That I love Disney is a severe understatement.
Do you know how long Beast was cursed before Belle happened upon his castle? If you can recall that one very specific line from the movie that reveals this information, then you probably empathize with my very somber regard toward the present status of my favorite film company. And we should probably be friends.
Kids born in the late ’80s, plus or minus a few years, were truly blessed. We lived in the days of “Rocko’s Modern Life”; the days when wearing high-top converse didn’t mean you knew how to slam dance — it meant you were five; the days of yo-yos, scrunchies, marbles, jellies and mean games of tetherball. But most importantly, they were the days of Ariel, Robin Hood, Mufasa, Baloo, Maleficent and that feisty little raccoon named Meeko. It was the Golden Age of Disney.
And I fear it has been lost forever.
Ever since “Toy Story,” those guys down in Burbank have been getting funny ideas about computer animation, namely using it to replace animation. Of course I understand that hand animation takes ages to complete and that technology pervades everything, making it easier to produce films and all that logistical business. But that curious lamp who bounces his way across the screen before new movies symbolizes the only thing about Disney I have come to almost resent: Pixar.
Yes, “Finding Nemo” was hilarious and I obviously quoted it for several months. Yes, “Monsters Inc.” was clever and cute, etc. And, “Wall-E” is undoubtedly the single most adorable movie in the entirety of human existence. I’m not saying Pixar hasn’t pumped out some great, enjoyable movies. They most certainly have and sales alone are proof of this. But when children now are more familiar with the lines of “The Incredibles” than “Peter Pan,” it crushes my soul a little. One kid I met a few years ago, around age 5, admitted she had never seen “Robin Hood.” It was one of the most tragic moments of my life. That’s probably an exaggeration, but it was very eye-opening. Since when did Pixar overtake classic Disney?
With Pixar came the end of the Golden Age, the end of traditional animation and the end to a long series of timeless masterpieces. Not to mention the beginning of an out of control, obsessive line of about a thousand awful sequels to the old Disney movies. Movies that already have an explicit, concrete ending. “The Little Mermaid 2”? “101 Dalmatians 2”? “Lion King 1 1/2”? “Cinderella 2” and 3? Of all the animated films that were the most clear in its perfectly happy ending, Cinderella has no business having a sequel, much less second sequel. Not only were the classics retired, they were ruined a little by pathetic continuations.
I’m embarrassed for Disney, and I hope Uncle Walt never finds out after they unfreeze him.
I am disappointed in this blog for a couple of reasons.
First, I don’t agree with you premise. I do not think the introduction of Pixar films into the Disney world has created a decline among traditional hand-drawn animation. Since the release of “Toy Story” the Disney canon has welcomed such hand-drawn favorites as “Mulan,” “The Princess and the Frog,” “Tangled,” “Lilo & Stitch,” “Brother Bear,” “Meet the Robinsons,” “Tarzan,” “Hercules,” and “The Hunchback of Notre Dame” among others. Sure there have been some lemons (hello “Home on the Range” and “Treasure Planet”), but every generation of Disney films have their own failures–don’t forget “Rescuers Down Under” (a sequel) was released between “Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast.”
Second, while the late 80s and early 90s were a rebirth for the Disney company, traditional Disney fans and historians place the Golden Age of Disney from 1937-1941.
Third, the inclusion of Robin Hood, Maleficent and Baloo as belonging to your generation belittles the significance of all Disney heroes and villains as timeless creations that belong to ALL generations which is why it is very hard to find a piece of Disney merchandise with a date on it because the Disney company themselves consider their products timeless.
Lastly, the use of sequels and re-inventions of stories is nothing new for Disney (or the world in general). While some of the direct-to-DVD titles Disney has released in recent years have been sub-par Disney has released sequels for “Atlantis,” “The Rescuers,” and “Fantasia” to theaters. Almost all of the titles in the Disney canon are re-imaginings of much older story lines from other cultures: “The Little Mermaid,” “The Lion King,” “Robin Hood,” “Hunchback,” “Tarzan,” “Tangled,” “The Princess and the Frog,” and “Snow White.” Need I go on?
As a former Disney employee and life-long Disney fanatic I find it insulting that you “resent” Pixar. I was working for the company when Disney and Pixar signed their second production/distribution agreement and I can tell you that most Cast Members were delighted to be welcoming such incredible artists, musicians and technicians to the Disney family. Oh, and by the way, many Pixar stalwarts have a longer history with Disney than many of us: John Lasseter–long-time Pixar exec and current Chief Creative Officer for Pixar and Walt Disney Animation–worked at Disneyland before becoming an animator for Disney to work on “Mickey’s Christmas Carol” and spearheaded “Brave Little Toaster.”
I don’t doubt your love for Disney but don’t discount the treasures of today’s children just because they are not part of your “Golden Age.”
One last thing, “Beauty and the Beast” was the first Disney feature to use computer animation; it was during that incredible ballroom scene with Belle in her yellow dress and Beast in his finest. I’m sure you remember it from your childhood.
Sincerely,
Will Griggs
Cal Poly History Major
35 years old and still a kid at heart
Throughout this post, you claim that our generation, the “Kids born in the late ’80s, plus or minus a few years” were “blessed” with the Golden Age of Disney. You go on to say ‘But when children now are more familiar with the lines of ”The Incredibles” than “Peter Pan,” it crushes my soul a little. One kid I met a few years ago, around age 5, admitted she had never seen “Robin Hood.” It was one of the most tragic moments of my life.’ This is a fine example of a false analogy. I do agree with you that our generation was blessed with a great era of Disney works, but to compare our generation with the generation growing up with Pixar is not right. The two generations are too different. Another example of a false analogy would be to compare our generation and the Disney works within it with the generation of our parents who had the Disney era of Mighty Mouse and Donald Duck. The eras are too different to be compared with each other.
Throughout this post, you claim that our generation, the "Kids born in the late ’80s, plus or minus a few years" were "blessed" with the Golden Age of Disney. You go on to say ‘But when children now are more familiar with the lines of ”The Incredibles” than “Peter Pan,” it crushes my soul a little. One kid I met a few years ago, around age 5, admitted she had never seen “Robin Hood.” It was one of the most tragic moments of my life.’ This is a fine example of a false analogy. I do agree with you that our generation was blessed with a great era of Disney works, but to compare our generation with the generation growing up with Pixar is not right. The two generations are too different. Another example of a false analogy would be to compare our generation and the Disney works within it with the generation of our parents who had the Disney era of Mighty Mouse and Donald Duck. The eras are too different to be compared with each other.
To say that the quality of Disney Films has degraded because of their partnering with Pixar and computer generated animation is analogous to saying that Disney ruined their earlier cartoons by adding color. Each generation of films is done in different styles and circumstances, so they are always different. Stating that Disney classics from the 80’s are superior to modern films because of computer animation is a false analogy. The two generations of films must be observed for their quality in the context of generation to avoid making the generalization that Disney:Pixar films are less magical and classic than older Disney hand-drawn films.