Will Disney ever produce a "classic" movie anytime soon?

[Tip Top Club]

Turtle First of all you misunderstood my post. When I said they weren't going anywhere what I meant was that they will continue to make smash hit movies.

Second Diseny/Pixar is not a distribution Deal, they are one Company. Disney is distributing Studio Ghibli Movies, and Dreamworks Live Action movies (Through Touchstone) those are different kind of things. With Pixar, it's not a distribution deal It's that they are one and the same.

 

[MarkTwain]

Disney Animation Studios and Pixar aren't completely the same. They're two separate studios, located in buildings hundreds of miles apart from each other, that each take on their own projects without caring what the other one is working on. Both WDAS and Pixar are subsidiaries of the larger "Disney Studios", which also distributes Studio Ghibli and Dreamworks live action. They hire employees separately, and an animator working on a Pixar film will likely never work on a Disney film and vice versa. One exception (but possibly not the only exception) is John Lasseter, who oversees both animation studios as part of the deal of the Pixar buyout. There has been a little bit more "blending" since Ed Catmull, a former Pixar employee, now oversees the Disney Animation Studios, but Pixar heads like Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton will most likely continue to oversee Pixar projects.

 

[MagicMike]

One huge reason the Pixar name is kept around is for consumer recognition (Although this may not be the only factor). People have gotten so used to the Pixar brand producing extremely high quality animation, Disney wouldn't risk dropping the name.

 

[stlbobby]

Disney Animation Studios and Pixar aren't completely the same. They're two separate studios, located in buildings hundreds of miles apart from each other, that each take on their own projects without caring what the other one is working on. Both WDAS and Pixar are subsidiaries of the larger "Disney Studios", which also distributes Studio Ghibli and Dreamworks live action. They hire employees separately, and an animator working on a Pixar film will likely never work on a Disney film and vice versa. One exception (but possibly not the only exception) is John Lasseter, who oversees both animation studios as part of the deal of the Pixar buyout. There has been a little bit more "blending" since Ed Catmull, a former Pixar employee, now oversees the Disney Animation Studios, but Pixar heads like Pete Docter and Andrew Stanton will most likely continue to oversee Pixar projects.

They are not completely the same, but Pixar films are a subset of Disney movies. While the staffs and buildings may be separated there has always been collaboration. I am sure the amount of collaberation varies from project to project, but Disney has had a guiding hand in every Pixar movie. In fact during the early years of Pixar they often chaffed at Disney's vision.

The quality of the early Pixar films can be, and often is attributed, to the combination of old school Disney know-how combining with the boundary pushing work at Pixar.

 

[Mickey_777]

The first ones you mentioned are Pixar films...

Could've fooled me. When I pop in my Toy Story Blu-Ray, the first thing I see is a Disney Castle with the epic intro/wish upon a star music. When the films come out, they're called "Disney Pixar" films. Disney comes first. Woody, Buzz, Mater, Nemo, Sully etc are plastered all over Disney theme parks world wide. I saw the Pixar documentary on TV. I know their story. But today, Disney and Pixar are practically interchangeable. Take a look at John Lasseter. Mr. Pixar is principal creative advisor to Walt Disney imagineering. I see where you're coming from but I just think that nowdays (if not officially, at least in most peoples minds) the two are pretty much one in the same.

 

[Fraisie]

A "classic" is something that stands the test of time, and as abused by Disney as the word is (did you know Home on the Range is an official Disney "classic"?) .

Hey I loved that movie!

Anyway, to me, a Disney classic is any Disney movie that makes me go "Awww... I can't wait to see that again!". They range from Snow White to Toy Story, with movies like Cinderella, Peter Pan, Beauty and the Beast, Hercules and The Emperor's New Groove anywhere in between.

 

[Turtle]

I

Turtle First of all you misunderstood my post. When I said they weren't going anywhere what I meant was that they will continue to make smash hit movies.

Second Diseny/Pixar is not a distribution Deal, they are one Company. Disney is distributing Studio Ghibli Movies, and Dreamworks Live Action movies (Through Touchstone) those are different kind of things. With Pixar, it's not a distribution deal It's that they are one and the same.

I know.. NOW they aren't a distribution deal. Froom 1995-2004 they WERE a distribution deal and that was the time period I was speaking of

 

[Turtle]

They are not completely the same, but Pixar films are a subset of Disney movies. While the staffs and buildings may be separated there has always been collaboration. I am sure the amount of collaberation varies from project to project, but Disney has had a guiding hand in every Pixar movie. In fact during the early years of Pixar they often chaffed at Disney's vision.

The quality of the early Pixar films can be, and often is attributed, to the combination of old school Disney know-how combining with the boundary pushing work at Pixar.

I don't mean to speak back in any way: But from what I know Pixar has been making the films without Disney's collaboration (except marketing). I think Toy Story and Bug's Life applies from this paragraph but ever since Pixar has been a hit studio (around 2001).

I didn't mean any controversy with the Pixar corrections, I just have a pet peeve when people mention a Pixar film as "Disney", because the films are made by Pixar, but Pixar is owned by Disney. Just like how many people on this forum have pet peeves of people calling Disney World, "the happiest place on earth" (I have that peeve also lol).

 

[luv]

I just cal them all "Disney movies" now. I was kind of glad when Disney bought Pixar, so that all of this "Disney movie made by Pixar" stuff could end.

 

[invader]

Toy Story is my favorite Disney movie.

 

[Patricia Melton]

A part of this that I don't see people talking about is the stories themselves that are being told.

Most of the really well-known, classic fairytales have been used already...so the movies that are being made recently (and ones that will be made in the future) will have to really stretch to find stories to re-interpret.

I've been trying to think of what Disney will do for the "Hispanic princess", since Disney is clearly trying to develop a princess character for every ethnic group. I don't know of any Spanish fairytales they could do, but I imagine they will get to this soon. The "princess line" can't be complete until there's a Spanish-speaking princess, because Disney will just be criticized in the future for not having one.

I think that in the future we will see the following Disney films (though they will be called something different no doubt):

* Hansel and Gretal
* Little Red Riding Hood
* Princess and the Pea (if they made Frog Prince into the New Orleans story with Tiana then they could do just about anything with this)
* The Dancing Princesses
* Jack and the Bean Stalk (even though it's a Mickey cartoon, they'll make it for real one day with a princess at the top of the beanstalk)
* Tom Thumb (but not Thumbelina, as that's a Bluth animated movie)
* Gulliver's Travels

If you know any good princess stories from around the world list them because I am sure that Disney will get to them eventually.

But notice how none of these have the emotional punch or the instant-relatability of Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, CInderella, Little Mermaid, etc.?

Disney can animate the heck out of stories in the future but they will not resonate as much as these "tales as old as time" that people are really familiar with.

 

[Patricia Melton]

Many of the films you list as "classic" were not even considered very good when first released. Fantasia, Pinocchio, Dumbo and Bambi all had their detractors. As you note, Pinocchio was a "financial debacle", as was Fantasia. It's only through the haze of time that they've been reclassified as "classic".

Who knows what movie today will be considered a "classic" 50 years from now. If we could somehow be transported to 2062, I think we might be surprised to see how time judged some movies.

There's also this thing people do where they criticize anything being done today as inferior to what was done 50 years ago. Some people feel superior when they do that, as if they're special because they appreciate things from long ago when people today are ignorant and have no taste.

I was startled to find this phenomenon in a magazine I found at the library from the 50s. It bemoaned how much better everything was at the turn of the 20th Century....and how ignorant people had become and how no one enjoyed cultured things anymore.

You pick a year, and I bet you'll find a cohort of vocal malcontents who enjoy bemoaning how they were "born in the wrong era" and how sad it is that they missed "the golden days".

When you live long enough you can see that each year has its plusses and minuses. I would never want to live in a time before the Internet or Amazon.com. No thanks.

I do grant that Disney has had some periods of great movies and some periods of lackluster ones. I think we're coming up on another period of great ones. I also think Princess and the Frog is highly underrated and is an instant classic in my house and my family's favorite Disney animated movie.

 

[ParentsOf4]

You pick a year, and I bet you'll find a cohort of vocal malcontents who enjoy bemoaning how they were "born in the wrong era" and how sad it is that they missed "the golden days".

It's the basic premise of Woody Allen's "Midnight In Paris".

 

[stlbobby]

I didn't mean any controversy with the Pixar corrections, I just have a pet peeve when people mention a Pixar film as "Disney", because the films are made by Pixar, but Pixar is owned by Disney. Just like how many people on this forum have pet peeves of people calling Disney World, "the happiest place on earth" (I have that peeve also lol).

The problem with your Pixar pet peeve is you are wrong. Pixar movies are Disney movies. They are developed in collaboration with each other. It is not a distribution deal, it is a production deal and Disney exercises a great deal of creative control. The line has become even less distinct as many of the Pixar creatives have moved into to positions at Disney.

 

[Turtle]

Toy Story is my favorite Disney movie.

lol you just did that to get me mad haha.

 

[unkadug]

lol you just did that to get me mad haha.

I didn't even catch that!

 

[Turtle]

The problem with your Pixar pet peeve is you are wrong. Pixar movies are Disney movies. They are developed in collaboration with each other. It is not a distribution deal, it is a production deal and Disney exercises a great deal of creative control. The line has become even less distinct as many of the Pixar creatives have moved into to positions at Disney.

If what you consider "great deal of creative control" writing the films then you'd be wrong, Pixar writes their own films and has their own writers and story artists. All I'm trying to say is that Pixar is a separate studio from Disney.

 

[stlbobby]

If what you consider "great deal of creative control" writing the films then you'd be wrong, Pixar writes their own films and has their own writers and story artists. All I'm trying to say is that Pixar is a separate studio from Disney.

First that's not all you were saying. You were screaming that the Pixar films are not Disney films. Those are different arguments. And while the separation between studios and production entities varies throughout the industry, the Pixar/Disney relationship is extremely close and interdependent.

Disney has 100% script approval over all Pixar movies and has used it regularly. As I stated before Pixar didn't want anything to with a song and dance movie when they were making Toy Story, but Disney insisted. The compromise was the Randy Newman score, but no big musical numbers. Disney executives recommended specific buddy movies the Pixar animators should watch during the writing process and eventually brought on Joss Wheadon and others to work on the script. Clearly Disney was in the loop during the writing/development of the film.

The relationship continued beyond Toy Story. It is most well documented for Toy Story because of the ground breaking nature of the film, it is the point when the lines between the studios was most distinct, and it is the place where the relationship was birthed. After Toy Story there are not as many documented "battles", because they fell into a comfortable symbiotic relationship. Even when the financial partnership was about to sever during the production of Ratatouille, the creatives maintained a close relationship.

John Lasseter's career is a perfect metaphor for the relationship. He started as an animator for Disney. Moved onto a key creative position at Pixar. He worked with Disney of several classic films. And is now the head of both animation studios and a principal creative for Imagineering. So when he directed Cars 2 as the head of animation for Disney, but a founding member of Pixar he embodied the collaborative spirit of the relationship.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Much as I think Pixar one the greatest things to happen to cinema the past two decades, I still can;t get used to them being a Disney subsidiary. Pixar characters feel alien to me. I wish they were limited to DHS, like the Muppets.

 

[Turtle]

First that's not all you were saying. You were screaming that the Pixar films are not Disney films. Those are different arguments. And while the separation between studios and production entities varies throughout the industry, the Pixar/Disney relationship is extremely close and interdependent.

Ohhh. I mean that Pixar's films aren't Walt Disney Animation Studios films which is what the forum is about. Yes Pixar are Disney movies but I mean that they aren't films from Walt Disney Animation Studios. You get me? Haha i think i didn't understand what you mean, of course they're disney! (Just not Walt Disney Animation Studios)