Hey everyone,
I was thinking of the Disney Animated Classics... the ones made before the 90's renaissance, and I realized that none of the really have a tight story. That doesn't make them lesser movies, they each excel in other areas..., but I happen to think that the movies made in the 90s have much tighter stories than the older classics...
Here is what I am thinking:
1) Snow White: story is heavily padded with the dwarves' antics which don't quite advance the plot.
2) Pinocchio: many deus ex machina, and Pinocchio's drastic change in character before he goes in the ocean.
3) Fantasia: not a narrative
4) Dumbo: somewhat padded with antics, and rushes to the end right after he learns to fly.
5) Bambi: there is barely a story here
6 thru 11: package films
12) Cinderella: passive heroine, over extended climax, and the first half is 90% about the mice.
13) Alice: episodic, no character arc
14) Peter Pan: this one might come close to having a solid story, but the only one who has a character arc is Wendy
15) Lady and the Tramp: not sure how to analyze this one... but the story feels bland to me.
16) Sleeping Beauty: Passive heroine/hero. Slow story up until the last part. Lots of "antics" to pad the first 80% of the film.
17) 101 Dalmatians: this one has one of the stronger stories, IMO. But the second half seems a lot weaker (the whole trip home)
18) Sword in the Stone: also very episodic
19) JJungle Book: episodic, and with barely any story. Even in the making-of, they talk about how they didnt know how to end it so they just added the girl to wrap things up.
I won't keep going, cause here is where Walt died, and stories got REALLY weak.
Its just funny we all revere these films, and yet I dont think any of them have a strong story behind them.
Are the Disney Classics overrated, story wise?
-
PatrickvD
- Signature Collection
- Posts: 5207
- Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2003 11:34 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: Are the Disney Classics overrated, story wise?
Marce82 wrote:I won't keep going, cause here is where Walt died, and stories got REALLY weak.
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
Walt's animated films are quite brilliant in terms of story as they deal more in visual storytelling, symbolism, mythic archetypes, caricature, pantomime, satire, situational and character/personality humor, timeless themes, emotion, and other communication styles of the non-literal, cartoon variety. They are delivered simply but are not simplistic in the least, in the tradition of ancient folk tales and fables. A unique a deeply felt medium that communicates in many ways to all ages from an innocent point-of-view. They age and translate well for this reason.
The latter day company's films spell it all out for viewers in a more literal stage-y and live-action way. Everything is explained in dialogue or lyric, little left to interpretation or imagination. Also, more attuned to current trends and themes, rather than folklore and myth. Many are very strong films, but almost a different medium. With a few notable exceptions they haven't seemed to age as well, but are more of-their-time, and perhaps come from more of an adult/parental perspective.
I miss cartoons myself. But Pixar storytelling still has some of the "Walt" in it.
The latter day company's films spell it all out for viewers in a more literal stage-y and live-action way. Everything is explained in dialogue or lyric, little left to interpretation or imagination. Also, more attuned to current trends and themes, rather than folklore and myth. Many are very strong films, but almost a different medium. With a few notable exceptions they haven't seemed to age as well, but are more of-their-time, and perhaps come from more of an adult/parental perspective.
I miss cartoons myself. But Pixar storytelling still has some of the "Walt" in it.
Pinocchio was known behind the scenes for having some very deliberate plot holes, made simply for the sake of presentation. While this has always been my top favorite Disney film, I believe this decision may have wrongly influenced other filmmakers whom have attempted to replicate Disney's success, specifically Don Bluth.
Dumbo was criticized for being too short, but I think the brevity of the ending fits the film's pacing perfectly.
Cinderella's focus was too much on the secondary characters. If they wanted to make a cat-and-mouse film, they should've made a cat-and-mouse film.
What could really have been done to improve Alice in Wonderland? The original two-part novel was episodic. The mistake Walt made was trying to mold the story into his "good triumphs over evil" structure.
Lady and the Tramp has a pretty solid story to me. I think the only problem is Walt didn't realize the benefits of utilizing his own original screenplay, where he had much more freedom to dictate the world of his characters, instead of being trapped into adapting another person's story.
Sleeping Beauty did suffer from a less focused screenplay, where much of the production staff were left to figure out their own problems, some more successfully than others.
The Sword and the Stone could've been better as a featurette. This was sort of a tell of where Walt's focus was at the time.
The Jungle Book came after Walt rejected Bill Peet's version, which was somewhat faithful to the original story. He opted for a much looser story, which based on the troubles he had with Alice, I suspect wouldn't have gone over too well if, being Walt's final film, nostalgia hadn't played a factor in what people saw in the film.
As discussed more recently, The Aristocats and Robin Hood were simplified deliberately to keep the old flame burning, though it did damage the films in the long-term.
The Rescuers, while slow-paced, was much more successful in replicating the style and tone of storytelling from Walt's classics.
The Fox and the Hound had a theme that was new to Disney's stable, which opened itself to new ideas in storytelling. But probably because of that, was prevented from being a better film.
I might get to the 90's films onward later. I don't think all of Walt's films lacked tight stories. Most of those that did aren't as bad as it might sound, and has more to do with external challenges than the films themselves. Few of those with loose storylines somehow worked in their own way.
Dumbo was criticized for being too short, but I think the brevity of the ending fits the film's pacing perfectly.
Cinderella's focus was too much on the secondary characters. If they wanted to make a cat-and-mouse film, they should've made a cat-and-mouse film.
What could really have been done to improve Alice in Wonderland? The original two-part novel was episodic. The mistake Walt made was trying to mold the story into his "good triumphs over evil" structure.
Lady and the Tramp has a pretty solid story to me. I think the only problem is Walt didn't realize the benefits of utilizing his own original screenplay, where he had much more freedom to dictate the world of his characters, instead of being trapped into adapting another person's story.
Sleeping Beauty did suffer from a less focused screenplay, where much of the production staff were left to figure out their own problems, some more successfully than others.
The Sword and the Stone could've been better as a featurette. This was sort of a tell of where Walt's focus was at the time.
The Jungle Book came after Walt rejected Bill Peet's version, which was somewhat faithful to the original story. He opted for a much looser story, which based on the troubles he had with Alice, I suspect wouldn't have gone over too well if, being Walt's final film, nostalgia hadn't played a factor in what people saw in the film.
As discussed more recently, The Aristocats and Robin Hood were simplified deliberately to keep the old flame burning, though it did damage the films in the long-term.
The Rescuers, while slow-paced, was much more successful in replicating the style and tone of storytelling from Walt's classics.
The Fox and the Hound had a theme that was new to Disney's stable, which opened itself to new ideas in storytelling. But probably because of that, was prevented from being a better film.
I might get to the 90's films onward later. I don't think all of Walt's films lacked tight stories. Most of those that did aren't as bad as it might sound, and has more to do with external challenges than the films themselves. Few of those with loose storylines somehow worked in their own way.
"OH COME ON, REALLY?!?!"
-
Disney Duster
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 14065
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: America
It's true. I can't deny it. Many of Walt's films hardly had enough story. So many are too padded out. What happens in the padding does serve the film and story, but still don't move the story forward. They build character but it's better to move the story forward.
I know that they wanted to make every character stand out and have equal time, but that took away from what was really important, and that is still story.
I think Bambi is good enough with its story though. That film feels right accept for "Gay Little Spring Song" and when Bambi and his friends meet girl versions of themselves. Other than that, everything feels perfect to me, including the story.
I know that they wanted to make every character stand out and have equal time, but that took away from what was really important, and that is still story.
I think Bambi is good enough with its story though. That film feels right accept for "Gay Little Spring Song" and when Bambi and his friends meet girl versions of themselves. Other than that, everything feels perfect to me, including the story.
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
While the more recent films are definitely more specific, complex, and structured in terms of "plotting" - I wouldn't say that is more sophisticated or preferable in terms of overall "storytelling." Just a different type of story.
The more idealized, general, and simple presentation of Walt's animated films (aka "cartooning") is akin to modernism and primitivism -- in that these stories are streamlined down to the most essential elements with broad, universal themes - and relatable situations. I'd argue that the less specific, more stylized presentation is actually a strength of the classics, as audiences are more readily able to apply their own personal experiences and observations to the situations and character archetypes presented. How the movie plays may differ somewhat depending on what the viewer brings in with them.
After all, who can't relate to the simple idea of being a misfit who discovers their defect is really an asset (Dumbo) or other such timeless concepts that will hit the heart no matter what decade it is? Sincerity and belief in the character's dilemma is primary -- and an optimistic reassurance in the resolution. The balance is about clever, charming and entertaining sequences that advance the situation. Is more "plot" truly necessary?
That so many of Walt's films are still among the most resonant (and moneymaking) of film classics for new generations, even after 50-80 years, speaks for itself. You can't just get that level of mojo from marketing alone.
It's the story.
The more idealized, general, and simple presentation of Walt's animated films (aka "cartooning") is akin to modernism and primitivism -- in that these stories are streamlined down to the most essential elements with broad, universal themes - and relatable situations. I'd argue that the less specific, more stylized presentation is actually a strength of the classics, as audiences are more readily able to apply their own personal experiences and observations to the situations and character archetypes presented. How the movie plays may differ somewhat depending on what the viewer brings in with them.
After all, who can't relate to the simple idea of being a misfit who discovers their defect is really an asset (Dumbo) or other such timeless concepts that will hit the heart no matter what decade it is? Sincerity and belief in the character's dilemma is primary -- and an optimistic reassurance in the resolution. The balance is about clever, charming and entertaining sequences that advance the situation. Is more "plot" truly necessary?
That so many of Walt's films are still among the most resonant (and moneymaking) of film classics for new generations, even after 50-80 years, speaks for itself. You can't just get that level of mojo from marketing alone.
It's the story.
-
milojthatch
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2646
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:34 am
Here's the thing, the focus on "what makes a good movie" has changed over the years. These days, there is a big push to focus on crazy, complicated plots and sub plot after sub plot, and have them all tied together in a neat little bow. And if that doesn't work, then have no plot at all and lots of action instead.
In Walt's day, there was normally just one plot line with a stronger focus on character. If you look at other non-Disney movies from the day, you'll see a similar focus.
Personally, I think the Walt Disney films are just fine as they are. I'll take them over most of modern Disney's films from the last few years any day of the week!
In Walt's day, there was normally just one plot line with a stronger focus on character. If you look at other non-Disney movies from the day, you'll see a similar focus.
Personally, I think the Walt Disney films are just fine as they are. I'll take them over most of modern Disney's films from the last few years any day of the week!
____________________________________________________________
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
Wait a sec here: I want to clarify something. I DID NOT SAY WALT'S FILMS WERE BAD. I just said they had weaker in the story department, which doesn't mean they arent great films. THey are, and I love most of them, and they excel in many other ways. And I wouldn't change them at all!
I started the thread cause it surprised me that none of them seem to have a tight story.
I started the thread cause it surprised me that none of them seem to have a tight story.
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
Again, it depends on one's definition of "tight story."
If "tight story" means a three-act template with problem, plot turns, A/B subplots, action, character arcs, climax that hit at very specific intervals for about 110-120 minutes -- a typical Hollywood script development project -- with little room allowed for development or exploration of character interaction, entertaining situations, musical numbers, fantasies and set-pieces that deviate from the most direct path to the next expected one-liner or speech - - thankfully, no they don't.
But if "tight story" means delivering a transporting, resonant, emotionally fulfilling, reassuring, sometimes surprising, and often unforgettable visual storytelling experience through a series of entertaining sequences, executed with streamlined simplicity and ease, all in about 75 minutes, then you can't get much tighter in terms of what has been actually acheived during that run time.
If "tight story" means a three-act template with problem, plot turns, A/B subplots, action, character arcs, climax that hit at very specific intervals for about 110-120 minutes -- a typical Hollywood script development project -- with little room allowed for development or exploration of character interaction, entertaining situations, musical numbers, fantasies and set-pieces that deviate from the most direct path to the next expected one-liner or speech - - thankfully, no they don't.
But if "tight story" means delivering a transporting, resonant, emotionally fulfilling, reassuring, sometimes surprising, and often unforgettable visual storytelling experience through a series of entertaining sequences, executed with streamlined simplicity and ease, all in about 75 minutes, then you can't get much tighter in terms of what has been actually acheived during that run time.
The way I see it, the earlier Disney stories were simpler because they were far more focused on inspiring emotion in the viewer, creating pathos for the lead characters and bombarding people with visuals and music. That's not to say that they didn't do a good job with the story. One thing we tend to forget is that the earlier Disney movies were a tad more subtle in their efforts than what we see today. For example, Cinderella is a very simple, straightforward story: young girl gets abused by her family, she gets her wish granted, and she lives happily ever after. Disney's Cinderella follows that to a T, but instead turns it into a story of faith, beliefs and hope. It adds scenes like the torn dress moment to give it weight, and thus we have a story that feels heavier than it really is.
Dumbo is another example of that. It is a very short story, but we are treated to grand visuals and moments that inspire heavy emotions in us. Nowadays, the advent of the internet and other movie viewing techniques have made people far too aware of how movies work, thus these stories need to be deeper, more sophisticated and better written and clever. The films of the 30s, 40s and 50s were known for being escapist stories. They allowed people to go to another world and just enjoy themselves. The early Disney films are proof of that, and maybe that is why the movies are hailed as the best, sometimes above better modern films.
Dumbo is another example of that. It is a very short story, but we are treated to grand visuals and moments that inspire heavy emotions in us. Nowadays, the advent of the internet and other movie viewing techniques have made people far too aware of how movies work, thus these stories need to be deeper, more sophisticated and better written and clever. The films of the 30s, 40s and 50s were known for being escapist stories. They allowed people to go to another world and just enjoy themselves. The early Disney films are proof of that, and maybe that is why the movies are hailed as the best, sometimes above better modern films.
-
milojthatch
- Collector's Edition
- Posts: 2646
- Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:34 am
Reiterating my point again in simpler terms. Today's films are meant for the ADHD generation who can't focus on just one or two plots in a story. They need four or five at least. The films from Walt Disney and that generation were more about one or two stories in a plot.
Another example of this for me as always been Star Trek. If you look at TOS and compare it to any of the newer titles, this point becomes very much apparent.
Another example of this for me as always been Star Trek. If you look at TOS and compare it to any of the newer titles, this point becomes very much apparent.
____________________________________________________________
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
All the adversity I've had in my life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me... You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.
-Walt Disney
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
Good points.
Also -- for the traditional animated film story, what would be considered the "fat" of a modern screenplay -- is the "meat" of the cartoon medium (mice making a dress, pink elephants on parade, flying over London) -- fanciful, plausibly impossible visual entertainment is what the form did best (and live-action could not do as well before the advent of cgi).
Also -- for the traditional animated film story, what would be considered the "fat" of a modern screenplay -- is the "meat" of the cartoon medium (mice making a dress, pink elephants on parade, flying over London) -- fanciful, plausibly impossible visual entertainment is what the form did best (and live-action could not do as well before the advent of cgi).
Well, I could consider Beauty and the beast and The Lion king the two strongest Disney films FROM A STORY STANDPOINT. And I dont think there are lots of subplots or that Im being bombarded with a million things...
But yes, I do consider character arc to be important. And as much as I love Pinocchio, all the deus ex machina in that film is ridiculous! and listen to the audio commentary... they even comment on the drastic (and unexplained) change in Pinocchio's character before he jumps in the ocean.
And MErlinJones, those two are very extreme examples you gave. There is a middleground. But again, Im not commenting on characters, or visuals, or entertainment value. Im talking about the amount of plot, at times pacing, LOGIC and character arc within a story.
But yes, I do consider character arc to be important. And as much as I love Pinocchio, all the deus ex machina in that film is ridiculous! and listen to the audio commentary... they even comment on the drastic (and unexplained) change in Pinocchio's character before he jumps in the ocean.
And MErlinJones, those two are very extreme examples you gave. There is a middleground. But again, Im not commenting on characters, or visuals, or entertainment value. Im talking about the amount of plot, at times pacing, LOGIC and character arc within a story.
Eh, while I do agree that many stories nowadays are needlessly convoluted, I don't think Disney animated films in any era have ever been guilty of that.milojthatch wrote:Reiterating my point again in simpler terms. Today's films are meant for the ADHD generation who can't focus on just one or two plots in a story. They need four or five at least. The films from Walt Disney and that generation were more about one or two stories in a plot.
Another example of this for me as always been Star Trek. If you look at TOS and compare it to any of the newer titles, this point becomes very much apparent.
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
>>And as much as I love Pinocchio, all the deus ex machina in that film is ridiculous! <<
Not really, in that the goal is clearly set (through the Blue Fairy's magical rules) that Pinocchio can become a "real boy" only if he gives up his selfish ways to think of others and prove himself "brave, truthful and unselfish" -- which he does himself only once he sees that his choices have endangered Geppetto -- the miracles that occur are a symbolic result of his baby steps of transition from narcissistic youth to self-realized maturity, which are structured across the whole film. A series of lessons in life. It's the fanciful symbolism of coming-of-age and the psychological process of growth we must all embrace/avoid to be productive members of society.
There is an appealing element of wish-fulfillment -- in that Pinocchio, unlike real life, is given a second-chance each time to reconsider his actions and make another choice. If only we could learn from our mistakes as productively...!
All quite brilliant, IMHO. And certainly engaging/entertaining.
(BTW -- I too think B & B is a great film as the power it draws from it's symbolic fairytale/folklore roots is cut from the same cloth as Walt's films, though more modern and specific in style).
Not really, in that the goal is clearly set (through the Blue Fairy's magical rules) that Pinocchio can become a "real boy" only if he gives up his selfish ways to think of others and prove himself "brave, truthful and unselfish" -- which he does himself only once he sees that his choices have endangered Geppetto -- the miracles that occur are a symbolic result of his baby steps of transition from narcissistic youth to self-realized maturity, which are structured across the whole film. A series of lessons in life. It's the fanciful symbolism of coming-of-age and the psychological process of growth we must all embrace/avoid to be productive members of society.
There is an appealing element of wish-fulfillment -- in that Pinocchio, unlike real life, is given a second-chance each time to reconsider his actions and make another choice. If only we could learn from our mistakes as productively...!
All quite brilliant, IMHO. And certainly engaging/entertaining.
(BTW -- I too think B & B is a great film as the power it draws from it's symbolic fairytale/folklore roots is cut from the same cloth as Walt's films, though more modern and specific in style).
Hey MerlinJones,
I like yr analysis of Pinocchio, but I think it's stretching what is presented to fit what you would like it to be.
I think Pinocchio;s change should have been gradual, and derived from having to get HIMSELF out of the nasty situations he got himself into. I think the natural thing for him to think after all the deus ex machina, is that he can do whatever he wants, since the fairy will come to rescue him...
And Gepetto being in danger is VERY indirectly linked to pinocchio's actions!~
I like yr analysis of Pinocchio, but I think it's stretching what is presented to fit what you would like it to be.
I think Pinocchio;s change should have been gradual, and derived from having to get HIMSELF out of the nasty situations he got himself into. I think the natural thing for him to think after all the deus ex machina, is that he can do whatever he wants, since the fairy will come to rescue him...
And Gepetto being in danger is VERY indirectly linked to pinocchio's actions!~
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
>>I like yr analysis of Pinocchio, but I think it's stretching what is presented to fit what you would like it to be.<<
Now you're getting it! Cool, huh?
>>And Gepetto being in danger is VERY indirectly linked to pinocchio's actions!<<
Well, that point is exactly linked, as Geppetto has specifically gone out to find Pinocchio. That's what his note says verbatim. So Pinocchio's irresponsibility and vulnerability to temptation (despite clear warnings from Geppetto, Jiminy and Blue Fairy) is directly at fault for his father's predicament -- and this is WHY Pinocchio changes motivation at that point, he realizes that and begins to think of others, resulting is his own transition to a "real boy." He changes gears and saves Geppetto through self-sacrifice. The whole point of the narrative.
Is this end choice convincing to you as audience member? -- perhaps not, but that is interesting in itself!
You seem to prefer a film that is spelled-out for you in a more passive-viewer way that require less of the imagination and more of the writer's POV. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it is not "better" or "more sophisticated" storytelling, only a different style.
We could debate Pinocchio until morning and never really define it (part of the fun), but notice that neither of us debates B&B at all, because there is nothing left to chance or individual interpretation.
Note that Walt himself refused to overanalyze his stories or explain them, preferring to leave that to the viewer and the critics.
Now you're getting it! Cool, huh?
>>And Gepetto being in danger is VERY indirectly linked to pinocchio's actions!<<
Well, that point is exactly linked, as Geppetto has specifically gone out to find Pinocchio. That's what his note says verbatim. So Pinocchio's irresponsibility and vulnerability to temptation (despite clear warnings from Geppetto, Jiminy and Blue Fairy) is directly at fault for his father's predicament -- and this is WHY Pinocchio changes motivation at that point, he realizes that and begins to think of others, resulting is his own transition to a "real boy." He changes gears and saves Geppetto through self-sacrifice. The whole point of the narrative.
Is this end choice convincing to you as audience member? -- perhaps not, but that is interesting in itself!
You seem to prefer a film that is spelled-out for you in a more passive-viewer way that require less of the imagination and more of the writer's POV. Nothing wrong with that at all, but it is not "better" or "more sophisticated" storytelling, only a different style.
We could debate Pinocchio until morning and never really define it (part of the fun), but notice that neither of us debates B&B at all, because there is nothing left to chance or individual interpretation.
Note that Walt himself refused to overanalyze his stories or explain them, preferring to leave that to the viewer and the critics.
-
thelittleursula
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1235
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 3:15 am
- Location: Europe
Snow White despite being made quite a while ago is still quite beautiful. The animation is just impressive, and the story while quite simple is quite emotional. I think the Nostalgic Critic said it best with the storyline of Snow. It's emotions. The story is based on how we want the story to go. We want Snow to be happy and find her Prince, but we also want danger, scary scenes, romantic, cute scenes, funny scenes and thought provoking scenes.
The scary scene where Snow runs through the forest is so clever, because it's not just a scary scene it's Snow's fear and wild imagination and how her fear is making everything worse than it actually is, it's so clever.
Pinocchio is basically that there is no shortcuts in life, there is no easy path in life. Every road you take in life is going to hard and if you think that you've found a easy path, be surprised because it's not. That's pretty deep.
Oh and if you don't treat your parents with love and respect. Your a ass.
Dumbo I sort of have issues with. While it does have a moral of don't tease or bully the different it sort of has a " you're okay if you
are poplaur or famous" ring to it. Even Timmy the mouse the only animal to befriend him, his whole desire is to make him famous. And Pink Elephants on Parade is just random nightmare fuel. Unlike the scary bit in Snow, PE on Parade is just scary and weird for the sake of being scary and weird imo.
Bambi I have issues with as well. It's just the Circle of Life. You're born, have kids, take care of them and then die. It's too simple. Nice for a viewing; but after that I don't see any point. I do believe that Bambi is overrated. Very overrated.
Fantasia No narrative ? And ? That isn't what Fantasia is about ! Fantasia is about using your imagination and creative mind when listening to music !
Cinderella Passive heroine. ARE YOU JOKING ? Cinderella is one of the most mentally strong and tough princesses in the group. She believes in hope and faith that things will get better one day. That is something that people loose so easily and yet Cindy keeps that. Not to mention that the story has a strong karma vibe to it. Be kind and you'll be awarded and be nasty and you'll be punished without the cliche " villain dieing off a cliff " thing.
Peter Pan Peter Pan is all about finding maturity and the whole relationship between childhood and adulthood and when you're ready to become a adult. Many people don't realize that your not ready to become a adult until your ready too, and Wendy she felt ready even though her Mother still saw her as a child. But it's also about keeping your inner child within you. How is that bland ?
I don't want to go on here but in short I basically really disagree with you minus Dumbo and Bambi.
The scary scene where Snow runs through the forest is so clever, because it's not just a scary scene it's Snow's fear and wild imagination and how her fear is making everything worse than it actually is, it's so clever.
Pinocchio is basically that there is no shortcuts in life, there is no easy path in life. Every road you take in life is going to hard and if you think that you've found a easy path, be surprised because it's not. That's pretty deep.
Oh and if you don't treat your parents with love and respect. Your a ass.
Dumbo I sort of have issues with. While it does have a moral of don't tease or bully the different it sort of has a " you're okay if you
are poplaur or famous" ring to it. Even Timmy the mouse the only animal to befriend him, his whole desire is to make him famous. And Pink Elephants on Parade is just random nightmare fuel. Unlike the scary bit in Snow, PE on Parade is just scary and weird for the sake of being scary and weird imo.
Bambi I have issues with as well. It's just the Circle of Life. You're born, have kids, take care of them and then die. It's too simple. Nice for a viewing; but after that I don't see any point. I do believe that Bambi is overrated. Very overrated.
Fantasia No narrative ? And ? That isn't what Fantasia is about ! Fantasia is about using your imagination and creative mind when listening to music !
Cinderella Passive heroine. ARE YOU JOKING ? Cinderella is one of the most mentally strong and tough princesses in the group. She believes in hope and faith that things will get better one day. That is something that people loose so easily and yet Cindy keeps that. Not to mention that the story has a strong karma vibe to it. Be kind and you'll be awarded and be nasty and you'll be punished without the cliche " villain dieing off a cliff " thing.
Peter Pan Peter Pan is all about finding maturity and the whole relationship between childhood and adulthood and when you're ready to become a adult. Many people don't realize that your not ready to become a adult until your ready too, and Wendy she felt ready even though her Mother still saw her as a child. But it's also about keeping your inner child within you. How is that bland ?
I don't want to go on here but in short I basically really disagree with you minus Dumbo and Bambi.
-
merlinjones
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1056
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:52 am
I think Ursula's comments on "Cinderella," "Peter Pan" and "Pinocchio" themes are on the nose (excuse the pun).
A few thoughts on the others:
>>Dumbo I sort of have issues with. While it does have a moral of don't tease or bully the different it sort of has a " you're okay if you
are poplaur or famous" ring to it.<<
I'll disagree with this interpretation. Like "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer", "Dumbo" is about how your most severe preceived flaw can really be your greatest asset, though you don't know it yet. His freakish ears are what allows him to fly (literally and metaphorically)
That Dumbo's ultimate reward is fame has more to do with the fact that he lives in the circus (show biz). Rather than being the freak show or clown he becomes the star of the show -- it goes with the setting.
>>Bambi I have issues with as well. It's just the Circle of Life. You're born, have kids, take care of them and then die. It's too simple. Nice for a viewing; but after that I don't see any point.<<
Well, that is exactly the point -- and a vital one. We all need to center ourselves from time to time in the simple basics of life. Bad things can happen -- but we survive, move on, and the world is born again in the spring in the endless flow and cycle of life. We are but cyphers in the grand scheme of Mother Nature. Who doesn't need to be reminded of that from time to time?
A brilliant and beautiful film precisely because of it's elemental premise -- and perhaps even more important as people move further away from first-hand experience of nature's rhythms.
"Snow White" -- not nearly as simple as it seems, but an elemental warning lesson in the traps of vanity and envy. The Queen's famed beauty is worthless, as her heart is ugly as can be. Snow White is truly the fairest, as her heart is pure and her physical beauty incidental. Another message we may need even more in today's "botoxed" image-driven society...
A few thoughts on the others:
>>Dumbo I sort of have issues with. While it does have a moral of don't tease or bully the different it sort of has a " you're okay if you
are poplaur or famous" ring to it.<<
I'll disagree with this interpretation. Like "Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer", "Dumbo" is about how your most severe preceived flaw can really be your greatest asset, though you don't know it yet. His freakish ears are what allows him to fly (literally and metaphorically)
That Dumbo's ultimate reward is fame has more to do with the fact that he lives in the circus (show biz). Rather than being the freak show or clown he becomes the star of the show -- it goes with the setting.
>>Bambi I have issues with as well. It's just the Circle of Life. You're born, have kids, take care of them and then die. It's too simple. Nice for a viewing; but after that I don't see any point.<<
Well, that is exactly the point -- and a vital one. We all need to center ourselves from time to time in the simple basics of life. Bad things can happen -- but we survive, move on, and the world is born again in the spring in the endless flow and cycle of life. We are but cyphers in the grand scheme of Mother Nature. Who doesn't need to be reminded of that from time to time?
A brilliant and beautiful film precisely because of it's elemental premise -- and perhaps even more important as people move further away from first-hand experience of nature's rhythms.
"Snow White" -- not nearly as simple as it seems, but an elemental warning lesson in the traps of vanity and envy. The Queen's famed beauty is worthless, as her heart is ugly as can be. Snow White is truly the fairest, as her heart is pure and her physical beauty incidental. Another message we may need even more in today's "botoxed" image-driven society...