Disney doesn't need saving, it just needs to die. Preferably in pain and ruin, but I'll settle for quick.
I know how cool it is to hate Disney, but they currently seem to be entering a second renaissance with the animated canon films. The Princess and the Frog, and Tangled, were both wonderful films and a return to form for them.
I don't understand why so many people condemn Disney for shameless corporate mediocrity, but always give Pixar a pass, even praise them, for pulling the same exact shit. Hell, if not for Pixar, the cancer that is 90% of modern CGI family films wouldn't exist.
Planes, by the way, was done by DisneyToon Studios, the same shit studio responsible for all the terrible direct-to-video sequels they used to churn out.
Actually it's not really cool to hate Disney, they have much stronger fan bases than you could imagine. My dissatisfaction with them lies there, the glassy eyed people who prop up a company which churns out work that's devoid of anything beyond status quo culture, and continues to be praised over the marginal gains that animators continue to make under their auspices (woo hand drawing is back in style).
No, not all animation should be a Malick flim, but it could be a damn slight better if studios like Disney didn't exist to tow the line of American culture, placating already a sloth minded audience with stories that reinforce traditional social moray ad nauseum. Granted, this is also the fault of creators not striking out on their own, to wrest control away from these so called standard bearers, but how can you carve your own niche, when you've got something as big as Disney looming in the distance?
Whatever though, no big deal, I'm just talking out of my ass pay no mind.
I usually rank Disney films on their own merits. "The Emperor's New Groove" is probably the funniest and most "cartoon"-y movie they've ever done, but it didn't exactly set the box office on fire. "The Princess and the Frog" broke some new ground, but I'm getting quite bored with the emphasis on their creating a complete set of ethnic "princess" characters since in the end it's all just a doll commercial anyway.
Most of Pixar's offerings are better than average, except for Cars 2. I'd accuse them of falling into sequel-cancer territory, but Planes was, as stated, made by another studio, and I don't think anyone would fault them for the Toy Story trilogy, so at the moment they get a pass.
But, it must be said that Disney is a marketing juggernaut and will squeeze every last drop of toy and merch money out of a franchise. Perhaps that's where the hate lies, especially when they oversex certain characters and peddle an image of gender roles some object to. Hell, I can still remember the grumbling over "Hunchback of Notre Dame," which not only changed the story significantly, it drove home the moral that "ugly people wind up with ugly people, beautiful people wind up with beautiful people, and that's the way it should be."
It took me a while to figure out that this wasn't a parody of a real movie.
Damn it, Jerry.
All these 3D animated movies are cinematic cancer.
Fun fact: Planes 2 was made at the same time as Planes 1, and given a release date before the first movie even hit theaters. There is also a Planes 3.
|Seven Arts/H8 Red |
Disney already made a boat-based film. Gilbert Gottfried played Napoleon, and Molly Ringwald played Anne Frank.
I don't understand why people hate Disney more than the other studios. It's almost like the fact that they have a family-friendly appearance just offends people into seeing red. As if FOX, a News Corp subsidiary, is some wonderful company.
|Binro the Heretic |
Has anyone else seen the ads for "Free Birds" yet?
And the girl boats have tits.
| Register or login To Post a Comment|