Disney Movie Sequels

[crayauchtin]

You can't count The Rescuers Down Under on this list of "Disney Sequels" because, if I'm not mistaken, it was also based on one of The Rescuers novels by Margery Sharp. Even if I am mistaken and there was no Australian book in that series, The Rescuers was at least based on a series from the beginning whereas all these other films are based on stand alone stories that did not continue and did not have sequels. I think that helps The Rescuers Down Under immensely.

[kyranthia]

Well, Tarzan also had several books too.  And Winnie the Pooh had multiple books as well.  The sequels with those characters have been kinda mixed.

As for the Rescuers, I don't know if there was a definite book that had an Australian setting.

[crayauchtin]

I didn't even know they made a sequel to Tarzan.

As for the Winnie the Pooh, with the possible exception of the latest movie which I didn't see, every movie and tv episode was pretty consistent and pretty in line with the books (not that they used stories from the books or poems, but in the behavior of the characters and such).

[GrahamRocks!]

You think this should be relabelled The Disney Movies Topic? We seem to be discussing all our favorites aside from the Aladdin movies anyway.

As for Winnie the Pooh... I feel bad about the newest one. See, my Mama loves those stories (and so do I, having grown up with them), and we'd planned on seeing it in theaters together. But, I have a certain rule when it comes to movies based around books I like: before seeing the movie, re-read the book(s) the movie is based on, and then once you see the movie try and pick out any differences you see between the book and the film if there are any.

That doesn't seem so bad, right? Except for one problem. I couldn't find my "Complete Collection of Winnie the Pooh" book anywhere! so, we ended up missing the theater run and I've just now found it again.

*sigh* Maybe one of my little cousins will get it someday.

[Lambonius]

But, I have a certain rule when it comes to movies based around books I like: before seeing the movie, re-read the book(s) the movie is based on, and then once you see the movie try and pick out any differences you see between the book and the film if there are any.

That is a ridiculous rule, made even more terrible by the fact that you actually passed up the opportunity spend quality time with your mom because of it.

[GrahamRocks!]

... Thanks for making me feel bad first thing in the morning there, buddy.

[KatieHal]

Play nice, kids.

And GR, now that you found the book, you could always rent the movie to watch together.

[snabbott]

My rule for movies based on books I like is to pretend they have nothing to do with the book- often, that's not far from the truth.
It works better if you see the movie and then read the book (except that you miss out on the book in the meantime). That way it's not a disappointment when you find out how much better the book is.

[Blackthorne]

It works better if you treat each individual work as it's own entity, rather than spend needless amounts of time comparing and contrasting them - so much so that it gets to the point where you miss out on the enjoyment of either.

In most cases, personally, I find that books are better merely because of the nature of the medium.  The stories can be fleshed out with more detail and a generally more intimate and intricate nature.  But films have their merits too - it's a different method of storytelling.  Sometimes I think comparing books and films is like comparing, say, Coq au Vin to Bubble Tape.  Sure, both are considered "food", but one is a sumptuous meal, and the other is a fun snack.  Sometimes, I want to sit down and eat the Coq au Vin, and savor it over time while sitting at a table.  Other times I want to chew bubble gum while I kick some rocks around outside.  Point is, both have their place.


Bt

[KatieHal]

And now we know one of Bt's hobbies is kicking rocks and chewing bubble gum.

[Lambonius]

And now we know one of Bt's hobbies is kicking rocks and chewing bubble gum.

But he's all out of gum.

Sorry, Graham.  I basically meant what Bt said, but I could have put it more nicely. 

[GrahamRocks!]

No hard feelings, you two.

[Blackthorne]

And now we know one of Bt's hobbies is kicking rocks and chewing bubble gum.

Katie, you've met me.  It's really not that hard to imagine now, is it?



Bt

[Delling]

It offers an explanation for why your avatars mouth is moving all the time.

[kyranthia]

I didn't even know they made a sequel to Tarzan.

As for the Winnie the Pooh, with the possible exception of the latest movie which I didn't see, every movie and tv episode was pretty consistent and pretty in line with the books (not that they used stories from the books or poems, but in the behavior of the characters and such).

There's a Tarzan II movie that's an 'interquel' of Tarzan's life as a kid.  There was also Tarzan and Jane, but that was more the pilot to the animated series.   I gotta admit, I never say Tarzan II but the animated series was decent at least.

As for Winnie the Pooh - agreed.  the series and most of the sequels kept to the personalities of the characters.  They were usually at least cute, if not all that memorable. 

[Blackthorne]

I'm just glad there's no sequel to The Great Mouse Detective or Oliver and Company!


Bt

[crayauchtin]

SUCH good movies Bt, but a sequel would be awful you're right!

[Blackthorne]

SUCH good movies Bt, but a sequel would be awful you're right!

Yeah, I dig the movies - but I think sequels to those would just be a faceplant!


Bt

[Deloria]

Awww, I got here late. Kayak-travel is way too slow.

I think it's nice to have traditions/rules that you think have value.

[MangoMercury]

And now we know one of Bt's hobbies is kicking rocks and chewing bubble gum.

Better than chewing rocks and kicking bubble gum