From: rcook@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Robert Cook)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.disney
Subject: Re: my aladdin review....
Date: 21 Jan 1993 17:37:06 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego
NNTP-Posting-Host: sdcc13.ucsd.edu

In article <NN6oXB5w165w@cybernet.cse.fau.edu> phase@cybernet.cse.fau.edu (Phase) writes:
>
> This is what I think of Aladdin and the way Disney is headed.
>If you have flames, whatever, but I know my opinion is different from 
>most others, and I don't wanna hear your personal attacks and threats via 
>e-mail . that is ridiclious.

Yes, if unwarranted.  It'd be kind of nice if you'd consider the
audience you're writing to.  This is a suggestion, not a flame.

>      It's new and it's hot, it's number one on the film charts
>    and it's got a merchandising deal on everything from everything
>    from statues to underwear.

That has little to do with the movie.  For those who are really into
Aladdin, it's nice to collect some of the bric-a-brac; I do.  The
movie shouldn't be judged by that.

>          Don't be swayed by it's box office success, Disneys
>    Aladdin is the worst Disney animated film ever. However strikingly
>    animated, dazzling and polished, it remarkably destitute of anything
>    of substance or quality. Aladdin tells the Disneyized version of the
>    ancient Arabin Nights tale with almost no continuity or respect for
>    the original . It shamelessly tries to cash in on the formulatic,

They don't have to "respect" the original.  Why would they?  You can
say that the original is better (read it and see--I don't think it's
better), but there's no contract between Disney and the long-dead
writers of the Arabian Nights.

>    tired plot that made the last 3 disneys hits such a finnancial 
>    success: A handsome hero, meets a beautiful heroine, but some evil
>    creature or even prevents them from falling in love, the obstacle 
>    is overcome and they all live happily ever after. It's that simple-
>    and it gets old after a while.

That's exactly my opinion, but only for Aladdin because it so closely
resembles The Little Mermaid (I've written at length on this).
However, both films offer a lot more than just their plots--it's not
hard to see this, even if you don't like what they offer.  Beauty and
the Beast is much different than the other two recent fairy tales,
IMHO.  Generalizing can be okay in a limited sense if you can prove it
case-by-case.  And if you want something to blame, blame the audience.
Case in point: I thought that The Rescuers Down Under (1990) was a
wonderful film--great characters, lots of humor, a terrific musical
score, and some very touching moments.  And it's anything not like the
other movies you're considering.  Look at its box office figures,
though, and you'll see a different story.  The reason?  Who knows?
Maybe Disney should've done MORE marketing.

The rest of your review seems to be pretty easy for Disney fans to
read and digest; except for...

>         I'd reccomed Aladdin for children under 12 (who never seem
>    to care much about plot or quality), or very slow adults only.
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Please don't be condescending.  You can claim the First Amendment
(which is starting to sound like a cliche), but then there's
etiquette to consider.  Try to be fair to Disney and to others on
rec.arts.disney.  And if you think you did something wrong (which is
improbable), then say it!  I make boo-boos all the time. :-)


- Robert Cook
Newsgroups: rec.arts.disney