The buzz: 2 'Toy Story' sequels

[speck76]

You are spending so much time attacking my post that you are not seeing my true point. .

Was this your true point? (it was your first post on the thread)

Does anyone else find it somewhat laughable that Eisner says the Disney produced movies will be cheaper to make and then turns around and says that victory will come down to storytelling and emotion? Aren't these two things in direct contrast to each other?.

I will not back down from my feeling that Disney Animation is going nowhere right now. It's o.k. for me to feel disappointed with the quality of the product that is being put out. You make your point with statistics, that's great, but statistics don't always show the big picture. I was not implying that there is a direct corrolation between money spent and quality of story. Does a good budget help? Sure. Can a terrific movie be made on the cheap? Sure. There is no black or white here. .

We are in agreement here....there is no relationship between budget and story/heart, but your first post says quite the opposite.

I simply find it ironic that Eisner can be so cocky in his statement about the quality of Disney movies (sequels to be exact) when the recent past has proven otherwise. He needs to back up this statement with a quality story. I'll believe it when I see it.

Eisner needs to be cocky in the environment that these coments were made (Goldman Sachs meeting), as he is the head of a company, he needs to have a winning attitude. I agree that Disney has a lot to prove with their next few releases, at least before I will blindly trust that everything they produce is quality.

 

[HauntedPirate]

The Emperor's New Groove was so expensive because of all the re-writes and other such nonsense that occured prior to it's release.

"Eisner said an enormous amount of computer-animated movies will spill forth from Hollywood in the next few years, but victory will boil down to story-telling and emotion, rather than just technology. "

In my mind, from this statement and the lack of story-telling and emotion coming from Disney in the past several years (with the exception of Mulan and Brother Bear, just my opinion), Disney will lose.

 

[Lauriebar]

My first post was refering to Mr. Eisner's choice of words. "Cheap" can mean inexpensive, but it can also mean inferior or shoddy. So if one looks at it meaning the latter then indeed the two (quality and inferiority) are in direct contrast to one another.


My second post was in response to your answer to my first post. You misinterpreted the meaning of my post and I responded to your point about money not being significant to good movie making. For every point you make about a less expensive movie being better than one that cost much more, I'm sure I could find and example to prove the other side. Perhaps I misspoke when I said creating good stories require time and money, my frustration at the current quality level of Disney animation forces me to try to justify the lack of caring that has been going into the films being released.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

Ok, in your coughing, you picked the two cheapest films on the list, bringing me back to my point of "there is no relationship between budget at story/heart"

I wasn't reffering to that. I was reffering to your question as to whether maybe Disney never had the ability to create "story and heart". The coughs show otherwise.

 

[speck76]

I wasn't reffering to that. I was reffering to your question as to whether maybe Disney never had the ability to create "story and heart". The coughs show otherwise.

Your coughs may have provided evidence for both points....like it or not.

 

[Legacy]

*coughLionKing,BrotherBear,Lilo&Stitchcough*

The Lion King was an already established story. It may not be blunt, but all it is is Hamlet beinig performed in a G-rated setting with lions. Lilo and Stitch was not developed by Disney as a whole, but instead created by a small group of animators who bucked tradition and developed the story after-hours. Brother Bear is probably the only cough that fits into the catagory of company developed with heart.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

My coughs are really off, aren't they?

I could've sworn they said in the B&tB video extras the Lion King was Disney's first true original. Oh well....

 

[Legacy]

My coughs are really off, aren't they?

I could've sworn they said in the B&tB video extras the Lion King was Disney's first true original. Oh well....

The Lion King was original in the fact that it took a story and manipulated it in a way that you can't tell what the original story was. Instead of calling it, "Hamlet" like they have done with all of the other traditional films they created a unique world with a more magical set of characters. It's still original in that respect, however the actual plot ain't.

(Unless you have seen Kimba: The White Lion... but that's a competely different thread)