same because they have the same names makes absolutely zero sense. I don't know if you trying to be sarcastic, or if your really being serious, but either way, it makes just no sense at all.

I'm not sure what your logic has to do with this either.

There are thousands of variations of the Cinderella story and they DO NOT all have the same name. The original Grimm Brothers story of Snow White had no names for the dwarfs...Disney created those and no one but Disney can legally use those names in any retelling of the story.

 

[ellie-badge]

Interesting. I can refute two of your arguments using the exact same reasoning:

It's not supposed to be related to Disney's film? Really? Then why do the dwarfs in this new version HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? Sheesh.

It's supposed to be a different take on the seven dwarfs from the original fairy tale? Really? Then why do the dwarfs in the new version HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? Sheesh.

Your logic, if it can be called that, is puzzling. Sounds like you're making excuses to me.

And as for the characterizations in the "Once Upon A Time" TV show..well, in case you hadn't noticed, that show isn't animated. So some change in appearance and characterization is understandable. But once again, your "logic" doesn't hold up. If the dwarfs in that show aren't supposed to be related to the Disney film, WHY DO THEY HAVE THE EXACT SAME NAMES as the dwarfs in the Disney film? In point of fact, the show "Once Upon A Time" has TONS of allusions to Disney films. Some are obvious, some you have to really look for, but that's part of the fun.

In case you didn't know it, the dwarfs in the original Snow White fairy tale didn't have names. Ever. Walt and company GAVE them names for their film version of the story. Those names AND THE DWARFS' APPEARANCES are what make those characters memorable. Changing their appearance to make them look like the crappy squiggly drawings used in some modern TV cartoons is akin to changing Sleeping Beauty Castle into White Castle. At least to those of us with the ability to appreciate the classic Disney aesthetic. Sheesh.

Talk about puzzling logic. What does a show being animated or live action have to do with anything? Once Upon a Time gets a free pass, but The 7D doesn't?

Disney owns ABC just as much as it owns Disney Jr., in case you didn't realize. With your logic from earlier, the dwarfs featured in Once Upon a Time would be just as much of an "extension" as the dwarfs in this new show would be.

You have some serious problems if you think I don't appreciate the classics just because I disagree with your original post, let alone mocking what I originally said in mine. If anything, you're the one making excuses for your irrational behavior.

Take a chill pill or something.