Are the Disney sequels any good? (1 Viewer)

[Todd_Brown]

I'm speaking specifically of the direct to video animation movies like Beauty and the Beast 2 , Lion King 2 : Simba's Pride , etc... I have been contemplating getting them especially with tuesday's upcoming release of Hunchback and it's sequel.
Is the animation up to quality, storylines good, etc... and, although I probably shouldn't ask, any good extras?
Todd

 

[Richard Travale]

I can't comment on the others, but I have to say that Simba's Pride was actually quite good. If you enjoyed the original, I would recommend picking this one up.

 

[Jeremy Wadian]

Well, I once read that Toy Story 2 was supposed to be a direct to video release but Disney thought it was good enough for a theatrical release. Same thing for Peter Pan: Return to Neverland. That should give you some idea of the quality of the movies that Disney only releases on home video.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Well, I once read that Toy Story 2 was supposed to be a direct to video release but Disney thought it was good enough for a theatrical release. Same thing for Peter Pan: Return to Neverland. That should give you some idea of the quality of the movies that Disney only releases on home video.

If by that you mean TS2 and Return to Neverland are sub-par products and that therefore the direct-to-video sequels are schlock, I have to disagree.
The direct-to-video sequels are, indeed, not even close to the originals. And, Return to Neverland was a sub-par Disney product (not a strong story, nor strong songs, animation, etc.).
However, Toy Story 2 was every bit the effort that Toy Story was. In some categories, I might even place TS2 ahead of its predecessor. BOTH films are absolutely great! Great stories, well-told. Incredible characters. Wonderful premise. Strong emotion. Solid Randy Newman scores. Incredible fun.
The sequence featuring the Sarah MacLachlan version of When She Loved Me is enough to make the film a classic. That particular montage never fails to bring a tear to my eye as I have a 15 year old daughter who also has been transitioning from her childhood interests to teenage interests. Goodbye dolls, hello boys! :rolleyes

 

[Malcolm R]

If by that you mean TS2 and Return to Neverland are sub-par products and that therefore the direct-to-video sequels are schlock . . . .

I think Jeremy's intent was to say exactly the opposite. That if TS2 was considered to be a DTV release, then their DTV standards are quite high compared to some other studios (though with TS2, they might have "polished" it a bit after they decided to go with a theatrical release).
I have "Lion King 2" which I quite liked and thought was pretty well done. I also have "Little Mermaid 2" on order after reading some reviews that said it was also pretty good. The "Aladdin" sequels were OK (at least Robin Williams was back in the 3rd) and I've been pondering "Lady & the Tramp 2."
That said, however, the recent trailers for "Cinderella II" and "Hunchback II" have left me completely underwhelmed. The animation looks no better than the level of Kid-TV cartoons. And I understand that the Cinderella video is basically three short vignettes, as if they were the beginning episodes of a scrapped Saturday AM cartoon that were thrown together and put out on video to recoup some costs.
Basically, you just have to look at the trailers yourself and check the reviews . . . and HTF member opinions, of course. Each release seems to warrant judging on its own, rather than lumping all the DTV releases together.

 

[JulianK]

The animation on Hunchback II is quite appalling; it looks like one of those hack efforts that appear on video to take advantage of a legitimate Disney film (you know the type - the ones that on-line retailers have to label "Not the Disney Version" so that consumers don't get confused!)
Cinderella II isn't much better, but Peter Pan - Return to Neverland deserved to have a theatrical release. It may not have great songs, but the story is quite robust, and the animation is as good as anything in minor "Classics" like Pocahontas or Mulan, including some impressive shots featuring a CGI version of Hook's ship.
Many people regard Toy Story 2 as being better than the original film. IIRC it was originally destined for video, but the project was going so well that they decided to expand it for theatrical release. The cell-animated sequel Buzz Lightyear of Star Command is horrible, and back to the shoddy animation quality of Disney Channel filler.

 

[Bill Moore]

Of the ones I have seen, Lion King II and Lady & Tramp II have come the closest to "Disney Quality" compared to the originals. Aladdin 3 was also close, due to Robin William's presence. Lady & Tramp II was hurt by a song sequence at the junk yard that did not fit the look and feel of the rest of the movie, let alone the original.

Rented Cinderella II this week for the small ones in the family. It was clearly three "made for Saturday morning" episodes tacked together. Not awful on that scale, but no where near the quality of the original. Ugg.

Saw the tail end of Mermaid II (last 15 minutes or so) and was not impressed. Can't really speak about the whole film though.

B

PS -> I've seen Toy Story II as well, but it is in a class by itself.

 

[GlennH]

I don't think the direct-to-video sequels are very good personally, but my 8-year-old daughter likes them. In fact, she thinks Little Mermaid II and Lady and the Tramp II are better than the originals (where did I go wrong? ). She says the "colors are better."
She also likes Cinderella II, which is pretty bad from the part of it I stayed around for. So even though these are generally cheap rip-offs, apparently Disney knows their audience and I hear that they are very profitable, which is why there are so many of them all of a sudden.

 

[Alex S]

Little Mermaid II and Lady & the Tramp II are the two best sequels in my opinion.

 

[Patrick Larkin]

I can't comment on the others, but I have to say that Simba's Pride was actually quite good. If you enjoyed the original, I would recommend picking this one up.

Hmmm, I'd like to pick up Lion King II -if- my family was given the opportunity to see The Lion King on DVD first. Disney's lame marketing tactics means losing a whole generation of kids. I refuse to rent a VHS (also out of print) which was probably rented 6,000 times and has degraded beyond recognition.

 

[Ken_McAlinden]

They are almost all rehashes of the original, superior films. Their problems stem from not having the best story people work on them much moreso than their animation limitations. IIRC, Roger Allers, who was one of Disney's top story artists before co-directing The Lion King and unsuccessfully trying to make Empire of the Sun, received story artist credit on Return to Neverland. I'm sure they brought him in to beef it up when they decided to make it a theatrical release.

The real unsung heroes of the best animated films are the story artists and editors who work with the directors to hone everything to perfection before sending it off to the layout and animation areas. Most of the DTV sequels are done by the "B" or "C" team story folks. Of the ones I have seen, Lion King 2: Simba's Pride and Lady & the Tramp II: Scamp's Adventure have the highest apparent production values, but are still basically just slight variations on their predecessors story-wise.

Regards,

 

[Damian]

I'm speaking specifically of the direct to video animation movies like Beauty and the Beast 2 , Lion King 2 : Simba's Pride

There was a Beauty And The Beast 2?

Most of the direct-to-video sequals aren't that good. Little Mermaid 2 was good, Lady And The Tramp 2 was okay. I haven't seen Hunchback 2 yet. Cinderella 2 was pretty horrid in my opinion as was Pocahontis 2.

 

[Malcolm R]

There was a Beauty And The Beast 2?

Beauty and the Beast: The Enchanted Christmas And weren't there some other "Belle" videos, too?

 

[Anthony Liz]

I think Disney's sequels should be judged on their own. It's already made clear that the animation and story don't come close to the originals, so maybe we should rate them or compare them to other sequels instead of the film's original.

We must remember that these sequels are pretty much aimed for a younger audience. For example, I think a kid would rather see Hunchback II instead of the original. The original was dark and gothic, but the second has more kid humour and its a much brighter film.

Disney can keep making all the sequels that they want, but all I ask is that don't touch films like Snow White.

 

[Jim-M]

Lion King II is pretty good, but darker than the original. The songs aren't as good either. But we like it and it will tide us over until Lion King comes out next year. I read somewhere that it was released as a feature in theaters in Europe, if that tells you anything about the relative quality.

Little Mermaid II is OK, but since we have the original I don't see a need to get it.

Lady And The Tramp 2 is good. I think I like it as least as much as the original, although I haven't seen the original on DVD so my opinion could change on that. This one also has 3 Pluto shorts and a game as extras that make it a decent value.

Our family enjoyed Return to Never Land in the theaters and I have a feeling we'll be hounded to buy that when it comes out on DVD.

We haven't bought Cinderella II because of the reviews I've read, but the kids might like it. We don't buy everything though, since this is one where we drew the line.

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Lion King II is pretty good, but darker than the original.

Darker? I strongly disagree. Lion King was quite dark at times - Scar's Nazi-influenced song, Mufasa's death, the battel at the end - and the sequel offered no moments that seemed as intense or powerful. As someone mentioned, Disney animated sequels tend to simply remake the originals, though there's often a twist. In Pocahontas, the English came to America, while in the sequel, Pokey went to England.

I love Disney animation, but none of the direct-to-video sequels have been memorable for me. Some are better than others, but they all seem bland and forgettable...