It's surely only a matter of time before we see the Wicked Queen as the Witch catch a branch on the way down as she falls to her death and clamber her way back up the mountainside and we'll have Snow White 2 to contend with!! God forbid and perish the thought!!

The only thing I'd like to see Disney do is to fully animate the Soup eating music In Your Soup sequence which currently only exists as a pencil test animation sequence/soundtrack.

My wife is one of the people that buys this crap. Occasionaly some of the sequels are watchable, but the idea of Bambi and Dumbo 2 makes me ill.

Disney has no respect for their own history. Its sad.

i would imagine you'll see movies made for each experiment that preceded stitch before you see an SE for Black Cauldron aka the worst disney movie ever.

while i like some of this movie, the on screen death of the horned king (which in itself is unusual for disney) is so gruesome it seems more appropriate for a horror movie than a family movie.

The Aladdin sequels were good at least.

if you have the dumbo 60th ann. dvd check out the more section in special features for a preview of dumbo 2

Disney may have used to stand for quality and not quantity, but they have done what any other corporation does over the years... they get bigger and they expand and have more money to throw around. Anybody with two days of education can figure that out. Of course they're catering to children! Why not? They'll be entertained by much more than an adult would, and they love seeing their favorite characters come back time after time. Those of us who grow up and know the difference between Disney's true classics and the money makers they've conjured up since then, truly see these sequals as abominations. But you know, these crappy sequals are released direct to home video. The movies that Disney make and make with quality, come out in the theaters and those are always geared for a general audience, kids and adults. There's a huge market out there for kids, so why shouldn't they cater to them? I'll spit on these titles and I'll never put one of those crap-fests in my collection, but children enjoy them and that's who they're meant for. If you can just live with the fact that you don't have to be a completist with everything and you don't have to pick these movies up, if you cant live with just the original film that you fell in love with, then really whining about this is just kinda silly. Let the kids continue to go on adventures with their favorite characters, while you enjoy the classics, that's the way they've been made to be enjoyed.

But that is just it, no one is saying not to cater to kids. They could create new characters and new franchises just as well but they wouldn't sell 10 million copies the first day. So it really isn't about catering to kids, it all comes back to greed.

And I really don't think there is anything wrong with trying to continue some of these stories, if there is reason to. Daniel Clowes, for example, did an adaptation of an apparently real sequel to Sleeping Beauty for Little Lit (in which he said this was as the story was told 300 years ago). It involved deception and cannibalism, so I doubt Disney would ever touch that material for a movie, but the point is that there could be better sequels if people actually tried to make a better story rather than a product. At least the folks at Pixar had a good mind to do that for Toy Story 2.

I would be all for the sequels if they weren't rushed and weak and devoid of any spirit. I am sure there must be better material out there for Disney to mine than these crappy movies, and it's not Home on the Range and Chicken Little.

Link?

I wonder if in Dumbo 2, the elephant and his little mouse friend get pissed drunk again. If I remember correctly, getting drunk made Dumbo fly the first time.

for the sake of conversation i will play devil's advocate.

Back in the Disney Hey day charachters from the movie did appear in other disney shorts...whether it be selling war bonds, playing a a charachter in a Xmas special, or making phone calls to the rest of the gang while they are out on the golf course. Walt Disney (the man) had no problem trying to make money. However I do believe at the heart of everything it had to be a good story. Disney is not beyond doing a good sequel...rescuers down under, and toy story 2 (I know its pixar).

Again i will state that I have always believed that happilly ever after should stay that way. I don't have as big a problem with sequels for modern disney movies really....it just tears me up when they go about adding on to a story where Walt himself left a fingerprint on it.

Rather than churning sequels, there are tons of children's stories and fairy tales which haven't yet been adapted; Goldilocks and the Three Bears, Hansel and Gretel, Little Red Riding Hood, Rumplestiltsken, etc.

Another thing Disney could do (which might p' more people off) is crossovers!

Tho - I would like to see a sequel to Robin Hood

I'm coming up with a number crunch. I think this has a 32.33--repeating, of course--percent chance of not sucking hard. And by that I mean it will still suck, just not as hard. It may take some divine intervention to prevent this from happening.

'least it comes with chicken

Movies aren't always about art though folks, remember that. When it comes to Disney trying to cater to the childrens market, they COULD go ahead and make cheap movies off of tales not yet used in Disneys classic collection but, from a business standpoint it's a sure fire way to make money if they just make sequals of characters that are already loved by children. That's why we have The Lion King 2, and then Timon & Pumbaa in Lion King 1 1/2, that's why there's so many Stitch movies on DVD, etc. If you were part of Disney and you had the option to make some sure fire cash, of course you would do it as well. Sometimes as the consumers we have to remember that these companies are just that, companies. In the end it's all about business. And from a business standpoint, these direct to home video sequals really is a no brainer for Disney as a company.

i think the biggest money saver on this is that all the charachter development is finished. You don't need to hire conceptial artist, because you have a good feel for what the charachters should look like. Thats a few more hand draw artist that don't get a job. It is also easy to secure voice actors for these cash cows for the modern day sequels. After the whole Robin Williams debacle they have used the secondary charachters more frequently in sequels.

Creating a new fairy tale would cost a lot, and the sad thing is people had not been going to hand drawn animation movies in recent years. Dreamworks piled on the flops for a while. Disney took note and has rethought there stance. No doubt that people don't want to see crappy animated movies. Home on the range and teacher's pet were supposed to be a revamp. These failed, ulike Lilo & Stitch which was off the disney Norm but well recieved.

I think it would be good if Disney created some new shorts to run before live action features...I would much rather see that than another Army/gatorade/fandango commercial.

I think the problem most people have, mzupeman2, is that Disney has always been a company, yet Disney has not always milked its franchises to death with cheap sequels. This is relatively recent behavior. Disney used to be profitable by creating original,* quality work.

*well, as original as you can get when basing most of your stories on fairy tales, etc.

True Duder, but still. There's much more opportunity out there now with the home video market than there was ever before. They've always been a company, but now more than ever they're able to cater to the children market on a much larger scale than they ever have. Home entertainment is at an all time high, it's all about the home entertainment now-a-days. I believe it's a much larger market than VHS ever was, and Disney sees this, and their utilizing this accessible source of media to earn the dollars. It all just boils down to one thing as I pretty much said in my last post:

If you were a company, and you see these opportunities knocking at your doorstep, you're going to take them. At the end of the day, it's about money. When there's more to be made, they'll take it.

Di$ney raped my childhood. How can I take the artistic integrity of Lilo and Stitch seriously with all these sequels?

That's all fine and dandy. However, give us something with substance. They are passing an inferior product on to a new generation. If they have such a good business sense, they should know that the reason that the Disney movies have held up so well over the years is because of the quality put into them. The parents loved them as kids, and would have probably loved poop on a string if presented in the right way, but unlike the poop on the string movies, the Disney movies they grew up with were good. So they would take their kids to see the movies when they came around again in the theaters, and when home video came around, that was a way for those kids to share these wonderful movies with their families.

They have the potential to do great sequels, and if the sequel can't be great, don't make it. They don't have to green light every idea that hits their table. These new movies are rushed products to make a fast buck, and it will bite Disney in the ass. Once the kids today who enjoyed these movies grow up, will they want to share them with their kids? Or will they see that wow, these movies really were not that great to begin with, and they will pass on them, maybe buy up reissued copies of Shrek and Madagascar to share with their kids instead?

Disney has always had the business sense to not only make money in the now, but invest in the future. This shoddy repackaging of their older characters into new movies says they have the business sense to make money in the now, but they really are not investing in the future too well.

If you haven't noticed, pretty much everything the newer generation watches is garbage, pure garbage. But a lot of our argument as for as that goes can be chalked up to one thing... we're the older generation.

Yes, it's happening boys and girls. We're growing up and as much of a horror story as it may sound, we're turning into our parents, where we had the good stuff and the upcoming generation has a bunch of garbage.

They do have potential to do great sequals but, they don't. If a sequal IS worthy of being a theatrical release, they do so, isn't that what happened with Toy Story 2? Come on man, there's tons of stuff that we watched when we were kids that todays generation would think is crap. We're always going to think what we enjoyed was quality, because it's what we grew up with, and that doesn't make it so.

It's just the old theory that every generation thinks that the world has hit a pinnacle with them at some point and will never reach the same height again. You see it in every generation! We're discouraged by crap-ass sequals from Disney, but the younger generation seems to really enjoy them, at least the young ones. And you know what? They'll love it and their kids will look at it someday and say 'boy that SUCKED mom, how did you watch that?', while they're watching stuff that's probably even MORE watered down compared to our standards.

I'm not debating that their new movies suck, because I think they do. I think they suck and again, it's because I'm older and no longer interested. All of these old 80's cartoon shows we see on DVD, we buy because of nostalgia and because we grew up with them! And these kids will do the same. Life will go on and continue this pattern.

Disney isn't investing in their future though? How so? They're still making films. You still have your big hits ever so often, Toy Story, Toy Story 2, Monsters Inc, Finding Nemo, Incredibles... and they'll continue to make stuff theatrically that hits the spot. Just because they have more garbage infesting the home theater market than they have hits, it doesn't matter.

They're still doing big projects. They'll always have big projects and continue to be the leader in family entertainment in animation. To them, all of these side sequals that cost them next to nothing, are just side projects that won't effect them in a negative way what-so-ever, it's just making them extra cash until the next big movie comes along.

Yeah but then wouldn't little Ryo freeze right off?

I really don't think that is the case. There are some Disney channel shows and what might be considered kids/family movies that are brand new that I like. I can probably go to the DVD section of Best Buy and peruse their family section and find a dozen or so new titles I would be willing to watch right now. And not everything from my childhood is gold, you know. What I thought was mind blowingly great when I was 7 isn't always viewed in the same way when you are 27. I watched Battle Beyond the Stars after 20 years and could not believe I let my young eyes think that movie was anywhere half way decent.

There is a bunch of garbage for EVERY generation. Kids today will soon grow up as we did and realize what from their child hood was good and what was garbage, and the Disney sequels will wind up in the garbage pile.

As will countless films I've purchased from my childhood, such as Popeye. That movie doesn't hold up for me anymore, at all. Oye.

I meant Roy. He's the looker in the family.