DVDizzy Forum

I was wondering if The Wild is the 46th Animated Classic from Disney, after Chicken Little? If it isn't, then do you know what is? Any help would be awesome! Thanks in advance!

The Wild is not produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation but by CORE I think... so the 46th after Chicken Little would be Meet the Robinsons, wich comes out March 2007

About The Wild, as good as the animation seems, I really think it's unoriginal ! First of all, it's obsiously a really-not-well-hiden-copy of Dreamworks'Madagascar, storywise. Second of all, the story also look a lot like Finding Nemo, it's Nemo in the jungle...
So, in short: Madagascar + Finding Nemo = The Wild. Unoriginal...

CGI Animation studios seem to really copy each other... Especially Disney and/or Pixar and Dreamworks... I mean: A Bug's Life VS Antz, Shark Tale VS Finding Nemo, The Wild VS Madagascar, etc... Some times, I really have the feeling that it's a vulgar copy/paste...!

They should come up with more original idea than t ocpy other other!

Jordan wrote:About The Wild, as good as the animation seems, I really think it's unoriginal ! First of all, it's obsiously a really-not-well-hiden-copy of Dreamworks'Madagascar, storywise. Second of all, the story also look a lot like Finding Nemo, it's Nemo in the jungle...
So, in short: Madagascar + Finding Nemo = The Wild. Unoriginal...

CGI Animation studios seem to really copy each other... Especially Disney and/or Pixar and Dreamworks... I mean: A Bug's Life VS Antz, Shark Tale VS Finding Nemo, The Wild VS Madagascar, etc... Some times, I really have the feeling that it's a vulgar copy/paste...!

he asked who produced it. Your kind of beating a dead horse. Madagascar + Nemo = The Wild. We all get it

Now that Disney owns Pixar couldnt future Pixar movies like Cars be considered Disney Animated Classics

First of all, who says Chicken Little is #45?

It has been said all over this site Luke said it is too.

http://psc.disney.go.com/guestservices/8695.html#8695

We are no longer numbering our animated features due to the changing face of animation. With live-action/computer generated hybrid films like "Dinosaur" and theatrical releases produced by our TV Animation division like "The Tigger Movie," determining what "counts" in our legacy of full-length animated features has become a challenge. Therefore, we have decided to stop numbering each feature and let the films stand on their own.

Disney said it themselves. They no longer are numbering them. Chicken Little could very well be an "animated classic", but who says Disney dosn't include Dinosaur (and others) too? And don't say because Dinosaur wasn't made by WDFA. Did Disney ever say the "animated classics" had to be made by WDFA?

castleinthesky wrote:Disney said it themselves. They no longer are numbering them. Chicken Little could very well be an "animated classic", but who says Disney dosn't include Dinosaur (and others) too? And don't say because Dinosaur wasn't made by WDFA. Did Disney ever say the "animated classics" had to be made by WDFA?

To quote myself in the recent "Classics?" thread...

Luke wrote:Even though they claim to have stopped counting, info sent to U.S. retailers indicated through <i>Home on the Range</i> the same counting that we and other places have, plus the European DVDs actually illustrate the counting. So, though in 2002, Disney's official stance was that the list was no longer, it seems like they really are counting but downplaying it in certain parts of the world like the US.

And, from what I understand, <i>Chicken Little</i> has been dubbed #45 of the "Walt Disney Classics" overseas.

well, as for me, neither Chicken Little nor Dinosaur are animated classics, because 1.-how can a High tech produced movie can be classical, and second, Beavis and Butt-head or even Ren & Stimpy are way more classics than this two

Isidour wrote:well, as for me, neither Chicken Little nor Dinosaur are animated classics, because 1.-how can a High tech produced movie can be classical, and second, Beavis and Butt-head or even Ren & Stimpy are way more classics than this two

1. "High-tech" could refer to a majority of Disney animated features. It certainly seems applicable to Walt's innovative pioneering work and more recent films like <i>Tarzan</i>, <i>The Lion King</i>, and <i>Beauty and the Beast</i> which implemented techniques to enhance the dramatic realism. Furthermore, you're referring to one definition of "classic" which isn't really the one that's being used.

2. Again, "classics" is a way to refer to the class, not necessarily their caliber. You'd be hard-pressed to find anyone here arguing that all 45 of the "canon" films illustrate excellence.

I'm not defending <i>Chicken Little</i>'s stature as a film (if you read my recent review, you'd know I don't think much of it as a film), merely its classification as the latest film from Disney Feature Animation, which seems to be the only way to categorize the studio's works.

Thanks for the information guys. I hope I didn't cause any friction!

It's Disney man !!! I'm watching and buying !!!

Isidour wrote:well, as for me, neither Chicken Little nor Dinosaur are animated classics, because 1.-how can a High tech produced movie can be classical, and second, Beavis and Butt-head or even Ren & Stimpy are way more classics than this two

Snow White was considered high-tec at the time.

PatrickvD wrote:

Jordan wrote:About The Wild, as good as the animation seems, I really think it's unoriginal ! First of all, it's obsiously a really-not-well-hiden-copy of Dreamworks'Madagascar, storywise. Second of all, the story also look a lot like Finding Nemo, it's Nemo in the jungle...
So, in short: Madagascar + Finding Nemo = The Wild. Unoriginal...

CGI Animation studios seem to really copy each other... Especially Disney and/or Pixar and Dreamworks... I mean: A Bug's Life VS Antz, Shark Tale VS Finding Nemo, The Wild VS Madagascar, etc... Some times, I really have the feeling that it's a vulgar copy/paste...!

he asked who produced it. Your kind of beating a dead horse. Madagascar + Nemo = The Wild. We all get it

I know what he asked and I know how to read, thank you. I was just making a comment on the movie in passing, as it was mentionned...

PatrickvD wrote:

Isidour wrote:well, as for me, neither Chicken Little nor Dinosaur are animated classics, because 1.-how can a High tech produced movie can be classical, and second, Beavis and Butt-head or even Ren & Stimpy are way more classics than this two

Snow White was considered high-tec at the time.

yeah, but considering that it was Walt`s very first in color and animated movie make it a classic.

Besides,and I understand your post Luke but, shouldn`t a classic remain in our memory as a very apreciated...I hate to be redundant...memory?

Isidour wrote:

PatrickvD wrote: Snow White was considered high-tec at the time.

yeah, but considering that it was Walt`s very first in color and animated movie make it a classic.

Besides,and I understand your post Luke but, shouldn`t a classic remain in our memory as a very apreciated...I hate to be redundant...memory?

i think i can speak for a lot of people in saying this argument is old, silly, and in a way arrogant. So i will attempt to repeat (in my own special way) EVERYTHING that has been said on the matter so that EVERYONE can maybe get it straight. forgive me if i sound crude in any way.

1- Disney does not use the term "Classic" in the way it's put in the dictionary! The films that are deemed as a "classic" are the ones that disney feels represent the company the best, basically. This has NOTHING to do with how successful the movie was or how the movie was made. To the Disney company Animation=Animation, whether that be hand-drawn or CG it's all the same. That may not be what you feel is the standards for the term "classic", but you are not the ones making the decision. On top of that i havn't noticed the term "classic" being posted anwhere on any of the dvd's lately, so now it all comes down to how you personally wish to organize these movies on your dvd shelf.

2- If you don't feel that movies like Dinosaur aren't classics, that's fine for 2 reasons. the first being its your opinion and you have every right to it. the second being that Disney doesn't consider to be in their classic cannon anyways, so end of story. The one thing that does bother me personally is that saying that just because you hold no personal attachment to this movie means that no one else in the entire world does. Dinosaur came out when i was in Jr. High and i went to go see it with my mom. While i was there i saw a kid from school and we sat next to each other, since then we've become really good friends. We still meet everyonce in a while and watch this movie. There is a story of how it has been a part of a memory.

This is not a personal attack on anyone or anyone's views at all. I'm just restating what has been stated a billion times throughout this forum. i hope i havn't offended anyone. rant over!

castleinthesky wrote:First of all, who says Chicken Little is #45?

I agree with castleinthesky. Chicken Little first of all CAN'T be #45. It can't because it is not animated, hand-drawn. If I'm mistaken, usually I'm not, Chicken Little would only be number 45 if it was hand-drawn. Really, I can't see why UD put Chicken Little on the Animated Classics List,
it's not even animated, well sure computer animated, but not hand-drawn. Chicken Little can't be Number 45!

TheSequelofDisney wrote:I agree with castleinthesky. Chicken Little first of all CAN'T be #45. It can't because it is not animated, hand-drawn. If I'm mistaken, usually I'm not, Chicken Little would only be number 45 if it was hand-drawn. Really, I can't see why UD put Chicken Little on the Animated Classics List,
it's not even animated, well sure computer animated, but not hand-drawn. Chicken Little can't be Number 45!

Um, I think this is one of those times you are mistaken. I don't think you can really say that since Disney doesn't do traditional animation anymore...well for now, besides Enchanted. Your statement is basically saying WDFA movies from now on are no longer Animated Classics. That doesn't make much sense. I think it would be better to say..."In my opinion, Chicken Little would only be number 45 if it was hand-drawn." That's not fair to say it can't be because of your opinion of computer animation.

Also, for Rapunzel, aren't they doing a new technique in which they hand draw some of the frames and use the computer to animate it? What would that count as?

Another thing...now that Disney owns Pixar, perhaps they'll let them take care of CGI projects and return to traditional animation. In my opinion, Curious George was a breath of fresh air for theatrical animation.

My god, no one's listening to each other in this thread at all, regardless if it's being said over and over again...

CLASSIC, in the Disney sense, does NOT mean what everyone wants it to mean (a good film, either artistically, storywise, etc.). It's merely a LABEL. A BANNER. A NAME for their list. They could go and change it any day, saying, "From now on, our canon films from Snow White to Sleeping Beauty will be called Disney Animated Masterpieces, while films from 101 Dalmatians to Oliver & Company are Disney Animated Movies, and The Little Mermaid to The Emperor's New Groove are Disney Animatd Classics. All films after The Emperor's New Groove will be called Disney Animated Merchandise-Pushers".

It's a word to name their list of films produced through WDFA, regardless if they are package films like "Make Mine Music", a flop like "The Black Cauldron", or CGI like "Chicken Little". The word "Classic" merely separates these films from those produced by other animated studios in Disney's control (DisneyToon Studios, Pixar, etc.).

Look at other various lists that other studios do. Fox's now defunct "Studio Classics" was a line devoted to...well, simply old movies by Fox. They are just a flashy banner that separates that movie from a regular release (though they are pretty much the same as a regular release). WB has boxsets devoted to Film Noir, Controversial Classics, and...Signature Collection. Signature Collection is supposedly the best of the best of an actor/actress's films (with WB of course). They're just names of a line of movies. I personally don't believe Anna Christie should belong in Garbo's signature collection (regardless if it's her first talkie), because I don't consider it some best work out of the movies in the boxset. Likewise, I was surprised that they chose not to include The Adventures of Robin Hood in Errol Flynn's Signature Collection.

We may have our own definition of what merits the "prestigious" name of Classic for Disney Animated Classics, but no matter how anyone tries to spin it, it's simply a label for films made in WDFA. And that includes Chicken Little, whether anyone likes it or not.

Classic for Disney does not translate as their best of the best, though people often consider it that. Classic for Disney translates as films made in WDFA.

Escapay