Escapay versus Walt Disney in the Great Beyond

[Disney Duster]

But later I started saying "I think" Walt would, meaning I tried to amend it and it became my current. But now that I think I about it, I still stand by the "I know" because I don't just think it, I feel I know. It's just the truth and I'm going to be honest about these feelings here.

I don't have to have done all those things and Walt didn't have to do all those things you said we had to. Can you explain why you feel everything you do? Why you like a film, why you think something is wrong? Why you feel that someone wouldn't do something? You felt such things as well for people. I'm just voicing it.

An opinion on what the Disney essence is? All I have to do is watch mnay Disney films, even if only all the Walt ones, and I, just like everyone else can feel the Disney essence, so I did, and in feeling you know the feeling and you know it. The hard part is describing it and putting it into new films, of course.

I don't think so! And it is more likely that Walt would think so, either.

A blatant and obvious "If I don't believe it, Walt doesn't either."

Not when I said:

I don't think so! And it is more likely that Walt would think so, either.

[Escapay]

You're missing my point.

You hide your opinion behind the facade of Walt. You don't have to. And it does a disservice to the man to attribute your opinion to him, because you believe he would have the same one. You can try to explain it away with "I feel this" and "I know this" but it doesn't change the fact that you will never know how or why Walt thought the way he did.

You don't need to say that Walt would share your opinion. Just give your opinion and leave Walt out of it.

Like I said, you don't know him. And he doesn't know you.

I don't have to have done all those things and Walt didn't have to do all those things you said we had to. Can you explain why you feel everything you do?

Because you can't say your opinion is similar to a dead man's when you don't know how that dead man thought, no matter how many movies you watch, how many books you read, and how many audio transcripts you listen to. Most importantly: he's dead. He can't have an opinion on something done after his death.

Why you like a film, why you think something is wrong?

Because there are things that appeal or don't appeal to me within that film based on my experiences with other films, with actors in the film, with the way the director points the camera, with the music a composer uses on a scene, with a background player who does something I'm not supposed to pay attention to but I do, etc. When I like or dislike a film, there's a variety of factors as to why, but I don't let it just rest on one person, no matter who that person is. I don't need to hide behind a filmmaker to explain why I like or dislike something. I absolutely love Laura but I'm not going to say that director Otto Preminger thinks it's the greatest movie he ever made just because it's my favorite from his filmography. If I were to remove the biases I had towards Laura, I'd say that Anatomy of a Murder or Advise and Consent were his best.

Likewise, why do you have to hide behind the idea that because you share similar ideas with Walt that whatever you think of something, he must have too? Are you that unsure of your opinion that you only form it if you think it will fit with what your-perception-of-Walt would think? You've already proven in your years at UD that you have opinions and stick to them. Why are you suddenly now prefacing all of them with your idea that Walt thinks like you do, or that you think like Walt does? Let your thoughts stand on their own.

This is exactly why the post-1966 Disney era sucked. The majority of films they made they tried to do because they were thinking "What Would Walt Do?" and basing decisions on their perception of Walt rather than their own ideas. Some people live and breathe by that, but the result is them sacrificing their own creativity and ideas in order to emulate something already done. As a result, you get weak movies like The Aristocats and Robin Hood which try to be a good Waltish movie instead of trying to be a good movie.

Of course, I'm not saying they should've shunned the Walt Disney Filmmaking 101. And I'm not saying that every movie sucked (this is where Goliath will chime in with The Rescuers). But the majority of the 1970s were filled with movies that simply sucked because the filmmakers were so unsure of their own potential that they played it safe and kept wondering "Is this similar to something Walt did? And if it is, will people recognize that and like it?" They should have made a movie to make a movie, not make a movie and wonder if a dead man would have made it too. As much as I love Bedknobs and Broomsticks (in both the theatrical version and reconstructed version), it's still a mess of a movie and a poor man's Mary Poppins. Could the movie have been better if Walt had more supervision on it beyond the brief work he did in the 1960s? Nobody knows. But it's an inferior movie simply because they tried to make it similar to a previous one (aforementioned Mary Poppins), rather than just try to make it stand on its own.

And of course, this came to bite them in the butt when they branched out in the late 70s/early 80s with stuff like The Black Hole and The Watcher in the Woods. Suddenly, the public of the time weren't being given a poor man's Disney film, they were given a Disney film that actually dared to be original. And it scared them and they stayed away in droves. It didn't recover until the major changing of the guard in 1984, when all of a sudden they had the big revelation: "Wait, we don't have to keep trying to make movies like Walt. He made those movies, those are his. We need to make movies that are good because we made them, and that they are the next generation of what The Walt Disney Company is."

In 50 years, there will be different filmmakers, different animators, and different movies at The Walt Disney Company. And they will have to prove themselves to new audiences. And they will not have the benefit of anyone who knew Walt personally. Their perceptions of what a "Walt" film is will be vastly different from any perceptions today. Those perceptions will change 100 years from now. 200 years. And so on.

Disney the company needs to keep re-inventing itself in order to stay relevant. They shouldn't forget their roots (Disney the Filmmaker), but at the same time, they shouldn't try to call a new seed that root. Consciously making a new film like a Walt film does more damage than good, IMO. Let the film be made because it wants to be made, they shouldn't have extra baggage looming over them right from the start.

Why you feel that someone wouldn't do something?

I don't. I don't know the why-for of how other people think or act, I'm not them. I do not presume to think I would know either.

An opinion on what the Disney essence is?

The Disney Essence is not some cold hard factual trademarked idea that is universally agreed upon. Thus, your opinion of "Disney Essence" is different from anyone else's.

Opinions are formed based on preferences, bias, likes, dislikes, experience, etc.. Because people have their own preferences, bias, likes, dislikes, experiences, etc. they will have their own opinion. You can't say that your opinion is a fact ("Disney Essence"), simply because that's what you believe in. And you can't say that it's Walt's either, simply because you think he would feel that way.

Walt had his own preferences, bias, likes, dislikes, experiences, etc.

You have your own preferences, bias, likes, dislikes, experiences, etc.

If there are similarities, there are similarities. But that is never enough for anyone to say that what you think is what Walt thinks.

All I have to do is watch mnay Disney films, even if only all the Walt ones, and I, just like everyone else can feel the Disney essence, so I did, and in feeling you know the feeling and you know it.

Again, the "Disney Essence" is not something concrete and universally agreed upon. People have their own idea/opinion on what it is.

Look, I'm not trying to be mean or anything. I actually enjoy these arguments because it gives me a reason to actually post regularly on UD. And we've already chatted off UD about various things and you know I think of you as a friend even if we're at odds most of the time on UD these days. But really, this is very very simple and I'll repeat it once more:

Have an opinion. Just don't foist it on a dead man and say he has it too.

No matter what type of gut feelings or thoughts you have. You can't say a dead person shares your opinion.

albert

[Rudy Matt]

You can't say a dead person shares your opinion.

This is true. I love Schindler's List. I can't say that Hitler would share my response to that movie. But even though he is dead, I feel confident in making the assumption Hitler would not have been a big admirer of Schindler's List.

Anyway, I found your faux interview with Walt to be a little distasteful in the instances where you used Walt as a vessel to defend Direct To Video sequels. Aside from that, it was a cute harmless diversion, and don't think it's worth the ensuing argument.

[Escapay]

Anyway, I found your faux interview with Walt to be a little distasteful in the instances where you used Walt as a vessel to defend Direct To Video sequels. Aside from that, it was a cute harmless diversion, and don't think it's worth the ensuing argument.

Thanks, Rudy Matt. The faux interview came from a couple years ago when I liked writing humorous things on UD. The sequel part was something I put in when I first wrote a "preview" version of the faux interview in 2008 (then subsequently forgot about it and never finished writing it). I intended to let fake Walt talk about all the horrors he did to DTV Studios while they were developing it, but two years later when I revisited this to complete, realized that writing about him as a poltergeist all because of Snow White 2.0 was against my "you can't claim your opinion is the same as his" stance. Just because I would have been a poltergeist to DTV Studios (simply because they made bad movies most of the time, not because they were bad sequels to original movies), doesn't mean Walt would have.

So I kept the first part (which was in the preview) in which he said he was the poltergeist, as it was still a funny concept, and Fake Walt was saying it sarcastically. The rest though is basically my assessment of the DTV projects. They are a separate studio (within Disney but not connected to WDAS), the only Disney they share is the name. I know there are quotes Walt had regarding sequels, which is why I included the bit about how the stories he told were his, and he wasn't interested in the idea of sequels. In addition, I made sure to stress that the sequels were not his ("That's not my work") in order to let it be known that Walt was not around for the sequels, so no matter what anyone thinks he would have said, nobody knows how he really would have felt. I didn't outright ever use Fake Walt to say "I hate sequels", simply that "They're not mine." That's why he also says "I don't like speculating."

Hope that clears it up a bit more. I wasn't trying to use Walt to defend the DTV movies, just using my fake Walt to say "I didn't make those, they're not mine." I can't speak for Walt about his feelings for the sequels, so I gave Fake Walt the option of simply letting them speak for themselves (and given their quality, most of them speak badly anyway), whilst also stressing that they were made without his input. Adding any more (from either the side of "The DTVs spit on Walt's legacy!" or "The DTVs are a product of its time!") would be picking sides, which I didn't want to do. So I tried my best to write it as "Let them speak for themselves, just remember Walt didn't make them."

What I'm surprised at is that nobody has commented on Walt's favorite shower song. Surely "Wake Me Up Before You Go-Go" is worth a few "Why did you pick that song, Scaps?" questions.

albert

[REINIER]

So, I'll bite..why did you pick that song scaps

[Escapay]

So, I'll bite..why did you pick that song scaps

The answer is rather anti-climactic:

It was playing on my computer when I was writing that particular line. I figured "Eh, why not?"

Plus, afterwards, I ended up picturing Walt just singing the song, and it seemed hilarious. Just imagine him saying "Jitterbug" then snapping once or twice. Then him singing lyrics like "'Cause you're my lady / I'm your fool / Makes me crazy / When you act so cruel" whilst Lillian is elsewhere in the bathroom putting on make-up and rolling her eyes jovially at him.

It's the perfect song.

albert

[Disney Duster]

But my opinion was that Walt wouldn't like it. That was my opinion, though I use the term "opinion" loosely because it I feel it is true, that he really wouldn't like it and would wish the company tried more to stick to his concept of what Disney is.

It's not the man I want them to pay attention to the most. It's what Disney is they should give the attention foremost.

The Disney essence, as it really exists, cannot be opinion. It is what it is. What is opinion, is trying to say what it is, to describe it, how to put it into a film. The opinion on it is people getting what it is right or getting it wrong. Of course it can mean different things to different people, but what it is and what it means to people are of course different.

What has bugged me most about Disney not keeping Disney what it is is more what they have done after Lilo & Stitch, seeming even trying to be like other studios (especially like Dreamworks and such).

You know, for all the talk of "Walt would have done CG", then why didn't they do it first like Disney did most things first? Cause of Eisner? Maybe. Chicken Little may have had Disney shorts-like CG (so you say), but not good Disney in its story. But Rapunzel looks like it might have the good Disney style and story this time.

But with Home on the Range, Marvel, Rapunzel's changes to Tangled, and I think Iger saying they wouldn't pay attention to Walt's legacy anymore or be reverant anymore to it or something (!!!!!) is more what has me upset and saying what I'm saying.

Most importantly: he's dead. He can't have an opinion on something done after his death.

I believe in the afterlife and that yes he can, but anyway, I mean what he would do.

And you know that the renaissance fairy tales and Bambi with Lions was still very Walt-like subject material and that's why those movies are so Disney and became such successes.

In 50 years, there will be different filmmakers, different animators, and different movies at The Walt Disney Company. And they will have to prove themselves to new audiences. And they will not have the benefit of anyone who knew Walt personally. Their perceptions of what a "Walt" film is will be vastly different from any perceptions today. Those perceptions will change 100 years from now. 200 years. And so on.

I really don't think or hope so, but in any case even if the people get the perceptions wrong they can still try to figure out what it really is and get it right. They have to at least try, that's the biggest thing I'm concerned with. Why is this film or that film at Disney and not anywhere else, when there's lots of family friendly animation studios, is the big question.

Let the film be made because it wants to be made, they shouldn't have extra baggage looming over them right from the start.

Not right from the start. They should be free to come up with any idea, and then ask, does it fit Disney, is it something Disney should make over any other studio?

Why you feel that someone wouldn't do something?

I don't. I don't know the why-for of how other people think or act, I'm not them. I do not presume to think I would know either.

Yes you do. I know you have felt this feeling, that a certain person wouldn't do something, that it doesn't seem like them, it doesn't seem like something they would do. Everyone has felt this feeling.

If there are similarities, there are similarities. But that is never enough for anyone to say that what you think is what Walt thinks.

Yea, again, I don't say that. I say I think Walt would think this. Because I do. I am being honest on this forum.

Have an opinion. Just don't foist it on a dead man and say he has it too.

Again, I'm not doing that. You did it much more with your "interview".



You are my friend too, no matter what we argue over.

[REINIER]

So, I'll bite..why did you pick that song scaps

The answer is rather anti-climactic:

It was playing on my computer when I was writing that particular line. I figured "Eh, why not?"

Plus, afterwards, I ended up picturing Walt just singing the song, and it seemed hilarious. Just imagine him saying "Jitterbug" then snapping once or twice. Then him singing lyrics like "'Cause you're my lady / I'm your fool / Makes me crazy / When you act so cruel" whilst Lillian is elsewhere in the bathroom putting on make-up and rolling her eyes jovially at him.

It's the perfect song.

albert

The things you come up with...

I'd like to see you take on a story/song for Eisner

Something along the lines of

''Sorry seems to be the hardest word'' ,seems fitting right

[Escapay]

But my opinion was that Walt wouldn't like it. That was my opinion, though I use the term "opinion" loosely because it I feel it is true

And therein lies the problem. That's a problem everyone has with their own personal opinions. They hold it to be true, simply because they believe that strongly in it.

My opinion is that The Ten Commandments was the best film that Cecil B. DeMille ever made. Based on other UDers comments about the film that I've read, some would likely agree with me (jeremy88, carolinakid), whilst others would disagree (Goliath, jpanimation).

As strongly as I feel about The Ten Commandments, do I ever state it as a fact, as if it were true? No.

The Disney essence, as it really exists

The Disney Essence is an idea, not an actual physical living thing. The idea changes based on each person, and thus, the person's opinion about the Disney Essence is different. There is no "is what it is" about it. The idea can be the same, but the opinions about it are different.

Most importantly: he's dead. He can't have an opinion on something done after his death.

I believe in the afterlife and that yes he can, but anyway, I mean what he would do.

But we're not in the afterlife. We don't know his opinions, and we can't presume to know them.

And you know that the renaissance fairy tales and Bambi with Lions was still very Walt-like subject material and that's why those movies are so Disney and became such successes.

They were good films because they were good films (though YMMV on that assessment). Because people recognized the similarities to Walt-Era movies doesn't mean that they were good films because they were like a Walt movie. If the filmmakers outright say "We made these movies to be like Walt" then that's their reason, but the way a film connects or resonates with an audience doesn't always rely on the filmmakers' intentions when making the film. If so, a lot more people would've embraced The Princess and the Frog at the box office since there was nothing but a lot of hoo-hah from the filmmakers about how they were trying to make a Disney movie like the ones of yesteryear.

For me, Lilo & Stitch is the best Disney movie of the past ten years and it's already proven to have fans divided on how Disney or non-Disney it is. People recognize things in that movie that they attribute as Walt-like or not-Walt-like, which again goes with the whole idea that The Disney Essence changes from person to person.

If there are similarities, there are similarities. But that is never enough for anyone to say that what you think is what Walt thinks.

Yea, again, I don't say that. I say I think Walt would think this. Because I do. I am being honest on this forum.

What you think versus what Walt thinks is vastly different. You can't present what you think as what you think Walt thinks in a way that reads what Walt thinks.

Look at these two phrases:

"I dislike sequels."

"Walt dislikes sequels."

Both are true, right?

Now, look at these two phrases:

"I don't think Lilo & Stitch was a very Disney-esque movie."

"Walt wouldn't think Lilo & Stitch was a very Disney-esque movie."

One is true, one is false.

It's the way it's worded. The former shows your own opinion. The latter shows your opinion attributed to someone else, because you think they would think that way. But it shows it as if it were their opinion.

Have an opinion. Just don't foist it on a dead man and say he has it too.

Again, I'm not doing that. You did it much more with your "interview".

Fake Walt is not Real Walt.

I presented my opinions via a character I constructed, not via a person I never met.

Every "Escapay versus..." is a work of fiction after all.

Or are people taking it seriously?

albert

[Escapay]

The things you come up with...

I'd like to see you take on a story/song for Eisner

Something along the lines of

''Sorry seems to be the hardest word'' ,seems fitting right

I would write a faux interview with Eisner, but given all the drama that this one created, it will likely be a couple years away. Besides, I've got to finish writing my faux interviews with Mickey Mouse and the Lace Collar. Now that will be one hell of a thing. Nothing but roars and controversy. I can't wait!

albert

[REINIER]

Neither can I, keep up the good work

[Disney Duster]

Escapay, you've said all those things pretty much before and again and again.

The answer is no, I still do not agree with any of that, those things are not what I am doing.

Hey, how's this one: all that is your opinion. It is your opinion it is just my opinion, and everything else you said.

But I will especially go out of my way to say Walt indeed had an idea of what the Disney essence was and that was what it really was and always will be. He put it in his films and shorts and the future workers at Disney must watch his films and shorts and try to learn or figure out what the essence is from those films and shorts and if need be, other things. If they all have different opinions on it they must try to figure out what it really is. If sometimes they are wrong, well at least they tried, and if lots of people vote on or come to an agreement through explanaton on what the Disney essence is, more likely that will be it, though they could still be wrong, but at least they tried.

And The Princess and the Frog was definately not all the Disney essence as it was not really based on The Frog Prince, not even keeping the title, was a new thing in a new setting with new characters and modern wacky humor like a cat's eyes bulging out of it's head. NOT Disney in every way, so not connecting with the audiences that loved Disney enough.

We already had examples of how Walt would have done a fairy tale, three times, and the Renaissance fairly kept to that. The Princess and the Frog all but pissed on it. Tradition, tradition, tradition. It's a good thing and it ensures Disneyness. Don't piss on it.

[ajmrowland]

^uh, sure. Because he didnt make tons of changes to the other fairytales. because movies aren't representative of the period in which they're made. it just so happens that movies today of any kind are different than what they were ten, twenty, thirty years ago.

he's DEAD. stop comparing movies made by other people with their own artistic talents to him and look at them compared to others. better yet, look at them on their own. Walt Disney was a great artist and storyteller, but there are more out there, and you're preaching like he was the boss of the entire hollywood industry and that everything should be made the way he would make it and no one should be allowed to inject themselves into their own work.

stop trying to halt change. change is a natural process

[Heartless]

I've been watching Disney Duster for a long while now, been lurking around the boards since back in 2008 and this whole thing with Duster has caused me to create an account...
Duster, you have no idea how much I dislike you..

And The Princess and the Frog was definately not all the Disney essence as it was not really based on The Frog Prince, not even keeping the title, was a new thing in a new setting with new characters and modern wacky humor like a cat's eyes bulging out of it's head. NOT Disney in every way, so not connecting with the audiences that loved Disney enough.

Apparently all your wanting is for Walt Disney Animation Studios to copy the exact formulas used in the films by Walt Disney, because nothing else to you will have this "Disney Essence." The formulas produced wonderful movies, I admit. But as EVERYONE has said, time's have changed. There's more than the same exact ways Walt Disney used to create a wonderful movie.

The Princess and the Frog was a spectacular movie. (This is an example of an opinion, btw, since you can't seem to be able to tell the difference between fact and opinion). And yes, it WAS based off of the Frog Prince. Just because it wasn't the exact retelling of the story doesn't mean that it isn't based off of it. It was BLATANTLY based off of the Frog Prince. And as ajmrowland has said, Disney made changes to almost ANY fairytale he made. He added characters, he changed names, he changed the story around..

I started saying "I think" Walt would, meaning I tried to amend it and it became my current. But now that I think I about it, I still stand by the "I know" because I don't just think it, I feel I know. It's just the truth and I'm going to be honest about these feelings here.

But that's NOT THE TRUTH. No one on earth can possibly ever know what Walt Disney would ever feel about anything in the past 45 years. EVER. That goes the same for anyone that has died.

I understand its really a lost cause to try to get through to Duster in any way since he's so closed off to anything except his own 'beliefs,' but its so ridiculous to me...

[disneyboy20022]

I've been watching Disney Duster for a long while now, been lurking around the boards since back in 2008 and this whole thing with Duster has caused me to create an account...
Duster, you have no idea how much I dislike you..

...

Oh...great....now Disney Duster has an online stalker on the UD/DVDizzy Forum?? Just when I thought things on this forum were halfway normal....

[Heartless]

Oh...great....now Disney Duster has an online stalker on the UD/DVDizzy Forum?? Just when I thought things on this forum were halfway normal....

Not just Duster, all of you!

[disneyboy20022]

Oh...great....now Disney Duster has an online stalker on the UD/DVDizzy Forum?? Just when I thought things on this forum were halfway normal....

Not just Duster, all of you!

Quick somone grab a Keyblade

btw welcome to the forums.....

[Margos]

Well, hey, I started posting after a year of "stalking," too! It's a great way to learn your way around before you jump right in! I knew all of you before you had heard of me, too!
Welcome to the UD, Heartless!

[Heartless]

Well, hey, I started posting after a year of "stalking," too! It's a great way to learn your way around before you jump right in! I knew all of you before you had heard of me, too!
Welcome to the UD, Heartless!

Yes exactly! XD
I understand how things work around here. Thank you for the welcome!

btw welcome to the forums.....

Thank you disneyboy!
And by the way, Escapay I really enjoy your 'versus' threads! They are so amusing!

[Goliath]

Of course, I'm not saying they should've shunned the Walt Disney Filmmaking 101. And I'm not saying that every movie sucked (this is where Goliath will chime in with The Rescuers).

You beat me to it!

But wouldn't you agree? I'd like to know. After Walt's death, the studio made two films that were similar in tone and structure to The Jungle Book, hoping to reprise Walt's succes. Both The Aristocats and Robin Hood have a light-hearted, episodic structure that puts the accent on the humor, similar to Jungle Book. Aristocats even borrows the 'finding a way home'-story from that film. The Rescuers was the return to a tight story, drama, character development, and a heart-felt story.

Robin Hood is still one of my favorite Disney-films and I know a *lot* of people who feel the same way, simply because it's the funniest Disney-film of them all.