clarksfan95
Member
Quite true....but in the end....it was the same mouse that is recognized today as Mickey Mouse.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Letters protesting the absence of Roger Rabbit
- Thread starter disneyphilip
- Start date
You evidently dont watch House of Mouse. Mortimer is a regular, and looks nothing like Mickey.clarksfan95 said:
clarksfan95
Member
Mortimer was developed a couple years later. He appeared in a cartoon as possible competition for Mickeys love of Minnie. He originally starred in a cartoon called "Mickey's Rival" in 1936. Here's a quick description I found for the cartoon.....
Minnie's old friend, Mortimer Mouse, drops in on Mickey and Minnie's picnic. His practical jokes and coming on to Minnie soon have Mickey stewing, and their car isn't happy either. When Mortimer gets a nearby bull enraged and takes off, the car comes to the rescue after Mickey gets tangled up in a red blanket.
Minnie's old friend, Mortimer Mouse, drops in on Mickey and Minnie's picnic. His practical jokes and coming on to Minnie soon have Mickey stewing, and their car isn't happy either. When Mortimer gets a nearby bull enraged and takes off, the car comes to the rescue after Mickey gets tangled up in a red blanket.
That is incorrect. When walt first developed the mouse, after losing the rabit, the mouse's name was Mortimer.
Enderikari
Well-Known Member
Technically you are both right..
Yes Mickey's original name before his current moniker was Mortimer, but the name was changed (according to Disney legend) by Lillian Disney, to a more suitable name.
Later on in Mickey's career, Disney introduced a new character, a foil to Mickey, who's name was Mortimer.. Almost a tribute to what might have been.
Yes Mickey's original name before his current moniker was Mortimer, but the name was changed (according to Disney legend) by Lillian Disney, to a more suitable name.
Later on in Mickey's career, Disney introduced a new character, a foil to Mickey, who's name was Mortimer.. Almost a tribute to what might have been.
clarksfan95
Member
I know that the mouse that Walt created on the train ride home was originally named Mortimer....but, in the end, that mouse, that body, that face, that personality...is Mickey. I read in an interview with Walt that that original Mortimer character was only called Mortimer for two days. When he got home and informed his wife about what had happened..he showed her this Mortimer. At that point, he was no longer known as Mortimer. We are talking two days here....that length of time isn't really anything...especially when it comes down to development. By the time the first cartoon was released with that character - it was called..................Mickey Mouse. Belle, went through 3 name changes during development of Beauty and the Beast.
One of the problems with the merchandising and what-nots of Roger fall into the original deal that was created between the companies back when development of the film started. The lawyers were well at work and for quite some time before the film ever started and they apparently those meetings were not fun. Disney creates what they can, but they are very limited to what they can make. They can make merchandise and that's it. If they want to do a sequel or even short cartoons, then the lawyers are once again needed. It's not easy for 3 large corporations to work out that kind of deal because they only care about themselves and how much money they are going to get...meanwhile the other 2 corporations are aiming for the same thing...
I love Roger Rabbit, but I realize that he is stuck between 3 companies that don't really get along that well. To be honest, this past release on DVD was butchered by Disney because a lot of the film was not politically correct, let alone all of the things on the edges of the screen that were animator placed gags. In an interview with Richard Williams after Roger Rabbit he said that he later discovered through one of the animators that over 34 not-so-clean gags were placed into the film - this is not what Disney is about and they really cleaned the film up before it got released this past time.
He's a great cartoon, I'm not arguing that...I'm stating that. It's obvious opinions differ on the impact and power of the Little Mermaid (it opened feature animation up to little girls again). She was the first contemporary princess. I have no doubt that Disney would've cheapquelized Roger already if they had the chance...that's what they do ya know, but as luck has it...they can't and the original can be preserved (more or less).
Go to Disneyland tho', it's not a bad ride....it does exist. To be honest tho', Disney World just got Disneylands (California Adventures) best ride...and that was Soarin' - it be nice to rip down the Indiana Jones ride at MGM and replace it the Disneyland version, it's much more exciting, tho I think it's almost the exact same track layout as Dinosaur. Good ride....highly recommend.
One of the problems with the merchandising and what-nots of Roger fall into the original deal that was created between the companies back when development of the film started. The lawyers were well at work and for quite some time before the film ever started and they apparently those meetings were not fun. Disney creates what they can, but they are very limited to what they can make. They can make merchandise and that's it. If they want to do a sequel or even short cartoons, then the lawyers are once again needed. It's not easy for 3 large corporations to work out that kind of deal because they only care about themselves and how much money they are going to get...meanwhile the other 2 corporations are aiming for the same thing...
I love Roger Rabbit, but I realize that he is stuck between 3 companies that don't really get along that well. To be honest, this past release on DVD was butchered by Disney because a lot of the film was not politically correct, let alone all of the things on the edges of the screen that were animator placed gags. In an interview with Richard Williams after Roger Rabbit he said that he later discovered through one of the animators that over 34 not-so-clean gags were placed into the film - this is not what Disney is about and they really cleaned the film up before it got released this past time.
He's a great cartoon, I'm not arguing that...I'm stating that. It's obvious opinions differ on the impact and power of the Little Mermaid (it opened feature animation up to little girls again). She was the first contemporary princess. I have no doubt that Disney would've cheapquelized Roger already if they had the chance...that's what they do ya know, but as luck has it...they can't and the original can be preserved (more or less).
Go to Disneyland tho', it's not a bad ride....it does exist. To be honest tho', Disney World just got Disneylands (California Adventures) best ride...and that was Soarin' - it be nice to rip down the Indiana Jones ride at MGM and replace it the Disneyland version, it's much more exciting, tho I think it's almost the exact same track layout as Dinosaur. Good ride....highly recommend.
clarksfan95 said:- it be nice to rip down the Indiana Jones ride at MGM and replace it the Disneyland version, it's much more exciting, tho I think it's almost the exact same track layout as Dinosaur. Good ride....highly recommend.
Disney Studios doesnt have an Indy ride.
Enderikari
Well-Known Member
clarksfan95 said:
Right... but they created another different character later, first appeared in the cartoon short "Mickey's Rival." A tall drink of water named Mortimer Mouse, a rival for Minnie's Affection
clarksfan95 said:
This just so happens to be one of the many things you happen to be dead wrong about, clarksfan. Roger is not by 3 companies. He's owned by only 2 companies: Disney and Amblin.
Warner Brothers never had any ownership of the character. They WB studio just gave them permission to use the Looney Tunes characters in that film. Besides, characters from other non-Disney studios were licensed to appear in the film, so not all of them can own a single property like that.
clarksfan95
Member
To DisneyPhilip:
Okay, I did have a typo there...it isn't 3 companies...but two companies and an individual. Disney, Universal (Amblin was bought by these fellas) and Steven Spielberg (who no longer has any involvement with Amblin due to Dreamworks). So in order for Roger Rabbit to get any further exposure, the lawyers have to consult all 3 of these.....owners and all 3 of the owners have to okay the deal for it to be worked out.
As for me being wrong about many things....I don't know about that...I am known to be wrong about some things....but a lot of what I've said in this thread is factual and could be looked into via the internet. I've spent the last 20 years of my life pursuing a career in animation and I know a lot of backstory to films and their development stages. I read interviews by their creators...I download interviews, I've had classes with instructors who worked at Disney for periods of time....I really do know what I'm talking about...it doesn't always come out correctly...and I do occasionally make typos. You've actually given me nothing to defend....when I asked what you thought was incorrect...you said everything....what's everything....I reitterated comments, but I need you to take a stance and let me know what you disagree with.....I know my statements about the Mermaid are in your disagreement somewhere.....
To: Enderikari
As for Disney Studios not having an Indy ride, you are right...but they have the stunt spectacular....I think (my opinion) it would be in the better interest of the parks to remove that attraction and replace it with an updated version - which the Indy ride from California would be an appropriate attraction. It's a much more exciting attraction, but like I said, it's just like Dinosaur but with Indiana Jones.
Okay, I did have a typo there...it isn't 3 companies...but two companies and an individual. Disney, Universal (Amblin was bought by these fellas) and Steven Spielberg (who no longer has any involvement with Amblin due to Dreamworks). So in order for Roger Rabbit to get any further exposure, the lawyers have to consult all 3 of these.....owners and all 3 of the owners have to okay the deal for it to be worked out.
As for me being wrong about many things....I don't know about that...I am known to be wrong about some things....but a lot of what I've said in this thread is factual and could be looked into via the internet. I've spent the last 20 years of my life pursuing a career in animation and I know a lot of backstory to films and their development stages. I read interviews by their creators...I download interviews, I've had classes with instructors who worked at Disney for periods of time....I really do know what I'm talking about...it doesn't always come out correctly...and I do occasionally make typos. You've actually given me nothing to defend....when I asked what you thought was incorrect...you said everything....what's everything....I reitterated comments, but I need you to take a stance and let me know what you disagree with.....I know my statements about the Mermaid are in your disagreement somewhere.....
To: Enderikari
As for Disney Studios not having an Indy ride, you are right...but they have the stunt spectacular....I think (my opinion) it would be in the better interest of the parks to remove that attraction and replace it with an updated version - which the Indy ride from California would be an appropriate attraction. It's a much more exciting attraction, but like I said, it's just like Dinosaur but with Indiana Jones.
Enderikari
Well-Known Member
clarksfan95 said:
Uh... wha...? I was walking about Mortimer Mouse.... when did Indy show up?
clarksfan95
Member
Sorry about that Enderikari.....I had scrolled down to look over the posts thought your name was attached to that post......:veryconfu
I think that that was actually meant for HakunaMatata.....:brick:
It's been a long day already and it's only noon.
I think that that was actually meant for HakunaMatata.....:brick:
It's been a long day already and it's only noon.
Ghostbuster626
Member
So are we going to get this letter campaign going or what?
clarksfan95
Member
If you wanted....you could write letters to Disney and probably Universal. Amblin is no longer in operation and Dreamworks isn't in the mix at all, unless you are trying to get in touch with Spielberg - which going through Dreamworks wouldn't be the appropriate channel and your letter would probably get tossed in the trash by those that read the letters.
The difficulty of the 3 owners coming to terms is very high and would cost the companies a lot of money just to work out a new deal.
The difficulty of the 3 owners coming to terms is very high and would cost the companies a lot of money just to work out a new deal.
Oh, mkt and clarksfan95, will you two please stop it and shut up!!!
Why do people like you two have to have the last word? Please do us all a favor and knock off the pessimism and snotty, imbecillic attitudes already!
And you wonder why Disney fired you, mkt...
And clarksfan95, for the last time, R.R. has TWO owners, NOT THREE!!!
Why do people like you two have to have the last word? Please do us all a favor and knock off the pessimism and snotty, imbecillic attitudes already!
And you wonder why Disney fired you, mkt...
And clarksfan95, for the last time, R.R. has TWO owners, NOT THREE!!!
imagineer boy
Well-Known Member
disneyphilip said:Oh, mkt and clarksfan95, will you two please stop it!!!
Why do people like you two have to have the last word? Please do us all a favor and knock off the pessimism and snotty, imbecillic attitudes already!
And you wonder why Disney fired you, mkt...
I saw what you posted before you edited. Don't think you can get away so easily.
clarksfan95
Member
I'm not being pessimistic...it's called being realistic....and your right...he doesn't have 3 owners...he has 4. The creator Gary Wolf (who still has some control over what is done with him), Disney, Spielberg and Universal - I actually found this out today, while researching Roger Rabbit.
Ghostbuster626 merely asked how to get this started...I merely responded that he could start by sending letters to some of the people, but figured I'd save him some stamps and time by informing that Dreamworks (who you listed with an address) is not involved in this and that Amblin Entertainment is no longer is business. This thread actually made me wonder if they were still around - so I checked into things and they are not listed on either MPSC839's company list and/or Animation World Networks company listing. I also checked my Animation Industry Directory for 1999-2000 and they are not listed on there either. So why waste the time and the stamp to send to people who are not involved in the situation........? They can't do anything...
I will retiterate that everything I have posted about, I've researched either in the past or the present....if you are having a problem with reality then I'm sorry, but until you support your ideas with something stronger "than I'm wrong about everything"...then don't tell me about it....I make sure I know the things I'm talking about (I may mistype or mis say something on occasion), but at least I'm attempting to support my stance on the subject.
Ghostbuster626 merely asked how to get this started...I merely responded that he could start by sending letters to some of the people, but figured I'd save him some stamps and time by informing that Dreamworks (who you listed with an address) is not involved in this and that Amblin Entertainment is no longer is business. This thread actually made me wonder if they were still around - so I checked into things and they are not listed on either MPSC839's company list and/or Animation World Networks company listing. I also checked my Animation Industry Directory for 1999-2000 and they are not listed on there either. So why waste the time and the stamp to send to people who are not involved in the situation........? They can't do anything...
I will retiterate that everything I have posted about, I've researched either in the past or the present....if you are having a problem with reality then I'm sorry, but until you support your ideas with something stronger "than I'm wrong about everything"...then don't tell me about it....I make sure I know the things I'm talking about (I may mistype or mis say something on occasion), but at least I'm attempting to support my stance on the subject.
clarksfan95 said:
Whoever said that stuff is NOT entirely right! Members like you and posts like your filth are what drove me to avoid coming here regularly recently!
What you're saying is STILL pessimism and NOT realism! Disney and Amblin are the ONLY 2 owners of R.R. and THAT is the truth! And Amblin is still in business!
clarksfan95
Member
I thought this was over already....see that line....these people aren't wrong, they are the industry and the industries people. That's all.
The MPSC839 is the animators union that deals with all major studios run in the United States. They were created a while back, remember the Disney strike.....
The Animation Industry Directory is a listing of all production, animation and post production companies in the world. It's rather extensive and includes over 5000 different companies.
The Amblin marker that you see on movies has basically become nothing more than Steven Spielbergs trademark logo and that's it...no company even exists anymore.
I'm sorry that I don't see eye-to-eye with you and that because I don't agree that means my posts are filth and heresay (sp?). You must learn that not everyone thinks like you or agrees with everything you have to say and blow it off and move on. I did...and totally forgot about this until your recent post brought the subject back to the top of the list. I did my research through organizations that deal with the animation industry, not through some Joe Schmoe I met on the street...I'm sorry you didn't agree with my findings.