Okay, so I already discussed how great art ripped into Disney, but here I’ll discuss how Disney simply ripped off great art. There’s a significant difference between the two.
OK, so now it should be obvious where the ripoff occurred. The difference is that South Park actually skewered and satirized Disney, while conveying something of actual depth re: p.c., political censorship, and intolerance of all stripes—even p.c. stripes. In other words, it completely turns Disney’s usage of it on its head and it’s not only satire and tweaking, but outright pastiche.
Disney, on the other hand, merely stole the techniques that Stanley Kubrick used so brilliantly in 2001: A Space Odyssey, for no particular reason, aside from the hippies of the late ’60s and early ’70s. In 2001, it conveys intergalactic, and possibly interdimensional travel; thus it serves a very basic narrative purpose, despite claims to the contrary by naysayers—Kubrick simply didn’t like condescending to his audiences and wrapping every aspect of a story up in a nice little bow. In Disney, it’s a gimmick.
Showing posts with label Walt Disney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Walt Disney. Show all posts
10/19/09
South Park Kicks Disney’s Ass
Dan and Jess mentioned a few South Park songs and rewatching them, I eerily realized they were parodies of some Disney songs from nearly 20 years ago. I looked it up online to match the songs, and here you can compare the parody to the original, and frankly, the riotous parodies trump the pabulum originals:
As I said, South Park is definitively better.
As I said, South Park is definitively better.
Fantasia
Given its vaunted reputation, one would think that Walt Disney's Fantasia would be, well, a good film.
It isn't. It's self-indulgent and a bit high-falutin'. The mix of Classical music with the cartoons has too much seriousness, and one need only compare any of the vignettes within with some of the classic Looney Tunes put out by Warner Bros. Especially those cartoons wherein Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck is involved in something artistic- such as cartoons where operas are spoofed, or where Bugs directs an orchestra.
To be fair, a segment like this can be seen as a precursor to music videos, which only came about decades later, but is it anything that stirs a desire to rewatch? I don't think so.
Example:
Ok, it's nice. I guess. But does it really entertain? Does it enlighten?
And this is the problem with all of the Walt Disney cartoons (even throough today's). They are well made, but forgettable. There is nothing approaching the ribaldry of Bugs and Daffy.
The Looney Tunes were the rock-n-roll of animation, whereas Disney was the parentally-approved pabulum kids were forced to watch.
But you're all grown up now, right?
It isn't. It's self-indulgent and a bit high-falutin'. The mix of Classical music with the cartoons has too much seriousness, and one need only compare any of the vignettes within with some of the classic Looney Tunes put out by Warner Bros. Especially those cartoons wherein Bugs Bunny or Daffy Duck is involved in something artistic- such as cartoons where operas are spoofed, or where Bugs directs an orchestra.
To be fair, a segment like this can be seen as a precursor to music videos, which only came about decades later, but is it anything that stirs a desire to rewatch? I don't think so.
Example:
Ok, it's nice. I guess. But does it really entertain? Does it enlighten?
And this is the problem with all of the Walt Disney cartoons (even throough today's). They are well made, but forgettable. There is nothing approaching the ribaldry of Bugs and Daffy.
The Looney Tunes were the rock-n-roll of animation, whereas Disney was the parentally-approved pabulum kids were forced to watch.
But you're all grown up now, right?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)