Jim on Film
Page 2 of 2
In the Fall 2004 issue of the Disney Magazine, we also saw the blurring of the lines between Walt Disney Feature Animation and the Disney/Pixar films, a line that has been disappearing for several years. In that issue, the magazine created an interesting guide to Disney animation. While the list thankfully left out the cheapquels and the television features, it did include Dinsosaur and the Pixar films. Dinosaur was a Disney film and did utilize talent from Feature Animation, though its live-action backgrounds, to me, doesn’t put it on the same level as fully animated features like Lady and the Tramp or Beauty and the Beast. Despite this flaw, the real trouble in the list was the addition of the Disney/Pixar films.
Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy the Pixar films, but now, talent from outside the studio is being meshed with the in-house talent. There is no doubt that Disney has exerted some control over these films, but to count these as part of the Disney canon doesn’t seem quite right. Beautiful computer-rendered animation aside, these are Disney/Pixar films and not Disney films from Feature Animation.
Furthermore, the presence of the Pixar name will only serve to erode the studio in the future. The Disney/Pixar films are extremely popular, and Disney should promote those films in the theme parks, on television, and in merchandising. The problem with putting these films on the same plane as their own classics in advertising and in studio history will be if and when Disney and Pixar make their final break. As of right now, Cars is the last Disney/Pixar venture. No one really knows the true extent of the Disney/Pixar relationship. The word on a final split between the two could be just studio politics as they put pressure on each other, or it could really be the end of a magical collaboration. If and when the collaboration does end, the studio will have to contend with their Disney name being forever entwined with another studio’s releases. After all, if “Disney’s presentation of a Pixar film�? like The Incredibles is in the same category as The Little Mermaid, then why wouldn’t a, say, “Twentieth Century Fox presentation of a Pixar film�? be any different? All during the 80s and 90s, at a time when studios were rushing to release animated films, Disney always maintained the upper hand because they were the only studio who had the history—the classics, the masterpieces, the gold collections, the platinum collections. To forever link another studio’s output with their own, such as they are doing with the Pixar films, they will have to share that unique history and the financial rewards they have reaped because of it. It some ways, it is as if they are selling the Disney name to another company.
When I was writing my series Chronologically Through the Canon, in which I wrote my observations on watching each of the Disney full-length animation features from Feature Animation in a row, Laughing Place writer Rhett Wickham encouraged me to include in my survey all of the studio’s theatrical output, not just the Feature Animation releases. He wanted me to chart what the company expected the audience to accept as feature-quality animation. I didn’t because I had other goals in mind, but after seeing the Teacher’s Pet movie, I fully understood what he meant. The studio is now asking us to buy Teacher’s Pet: The Movie, The Lion King, and Toy Story as equal, as the same. Sadly, for one generation, Disney will always be signified by the likes of Cinderella 2.
As the company blurs the lines between what is Disney Feature Animation and what is not, the once proud art form is rapidly losing its identity. When looking at advertisements for The Jungle Book 2, Brother Bear, or Teacher’s Pet, it’s very hard for the casual viewer to tell the difference. Just as I have written off all film adaptations of television shows after suffering through the Josie and the Pussycats and Scooby-Doo movies, I can see why people have stopped seeing masterpieces like Brother Bear. Given enough of The Little Mermaid 2 (a film I have yet to hear anyone say anything good about), The Jungle Book 2 (another film I have yet to hear anyone say anything good about), and Teacher’s Pet: The Movie (a film I saw for myself and had nothing good to say about), I would go to what is most apparently not those films, CGI.
In Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Kida tells Milo that her civilization is “like a stone the ocean beats against. With each passing year, a little more of us is worn away.�? I doubt anyone knew in the making of that film how accurately those words might speak for their legendary department. Certainly, the current management of Disney still doesn’t understand. They just keep pushing more and more ocean.
Discuss It!
Related Links
-- Jim Miles
The opinions expressed by our guest columnists, and all of our columnists, do not necessarily represent the feelings of LaughingPlace.com or any of its employees or advertisers. All speculation and rumors about the future of Disneyland and the Walt Disney Company are just that - speculation and rumors - and should be treated as such.
-- Posted November 22, 2004