Hey all,
So I just looked at Marissa's post and got to thinking. Disney... We all know and grew up with the Disney Princesses and Princes. I'm sure we all have our favorites and even wish our own lives were fairy tales.
I had this discussion with my mother over Spring Break. We had just saw Disney Princess on Ice (Yes, be jealous :P), so we decided to watch a Disney movie when we got home. When looking at the selection of movies to choose from, I couldn't help but notice that Disney has made some very unsuccessful sequels to their already adapted works.
The Little Mermaid, taken from Hans Christian Andersen, continues with the Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea and even a third edition. Cinderella, coming from the Brothers Grimm, continues with Cinderella II: Dreams Come True and so on. There is Mulan II and Pocahontas II. After already adapting a story, Disney then makes sequels and tri-quels (is that even a word?).
So the discussion I had with my mother and want your input in on is: Is it ok for the adapter to continue the story and make sequels? Why have these Disney sequels been so unsuccessful?
Have fun with this, bring any other examples in ^_^
Happy posting,
Kristie
14 comments:
The Disney sequels are generally rather ill-fitting and feel alien to the original story. I am not really opposed to the idea of a sequel to the original, but I am opposed to really bad sequels. The problem is, when taking a story that was already adapted from the original, the addition often doesn’t work well with the flow of the first story, even if the original adaptation was good or even sometimes if it was very different from the original. Cinderella II was just odd and Cinderella III was just awful; that pretty much fits the description of most of the sequels to the Disney classics: odd or awful (Jungle Book II is rather heinous in my opinion). When carrying on past the original premise, it needs to be good, and the problem is that it often just isn’t good.
I admit to an unqualified fondness for The Lion King II (and a profound dislike of Lion King 1½). This may be because they followed their little Shakespearean theme, instead of taking off in completely strange and not entirely logical directions. It is also probable that that is not the reason (I was too young to care at the time), and I just liked it because it was good.
The bad thing about sequels that come after a story based on something else is that there are certain expectations that come with them. In class, I mentioned Andrew Lloyd Weber’s sequel the Phantom. People look at it and see it as a blatant ploy to make money, and it probably is; the plot is a disaster (a disappointment to many, I’m sure). People go to these types of sequels, either determined to hate them or with high expectations poised to be squashed. The sequels don’t have to be of low quality for them to be a disappointment. They also don’t have to completely stink; some of the songs in the Phantom sequel are very beautiful. Here is a video of “Til I Hear You sing”, sung by the Ramin Karimloo to promote the show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=47dUc4iMAvQ
I would say that this one song really does belong to whatever happened after everything played out at the opera house…It is the story that doesn’t mesh.
I think one thing to keep in mind is that the times that the sequels were created. First off, the majority of Classic Disney movie sequels were made years after the original so the creator is a different person who had a different perspective of the concept of the story.
Also, the sequels to these movies do not logically fit with the flow of the first movie's plot. I agree with Marissa when she says that the sequels take complete different directions. That is the problem with Disney sequels. I would say that no, it is not ok to have a sequel if the story does not fit with the original plot. However, like I said before, it is not the same adapter who is making the sequels. The first adapter took for example the Little Mermaid from Hans Christian Anderson, then another adapter took the Little Mermaid into a sequel. The second adapter may not have been entirely aware of Hans Christian Anderson's piece in the first place. That's something we will never know. A sequel must work with the original piece in order for it to successful like Batman or Pirates of the Caribbean. (Those could be poor examples, but the point is that the sequels flowed with the story of the first one).
Marissa and Candace both brought up very interesting points about why the sequels are not as successful as the original story.
It could also be that the original story was just so great that there isn't really a way of making it better. My all time favorite Disney movie is Tarzan. I watched it over and over again when I was little. However, I always wondered what happened during the time that Tarzan was growing up, and my questions were answered when Tarzan II came out. It was a really good movie. Phill Collin's music was still used and everything fit in with the original movie. However, it was still not as great as the first Tarzan movie.
I'm not exactly sure, what would cause this difference in popularity of the two films, but thinking about it our age could have something to do with it. I watched Tarzan when I was about eight years old and then Tarzan II when I was fifteen. It could be that the audience grew up and didn't appreciate the second movie as much.
As far as Disney sequels go, I LOVED Th Little Mermaid 2! But I agree that the rest of the sequels more or less sucked.
I agree with you guys about how they probably have different creators since they were conceived many years after the original. Part of it though I believe has to do with our own mindset. All of the original movies are Disney classics. We love them! Why can't we love the sequel? Because it isn't the original. We are constantly comparing it to something that in our minds is AMAZING! Sequels really don't stand a chance.
However, The Little Mermaid was one of my favorite Disney movies. And I think this is part of the reason I liked the sequel so much. I wanted to know what happened to Ariel and Eric, and the second movie told me. (Perla alluded to this with her Tarzan example).
I know for myself watching the Disney movie adaptations were the first time I had been introduced to these tales from older sources so to me these were not adaptations but the real source of the stories. This may in larger part be due to the fact that such movies as Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid, The Lion King and other classics were coming out right when I was an impressionable toddler. I know that a lot of these stories that Disney altered had actually quite violent and gruesome plots so my parents never opened my up to these original stories as they were geared towards an older generation. Not until I was older did I even know of the Brothers Grim fairy tales. Disney was my original and the characters were so colorful that I fell in love.
Thinking in particular on why the sequels didn't have as great of a response may be due to the fact that the Disney movies weren't made to. By this I mean that the plots were always resolved to the perfect "Happy Ending" there were never endings that left you hanging...good always concurred evil. Therefore when I think of the sequels I think of them as completely separate movies rather than a continuation of the original plot which was wrapped up in such a picture perfect manner in that that is how I like to remember the movies...just as they were originally made. The sequels to me are not true Disney classics but attempts to make money. Rather than try to build off of a Disney classic create more original works that today's younger generation can hold onto as something special in their childhood.
The whole Disney image is so magical representing childhood innocence and dreams even translated into a theme park!! Talk about the ultimate form of translation... from cartoon movies to an actual amusement park known throughout the world including rides, castles, disney characters, all for the purpose of immersing you in a magical world. I think also that these constant references to Disney classics also helps to establish this idea that the movies were made to stand alone.
Bottom line...the original Disney movies hold a place in my heart and remind me of my childhood
I never really understood why some of the Disney classics had sequels. I never understood how there could be anything after "happily ever after" so to speak.I agree with everyone else that said the sequels always seemed to go off in some screwy direction rather than being a continuation of the first plot line. Sometimes I wonder if the reason the sequels weren't as good, is because the originals were so dazzling to us as the Disney generation that nothing can compare. In a way I think we make the movies bad, if that makes sense. The originals are so iconic that anything that claims to be a part of it has to be as awe inspiring as the first.
Another reason I think the sequels flopped is because maybe Disney was just trying to get more money out of their classic films, trying to suck the kids back into old characters to sell more stuff. I don't know.
All I know is nothing compares to the Disney Classics :)
I love that we've started talking about Disney translations! I really agree with Aubs; I feel like a lot of sequels are created because Disney got greedy and wanted to extend the success of their original classics. I think that because the sequels often come so much later in time there is a difference between the new creator's ideas and the original, but there could also be additional influences of the more modern time. The original Disney classics were detailed, not complex persay, but they had "substance." I feel like many of the classics are missing the key elements of the originals that made them so fulfilling to watch. Again, I agree with Aubs in that making a sequel after "Happily Ever After" doesn't make much sense. It might even take away from what we invisioned happened after the prince and princess defeated the evil villain and went on to enjoy their happily ever after.
In the way of successful Disney sequels, I happened to like both of the Aladdin ones. Moreso the third actually. I think the reason is because at the end of the first movie, Jasmine and Aladdin can be together, but there isn't a full resolution for several things. The third movie pulls on these absent resolutions and creates a rather coherent plot for a sequel.
Good Lord...Disney.
Mostly I think they speedily make crappy sequels to leech money from the popularity of the first film, and that they do not put much time,thought, or talent into these spin-offs. I think this is totally ok, because whatever, it's their company to do what they want with, and no one forces me to watch them so I generally disregard.
I think the Disney company has some problems where they don't accept any ideas that are not stereotypically 'Disney', and therefore they are stuck reworking the same tired themes and refuse new ideas. For example, they fired the man who made "The Brave Little Toaster", merely for presenting the idea to them. They told him that his movie was so not 'Disney' that he had to pack up and leave. (Thankfully he found funding elsewhere and made his movie.)
Same goes for the people who created Dreamworks and Pixar, all Disney castoffs.
I love the Disney Princesses! But like Lindzi and Aubrey mentioned, these stories end with a “And they all lived happily ever after”...until they make a new movie with another plot twist that frazzles them for a bit, and then again, they “live happily ever after”. Can't they just make up their minds? The Princesses were meant to enchant little girls and teach them that diverse young ladies, not always from a prosperous family, can find their prince and end up as princesses. Not very realistic, but they were supposed to learn that love conquers all and that Prince Charming does exist. Adding families and new or old rivals challenges what happily ever after means. Personally, I liked to believe that after the happy wedding, they lead their kingdom into tranquility and they are never bothered with, after one story ends, you read the next one. Adding another part to the movie leads to questions that might not be able to be answered. What happened in between the two movies? Did their daughter get married? Does she find her prince eventually even though shes only eleven? How does her prince charming measure up to her father who was supposed to be THE prince charming? So many questions that wont be answered, and some of them are for the best.
Growing up I was probably one of the biggest disney movie fans and when I saw the sequels was very disappointed in them. I tend to not like sequels and especially bad ones if they take away from the original. I believe that some sequels are mad to enhance the original but with disney sequels that doesn't seem to be the case.
Even though as a child I was a huge disney fan as I got older I began to have some serious issues with disney. Looking back on many of the movies and shows disney has tended to be very racist, classist and sexist. They have taken original works and stories and turned them into glossy/glittery works of art. The story that probably disappointed me the most was the story of Pocahontas, if any one knows what really happened to Pocahontas it is very different than the version that Disney gives you in the original and the sequel. Disney has adapted folktales and old stories into the stories that we see today. I think that disney's depiction of Pocahontas i disrespectful to the historical figure.
Another issue I have with disney is that it took them forever to come out with an African American Princess and when they did she was a frog for the majority of the movie. Subtle hints of racism are throughout disney movies and it really has started to bother me.
I know I kind of went off on a tangent but when you look at Disney you have to take into account all that comes along with it.
Candace, you brought up a very important idea here. The fact that these Disney originals were made years ago does in fact play a part in their success. When we first watched these movies, we were very young. They made an impression on us and created a very magical world for us to escape in. I guess now that we are older, the sequels don't appeal to us. Do you think if we were born in the generation that these sequels came out in that we'd appreciate them more?
Kristie, I must say that I agree that age has a very significant impact on how we view the sequels. I remember that I actually was excited about all of the Disney sequels that came out during or around then time when I was in elementary school. I certain there is a box somewhere in my house that contains VHS copies of almost all the classic Disney films along with their sequels. My sister and I watched them on what was pretty much endless repeat. They never quite made it onto our favorites list, but they were certainly well watched.
When I was little, the mere existence of a sequel meant that I HAD to watch it; I needed to know what happened next. It didn’t really matter to me, back then, if it was good or not. Pocahontas II, Lady and the Tramp II, Lion King II, Little Mermaid II, the Aladdin movies II&III…I watched them, and enjoyed them. The funny thing is, thinking back on them makes me realize that the only one of the sequels that I remember in any degree of detail is the Lion King II, even though all of the originals are still pretty clear on my mind. I really only started to dislike them as I got older. I began to view the sequels that were made later in my life with a certain level of contempt. I hated the ones like Jungle Book II, 101 Dalmatians II, Cinderella III, and some of the others so much that I couldn’t even finish watching them. I do believe my age was a factor in how well I thought of them. I am sure that I would dislike some of the older sequels if I went back to watch them now. I would be likely to approach them without a very open mind, expecting them to be of poor quality.
I personally strongly dislike most sequels that are made to disney movies. The original stories are so just so full of life that the sequels just seem to be trying way too hard to make another plot line that will sell seats. I remember watching the second cinderella once, and it was practically painful! I mean don't get me wrong, i LOVE Disney movies, but I also feel like they do come from original works, and those works should be respected and the plot shouldnt be dragged out and re-dragged out until the bitter end.
Plus might I add, that they didn't start making these sequels until almost a decade later in some cases! which can also mean different artists, different actors, different directors, all of which completely change the tone and the intent of the film.
Post a Comment