genuinely wonder if mickey being used less and less is because the term "the mouse" has been used as shorthand for disney whenever theyre being evil about something
@@agramugliawhat Disney should’ve done is right after Walt Disney had moved on to the next life the entire company does a massive overhaul and makeover of itself that includes renaming Walt Disney Studios as Buena Vista Studios, renaming Disney Animation Studios as Steamboat Animation Studios and expanding into more adult entertainment and foreign media alongside their own normal kid friendly media without feeling the need to buy up anything or making subsidiaries for the more adult entertainment or even without feeling the need to be 🐔💩 about marketing the foreign media.
@@MarshalMarrs-eu9yh Dr. Who too, to the point where people are blaming Disney as the final nail in the coffin from what is already coming from the public broadcasting services of a troubled country. Disney, if they went into anime, should have stuck to “cute girls doing cute things” rather than battle shonen or giant robots.
My grandfather has worked at Disney since he was 18 years old. He's 70 now and he's still working for them. He's been criticizing the "mouse" for awhile now but you could tell how bitter he has become working for Disney.
@@justanoreo2.0Yeah it’s sad what reality can do to pure hearted dreamers and optimists it’s not that we don’t want to continue doing that but sometimes something we thought we knew becomes a disappointment it’s like why even bother with it when I can just sit back relax grab some popcorn and watch it burn. Hurt dreamers hurt dreamers we sometimes also are like is it even worth it? All the hurt and hell we’ll have to do to attempt to do something. It feels as if what we were doing was in vain the whole time. Optimistic people become Cynical people. Cynical people were once dreamers and optimistic people themselves but then they had their dreams crushed by people closest to them, I’m still optimistic but I’m also Cynical and Skeptical at the same time to keep my world view in check. I used to be a Happy go lucky type a guy. A pure gentlefolk kinda guy. I’m still optimistic now I just have a cynical side to use as a shield so to speak. The optimistic side is a sword and the cynical side of me Is a shield. Again like your grandfather I wanted to be the “Walt Disney” of our generation. But after learning about the skeletons in Disney’s closet I was like I’ll find something else to do with my talents. I’m under the notion that were someone today like Walt Disney they wouldn’t be hired and have to create their own film studio to live their dreams. I neither have the money manpower to peruse such a venture. My sympathies to your grandfather whom is working for Disney. It is not what it once was.
@@MichaelEarnedIt-19 And it breaks people who were already cynics into outright monsters, as we see with many of those who were already critical of Disney becoming far-right pundits.
@@austinreed7343 I’m right wing but I’d say I’m very independent/conservative like Walt was with my politics. You want to know who’s pushing these agendas and DEI? It is Black Rock and Vanguard along with the left. Not the right. Don’t listen to the brainwashing of the left. Seek the truth and think for yourselves. They are the one who want to make America into a communist country, make America into a demonic state, want to trans your kids, want to force gender ideology onto you, want to do all this stuff you don’t want. We Republicans just want to be left alone and live a normal life. While the left wants to pervert everything we care about.
Something that really irks me about the Ralph 2 princess scene is the pajamas they wear that just re-enforces that idealized marketable idea of their characters. Just surface level references to their movie in a “modern and quirky” way. Just another way for Disney to further dilute and water down their characters
@@imaginefun13 Disney actually was one of the earliest tie in merchandisers with the Davy Crockett fur hat which was released at the same time as the pilot of the Davy Crockett tv show and Snow White's vinyl soundtrack which was released at the same time as the movie. So it's weird that people see The Disney being The Disney.
@@johnlee7164 Tarzan’s long been a tie in merchandising icon since the Tarzan books had silent film adaptations. People used to have Tarzan ice cream and Tarzan cereal flakes too in the 1930s, decades before people had McDonald’s Disney’s Tarzan Happy Meals.
They watered down Vanellope, Merida, and Tiana too - I don’t know which one angers me more so I’m just gonna point out Tiana because she already has flack for being “the overachieving black person who barely has fun” stereotype in her own movie until she turns into a frog - why they gotta water her down *MORE?*
@@dissonanceparadiddle Doylist Answer: Some exec's wet dream about Belle, boiling her down into a cardboard cutout instead. Watsonian: Gaston's ideals about women.
I think that one big problem, not only at Disney, but also at various service and entertainment companies, is the influence of Wall Street. Business owners or boards of directors have been so focused on not seeing their stocks fall that they have forgotten to please the audience that made their products or brands popular.
@@CanonessEllinorDisney stock is in decline since years. I have one share just to monitor how much on - my number goes They are so hard focused on brand value it does not even work
For sure. This seems like a generic and obvious statement but it's really the ignorance of execs thinking they could ever improve a property by putting their uncreative hands into the creative juices. Let the artists do art and just write checks or whatever
Yes, the introduction of shareholders and speculative investors have been nothing but detrimental to society. These are leeches who contribute nothing to society whilst destroying it.
The original Hunchback novel called 'Our Lady of Paris' is complicated. It was published by victor hugo to raise awareness and raise funds to preserve Notre Dame and lot is written about history of Paris. Unfortunately it has lot of negative attitude towards Romani people and Esmeralda is revealed to be a french girl kidnapped by romani (a common trope of anti-romani bigotry). Disney did right thing by making her actual Romani and shows persecution of their people which happened in Europe at the time.
Frollo hypocritically defying his religious beliefs for personal gain or for revenge is perfectly in-line with his character...especially if it's the version that has already been to hell.
That works, like with his appearance in Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance, but I only think it works because he's not as consciously "aware" of the "witchcraft" he's dealing with. I think he's at least honest enough that if you point to something and say "witchcraft", and it feels W-crafty enough, he will reject it. Like, even an offer to help him with his goals, having Maleficent walk up and say "I'll use my magic to get rid of those gypsies for you if you help me", he will more likely still reject her help. I'm sure there's a way to write around him accepting help from witchy sources and highlight more hypocrisy, but it doesnt sound like that live show is it. Like, I get the gypsy thing. They're "outsiders" that give a witch-adjacent vibe, so he's against them. What care does he, as a Judge, have against what another separate Magic Kingdom? As long as they leave Paris alone, I think he'd be satisfied. He doesn't quite have the pull to go against a separate nation that isn't "encroaching" in "his" city.
Ah, but he is a huge hypocrite, even in his own movie. If he sees teaming up with these pagan gods as a way to further his own goals I’m sure he would do it.
@@intergalactic92He's a hypocrite, but he is a zealot. I don't think he actually would do absolutely anything and everything for the furtherance of his goals, and he has shame for the goals that are not within the bounds of the church. As hellfire expresses, he feels out of control to even himself, and he would never work alongside those who did evil shamelessly, I think, without something more going on. At the very least, they would disgust him absolutely.
A lot of the time I see people praise Lion King 2 because they like the new characters, the music is well done, and the animation is above average for these straight to video sequels. However, what I don't see people praise is how the film dealt with trauma. Yes, Simba was turned into a psuedo-antagonist to rival Kovu's protagonist status. We often look at Kovu's character arc and drop it at that while rarely acknowledging Simba's arc in the film. The most obvious of these instances of seeing Simba deal with trauma is the nightmare scene. But, one could also make a nearly one to one comparison of "Kovu's betrayal" where we see Simba being chased by the outlander lionesses. The scenes and shots are comparable to his escape from the hyenas as a cub after the death of Mufasa. This also helps to explain his absolute lack of wanting anything more to do with Kovu and being adamant about not listening to Kiara. She has no real understanding of what happened and certainly has no clue as to what Simba was feeling in the moment. As an audience we just see Simba as "angry father who banishes his daughter's boyfriend" when upon closer inspection we can see someone who just relived a childhood trauma brought about by an incarnation of his past abuser (Scar).
I'm really late to reply to this, but that is a very interesting analysis. I've watched this film a decent number of times since I learned about some of the cut content from this movie, and not once did I ever think about what Simba's perspective was. Most of my thoughts and analysis went to Zira and the other Outsider lions, Vitani was also an interesting one for how the last thing she ever said to her mother was to reject her. I'm glad I found this comment as yet another angle of this story to think about :D
Beauty and the Beast is a fragile ice sculpture carefully crafted to perfection by master artisans. Every piece of related media is a third grader tossing together a sloppy snowman and going “same thing.” Disney just don’t understand what that movie is, and for a story with such emotionally sensitive themes, the end result is particularly horrid.
If you ever watched “Waking Sleeping Beauty” (I suggest you do), you would know that “Beast” was part of the time of Disney’s history when they realized the eighties was just as shit as it is now, and collaborations between said “artisans” was what, eventually, got us to the Renaissance in the nineties we all know now and that, ironically, is what Disney is milking dry today, especially regarding those “live-action” remakes. Of course what Disney *really* needs is another “Waking Sleeping Beauty”; the question now is “can they?”.
@@CanonessEllinor The 2017 one, on the other hand, is a violent blizzard that some enraged pundit tried to pass off as “modern art”. Calling it a sloppy snowman is an understatement.
@@Kaikaifilu1994 It's a cycle. Artisans create great entertainment, great entertainment creates hacks, hacks create stagnation, stagnation creates artisans. Also there's some kind of great change such as the death of Disney, advent of recorded media, CG, streaming, etc. They question isn't, can they, it's "when will they".
Ah yes, good ol' Olaf rushing into Beast Castle to smash open the rose dome and start milking for cash to appease Emperor Michael Rat, lord of the Magic Empire.
About your comment on The Little Mermaid 2: Return to the Sea, I agree that it is a bad movie, but for a different reason. It's only a bad movie because it's incredibly rushed, has bad animation, amateurish songwriting and has too many visual callbacks. However, I would be lying if I said the movie didn't have emotional intelligence or subtle nuance. Because it does. Even though there are distracting amount of visual callbacks, it's not just the original in reverse. The original was a romance fantasy, the sequel is a coming-of-age journey. And the saving grace of the movie are in fact the main characters, Ariel and Melody. Melody in particular, who I would argue is a much stronger character than Ariel was in the first film, mainly because she experiences more character growth. I also disagree that Ariel was acting out of character in the movie. She was suffering from generational trauma, the trauma of seeing her daughter almost devoured before her eyes and most importantly, she was losing her sense of self in the pursuit of trying to be a good mother. Which only makes sense because, after all, Ariel grew up without a mother figure and became a mother at 18 (and Eric was raised by his royal court, so he doesn't have a good concept of parenthood either). Her struggle is even reinforced through the symbolism of her hair. In the beginning, she has loose hair, but after cutting ties with Atlantica, she has her hair tied in a bun, symbolizing how she has essentially sacrificed her identity for her daughter's safety. And after becoming a mermaid again, her hair loosens, symbolizing that she has realized her mistake and will trust her daughter from then on, a trust that will set both of them free. Ariel's arc is all about becoming a better mother and ending the generational trauma. Melody goes through an arc of her own. She is not a brunette Ariel, she is her own character and they even did a great job with her design. She's blunt, she's socially awkward, she's short-tempered, she's sassy and she's depressed. Like most preteens, Melody is desperate for acceptance but she doesn't fit in with anyone because of her identity crisis. A crisis which stems from the fact that she's a half-mermaid who is intuitively drawn to the sea where she feels just as much at home as she does in her own palace, but she is ostracized for this because no one but her mother can relate to her. When she finds out merpeople are real, she wants to live among them because she thinks they're the only ones who will accept her. But after becoming a mermaid, she starts to see that she's the same person as before and is able to save the ocean from Morgana specifically because she finally embraced her human half. Melody's arc is all about realizing that there was nothing wrong with her to begin with and that she needs to accept herself if she wants to be accepted. Hence she turns down the offer to become a permanent mermaid and instead chooses to simply have access to both her ancestral homes and starts a new, healthier, relationship with Ariel. Now, some might laugh at me for defending a second-rate kid's movie and you could argue that I like the concept more than the execution, but I think this is one of the few Disney sequels that had a lot of potential and it could've been a good movie with a bigger budget, extra 20 minutes to the runtime and a few more drafts. So it's actually a movie that I don't think is good, but I'm glad that it exists.
@@hotspotcinema234 Exactly what I'm saying. With a bigger animation budget, a longer runtime and a few more drafts, this movie could've been excellent.
@@vetarlittorf1807 Heck, on the fanfic side of things(fanfic writer here) I keep having to go back and forth with one idea for a fic where The events of the 2nd little mermaid are tweaked yet the core is still the same, the mother daughter relationship.
I think the only problem is that it doesn't make much sense why Ariel didn't tell Melody about the merpeople at all. I sort of assumed Ariel made up with her family and especially her dad at the end of the first movie but we don't see them talk it out or anything; she just got legs and her dad's implied marriage blessing lol. So I'd accept that no one had good communication skills and that created friction later. And I checked out the second Sebastion called the new villain "Ursula's crazy sister" so I don't even recall if I finished watching it as a kid; I was so pissed off that was the only thing they could come up with as a descriptor (and if memory serves, she just resembles a skinny Ursula.) It unalived my willing suspension of disbelief lol. But I respect your defense of this movie because I've certainly defended just as bad cartoons myself. It sounds like they had a great idea and just botched it somewhat. It's honestly a mixed bag regarding the direct to video and TV series era but the people who worked on them were trying; there's some good ideas floating in the muck. Some things were much harder to generate a sequel for, I don't blame them for struggling there, and the mid-quels were always gonna have trouble rising above mid status. I might have to give this one another watch some day, while sailing under the jolly roger. I mean, I watched the first Swan Princess and that's also very flawed but I appreciate what they wanted to do with it even if that didn't quite work... and then it got devoured by sequel hell lol.
- If you're referring to "Mickey, Donald and Goofy: The Three Musketeers", I believe it was also a wasted opportunity; Unlike the little bit of screen tie he had in "The Prince and the Pauper", Horace Horsecollar could've had a bigger role in "Musketeers". Keep in mind that the three Musketerrs themselves (Porthos, Athos and Aramis) are led by D'artagnian. Thus, Mickey, Donald and Goofy being led by Horace. He could've been a former Musketeer who Pete felt was a threat to his plan, and thusly dumped, only for Horace to get the three heroes together to restore order. Perfect irony. Why didn't they do that? And, for that matter, why didn't they give Horace his own animated series (Maximum Horsepower)?
The new Mickey shorts are actually incredibly entertaining. The only problem is that most people will not seek them out. However, if the shorts are already playing somewhere, they have this quality that makes it impossible to look away. At least for me lol
That's why Saturday morning cartoons were an incredible way to passively get people to watch things they don't have to actively seek out. Looney Tunes got big because they played before feature films were shown in theaters.
I have the benefit of having little children that love Mickey. We just stumbled onto the shorts seeking out more mickey things. The shorts really feel like they are made by someone that watched cartoons in the 90s and I love it. Also all the references to the parks and movies.
This question of what makes stories worth telling is probably a big part of why Inside Out 2 went over so well. Because "What happens when Riley enters puberty" IS a strong narrative concept - we have decades of studies examining the exact effects the process has on girls going through the process, and the film simply explores that exact direction. Also, you really nail down why Beauty and the Beast is Disney's definite love story. Mad props to everyone involved for making such a strong romance.
About the Muppets, When i see comments online, everyone wants more Muppets. And there is no shortage of ideas for what kind of movies the Muppets could do. Im personally a fan of the idea that we stick with Muppets staying as actors in their movies. Like in Treasure Island. I think Disney should use popular IPs, like Dracula as an example or Sherlock Holmes, and have the Muppets act the part. People would go silly for it. Getting excited for whatever story the Muppets get to act in next. They could even do little red carpet events for the movies. It would be so cute to see the Muppets walk around in fancy clothes and do interviews. Lol Anyways, Disney, please do better with Muppets. At least fo Muppets Dracula or something.
I refuse to call the Beauty and the Beast midquels canon. Anyone who thinks so really needs to rewatch the original and see how disconnected those films are to that film.
most of those disney direct to video sequels aren't canon really. they sit and rot with less reference to them overtime like they don't exist. there are fraction i wouldn't mind to be canon
I’m glad Mickey is at least still popular as a CHARACTER first and a MASCOT second. The Paul Rudish Mickey cartoons are the best singular production Disney has put put in 20 years. The musicals are great and all, but NOTHING is as over the top and wacky as Rudish’s shorts, at least under the Disney umbrella. We may not have the direct to video DVD’s nowadays, but across Rudish’s run, we got over 100 full Mickey Mouse cartoons (nearly matching his original theatrical run in numbers) plus special length episodes themed to the four seasons, and holiday’s like Christmas and Halloween. It may not be the same as in the new millennium, but it certainly is MORE overall. Its just that because its on Disney Channel and Streaming, its not as easily seen in our culture as before. Mickey Mouse represents Hollywood’s golden era, a time of massive technological innovation in film, with Mickey spearheading sound cartoons and the three strip technicolor process. Look at Fantasia! That entire project was built out of a love for Mickey Mouse, and wanting him to reach a new artistic high point! Mickey should be remembered for all the good he did for the artform, and how he can still be used in fun and creative ways, even if Disney often restrains his full potential. Plus, with Epic Mickey getting a remake later this year with “Rebrushed”, and his continued appearances in Kingdom Hearts and extended cartoon/entertainment venues, I think we haven’t seen the last of what the Mouse is capable of achieving. Mickey is one of the most malleable and whimsical characters in all of fiction, much like Super Mario, he is a blank slate in most instances, but its all about finding imaginative and cool ways of using the character that matters. We the artists should use Mickey for good, reinvigorating his personality just as Rudish has, just as Walt Disney before him did. We as artists and fans have that power.
@@Ithinkimaninkyfanidk oh absolutely! Oswald is really Mickey’s older brother, Oswald walked so Mickey could run! Oswald also deserves a lot more credit in the scheme of animation history, and at least these days he’s beloved by both Disney fans and the general public. Plus, Oswald gets his own merch stores, meet and greets, and even his own cartoon short for the 100th anniversary of Disney. Hopefully they do more with him, as they did with Mickey!
@@Ithinkimaninkyfanidk both modern literature and popular culture couldn’t co-exist as they are without the almighty Tarzan! It’s because the concept of a true trans media character like him wasn’t even made possible until the mid 1910s thanks to Edgar Rice Burroughs’ shameless marketing tactics.
Disney essentially erased The Black Cauldron and Return to Oz from their canon, which were great movies, but were financial bombs at the box office. This is why Princess Eilonwy was not in Wreck in Ralph 2, and also why she’s never been invited to a princess tea party 😢
Oh shit. Return to Oz was Disney? That movie slaps so hard. Was one of my favorite, "I have to watch this movie over and over, but also it kinda frightens me, but also I kind of want to be scared, so I'm going to keep watching it" movies as a kid.
Return to Oz was a dark fantasy classic. As for Disney’s The Black Cauldron… not really. They castrated a lot of potential of the characters from the book and Frankenstein’d two books from the series for the movie adaptation. If you ever watched the movie versions of Madeline or The Series of Unfortunate Events, you’ll know that slapping too many books into a narrative is a recipe for disaster.
@@Pillzpopyea sometimes we gotta be real , I love black cauldron and sword in the stone a lot lmao but I would never dare call them great and that fine they resonate with me and I enjoy and appreciate them. Not saying they are horrendous or anything
The Disney princess movies were one of the first targets of media illiteracy. No one cared until recently. Those movies aren’t perfect, but still have a lot of love and emotional value to give to many people. 😭❤️
If I have to hear another person tell me Disney Princesses are just useless women sitting around waiting for a man (or be told by their overcorrecting recent movies that have no romance or real villainy that I should celebrate Elsa just because she doesn’t end up with a dude) I’ll scream, I swear to god. When I was a kid, I was a chubby bookworm. Whenever we would move, my mom would let me pick my room decorations and it was always Barbie or Disney Princess. And shocker, I never learned to sit and wait for a man to do things, I learned to love to read like Belle (my favorite) and go out and get the stuff I want by not reading the fine print of things I sign (like Ariel, my second favorite) 😂 And Barbie didn’t give me unrealistic body image issues, I just thought she was pretty lol
@@papermr.magolorguy7957 I have seen that art and we were ROBBED But I knew that movie wasn’t gonna work for me at all by how annoyed I was with the Goat just from the ads
Disney has faced criticism lately for prioritizing profit over creativity. Fans argued the focus on franchise expansion, particularly through live-action remakes of beloved classics, has led to a decline in originality and the "magic" that once defined Disney.
@@matt0044 The far right are not Disney’s saviors, at least not anymore. They are still important to discuss, but they are now nothing more than a persistent threat to Disney (if they ever were anything else)
Disney has enough gloom and doom without the Right-wing, who's late to the party btw as the Left-wing has pretty much always hated Disney for being a staunchly anti-Communist bastion of Capitalism and blaming the latter for every mouse turd that the Magic Empire has laid.
Disney already had a dark age after Walt's passing. With Investors and Shareholders from Wall Street gaining more and more power of an industry they should have no business in, there's a reason why we are in the middle of a historic strike between THREE unions We had striking actors and writers earlier this year, and now the animators are gearing up to follow suit. On that note, phrasing. I know the allegory is meant to be flat martinis that lost their flavor, but that can come off the wrong way. Ironically, Lorcana is carrying this dark era by being a creator-driven card game made up of artists and writers who care about Disney's legacy as an animation studio more than those in Wall Street.
Literally have said to so many people lately that the only Disney project that has brought me genuine joy in years has been Lorcana. The art is beautiful. The gameplay is so lovingly and carefully crafted around the stories and strengths of the characters. The artists have a lot of creative power in the designs and because Ravensburger has more control over it than Disney as a whole, it seems a little less touched by the full wall street greediness (even if it was created as a means of cashing in on that sweet MTG money as competition)
I think you're missing the most simple reason things are like this... Walt Disney and Jim Henson aren't around to steer their ships. The original collab didn't happened cause Jim died, and Walt's final Ideas were what became Walt Disney World. Thats why the company keeps going back to the parks, they even said it was "Walt's final dream."
A lot of things change when the creator dies. Look at what’s happening to the Backyardigans. The original creator didn’t want a reboot and she would definitely hate what Nickelodeon has done now. Same with Spongebob.
A lot of things change when the creator dies. Look at what’s happening to the Backyardigans. The original creator didn’t want a reboot and she would definitely hate what Nickelodeon has done now. Same with Spongebob.
I think a better take would be an optimistic, yet ultimately misguided, philanthropist/investor. It bails on Mickey’s fatal flaw: His optimism and happy-go-lucky attitude.
@@austinreed7343My personal favorite is "Thanosney", Thanos wearing Mouse ears and having all the stuff modern Disney buys up set in the Infinity Gauntlet.
@@agramuglia you 🤝 Every Belle Liker Under the Sun Frustration with the how Belle is portrayed in the Sequels and Live Action Movie bc Oh my god how hard is it to write a empathetic book worm?!
It gets into a VERY weird place where there is no legitimate way to watch it, so if you want to do it you need to either know a guy or know how to pirate it. It's like getting rid of a pet cat by locking it out of the house; it might find a new home and end up okay, but it will likely die forgotten in some dark corner through no fault of its own. It's not good from an archivist perspective because in order to study history you have to actually still have parts of it, and enough stuff gets lost as it is without things being actively scrubbed. If we don't have any media LEFT from a certain era or only have a small portion of it, we're going to make the same mistakes the scrubbed media did. (As a more lighthearted example, the Road to El Dorado is a great movie on its own, but it's completely recontextualized when you find out that it was written as a homage to a genre of black and white adventure movies and intentionally includes a lot of the genre's tropes. We wouldn't have that extra layer of analysis if we'd completely lost those adventure movies!)
When a show becomes a "tax right off" a company will do everything in their power to expunge any trace of it from their platforms. Removal from streaming, immediate cease of production of any physical merchandise and removal from all their websites etc. It's for them to show on their end there is no possible way for them to ever profit off said IP ever again
I tried to face my fear of animatronic dinosaurs by going on the Dinosaur ride but by the end of the ride I was shaking and on the verge of tears lol. I'm glad to finally hear someone else acknowledge how scary it is compared to Disney's other rides.
I'd like to argue Mickey Mouse has been reduced to being a marketing symbol for much longer. I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure Disney wanted Mickey to have little to no screen time in the first Kingdom Hearts game but then after that game was successful, Disney let Square Enix give Mickey as much screen time as they want in the games.
Aladdin and the King of Thieves gets a pass cuz Aladdin’s dad was fine as hell. Also that song from Simba’s Pride slaps hard. Deception…Disgrace EVIL AS PLAIN AS THE SCAR ON HIS FACE
The reason doesn’t even have to be that shallow. It’s a perfectly fine next adventure for the characters, with its own arc, that draws a line under the entire story. And it brings back Robin Williams.
@@Saltyoven Man both those movies don't get the recognition they deserve. The first is an amazing drama, and the second is an amazing action comedy. Together they stand as some of the best work Disney has put out there and hardly anybody talks about either of them.
Mario makes money. Mickey doesn't. It's true he's a versitale character that can be used for anything because he has no real personality on his own, but most people aren't drawn to the idea of watching a Mickey Mouše movie 😂
@zalybrainlessgenius503 Not true. Look at the attention the return of Epic Mickey and heck, even the Paul Rudish series brought. People are interested in Mickey.
The timeline for fox and the hound cracks me up from a character perspective cause amos slade goes through a roller coaster of ornery old man willing to pop a cap in a baby fox, softens up cause he experiences whimsy, time skip happens and hes back to ornery only to end the movieverse in kind of a sad tired defeated gramps moment
It baffles me how quick some western companies are to do big sweeping "money saving" tax write off, shelving and discontinuing of products. Part of the reason why Mickey got big in the first place was his (over)exposure. Same for Bugs Bunny and Woody Woodpecker. Heck, it is the same nowadays for Goku and Pikachu. Even if you don't make all the money you want from something, living rent free in people's head as part of the popular zeitgeist is a *lot* more valuable than an extra pin sold at the parks. The fact that nothing has the time to simmer anymore, and that we live on the age of "on demand" yet you can't demand nearly any thing without 3 layers of approval is legit bad business. It doesn't matter if you're pro or against capitalism, there's just no defending dumb capitalism.
"Even if you don't make all the money you want from something ..." And this is why letting shareholders control decision-making is always a terrible idea. It's no longer enough for something to make a lot of money over time, it needs to make ALL the money and it needs to do so by next financial quarter otherwise it's a flop.
@@SpoopySquid More or less why I said it is dumb capitalism. Change a dollar today for two dollars tomorrow isn't bad business, you're creating evergreen content that has potential to be more. So I think it is a bigger problem that the shareholders are usually stupid than it is that there are shareholders at all. It's almost like all of them just want pump and dump schemes and not actually any investment.
What baffels me is that ppl want products to be big. Things like Mickey mouse, Goku Bugs Bunny just whiter on the vine. They strat our great and just become more an more hollow until they are just a shell of the thing they where at the start.
Disney should retheme the rest of DinoLand USA to the "Tropical Americas," but they should KEEP DINOSAUR. The Tropical Americas is based on the Yucatán Peninsula, the exact same place where the asteroid hit. It'll make more sense to keep DINOSAUR then to replace it with Indiana Jones.
You could argue that Pocahontas 2 does try to push the story forward, by exploring the real life next step on her story…. But that doesn’t save it. The only good part is the message in the credits admitting that the everything you just watched is nonsense, and encouraging the viewer to look up the true story for themselves. Just a shame everyone had switched off long before that so wouldn’t see it.
@@neb.9489 Not necessarily. In the first movie, Ralph learns that he doesn't have to be the "bad guy" to be valued and that he can find friendship and acceptance. In the sequel, he learns that friendship doesn't mean control or dependence, but allowing those you care about to follow their own paths. The first movie focused on self-acceptance and finding value in oneself, while the sequel explores the challenges of maintaining relationships in the face of change. This is a natural progression for both Ralph and Vanellope, dealing with new challenges that test the lessons they learned in the first film.
@@gamestation2690 well said. the way the sequel expands on ralph and vanellope's friendship is why i love the movie so much. also, themes of letting go and not controlling your loved ones are usually portrayed in stories of familial relationships, or as a side plot in romance stories. it's nice to see it explored through the lens of friendship. i don't like it when companies push out sequels that lack artistic vision, but wreck it ralph 2 clearly had a theme and message.
You know the last time Disney was in a funk in the early 2000s, they tried lots of things who are interesting to study today.. If that happens again, i fear they will just reuse the same franchises again and again
I blame Lasseter’s, uh, “letting go” (not to say that sexual misconduct is necessarily a passable-thing, mind you, but at the same time nobody else seemed to have the same knack John Lasseter had).
I've always felt like that scene in Wreck-it-Ralph 2 felt really off back when I saw the trailers and I'm happy to see that I'm not the only one who felt that. I feel like you hit the nail on the head in explaining why that felt so off to me. Its a shame really that by sanitizing for marketability reasons can strip agency and complexities from characters, films, and other things under Disney.
It's really sad that the scene with the princesses was one of the best in the movie. (I wanted so badly to love that movie, but it sucked.) And it's even sadder that the person who suggested it was afraid they were going to be fired because corporate Disney is so protective of the Disney Princess branding
To be fair, retonning Aladdin and Jasmine not getting married at the end of the first film was probably a good thing since they didn't even know each other that long. We get the entirety of the animated series to develop their relationship all the way up to the actual marriage in King of Thieves. Aladdin was such a great franchise, I can't believe how well it ended up being despite all the Disney bullshit.
At this point, the only ongoing property that Disney has left is Kingdom Hearts by virtue of Nomura & Square being able to put their feet down in regards to their own content. The Disney worlds may be regulated, but everything else is fair game (Nomura even got the KH cartoon and possibly a KH book canned, it's his baby until the very end)
I mean say what you want about kingdom hearts..like a lot…but you can at least say “Well it’s been a crazy, campy experience.” I’m not a fan but I can appreciate the series’s fandom appreciation, that it did give newer gamers a chance to play a RPG, and that it stood by its decisions. Artistic integrity and all that.
Since Disney wholly owns KH, I think it's less that Nomura has contractual power to say no as much as Disney has somehow (rightfully) internalized the idea that they fundamentally do not and can not understand the series and what makes it tick. They could theoretically do whatever they want with it and Square Enix wouldn't really be able to do anything about it, but Disney knows that would do far more harm than good. It's a weird Japanese thing by a weird Japanese company in a medium they don't deal with much. It's consistently made money for decades with a demographic they usually struggle with and all they have to do is provide a budget and make sure they don't go too far with the properties the series borrows. KH is far from perfect, but I'll take its weird, specific problems and issues over the ones that have infested every other Disney property any day. Kind of like Nintendo's relationship with the greater AAA game industry.
I think Lilo and Stitch, The Lion King and Aladdin worked because they have some aspect of worldbuilding in them that can be expanded on as opposed to Hunchback, Pochantos and even Beauty and the beast when it came to the video sequels.
The only 2 live action remakes with potential were Aladdin and Mulan, and only if they weren't remakes of the animated movies but adaptations of the source material. Guess which road they didn't go. I guess it wasn't on brand.
Fun fact: ‘Mulan’ was directed by Niki Caro, who also directed ‘Whale Rider’ (a personal favorite of mine) from back in ‘02. It was free here on UA-cam for a while, but then they took it down. I suggest you check it out, it’s a real gem.
Aladdin especially. I love Aladdin, but it's true that the movie was originally meant to be completely different. I'd love to see the original concepts brought to life
@@KawaiiStars tbh as much as i love the 2015 cinderella, it’s such a classic tale that was told many times esp in live action that one can argue the potential was already explored. I mean people already love that one adaptation Ever After. I myself watched a disney channel version of the story as a kid. I don’t think it was necessary other than trying it out with the disney version of the story and with disney creatives and budget. Also probably because of all the princess films, that one would’ve been the easiest to adapt and they also didn’t do a word-for-word, shot-for-shot adaptation like, say, beauty and the beast or aladdin with only one or two extra songs. Imo that is why it was so well received compared to other ones. Doing a shot for shot remake just shows that live action versions of these animated movies are inferior because it wasn’t the medium they were made to be in. And unlike other more unique adaptations like Cruella and Maleficient it kept the story basically the same anyway. The Jungle Book live action was received pretty well too iirc.
Thanks for this critique of Disney that's about the systemic issues within the studios, not the usual sticking points like the Woke or stuff churned out by those weird bad faith channels. Hope you can explore the same for WB & DC, 'cos gods, there's so many to unpacked about those studios, way longer before Zaslav sits his ass on the throne.
Thank Flipping God. Anyone that uses that word is someone who clearly is too freakin' lazy to construct a bridge to any kind of criticism. Not helped by the fact its done by stereotypical neckbeards and gingers. Making even those people look bad. I get it, not all geeks and gingers are bad people. But man its weird how those Grifters' share the same traits.
45:52 I don’t really get this point either… from the 1940’s to the 1990’s, Mickey Mouse didn’t have much of a presence at Disney either. He didn’t appear in any films, tv shows, etc. All those examples you showed were from late 1990’s early 2000’s direct to video stuff. I don’t think Disney is slowly letting him fade away. He has moments where he comes back in a big way from time to time. This is just another one of those examples.
I also want to bring up that the Disney Princesses have been criticized for bring "helpless damsels in distress who do nothing but sit and wait to be rescued." It's a mindset I had when I was growing up in the 2000s. But, in reality, not all Disney Princesses are damsels in distress who wait to be rescued because the first 3 Disney Princesses were passive in their own stories with little to do the films they starred in. Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora are the damsels in distress. In comparison, starting in 1989 with the Disney Renesance (1989-1999), the Disney Princesses since then have gained active roles in their films and got to be heroes. Ariel saves Flounder from a shark, inadvertently kills Ursula's eels in the climax, and saves Prince Eric more than once. Belle, cleverly rejects Gaston, saves her father and the Beast more than once, and breaks the spell in the end. Jasmine....ummm she chases away jerky princes with her tiger and distracts Jafar? (Sorry. She didn't do a lot in Aladdin. But, she was able to kick butt in the TV show). Pocahontas stops a war from happening and saves John Smith. Mulan saves China as an action hero. Tiana fights off fisherman as a frog and defeats Dr Faclier in the end. Rapunzel fights off thugs and saves Flynn Rider with her hair and frying pan. Merida is a badass with a bow and arrow and a sword and breaks the spell in the end by fixing the tapestry. Anna and Elsa do their part to save each other and Arendele. Moana restores the heart of Tafiti. Rya is a badass action hero. Am I wrong or am I right? Am I missing something?
Heck, even with Cinderella, you can see why she is the way she is: one can argue that it's a fawn trauma response. Worth noting too is that with her story, the prince is the reward more than anything, and it's less her being saved by the guy and more Cinderella leaving her abusive family. Aurora is probably the most "damsel" of the three classic princesses, and there the fairies were more the main characters than she was, considering the movie focuses on them more than Aurora or her love interest.
@@RozenGermain I couldn't agree more. The fairies felt they were more like the protagonists of Sleeping Beauty. They have distinct personalities, the film focuses more on them, and they progress the story forward. They have an active role in the film and a very active role in the climax in helping Prince Philip defeat Melificent. Auroa felt like she was more of a plot device than an actual character.
Tbf SW and Cindy were in abusive households and they do have their own acts of defiance towards their respective stepmothers, but Aurora, I can agree, doesn’t do a lot in her film.
Man, a revamp of the prehistoric section of the Animal Kingdom would be so great. I can understand the story reasons why the rides are flat rides but it’s understandable why they aren’t favored. A ride that goes through paddocks of rescued animals would be interesting to see. Maybe even do some non Mesozoic eras
I think a part 2 is in order to cover things like ABC and Fox, Disney & the Far Right, Disney’s international IP follies, Disney as a bad example for other corporations, etc.
@@partyharry7585 The far right does have a tendency to poison the well of what are otherwise valid complaints about the company, by making it all about them and even bashing the good things Disney do that happen to be “woke”
they also included quasimodo in the magic kingdom fireworks show, happily ever after. granted, the projection aspect of it is literally scenes from a bunch of their movies lol
My guess as to why they're putting an Encanto themed ride in Animal Kingdom is because of Antonio's gift of talking to animals. Still a shame that they would replace the Dinosaur ride.
As a Disney Kid and Pseudo Disney-Adult, I pretty much knew all of this stuff before hand*. So that's my way of pretty much agreeing with you and saying this is pretty dang accurate. So, good video. Would recommend * Except the bit about the princess mini videos. I did not know that but BOY do they look bland and soul draining. Also Jasmine's the one teaching about patience? Why isn't it, oh, I dunno, *CINDERELLA?!* Her life is miserable because of circumstances outside of her control and while she's always hoping for something better, she makes the best out of what's happening in her life. That's the virtue of patience to a T! Maybe I'm biased here because that whole tangent on Cinderella is why she's my favorite Disney princess and the same way people mischaracterize Bell as having Stockholm syndrome (which I recommend everyone look up the origins of but that's *another* tangent so I won't get into it) they characterize Cinderella as doing nothing. Which, like, we can't always do something to make our lives materially better! Sometimes we can only choose how we respond to a situation! Cinderella is awesome, gosh dang it! Anyway, rant over. Good video
Growing up in the 2000s. Disney has always been a huge part of my life. Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy, & the others were all my childhood heroes. The Lion King, Fantasia, & Toy Story were my top three favorite films of all time. Cinderella, Belle, & Ariel were three princesses that I grew up crushing on, despite being so kind & pretty. Kingdom Hearts has always been a big part of my childhood. The likes of Pirates of the Caribbean, Tron, & Mighty Ducks were my top three live action movies. As well the likes of Disney Channel & Jetix were favorites for me to remember.
And I owe it to Kingdom Hearts for reviving my love for Disney. It's what also made Ariel my favorite Disney character after seeing her be a badass party member in the Atlantica level due to my prejudice judgement in the 2000s toward the Disney Princesses for being "helpless damsels in distress who just wait to be rescued". And coincidently, in the 1989 movie, Ariel did break the damsel in distress trope by having an active role in the film (saving Flounder from a shark, inaevertly killing Ursula's eels in the climax, and saving Prince Eric more than once) and she paved the way for more badass and active female leads in Disney films from Belle in Beauty and the Beast to Mulan herself.
It's funny you've mentioned how less prevalent Mickey has become as the mascot of Disney, besides a couple of things here or there, that only die hard Disney fans care or it's just aimed at preschoolers. Ironically, I feel the Simpsons have become a more prevalent mascot for the company, ever since they bought most of Fox and launched Disney+ in 2019, despite the fact they were never a original creation of Disney.
It makes me so sad that Mickey and Friends have been reduced to mere marketing symbols that are parodied over and over again in unoriginal ways. The old Mickey Mouse shorts had a lot of charm and were good displays of animation as an art form, but nowadays Mickey is only used for Kids Shows and the occasional series of actual good shorts like the ones from 2017.
This video couldn't have been more well timed, with how many sequels and spinoffs just got announced/confirmed at D23. Then again, it was a tad predictable of Disney to do so.
Well at least we got the Beavers Avatar...and the Beaver Avatar as new thing? (No but seriously bar the beavers thing, i skipped most of it after seeing they were nothing really new)
Subbed. 8:53 This has been stuck in my head for 2 days Edit: fyi the Swiss Family Robinson isn't based on Robinson Crusoe. Those are two different old tropical island survival adventure books.
What Disney wants is what all studios wants, to minimize identity into something easily marketable. Any sort of project has to adhere to a specific brand or framework or it’s not considered. Take the Looney Tunes for example. They are like The Muppets in the sense that they are a franchise that will always remain relevant, but isn’t really built to be milked. Almost every effort to make new LT things were either corporately mandated to the point that it misses the core identity of why these characters work, or do work but don’t get any marketing or even release and fade away. Space Jam 2 was micromanaged from a satire of the brand focused modern Hollywood to just another showcase of those brands, taking away the edge that defines the Looney Tunes. Coyote Vs Acme was thrown into the tax wood chipper and The Day The Earth Blew Up was sold off to a small scale distributor because they don’t fit the mold of how studios want to sell their brands or were seen as comparably risky in the eyes of executives who only want to green light projects in a shrewd manner. Disney is going to keep learning the wrong mistakes from their successes since rather than allowing their creative teams the same environments that birthed their classic films or recent good works, they will instead be relegated to sanding down their projects into the assumed brand ideas since that’s how executives think. Rather than letting the creatives create, they think they can job the system by repeatable formulas and all this does is make them projects that come across as hollow. The ip focus of Disney will hit a wall sooner or later in the sense that you can only sell nostalgia for so long until you run out of it. The company has always had a sense of corporate direction before, but never to this extent to the point that it’s kind of exhausting seeing every remake or another remake. Or how look at the animation studios where outside of sequels that feel less intuitive than the originals mostly, the original films really can’t experiment or do something really different than the “brand image” of what a Disney or Pixar film is framed as.
If I was in charge of writing Hunchback II, I'd incorporate elements of Victor Hugo's other novel, Les Misérables. I don't have all the details yet, but that's about the only logical path Disney could've followed.
Speaking primarily as a Disney parks fan, this really gets to the heart of why many of us don't like the current "IP mandate" - the last original from the bottom-up attraction, not based on a preexisting IP (with requisite flattened characters) that opened at Disney World was Expedition Everest, and that was nearly *twenty* years ago. Original ride concepts are being replaced in the name of further monetizing brands the company owns, even if said brands aren't well suited to the medium of theme park attractions. The Haunted Mansion was not created to sell an individual IP to audiences; as such, current Disney management would *never* OK an attraction like it today, even though the Haunted Mansion was made from the start with the core idea of working as a three-dimensional themed ride. It was part of why there was such a blowback when they replaced the former EPCOT nighttime firework show, Illuminations: Reflections of Earth, with HarmonioUS - there were issues with the setup of HarmonioUS (its fireworks barges blocked formerly great views around the park's lagoon), but ultimately the former show was an original concept that attempted to craft a bottom-up narrative of the development of Earth and humankind from creation via flames, lasers, water, fireworks, an original orchestral score, all creating a really sweeping, emotional note...and the latter show was "here are the same Disney songs you hear in all the other parks, but sung in different languages. Buy Disney+!"
Thank you for talking about the Willow tv show being removed. It was an amazing show! Im named after Elora from the original movie. So of course the show was always gonna be special to me. But! It was such a good show! Not just a nostalgia trip. Not just me seeing my namesake go on a fun journey. But it was genuinely a fun, well written story. With a bombastic cast with great chemistry. And great sets, props, costumes, soundtrack. And then Disney not only cancels the planned trilogy seasons. But they take it off the app only 6 months after airing? Like what the hell! Its not fair and Im very upset. Also, please dont believe most of the reviews of the show Willow. Most of the reviews are from men who hated that the show focused on girls and then dared to have two of the girls be gay. Anyways. I hope someday the show gets picked up again so we can see Graydon saved from lovecraft hell. Hes my favorite
I am legitimately PISSED that they cancelled Muppets Mayhem. That show was so fun, and I love the Mayhem, the music was there and the sort of spirit of creativity that I feel goes really well with the Muppets. Yeah it’s them not doing what Jim did and trying to play the Muppets safer for the sake of synergy, but it was really fun.
I hate how they drew Mickey in Runaway Railway, and I hate how he and Minnie have animatronics that look like inflatable lawn ornaments. It looks like dog shit in an otherwise perfect dark ride attraction. I hate it more than you hate Beauty and the Beast 2.
"They take...an ageless, stagnant version of a fictional character, and boil them down to the most identifiable traits to the elimination of everything else." You've just described how human memory works - maybe that Disney is onto something...?
Many of the problems with DTS is that they were mandated/ordered by Disney after the release of Return To Jafar and did not have many people who worked on the originals- sometimes those people were dead. That is why Belle is so out of character and why many installments are very bad or just mediocre. There often seems there wasn't a "story trust". I know it's a different studio, but having connections with those people would at least maybe save the movies to me. Just having the people on as a creative team would cost them money. You can see that with the creative choices in Tinker Bell, there was many disagreements on how that movie should have been made and I do prefer some of the original art style. However, its the fact that well, some installments like the Tinkerbell movies, Extremely Goofy Movie, Bambi 2, and Cinderella 3 are actually interesting for their concepts and creative/art direction. Even when a mediocre studio has the option to be creative and original, it shows in the quality. I am not against sequels and spinoffs, but often they rely too much on the previous movie to market it rather than make it it's own thing. I know that is the point, but its just that. I would love to actually see some stories continue and be expanded upon, but the execution matters and can actually help the movies be more profitable/memorable. I'm young, I'm Gen Z, many people in my generation are dissolutioned with Disney just as a thing. I think Disney doesn't know it has the reputation of being "fake" with so many people. Often people dont seem to like Disney in general these days, so I can see their originals and spinoffs failing in the next coming years. Many people look at Disney's marketing and say "I see what youre doing" Many people love their newer animated shows, and when they get treated poorly people don't forget it. When I hear something bad about Disney like how Mickey Mouse was supposedly stolen I don't forget it. Or that Pixar hates "biographical" stories now, or that Lilo and Stitch was worked on in secret because Disney wouldn't normally greenlight that stuff. Here's the thing, I feel like what is actually profitable for Disney in the long run with Gen Z ppl my age is their weird spinoff stuff. Like Kingdom Hearts, Epic Mickey, Fairies, Tangled series, Ducktales reboot. Spinoffs with new ideas. But at the same time it's hard to market to this generation. People love looking at the so called niche stuff and a lot of the TV shows. People want to see the Tiana spinoff series and never cared about Moana 2 as much. I have such mixed feelings on their creative output in general, as an entity, as a thing. And Mickey, especially Mickey and it's spinoffs with the history of racism in some early cartoons. Yet Mickey has always been the face, the classics have always been the face. The thing is, Disney has always been the "nostalgia marketing" company, and I feel like this time now is when the reputation they built of happiness and dreams or whatever they say over 100 years is coming back to bite them. They are like a snake eating it's own tail. When they are creative, they are weird and eccentric and loose and have those hidden experimental gems and niche stuff. When they are original, are they really? When they help produce a TV show like the Owl House or Amphibia, they are memorable. But not that new movie, just another movie. I feel like Disney's fake yet real world is kind of crumbling. I don't care about the legacy (as it's marketed), the entity, I want to cut to the good stuff. I think some of their new movies won't do as well within my age group, just in general within all the sorts of stuff they make and own. They will always be the greedy mouse who ruined the public domain, that has been creative and does have a legacy, yet hasn't been creative, yet doesn't have that legacy in that way. The rose colored glasses attached to a chain are usually off, the castle wasn't on a good foundation anyway.
the 80s Tron was one of my absolute favorite films... i saw it in the early 2000 and i absolutely liked The Black Cauldron, the Horned King is the best design for a Lich
The Swiss Family Robinson has no real connection to Robinson Crusoe. The movie is based on a book that came out 99 years after Robinson Crusoe. Both have the plot of castaway/s on a deserted island having to survive. Only in Robinson Crusoe he is alone most of the time. And the Swiss Family Robinson is about a family from Switzerland surviving together on an island for 10 years and making the island their home. The main feature of Swiss Family Robinson is the Tree house that they live in during the summer months. Falconhurst. Which is one of half a dozen homes they build on the island. That Tree House is what the Disney attraction is based on.
@@intergalactic92 yeah, the naming was probably picked do to the similarly of the story setting. That is not uncommon for books with similar settings to have similar titles to help people know this is similar to that other book. Authors will even pick their nom de plume to be place near another author if their books have a similar naritive. Erin Hunter is an example of this. The writing group chose that name so their books would be placed near Brian Jacques books because they both write about animals. I am not saying there is no inspiration from Robinson Crusoe to The Swiss Family. Crusoe was a very popular book. And it is even mentioned in the version of The Swiss Family Robinson I have. But having similarities and possibly being somewhat inspired dose not make it based off of it which is my point. Since that is what the video essayre said. There are a lot of books that took inspiration from Robinson Crusoe. It is a genre called "Robinsonade".
Actually, since the last Indiana Jones movie was all about finding a time travel device, it wouldn't be that far a stretch if they wanted to keep the dino theme of the ride while rebranding it into Indiana Jones instead of Disney Dinosaur.
Funny that you've mentioned Tarzan's Treehouse because that got recently rethemed to just "The Adventureland Treehouse: Inspired by Walt Disney's Swiss Family Robinson" as a tie-in to their S.E.A. IP series with Jungle Cruise and other non-franchise based attractions. Splash Mountain is another example you could've used for your "Some Disney Properties Fade Away" segment because of how it's based on the controversial Song of the South, which Disney still refuses to release on any form of home media for obvious reasons. This of course got the ride rethemed to Princess and the Frog in both California and Florida (Japan still has the original) because they can't sell the old film anywhere else. And don't get me started on the Disney parks fans' obsession with the Country Bears, Figment, and the Peoplemover.
As a Mulan stan since day one, I always get PISSED when they try to lump her in with the princesses. She’s not a princess, she has a body count, the highest in any animated film for that matter!!! Edit now that I’m farther into the video. Tron means so damn much to me with Tron Legacy is my favorite film, saw it 8 times in theaters and the only movie I’ve seen in IMAX, even made the Tron Daft Punk helmets, with the soundtrack being my favorite soundtrack of any film ever. I am very VERY nervous about the third movie. Also I will die on the hill they really missed the mark on Light Cycle Run, never mind that it’s a complete clone and took YEARS to finish, it’s less than a min ride, but the biggest is by putting it in the magic kingdom and not EPCOT. By putting it in EPCOT, they could have made a whole area based on The Grid which would be freaking incredible and a dream come true. But no. They put it in tomorrow land in the magic kingdom with no damn theming and destroyed EPCOT with nothing to show for it
Finally, someone openly acknowledging Frozen 2 is better than the first movie. It may be a mess but it's a FUN mess! For crying out loud, it even makes Olaf kinda fun. OLAF!!!
another brilliant critique, It shows why all the brilliant work is done by Indy studios now. I would love to see your take on a film like "I saw the TV glow"
i remember having the enchanted tales dvd as a kid, or more accurately i very vividly remember scratching the entire back of it so it would be unplayable and id never have to watch it again
Wish to me is biggest indicator of something is wrong. Wish, the MOVIE that was suppose to be the celebration of 100 years, would be given the time and effort to be special. Traditional animation coming back? Sure! Now? It is possibly one of the most disappointing Disney films, and not in the “oh it really was good but no one saw it” or “oh it has flaws but my god there are some great choices here.” This ain’t Atlantis, this ain’t treasure planet. When you have critics pointing out that there dosnt seem to be a cohesive story and that the ANIMATION looks wrong you know something is off. Wish seems to be more of a movie drama up by corporate executives with no talent in storytelling and desiring maximum profit. If the behind the scenes are correct, there really wasn’t a game plan per se in creating the movie. It was around this time, that I learned about the Nimona movie reports, that Disney had the rights to the comic, that it COULD have made it, but it didn’t. I haven’t read the comic, but I know exactly WHY it didn’t. And it took a lesser known animation company to make an adaptation that audiences and fans loved. It was an embarrassment for Disney.
@@gamestation2690note how you call Wish decent, that's not even a compliment. It's mediocre at best and you think it should still be praised or something? Also, no audience hyped up Wish, Disney did, it's their own fault for marketing an abysmal product the way they did.
45:50 If you had the closed captions on while watching this episode of DuckTales, they don’t even refer to the Mouse by name proper. His lines are listed as having been spoken by “Mikey”.
The films from the Dark Age period are largely superior to the Renaissance films in my opinion. The Fox & The Hound is my favorite one from that period.
It's sad cause I loved Disney & it's 2D Animation growing up in the 90's. Now it's unrecognizable & it's monopolized many things. These current people have shown how out of touch they are. A lot of them seem to only be capable of writing narcissistic stories that self insert themselves and their own beliefs into anything they do. Even if they get to make something from a pre-existing beloved story, they cannot help themselves. They seem to be incapable of creating artistic creations that stray away from their own personal perspective, instead of showing they can lean heavily into escapism and pure storytelling.. They have proven time and time again that they are not capable of doing anything even remotely close to that.. (which is weird because that should be one of the most important attributes that a director or a developer or an actor has in order to be successful at their job....?) How is there no one that will fire these people who seem like they openly dislike the fans, who seem to disrespect the consumers that were the ones who made their success in the first place.. There's now people like Kathleen Kennedy, She's a Perfect example of this awful trend where people keep getting these positions when they in no way deserve those positions. They are not hired based off talent or skill..? So we are seeing very expensive shows, movies, all so terribly designed, terribly managed, Awful writing, world design, character development, poor aesthetics. So much now feels creatively bankrupt and I really hope we all snap the heck out of it and get back to making better things. The new Acolyte show comes off so cheap & tacky.. It's not just the terrible writing & terrible acting. The whole thing is a complete self centered power trip.. It's horrible set design, horrible world building, horrible camera work. It all makes this show feel so small. Like it's filmed in a single green screen room.. Grasping at awful CGI techniques to try and force any bit of a false reality into this mess of a show. It's so far from Legitimate Star wars movies that it feels as if this whole thing is a big parody.. A very expensive parody.. Now Compare the "The Acolyte" as If you go back & watch "X-Men the Animated series" It was so well crafted. The story of the struggles of mutants having to deal with humanity was such a universally relatable storyline. Media back then was not afraid to face difficult topics head on. They found really unique ways to abstractly teach people life lessons. They touched on difficult situations & found intelligent ways to convey certain stories. Even when I was all grown up & rewatched it, it really felt like the story is crafted so well & executed at such a high level that anyone is capable of relating to it in someway or another. It's stuff like that, that we are deeply lacking nowadays. So much so that literal kid's cartoons from the 90's told deeper and more mature stories than most media nowadays. Stuff used to take pride in who can find the most creative ways to convey certain things. Who can give the audience certain feelings without overly explaining it. It used to not matter what kind of character, creature, species they were. What matters is that they found ways to convey artistic depictions of the Human condition. Creative ways that can connect us on a deeper level.
How companies work is at the top you have shareholders. Shareholders care only about the money going into their pockets so everything the company makes has to prioritiese money for them. The next level is the company executives who only care about brand recognition so everything the company makes has to prioritise money for the shareholders and selling the idea of the compay. And it keeps going like this going down the ladder until the smallest priority is us who want the product to be good.
Not gonna lie, I did a big ol' grin when you said 'Ursala's crazy sister' in a very normal tone while my brain was superimposing Sebastian saying it over top.
Yknow I was going through this video and kept thinking “wonder if the Tron franchise is gonna be mentioned considering its unfortunate path down into irrelevancy with its sequel and a cancelled tv show” AND LO AND BEHOLD IT HAPPENED. Interesting thing about Tron and the last piece of media it had for a while, Tron Uprising: I’d argue there *wasn’t* a flattening effect happening in that show. In fact, it did the opposite and expanded on the characters and world, giving nuances and edges to this digital space by putting it center-stage. Tron has trauma, for Christ’s sake! And guess what, they sucked at marketing it! I’m not saying the two are related, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
We had a copy of Belle’s Magical World in my house when I was a kid, and the only parts I really liked about it was a little toy that came with the VHS and the trailer for Castle in the Sky that played before the actual movie. I used to put it on just so I could watch the trailer, because it was small town Canada in the early 2000s and Miyazaki movies were hard to come by.
I’m a huge Disney fan. A “Disney Adult” some might say. And you hit the nail right on the head. Disney is at its best when its creatives are allowed to roam free and Disney (the brand) has had a stranglehold on its creators after its financial loss from its parks and theater releases during the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s been in decline for a while now but it always seemed to bounce back. All these losses tell me that someday we’re gonna finally get something good, hopefully 😅 I want to become an imagineer when I leave college and I know I’m probably not gonna be the person to revamp the whole system but I’d like to bring imagination to the forefront at Disney again (at least Disney parks)
Beauty and the beast Xmas would have become a classic to not miss for gen z if only it had the beast being a socially awkward crushing on belle dolt. Let’s remember he was transformed before he was even a teenager if the original film intro is trusted, so an actual adult with his first time crush on someone who is smart would have had him likely asking all about the townspeople and such.
Great video!! I loved every point you touched on, and I love that it came from a place of passion for the movies! Just a quick fact check tho- when animation was reused, it wasn’t used because they thought that specific piece of animation was better because it had already been used in a successful movie. They recycled animation to cut back on costs and time!
@@agramuglia Twisted Wonderland, not actually a dating sim, moreso a turn based battle/rhythm game/visual novel. there's gonna be an anime...someday. its a wild game. one of the recent events included Rollo, Frollo but a twink with a bowl cut
As someone who visited Disneyland as a small child on the early 90s, nothing hss made me feel so comforted as them changing the treehouse back to Swiss Family Robinson. It's an incredibly atypical move for them at the moment and it's very nicely done.
Having watched the ENTIRE video of S&P emails Alex Hirsch had to read with his own two eyes, I have recognized he is a stronger man than I will ever be
Thank you so very much for pointing out the darker societal themes of FOX AND THE HOUND Ant! That one was among my personal favorite Disney movies growing up and a criminally underrated gem IMO! I thankfully never saw the terrible sequel BTW…
Comparing beauty and the beast enchanted Christmas to Disney junior is insulting to actual Disney junior shows like sofia the first which also has the Disney princesses & is actually good
genuinely wonder if mickey being used less and less is because the term "the mouse" has been used as shorthand for disney whenever theyre being evil about something
That's a legitimate possibility
@@agramugliawhat Disney should’ve done is right after Walt Disney had moved on to the next life the entire company does a massive overhaul and makeover of itself that includes renaming Walt Disney Studios as Buena Vista Studios, renaming Disney Animation Studios as Steamboat Animation Studios and expanding into more adult entertainment and foreign media alongside their own normal kid friendly media without feeling the need to buy up anything or making subsidiaries for the more adult entertainment or even without feeling the need to be 🐔💩 about marketing the foreign media.
@@agramugliaand also Disney sucks at marketing anime, do you have a reason why that is?
@@MarshalMarrs-eu9yh
Dr. Who too, to the point where people are blaming Disney as the final nail in the coffin from what is already coming from the public broadcasting services of a troubled country.
Disney, if they went into anime, should have stuck to “cute girls doing cute things” rather than battle shonen or giant robots.
@@austinreed7343 they are in fact getting into anime with not very stellar results.
My grandfather has worked at Disney since he was 18 years old. He's 70 now and he's still working for them. He's been criticizing the "mouse" for awhile now but you could tell how bitter he has become working for Disney.
Just wow
@@justanoreo2.0Yeah it’s sad what reality can do to pure hearted dreamers and optimists it’s not that we don’t want to continue doing that but sometimes something we thought we knew becomes a disappointment it’s like why even bother with it when I can just sit back relax grab some popcorn and watch it burn. Hurt dreamers hurt dreamers we sometimes also are like is it even worth it? All the hurt and hell we’ll have to do to attempt to do something. It feels as if what we were doing was in vain the whole time. Optimistic people become Cynical people. Cynical people were once dreamers and optimistic people themselves but then they had their dreams crushed by people closest to them, I’m still optimistic but I’m also Cynical and Skeptical at the same time to keep my world view in check. I used to be a Happy go lucky type a guy. A pure gentlefolk kinda guy. I’m still optimistic now I just have a cynical side to use as a shield so to speak. The optimistic side is a sword and the cynical side of me
Is a shield. Again like your grandfather I wanted to be the “Walt Disney” of our generation. But after learning about the skeletons in Disney’s closet I was like I’ll find something else to do with my talents. I’m under the notion that were someone today like Walt Disney they wouldn’t be hired and have to create their own film studio to live their dreams. I neither have the money manpower to peruse such a venture. My sympathies to your grandfather whom is working for Disney. It is not what it once was.
@@MichaelEarnedIt-19
And it breaks people who were already cynics into outright monsters, as we see with many of those who were already critical of Disney becoming far-right pundits.
He will work for disney till he's 90. To quote Deadpool
@@austinreed7343 I’m right wing but I’d say I’m very independent/conservative like Walt was with my politics. You want to know who’s pushing these agendas and DEI? It is Black Rock and Vanguard along with the left. Not the right. Don’t listen to the brainwashing of the left. Seek the truth and think for yourselves. They are the one who want to make America into a communist country, make America into a demonic state, want to trans your kids, want to force gender ideology onto you, want to do all this stuff you don’t want. We Republicans just want to be left alone and live a normal life. While the left wants to pervert everything we care about.
Something that really irks me about the Ralph 2 princess scene is the pajamas they wear that just re-enforces that idealized marketable idea of their characters. Just surface level references to their movie in a “modern and quirky” way. Just another way for Disney to further dilute and water down their characters
Not to mention they sold those clothes and dolls in those clothes once the movie was out
@@imaginefun13 Disney actually was one of the earliest tie in merchandisers with the Davy Crockett fur hat which was released at the same time as the pilot of the Davy Crockett tv show and Snow White's vinyl soundtrack which was released at the same time as the movie.
So it's weird that people see The Disney being The Disney.
@@johnlee7164 Tarzan’s long been a tie in merchandising icon since the Tarzan books had silent film adaptations. People used to have Tarzan ice cream and Tarzan cereal flakes too in the 1930s, decades before people had McDonald’s Disney’s Tarzan Happy Meals.
All the marketable princesses.... and Merida who has been reduced to a joke character
They watered down Vanellope, Merida, and Tiana too - I don’t know which one angers me more so I’m just gonna point out Tiana because she already has flack for being “the overachieving black person who barely has fun” stereotype in her own movie until she turns into a frog - why they gotta water her down *MORE?*
The Beauty and the Beast Christmas sequel is how I imagine Gaston wanted Belle to be rather than who she was.
Ooh, what if the sequels aren't canon, and are actually Gaston's fan fics?
@@dinosaysrawr No one writes fanfic like Gaston!
@@dinosaysrawrthey are his DMT trip as he dies falling to his death
@@dissonanceparadiddle Doylist Answer: Some exec's wet dream about Belle, boiling her down into a cardboard cutout instead.
Watsonian: Gaston's ideals about women.
@@hailghidorah2536
Gaston: *Belle is mine!*
Proceeds to write self insert fanfic
I think that one big problem, not only at Disney, but also at various service and entertainment companies, is the influence of Wall Street. Business owners or boards of directors have been so focused on not seeing their stocks fall that they have forgotten to please the audience that made their products or brands popular.
Being publicly traded is a curse upon any company, and in particular those that make art.
@@CanonessEllinorDisney stock is in decline since years. I have one share just to monitor how much on - my number goes
They are so hard focused on brand value it does not even work
For sure. This seems like a generic and obvious statement but it's really the ignorance of execs thinking they could ever improve a property by putting their uncreative hands into the creative juices. Let the artists do art and just write checks or whatever
Yes, the introduction of shareholders and speculative investors have been nothing but detrimental to society. These are leeches who contribute nothing to society whilst destroying it.
The original Hunchback novel called 'Our Lady of Paris' is complicated.
It was published by victor hugo to raise awareness and raise funds to preserve Notre Dame and lot is written about history of Paris.
Unfortunately it has lot of negative attitude towards Romani people and Esmeralda is revealed to be a french girl kidnapped by romani (a common trope of anti-romani bigotry).
Disney did right thing by making her actual Romani and shows persecution of their people which happened in Europe at the time.
If Romanians don't like being portrayed as sketchy individuals, maybe they shouldn't engage in the commitment of sketchy shit.
@@chesterstevens8870sorry, I couldn't quite hear you under that white hood
@@chesterstevens8870Did autocorrect hit you?
@@chesterstevens8870European all over Europe are overwhelmingly sketchy as shit, don’t hear that becoming a stereotype
@@vlogily8043
That's only because we've already attached equally-amusing and degrading stereotypes to them.
Frollo hypocritically defying his religious beliefs for personal gain or for revenge is perfectly in-line with his character...especially if it's the version that has already been to hell.
That works, like with his appearance in Kingdom Hearts Dream Drop Distance, but I only think it works because he's not as consciously "aware" of the "witchcraft" he's dealing with. I think he's at least honest enough that if you point to something and say "witchcraft", and it feels W-crafty enough, he will reject it. Like, even an offer to help him with his goals, having Maleficent walk up and say "I'll use my magic to get rid of those gypsies for you if you help me", he will more likely still reject her help.
I'm sure there's a way to write around him accepting help from witchy sources and highlight more hypocrisy, but it doesnt sound like that live show is it. Like, I get the gypsy thing. They're "outsiders" that give a witch-adjacent vibe, so he's against them. What care does he, as a Judge, have against what another separate Magic Kingdom? As long as they leave Paris alone, I think he'd be satisfied. He doesn't quite have the pull to go against a separate nation that isn't "encroaching" in "his" city.
What about Bilbo?
I really liked the part about Frollo. That's such a good point actually, about how he would want to have nothing to do with the other villains. 😂
Ah, but he is a huge hypocrite, even in his own movie. If he sees teaming up with these pagan gods as a way to further his own goals I’m sure he would do it.
@@intergalactic92He's a hypocrite, but he is a zealot. I don't think he actually would do absolutely anything and everything for the furtherance of his goals, and he has shame for the goals that are not within the bounds of the church. As hellfire expresses, he feels out of control to even himself, and he would never work alongside those who did evil shamelessly, I think, without something more going on.
At the very least, they would disgust him absolutely.
A lot of the time I see people praise Lion King 2 because they like the new characters, the music is well done, and the animation is above average for these straight to video sequels. However, what I don't see people praise is how the film dealt with trauma. Yes, Simba was turned into a psuedo-antagonist to rival Kovu's protagonist status.
We often look at Kovu's character arc and drop it at that while rarely acknowledging Simba's arc in the film. The most obvious of these instances of seeing Simba deal with trauma is the nightmare scene. But, one could also make a nearly one to one comparison of "Kovu's betrayal" where we see Simba being chased by the outlander lionesses. The scenes and shots are comparable to his escape from the hyenas as a cub after the death of Mufasa. This also helps to explain his absolute lack of wanting anything more to do with Kovu and being adamant about not listening to Kiara. She has no real understanding of what happened and certainly has no clue as to what Simba was feeling in the moment. As an audience we just see Simba as "angry father who banishes his daughter's boyfriend" when upon closer inspection we can see someone who just relived a childhood trauma brought about by an incarnation of his past abuser (Scar).
Are you Simba
I'm really late to reply to this, but that is a very interesting analysis. I've watched this film a decent number of times since I learned about some of the cut content from this movie, and not once did I ever think about what Simba's perspective was. Most of my thoughts and analysis went to Zira and the other Outsider lions, Vitani was also an interesting one for how the last thing she ever said to her mother was to reject her. I'm glad I found this comment as yet another angle of this story to think about :D
Beauty and the Beast is a fragile ice sculpture carefully crafted to perfection by master artisans. Every piece of related media is a third grader tossing together a sloppy snowman and going “same thing.”
Disney just don’t understand what that movie is, and for a story with such emotionally sensitive themes, the end result is particularly horrid.
If you ever watched “Waking Sleeping Beauty” (I suggest you do), you would know that “Beast” was part of the time of Disney’s history when they realized the eighties was just as shit as it is now, and collaborations between said “artisans” was what, eventually, got us to the Renaissance in the nineties we all know now and that, ironically, is what Disney is milking dry today, especially regarding those “live-action” remakes.
Of course what Disney *really* needs is another “Waking Sleeping Beauty”; the question now is “can they?”.
@@CanonessEllinor
The 2017 one, on the other hand, is a violent blizzard that some enraged pundit tried to pass off as “modern art”. Calling it a sloppy snowman is an understatement.
@@Kaikaifilu1994 It's a cycle.
Artisans create great entertainment, great entertainment creates hacks, hacks create stagnation, stagnation creates artisans. Also there's some kind of great change such as the death of Disney, advent of recorded media, CG, streaming, etc.
They question isn't, can they, it's "when will they".
Ah yes, good ol' Olaf rushing into Beast Castle to smash open the rose dome and start milking for cash to appease Emperor Michael Rat, lord of the Magic Empire.
@@autobotstarscream765
Darth Michaelis Musculus, actually. The Emperor is Ursula.
About your comment on The Little Mermaid 2: Return to the Sea, I agree that it is a bad movie, but for a different reason. It's only a bad movie because it's incredibly rushed, has bad animation, amateurish songwriting and has too many visual callbacks. However, I would be lying if I said the movie didn't have emotional intelligence or subtle nuance. Because it does.
Even though there are distracting amount of visual callbacks, it's not just the original in reverse. The original was a romance fantasy, the sequel is a coming-of-age journey. And the saving grace of the movie are in fact the main characters, Ariel and Melody. Melody in particular, who I would argue is a much stronger character than Ariel was in the first film, mainly because she experiences more character growth. I also disagree that Ariel was acting out of character in the movie. She was suffering from generational trauma, the trauma of seeing her daughter almost devoured before her eyes and most importantly, she was losing her sense of self in the pursuit of trying to be a good mother. Which only makes sense because, after all, Ariel grew up without a mother figure and became a mother at 18 (and Eric was raised by his royal court, so he doesn't have a good concept of parenthood either). Her struggle is even reinforced through the symbolism of her hair. In the beginning, she has loose hair, but after cutting ties with Atlantica, she has her hair tied in a bun, symbolizing how she has essentially sacrificed her identity for her daughter's safety. And after becoming a mermaid again, her hair loosens, symbolizing that she has realized her mistake and will trust her daughter from then on, a trust that will set both of them free. Ariel's arc is all about becoming a better mother and ending the generational trauma.
Melody goes through an arc of her own. She is not a brunette Ariel, she is her own character and they even did a great job with her design. She's blunt, she's socially awkward, she's short-tempered, she's sassy and she's depressed. Like most preteens, Melody is desperate for acceptance but she doesn't fit in with anyone because of her identity crisis. A crisis which stems from the fact that she's a half-mermaid who is intuitively drawn to the sea where she feels just as much at home as she does in her own palace, but she is ostracized for this because no one but her mother can relate to her. When she finds out merpeople are real, she wants to live among them because she thinks they're the only ones who will accept her. But after becoming a mermaid, she starts to see that she's the same person as before and is able to save the ocean from Morgana specifically because she finally embraced her human half. Melody's arc is all about realizing that there was nothing wrong with her to begin with and that she needs to accept herself if she wants to be accepted. Hence she turns down the offer to become a permanent mermaid and instead chooses to simply have access to both her ancestral homes and starts a new, healthier, relationship with Ariel.
Now, some might laugh at me for defending a second-rate kid's movie and you could argue that I like the concept more than the execution, but I think this is one of the few Disney sequels that had a lot of potential and it could've been a good movie with a bigger budget, extra 20 minutes to the runtime and a few more drafts. So it's actually a movie that I don't think is good, but I'm glad that it exists.
No I agree with you! I have the same opinion(The screenplay is garbage but the concepts were too good).
@@hotspotcinema234 Exactly what I'm saying. With a bigger animation budget, a longer runtime and a few more drafts, this movie could've been excellent.
@@vetarlittorf1807 Heck, on the fanfic side of things(fanfic writer here) I keep having to go back and forth with one idea for a fic where The events of the 2nd little mermaid are tweaked yet the core is still the same, the mother daughter relationship.
As someone who adored The Little Mermaid II as a kid, I salute you with a tear in my eye
I think the only problem is that it doesn't make much sense why Ariel didn't tell Melody about the merpeople at all. I sort of assumed Ariel made up with her family and especially her dad at the end of the first movie but we don't see them talk it out or anything; she just got legs and her dad's implied marriage blessing lol. So I'd accept that no one had good communication skills and that created friction later. And I checked out the second Sebastion called the new villain "Ursula's crazy sister" so I don't even recall if I finished watching it as a kid; I was so pissed off that was the only thing they could come up with as a descriptor (and if memory serves, she just resembles a skinny Ursula.) It unalived my willing suspension of disbelief lol.
But I respect your defense of this movie because I've certainly defended just as bad cartoons myself. It sounds like they had a great idea and just botched it somewhat. It's honestly a mixed bag regarding the direct to video and TV series era but the people who worked on them were trying; there's some good ideas floating in the muck. Some things were much harder to generate a sequel for, I don't blame them for struggling there, and the mid-quels were always gonna have trouble rising above mid status. I might have to give this one another watch some day, while sailing under the jolly roger. I mean, I watched the first Swan Princess and that's also very flawed but I appreciate what they wanted to do with it even if that didn't quite work... and then it got devoured by sequel hell lol.
Three Mousketeers is way underrated.
Agreed, that movie slaps.
- If you're referring to "Mickey, Donald and Goofy: The Three Musketeers", I believe it was also a wasted opportunity; Unlike the little bit of screen tie he had in "The Prince and the Pauper", Horace Horsecollar could've had a bigger role in "Musketeers". Keep in mind that the three Musketerrs themselves (Porthos, Athos and Aramis) are led by D'artagnian.
Thus, Mickey, Donald and Goofy being led by Horace. He could've been a former Musketeer who Pete felt was a threat to his plan, and thusly dumped, only for Horace to get the three heroes together to restore order. Perfect irony. Why didn't they do that? And, for that matter, why didn't they give Horace his own animated series (Maximum Horsepower)?
The new Mickey shorts are actually incredibly entertaining. The only problem is that most people will not seek them out. However, if the shorts are already playing somewhere, they have this quality that makes it impossible to look away. At least for me lol
That's why Saturday morning cartoons were an incredible way to passively get people to watch things they don't have to actively seek out. Looney Tunes got big because they played before feature films were shown in theaters.
Wish Upon a Coin is my favorite!
I have the benefit of having little children that love Mickey. We just stumbled onto the shorts seeking out more mickey things. The shorts really feel like they are made by someone that watched cartoons in the 90s and I love it. Also all the references to the parks and movies.
This question of what makes stories worth telling is probably a big part of why Inside Out 2 went over so well. Because "What happens when Riley enters puberty" IS a strong narrative concept - we have decades of studies examining the exact effects the process has on girls going through the process, and the film simply explores that exact direction.
Also, you really nail down why Beauty and the Beast is Disney's definite love story. Mad props to everyone involved for making such a strong romance.
About the Muppets,
When i see comments online, everyone wants more Muppets. And there is no shortage of ideas for what kind of movies the Muppets could do.
Im personally a fan of the idea that we stick with Muppets staying as actors in their movies. Like in Treasure Island.
I think Disney should use popular IPs, like Dracula as an example or Sherlock Holmes, and have the Muppets act the part.
People would go silly for it. Getting excited for whatever story the Muppets get to act in next.
They could even do little red carpet events for the movies.
It would be so cute to see the Muppets walk around in fancy clothes and do interviews. Lol
Anyways, Disney, please do better with Muppets.
At least fo Muppets Dracula or something.
Muppets Shakespeare would be histerical!
@@RozenGermain Yes! Oh my gosh, like imagine Piggy in Taming of the Shrew lol
@@stormaggeden That would be AMAZING!
I always love the pitches with the main human attached as well. Like Pedro Pascal in Muppets Casablanca
and the songs! Never forget the songs!
I was obsessed with Muppet Treasure Island as a kid. And I still watch A Muppet's Christmas Carol each year
I refuse to call the Beauty and the Beast midquels canon. Anyone who thinks so really needs to rewatch the original and see how disconnected those films are to that film.
Oh, no question--but, y'know, I do have a soft spot for the evil Tim Curry pipe organ.
most of those disney direct to video sequels aren't canon really. they sit and rot with less reference to them overtime like they don't exist. there are fraction i wouldn't mind to be canon
I’m glad Mickey is at least still popular as a CHARACTER first and a MASCOT second.
The Paul Rudish Mickey cartoons are the best singular production Disney has put put in 20 years. The musicals are great and all, but NOTHING is as over the top and wacky as Rudish’s shorts, at least under the Disney umbrella.
We may not have the direct to video DVD’s nowadays, but across Rudish’s run, we got over 100 full Mickey Mouse cartoons (nearly matching his original theatrical run in numbers) plus special length episodes themed to the four seasons, and holiday’s like Christmas and Halloween.
It may not be the same as in the new millennium, but it certainly is MORE overall. Its just that because its on Disney Channel and Streaming, its not as easily seen in our culture as before.
Mickey Mouse represents Hollywood’s golden era, a time of massive technological innovation in film, with Mickey spearheading sound cartoons and the three strip technicolor process. Look at Fantasia! That entire project was built out of a love for Mickey Mouse, and wanting him to reach a new artistic high point!
Mickey should be remembered for all the good he did for the artform, and how he can still be used in fun and creative ways, even if Disney often restrains his full potential.
Plus, with Epic Mickey getting a remake later this year with “Rebrushed”, and his continued appearances in Kingdom Hearts and extended cartoon/entertainment venues, I think we haven’t seen the last of what the Mouse is capable of achieving.
Mickey is one of the most malleable and whimsical characters in all of fiction, much like Super Mario, he is a blank slate in most instances, but its all about finding imaginative and cool ways of using the character that matters. We the artists should use Mickey for good, reinvigorating his personality just as Rudish has, just as Walt Disney before him did.
We as artists and fans have that power.
but he wouldn’t be here without Oswald
@@Ithinkimaninkyfanidk oh absolutely! Oswald is really Mickey’s older brother, Oswald walked so Mickey could run!
Oswald also deserves a lot more credit in the scheme of animation history, and at least these days he’s beloved by both Disney fans and the general public. Plus, Oswald gets his own merch stores, meet and greets, and even his own cartoon short for the 100th anniversary of Disney. Hopefully they do more with him, as they did with Mickey!
@@PullStar05 yep!
@@Ithinkimaninkyfanidk both modern literature and popular culture couldn’t co-exist as they are without the almighty Tarzan! It’s because the concept of a true trans media character like him wasn’t even made possible until the mid 1910s thanks to Edgar Rice Burroughs’ shameless marketing tactics.
45:23 Runaway Brain was Disney's chance to make Mickey cool again and they buried it.
@@SaiScribbles
So was Epic Mickey. The most successful Mickey reinvention, sadly to say, was the Rudish series.
@@austinreed7343 “Sadly”? I loved those shorts!
Don't forget about the ToonTown MNORPG game.
@@austinreed7343wdym sadly? The shorts were great
@@austinreed7343Don’t Forget Oswald!
Disney essentially erased The Black Cauldron and Return to Oz from their canon, which were great movies, but were financial bombs at the box office. This is why Princess Eilonwy was not in Wreck in Ralph 2, and also why she’s never been invited to a princess tea party 😢
Oh shit. Return to Oz was Disney? That movie slaps so hard. Was one of my favorite, "I have to watch this movie over and over, but also it kinda frightens me, but also I kind of want to be scared, so I'm going to keep watching it" movies as a kid.
Return to Oz was a dark fantasy classic. As for Disney’s The Black Cauldron… not really. They castrated a lot of potential of the characters from the book and Frankenstein’d two books from the series for the movie adaptation. If you ever watched the movie versions of Madeline or The Series of Unfortunate Events, you’ll know that slapping too many books into a narrative is a recipe for disaster.
Same with Kida from Atlantis. If your movie bombs, you’re not invited to the princess tea party.
@@TheMedicatedArtist princess tea party invites are for closers!
@@Pillzpopyea sometimes we gotta be real , I love black cauldron and sword in the stone a lot lmao but I would never dare call them great and that fine they resonate with me and I enjoy and appreciate them. Not saying they are horrendous or anything
The Disney princess movies were one of the first targets of media illiteracy. No one cared until recently. Those movies aren’t perfect, but still have a lot of love and emotional value to give to many people. 😭❤️
If I have to hear another person tell me Disney Princesses are just useless women sitting around waiting for a man (or be told by their overcorrecting recent movies that have no romance or real villainy that I should celebrate Elsa just because she doesn’t end up with a dude) I’ll scream, I swear to god.
When I was a kid, I was a chubby bookworm. Whenever we would move, my mom would let me pick my room decorations and it was always Barbie or Disney Princess. And shocker, I never learned to sit and wait for a man to do things, I learned to love to read like Belle (my favorite) and go out and get the stuff I want by not reading the fine print of things I sign (like Ariel, my second favorite) 😂
And Barbie didn’t give me unrealistic body image issues, I just thought she was pretty lol
@@averyeml Did you see the concept art for Wish? Imagine a romance between a non-verbal Starboy and a princess? 🥺❤️
@@papermr.magolorguy7957 I have seen that art and we were ROBBED
But I knew that movie wasn’t gonna work for me at all by how annoyed I was with the Goat just from the ads
@@papermr.magolorguy7957The actual story of Wish is great and didn't need a forced romance side plot.
@@averyemlWe were not robbed and you clearly have no idea what the movie is actually about.
Disney has faced criticism lately for prioritizing profit over creativity. Fans argued the focus on franchise expansion, particularly through live-action remakes of beloved classics, has led to a decline in originality and the "magic" that once defined Disney.
Is this Chat GPT?
@@d0dgecity Nope! It’s in my own words.
Finally, a Disney video essay without some doom and gloom right wing angle. I mean, it’s you, Anthony, but still, damn rare thing these days.
@@matt0044
The far right are not Disney’s saviors, at least not anymore. They are still important to discuss, but they are now nothing more than a persistent threat to Disney (if they ever were anything else)
Disney has enough gloom and doom without the Right-wing, who's late to the party btw as the Left-wing has pretty much always hated Disney for being a staunchly anti-Communist bastion of Capitalism and blaming the latter for every mouse turd that the Magic Empire has laid.
People filter problems through their world view. Something is wrong at Disney, determining what is an exercise for the reader.
yes! i’m so tired of people’s only criticism of disney is them going “woke” instead the actual bad shit they’re doing
Disney already had a dark age after Walt's passing. With Investors and Shareholders from Wall Street gaining more and more power of an industry they should have no business in, there's a reason why we are in the middle of a historic strike between THREE unions We had striking actors and writers earlier this year, and now the animators are gearing up to follow suit. On that note, phrasing. I know the allegory is meant to be flat martinis that lost their flavor, but that can come off the wrong way. Ironically, Lorcana is carrying this dark era by being a creator-driven card game made up of artists and writers who care about Disney's legacy as an animation studio more than those in Wall Street.
The art for Lorcana is insane
I need to get that card game, it looks awesome.
Literally have said to so many people lately that the only Disney project that has brought me genuine joy in years has been Lorcana. The art is beautiful. The gameplay is so lovingly and carefully crafted around the stories and strengths of the characters. The artists have a lot of creative power in the designs and because Ravensburger has more control over it than Disney as a whole, it seems a little less touched by the full wall street greediness (even if it was created as a means of cashing in on that sweet MTG money as competition)
I think you're missing the most simple reason things are like this...
Walt Disney and Jim Henson aren't around to steer their ships. The original collab didn't happened cause Jim died, and Walt's final Ideas were what became Walt Disney World. Thats why the company keeps going back to the parks, they even said it was "Walt's final dream."
technically EPCOT was his final dream and the OG EPCOT plan was a head trip!
This might also be true of Kamen Rider to an extent, with Ishinomori no longer around.
A lot of things change when the creator dies. Look at what’s happening to the Backyardigans. The original creator didn’t want a reboot and she would definitely hate what Nickelodeon has done now. Same with Spongebob.
A lot of things change when the creator dies. Look at what’s happening to the Backyardigans. The original creator didn’t want a reboot and she would definitely hate what Nickelodeon has done now. Same with Spongebob.
@@chey6073 It sucks, even though they have the resources to Newly create and innovate
I really hate how Mickey is commonly portrayed as a corporate overlord. He’s just as much a victim!
RIGHT?! Also, it would be so out of character for him to be a corporate overlord.
I think a better take would be an optimistic, yet ultimately misguided, philanthropist/investor. It bails on Mickey’s fatal flaw: His optimism and happy-go-lucky attitude.
I mean, we own Mickey now, so make him do something else? So far the only thing anyone's done is horror games.
@@TinyToonStar
If anything, Ursula makes much more sense as a representation of what Iger truly is.
@@austinreed7343My personal favorite is "Thanosney", Thanos wearing Mouse ears and having all the stuff modern Disney buys up set in the Infinity Gauntlet.
22:06 "Let's talk about Belle. Can we talk about Belle? I've been dying to talk about Belle."
"There is no Carol in HR"
@@agramuglia you 🤝 Every Belle Liker Under the Sun
Frustration with the how Belle is portrayed in the Sequels and Live Action Movie bc Oh my god how hard is it to write a empathetic book worm?!
I'm still questioning what happens to media when companies write them as a tax return
It gets into a VERY weird place where there is no legitimate way to watch it, so if you want to do it you need to either know a guy or know how to pirate it. It's like getting rid of a pet cat by locking it out of the house; it might find a new home and end up okay, but it will likely die forgotten in some dark corner through no fault of its own.
It's not good from an archivist perspective because in order to study history you have to actually still have parts of it, and enough stuff gets lost as it is without things being actively scrubbed. If we don't have any media LEFT from a certain era or only have a small portion of it, we're going to make the same mistakes the scrubbed media did. (As a more lighthearted example, the Road to El Dorado is a great movie on its own, but it's completely recontextualized when you find out that it was written as a homage to a genre of black and white adventure movies and intentionally includes a lot of the genre's tropes. We wouldn't have that extra layer of analysis if we'd completely lost those adventure movies!)
When a show becomes a "tax right off" a company will do everything in their power to expunge any trace of it from their platforms. Removal from streaming, immediate cease of production of any physical merchandise and removal from all their websites etc. It's for them to show on their end there is no possible way for them to ever profit off said IP ever again
I tried to face my fear of animatronic dinosaurs by going on the Dinosaur ride but by the end of the ride I was shaking and on the verge of tears lol. I'm glad to finally hear someone else acknowledge how scary it is compared to Disney's other rides.
A DnD youtuber actually made a video where she went on a ride and hated the animatronic dinosaurs too!
I'd like to argue Mickey Mouse has been reduced to being a marketing symbol for much longer. I might be wrong but I'm pretty sure Disney wanted Mickey to have little to no screen time in the first Kingdom Hearts game but then after that game was successful, Disney let Square Enix give Mickey as much screen time as they want in the games.
Aladdin and the King of Thieves gets a pass cuz Aladdin’s dad was fine as hell.
Also that song from Simba’s Pride slaps hard. Deception…Disgrace EVIL AS PLAIN AS THE SCAR ON HIS FACE
Aladdin's dad IS fine as hell. And yeah, Simba's Pride in general is great. Also, Cinderella III is a solid sequel too for how gonzo it is.
Rescuers Down under is another good sequel.
Aladdin and Lion King's sequels were great, and I will argue the Bambi interquel is really good till I'm blue in the face.
The reason doesn’t even have to be that shallow. It’s a perfectly fine next adventure for the characters, with its own arc, that draws a line under the entire story. And it brings back Robin Williams.
@@Saltyoven Man both those movies don't get the recognition they deserve. The first is an amazing drama, and the second is an amazing action comedy. Together they stand as some of the best work Disney has put out there and hardly anybody talks about either of them.
Using Mickey less is a bit weird. Imagine if Nintendo did that with Mario
They might if Miyamoto and Tezuka pass, they are the creatives behind the series.
Mario makes money. Mickey doesn't. It's true he's a versitale character that can be used for anything because he has no real personality on his own, but most people aren't drawn to the idea of watching a Mickey Mouše movie 😂
Yeah mario is more a fleshed out character than people give him credit for@@zalybrainlessgenius503
@zalybrainlessgenius503 Not true. Look at the attention the return of Epic Mickey and heck, even the Paul Rudish series brought. People are interested in Mickey.
@@alchemistofsteel8099Isn't Mario a Blank Slate character for the player to self insert in?
Mickey is a nickname for a friend, but remember Micheal Mouse is NOT your friend.
Emperor Michael Rat of the Magic Empire
Mickey is slang for penis in Ireland.
The timeline for fox and the hound cracks me up from a character perspective cause amos slade goes through a roller coaster of ornery old man willing to pop a cap in a baby fox, softens up cause he experiences whimsy, time skip happens and hes back to ornery only to end the movieverse in kind of a sad tired defeated gramps moment
I love Amos. He’s one of my favorite Disney characters. Maybe their first anti hero
It baffles me how quick some western companies are to do big sweeping "money saving" tax write off, shelving and discontinuing of products.
Part of the reason why Mickey got big in the first place was his (over)exposure. Same for Bugs Bunny and Woody Woodpecker. Heck, it is the same nowadays for Goku and Pikachu. Even if you don't make all the money you want from something, living rent free in people's head as part of the popular zeitgeist is a *lot* more valuable than an extra pin sold at the parks.
The fact that nothing has the time to simmer anymore, and that we live on the age of "on demand" yet you can't demand nearly any thing without 3 layers of approval is legit bad business.
It doesn't matter if you're pro or against capitalism, there's just no defending dumb capitalism.
"Even if you don't make all the money you want from something ..."
And this is why letting shareholders control decision-making is always a terrible idea.
It's no longer enough for something to make a lot of money over time, it needs to make ALL the money and it needs to do so by next financial quarter otherwise it's a flop.
@@SpoopySquid More or less why I said it is dumb capitalism. Change a dollar today for two dollars tomorrow isn't bad business, you're creating evergreen content that has potential to be more. So I think it is a bigger problem that the shareholders are usually stupid than it is that there are shareholders at all. It's almost like all of them just want pump and dump schemes and not actually any investment.
What baffels me is that ppl want products to be big. Things like Mickey mouse, Goku Bugs Bunny just whiter on the vine. They strat our great and just become more an more hollow until they are just a shell of the thing they where at the start.
Disney should retheme the rest of DinoLand USA to the "Tropical Americas," but they should KEEP DINOSAUR.
The Tropical Americas is based on the Yucatán Peninsula, the exact same place where the asteroid hit. It'll make more sense to keep DINOSAUR then to replace it with Indiana Jones.
You could argue that Pocahontas 2 does try to push the story forward, by exploring the real life next step on her story…. But that doesn’t save it. The only good part is the message in the credits admitting that the everything you just watched is nonsense, and encouraging the viewer to look up the true story for themselves. Just a shame everyone had switched off long before that so wouldn’t see it.
The actual real life Pocahontas story isn't a great one to begin with. and by great, I meant happy.
Wreck-it Ralph 2 commit characters assassination on Ralph and Vanellope than DisneyToons sequels wish they could have had.
No, it's called character DEVELOPMENT.
@@gamestation2690Character development where? It completely erases the character’s personalities.
@@neb.9489 Not necessarily. In the first movie, Ralph learns that he doesn't have to be the "bad guy" to be valued and that he can find friendship and acceptance. In the sequel, he learns that friendship doesn't mean control or dependence, but allowing those you care about to follow their own paths. The first movie focused on self-acceptance and finding value in oneself, while the sequel explores the challenges of maintaining relationships in the face of change. This is a natural progression for both Ralph and Vanellope, dealing with new challenges that test the lessons they learned in the first film.
@@gamestation2690 well said. the way the sequel expands on ralph and vanellope's friendship is why i love the movie so much. also, themes of letting go and not controlling your loved ones are usually portrayed in stories of familial relationships, or as a side plot in romance stories. it's nice to see it explored through the lens of friendship. i don't like it when companies push out sequels that lack artistic vision, but wreck it ralph 2 clearly had a theme and message.
@@kurokura8379
Exactly, at least they tried.
You know the last time Disney was in a funk in the early 2000s, they tried lots of things who are interesting to study today..
If that happens again, i fear they will just reuse the same franchises again and again
the direct to video era is analogous to the streaming era?
The fact that Disney haven't had a genuinely good theatrical animated film since 2021 with Encanto is insane
Inside Out 2?
@@sandy_shark That's Pixar. And it's not the main animation division of Disney.
@@misterchris3491
It’s also a sequel.
@@austinreed7343 Sequels are not inherently bad things, you know.
I blame Lasseter’s, uh, “letting go” (not to say that sexual misconduct is necessarily a passable-thing, mind you, but at the same time nobody else seemed to have the same knack John Lasseter had).
I've always felt like that scene in Wreck-it-Ralph 2 felt really off back when I saw the trailers and I'm happy to see that I'm not the only one who felt that. I feel like you hit the nail on the head in explaining why that felt so off to me. Its a shame really that by sanitizing for marketability reasons can strip agency and complexities from characters, films, and other things under Disney.
It's really sad that the scene with the princesses was one of the best in the movie. (I wanted so badly to love that movie, but it sucked.) And it's even sadder that the person who suggested it was afraid they were going to be fired because corporate Disney is so protective of the Disney Princess branding
32:53 Fun fact tho Cinderella currently is officially voiced by Jennifer Hale. You know. Commander Shepard 😂
.... that is amazing
To be fair, retonning Aladdin and Jasmine not getting married at the end of the first film was probably a good thing since they didn't even know each other that long. We get the entirety of the animated series to develop their relationship all the way up to the actual marriage in King of Thieves.
Aladdin was such a great franchise, I can't believe how well it ended up being despite all the Disney bullshit.
At this point, the only ongoing property that Disney has left is Kingdom Hearts by virtue of Nomura & Square being able to put their feet down in regards to their own content. The Disney worlds may be regulated, but everything else is fair game (Nomura even got the KH cartoon and possibly a KH book canned, it's his baby until the very end)
I mean say what you want about kingdom hearts..like a lot…but you can at least say “Well it’s been a crazy, campy experience.” I’m not a fan but I can appreciate the series’s fandom appreciation, that it did give newer gamers a chance to play a RPG, and that it stood by its decisions. Artistic integrity and all that.
@@pridefulmaster1390
Possibly also Marvel vs. Capcom depending on how the collection does.
Avatar, too, because of James Cameron
Disney sucks at marketing anime
Since Disney wholly owns KH, I think it's less that Nomura has contractual power to say no as much as Disney has somehow (rightfully) internalized the idea that they fundamentally do not and can not understand the series and what makes it tick. They could theoretically do whatever they want with it and Square Enix wouldn't really be able to do anything about it, but Disney knows that would do far more harm than good. It's a weird Japanese thing by a weird Japanese company in a medium they don't deal with much. It's consistently made money for decades with a demographic they usually struggle with and all they have to do is provide a budget and make sure they don't go too far with the properties the series borrows.
KH is far from perfect, but I'll take its weird, specific problems and issues over the ones that have infested every other Disney property any day. Kind of like Nintendo's relationship with the greater AAA game industry.
@@SuperfieldCrUn
Avatar, on the other hand, is owned by James Cameron.
I think Lilo and Stitch, The Lion King and Aladdin worked because they have some aspect of worldbuilding in them that can be expanded on as opposed to Hunchback, Pochantos and even Beauty and the beast when it came to the video sequels.
...and even in those cases, I'd argue everybody (or close to) still got Flanderized to varying degrees.
Fucking screamed when you mentioned the mistreatment of the Muppets.
Thanks.
The only 2 live action remakes with potential were Aladdin and Mulan, and only if they weren't remakes of the animated movies but adaptations of the source material. Guess which road they didn't go. I guess it wasn't on brand.
Fun fact: ‘Mulan’ was directed by Niki Caro, who also directed ‘Whale Rider’ (a personal favorite of mine) from back in ‘02.
It was free here on UA-cam for a while, but then they took it down.
I suggest you check it out, it’s a real gem.
Aladdin especially. I love Aladdin, but it's true that the movie was originally meant to be completely different. I'd love to see the original concepts brought to life
Cinderella??
@@KawaiiStars tbh as much as i love the 2015 cinderella, it’s such a classic tale that was told many times esp in live action that one can argue the potential was already explored. I mean people already love that one adaptation Ever After. I myself watched a disney channel version of the story as a kid.
I don’t think it was necessary other than trying it out with the disney version of the story and with disney creatives and budget. Also probably because of all the princess films, that one would’ve been the easiest to adapt and they also didn’t do a word-for-word, shot-for-shot adaptation like, say, beauty and the beast or aladdin with only one or two extra songs.
Imo that is why it was so well received compared to other ones. Doing a shot for shot remake just shows that live action versions of these animated movies are inferior because it wasn’t the medium they were made to be in. And unlike other more unique adaptations like Cruella and Maleficient it kept the story basically the same anyway. The Jungle Book live action was received pretty well too iirc.
Thanks for this critique of Disney that's about the systemic issues within the studios, not the usual sticking points like the Woke or stuff churned out by those weird bad faith channels.
Hope you can explore the same for WB & DC, 'cos gods, there's so many to unpacked about those studios, way longer before Zaslav sits his ass on the throne.
@@Germania9
Those who use those sticking points have become nothing more than another problem for Disney
@@austinreed7343There is a pattern with those channels: they are right-wingers who promote Russian propaganda.
@@tankart150
I knew they had ulterior motives!
Finally an actual criticism of Disney that isn’t ’Go woke go broke’
Thank Flipping God. Anyone that uses that word is someone who clearly is too freakin' lazy to construct a bridge to any kind of criticism. Not helped by the fact its done by stereotypical neckbeards and gingers.
Making even those people look bad. I get it, not all geeks and gingers are bad people. But man its weird how those Grifters' share the same traits.
45:52 I don’t really get this point either… from the 1940’s to the 1990’s, Mickey Mouse didn’t have much of a presence at Disney either. He didn’t appear in any films, tv shows, etc. All those examples you showed were from late 1990’s early 2000’s direct to video stuff. I don’t think Disney is slowly letting him fade away. He has moments where he comes back in a big way from time to time. This is just another one of those examples.
I also want to bring up that the Disney Princesses have been criticized for bring "helpless damsels in distress who do nothing but sit and wait to be rescued." It's a mindset I had when I was growing up in the 2000s. But, in reality, not all Disney Princesses are damsels in distress who wait to be rescued because the first 3 Disney Princesses were passive in their own stories with little to do the films they starred in. Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora are the damsels in distress. In comparison, starting in 1989 with the Disney Renesance (1989-1999), the Disney Princesses since then have gained active roles in their films and got to be heroes.
Ariel saves Flounder from a shark, inadvertently kills Ursula's eels in the climax, and saves Prince Eric more than once.
Belle, cleverly rejects Gaston, saves her father and the Beast more than once, and breaks the spell in the end.
Jasmine....ummm she chases away jerky princes with her tiger and distracts Jafar? (Sorry. She didn't do a lot in Aladdin. But, she was able to kick butt in the TV show).
Pocahontas stops a war from happening and saves John Smith.
Mulan saves China as an action hero.
Tiana fights off fisherman as a frog and defeats Dr Faclier in the end.
Rapunzel fights off thugs and saves Flynn Rider with her hair and frying pan.
Merida is a badass with a bow and arrow and a sword and breaks the spell in the end by fixing the tapestry.
Anna and Elsa do their part to save each other and Arendele.
Moana restores the heart of Tafiti.
Rya is a badass action hero.
Am I wrong or am I right? Am I missing something?
Heck, even with Cinderella, you can see why she is the way she is: one can argue that it's a fawn trauma response. Worth noting too is that with her story, the prince is the reward more than anything, and it's less her being saved by the guy and more Cinderella leaving her abusive family. Aurora is probably the most "damsel" of the three classic princesses, and there the fairies were more the main characters than she was, considering the movie focuses on them more than Aurora or her love interest.
@@RozenGermain I couldn't agree more. The fairies felt they were more like the protagonists of Sleeping Beauty. They have distinct personalities, the film focuses more on them, and they progress the story forward. They have an active role in the film and a very active role in the climax in helping Prince Philip defeat Melificent. Auroa felt like she was more of a plot device than an actual character.
Tbf SW and Cindy were in abusive households and they do have their own acts of defiance towards their respective stepmothers, but Aurora, I can agree, doesn’t do a lot in her film.
I have made this connection and wish you had noticed. The Tangled Rapunzel TV show is IDENTICAL to the old Esurance spy ads. Absolutely uncanny
Man, a revamp of the prehistoric section of the Animal Kingdom would be so great. I can understand the story reasons why the rides are flat rides but it’s understandable why they aren’t favored. A ride that goes through paddocks of rescued animals would be interesting to see. Maybe even do some non Mesozoic eras
I think a part 2 is in order to cover things like ABC and Fox, Disney & the Far Right, Disney’s international IP follies, Disney as a bad example for other corporations, etc.
There is SO MUCH to cover in a part 2.
Wait what does the far-right have anything to do with Disney? Isn’t the modern company currently very hard left-leaning.
@@partyharry7585Modern Disney isn't hard right or hard left. It's focused exclusively on making money
@@partyharry7585
The far right CLAIM they want to fix Disney but their solutions are inefficient at best & cruel at worst.
@@partyharry7585
The far right does have a tendency to poison the well of what are otherwise valid complaints about the company, by making it all about them and even bashing the good things Disney do that happen to be “woke”
Pretty good timing to release this video shortly before Disney endlessly shits out a diarrhea of sequels and live action remakes at us at d23
The timing is accidental. I meant to release it last week, but got delayed. Good thing for accidents, right?
I just need you to know I silently choke-laughed at work at "... and Frollo."
they also included quasimodo in the magic kingdom fireworks show, happily ever after. granted, the projection aspect of it is literally scenes from a bunch of their movies lol
My guess as to why they're putting an Encanto themed ride in Animal Kingdom is because of Antonio's gift of talking to animals. Still a shame that they would replace the Dinosaur ride.
As a Disney Kid and Pseudo Disney-Adult, I pretty much knew all of this stuff before hand*. So that's my way of pretty much agreeing with you and saying this is pretty dang accurate. So, good video. Would recommend
* Except the bit about the princess mini videos. I did not know that but BOY do they look bland and soul draining. Also Jasmine's the one teaching about patience? Why isn't it, oh, I dunno, *CINDERELLA?!* Her life is miserable because of circumstances outside of her control and while she's always hoping for something better, she makes the best out of what's happening in her life. That's the virtue of patience to a T! Maybe I'm biased here because that whole tangent on Cinderella is why she's my favorite Disney princess and the same way people mischaracterize Bell as having Stockholm syndrome (which I recommend everyone look up the origins of but that's *another* tangent so I won't get into it) they characterize Cinderella as doing nothing. Which, like, we can't always do something to make our lives materially better! Sometimes we can only choose how we respond to a situation! Cinderella is awesome, gosh dang it!
Anyway, rant over. Good video
Still waiting on Buzz Lightyear of Star Command, to get on Disney+…
Same
Noway, Disney hated Star command. They rather made a shitty movie than acknowledge its existence.
@@MrGamerofmusic
We probably won’t get it until John Lasseter has died, if that.
Growing up in the 2000s. Disney has always been a huge part of my life. Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy, & the others were all my childhood heroes. The Lion King, Fantasia, & Toy Story were my top three favorite films of all time. Cinderella, Belle, & Ariel were three princesses that I grew up crushing on, despite being so kind & pretty. Kingdom Hearts has always been a big part of my childhood. The likes of Pirates of the Caribbean, Tron, & Mighty Ducks were my top three live action movies. As well the likes of Disney Channel & Jetix were favorites for me to remember.
And I owe it to Kingdom Hearts for reviving my love for Disney.
It's what also made Ariel my favorite Disney character after seeing her be a badass party member in the Atlantica level due to my prejudice judgement in the 2000s toward the Disney Princesses for being "helpless damsels in distress who just wait to be rescued". And coincidently, in the 1989 movie, Ariel did break the damsel in distress trope by having an active role in the film (saving Flounder from a shark, inaevertly killing Ursula's eels in the climax, and saving Prince Eric more than once) and she paved the way for more badass and active female leads in Disney films from Belle in Beauty and the Beast to Mulan herself.
It's funny you've mentioned how less prevalent Mickey has become as the mascot of Disney, besides a couple of things here or there, that only die hard Disney fans care or it's just aimed at preschoolers.
Ironically, I feel the Simpsons have become a more prevalent mascot for the company, ever since they bought most of Fox and launched Disney+ in 2019, despite the fact they were never a original creation of Disney.
@@akm2219
I feel like Ursula is a much more fitting mascot for the company at this point.
@@austinreed7343 LOL. I get what you mean.
It makes me so sad that Mickey and Friends have been reduced to mere marketing symbols that are parodied over and over again in unoriginal ways. The old Mickey Mouse shorts had a lot of charm and were good displays of animation as an art form, but nowadays Mickey is only used for Kids Shows and the occasional series of actual good shorts like the ones from 2017.
Made even funnier by how Universal has theme park rights to The Simpsons
you just reminded me how much i miss the mickey shorts they compiled into vhs tapes back in the day
This video couldn't have been more well timed, with how many sequels and spinoffs just got announced/confirmed at D23.
Then again, it was a tad predictable of Disney to do so.
Well at least we got the Beavers Avatar...and the Beaver Avatar as new thing?
(No but seriously bar the beavers thing, i skipped most of it after seeing they were nothing really new)
Subbed. 8:53 This has been stuck in my head for 2 days
Edit: fyi the Swiss Family Robinson isn't based on Robinson Crusoe. Those are two different old tropical island survival adventure books.
What Disney wants is what all studios wants, to minimize identity into something easily marketable. Any sort of project has to adhere to a specific brand or framework or it’s not considered. Take the Looney Tunes for example. They are like The Muppets in the sense that they are a franchise that will always remain relevant, but isn’t really built to be milked. Almost every effort to make new LT things were either corporately mandated to the point that it misses the core identity of why these characters work, or do work but don’t get any marketing or even release and fade away. Space Jam 2 was micromanaged from a satire of the brand focused modern Hollywood to just another showcase of those brands, taking away the edge that defines the Looney Tunes. Coyote Vs Acme was thrown into the tax wood chipper and The Day The Earth Blew Up was sold off to a small scale distributor because they don’t fit the mold of how studios want to sell their brands or were seen as comparably risky in the eyes of executives who only want to green light projects in a shrewd manner. Disney is going to keep learning the wrong mistakes from their successes since rather than allowing their creative teams the same environments that birthed their classic films or recent good works, they will instead be relegated to sanding down their projects into the assumed brand ideas since that’s how executives think. Rather than letting the creatives create, they think they can job the system by repeatable formulas and all this does is make them projects that come across as hollow. The ip focus of Disney will hit a wall sooner or later in the sense that you can only sell nostalgia for so long until you run out of it. The company has always had a sense of corporate direction before, but never to this extent to the point that it’s kind of exhausting seeing every remake or another remake. Or how look at the animation studios where outside of sequels that feel less intuitive than the originals mostly, the original films really can’t experiment or do something really different than the “brand image” of what a Disney or Pixar film is framed as.
If I was in charge of writing Hunchback II, I'd incorporate elements of Victor Hugo's other novel, Les Misérables. I don't have all the details yet, but that's about the only logical path Disney could've followed.
Speaking primarily as a Disney parks fan, this really gets to the heart of why many of us don't like the current "IP mandate" - the last original from the bottom-up attraction, not based on a preexisting IP (with requisite flattened characters) that opened at Disney World was Expedition Everest, and that was nearly *twenty* years ago. Original ride concepts are being replaced in the name of further monetizing brands the company owns, even if said brands aren't well suited to the medium of theme park attractions. The Haunted Mansion was not created to sell an individual IP to audiences; as such, current Disney management would *never* OK an attraction like it today, even though the Haunted Mansion was made from the start with the core idea of working as a three-dimensional themed ride.
It was part of why there was such a blowback when they replaced the former EPCOT nighttime firework show, Illuminations: Reflections of Earth, with HarmonioUS - there were issues with the setup of HarmonioUS (its fireworks barges blocked formerly great views around the park's lagoon), but ultimately the former show was an original concept that attempted to craft a bottom-up narrative of the development of Earth and humankind from creation via flames, lasers, water, fireworks, an original orchestral score, all creating a really sweeping, emotional note...and the latter show was "here are the same Disney songs you hear in all the other parks, but sung in different languages. Buy Disney+!"
@@jmn327
Technically, we also got Habit Heroes & Awesome Planet, but they were both total ass.
Thank you for talking about the Willow tv show being removed.
It was an amazing show!
Im named after Elora from the original movie.
So of course the show was always gonna be special to me.
But! It was such a good show! Not just a nostalgia trip. Not just me seeing my namesake go on a fun journey. But it was genuinely a fun, well written story. With a bombastic cast with great chemistry. And great sets, props, costumes, soundtrack.
And then Disney not only cancels the planned trilogy seasons. But they take it off the app only 6 months after airing?
Like what the hell!
Its not fair and Im very upset.
Also, please dont believe most of the reviews of the show Willow.
Most of the reviews are from men who hated that the show focused on girls and then dared to have two of the girls be gay.
Anyways. I hope someday the show gets picked up again so we can see Graydon saved from lovecraft hell. Hes my favorite
I am legitimately PISSED that they cancelled Muppets Mayhem. That show was so fun, and I love the Mayhem, the music was there and the sort of spirit of creativity that I feel goes really well with the Muppets. Yeah it’s them not doing what Jim did and trying to play the Muppets safer for the sake of synergy, but it was really fun.
Some of the jokes were funny, but the hammy acting of Lilly Singh ruined the experience for me, and I disliked how the narrative was focused on her.
I hate how they drew Mickey in Runaway Railway, and I hate how he and Minnie have animatronics that look like inflatable lawn ornaments. It looks like dog shit in an otherwise perfect dark ride attraction. I hate it more than you hate Beauty and the Beast 2.
It's awesome to see a video about Disney's artistic problems that only barely discusses Star Wars and Marvel.
"They take...an ageless, stagnant version of a fictional character, and boil them down to the most identifiable traits to the elimination of everything else."
You've just described how human memory works - maybe that Disney is onto something...?
Many of the problems with DTS is that they were mandated/ordered by Disney after the release of Return To Jafar and did not have many people who worked on the originals- sometimes those people were dead. That is why Belle is so out of character and why many installments are very bad or just mediocre. There often seems there wasn't a "story trust". I know it's a different studio, but having connections with those people would at least maybe save the movies to me. Just having the people on as a creative team would cost them money. You can see that with the creative choices in Tinker Bell, there was many disagreements on how that movie should have been made and I do prefer some of the original art style.
However, its the fact that well, some installments like the Tinkerbell movies, Extremely Goofy Movie, Bambi 2, and Cinderella 3 are actually interesting for their concepts and creative/art direction. Even when a mediocre studio has the option to be creative and original, it shows in the quality.
I am not against sequels and spinoffs, but often they rely too much on the previous movie to market it rather than make it it's own thing. I know that is the point, but its just that. I would love to actually see some stories continue and be expanded upon, but the execution matters and can actually help the movies be more profitable/memorable.
I'm young, I'm Gen Z, many people in my generation are dissolutioned with Disney just as a thing. I think Disney doesn't know it has the reputation of being "fake" with so many people. Often people dont seem to like Disney in general these days, so I can see their originals and spinoffs failing in the next coming years. Many people look at Disney's marketing and say "I see what youre doing" Many people love their newer animated shows, and when they get treated poorly people don't forget it. When I hear something bad about Disney like how Mickey Mouse was supposedly stolen I don't forget it. Or that Pixar hates "biographical" stories now, or that Lilo and Stitch was worked on in secret because Disney wouldn't normally greenlight that stuff.
Here's the thing, I feel like what is actually profitable for Disney in the long run with Gen Z ppl my age is their weird spinoff stuff. Like Kingdom Hearts, Epic Mickey, Fairies, Tangled series, Ducktales reboot. Spinoffs with new ideas. But at the same time it's hard to market to this generation. People love looking at the so called niche stuff and a lot of the TV shows.
People want to see the Tiana spinoff series and never cared about Moana 2 as much.
I have such mixed feelings on their creative output in general, as an entity, as a thing. And Mickey, especially Mickey and it's spinoffs with the history of racism in some early cartoons. Yet Mickey has always been the face, the classics have always been the face.
The thing is, Disney has always been the "nostalgia marketing" company, and I feel like this time now is when the reputation they built of happiness and dreams or whatever they say over 100 years is coming back to bite them. They are like a snake eating it's own tail. When they are creative, they are weird and eccentric and loose and have those hidden experimental gems and niche stuff. When they are original, are they really? When they help produce a TV show like the Owl House or Amphibia, they are memorable. But not that new movie, just another movie. I feel like Disney's fake yet real world is kind of crumbling. I don't care about the legacy (as it's marketed), the entity, I want to cut to the good stuff. I think some of their new movies won't do as well within my age group, just in general within all the sorts of stuff they make and own. They will always be the greedy mouse who ruined the public domain, that has been creative and does have a legacy, yet hasn't been creative, yet doesn't have that legacy in that way. The rose colored glasses attached to a chain are usually off, the castle wasn't on a good foundation anyway.
the 80s Tron was one of my absolute favorite films... i saw it in the early 2000
and i absolutely liked The Black Cauldron, the Horned King is the best design for a Lich
The Swiss Family Robinson has no real connection to Robinson Crusoe. The movie is based on a book that came out 99 years after Robinson Crusoe.
Both have the plot of castaway/s on a deserted island having to survive. Only in Robinson Crusoe he is alone most of the time. And the Swiss Family Robinson is about a family from Switzerland surviving together on an island for 10 years and making the island their home.
The main feature of Swiss Family Robinson is the Tree house that they live in during the summer months. Falconhurst. Which is one of half a dozen homes they build on the island.
That Tree House is what the Disney attraction is based on.
And the fact they’re named Robinson is purely a coincidence. I’m sure it wasn’t inspired by Robinson Crusoe at all. 🙄
@@intergalactic92 yeah, the naming was probably picked do to the similarly of the story setting. That is not uncommon for books with similar settings to have similar titles to help people know this is similar to that other book.
Authors will even pick their nom de plume to be place near another author if their books have a similar naritive. Erin Hunter is an example of this. The writing group chose that name so their books would be placed near Brian Jacques books because they both write about animals.
I am not saying there is no inspiration from Robinson Crusoe to The Swiss Family. Crusoe was a very popular book. And it is even mentioned in the version of The Swiss Family Robinson I have.
But having similarities and possibly being somewhat inspired dose not make it based off of it which is my point. Since that is what the video essayre said.
There are a lot of books that took inspiration from Robinson Crusoe.
It is a genre called "Robinsonade".
Actually, since the last Indiana Jones movie was all about finding a time travel device, it wouldn't be that far a stretch if they wanted to keep the dino theme of the ride while rebranding it into Indiana Jones instead of Disney Dinosaur.
Funny that you've mentioned Tarzan's Treehouse because that got recently rethemed to just "The Adventureland Treehouse: Inspired by Walt Disney's Swiss Family Robinson" as a tie-in to their S.E.A. IP series with Jungle Cruise and other non-franchise based attractions. Splash Mountain is another example you could've used for your "Some Disney Properties Fade Away" segment because of how it's based on the controversial Song of the South, which Disney still refuses to release on any form of home media for obvious reasons. This of course got the ride rethemed to Princess and the Frog in both California and Florida (Japan still has the original) because they can't sell the old film anywhere else. And don't get me started on the Disney parks fans' obsession with the Country Bears, Figment, and the Peoplemover.
As a Mulan stan since day one, I always get PISSED when they try to lump her in with the princesses. She’s not a princess, she has a body count, the highest in any animated film for that matter!!!
Edit now that I’m farther into the video.
Tron means so damn much to me with Tron Legacy is my favorite film, saw it 8 times in theaters and the only movie I’ve seen in IMAX, even made the Tron Daft Punk helmets, with the soundtrack being my favorite soundtrack of any film ever. I am very VERY nervous about the third movie. Also I will die on the hill they really missed the mark on Light Cycle Run, never mind that it’s a complete clone and took YEARS to finish, it’s less than a min ride, but the biggest is by putting it in the magic kingdom and not EPCOT. By putting it in EPCOT, they could have made a whole area based on The Grid which would be freaking incredible and a dream come true. But no. They put it in tomorrow land in the magic kingdom with no damn theming and destroyed EPCOT with nothing to show for it
@@kandikidzora
Raya also doesn’t count as a princess by that logic… and good on her I guess.
@@austinreed7343 I still haven’t seen Raya, and I was just going on the characters that were talked about in the video
@@kandikidzora I always though they Shove Raya in there to “Improve” the Disney Princess IP
You should read more Calvin and Hobbes. I think it'll help you figure out how much you despise being marketed to.
Finally, someone openly acknowledging Frozen 2 is better than the first movie. It may be a mess but it's a FUN mess! For crying out loud, it even makes Olaf kinda fun. OLAF!!!
another brilliant critique, It shows why all the brilliant work is done by Indy studios now. I would love to see your take on a film like "I saw the TV glow"
That I feel needs its own deep dive.
@@agramuglia I am hoping you do one one day
i remember having the enchanted tales dvd as a kid, or more accurately i very vividly remember scratching the entire back of it so it would be unplayable and id never have to watch it again
Wish to me is biggest indicator of something is wrong. Wish, the MOVIE that was suppose to be the celebration of 100 years, would be given the time and effort to be special. Traditional animation coming back? Sure!
Now? It is possibly one of the most disappointing Disney films, and not in the “oh it really was good but no one saw it” or “oh it has flaws but my god there are some great choices here.” This ain’t Atlantis, this ain’t treasure planet.
When you have critics pointing out that there dosnt seem to be a cohesive story and that the ANIMATION looks wrong you know something is off. Wish seems to be more of a movie drama up by corporate executives with no talent in storytelling and desiring maximum profit. If the behind the scenes are correct, there really wasn’t a game plan per se in creating the movie.
It was around this time, that I learned about the Nimona movie reports, that Disney had the rights to the comic, that it COULD have made it, but it didn’t. I haven’t read the comic, but I know exactly WHY it didn’t. And it took a lesser known animation company to make an adaptation that audiences and fans loved. It was an embarrassment for Disney.
IMO, the problem is that people like you let the hype for it ruin your enjoyment of it.
I think Wish is a prime example of how hype can ruin a decent movie.
@@gamestation2690note how you call Wish decent, that's not even a compliment. It's mediocre at best and you think it should still be praised or something? Also, no audience hyped up Wish, Disney did, it's their own fault for marketing an abysmal product the way they did.
@@donovanfaust3227 Am I wrong for having a positive opinion about it?
@@bradhorowitz2765
It’s not even a 1940s package feature. It’s Chicken Little.
45:50 If you had the closed captions on while watching this episode of DuckTales, they don’t even refer to the Mouse by name proper. His lines are listed as having been spoken by “Mikey”.
I'd love to know how Frollo thought he was meant to take out a magical mouse.
I grew up with Fox and the Hound and it’s so sad. I wish more people knew about it because it’s such an important message too
The films from the Dark Age period are largely superior to the Renaissance films in my opinion. The Fox & The Hound is my favorite one from that period.
It's sad cause I loved Disney & it's 2D Animation growing up in the 90's. Now it's unrecognizable & it's monopolized many things. These current people have shown how out of touch they are. A lot of them seem to only be capable of writing narcissistic stories that self insert themselves and their own beliefs into anything they do. Even if they get to make something from a pre-existing beloved story, they cannot help themselves. They seem to be incapable of creating artistic creations that stray away from their own personal perspective, instead of showing they can lean heavily into escapism and pure storytelling.. They have proven time and time again that they are not capable of doing anything even remotely close to that.. (which is weird because that should be one of the most important attributes that a director or a developer or an actor has in order to be successful at their job....?)
How is there no one that will fire these people who seem like they openly dislike the fans, who seem to disrespect the consumers that were the ones who made their success in the first place..
There's now people like Kathleen Kennedy, She's a Perfect example of this awful trend where people keep getting these positions when they in no way deserve those positions. They are not hired based off talent or skill..? So we are seeing very expensive shows, movies, all so terribly designed, terribly managed, Awful writing, world design, character development, poor aesthetics. So much now feels creatively bankrupt and I really hope we all snap the heck out of it and get back to making better things.
The new Acolyte show comes off so cheap & tacky.. It's not just the terrible writing & terrible acting. The whole thing is a complete self centered power trip.. It's horrible set design, horrible world building, horrible camera work. It all makes this show feel so small. Like it's filmed in a single green screen room.. Grasping at awful CGI techniques to try and force any bit of a false reality into this mess of a show.
It's so far from Legitimate Star wars movies that it feels as if this whole thing is a big parody.. A very expensive parody..
Now Compare the "The Acolyte" as If you go back & watch "X-Men the Animated series" It was so well crafted. The story of the struggles of mutants having to deal with humanity was such a universally relatable storyline. Media back then was not afraid to face difficult topics head on. They found really unique ways to abstractly teach people life lessons. They touched on difficult situations & found intelligent ways to convey certain stories. Even when I was all grown up & rewatched it, it really felt like the story is crafted so well & executed at such a high level that anyone is capable of relating to it in someway or another. It's stuff like that, that we are deeply lacking nowadays. So much so that literal kid's cartoons from the 90's told deeper and more mature stories than most media nowadays.
Stuff used to take pride in who can find the most creative ways to convey certain things. Who can give the audience certain feelings without overly explaining it.
It used to not matter what kind of character, creature, species they were. What matters is that they found ways to convey artistic depictions of the Human condition. Creative ways that can connect us on a deeper level.
How companies work is at the top you have shareholders. Shareholders care only about the money going into their pockets so everything the company makes has to prioritiese money for them. The next level is the company executives who only care about brand recognition so everything the company makes has to prioritise money for the shareholders and selling the idea of the compay. And it keeps going like this going down the ladder until the smallest priority is us who want the product to be good.
Not gonna lie, I did a big ol' grin when you said 'Ursala's crazy sister' in a very normal tone while my brain was superimposing Sebastian saying it over top.
Yknow I was going through this video and kept thinking “wonder if the Tron franchise is gonna be mentioned considering its unfortunate path down into irrelevancy with its sequel and a cancelled tv show” AND LO AND BEHOLD IT HAPPENED.
Interesting thing about Tron and the last piece of media it had for a while, Tron Uprising: I’d argue there *wasn’t* a flattening effect happening in that show. In fact, it did the opposite and expanded on the characters and world, giving nuances and edges to this digital space by putting it center-stage. Tron has trauma, for Christ’s sake!
And guess what, they sucked at marketing it! I’m not saying the two are related, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
We had a copy of Belle’s Magical World in my house when I was a kid, and the only parts I really liked about it was a little toy that came with the VHS and the trailer for Castle in the Sky that played before the actual movie. I used to put it on just so I could watch the trailer, because it was small town Canada in the early 2000s and Miyazaki movies were hard to come by.
I’m a huge Disney fan. A “Disney Adult” some might say. And you hit the nail right on the head. Disney is at its best when its creatives are allowed to roam free and Disney (the brand) has had a stranglehold on its creators after its financial loss from its parks and theater releases during the COVID-19 pandemic. It’s been in decline for a while now but it always seemed to bounce back. All these losses tell me that someday we’re gonna finally get something good, hopefully 😅 I want to become an imagineer when I leave college and I know I’m probably not gonna be the person to revamp the whole system but I’d like to bring imagination to the forefront at Disney again (at least Disney parks)
I feel like enchanto and Indiana jones should be in epcot since they are both peefect for that theme park.
I would advocate for Indiana Jones to be at Hollywood Studios. Fits the movie theme beter.
Beauty and the beast Xmas would have become a classic to not miss for gen z if only it had the beast being a socially awkward crushing on belle dolt. Let’s remember he was transformed before he was even a teenager if the original film intro is trusted, so an actual adult with his first time crush on someone who is smart would have had him likely asking all about the townspeople and such.
Great video!! I loved every point you touched on, and I love that it came from a place of passion for the movies! Just a quick fact check tho- when animation was reused, it wasn’t used because they thought that specific piece of animation was better because it had already been used in a successful movie. They recycled animation to cut back on costs and time!
can't believe he didn't mention Frollo's cameo in the Disney villains anime boy dating simulator visual novel
......hang on what?
@@agramuglia Twisted Wonderland, not actually a dating sim, moreso a turn based battle/rhythm game/visual novel. there's gonna be an anime...someday. its a wild game. one of the recent events included Rollo, Frollo but a twink with a bowl cut
Twisted wonderland mentioned!!!! 🗣️🔥💯🗣️🔥💯🔥
As someone who visited Disneyland as a small child on the early 90s, nothing hss made me feel so comforted as them changing the treehouse back to Swiss Family Robinson. It's an incredibly atypical move for them at the moment and it's very nicely done.
Having watched the ENTIRE video of S&P emails Alex Hirsch had to read with his own two eyes, I have recognized he is a stronger man than I will ever be
Thank you so very much for pointing out the darker societal themes of FOX AND THE HOUND Ant! That one was among my personal favorite Disney movies growing up and a criminally underrated gem IMO!
I thankfully never saw the terrible sequel BTW…
Comparing beauty and the beast enchanted Christmas to Disney junior is insulting to actual Disney junior shows like sofia the first which also has the Disney princesses & is actually good