DVDizzy Forum

Yeah, Bobble and Clank are quite good.

But the writing has gotten better over the course of the films. It's actually been going uphill in terms of quality. No, it's nothing remarkable, but it's a marked improvement. Tinker Bell's friendship with Terrence the Dustkeeper is given a chance to blossom in 2, and the 3rd one has the strongest story that left me smiling in the end.

The_Iceflash wrote:Am I the only one starting to think Chris Sanders is overrated? I mean really, his leaving wasn't the apocalypse. Are we really supposed to believe American Dog was gonna be the best new animated film this century? Is Lilo and Stitch really worthy of the pedestal it's on?

Every time I see a new drawing of his I'm in awe of his style. No one draws women or quirky cute critters like this guy does. I don't think he's over rated considering he's only really done one film. HTTYD wasn't truly his (he merely took over from another director), I can't wait to see what he's capable of doing something from scratch. If you think lilo and stitch is overrated I think maybe your focusing too much on the over saturation on Disney's part. I don't think fans really needed or wanted 2 cheapquels, a tv series and shelf warming merchandising all over their parks.

I agree 100% with Semaj. That's all that can be said.

Big One wrote:[Bolt is] still ten times better than Lady and the Tramp.

No.

toonaspie wrote:When you consider in the 90s we had all kinds of animated features with all kinds of unique approaches...some got serious (Pocahontas, HotND) while others went more cartoony (Aladdin, Hercules). Regardless each of these films were able to find their ground with their individual styles.

That's funny. While I partly agree with you, all those 1990's films have been come to known as the 'Disney formula films'. I'm sure you have read criticism of this either on this forum or on others. Animaniacs even made a parody on this:

<object width="480" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/CJrud ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/CJrud ... 1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="390"></embed></object>

toonaspie wrote:To me Pixar films haven't been much about the story more than it is about following a money-making formula.

I think you're too blinded by unfounded Pixar-hatred, because this couldn't be further from the truth.

Here we go.

Mom, Goliath's picking fights again!

I'm just stating my opinion, and I'm not doing it any differently than anybody else.

Goliath wrote:

toonaspie wrote:To me Pixar films haven't been much about the story more than it is about following a money-making formula.

I think you're too blinded by unfounded Pixar-hatred, because this couldn't be further from the truth.

I completely agree, Goliath. To me, Pixar films are more about the story, and, at least in recent years, Disney is more about the money (and Ghibli is more about the characters, in my small Ghibli experience, although that has nothing to do with this).

Disney's been playing it safe with the Lasseter reign, but it's really been paying off I think, and not just monetarily. I love John Lasseter, and he's been doing a great job. But I know he's not perfect. I wasn't actively following Disney during the whole Chris Sanders American Dog fiasco, but I did read its synopsis on UD before it was changed. I thought it sounded stupid. Maybe I was close-minded, but I was envisioning it more along the lines of Beverly Hills Chihuahua, complete with requisite humour. On the other hand, I was very pleased with Bolt, although it was too unoriginal. It still turned out to be a satisfying, even heartwarming, movie--the best they put out in several years. Also, the whole thing about The Bear and the Bow/Brave. I'm really disappointed Brenda Chapman's not working on it anymore. Pixar's first female lead needs a female at the helm.

I haven't seen Bolt, but I already hate it for shoving Miley Cyrus down our throats.

As much as I despise her myself, she was probably the least of that movie's problems.

Big One wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:I'm worried Pixar is going to influence Disney too much.

Well thankfully you're in a nonvocal minority

Wait, you mean you think most people want Disney to lose it's identity and become more like Pixar so it isn't Disney anymore but a Pixared version of it?

Disney Duster wrote:

Big One wrote: Well thankfully you're in a nonvocal minority

Wait, you mean you think most people want Disney to lose it's identity and become more like Pixar so it isn't Disney anymore but a Pixared version of it?

no he saying you're in minority for thinking that. most of us don't think Pixar won't take over disney or influence them too much

Disney Duster wrote:

Big One wrote: Well thankfully you're in a nonvocal minority

Wait, you mean you think most people want Disney to lose it's identity and become more like Pixar so it isn't Disney anymore but a Pixared version of it?

Losing it's identity and becoming more like Pixar aren't synonymous with each other. Pixar is known for making high quality films, so for Disney to become more like Pixar it means they're going into the right direction. Disney has delved into the Pixar-like copies with stuff like Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, and Bolt but none of them quite realized what exactly made the Pixar movies great in the first. So the era of Pixar's negative influence on Disney is mainly over, since we're finally at a point where Disney is regaining it's own identity back with quality films like The Princess and the Frog and Tangled.

DisneyDuster wrote:Wait, you mean you think most people want Disney to lose it's identity and become more like Pixar so it isn't Disney anymore but a Pixared version of it?

That would never happen. Pixar have always prided themselves on having their own unique identity, one that has brought them success after success. When Disney animation was most at threat, did they not turn to Pixar and John Lasseter to put things right? Neither Lasseter not Pixar strike me as oppressive in any way so I don't see any reason to worry that they will impose themselves on the identity Disney has forged for itself in the last eight decades.

Anybody who doubts Lasseter is the right guy to head Disney Animation better watch The Pixar Story (2007). From this movie, Lasseter really emerges as our time's Walt Disney.

I wonder if Goliath will still be around to tell us “what Lasseter would’ve wanted” about the new Pixar films after Lasseter has passed.

Doubtful, consider he's hardly telling you now what Lasseter would want now.

That’s because Lasseter’s not dead yet--he doesn’t need a spokesperson right now.

Walt, on the other hand…

Disney's Divinity wrote:I wonder if Goliath will still be around to tell us “what Lasseter would’ve wanted” about the new Pixar films after Lasseter has passed.

Says the man who would rage at anything Goliath posted (or anyone posted, really) about Pixar being good at the moment.

SWillie! wrote: Says the man who would rage at anything Goliath posted (or anyone posted, really) about Pixar being good at the moment.

I "rage" at anyone who tries to lump me into a group or mischaracterize me as "raging"--including you, in this post--when I'm only defending myself and my position (which may or may not be shared by others). Because, as I've said multiple times, there are things I like about Pixar, and there are things I don't--I've never been uniformly one way or another, though that would suit your argument. The only reason you or anyone else like to write my behavior that way is because in your world there is no such thing as a criticism of Pixar unless it's done by a biased Disney fanboy--which, ironically, makes you (and the others who would do that) sound like a biased Pixar fanboy.