Disney's theatrical production "Aida" was originally conceived of as an animated movie, but it went to the stage when Elton John apparently didn't want to do another film.
And children's movies featuring Tom & Huck, removed from the original setting, have been made in recent-ish history, and made nicely—well, one, at least, and it even frequently rotated on the Disney Channel when I was a sprat, as I recall. And I loved it!
...admittedly a bit, um, grim, though. Especially considering it was from 1985. But then again, that was the same year Disney released Return to Oz.
And children's movies featuring Tom & Huck, removed from the original setting, have been made in recent-ish history, and made nicely—well, one, at least, and it even frequently rotated on the Disney Channel when I was a sprat, as I recall. And I loved it!
...admittedly a bit, um, grim, though. Especially considering it was from 1985. But then again, that was the same year Disney released Return to Oz.
Driftless
Donor
Sinbad, I think would translate particularly well to a Pixar style visual extravaganza. There's enough variation on the Sindbad stories where you could go in several directions.
Now that Disney owns Marvel, I could see them doing some of the wackier marvel stuff.
Donald Duck meets Howard The Duck would be amusing.
Someone HAS to eventually make the Unbeatable Squirrel Girl
Donald Duck meets Howard The Duck would be amusing.
Someone HAS to eventually make the Unbeatable Squirrel Girl
Getting back to the Space Rare-era sci-fi idea, Oh my God, why didn't they do that?! Disney himself seemed very keen on the idea of space travel, and the box office failure of Sleeping Beauty (1959) convinced them to abandon the fantasy princess formula for a long time (their next film being 101 Dalmatians, obviously a very different premise to past films), and the Space Craze only got bigger as the '60s continued. He even knew some of the most learned guys in the field of spaceflight at the time, why not try a sci-fi film?
There seems to be a theory that Disney (the man) was heartbroken at the half-hearted reception of Fantasia, today considered possibly his Magnum Opus. After that, his attention turned away from animation and towards live action and his theme parks. He put out new animated films, certainly, but nothing that was as pioneering in concept as Snow White or Fantasia. Maybe if the reaction to Fantasia had been warmer, maybe it came out before the war had started, or delayed until after it ended, then he might still be more enthusiastic about 'high-concept' feature length animation?
There seems to be a theory that Disney (the man) was heartbroken at the half-hearted reception of Fantasia, today considered possibly his Magnum Opus. After that, his attention turned away from animation and towards live action and his theme parks. He put out new animated films, certainly, but nothing that was as pioneering in concept as Snow White or Fantasia. Maybe if the reaction to Fantasia had been warmer, maybe it came out before the war had started, or delayed until after it ended, then he might still be more enthusiastic about 'high-concept' feature length animation?
I could see that, I could also see them doing an animated Star War movie eventually.
Indeed, and why not more Jules Verne adaptations?
20,000 Leagues under the Sea was their first full length live-action production.
Some of Verne's work screams Disney, especially in the steampunk moments.
I can easily imagine a moralising version (especially about the horrors of industrialisation/environmental damage) of The Begums Millions, with a pair of over-cute animated kids, complete with anthropomorphic pet and Ha! Ha! Ha! villain.
Driftless
Donor
Jules Verne could have been more of a gold mine for Disney. As you noted, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was done and remains the best film version of the tale.
* Begum's Millions/Fortune would be a good choice
* Master of the World &/or Robur the Conqueror (Robur was a Captain Nemo analog) could have been spectacular in Disney's hands. The 1961 American International Pictures version starring Vincent Price & Charles Bronson was a grade B production and pretty disappointing.
* Off on a Comet could serve as good source material. it provided the essential plot for the modern setting for the 1951 "When Worlds Collide"
I love 20,000 Leagues under the Sea. Journey to the Center of the Earth would be great fodder for a Disney adventure film. So would From the Earth to the Moon and Around the World in 80 Days.
Last edited:
Driftless
Donor
I love the 1959 version of Journey to the Center of the Earth. James Mason, Arlene Dahl, Thayer David, Peter Ronson, and even Pat Boone trying to work a Scottish burr. For me, that version is hard to top.
From Earth to Moon & Around the Moon could have been a better production in Disney's hands than the 1958 RKO/Warner Bros version. That one is another disappointing telling of a Vernian tale.
Five Weeks in a Balloon would have been another good candidate for a top end Disney production. The book reflects the racism of the 1860's when written, and the 1962 version makes a stab at anti-slavery from a 1960 white-society perspective. Still, lots to work with
I feel there's an unfortunate dys-synchronicity the timing for filming the Verne tales. To really hit the mark, you maybe needed some of the special effect techniques fro the original Star Wars era onward. However, once we hit that time frame, then some of the Verne tales seemed tepid by comparisson. That's where 20,000 Leagues stands above it's counterparts.
*edit* I love those old late 1930's to 1960's adventure movies - even the disappointing ones. I enjoy watching them, but wish for more from them.
Last edited:
Driftless
Donor
How about Disney tackling a post-1968 Huck Finn?
We've discussed the difficulty in doing a proper Huck Finn earlier in this thread, I believe. While on a superficial level, HF has been done as a kids tale, but any version of the story gets into the racial divide within the country and the nature of slavery. The archaic working-class, mid-country dialect is necessary to the story as it connects Huck & Jim and separates them from many of the other characters; but it's often difficult for modern or non-US audiences to cipher through the language.
It would take a film-maker with some brass cajones to attempt a modern take on the story - after the race impacted events of 1968 and on. The frequent use of the word "nigger" in the book would be hard to use in any modern movie.
We've discussed the difficulty in doing a proper Huck Finn earlier in this thread, I believe. While on a superficial level, HF has been done as a kids tale, but any version of the story gets into the racial divide within the country and the nature of slavery. The archaic working-class, mid-country dialect is necessary to the story as it connects Huck & Jim and separates them from many of the other characters; but it's often difficult for modern or non-US audiences to cipher through the language.
It would take a film-maker with some brass cajones to attempt a modern take on the story - after the race impacted events of 1968 and on. The frequent use of the word "nigger" in the book would be hard to use in any modern movie.
Driftless
Donor
Pleasing the Ghost (original story by Newberry Award winner Sharon Creech)
A wonderful sweet story that deals with grief, loss, and healing told with great humor. It's a story oriented towards kids, but would play very well with older audiences.
It would work as animation or a mix of live action & animation.
A wonderful sweet story that deals with grief, loss, and healing told with great humor. It's a story oriented towards kids, but would play very well with older audiences.
It would work as animation or a mix of live action & animation.
redlightning
Banned
The third and final book in The Rescuers series could have been done as well featuring the Black Castle with rescuing an ambassador's son in Norway.
If "The Begums Milions" is made in the Sixties, it will be definitly seen as a Cold-War-Parabel.
Talking of Heinlein, what about Destination Moon? Or, tho IDK how well it translates to animation, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? (Which would be
My personal fave of his.)
More kid-oriented, what about Beam Piper's Little Fuzzy/Fuzzy Sapiens? (Possibly done from the Fuzzy POV, so closer to Mayhar's Golden Dream?)
Some of Piper's other stories have odd-looking aliens that couldn't be done live-action well before (at best) "Planet of the Apes"-quality appliances (& might need to wait for CGI), but they were mature & smart, while still accessible to a younger audience.
Also, tho Isaac would take some persuading (maybe less so, with Disney involved), what about "Nightfall"?
And if you're doing kids' films, why not just do animated adaptations of Tom Swift?
My personal fave of his.)More kid-oriented, what about Beam Piper's Little Fuzzy/Fuzzy Sapiens? (Possibly done from the Fuzzy POV, so closer to Mayhar's Golden Dream?
)Some of Piper's other stories have odd-looking aliens that couldn't be done live-action well before (at best) "Planet of the Apes"-quality appliances (& might need to wait for CGI), but they were mature & smart, while still accessible to a younger audience.
Also, tho Isaac would take some persuading (maybe less so, with Disney involved), what about "Nightfall"?
And if you're doing kids' films, why not just do animated adaptations of Tom Swift?
Driftless
Donor
Talking of Heinlein, what about Destination Moon? Or, tho IDK how well it translates to animation, The Moon is a Harsh Mistress? (Which would be
More kid-oriented, what about Beam Piper's Little Fuzzy/Fuzzy Sapiens? (Possibly done from the Fuzzy POV, so closer to Mayhar's Golden Dream?
Some of Piper's other stories have odd-looking aliens that couldn't be done live-action well before (at best) "Planet of the Apes"-quality appliances (& might need to wait for CGI), but they were mature & smart, while still accessible to a younger audience.
Also, tho Isaac would take some persuading (maybe less so, with Disney involved), what about "Nightfall"?
And if you're doing kids' films, why not just do animated adaptations of Tom Swift?
There's a bazillion Tom Swift stories and the only thing canonical (if that's a word), are the Tom Swifty/Wellerisms; which should play well with young and old. You could re-create old Tom Swift adventures, or start from a clean sheet of paper and let fly.
The Fuzzy/Fuzzy Sapiens could be a bit of a thought provoker.
That's my thinking. Plus, a lot of what was in the books is hard to reproduce absent CGI, & very easy with animation. (It's something "ST:TAS" exploited, tho with unfortunateDriftless said:
results.)There's a side benefit, too: a lot of adults will have read Tom Swift, & be inclined to go to these films (or take their kids) to see how they get handled, or see how much thing have changed... (I've personally never done this with Tom Swift, of which I was a big fan at about age 6, but have with Butterworth...)
Fer sher. It depends on how close to the books the movie is, & how much thought the writer gives to why the Fuzzies turn out the way they do. Mayhar makes them more interesting than Piper did.Driftless said:
And more real. Piper makes them more "primitive savage" to be "saved"... (That, to be fair, will be a function of when the film gets made.) Doing this, tho, you might butterfly tribbles.
If David feels he can't do it without violating copyright (or without stepping on somebody's toes), my sense is, he'd do something else. (As it was, he was close to Heinlein's flatcats, without knowing it... Of course, he was also thematically akin "Pigs is pigs", too....)I accept it as one.Driftless said:
Usage I've usually seen is, "Is it canon?"
Last edited:
Then that's another good for an ATL Disney to continue to mine the Vernian canon post 20KLUTS. In some ways Walt Disney was to the 50s and 60s what George Lucas was to the 70s and 80s. And Disney had a creative team that clearly got the vibe of Jules Vern's novels, and since we're talking about Disney mining classic genre fiction, two words: Sherlock. Holmes. Admit it, you want to see golden age Disney do Hound of the Baskervilles.
Oh LOL! I've seen that before. That was fucking weird.
Last edited:
Driftless
Donor
Excellent point. 20KLUtS had unusual depth to the characters for a Disney tale, to go along with spectacular special effects, especially for the era. Carry that approach over to other Verne works in the 50's & 60's and you've possibly moved the SciFi/Fantasy movies from "B" list stock to "A" list blockbuster 20 years earlier.
By comparison, the characters of most of the "Princess" movies were either complete villains, clueless knuckleheads, or heroes. The kids ate those up, but it became too cookie-cutter and took the studio into the creative doldrums
Yeah. Butterflying Walt Disney's smoking habit would help avoid that. After his death, the Disney studio spent most of the 70s mining Walt's notes for ideas. Once they'd exhausted his notes they spent most of the 80s trying to re-invent themselves and re-capture Walt's magic touch. Walt Disney living for another 25 or 30 years would completely butterfly those problems.