DVDizzy Forum

Perhaps at the time, however, with all the Mickey shorts - Walt did not see the necessity of it? He didn't want to overwhelm an audience used to Mickey in short films with an hour+ film.

It may have had nothing to do with how 'special' Mickey was: it was a matter of exposure/overexposure.

Similar to how the original Pooh began as a film, was chopped into bite-size featurettes and then later re-assembled into a film.

There hasn't been a new Mickey short in years, and the only new video content comes from Mickey Mouse Clubhouse.

Pooh has been more exposed in the last decade than Mickey.

I think it is quite possible that if Walt had remained alive long enough and had scaled back the production of Mickey shorts, he would eventually have agreed to a feature when overexposure was no longer a concern.

'Winnie the Pooh' Talkback
http://www.cartoonbrew.com/feature-film ... kback.html

Floyd Norman wrote:It’s not whether I see a future for Disney 2D animated features. Only Disney can answer that question and there are indications the answer is, yes.

Anonymous wrote:What's on the drawing board for hand-drawn animation for Disney? The 'Mickey Mouse' animated film that has been mentioned?

Floyd Norman wrote:Hmmmm! How did you know about Mickey?

Anonymous wrote:Somebody I know told me that the 'Mickey' feature’s story was in the planning stages.

Okay, seriously. A Mickey Mouse feature HAS to happen! It's almost necessary!

Disney Duster wrote:Yea well I say that if Walt never made Mickey in a full-length feature and Mickey is ultra ultra special maybe you should think about that.

Walt Disney WANTED to make a feature film with Mickey! The 'Mickey and the beanstalk' segment was intended to be a feature film, but the story turned out too flimsy! Got that? "This is what Walt would have wanted"!

(According to J. Michael Barrier's Hollywood Cartoons.)

And your other remarks: well, it's better I don't answer them. Saying what I think of it would certainly get me suspended.

*Edited for typo's and to add source.

Hot Summer Derby
http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... derby.html

Steve Hulett wrote:The Disney animators who do hand-drawn stuff inform me that another "traditional" animated feature is in early development, but management hasn't yet decided whether to green-light another one or not.

I think that the hand-drawn feature that's in development is the Mickey Mouse feature and the "other" hand-drawn feature that has yet to be greenlit is the Musker & Clements film.

Goliath wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:Yea well I say that if Walt never made Mickey in a full-length feature and Mickey is ultra ultra special maybe you should think about that.

Walt Disney WANTED to make a feature film with Mickey! The 'Mickey and the beanstalk' segment was intended to be a feature film, but the story turned out to flimsy! Got that? "This is what Walt would have wanted"!

Oh lord I can't wait to see the response to this.

Duster, this is true, just in case you aren't aware. Walt had every intention to make Mickey and the Beanstalk a feature. There are even storyboards from deleted scenes that would have made the story longer. But the war forced him to combine it with Bongo as a package film.

Your argument of "since Walt didn't want..." is completely invalid.

Well, unless Walt was alive, then we'll never know what he 'wanted'.

DisneyJedi wrote:Well, unless Walt was alive, then we'll never know what he 'wanted'.

Jesus Christ. In the 1940s, Walt Disney wanted to make a Mickey feature. Yes, we don't know if he would want to today. But Duster is arguing that "since Walt never did it, it must have been because Mickey is "too special""...

But Walt did indeed want to, and thus Duster's argument is completely invalid.

SWillie! wrote:Oh lord I can't wait to see the response to this.

Duster, this is true, just in case you aren't aware. Walt had every intention to make Mickey and the Beanstalk a feature. There are even storyboards from deleted scenes that would have made the story longer. But the war forced him to combine it with Bongo as a package film.

Your argument of "since Walt didn't want..." is completely invalid.

This is from page 2 of this very same thread . . .

enigmawing wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:I know about Mickey and the Beanstalk, but that never happened,and I know people say it was because of the war and budget, but perhaps Walt also decided it wasn't good to use Mickey and the gang for a whole feature, actually.

The war and budgets have been documented as reasons behind the shortening of the feature, but was it ever documented that Walt made the decision because "it wasn't good?" Why is this assumption even thrown into the equation? Do you have any basis for it beyond your presumption of knowing what Walt would have wanted?

It never ends . . .

enigmawing wrote:It never ends . . .

Yes, exactly. Thanks enigmawing. People miss some details of things I say.

Anyway, I guess it wouldn't be so bad to have a Mickey feature. I just still worry if he's too special or if the DAC's aren't meant for him, which is why I think a non DAC feature kind of like A Goofy Movie would be a really great compromise. It wouldn't be so bad if that happened either, right everyone?

Goliath, if that was too bad I am sorry, but I do wish you would think more happily and good of the world, no matter what ever has happened, always have hope in the good over the bad.

Disney Duster wrote: Anyway, I guess it wouldn't be so bad to have a Mickey feature. I just still worry if he's too special or if the DAC's aren't meant for him, which is why I think a non DAC feature kind of like A Goofy Movie would be a really great compromise. It wouldn't be so bad if that happened either, right everyone?

We kinda talked about this at NYC, but despite your stance on the issue, I think this would be a good decision. It will allow two positive stances:

1. to allow 2D animation to thrive in the CG heavy era.

2. Allow more expose and recognition to the (new gen) masses about Mickey and gang, and hopefully release more merchandise for masses to see and buy.


Like we talked about on the disney store's current store items, it seems to give the impression of that Disney really doesn't want 2D. And the fact there is little to no merchandise of Pooh. POOH- the one franchise that is suppose to be very marketable, has little to none at a NYC disney store. Not a small mall disney store. This is a NYC Disney store we're talking about here.

But with Mickey and gang, Disney will in some sense have no choice but to release loads of mickey merchandise, or else things would really look dire and suspicious on Disney if they don't seem to support the very icon that started the company.

You are completely right, but couldn't they make a big deal out of the movie, and market it and merchandise it as much as if it were a DAC, but yet they wouldn't have to make it a DAC?

I guess I'd be okay with it being a DAC it's just that...it seems so weird to me after doing, for so, so, so, so, so, so long, by Walt and everyone else, just classic stories as the DAC's.

They're not making a big deal of this new Pooh movie simply because they don't give a rat's ass. Sad but true, I'm afraid.

^They just dont wanna make as big a risk as they did with their last 2D film. That doesnt mean they dont give a rat's ass.

DisneyDuster wrote:I guess I'd be okay with it being a DAC it's just that...it seems so weird to me after doing, for so, so, so, so, so, so long, by Walt and everyone else, just classic stories as the DAC's.

That's not necessarily true. But why couldn't a Mickey Mouse story not become a classic? Mickey has personality, he's instantly recognisable, he's the quintessential everyman hero. Add classic characters like Donald Duck and Goofy, create an original story and this could be a very intriguing film.

ajmrowland wrote:They just dont wanna make as big a risk as they did with their last 2D film. That doesnt mean they dont give a rat's ass.

I agree. If Disney didn't give a rat's ass, they probably wouldn't have bothered making the film and would have let hand-drawn animation quietly die.

But why? Why would they be taking a 'risk' by not advertising Pooh as much as they did for Princess and the Frog??

DisneyJedi wrote:But why? Why would they be taking a 'risk' by not advertising Pooh as much as they did for Princess and the Frog??

Because they went all out with PatF, thinking that it was gonna be big. This time around, they aren't so bold. They're just letting the movie speak for itself.

Disney Duster wrote:Goliath, if that was too bad I am sorry, but I do wish you would think more happily and good of the world, no matter what ever has happened, always have hope in the good over the bad.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:

DisneyDuster wrote:I guess I'd be okay with it being a DAC it's just that...it seems so weird to me after doing, for so, so, so, so, so, so long, by Walt and everyone else, just classic stories as the DAC's.

That's not necessarily true. But why couldn't a Mickey Mouse story not become a classic? Mickey has personality, he's instantly recognisable, he's the quintessential everyman hero. Add classic characters like Donald Duck and Goofy, create an original story and this could be a very intriguing film.

Well, you used classic in a different way than I meant. Mickey and the gang are classic beacuse they are old and good. But the other term classic means like grand, adventurous, romantic or magical. I said classic stories, meaning either old stories or new stories that are like those old ones, usually in the grand, adventurous, or romantic kind of ways.

But if Mickey is in a film like that, well, then maybe. I don't feel necessarily good about it and I feel Walt might be sad about it, but if after you've really thought seriously about everything I've brought up, you still think Mick should have a DAC, then fine.