Disney animated movies

[RobbyBevard]

Didn't think it was that great plot wise, though I loved Maleficent.

That's about the history it takes away with it.

Hercules and Princess& Frog are similar. Great memorable villains, mediocre movies.

(tho it pretty much goes without saying the actual art is going to be good on pretty much any of them, regardless of the story quality.)

[Ubiq]

Ub Iwerks had a lot to do with the quality of animation in Pinocchio and other films because of all the techniques and machines he invented like the multiplane camera. Ub really doesn't get a tenth the credit he deserves for all the work he did for Disney early on; the guy helped create Mickey Mouse, singlehandedly animated Steamboat Willy, Plane Crazy, and several of the early Silly Symphonies like The Skeleton Dance, but is all but unknown outside of animation circles. He's the Bill Finger of animation.

Yup. All done painstakingly, by hand, with ink and paint. Its insane.

It wasn't until 101 Dalmation they started cheating with photocopiers.

Cheating? That's not nearly as bad as when they start tracing cels like they did for Robin Hood.

[Satsuki]

Sleeping Beauty has a pretty thin plot (which is just the way the fairy tale is to begin with), but aside from Maleficent (who's the greatest Disney villain, imho), the real star of Sleeping Beauty is the impeccable artwork and atmosphere. You really felt like you were in the middle of a fairy tale, moreso than Snow White or Cinderella. Snow White comes close, but it's a little too cutesy for my taste. Sleeping Beauty is full on Grimm's Classic.

A score by Tchaikovsky doesn't hurt either. That final battle scene wouldn't be nearly as good as it is without the score.

[Airflow]

Pretty much all 2D Disney movies look incredible, it's the first thing you expect and deserve when you go to one. The atmosphere in Sleeping Beauty was really capturing but no amount of pretty visuals can cover the large gaps in narrative and the endless drags.

but aside from Maleficent (who's the greatest Disney villain, imho),

you know I used to think this but Dr Facilier is really making me question it.

[RobbyBevard]

Cheating? That's not nearly as bad as when they start tracing cels like they did for Robin Hood.

I was using "cheating" in a humorous manner, only in comparison to the entirely by hand stuff. Note that in a follow up post I didn't blame them at all for doing it.

And with Robin Hood... well... at least they traced their own work. You can pretend it was homage? I dunno. I have to imagine there was a crazy time/budget crunch on that one. They even reused stuff in a couple spots.

Buts its okay cause the movie itself was great.

[Ubiq]

Snow White was actually on the Disney Channel a while back; I'd forgotten how childlike her voice sounded. Cutesy is a good description especially seeing as how it still retained a lot of that rubbery Fleischer Brothers style animation.

Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella are all alike in that the title character is basically a living prop for the supporting cast to act on with the villain being the most memorable character in the film. That applies to just about every Disney film though besides Lady and the Tramp and Lilo and Stitch.

[RobbyBevard]

you know I used to think this but Dr Facilier is really making me question it.

Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella are all alike in that the title character is basically a living prop for the supporting cast to act on with the villain being the most memorable character in the film. That applies to just about every Disney film though besides Lady and the Tramp and Lilo and Stitch.

Mallificent, Hades and Facillier are all great, and easily the best parts of their respective movies.

Cinderella's stepmother, Cruella, Shere Khan, Ursula, Rattigan, Gaston, Jafar (and Iago!), Scar, Frollo are all also really good for their own different reasons.

Huh. They had a real good streak going in the 90's.

Yzma and Kronk were great in Emporer's New Groove, but the tv series diluted them a fair a bit from sheer over-exposure. Same for Gantu in Lilo and Stitch. He was just... never remotely a match for the hero. Nut Lilo and Stitch was about the title characters, the villain was... secondary. Tertiary even.

Black Cauldron and Mulan had great LOOKING villains, but their motives were weak and their screen time short.

Pinnochio, Dumbo, Bambi, Alice , Lady, Aristocats, Pooh, and Goofy Movie didn't really have main villains. Stitch *practically* didn't.

Rescuers villain lost all redibility when she was afraid of mice (the leads!) and Captain Hook and Prince John were terrible bufoons, no match for the leads at all. entertaining to watch maybe, but weak villains. Pocahontas and Tarzan, terrible villains. (Tarzan would have been BETTER without the villain, and just the Tarzan/Jane/father gorilla situation. Or maybe just without Rosie Odonnel's character.)

[Rebecky_Mo]

Which is why I love disney films. Characters show movement, in just about EVERY frame. From hair flowing, to breathing, to eye movement, to actual mouth movement, to bobbing up and down, left to right, stretching, bouncing, all of the basic and intermediate skills needed to make a character....well...a character.

This x 100. Disney gives their characters quirks that make them seem believable as people, which makes them better characters.

Calarts, still does traditional(as well as Sheridan) effects like water, flame, wind movement, all of the stuff the 9 old men were animating back in the day. You animate what they animate. You learn the disney method. That's the great thing about Calarts and Sheridan if anyone wanted to go.

Also, this. I went to Sheridan for a year for Art Fundamentals, hoping to get into the Animation course there. I realized somewhere in that year animation wasn't for me (decided I didn't like the idea of drawing the same thing 50 times), but I still remember taking the walkway over their section of the school, watching them sketch and bring things to life at their desks. Still amazes me to this day.


...Dammit, I just can't pick a favorite Villain. I keep darting around all the names in Robby's post above, and I love them all for different reasons.

[Ubiq]

Yzma and Kronk were great in Emporer's New Groove, but the tv series diluted them a fair a bit from sheer over-exposure.

Yzma and Kronk paled in comparison to Kuzco himself as he was a total bastard for a hefty chunk of that film, which is amply shown by how quickly his subjects accepted Yzma as their new Empress. I don't know if any villain in the Disney canon has as legitimate a grievance against the hero of their film as Yzma did.

Pinnochio, Dumbo, Bambi, Alice , Lady, Aristocats, Pooh, and Goofy Movie didn't really have main villains. Stitch *practically* didn't.

Pinocchio didn't really have a main villain, but that's because five different characters (J. Worthington Foulfellow, Gideon, Stromboli, the Coachman, and Monstro) are all sharing that role, each of them far more memorable than Pinocchio himself. Bambi and Dumbo definitely didn't, but the main characters were still pretty much living props that are prodded along by the rest of the cast. Dumbo especially since Timothy and the Crows are basically responsible for everything that happens after his mother gets locked up.

And, technically speaking, Stitch was the villain of that particular film. I really wasn't talking about films without a villain though so much as films where the main characters drive the action themselves without being drug along by their costars. A Goofy Movie is actually a pretty good example of a Disney film where things happen in said film because of the star making choices for himself and taking actions to make sure that they happen rather than just being tricked into doing it by a comic relief villain or nagged into it by a costar.

[Nobodyman]

Pinnochio, Dumbo, Bambi, Alice , Lady, Aristocats, Pooh, and Goofy Movie didn't really have main villains. Stitch *practically* didn't.

Ubiq already handled Bambi, so I'll say that there are some that have made the argument that "Man" is the villain in Bambi. Also, did have a villin in the butler, however forgettable and idiotic he was. Lastly, and I know this is stretching it, but you could argue that the Queen of Hearts was the villain in AiW (she was in the House of Mouse villains special).

[Satsuki]

Ever considered how the "Man" theme in Bambi is just a three-note version of the Jaws theme?

Rescuers villain lost all redibility when she was afraid of mice (the leads!) and Captain Hook and Prince John were terrible bufoons, no match for the leads at all. entertaining to watch maybe, but weak villains. Pocahontas and Tarzan, terrible villains. (Tarzan would have been BETTER without the villain, and just the Tarzan/Jane/father gorilla situation. Or maybe just without Rosie Odonnel's character.)

I actually really like Prince John, but that may have been how Peter Ustinov played him. Great range of emotion.

Rosie O'Donnel's character was hands down the worst part in Tarzan, I really don't know why they went with that character. Or why they chose of all people Rosie O'Donnel to voice her. Clayton at least gave us a good showdown with Tarzan at the end. I cringe every time Rosie's chara comes on screen.

Pocahontas . . . . . the only really good part was the music, frankly. Damn do I love those songs.

[Senshi Mizaka]

I thought Prince John was entertaining, but his whiny mama's boy shtick made it impossible to take him seriously as a villain. He seemed a bit like Helmeppo to me.

And yeah, Rosie O'Donnell's character in Tarzan made me want to vomit every time he opened his mouth. The same goes for Rosie, in general. I didn't really mind Clayton, even if he added a bit of unnecessary conflict to the plot.

I don't see The Fox and the Hound as having a clear-cut villain, either. He seemed more like an antagonist, even if he was out for revenge.

[S7evin]

Rosie O'Donnel's character was hands down the worst part in Tarzan, I really don't know why they went with that character. Or why they chose of all people Rosie O'Donnel to voice her. Clayton at least gave us a good showdown with Tarzan at the end. I cringe every time Rosie's chara comes on screen.

Meh, I can overlook her because movie was just so damn beautiful. That deep canvas technique they used for the backgrounds....
I practically wanted to jump into the film and take a vacation.

Chuck Jones is on that list too, right?

Of course, but this is the Disney thread so I thought I'd stick with Disney artists.

[Dark Lord Zenigame]

Yzma and Kronk were great in Emporer's New Groove, but the tv series diluted them a fair a bit from sheer over-exposure.

Overexposed, maybe... I still loved them regardless.

"First, I'll turn Kuzco into a cat! Then, I'll turn Kuzco into a mouse! Then, Kuzco Cat EATS Kuzco Mouse! It's brrrrrrrrrrrrilliant!"

(Tarzan would have been BETTER without the villain, and just the Tarzan/Jane/father gorilla situation. Or maybe just without Rosie Odonnel's character.)

He might have been a lame villain, but he got the must fucked-up Disney villain death ever(at least up until Facilier's. Nothing beats being DRAGGED SCREAMING INTO HELL.)

[taboo]

disney also makes for hilarious poops

[youtube]6zMOddr44hI[/youtube]

[youtube]oLGxZsFmfC0[/youtube]

[youtube]Sla-VrLXX58[/youtube]

[Dark Lord Zenigame]

Ew, poops.

[Senshi Mizaka]

[youtube]z3rHY0l5s60&[/youtube]

This short crossed my mind a few days ago, and I just had to watch it again. It's funny to think that this was my first exposure to Benjamin Franklin, or American history, for that matter.

[taboo]

He might have been a lame villain, but he got the must fucked-up Disney villain death ever(at least up until Facilier's. Nothing beats being DRAGGED SCREAMING INTO HELL.)

[youtube]RH5toJXxrcE[/youtube] .

[RobbyBevard]

Yzma and Kronk paled in comparison to Kuzco himself as he was a total bastard for a hefty chunk of that film,

EXCELLENT point. Few characters get as transformative a character arc and learning curve by the end of the film, for that matter. (I mean in personality, not appearance.)

I agree with all your other stuff too.

A Goofy Movie is actually a pretty good example of a Disney film where things happen in said film because of the star making choices for himself and taking actions to make sure that they happen rather than just being tricked into doing it by a comic relief villain or nagged into it by a costar.

Goofy Movie is one of my all time faves. It just IS.

I thought Prince John was entertaining, but his whiny mama's boy shtick made it impossible to take him seriously as a villain. He seemed a bit like Helmeppo to me.

He was ENTERTAINING, but never menacing. There was never a second where you thought Robin was in any actual danger, until the very, very end of the movie. Captain Hook was much the same to Peter Pan.

"First, I'll turn Kuzco into a cat! Then, I'll turn Kuzco into a mouse! Then, Kuzco Cat EATS Kuzco Mouse! It's brrrrrrrrrrrrilliant!"

Okay. That cracked me up just reading it to myself with Izma's inflection on it in my head. They're still a great duo. But the crazy plans take on a different feel when she's doing them daily, instead of as a one time desperation.

I don't mind... much... because the tv show kept the feel and charm pretty brilliantly. So did the Hercules show. (Hercules was actually a BETTER show than the movie, because the sidekicks balanced Herc out.)

[Ubiq]

He might have been a lame villain, but he got the must fucked-up Disney villain death ever(at least up until Facilier's. Nothing beats being DRAGGED SCREAMING INTO HELL.)

If you ask me, Oliver & Company is right up there because of its three-for-one deal with two fairly explicit electrocutions (thanks to the sound effects) and Sykes getting vaporized by a train.