Disney, DVD, and Beyond Forums
https://dvdizzy.com/forum/
That's my favourite link Luke about Kimba and Simba!Luke wrote:Please try to use more descriptive thread titles.
This is still my favorite link on the subject:
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a991224.html
Agreed....lol*Pocahontas* wrote:I don't really have a oppinion on this topic, I belive The Lion King did get some ideas from that movie, but didn't some one say Roy Disney said that himself before? The lion king is magical and it's a classic, and there couln't be one improvment done to make it any better, and the animation is beautiful, and i could go on and on, but what I am trying to say is no animated movie about a lion would ever beat the Lion King, agreed?
Wow I've heard of 'Nadia' but never seen it. It could be a very strange coincidence but I doubt it. I have a story I wrote when I was younger that was like 'Atlantis'. This was written before I had seen it, long before and it was eerie watching it but the character descriptions weren't the same.Knuckles the Echidna wrote:On a similar note:
http://www.oldcrows.net/Atlantis/
I do love Atlantis, but people, you just can't deny facts. It's not a rip-off, but it does borrow.
I should pick up a copy of the Kimba DVDs too.RJKD23 wrote:I saw a DVD on Kimbaa the White Lion at the 99 cents store, and I was tempted to pick it up just to see what it was all about...but I opted for the velcro tabs for my Bambi DVD.
I haven't seen Nadia or Atlantis, but I would like to watch both films. The images of Nadia and Atlantis look similar.Knuckles the Echidna wrote:On a similar note:
I do love Atlantis, but people, you just can't deny facts. It's not a rip-off, but it does borrow.
So, if this is indeed the case . . . why hasn't Disney sued the pants off Goodtimes Video for their rather obvious rip-offs?2099net wrote:. . . Personally, the bashing is because, had the "shoe been on the other foot" Disney would have slapped a court case, injunction, product recall etc on Kimba within days.
Purplebluelove99, whomever wrote that Rainbow Brite review you mention must have been a little confused, as anime existed decades before Rainbow Brite was ever even thought up!Good luck! They were sorted along with LOTS and LOTS of DVDs!Starion wrote:I should pick up a copy of the Kimba DVDs too.
It was *luck* that Kimba was grouped together because one of the store workers brought it in. I agree on that!Sunset Girl wrote:All stories borrow at least a little bit from other stories, but I don't think that the examples above are complete rip-offs as many people like to claim.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
I don't blame Disney for "copying" the ideas... I like those movies, and they've increased the # of our DVD collection! Because Goodtimes only do versions of Public Domain stories. Not Disney's "original" stories. You don't see a Goodtimes Lion King do you?Sunset Girl wrote:So, if this is indeed the case . . . why hasn't Disney sued the pants off Goodtimes Video for their rather obvious rip-offs?2099net wrote:. . . Personally, the bashing is because, had the "shoe been on the other foot" Disney would have slapped a court case, injunction, product recall etc on Kimba within days.
I don't think a lot of Disney characters have big eyes do they? Wasn't Walt striving for realism?There's a lot I could say here. . . I've known about this controversy for over well over ten years.
Perhaps it's worth noting that Tezuka was influenced by Disney at the beginning of his Manga career? That explains why most anime characters have big eyes!
But, if Disney artists did know about Kimba, which as you say sounds more than reasonable, don't you think they should have had their own internal red flags rising?I think it's impossible for Disney to claim that none of its artisits knew anything about Kimba AKA Leo, but has anyone stopped to consider how insanely idiotic it would be for Disney to completely rip off an existing property without obtaining the proper rights? I believe that there initially was an inspiration there, but I seriously doubt the Disney execs would have been comfortable enough to greenlight such a notion of following something so closely without giving adequate credt. I think they went off on their own tangent and freaked a little when the similarities were later found, thus their denial of having anything to do with Tezuka.
Perhaps some of the similarities between the two stories can be explained with story elements arriving to natural, thus similar conclusions. First of all, if you're going to do an animal story that takes place in Africa, well, what animal is considered the king of beasts? Bingo. As already mentioned here, "Simba" is Swahili for "lion," which was a natural choice for Disney to use (regardless of the name Kimba), especially when you consider the fact that the movie has a lot of Swahili in it. Don't even try to compare the lionesses, of course the main characters are going to have mates, right? And as Siren said, it's only natural for the "king" to have a castle, and what would work better than a gigantic rock to stand tall and proud on? Every king needs someone to keep connections and communicate, and what would work better than a bird that can fly off quickly in any direction to get information? And we need some bad guys. . . watch any nature documentary about Africa (my personal favorite is "Animals are Beautiful People") and you'll see why hyenas are a natural choice. I could keep going on this, but hopefully you get the idea. I'm not even gonna touch the Hamlet references, since they have nothing to do with this part of the debate. And obviously, Disney never had any humans in Lion King.
Yes, everything is coincidental. But add up all the coincidences and it becomes statistically unlikely. Take the Crystal. It may be pretty common in stories. But where in Plato's writings is a crystal mentioned? I may be wrong, but I don't think it is. So why would Disney choose a crystal after Nadia had. Milo isn't only a nerdy scientist, but he looks like the Nadia character. Some of the supporting characters look like the Nadia characters. Look at Helga and Nadia's counterpart. Or the Doctor. Or Explosive/Gunsman.I happen to own episodes of Nadia, by the way, and I'm also aware of the similarites that exist between that and Disney's Atlantis. I also believe that this is a case of story elements arriving to natural, thus similar conclusions. For example, you may argue that both star a nerdy scientist-type character and an exotic other-wordly princess with a bare midriff. Well, duh. If you're gonna do a story about a character that basically discovers Atlantis, you'd want him to be an intelligent sort, and what better way to show that by giving your character glasses and make him a little dorky? And need I even explain creating an exotic, other-worldly princess? Why wouldn't you have a princess to represent Atlantis? And then there's the thing with the crystal. Well, that's a pretty generic idea in the first place that has been used in many, many stories. I could go on. . .
Co-Incidences can happen, but I find it strange two such close co-incidences happened so near to each other. I also find it strange Don Hahn was involved in both. Logically you would expect his "red flag" go up during Atlantis after all the Lion King fuss.Well, all of this is just my opinion. I'd like to say that I'm not looking through rose-colored glasses, but I could be wrong. All stories borrow at least a little bit from other stories, but I don't think that the examples above are complete rip-offs as many people like to claim.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Yes large coincides are almost impossible, which is why the whole Disney?Dreamworks/Pixar film similarities really annoys me.2099net wrote:Yes, everything is coincidental. But add up all the coincidences and it becomes statistically unlikely. Take the Crystal. It may be pretty common in stories. But where in Plato's writings is a crystal mentioned? I may be wrong, but I don't think it is. So why would Disney choose a crystal after Nadia had. Milo isn't only a nerdy scientist, but he looks like the Nadia character. Some of the supporting characters look like the Nadia characters. Look at Helga and Nadia's counterpart. Or the Doctor. Or Explosive/Gunsman.
Actually, didn't Goodtimes release a "King of the Jungle" video when Lion King was released (which, co-incidentally, was a working title for Lion King)? I see your point with the public domain thing, but I also think it's painfully obvious that Goodtimes was quick to cash in on whatever Disney was releasing at the time even if they were going about it in a legal way. I remember an "f.y.e." I used to shop at that had a Goodtimes video of "Aladdin" on display. The had to add a sticker saying "this is not the film currently playing in theaters" after some angry returns were made!2099net wrote:Because Goodtimes only do versions of Public Domain stories. Not Disney's "original" stories. You don't see a Goodtimes Lion King do you?
Actually, it's well documented that the reason most anime characters have such big eyes is because of Tezuka's early designs. And Tezuka himself said he got that influence from American animation in the 1930's including the likes of Disney's Mickey Mouse and Fleischer' Betty Boop.I don't think a lot of Disney characters have big eyes do they? Wasn't Walt striving for realism?
Perhaps, but since we are not a part of the Disney team, we can only speculate. I can even see the arguments from both sides of the issue. But I still have a hard time buying into this idea for the reasons I've stated above.But, if Disney artists did know about Kimba, which as you say sounds more than reasonable, don't you think they should have had their own internal red flags rising?
Perhaps I'm relating too much to the fact that a similar thing has happened to my unpublished work-in-progress story? Something I came up with completely on my own that Disney now seems to have an eerily similar version of, including the story, character designs, and character personalities? And it's not as if I had influence over them. So statistically, it is possible. And sadly, if I ever pursue getting published, people are gonna claim that I ripped off Disney, when it was not the case at all since I came up with my idea years ago.Stories may be similar by accident, but I refuse to beleive designs are. Satistically its just impossible.
How does Milo look like Jean? The glasses and maybe the hair color? And what similarites are there between Kida and Nadia? That they have dark skin and both happen to be princesses? All the characters look more "American" than anime to me, and the Nadia characters are very anime in design. They even had a Japanese artist as the lead animator of Helga, and I don't honestly see a lot of similarites between her and Grandis. Or is Helga's counterpart supposed to be Electra? I'm thoroughly confused here.Yes, everything is coincidental. But add up all the coincidences and it becomes statistically unlikely. Take the Crystal. It may be pretty common in stories. But where in Plato's writings is a crystal mentioned? I may be wrong, but I don't think it is. So why would Disney choose a crystal after Nadia had. Milo isn't only a nerdy scientist, but he looks like the Nadia character. Some of the supporting characters look like the Nadia characters. Look at Helga and Nadia's counterpart. Or the Doctor. Or Explosive/Gunsman.
I feel the same way! Regardless of one's opinion on what happened with Lion King, by all accounts Disney was made aware of the similarites after the fact. Why would Disney risk more controversy? Keep in mind that Nadia was not as well-known in America back then, and not as likely to be known by the Disney artists (as opposed to Kimba).Co-Incidences can happen, but I find it strange two such close co-incidences happened so near to each other. I also find it strange Don Hahn was involved in both. Logically you would expect his "red flag" go up during Atlantis after all the Lion King fuss.
No argument there!As for generic stories, Disney has done loads of these. Even just recently. The Country Bears played with Almost Famous, Spinal Tap, The Blues Brothers maybe even various Muppet Movies. But it managed to make its own film. The Haunted Mansion wasn't exactly original - it was full of cliches. Even the Lizzy McGuire movie had references to Gidgit, Roman Holiday and various 'hip' music comedies of the 60s. But all managed to progress in different directions.
Which is why we have to look at each case at an individual basis. I know I could be wrong about Lion King, but that's just my opinion. But I have no doubt in my mind when it comes to Atlantis.Also remember a copy doesn't have to be a straight copy. Look at the various "look and feel" cases taken to court - mainly computer software but also for some physical products. You could argue a windows operating system is the logical way to evolve an interface, just like you can argue some of the stories share logical character/event evolution. But sadly, the courts have disagreed in most cases.
You're right, someone should point out the differences between the two films. Does anyone want to compare and contrast Atlantis and Nadia?DisneyFan 2000 wrote:You know, the Atlantis comparision seems way too biased towards the similarities. It doesn't even point out any differences, which for me makes the review unbelievable.. I really doubt Disney would make the same mistake twice. It could just be it accidentally turned out similar.
Sunset Girl wrote:Actually, didn't Goodtimes release a "King of the Jungle" video when Lion King was released (which, co-incidentally, was a working title for Lion King)?
Scroll down to the table on this page: http://utd500.utdallas.edu/~hairston/atlantis.htmlStarion wrote:You're right, someone should point out the differences between the two films. Does anyone want to compare and contrast Atlantis and Nadia?
