About the off-topicness, I agree that because a certain someone has been rather mean to me, that this is getting off-topic, but I want to resolve this. But originally it was about whether Mort fit the Disney studio (and the Disney essence : )).
Disney's Divinity, man, you are a really good person for stepping in and trying to help and defend someone like me who isn't really being helped by many other people, and who you sometimes even get mad at yourself, but are still helping when you think it's right! You're a great member. Thank you.
LySs wrote:I'm going to agree with Goliath.
Look, I find it hurtful sometimes when I hear negative comments about my favorite films.
But I don't make a big stink about it and ask "please take back what you said about Pocahontas, it really hurts me that you dissed my favorite Disney movie".
Well, you aren't me...
I will have to explain this in the other thread I bet but basically:
Someone said something that hurt me, so I asked someone if they may change their mind, while also providing an explanation that I thought might make them naturally re-think what they said and actually
want to change their mind considering the thoughts I provided. If they didn't, I would have just let it alone after that.
Dr Frankenollie, yes, those things are not fairy tales, but something you may not understood is I was talking about the things Disney has done so many times and that are in common with their work to find what it was about Disney that linked those things. Another aspect of Disney that is in common with those things is the idea of classic and fantastic stories. Legends and fairy tales are similar to each other. Fantasy and adventure go hand in hand. Hence things like the almost mythical Davy Crockett and Zorro. Though to be honest, and it's okay if you get mad because I didn't point this out, but I was focusing on what the main part of the Disney company usually did, and that is their Disney films, mainly their Disney Animated Classics, because that's how this started, it was bout the idea of the Disney Classics being said to feel like a movie by a different studio. I feel Disney's live-action television and films were a little looser with the Disney essence to appeal to wider audiences and experiment. But none of this matters because the topic of issue was the Disney classic feel which isn't the same as their television (no one calls them Disney classics that I know of).
What you say about animals makes sense, and I even agree to an extent, but that's not all there is. The animals are also indicative of what Disney is about specifically: things that are cute and innocent, part of nature, and yet, are fantasy (they can talk and act like humans that they couldn't really do in real life). Those are hallmarks of what Disney is.
As for how you treated me, using words like stupid or idiotic even to my posts is still
going to hurt me, so it's basically
the same as saying am those things. And of course, who a person is is always debatable but one conjecture is that what you do, even what you post, has to you, you know, have something to do with
who you are, so attacking and insulting my posts can also be attacking me and I'd say that's what you were doing.
Since I never did such a thing to you, and even apologized for the one time I said you were a stupid jerk which I clearly thought you were but still apologized anyway, if you really take back your apology, it just confirms to me what other people here like
DDivinity realize: that you are rather a jerk, and I will be very happy knowing that I am better than you in the specific way you are being this kind of jerk. I have not done the same mean things to you that you have done to me. Even you must admit "being melodramatic" in someone's
opinion is not the very same as calling someone's posts stupid which you did for
a fact.
But if you don't take back your apology, I will thank you, and think so much more highly of you.
