Disney's Renaissance

[Disney Princess Ariellen]

Disney will be back again but it needs to recapture its creativity a little bit. Probably in the a few years you'll see a boom again because children of the 80's and early 90's (i'd say people born between maybe 78 - 85) are going to be having kids and like the baby boomers they will take their kids to see Disney.

As someone born in '85, I just want to say that this post made me go , but not in a bad way. Just "dude...yeah, my generation and the people a few years older ARE probably going to be marrying and having kids and stuff soon." Though I can assure you...not I. Not yet.

[Lars Vermundsberget]

Those who include anything else have there own agenda they want to promote.

Agenda? Conspiration theories, anyone?

All right, let's cool down and not mess up the precious Lists. I'm not really the one to criticize anyone for "nitpicking". This is quite important.

I think we can get it straight that RR is not on the list of Disney's "Classic Animated Features". That list counts 44 titles and it may seem like it's going to stay that way.

But RR is much more a part of the history of Disney animation's renaissance than its non-inclusion on the list seems to suggest. I'm not sure if anyone said much beyond that.

"Renaissance" would mean "rebirth" in straight English or in this case even "come-back".

As for the Golden Age of Disney, that was half a century earlier.

[Prince Eric]

We're talking about what films are included in the Golden Age of Disney. To answer the guys questions, they are the animated musicals from 1989-1999. Those who include anything else have there own agenda they want to promote.

From what I've seen, there are people that have different opinions on which films should and should not be included. There is no specific "list" of which film was part of and should be recognized as a "golden goose" for the Disney company. It's all a matter of personal perception, opinion, and speculation.

Therefore, you say the Golden Age of Disney are those that are Disney musicals between 1989-1999. That doesn't mean everyone believes that Disney produced its best work between those exact years....there is bound to be some deviation.

If you want to get into years and all, I think this "Golden Age of Disney" happened between 1988 and 1995 when Katz, Eisner and Wells were all working together and created the following films: WFRR, Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, and Pocahontas.

That is my perception of the Golden Age. It may not be yours, it may not be Escapays, Timon/Pumbaa Fan's, Maerj's, or whoever else is replying to this thread to give their two cents. It is comments like "Those who include anything else have their own agenda they want to promote" that irk me.


No more for tonight...I have a long day tomorrow. Cheers. _Roger

Oh my goodness, you really caused me to have a revelation, especially since everything you said was repeated from my post.

Everyone has their own opinions of the Renaissance, but the rule of thumb for historians is that the Disney musicals of the 90's are what is considered the true Renaissance and third "Golden Age" of Disney animated features.

If you want to add your personal little favorite, by all means do so. You have proven me correct.

[Maerj]

From what I've seen, there are people that have different opinions on which films should and should not be included. There is no specific "list" of which film was part of and should be recognized as a "golden goose" for the Disney company. It's all a matter of personal perception, opinion, and speculation.

Therefore, you say the Golden Age of Disney are those that are Disney musicals between 1989-1999. That doesn't mean everyone believes that Disney produced its best work between those exact years....there is bound to be some deviation.

If you want to get into years and all, I think this "Golden Age of Disney" happened between 1988 and 1995 when Katz, Eisner and Wells were all working together and created the following films: WFRR, Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, and Pocahontas.

That is my perception of the Golden Age. It may not be yours, it may not be Escapays, Timon/Pumbaa Fan's, Maerj's, or whoever else is replying to this thread to give their two cents. It is comments like "Those who include anything else have their own agenda they want to promote" that irk me.


No more for tonight...I have a long day tomorrow. Cheers. _Roger

Oh my goodness, you really caused me to have a revelation, especially since everything you said was repeated from my post.

Everyone has their own opinions of the Renaissance, but the rule of thumb for historians is that the Disney musicals of the 90's are what is considered the true Renaissance and third "Golden Age" of Disney animated features.

If you want to add your personal little favorite, by all means do so. You have proven me correct.

I'm just impressed and overwhelmed by your humbleness, seriously. Good job! If you had written this response differently, people would have misconstrued it as being pompous instead of being enlightening and intellectual.

[Prince Eric]

Maerj = Instigator

Prince Eric = So Above That

[Maerj]

Instigator? Believe me, you don't need anyone to instigate for you. Afterall, I was just paying you a compliment, because I am so above that too, girlfriend! ::snaps fingers::

[Isidour]

I don`t want to be mean, but we are getting way off topic

I mean, the main reason to post in here is to discuss about the Disney`s golden age.
I mean, if we talk about the first it would be from Snowhite to Jungle Book because it was something really magical in this movies, something in common and this was Walt`s direction

The second golden age we could say that begins with "Who framed Roger Rabit" because it was something different than "Pete`s Dragon"--or however is called--but generaly we say that the second golden age starts with "The Little mermaid" and it includes the very knowed "Beauty and The Beast", "Aladdin" and "The Lion King" why? because they got something that Roger Rabit didn`t and is many many catchy songs.

Yes, in "The Hunckback of Notre Dame" wasn`t included because for some people it was kind of darker...and yes, it was a little but here we`re talking of a story of lust, crime, death and even we could talk about some madness. It`s very hard to do a story like this suitable for children don`t you think?

Pocahontas wasn good, but nos as good to be classified into the Golden age, IMO because since TLM, Disney started to use more the CGI on some effects like the lava, the famous scene of the vallroom(spelling) or the stampede of hundreds of animals

In Pocahontas some waited for something really cool with the graphics and all, but some feeled that the Disney`s quick grow had suffered a stop talking in animation, becuse even when they used really nice effects like the one of the mist, the "colors" of the wind or the talking tree

since nothing is really stated or is a rule to say "Tis movie started the Golden era and this is the last one" we can only talk about our personal opinion based on some possible facts that could gie us the reason, but we should ask to Eisner before he left Disney which movie ended this..but the most that we could get from him is a finger

So please, who cares if this or that movie is or isn`t categorized on the Golden era ones, because all Disney movies are good familiar and specialy charming movies. From the stories of princesses to the stories of heroes; from stories on the deep sea to stories on a forest and yes...even the stories of weird cows have their "special" charming stuff...somethimes very "special"...

[corrwill]

In my opinion, it all started with Roger Rabbit & Oliver and Company.

1988 was the test phase that got the ball rolling. If you recall, Eisner wanted to bring back the Disney animated musical and the Disney Action Adventure.

Oliver was the first out the gate as well as Roger. Both did well for the time period and from that they expanded into Little Mermaid and Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. We all know what happended in the later years

I also think it's important to put The Rescures Down Under in the Renaissance. It might not have been a musical, but you have to recall that it bridged the gap between colored cels and CAPS.

It helped push the limits of how charaters are colored and gave us that great color fade effect that has been used a ton since such as zazu's beak, simba and rafiki's nose and the beautiful blush on our heroic princesses.

[stitcharielbeast]

In my opinion, it all started with Roger Rabbit & Oliver and Company.

1988 was the test phase that got the ball rolling. If you recall, Eisner wanted to bring back the Disney animated musical and the Disney Action Adventure.

Oliver was the first out the gate as well as Roger. Both did well for the time period and from that they expanded into Little Mermaid and Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. We all know what happended in the later years

I also think it's important to put The Rescures Down Under in the Renaissance. It might not have been a musical, but you have to recall that it bridged the gap between colored cels and CAPS.

It helped push the limits of how charaters are colored and gave us that great color fade effect that has been used a ton since such as zazu's beak, simba and rafiki's nose and the beautiful blush on our heroic princesses.

"officially" the renaissance was started when The Little Mermaid and Beauty adn the Beast became so wildly popular that people ranked it among the great classics like Snow White.

The Little Mermaid and The Great Mouse Detective also used CAPS before the Rescuers did. and The Rescuers Down Under wasn't as popular and legendary as TLM or b&tB

Roger Rabbit should not be categorized inside the animation renaissance since it was partially live action, so it does not count. People were interested more ont he "how did they do that?" part or the special effects rather than the story.

If we're gonna talk about rolling the balls for the renaissance it woud have started with "Fox and the Hound" which showcased the new batch of animators who later on started the renaissance.

The renaissance started with "The Little Mermaid"....period.

[stitcharielbeast]

it's good that Pocahontas is considered part of the renaissance, becasue it really is.

I don't agree for that, but I'll save the argument for a later time

Whenever I think of the Disney Rennaisance, I just think of the four films-little mermaid, beauty and the beast, aladdin and lion king. Thats it.

although the "big 4" kick started the renaissance, Pocahontas, Hunchback, Mulan, Hercules and Tarzan, while not as wildly popular, still carried the torch of the renaissance satisfactorily just as Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland did during the second golden age. While they weren't "fantastic" they were still great and are still part of the renaissance. The renaissance ended with the failures of Atlantis and Treasure Planet which sowed the seeds for a new dark age in disney animation (with the exception of Lilo and Stitch)

[castleinthesky]

although the "big 4" kick started the renaissance, Pocahontas, Hunchback, Mulan, Hercules and Tarzan, while not as wildly popular, still carried the torch of the renaissance satisfactorily just as Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland did during the second golden age. While they weren't "fantastic" they were still great and are still part of the renaissance. The renaissance ended with the failures of Atlantis and Treasure Planet which sowed the seeds for a new dark age in disney animation (with the exception of Lilo and Stitch)

Well I disagree. Lilo and Stitch was the worst of the new Dark age.

[Isidour]

although the "big 4" kick started the renaissance, Pocahontas, Hunchback, Mulan, Hercules and Tarzan, while not as wildly popular, still carried the torch of the renaissance satisfactorily just as Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland did during the second golden age. While they weren't "fantastic" they were still great and are still part of the renaissance. The renaissance ended with the failures of Atlantis and Treasure Planet which sowed the seeds for a new dark age in disney animation (with the exception of Lilo and Stitch)

Well I disagree. Lilo and Stitch was the worst of the new Dark age.

Or home on the range...

[Timon/Pumbaa fan]

Roger Rabbit should not be categorized inside the animation renaissance since it was partially live action, so it does not count. People were interested more ont he "how did they do that?" part or the special effects rather than the story.

I was fine with everything you've said until you said, "People were interested more on the "how did they do that"?"

You're telling me people weren't interested in cartoons telling sex jokes! Much better than any thing in that stupid Mermaid movie!

So overall there really is know "official" list. Some people consider The Little Mermaid the start of the renaissance because it was the first full lenght animated movie to get succuessful since The Jungle Book. However some people(like myself) would consider WFRR to start with the renaissance because it saved animation! And other might want to include other films like, "The Black Cauldron, "THe Fox and the Hound" or "The Great Mouse Detective". Some will include just the fab-four, some will include all of the films from the 90's and there are probably many other lists I forgot to mention.

So overall I'm not saying your wrong that Mermaid wasn't the start of renaissance, however there is no official list and it has actually turned into an argument of opinions so you can't say the Little Mermaid is officially the start of the renaissance.