DVDizzy Forum

Did Disney even animate their own films??? Here's what I found on Wikipedia regarding the 'Sex' word controversy in a scene of The Lion King.

Subliminal messages

In one scene of the movie it appears as if animators had embedded the word "sex" into several frames of animation, which conservative activist Donald Wildmon asserted was a subliminal message intended to promote sexual promiscuity. The Disney Corporation's official response, however, was that it is supposed to read "SFX" (a common abbreviation of "special effects"), and was a sort of innocent "signature" signed by the effects animation team to the work they did. An close examination of the actual frames in question seems to reveal a different story, however. Numerous observers have claimed that the third letter looks more like a K than an X, making the embedded message "SEK" and not "SFX" or "SEX". This is a seemingly logical explanation for the embedded message, considering much of the animation work for the movie was done by the North Korean animation studio SEK Studio.

Here's more:

SEK Studio

SEK Studio (from "Scientific Educational Korea") is a North Korean animation studio, based in Pyongyang. It was registered in 1997 in order to take part at a festival of animated film in France. SEK has done work on such well-known films as Pocahontas and the Lion King.

SEK Studio employs over 1500 people, and is renowned for its favorable cost to quality ratio. SEK studio subcontracts work for over 70 companies from around the globe, including Europe, South Korea, and the USA.

What do you guys think??

I don't know if that's true or not. But if there is any truth I would say its likely to be one of the following:

a] Only some of the more repeatative "clean-up" work was shipped over
b] They perhaps did some of the work the The Lion King 2
c] They did some work for commercials for Disney's promotional partners featuring Disney characters but nothing from the actual films themselves.

But it even mentions Pocahontas. This is distressing. It must be true to a degree since it's on an encyclopedia.

I wish it wasn't true.

Well, just because it's an encyclopedia doesn't necessarily make it infallible. Even though I love Wikipedia, the problem with it is that ANYONE can submit information. I've read articles on there that not only were factually incorrect, but had horrible grammar and spelling mistakes, to boot.

Really!? Then I HOPE it's incorrect. It doesn't really make sense. The Lion King and Pocahontas were made by Disney and by SEK?

Dear Mr. Roy Disney...what on earth was happening at Disney in '94 and '95!?

Julian Carter wrote:Really!? Then I HOPE it's incorrect. It doesn't really make sense. The Lion King and Pocahontas were made by Disney and by SEK?

Dear Mr. Roy Disney...what on earth was happening at Disney in '94 and '95!?

Maybe they worked on Pocahontas II?

As far as I know (and some of this is hazy) all the sequels were contracted out. I know Disney say Lion King 2 was made by the tv animation department, but they just contracted work out themselves. And the work would have been contracted out to Korean, Japanese and Malaysian companies (most likely) Some cartoons, which relied on "cultural" knowledge were done by Walt Disney Animation Australia, because Disney found it hard to get certain jokes and timing right when animated by people unfamiliar with Western culture and storytelling. Bonkers was one of these cartoons

At the time, there was only the two Disney animation studios in America, plus one in Paris (which helped out on Disney's features, significantly on Tarzan) and had time to animate A Goofy Movie too. Australia would also help out on some features - they did some work on Hercules for example.

Then, when Disney started to make sequels in earnest, they set up DisneyToon Studios Australia by investing in their TV animation division over there (mainly because of the then low exchange rate on the Australian dollar I suspect).

I think Lady and the Tramp II was their first full project from the former Walt Disney Animation Australia - thus the expaination of the host of special features on the DVD. It was the first sequel done entirely by Disney employees and on a bigger budget (and possibly the first with CAPS too). And Disney seemed quite proud of this fact.

They also did Return to Neverland, Jungle Book 2, The Lion King 1.5/3, Mickey, Donald and Goofy: The Three Musketeers, Bambi II, Kronk's New Groove and possibly Tarzan II and 101 Dalmations II (I'm not sure about the last two). Again, oddly enough, these are the only sequel DVDs with some worthwhile behind the scenes "making of" supplements, but none are to the standard of Lady and the Tramp IIs.

While Disney was making its sequels, it also bought (either outright or into) a Tokyo animation house, which did Hunchback of Notre Dame II and Pooh's Heffalump Movie probably some others. These were closed down after Heffalump. Austalia is to be closed down after Cinderella III I think.

So there's a whole lot of sequels out there pre Lady and the Tramp II with unknown origins (Wikipedia claims Return of Jafar had its opening half animated in Australia and its closing half in Japan, and that the two styles of animation are clearly noticable when viewing.

That was very interesting 2099net. It seems Disney had many animation studios scattered throughout the world...so maybe SEK could be of them. Maybe owned by Disney and with Disney artists.

I think if Disney owned them, they would have Disney in the title.

According to The Tiki of the Wiki I'm wrong about Australia. They did a lot more TV than I thought. But Wikipedia also has this for a Korean studio Sunwoo which you note has no Disney in the name, and has done Disney tv shows, as well as other companies tv shows.

Confusingly The Tiki Wiki asserts both Australia and Sunwoo did Bonkers! So perhaps that the answer. No single company did the full animation process on either. Perhaps some did storyboards, others did animation and others did the finishing and photographing.

I'm one of the largest contributors to that article in Wikipedia, and that sentence is likely incorrect. Look at this website http://asiapundit.com/2006/03/23/juche-lion-king/:

Though not widely advertised, North Korea』s SEK Studio produced many of the 『in between』 cells for Disney』s 「The Lion King」 and 「Pocahontas」. Both of which are believed to have been managed by outsourced companies in Europe/Asia, due to America』s trade sanctions against the communist state,

Pocahontas? The Lion King? Both of these used North Korean animation skills: presumably on a subcontracting basis, as otherwise they』d fall foul of the Trading with the Enemy Act.

I've edited that sentence already.

Has anyone ever mentioned this story...

http://www.kimbawlion.com/rant2.htm

I've heard of the Kimba the White Lion controversy, but I really don't know what to think of it.

Really I think it must have been a coincidence all the time.