Point taken, but you did yourself a favor skipping Chicken Little. It laid an egg so rotten, Edith Massey wouldn't eat it! 
If you hated Home on the Range, you will loathe that. You might actually find more amusement from a rerun of Cartoon Network's Cow and Chicken.
The difference is that The Black Cauldron was not motivated by greed, contempt for tradition, and seemingly deliberate ignorance of all the lessons from its aftermath and the company's relatively rapid recovery from it, but by reverence for it and a desire to shake off the perception that Disney = kids only. Even their outright butchery of the film in post-production could not keep the animation department from flourishing anew with subsequent films. To throw all that away to copy their competitors was unconscionable. It didn't even have to be this way, not just in Disney having two CGI studios (then shutting down Blue Sky) at the expense of the type of animation on which they built their entire legacy. Nothing else they have done, be it live-action film production, TV, theme parks, the myriad of acquisitions over the last three decades, or the mountains of merchandise with the characters' likeness, would have been possible without it. Also, remember that The Jungle Book was almost the end of the line; if that had failed (and The Sword in the Stone, despite its charms and flashes of brilliant character animation, was not considered a moneymaker, so that was a distinct possibility), we would have gotten nothing. Why should the animators have just packed up, gone home, and rested on their laurels just because Walt was no longer around? Thankfully, they didn't.
But why did they even cut the animation budgets in the first place? Sleeping Beauty, ironically, cost so much money that it cost more than it made and counted on its 1970, 1979, and 1986 reissues to eventually turn a profit. Some artistic compromises were necessary just to keep the division open and so there'd still be Disney animated movies.
If you hated Home on the Range, you will loathe that. You might actually find more amusement from a rerun of Cartoon Network's Cow and Chicken.The difference is that The Black Cauldron was not motivated by greed, contempt for tradition, and seemingly deliberate ignorance of all the lessons from its aftermath and the company's relatively rapid recovery from it, but by reverence for it and a desire to shake off the perception that Disney = kids only. Even their outright butchery of the film in post-production could not keep the animation department from flourishing anew with subsequent films. To throw all that away to copy their competitors was unconscionable. It didn't even have to be this way, not just in Disney having two CGI studios (then shutting down Blue Sky) at the expense of the type of animation on which they built their entire legacy. Nothing else they have done, be it live-action film production, TV, theme parks, the myriad of acquisitions over the last three decades, or the mountains of merchandise with the characters' likeness, would have been possible without it. Also, remember that The Jungle Book was almost the end of the line; if that had failed (and The Sword in the Stone, despite its charms and flashes of brilliant character animation, was not considered a moneymaker, so that was a distinct possibility), we would have gotten nothing. Why should the animators have just packed up, gone home, and rested on their laurels just because Walt was no longer around? Thankfully, they didn't.
But why did they even cut the animation budgets in the first place? Sleeping Beauty, ironically, cost so much money that it cost more than it made and counted on its 1970, 1979, and 1986 reissues to eventually turn a profit. Some artistic compromises were necessary just to keep the division open and so there'd still be Disney animated movies.
