Senior HTF Member
- Aug 3, 2001
Finding Nemo, due on home video this fall, will open on 5,500 screens and have major tie-ins with McDonald’s, Pepsi, Frito-Lay, Kellogg’s, Dreyer’s and Orville RedenbacherI hope the "quick" turn-around on Finding Nemo doesn't mean the supplements are compromised (assuming it's 2 discs).
All other Pixar 2 disc sets have had a considerably longer window until released - Monsters, Inc was almost a whole year.
...and it certainly isn't confusing enough to require a "mid"-quel.Disney certainly didn't think it was...it was probably just convenient placement of the new story that they had worked on. Such placement allowed them to have "young Simba" again, a character which was a large part of the success of the first movie. I'm sure they hope it figures into more money for this release as well.
Conclusion: It's all about making a profit. Without that motivation, noone's in business to begin with. :wink:
The DVD of LK1½ will feature numerous extras, such as a mockumentary tracing Timon's childhood; a making of featurette; a collection of funny moments in Disney animated movies; an interactive tour of the Pridelands; a trivia game; deleted scenes and music videos.
Personally, I really wonder why Disney even bothers with direct to video sequelsPersonally, I really wonder why Disney even bothers with sequels to be released to cinemas. I mean, Return to Neverland? Jungle Book 2? Toy Story 2 being the exception, they're crap.
Now, regarding LK2 - Only saw it once, thought it was awful. If LK was Hamlet without the incest (which it was), then LK2 was Romeo and Juliet without the tragedy. I finished watching it and just thought "What was the point, other than money?"
Now, regarding Belle's Enchanted Christmas - a truly awful concept (although I confess to having never seen it). As I understand it, that is a film set during the time of the original "Beauty and the Beast", which clearly only spanned a couple of weeks (let's leave the issue of falling in love over such a small period of time). How is it possible they celebrated Christmas in that small time period with no mention of it in the original film? The whole approach of Disney in churning out sequels (or in this case, midquels) without giving thought to whether they even make sense in the context of the original films is appalling.
How is it possible they celebrated Christmas in that small time period with no mention of it in the original film?Well, there IS the "getting to know you" montage in the first flick - theoretically it all could have happened there, though the fact that Christmas includes a major piece of drama makes it an odd story to insert into the middle of things.
In any case, Christmas does bite. But at least it's better than Belle's Magical World, one of Disney's sorriest direct-to-video pieces...
Even when you have a clearly inferior spin-off product on your hands, you will fork over $15-$20 sometimes to make the child happy. Disney counts on this. It is too bad that they must look like they are being so mercenary about it, but after all, a business is in business to make money. That means make it cheap, and sell it for as much as you can. Sorry.I don't know. I just hope, when I'm a parent, that I will teach my kids to watch good quality films rather than any old crap Disney produces. That means I show them Snow White or Beauty and the Beast, but not Atlantis: Milo's Return or The Jungle Book 2. Plus I'll try to introduce them to the many other great non-Disney children's films. I want my kids to be happy if they're watching good films, not rubbish.
I probably won't succeed, and the parental pressures will probably be too much, but I want to think I tried.
The truth is, the timeframe of the film is very much distorted - problem is, "Christmas" amplifies the problem by throwing in an entire holiday seasons that was never even mentioned.I'm sure the folks at Disney figured, "Hey, it snowed in the movie - there's your Christmas!" And they also figured - probably correctly - that the intended audience wouldn't pick these particular nits. I agree with you that it's a crock, though...
I probably won't succeed, and the parental pressures will probably be too much, but I want to think I tried.But why exactly should it be difficult - I mean, if you're the parent, you surely have some control over what they watch. If you don't want your kids watching "Lion King 49" because its rubbish, don't buy it, don't rent it, don't allow it in your home. It's not as if an 8-year old could afford to buy it without the parent's help. Hell, give the kid a book, get them to run around outside, rather than watching and re-watching the same bad film over and over and over...
Of course, I am speaking here from a position of a single person, with no current prospects of becoming unsingle in the next few years, let alone having kids, so I am speaking with pretty much no knowledge or experience or anything to give my comments any validity.