Return to Neverland

[wdwguide]

Am I just confused, or was Return to Neverland not supposed to be a direct-to-video sequel to Peter Pan? In the latest Disney Magazine it says something about "arriving in theaters" next February...

 

[Banzai]

Return to Neverland is Theaters...Cinderella 2, Hunchaback 2, and Mulan 2 are DTV.

 

[wdwguide]

There are just too many sequels to keep track of these days...

 

[Another Voice]

It’s a change in strategy. After the huge sales of ‘Lady and The Tramp 2’, people figured out that the movie could have made some more money in theaters before the home video release. Besides a couple extra million, a theatrical release also serves as advertising for the home video; and with the cutbacks in Feature Animation, these films will help pad out the schedule a bit.

It should be noted that just because the films are going into theaters does not mean they’re getting a larger budget (which is what happened with ‘Toy Story 2’). The not-direct-to-video releases are still the same television animation produced movies that they always were.

 

[Liam]

The quality in these sequels is awful. I know they make money but if you love good animation these films are hard to watch

 

[donald@home]

Cinderella is my favorite film and the thought of Cinderella 2 is just sickening. Is nothing sacred? Remember when the name Disney used to stand for quality? This whole sequel trend will help sink Disney even quicker. Don't any of the decision makers realize that?

 

[pgjam]

What is with disney and sequels, they all end up being bad. They are just ruining memorable movies!!!!!!!

 

[Jennasis]

EXCUSE ME????? Did somebody say CINDERELLA 2??????

Whose ridiculous idea of a joke is that? I would sooner gouge my own eyes out with rusty forks than watch such a travesty. thank God Walt is dead.

 

[fab5101]

Just my 2 cents here.....

I thought that LT2 and LM2 were great sequels. I really enjoyed the story lines and Esp since a lot of the original versions are OOP, this is a good way to tide the crowds over until the time comes for the CLASSIC release (example--Cinderella approx release date 2006).

At TDS there is a preview for the Return to Neverland and it looks great! It's about Jane, Wendy's daughter..kind of like an animated HOOK...but Peter Pan is still (and always will be) a boy. I guess what I want to say is...don't knock it before you try it.

 

[April76]

I have to agree with Fab5101... I enjoyed the sequels; and maybe they don't "wow" folks the way the originals did , I think they really do serve a purpose --- what other good entertainment is out there for kids who want to see more of their favorite characters?

I saw some clips at the TDS today for the Peter Pan sequel and it looks good... it reminded me just how much I really enjoyed Peter, Tink, Capt. Hook and the rest of the gang (and now I'll probably watch the original again)... I think this will be fun!

Rather than introducing more "uninteresting" characters that don't remind folks of Disney (sorry, Recess comes to mind)... why not give them more of the familiar characters? (Here's hoping that it will also cause the company to put more classic movie character mdse in the stores for us!!!! )

 

[DisneyFanGuy]

Well, I agree that sequels are fine if the quality and storyline are good, AND it's modern material. But if it isn't, you destroy the "Magic" (There's that word again, but I think it applies here).

My daughter waited months eagerly to get Little Mermaid 2. She saved her allowance and bought it as soon as it came out. (She was 11 at the time). I heard about it every week for months!

She HATED THE MOVIE. HATED IT! She still talks about it 6 months later. She expected Disney quality and instead got.............?

My 8 year old son REALLY wanted to see Lady And The Tramp 2. We rented it. He liked it, but the rest of us couldn't even sit through it. My wife is a big fan of that original, and her opinion of the Disney Brand was hurt by them even considering a sub-standard sequel to her favorite Disney Classic, and when she finally saw the thing she was so mad she could have spit nails. She laughs with her friends about Disney tossing "crap" into the market to make money. Smooth move, Disney. My wife plans the trips.

I have heard about Dumbo 2, Peter Pan 2, etc., and I am just sick. Disney's market advantage is their brand, and if you play games with the integrity of your brand you are risking the customers who make you successful. Use any material after 1970 for sequels if you like, and make sure the quality is good, but leave the classics alone please.

The Magic Kingdom is growing old. The reason that people love going there is the magic of the characters and the fantasy of their youth. (That's why I love going anyway.) The attractions are NOT state of the art any longer, and don't need to be as long as people love the brand and the characters. These DTV sequels are a BAD MOVE. If people begin to laugh at the characters because of stupid and cheap sequels...........

OK, I am done now! Rant ended.

 

[Laurajean1014]

I agree that not all sequels are great (look at all those Rocky ones, or Lethal Weapon) but Disney does capture the kiddies. My 5 yo DS loved the LM2, TS2, and thought LT2 was ok. We can't wait to pick up the next video that comes along!

Can we say that about the next Land before time series, or Rocky, Lethal Weapon or Beverly Hills Cop or Batman? No!

 

[JeffH]

"...But if it isn't, you destroy the "Magic" "
My Tasha loved LMII and LatTII, but never watches PocII or LKII, so I guess they have both lost their magic. No, wait she LOVES Fantasmic, which is based heavily on Poc, and loves anything LK related (although she never watched the original movie anymore, or much to begin with).
These sequels breath new life into old classics, bringing them into the new century.

 

[hopemax]

I wonder what people in 15 years will think about the animated movies released by Disney in the past?

Today's high schoolers will be going to the DVD store (or however it's done then) picking up movies for their 5 year olds, because of the almost 100 year association that Disney is something that your kids can watch and it won't drive Mom and Dad up a wall. They will look at the rack and all those direct-to-video releases will be sitting next to the theater releases.

Will the Mom's & Dad's know which ones were the direct-to-video (DTV) releases?

Will they bother to look at the packaging enough to know that Cinderella 2 wasn't made by the same group of people that made Cinderella and know that the Cinderella animators didn't suddenly "lose it"? That it was made by a group of television animators and the budgets to match.

If they look at the year the movie was released, what will their perception be if they only find 1 out of 4 movies (1 theater release, 3 DTV's) in a certain year are worthwhile for parents to sit through?

How will watching a bunch of then older releases that fluctuate so much in quality, affect their decision to take their kids to the 2017 summer or Christmas release?

It may be raking in the dough for Disney now, but I wonder what it will cost them in brand loyalty and association when today's teens are the parents. I suppose that isn't entering the decision makers minds today, afterall in 15 or 20 years they'll most likely be at another job or enjoying their retirement. But if I were a stockholder, I think I'd worry about the long term effects.