Favorite teaser trailer

[Disney Duster]

Then I guess they could do whatever they wanted, making R-rated and X films and not give a crap about being Disney or what Walt would want, huh?

Yes they could. But no, they shouldn't.

And yes, there is a difference between something not being Disney because it isn't owned by them and something not being Disney because it doesn't feel like/capture the Disney qualities Walt set forth.

[Goliath]

In the 70's/80's animators at WDFA kept asking "What would Walt do?" and tried to make "Robin Hood" "The AristoCats" etc. films that Walt would have made. The result of so much self-doubt and trying to live in the past? The films "Walt would have made" ended up stale - a little too familiar.

But they hit it out of the park with a beautiful film like The Rescuers (1977) and tried to cover new grounds with The Black Cauldron (1985). And even though Robin Hood (1973) follows a clichéd formula and has far too much recycled animation, it is undoubtely the funniest Disney film of them all. The Great Mouse Detective (1986) was not a traditional musical and tried to be darker than others (a character gets eaten by a cat; another character gets thrown out of a zeppelin; the scene in the bar with the female mice performing a striptease). Of course there were boring, uninspired, stale films (The Aristocats, Fox and the Hound), but it wasn't *all* bad.

I agree with everything else you said --couldn't have said it better, myself. Succes arguing with brick walls!

[Goliath]

[...] was not something Walt would have wanted or approved of.

But I couldn't imagine Walt sitting through Lilo & Stitch and approving.

That's what Walt wanted,

And it is more likely that Walt would think so, either.

OH, FOR FUCK'S SAKE! Would you PLEASE stop with the never-ending "Walt would have wanted..." already! You don't KNOW what he would have wanted. You aren't him! You didn't know him! Yet you pretend you are and you did... ALL the time! You can't speak for him! And you're driving EVERYBODY on this board crazy with it! So knock it off already.

[Neal]

Oh DisneyDuster, there is no point in ever trying to talk to you. Brick wall, indeed.

Walt is long gone. Get over it. I respect the man. I admire his legacy. But he is dead. That's that. I'm not going to expect a company to continue to try to emulate or imitate the style of a man who passed on decades ago.

When Hayao Miyazaki dies, Studio Ghibli will only flounder if they continually say "What would Hayao do?"

When Shigeru Miyamato dies Nintendo will grind to a halt if they keep repeating the mantra "What would Shigeru do?"

A company lives on after its founder dies. That company needs to respect the legacy of its founder, but also adapt to the times. Walt moved on from animation in his lifetime. So all these "What would Walt do" arguments are ridiculous - he had grown tired of animated projects, he passed decades ago, and if he didn't he would still not be here today.

Walt would be dead today no matter what. It's time to move on from the mentality that it's "Walt's company" because it's not anymore. It's the company Walt founded, but it's not still his company. Now it is the company of many other talented, smart individuals who do not need to be stuck in the past. It's their time to shine and re-invent the Disney wheel. It's unfair to them to constantly say "What would Walt have done" because each of those artists is their own person with their own ideas. They are not the re-incarnations of Walt Disney.

I'd take more Stitches than more Snow Whites - does that make me not a true Disney fan? No. It means that after 50 movies, I'm tired of princesses, fantasy lands, and fairy tales. I want more original films. So bring on Reboot Ralph and I hope for Fraidy Cat - because we need something new.

There is a far cry from making X-rated, R-Rated animated films and "Lilo & Stitch" - but you, the ever melo-dramatic, always jump straight to the extremes.

You continue to insinuate that Disney must stick to making fairy tale and fantasy films or else it's not Disney. You say you don't because you like "101 Dalmatians" and "The Jungle Book" - but really the films you always hark back on are the princess fantasies.

A Disney film is defined by character design (more or less, there is a Disney character look - that is visible in both their CGI and hand drawn films). A Disney film has a certain "heart" (hate to quote Lassetter, but he's right), certain themes of love, understanding, and bonding. That is what makes a Disney film. And whether it's a mute flying elephant or a wild-child Alien, those themes can still be present and visible.

That is why Stitch is a Disney film. I made it sound like a laundry list of specifics, but that could be said for your beloved "Cinderella" or any of the forever-God Walt's films. We both know the themes are not just a laundry list.

But themes of being 'different' (Stitch and Cinderella were both outcasts), making friends (Stitch with Lilo, Cinderella with the mice), overcoming obstacles (Cinderella proving the slipper was hers, Stitch learning to be good and convincing the United Intergalatic Federation of it) - the core Disney themes were present in both films.

A Disney film can be loud or quiet, feature brash characters or meek ones - as long as the Disney themes are there, it is a Disney film.

And therefore, once again, "Lilo & Stitch" is in every way a Disney film and I am no less a Disney fan for saying it. You do not know Walt Disney. You never did. Never will. He is long passed and you should not speak for him. For all you know, he may have loved "Lilo & Stitch" - or maybe not - I don't know, either, but like Escapay said - do not speak for him because you do not know. It's more insulting as a fan for you to speak for him than it is for me to like Stitch.

[Goliath]

@ Neal:

You're right. Lilo & Stitch is the most 'Walt Disney'-like film of the last decade. It had a lot more in common with Walt's films than the cold, formulaic, reptitive Princess and the Frog.

[Neal]

For sure, Lilo's unconditional love for the most unlovable being imaginable definitely warmed my heart more than the banter between Naveen and Tiana.

Not to say TPatF was bad, but, that was definitely a film that tried to follow a 'laundry list' and ended up being just too slow-moving.

I liked Mama Odie and the songs, but as I left the theater I initially thought "that was kind of boring..."

I hope Tangled is a little more fresh.

[singerguy04]

It's hard to imagine it now, but I think we forget how inventive and unusual Walt's films were to the public when they first came out. Walt was constantly looking forward and using new innovations in every aspect of his films including the story telling. Walt also used tons and tons of pop culture elements throughout each of the films while he was alive. In a way, I've always felt that the studio does bad when it's trying to look back instead of moving forward.

IMO Lilo and Stitch is the most "Disney" film of the 00's. I don't even think the characters are too much because they represent the times. I work with kids who've grown up in the system (child protection and so on) and can't rely on their families for anything. I appreciate Lilo for actually representing them in a good way. It's practically dead on and still positive.

Now I like the Princess films and being a performer I adore the broadway musical films, but no one can argue that L&S wasn't successful. Personally I think Disney needs to make films with more originality to stay alive. What is more "Disney" than that!?

I honestly cannot understand why this is even an argument to begin with.

[Jules]

Then I guess they could do whatever they wanted, making R-rated and X films and not give a crap about being Disney or what Walt would want, huh?

I would seriously get an orgasm if Walt Disney Animation Studios made an R-rated film. It's totally possible, many people have claimed such a film can be released under the Touchstone banner.

There's nothing wrong with it. On the contrary, it will allow the artists breathing space and increased story terrain. I'm hoping it happens one day. I'm not expecting it to any time soon ... but it just might.

[Margos]

I would seriously get an orgasm if Walt Disney Animation Studios made an R-rated film. It's totally possible, many people have claimed such a film can be released under the Touchstone banner.

Please, Julian, not until they release on DVD/Blu! You don't want to end up like PeeWee Herman, do you!?

[Escapay]

Then I guess they could do whatever they wanted, making R-rated and X films and not give a crap about being Disney or what Walt would want, huh?

You know that's not what I mean, so don't even try.

Yes they could. But no, they shouldn't.

That's not up to you to decide.

And yes, there is a difference between something not being Disney because it isn't owned by them and something not being Disney because it doesn't feel like/capture the Disney qualities Walt set forth.

Yes, but you're missing my point.

Regardless of the qualities, it is still Disney. The company wouldn't put their name on it unless they believed it was worth putting their name on it.

Half the time, the whole "does it capture the spirit of Walt?" and other stuff sounds more like bullsh!t that Disney "fans" try to incorporate into their arguments in order to justify (to them) that something was worth the Disney name and their rabid devotion.

And Neal gets another and .

albert

[Disneyphile]

Okay guys, if you want to discuss other subjects, please create separate threads for them. This thread is for talking about your favorite teaser trailers. Thanks.

[Luke]

I know some people rag on Pixar's marketing, but I've gotten a big kick out of their trailers, especially on their "older" films. Off the top of my head, I recall liking <i>The Incredibles</i>' teaser best and having watched <i>Toy Story 2</i>'s the most.

[Disney Duster]

You can't exactly say what makes a film Disney.

If you could, then other studios would just take that explanation and follow it and they could be Disney too. I guess the best way to describe it how it feels, Disney does create magical, heart-warming, and even occasionally dramatic and dark feelings, and movies are all about how you feel. But whatever it is that made the core of the Disney films, I feel Lilo & Stitch missed it, which isn't surprising when it was all one wacky guy's idea, a guy who draws lots of big-boobed Hawaiian girls. Freddy Moore girls they are not.

Lilo & Stitch felt like something Walt would have not just not liked but been apalled by. Stitch just suddenly acs all nice. I didn't even believe him when he "learned to be good". It felt forced after what he was in the beginning. Maybe it's like forcing the un-Disney Chris Sanders' idea to be Disney...maybe that's why Bolt turned out the way it did too.

At least you see there is a Disney look, Neal. Though Lilo looked like a muppet. And know, I don't agree with Disney buying the Muppets or Marvel or even Pixar. Disney set up their own record studio in the past. Disney needs to be Disney not buy these other things...

[ajmrowland]

he didnt suddenly act all nice.

[yamiiguy]

You can't exactly say what makes a film Disney.

A good thing to check is that little logo that goes before the film. If it says Disney that's usually a good marker to whether or not the film is...Disney

[Super Aurora]

You can't exactly say what makes a film Disney.

If you could, then other studios would just take that explanation and follow it and they could be Disney too. I guess the best way to describe it how it feels, Disney does create magical, heart-warming, and even occasionally dramatic and dark feelings, and movies are all about how you feel. But whatever it is that made the core of the Disney films, I feel Lilo & Stitch missed it, which isn't surprising when it was all one wacky guy's idea, a guy who draws lots of big-boobed Hawaiian girls. Freddy Moore girls they are not.

Lilo & Stitch felt like something Walt would have not just not liked but been apalled by. Stitch just suddenly acs all nice. I didn't even believe him when he "learned to be good". It felt forced after what he was in the beginning. Maybe it's like forcing the un-Disney Chris Sanders' idea to be Disney...maybe that's why Bolt turned out the way it did too.

At least you see there is a Disney look, Neal. Though Lilo looked like a muppet. And know, I don't agree with Disney buying the Muppets or Marvel or even Pixar. Disney set up their own record studio in the past. Disney needs to be Disney not buy these other things...

LOL WAT?!

btw you still haven't reply to my pm.

[Escapay]

Lilo & Stitch felt like something Walt would have not just not liked but been apalled by.

I originally had a whole rewritten version of "Don't Cry For Me, Argentina" written entitled "Don't speak for Walt Disney, Duster" (similar to my "Don't Speak for Disney Fans, Marky" from a few months ago). But I figured beyond that title, the rest would be redundant and slightly hurtful, whereas the one sentence is really some advice that you need to heed.

So...

Don't speak for Walt Disney, Duster.

As for teaser trailers, I like the Finding Nemo one. At the time, I didn't know that the Pixar teaser trailers were specially-made and that the sequence wouldn't be in the film. When I was watching Finding Nemo for the first time, I kept waiting for the scene in the trailer to appear and was surprised when it didn't.

albert

[MagicMirror]

Both Neal and Escapay get :pink:s from me! We shouldn't confuse respecting Walt with inbreeding.

I've got to put in a vote for the Snow White trailer, which mostly consists of a rather dapper-looking Walt introducing the dwarfs to the viewer:

'Last but not least is Dopey. He's nice but... sorta silly.'

[Escapay]

Both Neal and Escapay get :pink:s from me! We shouldn't confuse respecting Walt with inbreeding.

Aw, thanks, MagicMirror! Glad to see you posting again too!

I've got to put in a vote for the Snow White trailer, which mostly consists of a rather dapper-looking Walt introducing the dwarfs to the viewer:

'Last but not least is Dopey. He's nice but... sorta silly.'

I forgot about that one. I like how he describes Doc: "This pompous-looking individual is Doc, self-appointed leader of the group."

I always thought that Sleepy should've been the leader. He's the one that always says the most common-sense things ("Maybe the Queen's got Snow White", and it was his suggestion to build her a bed in the deleted scene.)

albert

[Goliath]

I forgot about that one. I like how he describes Doc: "This pompous-looking individual is Doc, self-appointed leader of the group."

I always thought that Sleepy should've been the leader. He's the one that always says the most common-sense things ("Maybe the Queen's got Snow White", and it was his suggestion to build her a bed in the deleted scene.)

Good observation. In that way, the movie is a lot like real life: good people with common sense never get to lead; instead, the world is ruled by pompous, self-appointed leaders who don't know left from right.

Wow, I never knew Snow White was such a deep political satire.