Yep.. and that’s a problem for ‘alot’ of people. It’s supposed to be comical but not gross & cringey. They’re like bad parodies.. and I’d argue it is very much on topic.. cause Iger’s using it as one of spins as a “savior” of “Disney’s roots”, when it’s the exact opposite. And pretends the Mickey before it & Clubhouse, (that being 90s-early 2000s era ; Prince & the Pauper, Runaway Brain, Mickey Mouse Works, House of Mouse, Once Upon & Twice Upon A Christmas, and Three Musketeers) never existed. They’re not mentioned once in the documentary.
I honestly don’t mind the new cartoon style as long as we never lose the old style at times as well. I’m curious to see if/when the studios goes back to hand drawn animation movies what they are like. IMO Disney and Pixar has been very much lacking in the creativity department in movies for awhile now
I agree. And that’s why I’m so frustrated about it.. we ‘have’ lost the genuine old style.. and while we’ve seen bits & hints of classic/traditional animation in clothing ads featuring Oswald, 101 Dalmatians, etc.. the staff within is a skeleton crew. They just will not and don’t see the value in doing full movies in that style anymore nor television series. Or full length shorts on that matter.. only ones that are about 4-5 mins at most due to lack of staffing, internal support, and budgets being able to make longer ones, which is a shame since they’re great otherwise. (See Goofy in How To Stay At Home short series)
How was the quality of dining today versus 1994?
If I may be so bold, I’d like to suggest a cool urban hiking adventure (if your group is into this sort of thing) that takes place under the Hollywood sign:
www.theeastsideagent.com
Haters dismiss it as “CalArts Style.”
My thought is that it's similar to the way that Blippi reincarnates certain elements of Barney (the slow speaking rate, exaggerated facial expressions, over the top enthusiasm and uber expository dialogue...) In that the features that draw in kids as viewers tend to be reproduced, because, well, they earn viewers, ergo execs like them. So yes, it's been done before, but it's all been done before for a reason.
In regard to what I meant - the summary version would be "It's not about what's new or old, it's about what works to bring in viewers." Kids tend to have very specific preferences.
I'd be curious to know if Iger even knows about most of the things you suggest he's trying to hide from you.
When they talk about "CalArts Style", they mean the "bean mouth"-style faces of the characters in shows like Steven Universe, Gravity Falls, and Star vs. the Forces of Evil (the latter two both owned by Disney).
He damn well should, they’re all very important parts of Mickey’s history. Fantasmic! included (which also wasn’t mentioned for whatever reason). Seriously, that Disney + documentary was ‘awful’. The ‘entire’ 90s-early 2000s era of Mickey literally ignored/framed as something that never existed or that brought anything good or significant to the Mouse’s history/legacy as a character. Insane
Truth be told, my criticism has nothing to do with any “Cal-Arts” style. (Which ironically was coined by the man that created Ren & Stimpy.. the very thing that started this whole problem and was the main inspiration behind the new shorts..who has his own share of serious issues I’d rather not get into) My problem is in the way they treat the characters as gross, needlessly edgy mockeries of themselves rather than anything sincere & with real personality & emotion.
