How do Disney label their films?

darth_deetoo · Post by **darth_deetoo** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 1:47 pm

Oh, and there are some very nasty comments flying around about Disney UK, claiming they couldn't care less and don't have a clue. Maybe my comments were made with the subtlety of a sledgehammer, but hey, I just got a bit fed up of the bluntness of everyone else, and responded in kind.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:30 pm

darth_deetoo, I think you are misunderstanding us. We are angry at Disney for placing "The Wild" in the Classics canon not because it's bad, but because it's not made by Disney. It could have been a masterpiece, capable of sweeping away all of the Academy Awards, but we would still be saying the same thing.

I haven't seen the movie yet, and I'd like to rent it at least. Oh...and "The Wild" may have a 17% rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes (if I'm not mistaken), but Roger Ebert - an acclaimed critic - gave it 3 stars. So it may actually be pretty good, if not a very good movie, regardless of what the critics say.

reyquila · Post by **reyquila** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:31 pm

Julian Carter wrote:darth_deetoo, I think you are misunderstanding us. We are angry at Disney for placing "The Wild" in the Classics canon not because it's bad, but because it's not made by Disney. It could have been a masterpiece, capable of sweeping away all of the Academy Awards, but we would still be saying the same thing.

I haven't seen the movie yet, and I'd like to rent it at least. Oh...and "The Wild" may have a 17% rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes (if I'm not mistaken), but Roger Ebert - an acclaimed critic - gave it 3 stars. So it may actually be pretty good, if not a very good movie, regardless of what the critics say.

Watch the movie and then, only then you can talk about it.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 2:52 pm

reyquila wrote:Watch the movie and then, only then you can talk about it.

For the final time! I am not critiscizing the movie! I am critiscizing the DVD release, for classing the film with the "Walt Disney Classics".

reyquila · Post by **reyquila** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 4:42 pm

Julian Carter wrote:
reyquila wrote:Watch the movie and then, only then you can talk about it.
For the final time! I am not critiscizing the movie! I am critiscizing the DVD release, for classing the film with the "Walt Disney Classics".

That's a marketing decision. Remember, we are not talking about the gospels here. They label the movie anyway the want to. You either buy or not. In your case, not....again.

goofystitch · Post by **goofystitch** » Sun Sep 17, 2006 5:01 pm

I feel that James D Farrow summed up this whole argument when he said this:

I think it is false advertising. But I guess if you can get away with it.... Now, if Ford Motor bought cars made by Honda or Toyota and slapped a Ford label on the grill they would probably end up in court but US laws have always been selective applied. So it's buyer beware - nothing is sacred anymore.

I haven't seen "The Wild" yet. I'll probably rent it tomorrow. But here are the facts. "The Wild" was not animated by ANY division that Disney owns. It's not WDFA, Disney Toon Studios, Pixar, Touchstone, anything under the massive empire that is Buena Vista. Now, since I can remember (18 years ago) Disney has been numbering their animated films. Growing up, I was often confused when I heard films like "A Goofy Movie" weren't part of the classics line, and I didn't understand why seeing as Goofy is my favorite Disney character and that is a personal favorite of mine. However, when it was explained to me that the reason is because it was not made by Walt Disney Feature Animation, I then realised how Disney determined what was "classic" and what wasn't. Disney uses the term "classic" very loosly and in the case of numbering their films, one shouldn't take the word to mean something that has been around for a while and that the general public loves. Every animated film that has come out of WDFA is NOT a classic. It is just a marketing tool to get people to want to own them all. In the early 90's, when a Disney animated film was released, it was an occasion. This is not the case anymore. In recent years, the Disney company has been doing a lot of things wrong. They are trying to turn themselves around and get back on track. However, I personally feel that since people have devoted their time and money to collecting all of the titles in the classic line, that it is very wrong on Disney's part to slap the title onto "The Wild." Reason? It's not really a Disney movie. Let's say that C.O.R.E. gets bought by Warner Bros. and with it goes all of it's properties, "The Wild" being one of them. Is Disney then going to come out and say "Meet The Robinsons is no longer the 47th classic, but is now the 46th. We didn't make The Wild and we no longer own it and we don't want a gap. All subsequent films should have 1 subtracted from it's number and that is it's new number." That would be just crazy. In my opinion, it is blatant false advertising and it is horrible of Disney's U.K. distribution team to do this. Again, it's like Ford slapping their blue oval on a Honda.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 4:31 am

That was perfectly explained goofystitch.

So, will we be convincing reyquila now?

reyquila · Post by **reyquila** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:12 am

Here are the facts: They own the company so they can label any movie any way they want to. You either like or not, but to consider it a blasphemy is part of the sick purism that forgets one tiny detail. Disney is a company and they are out to make tons of money. How? By the selling their products. This is not a religion, this people are working with an art form with lucrative purposes. (That's OK for me). Obviouly, you guys are not helping them much with the makking money goal.. That's why I'm more important to them than you. Yes, I'm a valued customer and you... well you type very well.

PS. Note the lack of the word opinion.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:11 am

reyquila wrote:They own the company.

No they don't.

Lars Vermundsberget · Post by **Lars Vermundsberget** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 6:48 am

reyquila wrote:PS. Note the lack of the word opinion.

Now what's the point of that?

Anyway, as for the "Classics" - we'll just have to live with those labels. Disney marketing will label anything a "Classic" if it'll make it sell. The only Disney DVD "label" with much "integrity" left would be the "Walt Disney Treasures", in my opinion. We can come up with other definitions of "The 44" if we need it for our peace of mind.

darth_deetoo · Post by **darth_deetoo** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 11:39 am

The thing that annoys me is not it's status as a classic, or even the merits of the film, I've already discussed that. What I think is an outrage is that some people have posted some very suspect remarks about the people who work for Disney UK. Some have as good as accused them of being incompetent, not having a clue what they are doing, and not caring. Now I'm not saying there aren't necessarily issues with the corporate management, which is no doubt where this labelling decision has come from, but if I were a Disney UK employee who happened onto this site and read those remarks, I'd be very upset. I'm sure there are Disney employees who frequent this site, and just consider how upset you were by my comments - now rethink your comments!

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:27 pm

darth_deetoo, I think you have a point. I just want to ask you one thing though. Are you a Disney employee? Because I'm getting a really strong suspicion that you just might be!

And you would have been hiding your real identity from us all this time.

Just kidding. Oh well, partially kidding, as you could be a Disney employee; it's not impossible. lol

Um, so...are you?

goofystitch · Post by **goofystitch** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:36 pm

reyquila wrote:

Obviouly, you guys are not helping them much with the makking money goal.. That's why I'm more important to them than you. Yes, I'm a valued customer and you... well you type very well.

Ok. That made me laugh a little. I go to Disney World every year for at least 10 days. I'm a member of the Disney Vacation Club. I'm also a member of the DMC and spend around $60 there every month. My family owns thousands of dollars worth of Disney stock. I've got platinum rewards status through the Disney Store. I own around 75% of what Disney has put on DVD, and what I don't own was mostly because they are for preschoolers. I haven't seen "The Wild" yet. I'm going to rent the film today AND if I like it, will buy it when it is released to the DMC. I'm giving Disney my money for their films directly without the middle man. You want to tell me that Disney doesn't value me again?

I simply think it is wrong to classify "The Wild" as the 46th classic.

darth_deetoo · Post by **darth_deetoo** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:36 pm

No, I'm not - I'm just a fan.

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:51 pm

darth_deetoo wrote:No, I'm not - I'm just a fan.

Oh, all right then.

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:21 pm

reyquila wrote:I'm more important to them than you. Yes, I'm a valued customer and you... well you type very well.

Congratulations, reyquila. With that one line, you've managed to insult everyone at this board who has freedom of choice in where they choose to spend their money.

Seriously, you need to get over yourself. You're not the only one in the world to own a boatload of animated Disney DVDs. There are likely hundreds more out in the world, who have far larger collections than you. Disney may bloody well value them more than they value you.

And if, for a moment, I can indulge myself in some castmember pride and some forum immaturity, let me just say this: DISNEY VALUES ME MORE THAN THEY VALUE YOU BECAUSE THEY PAY ME TO WORK IN THEIR OVERHEATED AND OVERPOPULATED PARK EVERY SUMMER.

Okay, enough with the castmember pride.

And I still say they should produce or at least distribute under their name some animated porn just to see if reyquila buys it.

Escapay

darth_deetoo · Post by **darth_deetoo** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:28 pm

Can we all drop this please. This is turning nasty.

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:39 pm

darth_deetoo wrote:Can we all drop this please. This is turning nasty.

Wouldn't be the first time.

But I feel I should stop because anything anyone says to reyquila falls on deaf ears.

Still, to sum things up and hopefully someone will finally understand...

CORE is neither owned nor operated by Disney.

Disney merely has a financial agreement to distribute its films. Nothing else.

A statement like "A film produced by CORE but distributed by Disney is actually a Disney Film" is incorrect.

Therefore, Disney UK branding "The Wild" as Disney's 46th Animated Classic is false advertising as it promotes it as a Disney film, not a Disney-distributed CORE film, regardless of the confusing status of what's supposed to fit in the DAC canon.

If it were "Disney Presents a CORE Production of 'The Wild' ", then it would be correct.

Blatantly leaving out any credit for CORE and Disney claiming the film as their own is simply dishonest, REGARDLESS if it's a good or bad film, and certainly regardless if someone chooses whether or not to own the film.

Escapay

Jules · Post by **Jules** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:42 pm

Yes! Yess! YESSSS!!

Escapay! I love you! I love you so much! You had me jumping up and down on my chair with satisfaction!!

darth_deeto, I understand what you mean, but I am SO GLAD someone has finally delivered reyquila a crushing reply.

2099net · Post by **2099net** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 1:49 pm

Escapay wrote:CORE is neither owned nor operated by Disney.

Disney merely has a financial agreement to distribute its films. Nothing else.

A statement like "A film produced by CORE but distributed by Disney is actually a Disney Film" is incorrect.

Therefore, Disney UK branding "The Wild" as Disney's 46th Animated Classic is false advertising as it promotes it as a Disney film, not a Disney-distributed CORE film, regardless of the confusing status of what's supposed to fit in the DAC canon.

If it were "Disney Presents a CORE Production of 'The Wild' ", then it would be correct.

Blatantly leaving out any credit for CORE and Disney claiming the film as their own is simply dishonest, REGARDLESS if it's a good or bad film, and certainly regardless if someone chooses whether or not to own the film.

Escapay

I hate to be [Blackadder]Mr Picky, the most picky man in Picksville, Pickyvania[/Blackadder] but...

How do you know how much input Disney had into The Wild? IMDB (not the most accurate of sources, granted) lists Disney as a production company ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0405469/companycredits ) while they don't for say, Valiant ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361089/companycredits ) meaning Disney probably has some financial input and ownership of The Wild (both the film and the characters). They probably have as much co-ownership as they did of Pixar's films and characters.

But as I said its all pointless anyhow. Disney US had simply dropped the rules, and other territories have changed the rules. How do Disney pick their Platinum titles? Well the take the top 10 money grossing... oh, sorry, that's wrong, because they changed the rules when they added 4 more. But nobody complained when the meaningless Platinum label was expanded.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

How do Disney label their films?