I was thinking about Ratatouille tonight, and I realized something. Could Gustaue’s be a metaphor for Disney after Walt’s death? Gustaue put his heart and soul into all of his dishes and tried to make them the best they could be, not standing for cheapness, as Walt did with his movies. After Gustaue died, Skinner ruined his good name by making cheap but money making microwave meals, which kinda remind me of a lot of the movies Disney comes out with these days. A coincidence? Or a hidden message?
Looks at High School Musical
You know, now that I think of it… That’s a really interesting observation. Hehe
I’ve thought about that, and they’re really similar scenarios. I don’t know if it’s a coincidence or not, but it’s very clever!
Wow, never thought of that! Good thinking.
I never thought of that. But it is indeed an intresting comparison.
I’d never thought of that, but now that you mention it, Rac_Rules, I can really see the comparison. I guess Skinner could be interpreted as Disney’s Eisner.
Walt Disney films are probably not the same anymore.
However, not all of the new movies are that bad. Some people don’t like the movies now so much that they judge some new movies without seeing it. But at least there are some good ones left, in my opinion. 
I really enjoyed Enchanted, because it gives you the familiar feeling from classic Disney, Meet the Robinsons, because “keep moving foward” was part of Walt Disney’s quote, and Pixar’s films, obviously, and some others. 
At least they’re trying, and taking risks to see what people like in movies.
Just like how people still go the Gusteau’s even after he died.
I actually look foward to Bedtime Stories. Don’t stone me, just stating my opinion.
^ There is an undeniable change in the Walt Disney company from years past to now.
I think most particularly the company used to pump out a classic 2D animated film after 2D animated film. Animated films that has posed an inspiration to fellow animators and loving fans around the world.
Now that the new millennium has struck, the only true success they’ve made was Lilo & Stitch - but that was years a go now. What do we get now in the 2D animation department? Besides straight-to-DVD sequels, nothing. The Disney 2D animation department has felt like it has deteriorated.
Even after having acquired Pixar under their arms, Disney STILL makes CGI films like Chicken Little, Meet the Robinsons, the upcoming Bolt, or that Chihuahua movie that looks terrible - which makes no sense whatsoever. Why would Disney have two separate CGI departments now making CGI films the same years? That only makes their own company compete with itself.
On another note - our other entertainment by Disney isn’t so hot anymore either. We get to enjoy (Or shall I say, the kids shall enjoy) High School Musical sequels, and Hannah Montana crud. Why? Because it’s instant cash for Disney!
I think Disney has lost its touch over recent years. It’s no longer about producing quality films that even they love to see, but it’s about producing cheep products that are targeted towards a lesser target-audience to make a quick profit.
I’m sorry for any Disney fans out there - heck, I’m a big Disney fan (Nods to user name), but I mostly appreciate the pre-millennium Disney, when things were different. Times sure change.
I think there was an article about Bob Iger that mentioned that underlying theme. How Michael Eisner was coughing up frozen foods (cheap DVD sequels), and then along came the talented Bob Iger to set things right. Persoanlly, I find Remy comparable to John Lasseter.
Hopefully Remy will come along and revive Disney’s 2D department and have them produce something that isn’t a sequel
But that’s a very interesting comparison. And I’m sure the thought of it passed through Brad Bird’s mind while writing it.
Double the movies mean double the money. Plus, those movies probably have an extremely high success rate if only because people will mistake them as Pixar flicks.
^ Actually I believe since John Lasseter became Creative Adviser of the Walt Disney Company, I believe he stated the same thing. Now that Disney wholeheartedly owns Pixar Animation Studios, they should be making all the CGI films.
I believe he also said over the years they will try to bring back 2D animation - which is kinda true. Because they’re gonna release The Princess and the Frog. So yeah, hopefully that means there will be a trend of 2D animated films in the future by Disney.
Actually, unfortunately, Rupunzel, the next one, will be in the old look but 3-D. Hopefully, though, Princess and the Frog will be different.
Yeah, Princess and the Frog will be 2D.
I wonder what others there might be after that one that will be 2D.
It also makes me wonder why we’re still getting things like Bolt and Rapunzel… Not entirely sure, but my guess is they could have already been in development before Lasseter’s decision that Disney should produce 2D animated films again… Or maybe a change of mind? I guess it is too early to speculate, because even if Disney is still moving back to old grounds, it might take a few years before we actually see the significant changes.
I wanna watch Rapunzel and the Frog Princess.
Of course, I miss Classic Disney, however, one thing I enjoy about most fairy tale twists is that the female characters are more believable and tougher than classic Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, or Cinderella. One thing that irritates me about some classic Disney is how the women seem to be obedient and not at all like strong feminists. I’m more into Mulan, Belle, and Meg, even though they’re not really princesses.
OK, to keep from straying too far off topic…
.
However, do you think that Pixar wanted Disney to notice this hidden message?
I don’t think the feminist part (If at all) has anything to do with 2D vs. 3D animation. I think it’s just more of a times thing, and yes times sure do change, as you see more of the recent Disney Princesses have stronger personalities.
I wonder… If Brad Bird really intended it to be like this. Now that we all think of it - it’s a really elaborate message. But I just wonder if it was intended to be that way or not… But sure thing is, this isn’t the first time Pixar movies have had some sort of nod to Disney in one way or another.
Like in WALL-E, a lot of people said they hid an extinct Disneyland attraction in it called the “Wedway Peoplemover”. Fans rage for Disney to bring back that ride, and I wonder if the Peoplemover is really a hidden Easter egg in WALL-E, maybe it’s Pixar’s nod to Disney to bring it back.
I absolutely did not notice that at all. Now that you point it out…wow.
Sort of ashamed to say this, but I found it funny that Disney was sponsoring “Wall-E” after watching it. If you go into the other themes of it, it’s obviously bashing a bit on businesses that take quantity over quality in an effort to make quick profits.
I have faith in Disney. With Pixar, I feel that the glory of the past era will rise once again. However, with the pieces of art from Pixar, we’re also getting medicore movies, cheap teen idols, and knock-offs of classic movies from Disney.
Faith? A lot of us have it, but it’s slowly thinning out. Let’s hope a Remy emerges from this mess of a kitchen representing the name of Walt Disney.
I think Disney really hit rock bottom a few years ago when they fired ALL of their remaining hand-cartoonists, instead favoring the cheaper computer alternative. They had been laying them off for quite a while at a slow rate, then they laid off the remaining several hundred (or it might have been 1,000) all at once.
I like that they’re going back to it again, and I DO appreciate the stonger princesses (I’m rather militant about equal treatment, both racial and sexual. I don’t think women’s roles should be put down, I down think race should factor into ANY decision, and I strongly support men that wear what they want…there’s a famous quote that it’s impossible for a woman to cross-dress.)
Anyhoo, I really really hope that PIXAR has got Disney back on track again.
Woah woah woah woah wait. Hold up. This is getting a liittle mature…I really agree that as the times change, the view on women change. Snow White was made in a time that women where seen as small, fragile, and feminine. I don’t think ti has anything to do with the type of animation, just the time of it.
Ever since I first saw Ratatouille I noticed that it’s a very good metaphor film. I always imagined Remy as more of a Brad Bird, but yes, you’re summary fits quite well and makes more sense as a whole. Clearly Remy has some qualities of Brad Bird in him, after all, he wrote the film, but it is perhaps more apt to make him more akin to one of the founding fathers of Pixar, John Lasseter. It would be even better if Pixar followed through on leaving Disney and going on their own (I know why this didn’t work out, but still.) Because then it’s just like Remy running his very own restaurant at the end of the film, La Ratatouille. And if this was the first Pixar film free from Disney, as it was going to be, it would work out perfectly. But regardless, things seem to be working out, and the metaphor still holds strong. I can’t help but think Brad Bird had it in mind.
The comparison to the ‘cheapening’ of Gusteau’s made me think of how the Disney company just went out of it’s way to slap the name on anything. (I still don’t see how a plastic toothbrush looking like Cinderella can be considered ‘magical’).
Walt Disney was always the innovator, wanting to try new things. Like Gusteau says, ‘you may try things that do not always work.’ Disney did this, and in one way, that can be said of ‘Fantasia.’ We see it for it’s artistry all these years later, but at the time, some felt Disney was doing something that was too ‘high-brow.’
Of course, Walt took risks everywhere (with his brother Roy handling the finances, which seemed to really be a major task given Walt’s penchant for pushing the envelope). What I find amazing is that Walt risked his own money in many cases and such. In one interview, animator Milt Kahl remarked how Walt put his life insurance into the pot to get Disneyland made. Think about it-how many people who own a business will put in their own money or finances? Imagine if Michael Eisner just had said, ‘forget my bonus this year, I’m reinvesting it into the company to try some new things.’
I can see Remy moreso being an encapsulation of PIXAR as opposed to just one director. Remy holds to the ideals, but has his own ideas and ways to utilize them. The soup could almost be his way of saying ‘here’s something that I think people will like,’ and Skinner’s trying of it is kind of like the old ‘guard’ saying, ‘you’re playing with fire here…you want to shake things up, and that’s dangerous.’
Of course, there’s the idea of ‘doing something unexpected,’ or ‘follow the recipe.’ If you consider it, after Walt passed away, there were many who just ‘followed the recipe’ for many years, with the ideas of innovation and new story directions just getting sidelined (watching ‘Robin Hood,’ that film just seems to be a ‘follow the recipe’ film).