Don Bluth's Beauty and the Beast

[MJW]

Don Bluth may be retired (I honestly didn't know that he was retired), but his company must still exist. Somebody must be running it.

Unfortunately, Sullivan Bluth Studios closed its doors in 1995, after Bluth and his partner were approached by Fox to head up their new animation studio. Bluth created Anastasia and Bartok the Magnificent before Titan A.E. pretty much bankrupted the Fox studio and they were forced to close as well.

Not sure if we'll ever see another new film from Bluth...

[Sotiris]

Not sure if we'll ever see another new film from Bluth...

Well, Bluth has been wanting to do Dragon's Lair: The Movie (which would be a prequel to the game of the same name) for a long time now. He has finished writing the screenplay and has storyboarded almost the whole movie and has been seeking funding to begin production. Unfortunately, a long time has passed since then and no one has been found to finance the film.

[Super Aurora]

Not sure if we'll ever see another new film from Bluth...

Well, Bluth has been wanting to do Dragon's Lair: The Movie (which would be a prequel to the game of the same name) for a long time now. He has finished writing the screenplay and has storyboarded almost the whole movie and has been seeking funding to begin production. Unfortunately, a long time has passed since then and no one has been found to finance the film.

The Dragon Lair games have been re-release on Wii not too long ago. It's farfetch but I wouldn't opted it to be out of option yet.

[Disney's Divinity]

I really would've liked to have seen this get made. It's too bad Bluth didn't get to make more films, considering we have so many different animation companies out there right now (well, I guess Dreamworks is the only other one in the U.S. really).

Personally, I've loved all of Bluth's heroines--Thumbelina easily being my favorite (though Benson might've tipped the edge in her favor). Plus, Beauty's design is awesome. (I was never a huge fan of Belle, so I would be open to other interpretations) The only thing I don't like about several of his films are the animals, which others already mentioned, and that looks like it would've happened here.

Still, Bluth never had a film with a female villain, that I remember. It would've been nice to see how he dealt with one, and if she would've been on the same level as Disney's villainesses. The design there is especially inspiring. She kind of reminds me of my 1st grade teacher--who I absolutely despised. Dark hair, pale white skin. Ugh. And I wonder why Disney has never used those green/blue colors for a villainess before? They would fit.

Also, Disney definitely sounds like they were consciously trying to crush Bluth, by taking up B&tB and Aladdin. Makes sense, business-wise, but still.

[Refael]

What an amazing thing this big
Don Bluth will make Disney movies
His style is a winning combination of Disney's cartoon world
I always wanted to be under the Disney films
Not at all different styles,
If Don Bluth manages projects of Disney's 2D movies just say one word "genius"

Course along with Gary Goldman

[Sky Syndrome]

Still, Bluth never had a film with a female villain, that I remember. It would've been nice to see how he dealt with one, and if she would've been on the same level as Disney's villainesses. The design there is especially inspiring. She kind of reminds me of my 1st grade teacher--who I absolutely despised. Dark hair, pale white skin. Ugh. And I wonder why Disney has never used those green/blue colors for a villainess before? They would fit.

He did have a villainess in one of his movies: Bartok The Magnificent. It's a spinoff of Anastasia about what Bartok the bat's life was like before he became Rasputin's sidekick. Bluth directed it but didn't direct any other sequels or spinoffs to his original movies. The villainess, Ludmilla, isn't anything special. She's the poor man's Jafar.

[estefan]

It's too bad Bluth didn't get to make more films, considering we have so many different animation companies out there right now (well, I guess Dreamworks is the only other one in the U.S. really).

Blue Sky and Illumination Entertainment ring a bell?

[Polizzi]

It's too bad Bluth didn't get to make more films, considering we have so many different animation companies out there right now (well, I guess Dreamworks is the only other one in the U.S. really).

Blue Sky and Illumination Entertainment ring a bell?

Not to mention, "Vanguard," "Sony Animation," and many more.

[phan258]

Still, Bluth never had a film with a female villain, that I remember. It would've been nice to see how he dealt with one, and if she would've been on the same level as Disney's villainesses. The design there is especially inspiring. She kind of reminds me of my 1st grade teacher--who I absolutely despised. Dark hair, pale white skin. Ugh. And I wonder why Disney has never used those green/blue colors for a villainess before? They would fit.

He did have a villainess in one of his movies: Bartok The Magnificent. It's a spinoff of Anastasia about what Bartok the bat's life was like before he became Rasputin's sidekick. Bluth directed it but didn't direct any other sequels or spinoffs to his original movies. The villainess, Ludmilla, isn't anything special. She's the poor man's Jafar.

Don't forget Gnorga, the Queen of Mean!

[Disney Duster]

Dear Disney Enthusiasts,

I don't mind explaining the quote. "A thing must be loved before it can be lovable." basically means that lovability is a concept of perception and perspective. When you've yet to experience the power of love, you may know that you're lovable, but your knowledge doesn't count, because nobody ELSE knows that you're lovable; when you've yet to experience love, you may not even truly be lovable, and once you're loved by someone else, their love may make you lovable. Once another person loves you, your lovability now exists, because it is known by another person, and/ or you may actually BECOME lovable because you are responding, with love, to the love of another.

I don't actually know which of these ideas was intended by Bluth. The first idea seems to be slightly shallow (You CAN be lovable without your lovability being known by another person), and yet, the second idea seems to be typical (Does lovability REALLY exist only AFTER someone is loved by someone else?) The entire issue brings up the question "If a tree falls in the woods, but nobody is around to hear it, does it really make a sound?"/ "If somebody is alone, and they've never experienced love, are they still lovable?"

I thought it meant that it meant that you can love anyone, that no one is really loveable already, or unloveable, but that in order to become loveable you just have to be loved, so anyone can be loveable. If that is what he meant, In a way, I think I like that better than the idea that someone is loveable because they act a certain way (kind, good, etc.). But I wish Mr. Bluth wood tell me himself!

[Cordy_Biddle]

I was just about to say that! Waaay too many animals! Actually, way too many side characters in general!

I want to say...I would love, very much, to see this! I like Beauty's design very much, and from what I can tell, I would like the Beast's design and that witch's design (the one with black hair in green) if they were just tweaked a bit. And Beauty should probably also be tweaked to look a little less like Thumbelina or any other previous Don Bluth girl.

I think that witch functions as the enchantress, or rather, the original story's fairy which tried to get the Prince to marry her, but she turned him into a beast when he refused. The difference is the fairy was not evil though, she made him a beast to learn what real love was. But Don Bluth's design for her reminds me of the Disney enchantress actually.

So, I would like to see this, just without the goofy, completely uneccessary and annoying-sounding animal sidekicks. It looks like Don drew the prince, Beauty's father, and maybe her sisters, and they look pretty good (even though the sisters were supposed to be a little prettier than that, I think).

I love that quote about someone having to be loved before they can be lovable! The quote seems to have been super well thought out; Don Bleuth seems to have looked at the human condition, rather than having simply focused upon The Beast himself, or the love story itself, etc.

I actually thought the quote didn't make sense. Would you mind explaining it to me?

Me too! Takes me back to a very happy and centered time in my childhood. I have a cheapo DVD with a few episodes, but I'd dearly love to see official seasons released.

Me three! I remember that from my childhood. I only rented one VHS tape but there was something about all of it I couldn't help but like. They actually had more than one season of the show? Wow. Hey, um, what did you mean by centered?

What meant by "centered" was really just that. I was a very happy kid and when I look back on that time, I re-connect with the shows I loved - "Lady Lovelylocks", "Faerie Tale Theatre", "T-Bag", "You Can't Do That on Television", "Degrassi Junior High", etc. We're talking around 1989 here.

[ajmrowland]

It's too bad Bluth didn't get to make more films, considering we have so many different animation companies out there right now (well, I guess Dreamworks is the only other one in the U.S. really).

Blue Sky and Illumination Entertainment ring a bell?

Illumination is based in France.

[dollover]

Bluth's version of Beauty looks exactly like his Thumbelina, right down to the hairstyle. I'm really glad Disney's version got made instead.

[estefan]

Blue Sky and Illumination Entertainment ring a bell?

Illumination is based in France.

Despicable Me was animated in France, I believe, but the actual production is American. Like some of Don Bluth's work was animated in Ireland, but they were still American.

[avonleastories95]

I would have loved to see this "forgotten" feature. I am sure the animation and story would have been great, and could have even leveled up to Disney's version (even though that's impossible). However, I do not think it would do too well in theaters because people would get confused and might even be tricked into seeing the wrong movie (Einstien that I am, I probably would). But then again, I have always been curious if Don Bluth had his hands on BATB and Disney with Thumbelina and Anastasia.

[Poody]

You all should check out the blog where most of this info and images came from:
http://theredanimation.canalblog.com/

It's a really awesome blog with more pics and info on other interesting animated films!

[SpringHeelJack]

Oh how I love this artist,
He has a rather unique style.
Attention! Image of Beauty and the Beast girl
Figure very similar lines of Thumbelina
Don one of the great artists they grew up
His film is very successful and beautiful
Anastasia is the perfect animated film has always been

I swear, he's like speaking in iambic pentameter or something.

Having just finally gotten around to reading this, let also echo Super Aurora's "too many fucking animals" remark. I mean... show some restraint. Just because she CAN have five animal friends doesn't mean she should. Also... the clairvoyant dog? Okay. Anyhow.

On another note, the whole bit about evil Queen Idontfeellikelookinguphername made me think about how a common weakness of the Bluth films (to me) seem to be a lack of particularly memorable villains. The only two who I'd consider all that noteworthy are Jenner from "NIMH" and Rasputin, though even he feels wasted at times (maybe it'd be better to say he doesn't quite know how to handle villains).

[Disney's Divinity]

Well, it's sort of like how Ariel originally had a huge amount of friends, before they finally narrowed it down to three (there was a dolphin, and then some other character that was supposed to have been a polyp in Ursula's lair).

Still, it's not so hard to believe that a character like Ariel would have lots of friends. Maybe it would've been the same case here?

[SpringHeelJack]

I don't think it's so much a case of "I don't think so-and-so would have a lot of friends" as it is that it's better to focus on developing a relationship between one friend in particular (I mean, as much as you can in a 90some minute movie).

And really, it DOES make sense to me that Ariel would have maybe one close friend. If she's that interested in the human world, it seems unlikely that there'd be a whole slew of others who'd indulge or support her.

[disneyprincess11]

Really interesting! Thanks for posting!