View Full Version : Disney Sequels
mouldy_bread
25 Jun 2003, 22:25
I know most sequels are ****house, and perhaps it's just me but has anyone noticed the Disney sequels are particularly bad? It's so aggravating, especially when they keep bringing out these crappy sequels when they could be working on something new. They haven't released anything decent for ages, Lilo and Stitch was okay, but didn't have the original songs all the other great Disney movies have had.
mouldy_bread
27 Jun 2003, 21:18
Must be just me :)
Either that or I'm the only one who gives a damn about the recent ****tiness of Disney.
NICK THE PIE MAN
27 Jun 2003, 22:59
Oh yes,
those sh*thouse straight-to-video sequels to the classic Disney films.
.A blight on Disney they are.
Films such as Aladdin, The Lion King, Little Mermaid etc in the early nineties were classic but the standard and quality has really gone on a downward spiral the last 5 years.
Desredandwhite
28 Jun 2003, 08:24
I think no one has an opinion on those sequels because no one has seen them!!! As NTPM mentioned, they all go straight to video. IMHO the last good animated film Disney produced was The Lion King.
Of course I'm leaving out films that Disney distribute but didn't actually make (ie: anything by Pixar, who are creative geniuseseses)
thehardaway
28 Jun 2003, 14:12
Originally posted by Desredandwhite
IMHO the last good animated film Disney produced was The Lion King.
Didn't like Lilo & Stitch?
Disney sequels tend to be atrocious and lack imagination. Then they make tv shows out of them :eek:
Desredandwhite
28 Jun 2003, 14:13
actually to be honest I haven't seen lilo and stitch yet :)
thehardaway
28 Jun 2003, 14:26
Originally posted by Desredandwhite
actually to be honest I haven't seen lilo and stitch yet :)
Its only $16 or so on dvd at Myer apparently
Lilo and Stitch was okay, but seems to lack that certain "something" that used to come in Disney films up to and including the Lion King. I've never bothered with sequels (except, I think, Little Mermaid 2 because I was at a friends house with kids.) mostly because you can kind of tell they'll be no good just by looking at the cover. (Yes, in case you're wondering, I'm very shallow)
mouldy_bread
29 Jun 2003, 08:23
Originally posted by aggels
Lilo and Stitch was okay, but seems to lack that certain "something" that used to come in Disney films up to and including the Lion King.
A good soundtrack!!!!!!!
The only reason I've seen a lot of these sequels is because they've been playing a lot of them on the Disney Channel recently.
HAHAHA what about that new disney movie
Sinbad or whatever its called.. HOw **** does that look?
Mobbenfuhrer
2 Jul 2003, 15:29
As Des said, Pixar films are the only really decent animations.
Originally posted by BeCcA
HAHAHA what about that new disney movie
Sinbad or whatever its called.. HOw **** does that look? I'm wondering why they cast Angelo Lekkas as Sinbad.
Has anyone seen a dvd of Lady and the Tramp ?
All I ever spot is L&tT 2 whatever that is - probably an inferior sequel or remake.
http://boingyboingy.com/jump/spaghetti.gif
clucas91
16 Jul 2003, 19:05
Disney sequels are not straight-to-video, they are made-for-video.
None of them get cinematic releases, nor should they, they all suck.
Was The Land Before Time and all dozen or so sequels Disney?
wagstaff
16 Jul 2003, 20:28
Originally posted by Nic
Was The Land Before Time and all dozen or so sequels Disney?
No, made by Universal studios and I think led by Don Bluth - who left Disney to form his own animaton company during the 1970s.