DVDizzy Forum

JeanGreyForever wrote:Yes, the Disney canon numbers technically already existed way before Tangled. Even in the 90s, if you look at the trailers and promotion, Disney films would be labeled by number so Pocahontas was the 33rd animated feature, etc. I meant that films like Dinosaur/The Wild were not part of the canon until it was decided to make Tangled the 50th animated feature. All the rest, counted though.

Oh, OK. In Spain, however, Dinosaur was labelled a classic from the beginning. When it was first released on DVD here, it already had its number on the spine.

D82 wrote:

JeanGreyForever wrote:Yes, the Disney canon numbers technically already existed way before Tangled. Even in the 90s, if you look at the trailers and promotion, Disney films would be labeled by number so Pocahontas was the 33rd animated feature, etc. I meant that films like Dinosaur/The Wild were not part of the canon until it was decided to make Tangled the 50th animated feature. All the rest, counted though.

Oh, OK. In Spain, however, Dinosaur was labelled a classic from the beginning. When it was first released on DVD here, it already had its number on the spine.

Oh, wow. I didn't realize that. That's interesting that Spain recognized Dinosaur as a classic from the very beginning. From what I heard on here, it always seemed as though Disney just threw it into the canon to make Tangled the 50th animated feature for the US, but that makes me think otherwise and that maybe with or without Tangled, Disney might still have considered Dinosaur a classic. It's difficult to say though because it seems each country has their own list.

JeanGreyForever wrote:Oh, wow. I didn't realize that. That's interesting that Spain recognized Dinosaur as a classic from the very beginning. From what I heard on here, it always seemed as though Disney just threw it into the canon to make Tangled the 50th animated feature for the US, but that makes me think otherwise and that maybe with or without Tangled, Disney might still have considered Dinosaur a classic. It's difficult to say though because it seems each country has their own list.

Yeah, I don't know. In the US the classics don't have the number on the spine, right? Then it's more difficult to know when they started to consider it a classic.

D82 wrote:Personally, with the possible exception of Dinosaur, I think the list is quite accurate. It includes all the theatrically released features produced at WDAS that are mostly animated. (With the exception of Victory Through Air Power, which is basically a documentary, so I understand its exclusion.)

But I agree that there can be other ways of categorizing them, depending on the criteria you use. I can understand that some would prefer all the classics to be one complete stories and not anthology films, while others would like to see all the feature films that Walt released which include some animation (like The Reluctant Dragon, Song of the South, etc.) included.

However, if you excluded all the anthology films, then you should also exclude the two Fantasias and The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. And if, for instance, you dismiss any film with live-action footage, the Fantasias wouldn’t be part of the collection either, and if you were to be very strict, not even Lilo & Stitch (it features live-action images on a TV) or the Walt Disney movies that open with a live-action book, like Snow White or The Jungle Book.

All deserve to be released again and not forgotten. But which ones that actually belongs in the canon is partial to do with personal preferences, but also other elements.

The first five Disney features is called "the big five", because they represent the avant-garde era at Disney when he planned to keep improving for each new movie, and originally intended to release a new feature every six month. Then the war happened, and when it was over he had to deal with limitations due to the budget, which killed much of his earlier enthusiasm. For that reason, I don't see the problem in including the original Fantasia, even if it has some live action.

Saludos Amigos feels like the same kind of movie like The Reluctant Dragon. Much of The Three Caballeros is like an animated guide to South-America. Because the war had killed the European market, he had to focus on South-America instead.
Not sure about Make Mine Music, Fun and Fancy Free (I wish they had skipped the live action elements), Melody Time and The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.

Winnie the Pooh is perhaps made up of three different featureettes already released, but at least they are tied together as a whole with the same character and the same area.
Short glimpses of Elvis or a book opening is irrelevant. One thing is being a purist, being completely fanatic is something else.

I don't feel there is anything new or revolutionary with Fantasia 2000. If it was excluded, I wouldn't complain.

https://disneyandbeyond.wordpress.com/2 ... -dinosaur/

Dinosaur is a really weird film when it comes to The Disney Canon. It was released in 2000, which featured 3 Disney animated film releases that were in the canon (well, 2 if you consider Fantasia 2000 released in 1999). Of these films, Dinosaur was certainly the most low profile release, and most likely one of the most forgotten films in the entire canon. In fact, it wasn’t even a part of the canon for 8 years, only living through an attraction at Walt Disney World’s Animal Kingdom that is very loosely based on the film. It officially became a part of the list in 2008, most likely so that the honor of the 50th film would go to the high-profile release Tangled, rather than the lower profile Winnie the Pooh.

My own collection stops with The Little Mermaid. That was the final cel animated movie in the canon. So between Snow White and The Little Mermaid, it is complete. After that I have only a few movies that I like more than the others, such as Aladdin, Lilo & Stitch and Wreck-It Ralph, but no true collection.
(With CAPS and CGI available, Disney was carried away for some time. Treasure Planet is almost a CGI movie with hand-drawn characters at places. But as many are probably aware, when they returned to the format with The Princess and The Frog, it was decided that computer animated movies should do what they did best, while so-called 2D movie should focus on what 2D did best. Sadly only one such movie has been released after that.)

D82 wrote:

JeanGreyForever wrote:Oh, wow. I didn't realize that. That's interesting that Spain recognized Dinosaur as a classic from the very beginning. From what I heard on here, it always seemed as though Disney just threw it into the canon to make Tangled the 50th animated feature for the US, but that makes me think otherwise and that maybe with or without Tangled, Disney might still have considered Dinosaur a classic. It's difficult to say though because it seems each country has their own list.

Yeah, I don't know. In the US the classics don't have the number on the spine, right? Then it's more difficult to know when they started to consider it a classic.

Yes, we've never had the numbers on the spines in the US. I think that's mainly a European thing.

Rumpelstiltskin wrote: My own collection stops with The Little Mermaid. That was the final cel animated movie in the canon. So between Snow White and The Little Mermaid, it is complete. After that I have only a few movies that I like more than the others, such as Aladdin, Lilo & Stitch and Wreck-It Ralph, but no true collection.
(With CAPS and CGI available, Disney was carried away for some time. Treasure Planet is almost a CGI movie with hand-drawn characters at places. But as many are probably aware, when they returned to the format with The Princess and The Frog, it was decided that computer animated movies should do what they did best, while so-called 2D movie should focus on what 2D did best. Sadly only one such movie has been released after that.)

Wow, I've met a lot of Disney fans who disregard the CGI films and even Disney fans who disregard any films after Walt's death, but I haven't met one who stops when the CAPS films start. That's really interesting actually. Always refreshing to see so many different types of Disney fans and what they equate as Disney for them.

Well, as mentioned, I do buy a Disney movie if I think it's worth it, but I no longer care about having a complete collection after the switch to CAPS. It's a fitting place to stop (at least for me). Also because the movies started to change in the 90s and beyond, for good and for worse. Like everything changes with time. Glen Keane has said the earlier animated movies looks the way they do because of the limitations of the medium (and to some degree the budget), and that computers can help remove a lot of those limitations even in hand-drawn movies. While I would love to see a movie where his ideas are fully realized, the limitations of the classic movies are also part of their charm, including the earliest Xerox features.

JeanGreyForever wrote:Wow, I've met a lot of Disney fans who disregard the CGI films and even Disney fans who disregard any films after Walt's death, but I haven't met one who stops when the CAPS films start. That's really interesting actually. Always refreshing to see so many different types of Disney fans and what they equate as Disney for them.

I get it. Digi-paint has a different look and feel than cel-painting.

Rumpelstiltskin wrote:All deserve to be released again and not forgotten. But which ones that actually belongs in the canon is partial to do with personal preferences, but also other elements.

Well, as I said, for the most part I personally agree with the US canon, but I don’t think everybody needs to agree with it. I perfectly understand the fans that, for example, not include the films after Walt; the ones that are CGI; or even, like you, the ones in which CAPS is used. And I think their points are completely valid, because it’s true that 2D and 3D animation are not the same, and neither are a cel-painting film and a CAPS-painted one.

I was just pointing out that some fans’ opinions didn’t seem to be consistent to me. They excluded some films because they are anthology features, for instance, but didn’t have problems including others who also are. But I see there can be other considerations as well. And, in the end, it’s not important what Disney says. Each one can have their own personal canon and their own rules for what a classic is for them and what’s not, and include or exclude any film they want.

Also, if we think about it, "classic" is not the correct term Disney should use, because they add every movie they produce to the list, and not every one is a classic. But that's a topic for another time.

Rumpelstiltskin wrote: https://disneyandbeyond.wordpress.com/2 ... -dinosaur/

Dinosaur is a really weird film when it comes to The Disney Canon. It was released in 2000, which featured 3 Disney animated film releases that were in the canon (well, 2 if you consider Fantasia 2000 released in 1999). Of these films, Dinosaur was certainly the most low profile release, and most likely one of the most forgotten films in the entire canon. In fact, it wasn’t even a part of the canon for 8 years, only living through an attraction at Walt Disney World’s Animal Kingdom that is very loosely based on the film. It officially became a part of the list in 2008, most likely so that the honor of the 50th film would go to the high-profile release Tangled, rather than the lower profile Winnie the Pooh.

Thanks for that bit of info. Yes, I did a little research yesterday and, though I didn't find any real proof, I saw many comments from that time from people who were surprised by its addition on the official Disney website. One person even said that he/she had a Disney leaflet from before that year that didn't include Dinosaur, so I think it must be true they added it later in the US, probably because of Tangled. I guess they were maybe unsure at first whether or not it should be part of the collection given that it was the first computer-generated feature, due to the live-action backgrounds, and/or because it was produced by a company division and not by the main studio.

Another digital tool used these days is software programs that take care of the inbetweening. Or at least some of it. If Disney has used them in their official canon I don't know, but possibly in Return to Neverland. When I saw it I knew nothing about animation, and assumed it would be just like the original movie. It was not. There was something about it that felt cheaper, even if I couldn't put my finger on exactly what. While nostalgia gives the older movies a special status, I wouldn't call modern tools cheating as long as the result is just as good or better. But if it looks worse, it's cheating.


If you look at the Wikipedia article called List of Disney theatrical animated features, you will notice that on 9 August 2008 at 15:28, Dinosaur is not included. At 18:56 the same day, the movie is included. All earlier versions of the list will show that Dinosaur was not part of the canon before this.

There are also several older articles that are referring to The Emperor's New Groove as Disney's 39th animated feature. On present day lists, it is number 40:

https://www.laughingplace.com/w/legacy/ ... 14040.asp/

Disney's 39th animated feature is now available on video and on Disney DVD in two versions: the standard one disc DVD (reviewed below) and a deluxe two disc collector's edition set titled The Ultimate Groove, which will be reviewed next week.

http://www.filmtracks.com/comments/titl ... cgi?read=2

I purchase soundtrack albums for various reasons. Sometimes it could be that it just so happens to be a score to a movie that I have interest in seeing in. Or it could be that I happen to be a collector of a certain genre, and so purchase them, regardless of how good or bad they are. The Emperor's New Groove falls into this latter category, in that it is the soundtrack to Disney's 39th animated feature, which will be released this December.

http://www.animationartconservation.com ... roove.html

Pre-Columbian art inspires the look of Disney’s 39th animated feature.

https://www.soundtrack.net/album/emperors-new-groove/

What happens when two years of work goes down the drain in one fell swoop? The uneven musical chaos that is Walt Disney's 39th animated feature: The Emperor's New Groove.

https://www.albawaba.com/entertainment/ ... new-groove

Disney's 39th animated feature takes place in a mythical South American empire, where an arrogant young Emporer Kuzco, David Spade, is transformed into a llama by his power hungry advisor, the devious diva Yzma, Eartha Kitt.

In February 2008, Atlantis: The Lost Empire was still considered number 40 in the canon:
http://www.blueskydisney.com/2008/02/20 ... uence.html

"Atlantis: The Lost Empire"
The ambitious and beautifully drawn, but flawed 40th animated feature from Walt Disney Pictures was an entertaining story set a little after the turn of the century(1914) in an America emerging from the birth of the Industrial Revolution.

What about the American DVDs? What does the number on the spine says for those released before 2008 when Dinosaur was included?

^Thanks for all that info, Rumpelstiltskin! The people who wrote these articles must have gotten the info on the number of classic from a press release issued by Disney, so I think it proves the studio didn't consider Dinosaur a classic until 2008.

Rumpelstiltskin wrote:What about the American DVDs? What does the number on the spine says for those released before 2008 when Dinosaur was included?

I asked that same question and JeanGreyForever replied to me that American DVDs don't have the numbers on the spines.

You welcome. To be honest, I would prefer it if the movies didn't have any number on the spine here as well. (On the other hand, that's probably how they could get away with adding Dinosaur to the list.)

Another example. Home on the Range is now considered Disney's 45th animated feature. Back then it was considered number 44 (if you read the reviews on Amazon and imdb before 2008, they will refer to it as 44 as well, the same pattern goes for all the movies between Fantasia 2000 and Meet the Robinsons)

http://animatedviews.com/2004/home-on-the-range/

Home On The Range, officially Disney’s 44th and final animated film in the list that starts with Snow White, just about gets it right.

http://www.dvdizzy.com/archives-0904a.html

September 1, 2004 - Our latest DVD review covers Disney's 44th animated classic, Home on the Range, which hits stores in two weeks.

https://www.baltictimes.com/news/articles/10961/

"Home on the Range" is to be the 44th as well as the last film to be meticulously drawn by hand.

http://www.meeko.org/disney/meettherobinsons/info.html

Meet the Robinsons, the 46th Walt Disney Animated Feature Film, is a computer animated film based on the characters and events in the illustrated book A Day with Wilbur Robinson, by William Joyce.

In late November 2008, there were still those who hadn't heard that Dinosaur had been included:
https://www.thestar.com.my/lifestyle/en ... or-a-hero/

Bolt, Disney’s 47th animated feature, also serves as the animated feature-film directing debut for filmmakers Chris Williams (The Emperor’s New Groove, Giago’s Guest) and Byron Howard (Lilo & Stitch, Brother Bear), two Disney veterans each with over a decade of work experience with the company.

http://theanimationempire.blogspot.no/2 ... d.html?m=0

The Princess and the Frog will be a 2009 upcoming American animated feature film produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios and based upon the classic fairy tale The Frog Prince. It will be the first traditional animated feature since 2004's Home on the Range. When finished, it will take its place as the 48th animated feature by Walt Disney Animation Studios.

But a few months later, most seemed to be aware:
http://j-entonline.com/blu-ray-dvd-revi ... sc-review/

The BOLT Blu-ray release scores a perfect 10 for picture and audio quality and special features! A wonderful release! The 48th animated feature from Walt Disney Animation Studios features an all-star cast with voice courtesy of John Travolta, Miley Cyrus, Malcolm McDowell, Susie Essman, James Lipton and many more and was released in theaters in Nov. 2008 and immediately, it was a clash of the titans as the animated film had to go against box office heavyweights such as the latest 007 film “Quantum of Solace” and the vampire hit “TWILIGHT”.

For the longest time I thought JeanGrey was from Thailand...

Also hey D82, I know there are Spanish Disney forums out there, do you happen to be inside them?

thedisneyspirit wrote:For the longest time I thought JeanGrey was from Thailand...

Also hey D82, I know there are Spanish Disney forums out there, do you happen to be inside them?

Lol really? I wonder why you thought that.

thedisneyspirit wrote:Also hey D82, I know there are Spanish Disney forums out there, do you happen to be inside them?

No, I don’t. This is the only forum I’m a member of. Well, I registered on the Animated Views forum too a couple of years ago so I could participate in the Oscars contest they run each year, but I’ve never commented there.

I know it’s maybe a bit strange that being Spanish I’m in an American forum and not in a Spanish one. Well, this is the first forum I found when I finally had Internet at home some years ago. At first I didn’t understand much English, but I came here to see the new trailers, stills, etc. that people here shared. Later, I discovered there were Spanish forums as well, though they didn’t seem as active. At least then, I don’t know how they are now. Once, I posted a comment on a Spanish blog about Disney that, if I remember it correctly, was called “Informemos de Disney” (I think it doesn't exist now) and they invited me to join their forum, but I didn’t do it. I’m very introvert and shy and, at the time, I thought that that wasn’t for me.

However, after three years more or less lurking on here, I had learned a bit more English and I also knew the members a bit by reading their posts, plus I saw there were people from all over the world, so I finally felt confident enough to join in. But, I didn’t think I would post much.

Now, however, maybe I post too much considering I’m still not too fluent in English. By the way, I take the opportunity to say that if you guys sometimes don’t understand something I say or if you see that I wrote something wrong, feel free to correct me. I won’t be upset; on the contrary, I’ll be very grateful, because I want to improve my English.

Sorry, thedisneyspirit, I know you didn’t ask for the story of my life , but I wanted to clarify my answer a bit.

D82 wrote:I was just pointing out that some fans’ opinions didn’t seem to be consistent to me. They excluded some films because they are anthology features, for instance, but didn’t have problems including others who also are.

In my case, if it's called a package feaure, it's different. But it's basically that Walt Disney intended Fantasia to be a full-quality feature-length film, but not the other anthology pictures. The only one I might be ok with is The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.

D82 wrote:Also, if we think about it, "classic" is not the correct term Disney should use, because they add every movie they produce to the list, and not every one is a classic. But that's a topic for another time.

Yeah, they shouldn't use the word classic.

Rumpelstiltskin wrote:Another digital tool used these days is software programs that take care of the inbetweening. Or at least some of it. If Disney has used them in their official canon I don't know, but possibly in Return to Neverland. When I saw it I knew nothing about animation, and assumed it would be just like the original movie. It was not. There was something about it that felt cheaper, even if I couldn't put my finger on exactly what. While nostalgia gives the older movies a special status, I wouldn't call modern tools cheating as long as the result is just as good or better. But if it looks worse, it's cheating.

If a film is cheating with comouters doing inbetweening, it's cheating no matter how it looks. Even if we can't tell the difference, what matters is the truth, that a human inbeteewened it or not.

D82 wrote:Now, however, maybe I post too much considering I’m still not too fluent in English. By the way, I take the opportunity to say that if you guys sometimes don’t understand something I say or if you see that I wrote something wrong, feel free to correct me. I won’t be upset; on the contrary, I’ll be very grateful, because I want to improve my English.

You don't post too much. I'm glad you joined.

D82 wrote:Now, however, maybe I post too much considering I’m still not too fluent in English. By the way, I take the opportunity to say that if you guys sometimes don’t understand something I say or if you see that I wrote something wrong, feel free to correct me. I won’t be upset; on the contrary, I’ll be very grateful, because I want to improve my English.

Your English is perfect. You shouldn't feel so self-conscious about it. And you certainly don't post too much. There's no such thing! I, for one, am always looking forward to reading your posts whether it's about new info or just your opinion on things. I'm glad you decided to participate and not just lurk anymore. You've been a great addition to our little community!

D82 wrote:

thedisneyspirit wrote: Now, however, maybe I post too much considering I’m still not too fluent in English. By the way, I take the opportunity to say that if you guys sometimes don’t understand something I say or if you see that I wrote something wrong, feel free to correct me. I won’t be upset; on the contrary, I’ll be very grateful, because I want to improve my English.

I could never even tell that English is not your first language. It doesn't come across that way at all in your posts, so you clearly have an excellent grasp on the language and are a fast learner. I know many people learn English more readily from watching movies, reading books, posting on the internet, etc.

Like everyone else, I'm really glad you are here as well and I don't think it's possible for you to post too much, so don't go anywhere

Wow, thanks Disney Duster, Sotiris and JeanGreyForever for your kind words. You've managed to make me cry, seriously. I’m also really glad to be part of this amazing community and to be able to discuss my favorite topic (Disney) with people as nice as you three and the rest of the members.

Thanks also for your compliments about my English. It means a lot to me. I try to write English correctly and, well, I can see by the replies that people more or less understand me, but I’m never sure if I'm actually achieving it or if I make some big mistakes every once in a while. I now you would understand if I made some errors given that I'm not a native speaker, but I was worried that maybe it could become a bit annoying now that I post more often. That's what I was referring to when I said that I was maybe posting too much. So I’m glad to hear that you think I’m not doing it so bad. That's a relief and gives me a bit more self-confidence.

However, I wanted to explain that my problem is not only writing in a different language, though it is definitely an obstacle to me, but also that I’ve always found it difficult to express myself, in my own language too. Maybe (hopefully) it doesn’t show much, but what others write in 5 minutes, it can take hours to me. And I’m not exaggerating. That, along with the language, is why I don’t post many long messages such as reviews, etc. or I usually avoid getting involved in discussions. But, little by little, I know I’m improving on that aspect as well. And posting here has definitely helped me a lot, not only with my English, but also with writing in general. Also, with people as understanding and supportive as you it's certainly much easier for me.

Disney Duster wrote:In my case, if it's called a package feaure, it's different. But it's basically that Walt Disney intended Fantasia to be a full-quality feature-length film, but not the other anthology pictures. The only one I might be ok with is The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.

OK, I understand your reasoning. Well, to me though he didn’t intended to make the package films the way they are at first and was forced by the circumstances of the time, he finally decided to released them that way, so they count to me. But I admit that you have a good excuse to exclude them.

D82 wrote: However, I wanted to explain that my problem is not only writing in a different language, though it is definitely an obstacle to me, but also that I’ve always found it difficult to express myself, in my own language too. Maybe (hopefully) it doesn’t show much, but what others write in 5 minutes, it can take hours to me. And I’m not exaggerating. That, along with the language, is why I don’t post many long messages such as reviews, etc. or I usually avoid getting involved in discussions. But, little by little, I know I’m improving on that aspect as well. And posting here has definitely helped me a lot, not only with my English, but also with writing in general. Also, with people as understanding and supportive as you it's certainly much easier for me.

If it's any consolation, you're not the only one who feels this way. Sometimes I feel like I have issues articulating my thoughts into a coherent post that others would understand. There are lots of times I want to post something in a discussion thread, but I find that I'm struggling to actually word what I am thinking or feeling. I completely understand what you mean about sometimes it taking hours to formulate a response. Whenever I'm struggling, I just leave the thread open in the background so I can come back to it a few hours later and maybe I'll be able to better word what I want to say. Other times, though, I still haven't figured out how to write it so I don't bother posting after all and just close the thread. I think expressing ourselves verbally or in writing can be difficult for anyone, even in their first language, let alone a second language, and I'm sure there are others who agree with us, so you're certainly not alone in that. I'm glad that your posting has helped you with your writing in general. I think it has for me in my writing as well, because I know it's not TV that's getting me good marks on my essays.

Disney Duster wrote:

D82 wrote:I was just pointing out that some fans’ opinions didn’t seem to be consistent to me. They excluded some films because they are anthology features, for instance, but didn’t have problems including others who also are.

In my case, if it's called a package feaure, it's different. But it's basically that Walt Disney intended Fantasia to be a full-quality feature-length film, but not the other anthology pictures. The only one I might be ok with is The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad.

I personally don't count Ichabod and Mr. Toad either. Besides the fact that I've never liked packing together two works of fiction that have nothing to do with another, I think both follow in the quality of the other package films, rather than the films that came after (Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, etc.). I know Walt was planning on making The Legend of Sleepy Hollow and The Wind in the Willows into full-length features but at least when it came to The Wind in the Willows, he felt the animation was not up to the quality of his previous features (not even Dumbo level), which is why it was turned into a package film. Which I think is a shame, because I've always wanted to see a story like The Wind in the Willows get the full-length animated feature treatment so it could be more recognized as a classic outside of the UK the way Winnie the Pooh, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan, Mary Poppins, etc. are now. Sleepy Hollow, however, I think works really well as a stand-alone short, especially since it's almost word-for-word based off the source material meaning it doesn't get any filler scenes like Disney adaptations tend to get in the Walt-era. Although I personally can't stand anything with Bing Crosby.

D82, you can never post too much even after saying why you think you do, and I have always understood you. I really like reading from you here.