DVDizzy Forum

Again, Disney labels them and you decide once you have seen it.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/ho ... 1003154642

Rights to the Pokemon franchise in America were bought by Disney in 2003. All Disney does is dub them, but they don't animate it or create the story. Disney has made shows that didn't air on ABC. I don't think they have any at the moment, however. Also, "Tom and Jerry: The Movie" isn't owned by Disney at all. I think it was originally made by F.H.E. and was purchased and is now owned by Warner Bros. I guess the three Myazaki films listed could be considdered since Disney did help fund their production in Japan (I guess Disney is Studio Ghibli's distributer there, too). The Pixar films deffinatly should count under the new deffinition because they were all funded by Disney. While I love "Ducktales: The Movie," "Doug's 1st Movie," and "Teacher's Pet" I feel that films made from TV series deffinatley shouldn't be included, although if Disney is going by the current deffinition then they would count.

That being said, "The Wild" is only being counted overseas and that's just at the moment. It's all a big marketing strategy to sell more copies of a film that was a money looser in theaters (cost $80 million to make, earned $86 million worldwide, but the marketing costs were at least another $20 million). While I like the film alot, I have a feeling that when Disney starts counting again in the U.S. that "The Wild" probably won't be on the list. At least that's what I'm hoping for.

goofystitch wrote:Rights to the Pokemon franchise in America were bought by Disney in 2003. All Disney does is dub them, but they don't animate it or create the story. Disney has made shows that didn't air on ABC. I don't think they have any at the moment, however. Also, "Tom and Jerry: The Movie" isn't owned by Disney at all. I think it was originally made by F.H.E. and was purchased and is now owned by Warner Bros. I guess the three Myazaki films listed could be considdered since Disney did help fund their production in Japan (I guess Disney is Studio Ghibli's distributer there, too). The Pixar films deffinatly should count under the new deffinition because they were all funded by Disney. While I love "Ducktales: The Movie," "Doug's 1st Movie," and "Teacher's Pet" I feel that films made from TV series deffinatley shouldn't be included, although if Disney is going by the current deffinition then they would count.

That being said, "The Wild" is only being counted overseas and that's just at the moment. It's all a big marketing strategy to sell more copies of a film that was a money looser in theaters (cost $80 million to make, earned $86 million worldwide, but the marketing costs were at least another $20 million). While I like the film alot, I have a feeling that when Disney starts counting again in the U.S. that "The Wild" probably won't be on the list. At least that's what I'm hoping for.

Disney did not finance the Ghibli films, while being produced. However, like the Pokemon films, they were dubbed (thus being financially backed), and distributed.

By the way requilla, you have no idea what you are talking about. It does not matter how good or bad a movie it is to be considered in the "canon".

I don't think "The Wild" is a Disney classic. I feel that it borrows too many elements of the "Madagascar" formula. I think if it's going to be considered a classic than it needs to be an orginal film. I also agree the "Duck Tales The Movie" should be considered classic, that along with "Dougs 1st Movie".

castleinthesky wrote:

goofystitch wrote:Rights to the Pokemon franchise in America were bought by Disney in 2003. All Disney does is dub them, but they don't animate it or create the story. Disney has made shows that didn't air on ABC. I don't think they have any at the moment, however. Also, "Tom and Jerry: The Movie" isn't owned by Disney at all. I think it was originally made by F.H.E. and was purchased and is now owned by Warner Bros. I guess the three Myazaki films listed could be considdered since Disney did help fund their production in Japan (I guess Disney is Studio Ghibli's distributer there, too). The Pixar films deffinatly should count under the new deffinition because they were all funded by Disney. While I love "Ducktales: The Movie," "Doug's 1st Movie," and "Teacher's Pet" I feel that films made from TV series deffinatley shouldn't be included, although if Disney is going by the current deffinition then they would count.

That being said, "The Wild" is only being counted overseas and that's just at the moment. It's all a big marketing strategy to sell more copies of a film that was a money looser in theaters (cost $80 million to make, earned $86 million worldwide, but the marketing costs were at least another $20 million). While I like the film alot, I have a feeling that when Disney starts counting again in the U.S. that "The Wild" probably won't be on the list. At least that's what I'm hoping for.

Disney did not finance the Ghibli films, while being produced. However, like the Pokemon films, they were dubbed (thus being financially backed), and distributed.

By the way requilla, you have no idea what you are talking about. It does not matter how good or bad a movie it is to be considered in the "canon".

That's for Disney executive to decide.

reyquila wrote:

castleinthesky wrote: Disney did not finance the Ghibli films, while being produced. However, like the Pokemon films, they were dubbed (thus being financially backed), and distributed.

By the way requilla, you have no idea what you are talking about. It does not matter how good or bad a movie it is to be considered in the "canon".

That's for Disney executive to decide.

And that is your very biased opinion.

goofystitch wrote:By the way, I'm curious to know more about the hisrory of the France studio and Japan's. If anyone knows more(or if I was wrong about anything) please post.

I'm an expert on the Sydney studio (I've even got photos), but I don't know much about the Paris and Tokyo ones.

Ok so is this movie part of the classics or what?

drnilescrane wrote:

I'm an expert on the Sydney studio (I've even got photos), but I don't know much about the Paris and Tokyo ones.

I'm very interested in hearing about it and seeing the pictures, so if you have time, please tell and post about it.

BATBfan1 wrote:

Ok so is this movie part of the classics or what?

At the moment, only in European countries. I was unaware, but I guess Disney stoped officially counting in the U.S. in 2004. The U.K. DVD numbers it as the 46th "animated classic." It's been a topic of much debate seeing as Disney only financed it. It was animated by C.O.R.E. In the past, the deffinition of what was numbered was anything made by Walt Disney Feature Animation, but the addition of "The Wild" in Europe breaks that. However, in Europe they also count the live action/animated films in the list such as "Mary Poppins" and "Pete's Dragon." In the states, we don't count them. I'm hoping that when/if Disney ever starts counting again, they will not be including "The Wild." I loved the film, but it just seems wrong to me. When I buy "The Wild," I will be placing it with films like "Dinosaur" and "A Goofy Movie," not after "Chicken Little" where Disney claims it belongs.

goofystitch - Chicken Little however is part of the animated classics. I feel that movie should be with dinosaurs and the other IMO because it is not 2-D animation.

I know. I have all the "classics" in chronological order on my shelf. After that I have the Pixar films, and then movies like "Dinosaur." I do put "Chicken Little" next to "Home on the Range" because it technically is the 45th film made by WDFA, thus in my book, making it the 45th "classic." I think by now, the number counting is pretty much open to interpretation since Dinsey themselves have stoped counting in America. When I get "The Wild," I'll be puting it with "Dinosaur" and "Valient" and films of that nature.

reyquila wrote:Again, Disney labels them and you decide once you have seen it.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/ho ... 1003154642

Your statement has NOTHING to do with the article...

First off, the article is written by a person from Hollywood Reporter, it isn't a press release from Disney... Second, nowhere in that article is "Animated Classic" mentioned, much less Disney itself... The writer used Buena Vista Home Entertainment...

By Thomas K. Arnold

Buena Vista Home Entertainment snagged the top two spots on the national DVD sales chart for the week ending Sept. 17 with the theatrical underachiever "The Wild" and a season two DVD set of television's hot "Grey's Anatomy," both new arrivals in stores last week.

I don't know if this means anything, but The Wild was prominent in a WDFA Sticker Book I saw at Costco today. BTW, the Pixar one had all the Pixar "film pals" except for A Bug's Life; and there was a DTV book as well. Anyways, here's the cameraphone pic I grabbed:

As far as I know, it's not the 46th Animated Classic in "Europe", just the UK. France for example has a totally different way of numbering the Disney films, with includes DTVs etc.

I'm not sure about other European countries. I know they do number the films, but its telling no other country has been mentioned throughout this "is it a classic" circular logic debate in many threads.

Even IF The Wild was classified by every country in the world as a DAC, it would not really make any difference. We can still buy and enjoy whatever movies we want to see. I was going for a complete DAC collection, but I can just call it a WDFA collection instead.

I just watched The Wild for the first time jsut a few minutes ago, and i thought i would share some thoughts.

I still don't want it to be considered to be an animated classic, which it's not in the U.S. but i will admit i enjoyed the animation. I liked the way it looked and i thought the characters fit the whole feel of the movie well too. I actually think it's much better than Madagascar and it's a shame it's going to be considered a knock off of Madagascar just became it came out after it. I would suggest giving this film a try, if you havn't seen it already. that's my two cents.

I still really want A Goofy Movie and DuckTales The Movie: Treasure of the Lost Lamp to be considered classics. i think they deserve it, and even though they may have not been made in the same location as The Little Mermaid or The Lion King i think they still carry the fan base and are beloved by many. That's what defines a Disney Classic in my eyes. I know it's all personal opinion though, so i'll just slip them in where they'd be in my collection if they were considered classics.

singerguy04 wrote:I still really want A Goofy Movie and DuckTales The Movie: Treasure of the Lost Lamp to be considered classics.

No way! Sorry but when I look over the list of classics they just don't fit.

Lucylover1986 wrote:No way! Sorry but when I look over the list of classics they just don't fit.

Well, I'd rather have these two as classics, than The Wild, which wasn't even made by Disney.

Hey, calm down - we know there are 44 "classics" - don't less senseless marketing decisions disturb that!

Lars Vermundsberget wrote:Hey, calm down - we know there are 44 "classics" - don't less senseless marketing decisions disturb that!

I counted 45...

Escapay