Originally Posted by srw1000
While one of the two new Snow White coming out may be good movies, it's hard to imagine them supplanting the Disney version in the minds of the public.
Meaning that Snow White is more an animated character in people's mind. Which is my point from the beginning: some characters are made (so to speak...) for animation, others for live action. Again, I didn't say it wasn't possible
to make these new versions of them, just that it doesn't work
Toy Story was used as an example to challenge the claim that was put forth: Using real people and real locations will always trump animation, no matter how much those fascinated with technology for its own sake proselytize otherwise.
Are you defining success as artistic, critical, or by financial gain? In the short and non-exhaustive list there are examples that would meet any of those standards.
I think Equilibrium is an excellent film, but it certainly wasn't successful
. In art in general, I think quality has nothing to do with 'success'. Yes to me success in more 'money-related' than anything. Arstistic value is something else. I'd also say that any artist wants to be successful.
Yes, Disney markets their animated product to a specific audience. But that shouldn't be taken as proof that animation can only be made for children. Some of these films have a large crossover audience.
Take the movie Up, for example. Do you really think that the prologue was aimed solely at children? Are they fully capable of understanding and appreciating the life-long bond that Carl and Ellie shared?
I agree, but Pixar movies (which to me aren't pure Disney movies) are an exception, the Cars franchise being their weakest imo. That sequence you mention is amazing.
As for Beauty and the Beast, that goes back to the question of what defines success.
Not really. Disney made a fine film and it was very successful. But to me, Cocteau's Beauty And The Beast is unmatched when it comes to artistic value. In that case I wasn't particularly referring to the film's financial success, but to the film as an artistic entity
(I refuse to say product