Let's face it, Disney lost its magic. How to come back...

[MovieMusicals.net]

Disney had success since it's first ever feature film - SNOW WHITE. Success followed with PINOCCHIO, BAMBI, etc.

The company's films have seen better and worse in between. However...

In 1988, OLIVER & COMPANY was released. This was based on the stage play OLIVER (and original novel OLIVER TWIST). Except in this film, the characters were animals, and it was set in contemporary New York City. Songs were written for the characters to sing, and another song was written to open the film, "Once Upon a Time In New York City." Although the film was not a huge success, it was a sign of the direction the company was heading towards.

The following year, THE LITTLE MERMAID was released. This was the key film in Disney's comeback, and when it comes down to it, it was all because of one thing: the music.

Howard Ashman and Alan Menken, who together did LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS for off-Broadway, teamed up for this project, and for it both took home Oscars. With songs like "A Part of Your World," "Under the Sea," "Poor Unfortunate Souls," and "Kiss the Girl," the film turned into more of a musical theatre style, and that is how the storyline developed. Disney contributed as they always have - added great animation and very fun, memorable characters that we love to love, and love to hate.

THE LITTLE MERMAID was a huge success, and many members of the creative process, including Menken & Ashman, teamed up again for the next Disney project: BEAUTY & THE BEAST.

This time having the entire development team, including Ashman and Menken, working from scratch, an old story was turned into a spectacular animated musical, which was nominated for BEST PICTURE at the Academy Awards - the first fully animated film to achieve such honor.

Again, Oscars were given to Menken & Ashman for Best Score and Best Song ("Beauty and the Beast"). The film competed against itself in the Best Song category, with "Belle" and "Be Our Guest" also nominated.

Disney continued in this reformatted style of animated musicals, with ALADDIN, THE LION KING, POCAHONTAS, THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME, HERCULES, and MULAN to follow - all of which were musically outstanding. Each received awards and nominations for Best Song.

Several songs during this era made the Billboard Top 10, including "A Whole New World" which made #1.

Sadly, MULAN was the last animated musical Disney would have success with. The company has degraded in recent years, releasing THE EMPORER'S NEW GROOVE, ATLANTIS, TREASURE PLANET, BROTHER BEAR, and HOME ON THE RANGE. Two successes thrown into the mix were TARZAN and LILO & STITCH.

And now, the point.

What Disney needs to do is go back to is animated musical roots that they discovered in 1989. Get Alan Menken back (he also did Disney's NEWSIES - Disney's first original musical for television).

If Disney revives its animated musical - I believe the company will thrive once again on the silver screen.

THE LITTLE MERMAID
BEAUTY AND THE BEAST
ALADDIN
THE LION KING
POCAHONTAS
THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME
HERCULES
MULAN
(and NEWSIES)

All HUGE successes, thanks to its "Broadway-style" storytelling (also called "book musical").

There's nothing better than leaving a good movie in a movie theatre and having a song that you like stuck in your head.

It's no good to just THROW songs in a film just because it's a Disney film. All Disney films have songs - but it's the book musical storytelling which makes the song have an emotional attachment. All of Phil Collins' songs for TARZAN were great - but the characters didn't sing them. They were background music with animation as visuals. That is simply will not do. Have the characters sing the songs. It's powerful storytelling.

To conclude, I think Disney can get out of this slump of theirs if they'd go back to the animated musical. Bring back Alan Menken, Tim Rice, Elton John, and Stephen Schwartz.

I CAUTION DISNEY, however, in bringing in "celebrity" artists. Hilary Duff or Lindsay Lohan music, although popular among children, simply does not work in Broadway-style storytelling.

Disney would think there's promotional benefits for the film in having "celebrity" artists do songs for the film. This is very true, but it ruins the film. Schwartz, John, Menken, and Rice write BETTER songs than those that Lohan and Duff sing. And it makes a good film. It brings Oscars, as proven in the past.

OK - I ranted on many aspects of my "Disney comeback" plan, and my fingers are tired. Agree? Disagree? DISCUSS!

[AwallaceUNC]

Get Alan Menken back (he also did Disney's NEWSIES - Disney's first original musical for television).

I agree with some of your points- not so much with others. I do want to point out that <i>Newsies</i> wasn't a TV movie- it was released theatrically. Also, as far as I know Disney hasn't "lost" Alan Menken- he just did <i>Home on the Range</i>.

-Aaron

[Kenai]

I CAUTION DISNEY, however, in bringing in "celebrity" artists. Hilary Duff or Lindsay Lohan music, although popular among children, simply does not work in Broadway-style storytelling.

I strongly agree on this. I'm SO sick of Disney Channel's stars in place of actual celebrities with talent. I'm still surprised Disney's never brought in Mariah Carey to do a soundtrack. (Well, Mariah did Disney in December in their Christmas parade but that doesn't count)

Hmm...however, like I'll always say, JUST because the movies aren't box office success (strong points to Brother Bear and TENG on this), doesn't make them good movies. Or even more so failures. I strongly disagree with what you say there. However, I can agree on the likes of Atlantis and Treasure Planet. Forgive me fans of these movies, but I think Disney's pantheon would've been better without them.

Another reason for the slump is well...American audiences I will say lack any sort of taste these days. No one will dare to watch an animated movie anymore unless it's Pixar. The audiences are willing to give these movies chances, unlike some of Disney's animated fare. (HOTR didn't look interesting though, so that's an exception) Audiences simply wouldn't tune into any 2-D kind of movie anymore, dismissing it as kiddie fare and leaving it only for kids with families. It's really sad and unfair that unless it's Pixar, audiences won't give the movie any backing. Howl's Moving Castle, even if it were released on 4,000 screens and with promotion, still wouldn't have done as well as The Incredibles/Nemo/Shrek money makers.

Sorry if I sound redundant, but I blame the American moviegoers for some of these duds, because they didn't bother to give the film a chance. (That's the not the case in most countries around the world where the movie grosses way more, look at Brother Bear and Howl's Moving Castle).

[bennyb98]

Well, first off I don’t think that Disney has lost its touch. In my opinion, the tastes of the movie going public has changed, not Disney.

Several of the new Disney’s movies have had great soundtracks (but not up to par with TLM or BATB); even The Emperor's New Groove was nominated for an Academy Award for its music. Disney can’t just count of having 2 to 3 songs nominated each year like in the past when the competition wasn’t as strong. I really do feel as some of the latest material from Disney hasn’t been its best but it’s far from what it could be and considering the rule of the evil Eisner is over I hope that Disney can return to its renaissance.

[MovieMusicals.net]

Emporer's New Groove, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Atlantis, Treasure Planet, etc. were all OK but nothing spectacular. Not one was as good as Aladdin, Mermaid, Hunchback, Lion King, etc.

Menken wrote ONE song for HOME ON THE RANGE and the film wasn't an animated musical (book musical).

The reason there is a slump now is BECAUSE Disney did Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Atlantis, Treasure Planet, etc. All of them were such a DOWNGRADE. I had no faith in Disney after Emporer's New Groove (even though I thought it was quite funny, the film was just SO kiddish).

The 2D animation was fine, but because of the decline in GOOD 2D films, and the GREAT 3D films, it became a groupthink that only 3D films are good and 2D is for children.

Again, if Disney would bring back the Broadway style animated musical, whether it be in 2D or 3D, they would do great. I truly believe this.

[MovieMusicals.net]

Au contraire - Emporer's New Groove's music was nominated because of lack of better competition.

Songs from THE LITTLE MERMAID, ALADDIN, THE LION KING, MULAN, HERCULES, HUNCHBACK, etc. were all GREAT songs. MERMAID, ALADDIN, and LION KING had MULTIPLE nominations for song - so there definitely wasn't "filler" nominations. They all deserved to be in.

HERCULES battled against non-Disney film's music from the movie ANASTASIA (a Broadway style animated musical). Both films lost to "My Heart Will Go On" from TITANIC.

[Pasta67]

Man, I hope people read this post. It would suck to have typed all this just to see that nobody read it because it was long.

my fingers are tired.

I'll bet they are. Good post.

I don't think that Disney would necessarily become successful again if they went back to their musical roots. Remember that Home on the Range was a musical, and it didn't do too much justice for the company (no offense, Ichabod). Even though the musicals are my favorite kinds of Disney movies, there have been good non-musical ones: Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet (note that I said good, not sucessful), and Tarzan. Whether it's a musical or not has no effect on whether it's a good movie.

I think that if Disney wants to get back in the game, they have to forget about the other players in the game. I've seen Disney's latest movies and they can't fit in that certain magic because they are too busy trying to keep up with competition. Take the jokes for instance. Disney pays too much attention to what other movies do to make people laugh. They probably think: "Well, in this movie, this guy farts and that makes children laugh. We could use that in our movie and I bet children will come to see it." In the classics, the jokes were witty, clever, and above all, actually funny. Today, Disney movies tend to make jokes that will make a movie funny for a few views, but fail in making the movie memorable. If Disney just forgets about competition, they could start producing winners again.

This is how I see the formula for a Disney's classic:
- Think up a good setting, plot, and problem for the story.
- Think of useful, memorable, three-dimensional characters that are relatable to audiences and serve the storyline.
- Write a inspired, humorous, heartfelt, witty script.
- If songs are needed, make them inspired, memorable, charming if it's a happy song, sinister if it's a villian song, entertaining and, most importantly: useful to the story. Disney classics don't just put in songs for the sake of having songs. They must push the story forward.
- If songs are not needed, find an effective way to advance the story in an equally entertaining way.
- Character development. I can't stress this enough. Characters must evolve during the movie; otherwise, what was the point of the movie?
- Magic. The audience must feel as if they are being enchanted the whole way through the movie.

Mix that all together and I think you have a good Disney classic.

Sadly, not all Disney movies follow this award winning formula. Let's take a look at the formula we've been seeing lately:

- A story that seems generic; something we've all seen before. If it's filled with plot-holes, that's also a no-no.
- Characters that either don't serve the story or are boring and unmemorable.
- Write a script that uses old, boring, unfunny jokes and unwitty dialogue. The sincere moments are meant to be heartfelt, but they feel forced on us.
- Boring, forgetable songs. This was especially present in Brother Bear.
- No magic; a movie that doesn't have that effect that brings you back to when you were a child and anything could happen.

Mix all that together and you have what we've been seeing in Disney lately.

As far as celebrity voices go, I don't think you have to worry about Disney pulling a Dreamworks and using nothing but celebrities to promote their movies. Something I've admired Disney for ever since Snow White is that they look for voices that suit the characters, not voices that promote their movies.

And what's even sadder is that Disney fails to realize their problem. They think that their movies are doing bad because 3-D animation is the "thing" now. That's probably why they shut down their 2-D animation studios (something I will never forgive them for). They probably think: "Don't blame us for the movie not doing well, it's 3-D animation's fault for taking our spotlight away." Newsflash, Disney: your movies lately are doing bad because they are bad. Sorry fans of Atlantis and Home on the Range, but this strongly applies here. That's not to say that 3-D animation's success has nothing to do with Disney's problem; it does contribute. Think of the average person with no opinion whatsoever on animation. He wants to see an animated movie. Will he choose:
a: The 3-D movie with good graphics and realistic enviornments.
or
b: The 2-D movie that could be just as good, but is the same style of animation that you could see on Cartoon Network for free.

Hate to break it to you, but the answer would probably be "a". Most people like 3-D animation because it's newer. That's the truth.

All that said, if Disney wants to strike cinematic gold again, do what I said above:
-Follow the Disney classic formula
-Ignore the competition

[SuicideSeaside]

I have no problem with using celebrities as long as their voice fit the character....like Robin Williams as the genie or Mel Gibson as John Smith. I also thought Tom Hanks and Tim Allen were great in Toy Story.

I don't think Disney should follow the classic formula totally. It's been over used.

[MovieMusicals.net]

The forumla is semi-flawed.

Nearly ALL of Disney's works are based upon pre-existing stories.

Characters are already developed in most cases - they just need to animate them.

In the case of animated musicals (the Broadway-style ones), songs weren't written just to be hits. They were written from experienced Broadway composers who knew what they were doing.

In Broadway-style storytelling, songs are written:
-to celebrate
-to mourn
-to proclaim love
-to taunt
-to tell a story/move story along
-etc.

First, the composers find places where songs could really help in the story. Next, they figure what the song would do. What will the song accomplish? After this is figured out, then composers' vary in techniques from there.

Also - HOME ON THE RANGE isn't a Broadway-style musical. I'd call it a "movie with music." None of the characters, except the villain, sang - I don't think.

[Pasta67]

I don't think Disney should follow the classic formula totally. It's been over used.

It may be overused, but it's a winning formla. Plus, I think that Disney could achieve true success if they use they're classic formula, but do it in a way that people don't know it's the same thing. If they can make that same formula feel different and new every time, they'll get out of they're so called "dark age" easily.

[MovieMusicals.net]

Like I said previously - it is Disney's own fault their films have gone downhill since Hunchback.

But this happens with every company. Disney has had slumps before - and LITTLE MERMAID rebounded them to Oscar worthy films.

What Disney does right now is crucial. They already did away with their 2D animation department, aside from the television animation studio. This may hurt them, maybe not.

Right now, I don't see a hit with Disney. Rapunzel Unbraided doesn't sound too hot. Nothing on their slate is appealing.

I'm anxious for the removal of Eisner and bring in someone with a vision. Someone to lead the company and doesn't care about the money (yeah, RIIIIIIIIIGHT).

However, Eisner's favorite Disney film is Hunchback of Notre Dame. He has had a PERSONAL AGENDA to have Disney do a TV musical (a la Cinderella, Annie, The Music Man) of Hunchback for the Wonderful World of Disney. In fact, it almost made it to pre-production - but then all the hallabullo happened with Roy Disney and everyone calling for his removal. It shook everything up.

It PAINS me to see what Disney is going through right now. It seems all the focus is going towards the COMPANY and their stocks and foreign affairs. Then secondary is their theme parks. The Broadway shows and feature films are last on their list. Even direct-to-DVD/video films are getting priority over the animated feature films. In the motion picture department - their live-action films are getting all the push. (Pirates of the Caribbean is one of my favorite films, but Haunted Mansion blew big time).

Their Disney Channel is worthless in my opinion. All hype and teen celebrity - no quality.

Disney is in a HUGE rut and they're focusing on staying alive right now and not working to revitalize the company. To rejuvinate it. To make a glorious comeback. They want the stockholders to be happy day by day. Who cares about artistry? Who cares about the Disney magic.

[Pasta67]

In the case of animated musicals (the Broadway-style ones), songs weren't written just to be hits.

I completely agree. That's what Disney classics accomplish. They don't have songs for the sake of having songs.

Also - HOME ON THE RANGE isn't a Broadway-style musical. I'd call it a "movie with music." None of the characters, except the villain, sang - I don't think.

Here's what it says about the songs in UD's review:

The characters do not break into song except for two occassions. Instead, like most of the post-Mulan films, pop singers convey emotions in an obvious fashion, less like Broadway and more like modern cinema.

So yeah, it is a movie with music, but it's about 15% musical.

[MovieMusicals.net]

HOME ON THE RANGE's story wasn't written to be a Broadway-style musical, so there is no way with the script as is could it have been turned into a musical. I couldn't imagine those cows breaking into song.

I LOVED the Alan Menken song in the film. I also liked one other song, forget its title.

And re: celebrity voices - you're exactly right. Other companies promote the voice. At least Disney gets the voice RIGHT, no matter who the "name" is. I loved Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Rosie O'Donnell, Robin Williams, the comedian who did Iago (can't remember the name), etc. They were right for that character.

[Pasta67]

I couldn't imagine those cows breaking into song.

Well, I think they do. I remember someone complaining once about Roseanne's singing voice.

the comedian who did Iago (can't remember the name)

Gilbert Gottfried. Yes, he was perfect. I can't imagine any other voice coming out of Iago's mouth.

I didn't know Eisner's favorite Disney movie was Hunchback of Notre Dame. That's awesome! That increases our chancess of getting a 2-discer!

[SuicideSeaside]

I just think that Disney needs to get more interesting stories. Make it weird and creative....something that hasn't been done before. Seems like a difficult job.

I'm actually really looking foward to The Corpse Bride....with all the stop motion animation and all. Tim Burton and Johnny Depp is a winning combination.

[MovieMusicals.net]

They have done LOTS of story/settings already:

Fairytale/castle - Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty
Village - Pinocchio
Circus - Dumbo
Forest - Bambi, Robin Hood, Pocahontas
Mexico - Saludos Amigos, Three Caballeros
Fantasy - Alice In Wonderland, Peter Pan
London - Peter Pan, Lady & the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians, Aristocats, Great Mouse Detective
Medival - Sword & the Stone
Jungle - Jungle Book, Tarzan, Emporer's New Groove
Swamp - Rescuers
New York - Oliver & Company
Ocean - Little Mermaid, Finding Nemo, Atlantis
Austrailian Outback - Rescuers Down Under
Desert - Aladdin, Lion King
Greek - Hercules
Paris - Hunchback
Hawaii - Lilo & Stitch
Outer Space - Lilo & Stitch, Treasure Planet
Farm - Home on the Range, Chicken Little

Just SO many different settings and themes, SO many repeats.

You have humans, animals, plants, objects, and aliens. What else is there?

I think adapting stories is just fine - find some good ones and do them. Just do them RIGHT. Disney took GREAT story ideas and ruined them, such as Treasure Island.

[Pasta67]

I think adapting stories is just fine - find some good ones and do them. Just do them RIGHT. Disney took GREAT story ideas and ruined them, such as Treasure Island.

I see nothing wrong with adding twists to certain story lines. People know Treasure Island, so adding a twist doesn't seem to hurt it at all. That wasn't Treasure Planet's problem, it was one of the many things that made that movie shine. Sorry, but I'm a huge Treasure Planet fan.

What exactly did you not like about the sci-fi twist?

[MovieMusicals.net]

What I wrote did make it seem like I bashed the Planet idea - but not at all what I think.

The idea was fine. The film wasn't too good. They had a good idea and did crap with it. "Hey - it's different. That's all the artistry the film needs. Now finish it in three days and let's make money."

No vision. No magic.

[Pasta67]

The place I found Treasure Planet suffered the most was that the characters were not relatable; Jim was the only relatable one and only teens could relate to him. I didn't notice any lack of artistry, but you're entitled to your opinion to.

As much as I love Treasure Planet, it's not without it's flaws. But it is one of the better post-Tarzan Disney movies.

[MovieMusicals.net]

As much as I love Treasure Planet, it's not without it's flaws. But it is one of the better post-Tarzan Disney movies.

I very much agree.

Since TARZAN, I would say LILO & STITCH has been Disney's best non-Pixar film.