DVDizzy Forum

I don't consider any Pixar film as a "Disney Animated Classic"..... but that's just me. Same goes for any CGI animated Disney film, though those I willl one day come to accept.... maybe!

A while ago I probably would have cared a lot about this particular question. However, I have eventually come to the conclusion that the term "Classic" has become totally inflated in the context of Disney animation and therefore pretty much meaningless.

Nevertheless, I use the "list of the 44" as a "yardstick" for my collecting - since I consider the CGI titles a "different animal". But I no longer need to convince myself that "these are the Classics, the only Classics and nothing but the Classics, so help me Walt"...

I collect the Disney Feature Animations (notice I didn't use the work Classic) as a way to have a chronological depiction of the evolution of Disney Feature Animations (feature meaning, released in theaters). So in that context I have no problem including Chicken Little and Meet the Robinsons.

The one movie though that drives me nuts is Dinosaur. Technically it IS a Disney movie (to me), it just was produced by some exerimental division that from what I understand was formed and then disbanded just for that movie.

Many claim the storyline in this movie is weak but you can say that about the other animations and I thing storyline is irrelevant anyway to determine what makes the list or not. My kids love this movie.

So I guess in conclusion. The scoop of my collection (whatever it be called) is:

- Created by Disney (Disney storyline, Disney artists) - so that excludes Pixas right there
- Theatrical release

So other than Dinosaur, what else do I need to add to the 44 listed here? I need to go review the background information about Dinosaur before making a final devision though.

In following up to my previous message, one other title comes up:

The Wild - But, in reading the background, I see it wasn't created by Disney - so it doesn't make my list.

I guess the other one that comes to mind would be Roger Rabbit? It appears the artistry IS from Disney, it just wasn't released by Disney per the review on this site:

Although it was made by the Disney studio, the film was released under the Touchstone Pictures label to distance the squeaky-clean studio from some of the film's potentially objectionable content.

So if MY collection is defined as Disney creations (despite what division they were created in) that were released in theaters, then I guess I have to include Roger.

Moreover, if one of the main objectives of my collection is to show the evolution (successes and blunders) of Disney-created feature animations, then both Dinosaur and Roger Rabbit are excellent editions since the represent who new ways of doing animation.

The Wikipedia entry for Roger Rabit is quite interesting. But unfortunately after reading it, it definitely doesn't beling in my collection:

"Despite being produced by Disney (in association with Steven Spielberg's Amblin Entertainment), Roger Rabbit also marked the first (and to date, only) time that characters from several animation studios (including Universal, Walter Lantz Studios, Paramount Pictures, Fleischer Studios, MGM (though the characters are owned by Turner Entertainment since 1986), Republic and Warner Bros.) appeared in one film. This allowed the first-ever meetings between Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse. "

Definitely a landmark animation but if it isn't virtually all Disney animation, it doesn't make my cut.

All of the animation was done in London by Richard Williams' studio but hired by Disney, but they took on several Disney animators. For example Andreas Deja was the lead animator on Roger Rabbit himself.

Richard Williams himself as little connection to Disney.