Animated Classics ?

[Spottedfeather]

I went through the list of animated classics and got to thinking....what are Disney/people who say what film goes on the classics list thinking ?

Snow White - No one can argue. This is definately a classic.

Pinocchio - Again, no argument. A classic.

Fantasia - Classic.

Dumbo - Classic.

Bambi - Classic.

Saludos Amigos - Sure, it has classic characters, but it's not a classic.

The Three Caballeros - Same as above.

Make Mine Music - Same as above.

Fun And Fancy Free - Yet again, same as above.

Melody Time - Same as above.

The Adventures Of Ichabod And Mr. Toad - Classic.

Cinderella - One of the top three classics.

Alice In Wonderland - Classic.

Peter Pan - Classic.

Lady And The Tramp - Classic.

Sleeping Beauty - Definate classic.

101 Dalmations - Don't like the movie, but definately a classic.

The Sword In The Stone - One of the top classics.

The Jungle Book - Don't like the movie, but definately a classic.

The Aristocats - From what I've seen of it, it's no where near a classic.

Robin Hood - Great classic.

The Many Adventures Of Winnie The Pooh - Another top classic.

The Rescuers - Classic.

The Fox And The Hound - Nowhere near classic.

The Black Cauldron - Definate classic, although it doesn't have the typical Disney "vibe"

The Great Mouse Detective - Nope. Not a classic.

Oliver & Company - Classic.

The Little Mermaid - Classic in the best sense of the Disney legacy.

The Rescuers Down Under - Okay movie, but not a classic.

Beauty And The Beast - Perfect Disney classic.

Aladdin - Perfect Disney classic.

The Lion King - Perfect Disney classic.

Pocahontas - Great movie (in spite of severe aging up of Pocahontas), but not a classic.

The Hunchback Of Notre Dame - Too DTV to be a classic.

Hercules - They totally messed up the Hercules legend. Hercules was NOT a full god, only half. Definately not a classic.

Mulan - Perfect classic.

Tarzan - A classic ? You're kidding, right ?

Fantasia 2000 - After the travesty that is Spiderman (it wasn't right to have him shoot webs out of his arms. He never did that. It was Spiderman 2099, not Peter Parker), you'd think that people would stop messing with perfection, but no. I know, Fantasia came out before but you get my point. I'm still mad at George Lucas's idiotic tampering with Star Wars. The original Fantasia was perfect. It should've been left alone. Definately not a classic.

The Emperor's New Groove - There must've been liberal smoking of certain substances for this to be included on the classics list.

Atlantis - Not quite classic....yet. Give it a few more years.

Lilo & Stitch - Good, but not a classic.

Treasure Planet - I'd rather listen to a Britney cd while looking at a picture of Fantasia Barrino and waxing a sensitive area that watch this garbage.

Brother Bear - Being Indian, I don't really want to say anything against this movie. It's alright, but really a classic.

Home On The Range - Just thinking about this "film" give me the feeling that I get when I see Jessica Simpson on tv....the dumbness just oozes through the screen.

Chicken Little - Who in their right mind would put this anywhere near the animated classics list ? First of all, the only movies that should be considered for the list should be cartoons, not CGI. I like CGI movies, The Incredibles, Nemo, and the two Toy Storys are some of my favourites but they can't go on the animated classics list. Only cartoons can.

Agree or disagree ?

[Luke]

"Animated Classics" is simply an easy way of saying "Feature-Length Films Made by Walt Disney Feature Animation." There are some discrepancies - some of the anthology features barely qualify by length or have plenty of live action in them. Others have animation in them but not enough to be considered "animated films" (<i>So Dear To My Heart</i>, <i>Song of the South</i>, <i>Mary Poppins</i>, and <i>Pete's Dragon</i>). Several are far from "classics."

But I must disagree with <i>Chicken Little</i> not being a part of the canon. Computers are a tool being used for animation and they have been used extensively in Disney animation since the 1980s. Just because they were used entirely for <i>Chicken Little</i> doesn't mean that it wasn't the same studio behind it.

I'm wondering with the new dichotomy Disney Animation will have following the Pixar purchase if Disney will retroactively consider the Pixar classics as part of the canon. It seems like there may definitely be crossover to some degree between the two distinct studios in the future.

[Escapay]

It's not necessarily the movie's appeal to the audience that qualifies it as a classic. They're labeled as such because these movies were produced through Walt Disney Feature Animation, which gives the films the status as a Disney Animated Classic.

Several of Disney's non-WDFA produced movies I like to consider as honorable-mention DAC's, simply because they've got the qualities of a DAC:

DuckTales: The Movie - Treasure of the Lost Lamp
The Nightmare Before Christmas
A Goofy Movie
Dinosaur

Escapay

[reyquila]

Show them my motto: Disney made it, Im buying!!! WDFA produced movies. DTV's, Pixar, etc.

[Escapay]

I'm wondering with the new dichotomy Disney Animation will have following the Pixar purchase if Disney will retroactively consider the Pixar classics as part of the canon. It seems like there may definitely be crossover to some degree between the two distinct studios in the future.

Hmm, if we're doing some wishful-thinking-retcons, then maybe Disney can retcon their canon and include Song of the South, So Dear To My Heart, Mary Poppins, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT, DuckTales The Movie - Treasure of the Lost Lamp, The Nightmare Before Christmas, A Goofy Movie, Dinosaur, and the Pixar films into their official line of Disney Animated Classics. And since length shouldn't be an issue, let's include The Small One, Mickey's Christmas Carol, and The Prince and the Pauper!

Also, I wouldn't mind if they retconned their entire DVD Line and started from scratch, re-releasing every non-anamorphic or P&S Title in anamorphic widescreen and making sure there's trailers and making-of featurettes on each title. Hopefully we'll see THAT in Blu-Ray!

Escapay

[Anders M Olsson]

But I must disagree with <i>Chicken Little</i> not being a part of the canon. Computers are a tool being used for animation and they have been used extensively in Disney animation since the 1980s. Just because they were used entirely for <i>Chicken Little</i> doesn't mean that it wasn't the same studio behind it.

Has Disney officially said that Chicken Little is their animated classic number 45? I know that some fan-sites (including Ultimate Disney) maintain that idea, but that doesn't mean it's the official standpoint of the Disney organisation.

In fact, one of the most trustworthy sources within Disney, Dave Smith, does not put Chicken Little on the same list as the classical animated features. Instead, he has a separate list of (currently) nine computer animated features where Chicken Little indeed belongs:
http://disney.go.com/vault/supplement.pdf

[kbehm29]

In fact, one of the most trustworthy sources within Disney, Dave Smith, does not put Chicken Little on the same list as the classical animated features. Instead, he has a separate list of (currently) nine computer animated features where Chicken Little indeed belongs:
http://disney.go.com/vault/supplement.pdf

But wouldn't that be saying that Disney will have no more animated classics, since they've thrown traditional animation out the window? Computer animated has replaced that, so it only makes sense to keep adding onto the list with the new ones.

[Luke]

Has Disney officially said that Chicken Little is their animated classic number 45? I know that some fan-sites (including Ultimate Disney) maintain that idea, but that doesn't mean it's the official standpoint of the Disney organisation.

I believe Disney hasn't officially acknowledged their animated classics list since 2002. See the official Company line here: http://psc.disney.go.com/guestservices/8695.html#8695

It makes little sense to me for <i>Chicken Little</i> to be lumped in with films that weren't animated by Disney.

[Anders M Olsson]

I believe Disney hasn't officially acknowledged their animated classics list since 2002. See the official Company line here: http://psc.disney.go.com/guestservices/8695.html#8695

Well, at least in the Scandinavian countries, the animated classics come with their numbers on the spine, so I guess that's some sort of official acknowledgement. Home on the Range has the number 44 printed on its spine.

It will be very interesting to see if Chicken Little will come with a number or not.

It makes little sense to me for <i>Chicken Little</i> to be lumped in with films that weren't animated by Disney.

Ok, I respect your opinion, but I don't agree. To me, it makes just as little sense to lump it in with the hand drawn classics. After all, Pixar is part of Disney now, and I'm pretty sure that Disney will soon begin to consolidate all its computer animation resources. That will leave room for new constellations for hand drawn animation as well.

[Luke]

Ok, I respect your opinion, but I don't agree. To me, it makes just as little sense to lump it in with the hand drawn classics. After all, Pixar is part of Disney now, and I'm pretty sure that Disney will soon begin to consolidate all its computer animation resources. That will leave room for new constellations for hand drawn animation as well.

But why is <i>Chicken Little</i> different from other animated films Disney has released which used computers for coloring and 3D elements, etc? It went through the same process as far as story development goes and involved people who have long been associated with Disney Feature Animation. Is it because it's entirely 3D animated? Because it seems to me that the mode of creation has always been changing since <i>Snow White</i>. Whether it's xerography or CG elements or computer-colored backgrounds or animating completely in 3D, it's all animation and it's all been done "by Disney."

I agree there is an obvious difference to its look but I'm just at a loss to see how the medium necessitates a different list altogether. I see the move to computers as a gradual thing which we can date back to the 1980s.

I think <i>Dinosaur</i> too might have qualified as a Feature Animation piece too, based on the way it was marketed and released, but apparently there was that "Secret Lab" responsible for it, not Feature Animation, and plus the fact that the backgrounds were primarily live action photography (albeit, manipulated) probably disqualifies it.

Back on topic, what can we see as the linking element to the "Animated Classics" list if not that they were done by Feature Animation? Because 2D animation in 1997 was definitely not the same as it was in 1937.

[ichabod]

It will be very interesting to see if Chicken Little will come with a number or not.

I think it's safe to presume that Chicken Little WILL be part of the classics line, as this DVD trailer shows.



I'm with Luke. It makes complete sense for Chicken Little to be counted as number 45. Yes it is CGI, but it is still the 45th film to be made by Walt Disney feature animation. Many of the people who worked on the film have contributed to a numerous animated films. Yes it is a divergance and a growth into a different field, but should still be counted alongside it's ancestors.

[Anders M Olsson]

I think it's safe to presume that Chicken Little WILL be part of the classics line, as this DVD trailer shows.

It can still be a classic on its own merits, without being on the numbered list.

(Or worse, it can be yet another film that Disney casually labels as a classic, not because it has anything to show for it, but just because they think it will sell better if they do.)

[Christian]

Fantasia 2000 - Classic. Yes, it stands in the shadow of the first but is still a classic in its own right. Even Walt wanted Fantasia to eveolve and continue. To see the production of Fantasia 2000 as similar to George Lucas' "tampering" with Star Wars is just plain silly.


And I simply cannot figure out why EVERYONE thinks "definite" is spelled "definate." This is quickly becoming an institutionalized misspelling.

[singerguy04]

I'm agreeing with Luke in saying animation is animation whether it's done with ink and paper or with a monitor and a mouse. all of these movies went through the same pre-production stage, but they were just animated differently. Which makes it the overall feel of the film. To me saying that Chicken Little cannot be a animated classic due to it's CG animation is the same as saying Sleeping Beauty can't be a classic because it's styling is made to make it look more like a animated portrait. Or 101 Dalmatians can't be a classic due to it's coloring outside of the lines. Or Bambi can't be a classic for using multi-plained animated backgrounds. And like luke said CG has been coming for a while, Beauty and the Beast's Ballroom scene is a HUGE example of this transition.

and one last point while i'm on this rant, hehe. Every Single movie that disney has released has touched SOMEONE somewhere. I think that Disney realizes this and calls each a classic, because for at least one person out there each film is. Also placing Classic on the top of a movie would help it sell better than if it didn't say it at all

[Kossage]

I think it's safe to presume that Chicken Little WILL be part of the classics line, as this DVD trailer shows.

Yeah, that caught my eye too when I saw the previews on LATT PE DVD.

I'm with Luke. It makes complete sense for Chicken Little to be counted as number 45. Yes it is CGI, but it is still the 45th film to be made by Walt Disney feature animation. Many of the people who worked on the film have contributed to a numerous animated films. Yes it is a divergance and a growth into a different field, but should still be counted alongside it's ancestors.

I agree with this statement. I too consider Chicken Little the 45th animated classic. I do prefer the more hand-drawn look of the 44 classics, though, and I don't mind the use of computers to create certain events which would be hard to do in traditional hand-drawn animation (such as the stampede scene in TLK), but it'll still take time for me to get used to thinking that completely CGI movies such as Chicken Little will be the future animated classics.

[stitcharielbeast]

I went through the list of animated classics and got to thinking....what are Disney/people who say what film goes on the classics list thinking ?

you have a rather odd way of identifying what is and is not a "classic"

if going by memorability and popularity not to mention technical achievement this is what SHOULD be on the "classics" list:

Snow White

Pinocchio

Fantasia

Dumbo

Bambi

Cinderella

Alice In Wonderland

Peter Pan

Lady And The Tramp

Sleeping Beauty

101 Dalmatians

The Jungle Book

The Many Adventures Of Winnie The Pooh - classic by default due to popularity of the characters

The Rescuers

The Little Mermaid

Beauty And The Beast

Aladdin

The Lion King

Pocahontas - technically one disney's best and while overshadowed by the renaissance's big 4, it is still without a doubt quite a memorable disney film.

Mulan

Tarzan - another Disney film that is a "classic" simply because it was a beautifully animated critically acclaimed and financially successful flim.

Lilo & Stitch - Disney's last great hit, there's a reason why there are so many Stitch fans everywhere.


now these are what I highly disagree with that's on your "classics" list

The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad - ask any normal person and chances are they won't remember this or even know that it exists.

The Sword In The Stone - enjoyable but nowhere near the caliber of the more memorable films, ask any ordinary person, they won't even know what it's about.

The Black Cauldron - One of the biggest disney flops in disney history, so big that Disney tries as much as they can to bury the memory of this film.

Oliver and Company - In no way is this up to par with the true classics. it was simply forgettable.

(in defense) Fantasia 2000 - Disney did not in any way tamper with athe original film, this is a production of its own, try being fair sometime.

(in defense) The Emperor's New Groove - They may have been smoking stuff but not even you can deny how enjoyable this movie was, you just stereotype the disney brand too much to appreciate this film.

Atlantis - A deeply flawed film that feels "incomplete" in so many ways, there's a reason why this was a flop. No chance in heck can this become a classic.

(in defense) Treasure Planet - Once again, judgement like yours is one of the reasons Disney animation died, too much stereotyping and no faith or respect in the story and stylistic treatment. You refuse to let the art grow.

Brother Bear - mirrors The Lion King and Bambi a little too much and is certainly not memorable in enough to reach classic status.

(In Defense) Home On The Range - see all my other "in defense" arguments, you have to accept that not all Disney films should be alike.

(In Defense) Chicken Little (and all other Computer Animated Filmns) - Just what is your definition of a 'classic'? The dictionary claims that classic is defined as a 'creation of the highest excellence'. If a CGI film is of that very definition then why should it be considered of a lesser standard than traditionally animated features?

and mind you, "Cartoons" is a very unjust term to use for the Disney "Classics"

[consultant]

I did several searches and was suprised I couldn't find a thread here discussing the fact that Disney is no longer numbering their "Animated Classics." Did I miss it? I found a web page at http://psc.disney.go.com/guestservices/8695.html which states:

"We are no longer numbering our animated features due to the changing face of animation. With live-action/computer generated hybrid films like "Dinosaur" and theatrical releases produced by our TV Animation division like "The Tigger Movie," determining what "counts" in our legacy of full-length animated features has become a challenge. Therefore, we have decided to stop numbering each feature and let the films stand on their own."

This sort of bums me out as I am late to the game and am close to completing my collection of all the Animated Classics. I did make an exception and bought Toy Story Toy Box, 10th, and 2 SE because I think those are landmark films regarding CGI even though they are not true Disney films. I also bought TRON for the same reason. They sit on the shelf by themselves though.

So this statement by Disney leads me to conclude going forward, it looks like it is essentially up to the consumer to determine what they consider will be a "Animated Classic." Too bad, I wish it was more clear cut as it has been thus far. Personally, I think the Disney legacy will always be hand-drawn animation. I'm sure 20 years from now there will be several Disney CGI releases considered "Animated Classics" but I prefer the "true art" of the hand-drawn stuff and doubt I will purchase every Disney CGI release going forward.

I'm crossing my fingers they will continue to ocassionally release hand-drawen feature animations.

[Luke]

This is very similar to the other recent thread and probably not worth standing on its own. Even though they claim to have stopped counting, info sent to U.S. retailers indicated through <i>Home on the Range</i> the same counting that we and other places have, plus in the UK the DVDs actually illustrate the counting. So, though in 2002, Disney's official stance was that the list was no longer, it seems like they really are counting but downplaying it in certain parts of the world like the US.

[castleinthesky]

To stitcharielbeast and Spottedfeather: Just because you may not like a movie or not view it as worthy, many people think the movies that you have dismissed are very good movies and worthy of classics.

[Aladdin from Agrabah]

What? You don't consider Pocahontas as a classic? And hunchback is much too DTV? And you think they messed up Hercules' legend and not Mulan's?I disagree.
The adventures of Ichabod and Mrs Toad and all those bunch-movies that were made just to bring money to the studio in order that it could make Cinderella and survive at last,through the mess of World WarII, should not be considered as classics IMO.They're Disney Fables. Winnie the Pooh is also a bunch movie, and IMO is not a classic, as well as the Rescuers Down Under-it's a sequel.
And I really disagree about Chicken Little being a disney classic. Why didn't they also name Dinosaur a classic? It was made completely by computers, but it was made by Disney alone, wasn't it? And Goofy Movie has great animation and cannot be considered as DTV movie-it's quality is very high, and it's also not a sequel.Now that Disney bought Pixar, will Nemo be considered as a Disney classic?
Except what Disney calls a classic, I think we all know which movies are classic and which are not.