But I still keep my opinions on the masters of repetition.
Not true. Your explanation seems to me your confusing "Disney" with "90's Disney" or "Princess Disney". But if you look at the whole company starting with Walt, he NEVER made the same movie again.pap64 wrote:But many film studios are guilty of this, one of them being Disney...
So why complain about Pixar using the same formula when Disney used their own for years?
Instead of doing a sequel to Snow White or even a carbon-copy of it after it was a huge success, he instead made Pinocchio. A completely different story with completely different characters(only Gideon compares to a Snow White character). But that enough for Walt. He then made Fantasia, which is perhaps the most innovative film to this day as there's never been a film quite like it(<strike>except Fantasia 2000</strike>), he truly took risks just to bring new experiences on film. Dumbo and Bambi maybe about animals, but that's all the similarities they have. They have completely different styles, stories and characters.
There is NO Disney "formula". There was a time where people didn't associated Disney with "princess"(thanks to the lame marketing today) but with quality animation. There's was never a story formula they followed though. In fact the only formula they did was "try and experiment".
Yes, he did make Cinderella, which is nothing more but a carbon-copy of Snow White, but with the economy troubles the company faced, he had no choice but to make a film so similar to Snow White thus it was almost certain to succeed. And by the time Sleeping Beauty was in production, Walt was far more interesting in his theme parks more than he was his movies, which is why the story turned out to be quite a mess.
But with that aside, Walt was almost always original every time. And that's just animated movies. His live-action movies, infinite shorts(though a few had a formula), t.v. shows and other media like theme parks, comic books and merchandise added, and it's impossible to say seriously Disney has a "formula".
Pixar made Toy Story, which is certainly one of the most original films ever. I love that movie. A Bug's Life was just a retelling of the Seven Samurai with Toy Story elements thrown in, but for argument's sake, will say it's relatively original. But Pixar have just remade Toy Story with Monster's Inc., Finding Nemo and Cars. Not to say MI or Cars are bad movies, but Pixar is hardly as original as claimed. It seems at times almost as if they figure if they just remake the same film, no one will ever claim them to be unoriginal because they're just copying themselves. Sadly, it has worked on most people.
Brad Bird is the only real exception to the rule. He has many more stories to tell than most at Pixar(he has cases with copying himself too with The Simpsons/The Incredibles and The Iron Giant/Ratatouille, but he's able to disguise it better).
No one is saying that. What most are trying to point out is that Pixar has made the SAME film over and over and over. No company or filmmaker has ever done as much as Pixar and is able to get away with it. You can still make original executions though, and original presentations. But Pixar hasn't done a lot of that as they constantly get credit for.Siren wrote:NOTHING is 100% original anymore. So the whole argument is a moot point. You can sit and compare one book or movie to 100s of others. No matter how original it may seem at first.
I've defended Wall-E as I think it actually looks like an extremely original film. But even if it's the most original film ever made, you can't deny Pixar has formulatic plot-points.