Animated Disney movies w/ plotlines that you'd change

[Dr Frankenollie]

Emperor's New Groove - Find a way to re-incorporate Yzma's sun plans from Kingdom of the Sun. Have Kronk keep questioning the idea and pointing out the ramifications of removing the sun, ala Smithers in Who Shot Mr. Burns but possibly even funnier and in Warburton's voice.

I love those ideas.

First of all, I will give you some praise for an excellent idea for a thread

Thanks!

THE LITTLE MERMAID; As already mentioned, it should have been given time for Ariel to apologize to what she did to her father. Also, I would have given her a more personal, more complEx reason to yearn for the human world.

Triton was a racist asshole, Ariel hardly did anything to him directly and her choice to go to Ursula is understandable. Also, Ariel does have a personal, complex to reason to yearn for the human world: she doesn't just love Eric, she is also sick and tired of her overprotective father and the underwater world of the merpeople, and wants something more and(due to her naturally rebellious streak) as Triton says the human world is bad, she grows to believe that it is good, and is attracted to it due to the bizarre (in her eyes) inventions of humans.

THE JUNGLE BOOK: Make the script more coherent and less episodic and give some more depth to the characters. The reason for sending Mowgli to the main village was quite stupid (the volwes could actually have defeated Shere Khan). And besides; Wouldn't the Wolf clan at least try to say goodbye to Mowgli before he went away?

I think the characters in the Jungle Book were some of the most well-developed Disney had ever done by the mid-60's; Baloo and Bagheera all go through story arcs, Mowgli goes through lesser but still largely noticeable and crucial development, and the plot is by no means episodic, but is about how the naive Mowgli has to choose what lifestyle he wants: does he want a life in the man village, or a manic, chaotic and seemingly nihilistic life like King Louie, or a easy-going life Baloo, or yet another kind of life like the Vultures'?

As for your other points, the Wolf clan was probably too cowardly, and as Shere Khan only appears quite late on, his fierceness may have been exaggerated in the mind and via whispers in the jungle.

[Disney's Divinity]

THE LITTLE MERMAID; As already mentioned, it should have been given time for Ariel to apologize to what she did to her father. Also, I would have given her a more personal, more complEx reason to yearn for the human world.

Also, Ariel does have a personal, complex to reason to yearn for the human world

That's what I was thinking, but I didn't want to start the Neverending Ariel Debate. I know DF09 has said that they think Ariel is selfish, so to be selfish I would think her decision to go to the human world was personal.

Thinking more about Disney films I would alter, I would definitely leave in the backstory the creators originally had for Louis in The Princess and the Frog. I have no idea why they cut that whole idea that he was one of Facilier's previous victims.

Also, I'd like to see what Hercules would've been like if they'd tried to give a film on the labors he went through--with a maternal villain in Hera. (Thinking about it, there aren't many Disney films with central male protagonists setup with female adversaries; the closest I can think of is Phillip v. Maleficent) I love the film the way it is, too, but I'd like to seen a film based on that.

I know most people would want to change The Sword in the Stone, but that film is actually a pretty decent adaptation of the book it's based on. You'd have to make a film based on The Once and Future King to get the older Arthur story.

I don't know what I'd do with TENG, but I don't really like the Pacha-side of the film. It drags whenever it goes into the whole moral message filler. I would've liked to have seen The Kingdom of the Sun, but I also liked a lot about TENG the way it is now, too.

As far as Pixar films, I'd definitely cut the dogs out of Up.

[DisneyFan09]

Triton was a racist asshole, Ariel hardly did anything to him directly and her choice to go to Ursula is understandable. Also, Ariel does have a personal, complex to reason to yearn for the human world: she doesn't just love Eric, she is also sick and tired of her overprotective father and the underwater world of the merpeople, and wants something more and(due to her naturally rebellious streak) as Triton says the human world is bad, she grows to believe that it is good, and is attracted to it due to the bizarre (in her eyes) inventions of humans.

I'm actually tired of discussing the Ariel subject, but I'm still gonna give this another go. Sorry if I seem arrogant, that wasn't my intention.

Yes, I do agree that Triton was a ignorant racist. But on the other hand, he still loved Ariel and wanted her to be safe, although he was a racist. But the difference is that Triton goes through an character arc, while Ariel doesn't.

As the matter of fact, both father and daughter are quite flawed and ignorant; Triton for not trying to comprehensive to his daughter and Ariel for being selfish, immature and putting her friends life in danger. I'm not saying that Ariel is a heartless and cruel character. She does saves her friends in danger. But at the end of the day, she first and foremost are obsessed with her own needs!

If Ariel were in some worse circumstances, like having a evil stepfather, then her desire to leave her father would have been more resonant. Just listen to the first conversation between father and daughter. There you willl see that both of them are flawed (or a better hint; Triton saying that he doesn't want his daughter to be in danger and Ariel rejects and saying "I'm sixteen years old! I'm not a child anymore.")

Besides; Being unhappy on the Ocean is just not a good reason enough to sympathize with a character. Ariel seems obsessed with the human world and assuming that the life on land is better, without really knowing what it really is. Just think about it; Do you really want to sympathize with a teenager like that who wants to escape a life that really isn't bad?

Everytime I listen to the lyrics of "Part of Your World", I just can't help to think that she's a spoiled and ungrateful girl, who yearns for a fantasyworld which she doesn't know about. Besides, at the end she doesn't even apologize to her father or even to her friends for what she put them through.

I think the characters in the Jungle Book were some of the most well-developed Disney had ever done by the mid-60's; Baloo and Bagheera all go through story arcs, Mowgli goes through lesser but still largely noticeable and crucial development, and the plot is by no means episodic, but is about how the naive Mowgli has to choose what lifestyle he wants: does he want a life in the man village, or a manic, chaotic and seemingly nihilistic life like King Louie, or a easy-going life Baloo, or yet another kind of life like the Vultures'?

As for your other points, the Wolf clan was probably too cowardly, and as Shere Khan only appears quite late on, his fierceness may have been exaggerated in the mind and via whispers in the jungle.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on that one, too. Neither of the characters have an arc. Although Baloo is the most likeable of the characters, he's still quite stupid and fails to the save Mowgli twice. He fails to realize that the jungle is too dangerous for him (although he does love Mowgli, but that's antoher case). Bagheera is a pretty stoic and unapprochable character who doesn't realize that it's quite tough for Mowgli to leave the jungle; The only home he's ever known. And when it comes to Mowgli himself; Yes, he's ignorant and stupid, but he's still being taken away from the only family and life that he's ever known. Wouldn't you have been bitter and stubborn, too? Hate me if you will, but the character does go through a bigger arc in the sequel.

I'm glad you agree with me when it comes to the volwes-issue, though.

[Disney Duster]

With Ariel, what about when someone likes, say...Disney.

Say someone forbid you from seeing Disney movies in your past. Saying they are too mushy or too unrealistic and bad for you. Your life is full of more educational things, and it's a good life, but... But you see the covers of Disney movies, or hear songs from them, or see parts of them, and you know you need to see those movies, and so you sing a song about how you want to see them. And, well, you just know that is what you want, not what you have. And then some day someone lets you get to see them, and you are so happy.

[DisneyFan09]

Oh, I just remembered that I forgot to mention another flick that could have needed some script-improvement.

THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME.

As much as I LOVE this movie to death, I still think the screenplay could have needed some more structure and cohesiveness. The story is primarily Quasimodo's, while it afterwards includes Esmeralda, Phoebus and Frollo along the way. While all of the characters goes through interesting struggles, there's no denial that Quasi's struggle is the most complex one.

In the second act, the story becomes primarily about Frollo's obsession for Esmeralda. I'm not claiming that Quasi is getting pushed to the side, but the story becomes less about him until the third act (climax). Don't get me wrong, I love all of the four main characters. But I do still think the screenplay could have a better cohesiveness between the main cast, instead of running back and forward between them.
Besides, the script does have a few holes; If Phoebus really was a nice guy, why didn't he reject Frollo's offer right away? And why the heck would Esmeralda hide Phoebus in the Bell Tower, when it was the most easiest place for Frollo to find him??

[Dr Frankenollie]

With Ariel, what about when someone likes, say...Disney.

Say someone forbid you from seeing Disney movies in your past. Saying they are too mushy or too unrealistic and bad for you. Your life is full of more educational things, and it's a good life, but... But you see the covers of Disney movies, or hear songs from them, or see parts of them, and you know you need to see those movies, and so you sing a song about how you want to see them. And, well, you just know that is what you want, not what you have. And then some day someone lets you get to see them, and you are so happy.

Bizarrely, I agree with Disney Duster's choice of words. I'd just like to add that Ariel is a very relatable character, because at some point in our lives, we all want something 'more' (forgive the cliche).

Everytime I listen to the lyrics of "Part of Your World", I just can't help to think that she's a spoiled and ungrateful girl, who yearns for a fantasyworld which she doesn't know about. Besides, at the end she doesn't even apologize to her father or even to her friends for what she put them through.

Part of Your World is one of Disney's best songs, and the lyrics are brilliant and full of depth. It makes Ariel a very believable, relatable and hugely likable character. I simply can't understand how you dislike it.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on that one, too. Neither of the characters have an arc. Although Baloo is the most likeable of the characters, he's still quite stupid and fails to the save Mowgli twice. He fails to realize that the jungle is too dangerous for him (although he does love Mowgli, but that's antoher case). Bagheera is a pretty stoic and unapprochable character who doesn't realize that it's quite tough for Mowgli to leave the jungle; The only home he's ever known. And when it comes to Mowgli himself; Yes, he's ignorant and stupid, but he's still being taken away from the only family and life that he's ever known. Wouldn't you have been bitter and stubborn, too? Hate me if you will, but the character does go through a bigger arc in the sequel.

Baloo isn't completely stupid; he just has a simplistic, easy-going lifestyle, in contrast to the more stoic and organised lifestyle of Bagheera. Also, in the movie's brief course, he wants to become a father, he becomes Mowgli's 'father', and deny that he doesn't understand that Mowgli should go to the 'Man Village' if you will, but you can't deny that at the end he accepts Mowgli's growing up (when Mowgli becomes attracted to the Village Girl).

Bagheera is a bit unapproachable, but it's clear that he loves Mowgli and wants what's best for him, and goes to the trouble of helping the latter as a baby.

I can't believe that you think Mowgli has a better story arc in the sequel...

[Disney's Divinity]

(about Ariel)
Besides; Being unhappy on the Ocean is just not a good reason enough to sympathize with a character.

Except millions of viewers have sympathized with her and still do.

I agree with you about Hunchback though. Frollo and Quasi are the interesting characters there, so I'm not sure why they put as much focus on the bland Phoebus and Esmeralda as they did.

[DisneyFan09]

Part of Your World is one of Disney's best songs, and the lyrics are brilliant and full of depth. It makes Ariel a very believable, relatable and hugely likable character. I simply can't understand how you dislike it.

Whoa, excuse me?? You misread and misunderstood my message. I NEVER said that I disliked "Part of Your World". In fact, I LOVE the melody. It's absolutely gorgeous. But the lyrics are still reflecting Ariel's shallow and short-sighted desire. Sorry, but I highly disagree with you when it comes to Ariel.

Baloo isn't completely stupid; he just has a simplistic, easy-going lifestyle, in contrast to the more stoic and organised lifestyle of Bagheera. Also, in the movie's brief course, he wants to become a father, he becomes Mowgli's 'father', and deny that he doesn't understand that Mowgli should go to the 'Man Village' if you will, but you can't deny that at the end he accepts Mowgli's growing up (when Mowgli becomes attracted to the Village Girl).

Bagheera is a bit unapproachable, but it's clear that he loves Mowgli and wants what's best for him, and goes to the trouble of helping the latter as a baby.

Okay, he's not actually completely stupid, but he's still uncapable to handle Mowgli. I agree that Baloo (sort of) accepts that Mowgli goes to the village in the first film. But I suppose that you've seen the sequel, where Baloo has trouble to accept Mowgli's absence and even takes him to the jungle. I agree with you when it comes to Bagheera, though.

I can't believe that you think Mowgli has a better story arc in the sequel...

Well, perhaps I shouldn't said that he has a better story arc, but he goes throguh a more resonant journey in the sequel. As the matter a fact, the plot is even more resonant in the sequel than it was on the first movie. Mowgli gets torn between the two worlds and actually has a more obvious growth. Even Baloo goes through an arc. I'm not saying that the sequel is amazing. In fact, it had some flaws and I absolutely HATED how they made Shanti to a personality-deprived coward, when she had the potential to be a great character. But it had a more resonant and logical story.

[DisneyFan09]

I agree with you about Hunchback though. Frollo and Quasi are the interesting characters there, so I'm not sure why they put as much focus on the bland Phoebus and Esmeralda as they did.

Really? I actually happen to love both Phoebus and Esmeralda (despite her flaws). I don't mind that they were included in the screenplay, but like I said; the fact that the screenwriters couldn't really decide which character to focuse on.

I'm glad you agree with me on Ariel, though. No offence to the Ariel fans.

[jpanimation]

I wouldn't George Lucas any of them.

You sure?

<iframe width="560" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/CAVn4DCB1wQ" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Off the top of my head, here are some changes I’d make to both the story and on the technical side of things:

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs - I’d make Snow White’s design more attractive (she’s supposed to be the fairest one of all) and her voice less annoying.

Pinocchio -I would make Honest John and Gideon human characters. Even as a kid I questioned them being the only giant talking anthropomorphic characters in a world dominated by humans (Gideon and Figaro?). Also, I’d reanimate the overhead shot during the "Hi-Diddle-Dee-Dee" number, as it wasn’t executed very well.

Fantasia - As perverted as it sound, I’d add nipples to the centaurs and centaurettes seen in “The Pastoral Symphony”. Seeing nothing there disturbs me, especially since the centaurs have no muscular definition that I can see of and their bodies are kind of too smoothed out (then look at Zues in that same sequence, full anatomy). I just find it weird. During “The Rite of Spring” sequence, I’d reanimate the sun/star the camera flies by during the beginning sequence, as the flames are just WAY TOO BIG and don’t give a proper sense of scale. I’d also reanimate the T-Rex (?) as he seems to be standing up a little too straight and not moving as realistically as the other dinos. Lastly, there is a shot during the extinction bit where an Apatosaurus moves it’s head from one water hole to another. It looks very awkward and I’d reanimate it.

Bambi - Probably would’ve worked on the transition from winter (mother’s death) to spring (“Twitterpated”) a little. It’s very jarring as it is. Also, would’ve liked to see Tumper’s death scene reinserted.

Beauty and the Beast - Tons and tons of re-animated scenes where characters are off model or just not animated well. I’d also like anywhere between 5-10 minutes of additional NON-MUSICAL time spent showing Belle and Beast falling in love (what I feel they should’ve done when they went back for the Special Edition instead adding yet another musical sequence).

The Lion King - This movie has it’s problems but nothing bothers me as much as the ending does. Gathering all the main characters, both good and bad, together during the climax for a comical final bout is an annoying cliche found in animated features that has become a pet peeve of mine. If that wasn’t enough, they use every trick in the book to make Scare and Simba’s slow motion bitch slapping contest as dramatic as possible. A convenient lightning bolt starting a convenient fire with a convenient rain washing it all away once their done? I understand color gives off certain feeling to a scene but Disney shoves it in your face. We get it, adding fire makes the action sequences more intense and having rain start up during a dramatic moment makes it all the more so.

The Hunchback of Notre Dame - Get rid of the gargoyles, nix Esmerelda’s “whacky” escape from Frollo after the Festival of Fools, make Quasimodo a mute, and change the ending to a less happy albeit more poetic one.

Mulan- I’d make China’s army WAY larger then it is in the movie, I’d get some better songs (“Reflection” is really the only one I like), and I’d nix the ‘teamwork’ ending (this particular criticism is shared with The Emperor’s New Groove).

Fantasia 2000 - I’d add about 40 minutes of new sequences and ditch the celebrity introductions for the more traditional interstitials of the original.

Lilo & Stitch - As much as I love the opening sequence and understand it’s importance, I really feel the movie should start with Lilo swimming in the water. I’d like to have us (the audience) be just as confused as Nani is about Stitch. Then, when Jumba and Pleekly are around the campfire spying on Stitch (the mosquito and wig thing), they could exchange a few lines that would explain to us what’s going on. I know nothing will be as effective (or as thrilling) as the opening sequence is in showing Stitch’s intelligence and strength, but I think we would’ve gotten the idea after a few of his feats on Earth anyways.

Brother Bear - Should’ve went the original rout of having Michael Clarke Duncan as Kenai’s mentor and ditched Koda. Also, needed to be tougher on Phil Collins during the song selection and not just accept his Tarzan rejects.

The Princess and the Frog - Collectively throughout the forums, I must’ve written a book on what should've to happened with this.

Rapunzel - I’d change the opening as I don’t like the way the prologue is told. I’d change the ending to having Flynn die for real (no magic tear). I’d change Rapunzel from getting a modern hairstyle when her hair is cut short to a more appropriate one. I’d make Gothel a two dimensional villain. Lastly, I’d have Menken write some decent songs.

[PixarFan2006]

Chicken Little- Redo the entire film from scratch. Lose the stupid alien invasion plot (as another poster pointed out), the lame pop culture references, the ugly character designs and take out all the pop songs. I am fine with making it CGI, as long as it has a better story (he could think the sky is falling could mean the world is ending for all I care), with more emotion.

Hunchback of Notre Dame - Lose the Gargoyles and have Quasimodo die at the end. 'Nuff said.

Tangled - I agree about getting rid of the cop-out ending and have Flynn die from the stab wound. Kids need to learn about death sooner or later.

I know I am sounding like a sadistic psychopath, but I think too many Disney movies have too many happy endings.

[Scarred4life]

Hunchback of Notre Dame - Lose the Gargoyles and have Quasimodo die at the end. 'Nuff said.

Really? If anyone died, I think it should be Esmeralda. (She was the main character in the book, after all. )

[Disney Duster]

IF FLYNN DIED IT WOULDN'T BE A DISNEY MOVIE, it would be untrue to Walt's way of happy endings! Disney is about bad things happening but good and happy winning out over it all in the end!

I NEVER said that I disliked "Part of Your World". In fact, I LOVE the melody. It's absolutely gorgeous. But the lyrics are still reflecting Ariel's shallow and short-sighted desire. Sorry, but I highly disagree with you when it comes to Ariel.

Even when she says her possesions are of no importance and she wants "more", then singing of life, experience, happy feelings that come from living where she feels she belongs like if we got to live in a world that had Disney or, say, a gay person got to live in gay culture or a place with gay acceptance?

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs - I’d make Snow White’s design more attractive (she’s supposed to be the fairest one of all) and her voice less annoying.

! YES! Okay, the thing is she is beautifully drawn, but she does need to be more beautiful somehow. Have you seen the re-design of her where she looks more pretty? You can see this re-design I mean here, where I like the hair, but here's a prettier face, and here's the original Gustaf Tenggren design which I think they just should have stuck more to, at least I like how the hair curls out better.

Pinocchio -I would make Honest John and Gideon human characters. Even as a kid I questioned them being the only giant talking anthropomorphic characters in a world dominated by humans (Gideon and Figaro?). Also, I’d reanimate the overhead shot during the "Hi-Diddle-Dee-Dee" number, as it wasn’t executed very well.

That's so un-Disney I don't even know where to begin. Those characters were a cat and fox in the original tale, and giant anthropomorphic animals with non-anthropmorphic characters may not make sense to you but that's you, it's still very Disney and there's lots of illogical things in any fantasy! It's not that bad! Neve get too, too logical with any Disney film, lol.

Bambi - Probably would’ve worked on the transition from winter (mother’s death) to spring (“Twitterpated”) a little. It’s very jarring as it is. Also, would’ve liked to see Tumper’s death scene reinserted.

This is NEEDED!

The Hunchback of Notre Dame - Get rid of the gargoyles, nix Esmerelda’s “whacky” escape from Frollo after the Festival of Fools, make Quasimodo a mute, and change the ending to a less happy albeit more poetic one.

Quasimodo could always talk in the original story...he just was deaf, so he sounded weird.

I’d make Gothel a two dimensional villain.

Huh? Whadya mean?

[Chernabog_Rocks]

I really don't understand the whole "Flynn should die" bit. I like the fact that he did survive, but I would have altered things so that the reason why wasn't a "magical tear" survival.

I agree quite a bit with DisneyFan09 on things said regarding Ariel.


jpanimation:

I don't agree or disagree about the centaurs, to help add to your case though for adding the nipples if one does watch Night on Bald Mountain you will note that the harpies do actually have them. If anything I would have made the male centaurs a bit more virile looking like they were going to be. They come off a little soft to me.

[Disney Duster]

For everyone to hear this: the thing is the magical tear makes sense. The magic was inside of Rapunzel. It could pass through anything. If you don't buy that, you can't buy the idea of the magic passing from the flower through the Queen into Rapunzel, either! Not at all! Because that makes just as much or as little sense!

[Super Aurora]

I
Quasimodo could always talk in the original story...he just was deaf, so he sounded weird.

Deaf people don't have tangible speech since they are.....deaf. In the novel he didn't speak in the same coherent sentences like the disney movie.

I would know about deaf people.

[merlinjones]

I would disagree with the negative take on Cinderella -- in the film, she isn't quite as passive as generally portrayed -- the character's reaction to her abuse is to take positive action on two fronts:

1) She does not allow the situation to create anger or bitterness in her own reactions or behavior or defeat her spirit of hope ("even they can't stop me from dreaming"). She does not perpetuate a cycle of aggression or anger by giving in to the cruelty by reacting in kind. She shows presence and patience in the face of suffering.

2) What's more, Cinderella channels her energy not into retribution toward her tormentors or anxiety about her own situation, but care towards those in the chateau weaker than she. She becomes a nurturer, caretaker, provider, comfort-giver (all the things she herself is deprived of) for the mice, the old dog and horse, treating them the way she wished she would be treated.

It is this sprit of generosity, kindness, optimism and faith that leads first to assistance from those she helped ("We can do it - we can help our Cinderelly") and then to the appearance of opportunity ("If you had lost your faith I wouldn't be here") that leads to her reward.

Unlike the stepsister's motives of desire, demand and entitlement - - Walt's film Cinderella presents selfless virtue and inner beauty as the key to survival and transformation ("No matter how your heart is grieving if you keep on believing the dream that you wish will come true").

That she internalizes a positive outcome in a situation where immediate action is not possible is a character building message, IMHO -- and one that is clearly reassuring to those in seemingly hopeless situations.

[Tristy]

A few things.

Brother Bear. There was potential as stated here but here's my advice. Make the characters more likeable and less annoying. Especially Kenai. He just really got on my nerves. All he ever did was bitch and moan.

Atlantis. I'm going out of my way and saying I enjoyed this movie (Doug Walker does too so I don't see what's wrong with it). However, I would have made Moliere a more consistent character. One minute he's a snooty professor type the next minute he is a childish prankster. It's like Disney realized they did not have animal sidekicks in the movie and decided to give Moliere some of the qualities of an animal sidekick. Well it works with characters like Donald Duck and Timon but not with a human character.

Tangled. This was a pretty good movie and I wouldn't have really changed anything except perhaps the opening. They could have had a book opening and maybe a motherly voice narrating the beginning. Would've worked much better and fit in with the tone of the movie.

Treasure Planet. More focus on the Jim/ Silver story and less on the ugly alien designs.

[Dr Frankenollie]

Whoa, excuse me?? You misread and misunderstood my message. I NEVER said that I disliked "Part of Your World". In fact, I LOVE the melody. It's absolutely gorgeous. But the lyrics are still reflecting Ariel's shallow and short-sighted desire. Sorry, but I highly disagree with you when it comes to Ariel.

Ariel does not have a shallow and short-sighted desire. She's realised that humans aren't bad like her ignorant father believes, and is intrigued by the world 'up there.' Isn't that understandable? If you knew there was an underwater world filled with mermaids and mermen, and you were very depressed and bored by the world, then wouldn't you want to see the underwater world, which from the little you've seen of is technologically groundbreaking, wondrous and heavenly?

Okay, he's not actually completely stupid, but he's still uncapable to handle Mowgli. I agree that Baloo (sort of) accepts that Mowgli goes to the village in the first film. But I suppose that you've seen the sequel, where Baloo has trouble to accept Mowgli's absence and even takes him to the jungle. I agree with you when it comes to Bagheera, though.

He realises that he is uncapable to handle Mowgli, so I don't see how that's a problem. Baloo is shown to be clearly flawed and he recognises it, and he DOES accept Mowgli going into the man village. Yes, you may feel that his urgings for Mowgli to come back show him to be unaccepting of Mowgli's choice, but nonetheless, if you were a parent, wouldn't you forcefully try to stop your child from going away and possibly never seeing you again?

Yes, Baloo only knew Mowgli fleetingly, but I inferred that he was rather lonely and wanted a companion. He also had a natural fatherly instinct, even if he was rather absent-minded, but it's not his fault the monkeys kidnapped Mowgli.

Well, perhaps I shouldn't said that he has a better story arc, but he goes throguh a more resonant journey in the sequel. As the matter a fact, the plot is even more resonant in the sequel than it was on the first movie. Mowgli gets torn between the two worlds and actually has a more obvious growth. Even Baloo goes through an arc. I'm not saying that the sequel is amazing. In fact, it had some flaws and I absolutely HATED how they made Shanti to a personality-deprived coward, when she had the potential to be a great character. But it had a more resonant and logical story.

I feel that The Jungle Book is a hugely thought-provoking, deep, profound and philosophical movie. Mowgli is a catalyst for the audience, being lured into the practitioners of various lifestyles (all with pros and cons) by the likes of Baloo, King Louie, the Vultures (characters with designs comically based upon the Beatles) and eventually - but to a much lesser extent - an Indian village girl.

The film wisely never presents us with what the best lifestyle really is; it just presents a wide variety of different lifestyles, from the uncaring, sloth-like way of life that Baloo practises, to the seemingly nihilistic lifestyle of King Louie and the monkeys. It leaves the decision up to us, but tries to show the consequences of the different ways of life.

The fact that you think the sequel is better (at least 'story-wise') baffles me.

[DisneyFan09]

Ariel does not have a shallow and short-sighted desire. She's realised that humans aren't bad like her ignorant father believes, and is intrigued by the world 'up there.' Isn't that understandable? If you knew there was an underwater world filled with mermaids and mermen, and you were very depressed and bored by the world, then wouldn't you want to see the underwater world, which from the little you've seen of is technologically groundbreaking, wondrous and heavenly?

Okay, you've got a point about Ariel realizing that the humnas are not bad. And yes, it is understandable, but it doesn't make her a less shallow character. She clearly doesn't appreciate the life she has in the sea, when it doesn't seem to be that bad. And she doesn't change og grow as a character, even after that she gets what she wants. Again; If she actually had a more deeper, complex reason to yearn for the surface (like Quasimodo or Rapunzel, for example), then it would make her character more resonant.

He realises that he is uncapable to handle Mowgli, so I don't see how that's a problem.

I never thought of it as directly a problem. I'm just suming up the characters and mentioning the flaws of Baloo. And I actually used to love Baloo as a kid. Seriously, you're overanalyzing what I'm saying.

Baloo is shown to be clearly flawed and he recognises it, and he DOES accept Mowgli going into the man village. Yes, you may feel that his urgings for Mowgli to come back show him to be unaccepting of Mowgli's choice, but nonetheless, if you were a parent, wouldn't you forcefully try to stop your child from going away and possibly never seeing you again?

Okay, you've got a point.

Yes, Baloo only knew Mowgli fleetingly, but I inferred that he was rather lonely and wanted a companion. He also had a natural fatherly instinct, even if he was rather absent-minded, but it's not his fault the monkeys kidnapped Mowgli.

Actually, it was his fault. If he had paid more attention, he could have prevented it.

I feel that The Jungle Book is a hugely thought-provoking, deep, profound and philosophical movie. Mowgli is a catalyst for the audience, being lured into the practitioners of various lifestyles (all with pros and cons) by the likes of Baloo, King Louie, the Vultures (characters with designs comically based upon the Beatles) and eventually - but to a much lesser extent - an Indian village girl.

The film wisely never presents us with what the best lifestyle really is; it just presents a wide variety of different lifestyles, from the uncaring, sloth-like way of life that Baloo practises, to the seemingly nihilistic lifestyle of King Louie and the monkeys. It leaves the decision up to us, but tries to show the consequences of the different ways of life.

Okay. That's your thought. But I still have to disagree.

The fact that you think the sequel is better (at least 'story-wise') baffles me.

And why does it baffle you that people have different opinion than you?? Aren't you capable to see things from another perspective?