DVDizzy Forum

That's why I was so surprised to see that Frollo's villain cover WAS an actual still from the film!


I guess Disney doesn't even HAVE clip-art of the character? I'm sure if they did, it would be him looking over his eyebrows, smiling wickedly with his hands in a praying gesture...

Most of these Villain covers have looked pretty awful, but Frollo and King Candy actually look...good. I'm wondering if Professor Ratigan's cover will use a still? I can't imagine Disney keeps clip-art from Great Mouse Detective handy... If they do, I'm going to be tempted to buy both of them.

Talked before but...Why Disney not only drops the quality with their BD and DVD releases but they can´t even keep consistency?

I´ve been getting the recent BD releases in Spain (Atlantis, Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet, Oliver & Company) and it´s so frustrating (actually makes me angry) that Disney doesn´t makes new extras but don´t even port the old ones. But, to make matters worse, is how cheap they´ve went with the whole packaging. From using old DVD covers to the "bland" blu discs instead of using art; when before they did something really nice by dividing the disc with half showing art and the other just the BD info.

http://www.covershut.com/cd_covers/Tang ... -51424.jpg

Everything, everything, screams cheap, laziness, lack of care and yet they sell each movie full price.

ProfessorRatigan wrote:That's why I was so surprised to see that Frollo's villain cover WAS an actual still from the film!


I guess Disney doesn't even HAVE clip-art of the character? I'm sure if they did, it would be him looking over his eyebrows, smiling wickedly with his hands in a praying gesture...

Like this?

The Frollo cover is decent but the rest of them are horrible. The little mermaid, too. That's my favorite movie and Ursula looks .. not good. Allthough it could have been worse, I mean they did go from this horrible cover
to this not-so-horrible-but-still-bad coverso it's an upgrade but I would have preferred a still from the movie.

I'm still not quite sure why they're being released like this ? Just for Maleficent ?

Atlantica wrote:I'm still not quite sure why they're being released like this ? Just for Maleficent ?

...Basically

Found Cover Art on Amazon's website



http://www.amazon.com/Adventures-Ichabo ... rds=disney

universALLove

With the recent DAC announcements for the US, are these the remaining titles that have yet to be released on Blu in the US?...

Saludos Amigos
The Three Caballeros
Make Mine Music
Melody Time
101 Dalmatians
The Black Cauldron
Aladdin

Have any of these been announced?

tlc38tlc38 wrote:With the recent DAC announcements for the US, are these the remaining titles that have yet to be released on Blu in the US?...

Saludos Amigos
The Three Caballeros
Make Mine Music
Melody Time
101 Dalmatians
The Black Cauldron
Aladdin

Have any of these been announced?

Yes, that is correct. Nothing has been officially announced yet, but 101 Dalmatians and Aladdin are expected to be next year's Diamond Editions.

So, expect The Black Cauldron as well? That would be the only one not getting a BD release nowhere and I thing they´d release it soon to get them over and start rereleases; if they do so.

Sigh. Sadly, the Great Mouse Detective Villains Collection edition is only available on DVD. Not Blu-ray. It's a shame.

They used a really great still as their Ratigan image (just like I predicted they would. I so called them not even HAVING clip art of Ratigan on hand. Depressing, but, I figured as much).

Same with Black Cauldron. DVD only.

DC Fan wrote:So, expect The Black Cauldron as well? That would be the only one not getting a BD release nowhere and I thing they´d release it soon to get them over and start rereleases; if they do so.

The Black Cauldron is celebrating it's 30th Anniversary next year, so there's a big chance we'll see this one then. Who knows, it also could be released this year with the Anniversary tag.

As for re-releases, sadly I don't think we'll see any of those due to the way the general public is adapting to digital distribution. Hope I'm wrong though.

Coming July 22nd


Source: http://forum.blu-ray.com/showthread.php?t=244093

I shiver.

-Placing basically 2 movies that have nothing to do in common (the sequel let´s call it an extra) on a pack; at least Ichabod and Fun and Fancy share the Package Film theme.

-They have the order wrong; Oliver comes after Fox and the Hound.

-How much will it cost since the buyer has to also pay for Fox and the Hound II?; implying it´s not going to be cheap, so what´s the idea then?

-Is this going to be a replacement wave since Oliver and Fox and the Hound are selling out?; what´s a person to do then if already has 1 of the 2?

What the heck Disney?

So glad I moved to Spain where I have my collection with each movie being sold individually and without the sequels forced into the customer.

PS

The most important thing to me (even tough selling 2 different movies together should be the main issue) is the wrong order for the cover.

To me that´s just hitting rock bottom for Disney in the way that clearly shows they officially just dropped the ball in quality. It´s obvious now that they just don´t care for these movies. If something so simple is wrong then there´s just no hope left.

...What I´m saying? They didn´t even make a new art forThe Fox and the Hound. They cut the characters and replaced them to fit the new cover; now Tod is looking nowhere AND it also somehow makes the title wrong since now the hound comes first than the fox.

^These aren’t great films, they’re not very popular, they’ve never generated a ton of money. Rather than drop the price point, they’ve made a practice of including sequels as a value-added measure. In other words, they’re doing exactly what you suggested they do with the package features—

DC Fan wrote:-They´d give more for the money.
-People wouldn´t find them as lacking.
-People wouldn´t mind as much adding 2 VHS, DVD, BD to their collection.

—even though *that* would go against “each movie being sold individually” and result in films being *forced* onto consumers.
(If this release isn’t going to be in your market, why do you care?)

By and large, the films packaged with their sequels can be had for reasonable prices—TFaTH BD package can be had for under $20 on Amazon (as can The Rescuers package). Oliver & Company as a standalone BD release is selling for less than $15. The DMC full price for this Fox/Oliver release is $24.95, so they’re clearly not charging a premium.

Will this be replacing the current, separate releases or will this 3-Movie Collection be available in addition to the individual releases? I've yet to get these two movies but I'd rather purchase them both separately for uniformity reasons and superficial (I prefer full cover art to half and half unless it's done like Fantasia/The Rescuers/Atlantis/Lilo & Stitch etc.)

Isn't this supposed to be a DMC exclusive release?!

^These aren’t great films, they’re not very popular, they’ve never generated a ton of money. Rather than drop the price point, they’ve made a practice of including sequels as a value-added measure. In other words, they’re doing exactly what you suggested they do with the package features—

Oliver was actually the highest grossing animated film ever when it was released. It was popular when it came out(just like Land B4 Time was the same year) its just that, as Disney tends to do so often, it got ignored the minute Mermaid(the next big thing) came out the following year. Im not sure how F&H performed in its initial release. But I definitely remember Oliver as its what made me a Disney fan.

as for not being great films, well that's a personal thing. I have nosalgia love for Oliver but I can understand how it might not be another's cup of tea.

as for the double pack, I already have them individually so i dont care if they discontinue the individual releases, but its sucks to know how little Disney cares for their history.

Fflewduur:


As unprincess commented one thing is that these movies may not be that popular and another different thing is how much money they made.

Plus, these movies have nothing in common. As such, it´s the same as what I said about the Package films. Next thing Disney will kept on doing the same thing; Example: The Hunchback of Notre Dame with 101 Dalmatians.

Even tough it doesn´t personally affect me because I´m in another market as you said that´s got nothing to to with the fact that I´a Disney fan and I don´t like these things happening. Especially in the USA.

Yes—point taken about Oliver’s initial box office performance.

Since I’m feeling contrary, though = )

Accounting for the difference in budgets and adjusting for inflation, Oliver’s performance would measure about dead even with The Rescuers and would lose out to The Fox and the Hound.

More importantly, the studio has made massive hay over the decades in the re-release and home release markets—some films pretty much owe their current reputations and esteem to those second (and third and fourth) chances, while other films have little in the way of staying power. Oliver came late enough in the game that it was rather fortunate to get even a single theatrical re-release. Even without adjusting for inflation, The Rescuers and The Fox and The Hound both fared better on each of their return theatrical engagements than did Oliver. And none of these films have performed well compared to better-loved titles: Oliver may have been the highest-earning animated feature to date, but but it doesn’t measure up to the business done by 101 Dalmatians in actual or adjusted dollars, whether comparing Oliver’s debut to 101D’s final release or Oliver’s lifetime (two-engagement) domestic gross to the numbers put up during 101D’s last two trips to the theatre. And that trend carries over into home media sales…

As for “great”ness…it’s not an adjective that ought to be tossed about casually. I think the list of truly great Disney films made is a pretty short list. I’d been watching Disney films all my young life when TFaTH came out (I was 12), and I remember feeling disappointed—clearly the studio had lost some direction and some magic with Walt’s passing. Oliver and Company was a bit of a mixed bag. It felt like a retread—talking animals with a young kid n trouble at the center of it all. The musical numbers weren’t bad, some better than others (Bette Midler’s number being the best), but seemed kind of forced and tacked on. I groaned to myself during a panorama in the opening in which the dogs where the only objects moving onscreen against a static background—this is supposed to be New York? But there was something fresh about it, and alive; it was the most fun of anything released by the studio in my lifetime. It was an encouraging sign that they were headed in the right direction, but I wouldn’t call it “great.”

I don’t think the studio “forgot” Oliver. Disney has no real control over how a film will resonate with the public. It was good, it was fun, it did well, but it didn’t capture the imagination or enchant people in the way that films like Pinocchio or Peter Pan did, or like Mermaid would the next year.

One could argue that Oliver and TFaTH are both Disney Dogs movies—not that I care about defending their packaging together on that basis, but its a rationale that makes just as much sense as the Disney Princess line, which has not real justification either (apart from branding selling merchandise).

I just don’t see anything definitecely *wrong* with this release. I’m sure Disney hasn’t put any extra effort into packaging or supplements or the transfers—everything already exists, so they’re not really taking resources away from other unreleased films. And by offering them together at the price point of single feature, they’re doing what they can to increase the films’ profile and penetration, making an attractive buy out of out films for which there isn’t tremendous public enthusiasm or nostalgia.