Dusterian wrote:
SZWG, okay, you want to see more diversity. But even though Walt wanted to move forward, that was mostly with technology and techniques. He returned to the fairy tale genre, or the classic literature genre, time and time again, and didn't do any wacky, twisted versions of them (like Princess and the Frog, which did not do nearly as well as those past Disney classics). Disney needs to be Disney, Disney needs to be classic.
I disagree. Walt Disney wanted to move forward with story as well. He altered the classic stories to make them suit his needs. Snow White was altered from the original:
http://www.surlalunefairytales.com/seve ... index.html At the end, the Prince's kiss doesn't awaken her. The Prince has his servants carry her coffin away, they stumble over a tree stump, and dislodge the apple. Disney altered the ending to make it appeal to a wider audience. He also altered Snow White by having her be friends with all the animals in the forest. This set a precedence that all Disney animated movies would have animal sidekicks. In the originals, there weren't any animal sidekicks. They were added to make the movies more interesting, for comic relief, and a someone for the main character to interact with.
When it comes to the fairytale genre, Disney only made four traditional fairytales which he adapted to please his audience: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, and Pinnochio (which was a financial failure). While the princess movies were a success, Disney didn't make them one after another.
Snow White 1937
Cinderella 1950
Sleeping Beauty 1959
Almost a decade in between all of them. When Disney needed to generate income, he made a fairytale film. In between these classic princess tales, he experimented with other stories. Bambi (adapted from Felix Salten's novel--the plot varies greatly from the film), Saludos Amigos, Make Mine Music, Fun and Fancy Free, Melody Time, and a short feature film entitled Dumbo. Dumbo was a big risk for Disney. He had bombed at the box office with Fantasia and Pinnochio. He made Dumbo, because he liked the story written by some of his employees and given to him in short segments with his newspaper every morning. Dumbo, with its original story not based off a classic fairytale, earned Disney more money than his other pre-WWII (before the US entered the conflict) movies (not including Snow White).
Look at the other movies in Disney's time, Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland, Bambi, The Adventures of Icabod and Mr. Toad, 101 Dalmations, The Sword and the Stone, The Jungle Book. These aren't classic fairytales. With the exception of The Sword and the Stone and 101 Dalmations (in their own right these titles are 20th century classic literature), these movies are all classic literature. They are all adaptations of novels that Disney rewrote and altered in some form to appeal to a greater audience. The original Jungle Book is whole lot darker than the watered down version Disney put his name on. Disney even got into some arguments with a few members on his production team who wanted the story to remain dark. But these are still considered classic Disney movies without a single fairytale princess to their name (Alice doesn't count).
Let's look to the future too. The Little Mermaid? In the original she dies and the prince leaves her for another woman:
http://www.surlalunefairytales.com/litt ... index.html
I've heard many an Anderson purist call Disney's version twisted. But by changing it to be family friendlier with a happy ending and animal sidekicks, it's regarded as a classic Disney movie.
And what about all of Pixar's movies? By being having diverse characters and new story plots instead of adaptations they haven't failed in ten years! But they're a different studio and despite being under the Disney label they're not traditional Disney, even though they've gone back to Walt Disney's roots even more than the current Disney animated studios.
My point being, classic Disney isn't just traditional fairytales. Walt Disney wanted to do stories that entertained an audience and pushed the format envelope. The time period he lived in was not as open minded about diverse and different characters as we are today (though there are still many barriers). I do think if Disney was living today, he would have characters of different ethnicities in his movies to appeal to those audiences. His main goal in life was innovation in story and technique. Classic Disney is finding/writing great stories even if you have to change them a bit and presenting them in a medium that compliments the story.
