What if Disney got the rights to Kimba?

[Bigdog]

[QUOTE=Bigdog;170538][QUOTE=Tetsuwan Atom;170442]Well Disney wound't want to have anything to do with it after the lion king came out anyway but the reason you come up with this is because of the 1965 anime right ?

well every Tezuka fan knows that that series was dumbed down because the American sponsor NBC Enterprises that simply wanted to pay tons of money to get what they wanted a Bambi like story and din't want real violence and blood etc.

I know that Disney in the past made more mature stories they even animated a short film about adolf Hitler and some more Natzi stuff but they don't really do that anymore do they ever since they have been focusing on that 3D Crap they only have been making very childish works i don't even think DR Tezuka woud have been a fan of the Disney of today if i say so myself.

Of course disney has always done works like that but in the past there still was some violence and deep thoughts into there stories and stuff and they don't have that anymore do they ?
so there you go.

Wow...I never realised that they were that much alike, from the thorns to the stampede...

If Disney did make a re-make, however (which nowadays they probably will not do, given the fact that they already made TLK and its two sequels) instead of The Lion King, maybe Disney did not want the plot to be a complete replica of Kimba's, even if they were very much alike? I honestly have no idea... Disney officially denied the claim, saying it is extremely coincedental, and no-one except for the people at Disney knows if they ever tried to acquire the rights or not, and even if they did apparently they did not succeed.

As for the human parts, I really don't see the fact that humans have to be in every film involving animals, with humans always playing out the villains and stuff. Kimba was the original one to introduce this I guess, and originally the plot was great, but now everyone is doing it. Originally the 'human-animal relationships' were good, but nowadays is it getting a bit repetitive? If I speak about The Lion King, and not about Kimba the White Lion (pretending that I've never heard of Kimba), if The Lion King also featured humans in any way, I personally believe that film would be absolutely ruined.
I actually watched The Lion King when I was about 5-6 years old or so, and I thought that it was actually a damn good movie. Then, I have not heard about Kimba the White Lion or the alleged copyright claims. It's kind of just a pity that Disney did not make a Kimba re-make instead of their own, and then the humans are okay since it is a remake.

Or maybe Disney themselves think that their plot is the best...?

The human plot ,while a bit unnecessary , did provide a backbone to the series but it is overdone in the traditional sense. If The Lion King was a remake, I could see humans being the minor characters /villains at best while the animals are at the forefront like Rise of the Planet of the Apes because otherwise, the film would not be as good. I agree with you on that.

But if it were done as Kimba , I think it would have possibly diverted from the dub and took direct inspiration from the manga because Disney wasn't afraid to have deaths and some violence as NBC was. And since it's animated and Disney, they could get away with it . I do like Timon and Pumbaa though.[/QUOTE]yeha Timon and Pumbaa is pretty funny I wasn't referring to the disney at that time in the Lion King where some deaths indeed.

Toy story was more the less the blame for it though i do like that films it was de gateway to those 3d movies and for some reason they where more and more for little kids like Cars and stuff that's just trash a cheap way to sell merchandise for years to come for some reason because i don't even get why they promoting the hell out of it that particular title.[/QUOTE]

The only tragedy about the best 3D CG Disney and Dreamworks films are that by all of the effort they put into the hand-drawing was wasted for 3D when they would've been better as hand drawn, whether digital or cel.

The list of them are:

-How to Train Your Dragon- Probably the best run for their money Miyazaki has ever had . Like Monooke with Dragons.

-Kung Fu Panda film series- If you have ever seen the prelim. artwork they did for these films , you would know CG ruined it.

-UP, Monsters Inc, Incredibles .Basically Pixar sans CARS films.

In short, while 3D CG animation is not inherently bad , it's just that they do it for every animated film it's tiring. With how similar they look to each other, they just blend into a constant film with no distinct taste on the outside. While the same can be said for 2D animation, there are so many styles that can be taken advantage of while every CG film not made by Pixar tries to be a Pixar copy.

But it could be from the short time 3D CG films have existed.

[AprilSeven]

My husband - an illustrator who started out PAINTING paperback book covers (mostly romances and westerns) - agrees with what Bigdog points. The limitations of CG work in it's present stage of development hinder the ability to reflect the individual styles of artists that made 2D animation so charming and compelling.

And maybe it comes down to 2D simply doesn't work in 3D. What is fantasy (and the human mind transposes into "real") becomes creepy and clownish when a "cartoon" is no longer "flat" but "round" and yet still unnatural.

some of the lighting and depth of field issues so apparently in earlier cg images are improving, but it's still not "right" somehow...

[Bigdog]

My husband - an illustrator who started out PAINTING paperback book covers (mostly romances and westerns) - agrees with what Bigdog points. The limitations of CG work in it's present stage of development hinder the ability to reflect the individual styles of artists that made 2D animation so charming and compelling.

And maybe it comes down to 2D simply doesn't work in 3D. What is fantasy (and the human mind transposes into "real") becomes creepy and clownish when a "cartoon" is no longer "flat" but "round" and yet still unnatural.

some of the lighting and depth of field issues so apparently in earlier cg images are improving, but it's still not "right" somehow...

From This :


To this:


I would post more , but just look up the art books for yourselves. For how Po looks in the final design, it looks generic unlike the concept art which shows his character. They might as well just done a simplified CG-friendly design and got rid of Marlot because barely any of the character of his Po was cheapened by the 3D.

There are a few films, like The Incredibles, that can do 3D CG to its advantage and really accomplish what 2D could not,but most of them don't have that depth much like how their live action counterparts have that very problem. They use it when it's either not needed or as a crutch much like any animation format can be used.

[AprilSeven]

OMG that's painful to look at. One is expressive and the other looks like a child's coloring book.

I daresay they also use CG because it's financially in their interest. Just look at the age of the people who create these movies (yes, the managerial folks are more mature, but the stock-and-trade animators are very young - also interns (known as "babies") who cost little or nothing.

There is nothing of a seasoned artist's effort in these movies. And the writing isn't what it used to be either.

Some day - hopefully? - things will return. But for now, it's a fast and furious race to the bottom line. People in their 20's once looked forward to being a seasoned professional in their 50's. Now people in their 40's don't even know if they'll FIND WORK in their 50's. It's backwards.

[Bigdog]

OMG that's painful to look at. One is expressive and the other looks like a child's coloring book.

I daresay they also use CG because it's financially in their interest. Just look at the age of the people who create these movies (yes, the managerial folks are more mature, but the stock-and-trade animators are very young - also interns (known as "babies") who cost little or nothing.

There is nothing of a seasoned artist's effort in these movies. And the writing isn't what it used to be either.

Some day - hopefully? - things will return. But for now, it's a fast and furious race to the bottom line. People in their 20's once looked forward to being a seasoned professional in their 50's. Now people in their 40's don't even know if they'll FIND WORK in their 50's. It's backwards.

There's one part of the film I do admire :the 2D intro and the special on the Furious Five. It is almost like Samurai Jack in a way.

Priest had a similar intro but that was done by Genndy Tarkovsky himself.

I did find the writing for these films I listed to be on par with the older stuff, just that the animation needs to advance more so the style can be integrated.I would love if they had found a way to give 3D CGI the look and feel of 2D animation so they could do things it would take traditional and digital 2D a lot of time and money to do. That's what I can see 10-20 years down the road what would occur for CGI.

If 3D CG animated films were also taken to the same level as their live action counterparts in quality , it would blow our minds. The biggest problem is that they don't put effort in the motion capture animation where it looks absolutely creepy like in Polar Express, though I liked the film to bits unlike in films. 3D CGI is not , repeat, a horrible animation format as it is just a relatively new tool in a series of tools that has only begun to ripen so I don't expect it to be able to embrace differing styles in any meaningful way for some time.

It is sad that people who want to make their life's work in animation are being screwed over ,and since I'm watching this to see what career I am going to take up because while I want to do work on animation primarily as a concept artist , writer and creator, there's no way to ensure having a job in the long term anymore. I might just go for live action film and or Television work for those very fields if I do not get into the comic industry because the film industry is in a standstill while the small screen is becoming the new theater for many.

There will be a renaissance, that is for certain. But not for a bit.

[AtomXKoisuru]

Disney already stole Kimba~! Simba, is just a remake of Kima... >

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4GR0DconsU

[Androids101]

Disney already stole Kimba~! Simba, is just a remake of Kima... >

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4GR0DconsU

Erm... this is the point of discussion for this thread? We've already established that. Although I'm still opposed to them practically stealing.

[Bigdog]

[QUOTE=Koi-suru Atom lover;171907]Disney already stole Kimba~! Simba, is just a remake of Kima... >

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4GR0DconsU

Erm... this is the point of discussion for this thread? We've already established that. Although I'm still opposed to them practically stealing.[/QUOTE]

Apparently it happened with Nadia and Atlantis : the Lost Empire too where Disney ripped Anno's anime off supposedly.

I love Atlantis though.

[Androids101]

I did not know about that.

As for the name, I just found out that Simba means 'lion' in Swahili.

Kimba, on the other hand, means 'bushfire' in Australian.

[Bigdog]

I did not know about that.

As for the name, I just found out that Simba means 'lion' in Swahili.

Kimba, on the other hand, means 'bushfire' in Australian.

Simba was the original name for Kimba right until they abruptly changed in a homage to one of the higher up's daughters named Kimberly, thus Kimba.

That is interesting Kimba means bushfire.