Disney Classics

[domino harvey]

Pretty much the best internet meme happening right now

[knives]

So they've expanded it beyond Ariel? Totally not cool anymore.

[ianthemovie]

A question about THE THREE CABALLEROS:

There appear to be two DVD versions available through Amazon: one from 2000 and another from 2008 (packaged with SALUDOS AMIGOS)...anybody know whether the 2008 version is an upgrade? The back of the disc doesn't seem to tout itself as having been restored. Beaver also has no info on this.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

It looks slightly better from what I can remember, but no intense restoration like what Bambi and Snow White have been put through in the past. It's also slightly more pricey, but it comes with that second feature which itself is pretty fantastic. I would certainly pick that version up instead.

[ianthemovie]

That's good to know; thanks.

[Tom Hagen]

Don't forget: the stunning Blus of Snow White, Pinocchio, and Fantasia are all OOP again as of yesterday. Amazon already seems to be out of stock of Snow White, and Pinocchio is in "in stock but may require an extra 1-2 days to process" land.

[matrixschmatrix]

Just pulled the trigger on Fantasia- I'm not normally big on Disney, but I didn't like the idea of that one slipping away.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

Just pulled the trigger on Fantasia- I'm not normally big on Disney, but I didn't like the idea of that one slipping away.

You shouldn't regret that one bit. Maybe it's because I'm a shameless fan of almost everything Disney from the era where Walt was still alive, but that film is one the masterpieces of forties. The art deco design of the live section beautifully lit by James Wong Howe and with segments where the colors and the effects blend together almost seamlessly to create a film that at it's best borders on Brakhage in pure visual emotion. That's not forgetting that the mix of Stokowski's wonderful control of the Philadelphia Orchestra is some of the great musical sound in all of cinema. The Stokowski arrangement of Bach's Toccata and Fugue in D Minor sends shivers through my body every time I see and hear it. My only complaint about the film is the weird jump Stravinsky's Rite of Spring takes to save time. The Blu-Ray also features a fantastic and incredibly detailed commentary about it's production that's on par with many of the best Criterion commentaries.

And it comes with Fantasia 2000 which you can save time with by placing straight it in the dumpster.

[Jonathan S]

Some important (to me) issues are raised in this HTF thread about Disney's "new editions" (in more senses than one) of their classics. Although it initially concerns Alice in Wonderland, serious concerns are raised by animation expert Stephen Worth about other titles too, with regard to Disney's changes to colour schemes, double-exposures, ripple glass effects, sound effects and dialogue to make them more acceptable for today. Even Robert Harris, despite his enthusiasm for these releases, admits the original films have undergone "re-imagining".

[swo17]

Well crap, I never would have noticed on my own, but now I can't look at Alice's Blu-ray hair without throwing up a little in my mouth.

[domino harvey]

Don't forget: the stunning Blus of Snow White, Pinocchio, and Fantasia are all OOP again as of yesterday. Amazon already seems to be out of stock of Snow White, and Pinocchio is in "in stock but may require an extra 1-2 days to process" land.

Wish I'd had a heads-up. They're all going for twice what they were selling for just a few days ago already-- we could have all cleaned up here!

[Alphonse Doinel]

You can still get the UK edition of Fantasia. Even better, it's part of the B1G1 Disney sale at thehut,com which includes titles like Dumbo, Bambi, Alice in Wonderland, and most of the Pixar titles. They work out to £8.25 each.

Unfortunately, I think most of these are Region B.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

Some important (to me) issues are raised in this HTF thread about Disney's "new editions" (in more senses than one) of their classics. Although it initially concerns Alice in Wonderland, serious concerns are raised by animation expert Stephen Worth about other titles too, with regard to Disney's changes to colour schemes, double-exposures, ripple glass effects, sound effects and dialogue to make them more acceptable for today. Even Robert Harris, despite his enthusiasm for these releases, admits the original films have undergone "re-imagining".

Someone I know is very good friends with Stephen Worth, who's an incredibly nice guy and one of the funniest people around who's so incredibly passionate for animation, and I've heard personally what he has to say about this. I know for a fact he was very upset with Alice in Wonderland for looking too white-washed and remember him specifically mention that the beautiful textures and colors from Mary Blair's original background were gone. My biggest complaint is actual the lack of grain on the Blu-Ray and the unreal and smooth colors. It looks too flawless on Blu-Ray and having just watched Bambi a week ago, it looked odd and and too sharp. This is hand drawn animation, and if you watch any other cartoon from the era, you can see and feel it was done by hand.

Still, in the end, it doesn't bother me on the level is bothers him and I rather own the Blu-Ray than own nothing at all. I think they look excellent and the colors are probably off a bit, but it doesn't matter too much to me personally.

[matrixschmatrix]

And it comes with Fantasia 2000 which you can save time with by placing straight it in the dumpster.

Aww, is it really that bad? I've never seen it, but I remember hearing generally positive things when it came out.

[Tom Hagen]

Don't forget: the stunning Blus of Snow White, Pinocchio, and Fantasia are all OOP again as of yesterday. Amazon already seems to be out of stock of Snow White, and Pinocchio is in "in stock but may require an extra 1-2 days to process" land.

Wish I'd had a heads-up. They're all going for twice what they were selling for just a few days ago already-- we could have all cleaned up here!

My girlfriend is the Disney collector here (the release of The Black Cauldron was a notable story at my residence!); I didn't realize until she pointed it out to me.

The "Rhapsody in Blue" segment of 2000 is good, though it will make you want to turn off the movie and watch Manhattan instead.

[zitherstrings]

And it comes with Fantasia 2000 which you can save time with by placing straight it in the dumpster.

Aww, is it really that bad? I've never seen it, but I remember hearing generally positive things when it came out.

It's fine. It even has multiple moments that match the original (which has flaws all of its own). Pines of Rome and the Firebird suite are on par with the original. The Donald Duck segment is flawed and the Tin Soldier falls flat. But the outdated Rite of Spring from Fantasia is just as weak (even if that's not the fault of the film makers), likewise Pastoral Symphony.

[matrixschmatrix]

I always liked the Rite of Spring- how is it outdated? The only part of the original Fantasia I remember disliking particularly was the Dance of the Hours, which seemed far more Disney-cutesy than most of the rest of the movie.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

The "Rhapsody in Blue" segment of 2000 is good, though it will make you want to turn off the movie and watch Manhattan instead.

It's probably the best part of the movie, but it feel uncharacteristically Disney. Maybe it's the Al Hirschfeld designed characters, but it feels like it should be a short from somewhere else (maybe because it's the only good short in the film). And my disdain for Woody Allen makes it that nothing can convince me to watch Manhattan. (-__-)

It's fine. It even has multiple moments that match the original (which has flaws all of its own). Pines of Rome and the Firebird suite are on par with the original. The Donald Duck segment is flawed and the Tin Soldier falls flat. But the outdated Rite of Spring from Fantasia is just as weak (even if that's not the fault of the film makers), likewise Pastoral Symphony.

I don't think any of the segments exactly match up with the original. None of the moments are as spectacular as The Rite of Spring (Which I guess is dated because it features animals that are 160 million yeas old) or as sublime as Ava Maria. People also forget what an avant-garde choice picking The Rite of Spring to play in American cinemas was in 1940, in a cartoon no less.

Fantasia 2000 is no where near as good and when The Sorcerer's Apprentice clip comes on, you'll wish you were watching that instead. And the awkward celebrity cameos including Quincy Jones and Bette Midler just fall flat and are no where near as charming or as interesting as Deems Taylor. I would only keep the disc for the Salvador Dali short, Destino, which isn't perfect and is a odd mix of Dali design and themes with a sweet Spanish influenced song that's unfortunately held down by cheesy CGI and over-elaborate camera moves.

I'll never understand why either Fantasia didn't adapt Petrushka instead. Seems perfect to translate into animation.

[zitherstrings]

Fantasia 2000 is no where near as good and when The Sorcerer's Apprentice clip comes on, you'll wish you were watching that instead.

Wrong. Pines of Rome and Firebird make me feel like I AM watching the original. Brilliant stuff. Rite of Spring has been done better elsewhere. It's old hat now. A very ballsy and intelligent piece of work but it's charm is lost in the wake of more intriguing treatments of the same (no fault of the filmmakers).

And the awkward celebrity cameos including Quincy Jones and Bette Midler just fall flat and are no where near as charming or as interesting as Deems Taylor.

Agreed. Though more mature modern audiences will likely find Taylor's over-explaining rather tiresome as well (if less so than in 2000).

I would only keep the disc for the Salvador Dali short, Destino, which isn't perfect and is a odd mix of Dali design and themes with a sweet Spanish influenced song that's unfortunately held down by cheesy CGI and over-elaborate camera moves..

That's fine. Throw the baby out with your nostalgic bias. I'll enjoy the brilliant aspects of both films and be glad that most people don't ignore greatness merely because it came sixty years after similar greatness.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

That's fine. Throw the baby out with your nostalgic bias. I'll enjoy the brilliant aspects of both films and be glad that most people don't ignore greatness merely because it came sixty years after similar greatness.

Why the hyperbolic comments like I struck a bad bone? Where did you draw the conclusion that I don't understand it's "greatness" because of the difference in age? I just feel it's weak in comparison with the original in pure visual beauty. It has nothing to do with age as it has to do with quality of the material. I have no problem with contemporary cinema as long as the film is good. Like I said earlier, my original comment might have been hyperbolic itself as I admit the charm and excellent design of the Rhapsody in Blue sequence and will admit that in retrospect, the two you site are visually wonderful, but the Shostokovich, Elgar and Saint-Saens' segments are very weak and visual unspectacular (especially the Shostokovich) and unfortunately bring down the film.

And Deems Taylor is doing the right thing: he's contextualizing it for an audience who probably wouldn't know in depth the material. The new one attempts to do the same thing but with hokey cameos instead distracting from what is going on.

And I've seen an awful lot of films, but where else in cinema have you seen the Rite of Spring used? I can only think of one instance off the top of my head.

[domino harvey]

I love when opinions and preferences are wrong

[zitherstrings]

Why the hyperbolic comments like I struck a bad bone? Where did you draw the conclusion that I don't understand it's "greatness" because of the difference in age? I just feel it's weak in comparison with the original in pure visual beauty. It has nothing to do with age as it has to do with quality of the material. I have no problem with contemporary cinema as long as the film is good. Like I said earlier, my original comment might have been hyperbolic itself as I admit the charm and excellent design of the Rhapsody in Blue sequence and will admit that in retrospect, the two you site are visually wonderful, but the Shostokovich, Elgar and Saint-Saens' segments are very weak and visual unspectacular (especially the Shostokovich) and unfortunately bring down the film.

I agree totally about those weak numbers. And they do bring it down. I agree. It's a lesser film. I agree. But in an age when you can pick and choice segments, through disc media, decrying the film as a coaster (at best) is completely unfair to the three or four worthwhile numbers (the Beethoven is on roughly par with the Bach, too).

And Deems Taylor is doing the right thing: he's contextualizing it for an audience who probably wouldn't know in depth the material. The new one attempts to do the same thing but with hokey cameos instead distracting from what is going on.

He's doing the right thing, but the effect is frequently annoying. The celebrities are FAR more annoying, no question. But I find the original's segues overwritten as well.

And I've seen an awful lot of films, but where else in cinema have you seen the Rite of Spring used? I can only think of one instance off the top of my head.

I meant the concept of a visual evolution, not the song. Also the science is slightly sketchier 60 years on (unavoidably, of course, but that is part of the appeal and now it's weakened). Again, not the fault of the film makers. It's just dated.

I love when opinions and preferences are wrong

His comment was that "you" (meaning me) would wish I watching the original. That's wrong. I don't feel that way when I watch 2000. His opinions are not superior to mine.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]

I meant the concept of a visual evolution, not the song. Also the science is slightly sketchier 60 years on (unavoidably, of course, but that is part of the appeal and now it's weakened). Again, not the fault of the film makers. It's just dated.

Understandable, but that shouldn't falter the film. See so many films of past eras and you see things that do date the film, but that should be expected when you watch a film that's over seventy years old.

I love when opinions and preferences are wrong

His comment was that "you" (meaning me) would wish I watching the original. That's wrong. I don't feel that way when I watch 2000. His opinions are not superior to mine.

I quote your post as a point of disagreement and never make any explicit references to how you are wrong and that your opinion is moot. I think your getting awfully defensively over me just expressing my feelings on the film. Your free to feel it's an excellent film. Who am I, on the internet of all places, to say my opinion is better?

[Feego]

I like Fantasia 2000.

[The Elegant Dandy Fop]