Ranking Pixar's films / your opinions on them.

[Nayrman]

Meet the Robinsons isn't Pixar. Only Disney.

No wonder it was bad...

[Java]

No wonder it was bad...

I never saw it and don't really know much about it, so I don't have an opinion on it.

[Nayrman]

I never saw it and don't really know much about it, so I don't have an opinion on it.

Nearly every joke fell flat since they were all incredibly predictable. And once again it proves to me Disney on their own hasn't made anything of worth since the Lion King in 1995. (not counting Pixar... I refuse to dump Pixar with those hacks)

[Tupin]

Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, Atlantis, Lilo & Stitch, and Treasure Planet. None of those are good? All came out between 1995 and 2002, all were made by Disney.

2002 was the last year of great non-CGI Disney films. After Treasure Planet bombed, they basically gave up on it, save for Brother Bear and Home on the Range. (Which were mediocre compared to the above list, I might add)

This year, The Princess and the Frog will be their first 2D film in 5 years. Hopefully they can make it good.

[Nayrman]

Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, Atlantis, Lilo & Stitch, and Treasure Planet. None of those are good? All came out between 1995 and 2002, all were made by Disney.

2002 was the last year of great non-CGI Disney films. After Treasure Planet bombed, they basically gave up on it, save for Brother Bear and Home on the Range. (Which were mediocre compared to the above list, I might add)

This year, The Princess and the Frog will be their first 2D film in 5 years. Hopefully they can make it good.

The only one I'll really give credit to is Treasure Planet and Lilo and Stitch.
I never once cared for the "re-tellings" like Hunchback, Hercules, etc. It's just an excuse to not have to come up with original characters and borrow from things already done.
Treasure Planet bombing made me really mad, and yes that's why Disney stopped trying (in pursuit of "other interests" such as crappy musicians who aren't musicians and giving kids the wrong idea about the harsh mistress of high school).

The Princess and the Frog seems like a desperate attempt to recapture the success of the Little Mermaid in the early 90's. At least that's the vibe I got from the plot synopsis. I just wish people would quit making a big deal about the princess being black. It's no big deal people get the crap over it.

[Tupin]

Ever see any of the lesser known Dreamworks films? Once you see Antz and Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, you'll wish you hadn't. The former was just a quick cash-in on A Bug's Life, which came out a month later, and the latter, despite being horrible, sounded a lot like Brother Bear, which came out the year after.

Until they hit a gold mine with Shrek, all Dreamworks did was rip off Pixar by making a movie based on their concept as soon as Pixar announced what their new movie was about. They have only made one good non-Shrek movie. Prince of Egypt. Everything else was just like a really bad Pixar movie.

[Nayrman]

Antz was intercourse ing terrible. Even as a kid I knew it was a terrible Bugs Life rip-off. Stallion of the Cimarron was okay. Switching between the human perspective and the horse perspective was interesting, but it was poorly executed as frankly neither story really interacted with each other.

Shrek was pretty good. Had some clever jokes (Dulac's information desk and the castle "compensating for something" being my favorites) but the sequels were poop. Dreamworks is a wannabe animation company. Prince of Egypt was good, but frankly I don't see the big fuss over it.

Now you know why I got into anime...

[Tupin]

I'm just glad Eisner isn't in charge anymore.

Remember all those direct-to-DVD/VHS movies that were out in like the early 2000's? Guess whose ideas those were.

[Nayrman]

I'm just glad Eisner isn't in charge anymore.

Remember all those direct-to-DVD/VHS movies that were out in like the early 2000's? Guess whose ideas those were.

Was he in charge of all those god awful sequels that didn't need to be made, or should've been made except for Disney's illustrious greed and evil-ness? (Isn't it ironic though that the game Disney's had the most influence in Kingdom Hearts, they act more like the Heartless than any other company involved in gaming?)

[Java]

The only one I'll really give credit to is Treasure Planet and Lilo and Stitch.
I never once cared for the "re-tellings" like Hunchback, Hercules, etc. It's just an excuse to not have to come up with original characters and borrow from things already done.
Treasure Planet bombing made me really mad, and yes that's why Disney stopped trying (in pursuit of "other interests" such as crappy musicians who aren't musicians and giving kids the wrong idea about the harsh mistress of high school).

Seriously? I thought all those "re-tellings" were great movies, especially Mulan and Tarzan, which had an amazing soundtrack. The Hunchback of Notre-Dame and Hercules weren't bad either...

Atlantis, on the otherhand, I always thought was really bad.

I thought Lilo & Stitch was good, I guess.

Treasure Planet, I never saw and I don't think it ever interested me when it came out.

[Nayrman]

Seriously? I thought all those "re-tellings" were great movies, especially Mulan and Tarzan, which had an amazing soundtrack. The Hunchback of Notre-Dame and Hercules weren't bad either...

Atlantis, on the otherhand, I always thought was really bad.

I thought Lilo & Stitch was good, I guess.

Treasure Planet, I never saw and I don't think it ever interested me when it came out.

All the re-tellings were essentially the same movie copy pasted and someone went in to change the name of the location and main characters.

[Tupin]

You know The Little Mermaid was a retelling, right? It was originally a story written by Hans Christian Andersen. The only difference was that in the story Ariel wanted to become a human not only to marry the prince, but also to have an eternal soul and worship in a church. Oh, and the story ends with Ariel turning into sea foam, so Disney did stuff with it to make it family friendly.

Really, these "retellings" differ so much from the original plot that they basically are their own movies. Plus, you can't beat the music of Alan Menken.

I will give you that The Hunchback of Notre Dame was basically like The Little Mermaid. Out There=Part of Your World.

Mulan was a personal favorite of mine, though.

[Nayrman]

Yea, I know about the Little Mermaid. And Alice in Wonderland is actually about Alice essentially "having a bad trip".
Lol making things kid friendly when they were fine as is. No wonder so many kids these days get the wrong idea about everything.

It's still really hard for me to count those movies, as frankly it's still taking characters and ideas from myths and stories and just making a kid friendly movie out of it. It doesn't take much creative thinking or thought to really do, and the idea is still essentially the same in all of them.

The only one I can really excuse is Snow White, because frankly Disney needed something known to market the first full length animated movie in the 1930's.

And for those wondering, yes I liked them as a kid, however I've come to realize just how shallow and one shot all these movies really are. Obviously a few manage to get away from that (Dumbo I think was mostly original, Lion King *even though it is borrowing Kimba the White Lion from Japan*, and Toy Story which isn't even Disney*).

I do admit, I can stand Mulan, only because the soundtrack is still listenable, compared to some other soundtracks I shall not mention.

**South Park got him totally right**

[Java]

Yea, I know about the Little Mermaid. And Alice in Wonderland is actually about Alice essentially "having a bad trip".
Lol making things kid friendly when they were fine as is. No wonder so many kids these days get the wrong idea about everything.

It's still really hard for me to count those movies, as frankly it's still taking characters and ideas from myths and stories and just making a kid friendly movie out of it. It doesn't take much creative thinking or thought to really do, and the idea is still essentially the same in all of them.

The only one I can really excuse is Snow White, because frankly Disney needed something known to market the first full length animated movie in the 1930's.

And for those wondering, yes I liked them as a kid, however I've come to realize just how shallow and one shot all these movies really are. Obviously a few manage to get away from that (Dumbo I think was mostly original, Lion King *even though it is borrowing Kimba the White Lion from Japan*, and Toy Story which isn't even Disney*).

I do admit, I can stand Mulan, only because the soundtrack is still listenable, compared to some other soundtracks I shall not mention.
[spoiler][/spoiler]
**South Park got him totally right**

...And what is wrong with the Tarzan soundtrack exactly? I, for one, happen to like it.

[Zero]

The only one I'll really give credit to is Treasure Planet and Lilo and Stitch.
I never once cared for the "re-tellings" like Hunchback, Hercules, etc. It's just an excuse to not have to come up with original characters and borrow from things already done.
Treasure Planet bombing made me really mad, and yes that's why Disney stopped trying (in pursuit of "other interests" such as crappy musicians who aren't musicians and giving kids the wrong idea about the harsh mistress of high school).

The Princess and the Frog seems like a desperate attempt to recapture the success of the Little Mermaid in the early 90's. At least that's the vibe I got from the plot synopsis. I just wish people would quit making a big deal about the princess being black. It's no big deal people get the crap over it.

Hey now, Mulan kicks ass