This Disney Cheapquel stuff is out of hand!

[Gonzo]

Originally posted by grail
the real trick is that 15 years from now, you'll still have plenty of folk nostalgic for the Muppets...but Disney's basically beating all the nostalgia out of the kids of today with over-priced, under-written junk that evokes no real emotional attachment or sentimentality save that of Disney for your money.

There may not be many here that read these posts that are old enough to remember this, but remember when they'd re-release the Classics in the Theatres? Every 7 years or so they'd re-release them, so that children would have the chance to see them in the theatres; this is before the VHS era...or at least before they were released on video as widely as they are now.

That was a GREAT way to keep people anticipating what would come next, and kept audiences captivated by the Classic Disney Magic...which has evidently all been sold out.

I'm glad I saw Peter Pan, Bambi, Pinocchio, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, etc. for the first time on the big screen, holding onto my parents during the scary parts, and that I didn't just pop them into the VCR in lieu of babysitting or parental interaction.

I don't know what I'm saying. Again.

Quindiana Jones

 

[GWGumby]

I think the re-release into theater thing is dying because of an inherent shift in the way our culture watches movies. When we were kids the VCR was something new, so up to then the only way to see movies was in the theater or broadcast on TV. And there was no way to see it again once it was out of theaters.

Today is a completely different story. We've moved to a home movie market. Theatrical runs are merely extended commercials for the DVD that you will buy 6 months later. That's why studios put all their marketing blitz in the opening weekend. Because if you don't see it then, it'll be gone from the theater replaced by the next big movie attraction.

Think about how many dollar theaters still exist. Growing up we had first-run theaters, then the slightly older cheaper run theater, then the dollar theater. Movies were held in the theater as long as possible to try and get as much money out of them as they could. Now, they get first run, then are immediately marketed to VHS and DVD.

Now as a parent, would you rather sit in a theater packed with hundreds of little kids whining and screaming to watch some cartoon that you could care less about, or would you rather just get the DVD and watch it at home? I would much rather see movies in the theater, but we just tried an experiment a couple weeks ago to take our kids to see the Veggie-Tales movie, and ended up leaving half way through because our kids just couldn't stay still or pay attention to it. We were ruining the experience for others so we decided to cut our losses and wait for the video.

In other words, I would rather introduce my kids to film in a theater, I think there's greater magic there, but convenience keeps me at home with the DVD player. Maybe when my kids get a little older that will change, but will there be any movies to take them to when they are ready?

 

[Gonzo]

Yeah,

We've recently discovered that Very Small Children and movie theatres don't mix either...and that my sister and her husband make for very convenient babysitters.

I understand the cultural shift (dare I say paradigm?) in the way we view movies...I think I just have these sweet memories of my own early movie-going experiences and wish it could be that way for my pups.

Yeah, one of the first things my wife and I said after seeing a movie in the theatres recently was, "that was GREAT! I can't WAIT for the DVD!!!"

*sigh*

Naja. What's past is past.

Quinnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[Gonzo]

...one more unrelated thing...

Does EVERYTHING have to have *fart* jokes in them? I mean, I love a good ripper as much as anyone else, but part of the thrill of that brand of second-grade humor was that it was forbidden... I think it's great and refreshing to squeak one out once in a while, but I don't think it should be in every cartoon that I could potentially take my kids to see. In the seventy minutes they have, surely they can come up with another joke or two to tell.

That's it.

Quinnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[GWGumby]

Originally posted by Gonzo
Does EVERYTHING have to have *fart* jokes in them?

Yes, I think that's part of the movie production code these days. Farts & explosions. Ya gotta have 'em. I'm surprised there aren't many movies were the farts and the explosions interact more.

 

[uncleduke]

I think the Irony of all the Disney sequels is the fact that they never made one for the The Great Mouse Detective ... that is one title that they never promote, and I wouldv'e love to have seen continued.

 

[frogboy4]

I agree. The film lends itself to the possibility of sequels. It was a fun film too.

 

[trekkie1701E]

Unfortunately, these sequels (Half of which I "embarrasingly" admit to liking) have brought in over $1 Billion for Eisner. So, there 'ya go: It's "all" about little gren pieces of paper...
At least they canned the already planned TREASURE PLANET sequel...
When Eisner was at Paramount, he said a quote that is "widely" known in the online community: "It is not our obligation to make art. It is not our obligation to make history. To make money is our only objective."
If only he hadn't gotten into a shouting match with Jeffrey Katzenburg, than he might have had a good shot at succeeding Eisner. And Judging from his awesome job so far at Dreamworks, Disney could have made a great turnaround, and finally do something about the amusing reputation Walt Disney Pictures now has (And Has had for about seven years now!).
And With 101 DAL 2, JUNGLE BOOK 2, DUMBO 2, MULAN 2, a LIZZIE MCGUIRE movie, etc on the way, that rep ain't improvin'. PIRATES OF THE CARRIBEAN sounds very cool, and the new WINNIE THE POOH theatrical feature (Due in Spring) will probably be good, but two films are not enough.
REMEMBER THE TITANS was even Hollywood Pictures! It was only changed to WDP for the video release!
In the meantime, MAX KEEBLE remained un-changed...

 

[trekkie1701E]

<B>f only he hadn't gotten into a shouting match with Jeffrey Katzenburg, than he might have had a good shot at succeeding Eisner. </B>
OK, that is a very incorrect sentence! Hope u got the jist of what I meant, though.

 

[Drtooth]

Originally posted by uncleduke
I think the Irony of all the Disney sequels is the fact that they never made one for the The Great Mouse Detective ... that is one title that they never promote, and I wouldv'e love to have seen continued.

I have to admit, because of that I easily forgot that that was one of my favorites. I love that film, and sequals would have worked well with it. It could have been a series, much like Shelock Homes, which it brilliantly saterizes. In fact, the only other place I've seen any Great Mouse Detective characters is in Darkwing Duck's living room (it's the statue he hits before he spins around in his chairs to get to his secrewt lair or something to that extent. I saw the Bean bahgs of the characters, and Unfortunately I never got them.

Sadly, this same thing happened to my OTHER favorite Diz flick, the Emperor's New Groove. I boycotted the frickin' Disney store for a year because of that (Monsters Inc Drew me back, and eventually I found some pretty good ENG stuff.) Then they go and promote Dino-snore, which was incredably dull, and pointless. I snuck in to see it after Viva Rock Vegas.. which at least was a more interresting Prehistoric film. Plus that increadbly bad Live action Cheapqual, 102 Dalmations, which was just obvious, old hat, and nausiating from the previews alone. It was a box office bomb, and ENG whent unpromoted....

And they never seem to rerelease the Ducktales movie to Video and DVD either...