Message-ID: <253@teklds.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Jan-85 18:52:55 EST
Article-I.D.: teklds.253
Posted: Mon Jan 21 18:52:55 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 24-Jan-85 07:23:17 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 9


Please tell me why you thought Fox and the Hound was a flop?

I thought it was one of the best movies I have EVER seen!!!

The plot or the moral of the story was fantastic and I am a dog
fanatic anyway.

karen alias larryg

Message-ID: <2284@nsc.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 26-Jan-85 13:31:09 EST
Article-I.D.: nsc.2284
Posted: Sat Jan 26 13:31:09 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 27-Jan-85 09:47:13 EST
References: <253@teklds.UUCP>
Reply-To: chuqui@nsc.UUCP (Chuqui)
Organization: The Warlocks Cave
Lines: 53
Summary: 

In article <253@teklds.UUCP> larryg@teklds.UUCP (Larry Gardner) writes:
>
>Please tell me why you thought Fox and the Hound was a flop?

Hmm... where to start???

I won't talk about banal plots-- it was probably no worse than 'The
Rescuers' or 'The Secret of NIHM', two pieces of animation I really DID
enjoy. All three, deep down inside, are the kind of films that Walt used to
make-- good, healthy, family films. I sincerely doubt that any of them
would be films Walt would make today, because he was never afraid to
innovate, but that is a personal opinion. 

The big problem with Fox and the Hound os the quality of the animation.
When it was about half done, Don Bluth had a falling out with Disney
Studios over future directions and company support (he felt that the
Studios were milking Walt's reputation instead of carrying on his work) and
left to form Bluth studios. So did most of the animation staff. Their
result, a few years later, was 'Secret of NIHM', which was animated the way
the classic Disney films were, and the detail shows.

Those that were left, and other animators that Disney could latch onto
tried to pick up the pieces. Most of them were relative novices or trained
as background artists, not character artists, and would have trouble
staying in the lines if you had them paint a wall. They did what they could
to use the existing cels to up the overall quality, but if you look at the
film, (even more noticable on a frame by frame basis) the quality is very
variable and it really shows. I wasn't terribly entertained by the thing,
or I might not be nit-picking the technical details to death (I'm not
calling 'NIHM' the best, but I did enjoy it and I did notice their
attention to detail-- it wasn't a product, it was a work of love). Having
worked in the disney corporation and being very close to the magic of
disney for years (as a fan of the films, the works, and the life of Walt) I
may also be over-critical because I see what they've done to the potentials
of the Disney companies since he died. It shows in the animation (always
the flagship of the company). It shows in the films (Black Hole, for
example? -- note that the only two decent 'Disney' films of recent time
were Splash and 'Never Cry Wolf' were not done BY Disney, simply funded by
them with no artistic control). It also, as I found out on a recent visit,
is really starting to show in Disneyland, the place where Walt's magic was
really most noticable-- its gone, an replaced by an aging and second rate
amusement park.

Chuq

-- 
From the ministry of silly talks:               Chuq Von Rospach
{allegra,cbosgd,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!chuqui nsc!chuqui@decwrl.ARPA

God is a trademark of AT&T Bell Labs
---
National Semiconductor does not require useless disclaimers on posted
material that is obviously not posted by company spokesmen...