Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Eternia Lad takes in an early screening of Disney's LILO & STITCH!!!

Sounds cool. by JoeLove	Feb 26th, 2002 02:49:43 PM
A bit of a departure from the standard is always a good thing. Am I frist? I've always wondered how it would feel to be frist...
stitch!!! by auroraleigh	Feb 26th, 2002 02:51:06 PM
This is the first disney movie I've been excited about in a long time. I think the last decent one was Mulan and the last great one was Lion King. Hopefully I won't be disopointed by the little blue prankster! I've been cracking up everytime I see those previews.
Be careful! by user id indeed!	Feb 26th, 2002 03:10:43 PM
Don't get too attached to this movie, or else you'll be really annoyed when they make the sequel in fifty years. This has been a Moment with User ID Indeed!
Looks pretty cool... by Pongo	Feb 26th, 2002 03:34:27 PM
This one looks like it has a chance to be a winner...probably won't come close to the greatness of The Lion King (my all-time favorite movie), but still could be really good.
Hey! I liked HERCULES! That guy had issues! by superhero	Feb 26th, 2002 03:54:59 PM
OK, ok so it was a ripoff of Superman I and II mixed in with Michael Joran's life but, hey, I still liked it dagnabit!
Stitch is the King! by LeeScoresby	Feb 26th, 2002 04:02:09 PM
I've seen some of this one, and I concur. It's the best (and certainly the most original) Disney film in a long time. Although, I have to say, Hercules gets a much harder time of it than it really deserves. Basically, its a superhero movie designed as a Disney film and all the risks that this reviewer talks about the animators taking were taken then too. They overturned the traditional song and dance structure to have narrative gospel singing as the through line, the character design was wildly divergent, the action was exciting (the Hydra battle is an outstanding early application of CG), and except for the usual tie in song by micheal bolton, was very entertaining. Meg is the best, most independent Disney girl. Although she has a virtually nonexistent waist. Check out Hercules if you havent yet. You'll be pleasantly surprised!
Lilo has a beer and cheets on Stitch! by Son of JOHN TITOR	Feb 26th, 2002 04:52:35 PM
just wanted to get that out of my system.
Hercules? by SamWave	Feb 26th, 2002 05:25:14 PM
Mmm.. I liked it, but the "love story" angle was Sooo boring. Don't tell me it wasn't. Plus there was the really crappy song Meg sang near the end(not Hunckback crappy, but bad)... For some reason, I've always wanted to see an animated adaption of Dracula. Hmm. Anyway, Lilo and Stich sounds (and looks) like a lot of fun!
I like, I like by Terry_1978	Feb 26th, 2002 05:40:36 PM
I saw the full length trailer for this at the end of the Atlantis VHS, and at first it kinda struck me as an Emperor's New Groov-ish type of movie, with the weird humor and unique character designs. This is gonna be one of those Disney flicks that break the mold like Emperor did. And the reviewer was right about the look of the characters...Tia Carrere's character is quite the cutie.
Dark period? by Gin Soaked Boy	Feb 26th, 2002 06:06:04 PM
People keep saying Disney have lost the plot, but TENG and Atlantis were great. Commercial 'flops' maybe, but I recently saw both, and was really impressed. Having said that, this sounds fantastic. GSB
Animation by ricardowakko	Feb 26th, 2002 06:41:21 PM
Been a Disney fan for as many years as I can remember, it seems, as most of you guys have pointed out, Disney have lost the plot recently. The last batch of movies produced by the Mouse have been average (apart from Emperor's New Groove which I thought was brilliant, and I'm sure I'm the only UK resident who saw it!). Maybe I'm turning into a cynic like you guys - but from a certain standpoint Disney seem to be more bothered about the merchandise than the movies themselves. Someone should tell them it should be the other way round. A good idea would be to throw a bunch of us fans into Disney HQ and kick some ass - listen to the people who pay their wages for a change. I'm hoping Lilo & Stitch will bring them out of this tight spot, as the trailers suggest something special and original. Treasure Planet, and I'm sorry, sounds bloody boring. As for the WB, Iron Giant was brilliant, but well under-promoted, and I'm so happy to see Cats Don't Dance has been mentioned here. It's a shame WB don't scream and shout about their animated movies more, because they deserve better (apart from Space Jam which was terrible). Having said that, making a series about the Baby Looney Tunes sounds like 'playing safe' - bring back Freakazoid!! Don't play safe Disney - take some risks! And don't take all the merit for Pixars brilliance. That's me done!
Leo Scorsby, Hercules was a mess by TimBenzedrine	Feb 26th, 2002 06:42:37 PM
They really dropped the ball on this one. It had all the elements of a classic: they took the greek myths, blended in elements from Superman and Rocky and then threw in a little of Damn Yankees with Meg as the Lola character. Then they crammed the whole thing into a blender and set it on full speed. Everything moved too fast in that movie(everything except the ballads,sheesh) Everything was handled in such a superficial way , there was never any chance of bonding with any of the characters. Hercules himself was handled as physically strong,emotionally weak and overall not very interesting. They could have spent less time on interchangable wisecracks and slowed the pace down to give the characters a little weight and depth . Meg comes off as bitchy and abbrasive through most of the film and her sharp angular design makes her even less appealing. If she had been allowed to drop her guard at least once early on, there might have been something remotely sympathetic about her. The movie overall is too cocky, too slick ,and too self assured for its own good. It' s like an overlong standup act. James Woods performance was the only standout. I guess I just felt shortchanged by the whole moviegoing experience because I could see all the ingredients, but they never added up to much. And then I felt that there was one glaring omission ,what should have been the big payoff at the end; what distinguishes Hercules from the rest of the gods, what allows him to succeed when all of Olympus has failed,is the fact that besides his god-like powers, he possesses a human heart. And that is what gives him his edge over Hades. Otherwise, it's just good guy beats bad guy end of story. Big Whoop. As in the case of Atlantis, it's not enough to applaud them for breaking away from the usual formula.Both films seem to come up short of being a completely satisfying film. A Disney film shouldn't leave you feeling, "well, they tried.". Even when they attempt something new, I guess I expect something more than a halfway decent attempt. And the trouble is. most of their recent films have been like this , a very slick packaged product without any real heart . I hope this new one is better.
The problem with recent Disney movies... by Prankster	Feb 26th, 2002 06:57:53 PM
Isn't that the scripts were "unfinished". Apparently Atlantis was quite good when it started out, for instance, and most of their other stuff had some pretty dark elements at the beginning. It's that Disney TEST MARKETS THEIR FILMS INTO THE GROUND. There's no shortage of inventiveness and originality in the Disney animation studio, and almost every Disney flick starts off MUCH better than it turns out, it's just that the execs run around, second-guess themselves and layer on the whitewash as production continues. I have nothing against the development process (Pixar, for instance, genuinely improves on their films by going back to the drawing board), but Disney films are usually subject to more reworking than even a live-action flick. Atlantis and TENG both produced almost as much unused animation, storyboards and designs as it did stuff that actually found its way into the movies, because Disney execs simply cannot trust the aniamtion department to do their job. I really liked "Groove", but it worked because they worked on it for years (it was yet another epic musical that sounded REALLY LAME) then got so sick of it they basically handed it off to Marc Dindal and said, "Here, fix this and leave us alone." They had basically written it off, but because he was left unhindered Dindal was able to produce one of the funniest, freshest and most sincere flicks Disney's done in a long time. (The same happened to Iron Giant, by the way--observe WB's previous animated disaster "Quest for Camelot", which was meddled into oblivion. After that the suits basically ignored the animation department.) Good producers, like Jeffrey Katzenberg, can really provide useful guidance in making an animated film, but there's no one like that at Disney now--just a bunch of suits who want to keep the cash cow's milk flowing. In that environment, the best thing for an animated film is to be LEFT ALONE Which is why I'm glad Disney's classical division has been faltering financially: the money-grubbers don't want to get involved. After all, what ushered in the era of lame stodginess at Disney? The mega-success of Lion King. After that, there couldn't be any originality--heavens no, that might cost them money! But after a half-decade of flops the animators have more flexibility.
Disney really sucks. Why aren't their movies funny instead o by SilenceofFreedom	Feb 26th, 2002 07:35:30 PM
Everyone seemed to like it but me. It was WAY too over-dramatic and unfunny. I loved all the voice actors, but it was typical disney crap, even though I was assured it wasn't. I'm really getting sick of Disney and Rosie O'Donnell.
What about "Atlantis",HUH?! Why,oh why doesn't "Atlantis" g by Atlantis2001	Feb 26th, 2002 07:36:51 PM
But,on the positive side,at least there won't be a crappy, bastardized direct-to-video sequel for "Atlantis".
Disney really sucks. Why aren't their movies funny instead o by SilenceofFreedom	Feb 26th, 2002 07:37:02 PM
Everyone seemed to like it but me. It was WAY too over-dramatic and unfunny. I loved all the voice actors, but it was typical disney crap, even though I was assured it wasn't. I'm really getting sick of Disney and Rosie O'Donnell.
Oh,and one more thing by Atlantis2001	Feb 26th, 2002 07:38:32 PM
The guy forgot to mention "Tarzan"!
Leo Scorsby, Hercules was a mess by TimBenzedrine	Feb 26th, 2002 07:40:43 PM
They really dropped the ball on this one. It had all the elements of a classic: they took the greek myths, blended in elements from Superman and Rocky and then threw in a little of Damn Yankees with Meg as the Lola character. Then they crammed the whole thing into a blender and set it on full speed. Everything moved too fast in that movie(everything except the ballads,sheesh) Everything was handled in such a superficial way , there was never any chance of bonding with any of the characters. Hercules himself was handled as physically strong,emotionally weak and overall not very interesting. They could have spent less time on interchangable wisecracks and slowed the pace down to give the characters a little weight and depth . Meg comes off as bitchy and abbrasive through most of the film and her sharp angular design makes her even less appealing. If she had been allowed to drop her guard at least once early on, there might have been something remotely sympathetic about her. The movie overall is too cocky, too slick ,and too self assured for its own good. It' s like an overlong standup act. James Woods performance was the only standout. I guess I just felt shortchanged by the whole moviegoing experience because I could see all the ingredients, but they never added up to much. And then I felt that there was one glaring omission ,what should have been the big payoff at the end; what distinguishes Hercules from the rest of the gods, what allows him to succeed when all of Olympus has failed,is the fact that besides his god-like powers, he possesses a human heart. And that is what gives him his edge over Hades. Otherwise, it's just good guy beats bad guy end of story. Big Whoop. As in the case of Atlantis, it's not enough to applaud them for breaking away from the usual formula.Both films seem to come up short of being a completely satisfying film. A Disney film shouldn't leave you feeling, "well, they tried.". Even when they attempt something new, I guess I expect something more than a halfway decent attempt. And the trouble is. most of their recent films have been like this , a very slick packaged product without any real heart . I hope this new one is better.
Silence, you know what really sucks? by half vader	Feb 26th, 2002 07:58:47 PM
I HATE when people keep saying Pixar films are Disney films. Disney don't animate or have real creative input into ONE FRAME of Pixar's films.They just do the distribution and merchandise. Aargh. When will people learn? Oh, and ;) by the way.
Viva La Animators by Cajun Lightning	Feb 26th, 2002 09:20:48 PM
I used to love Disney a little more than the average bloke. Then the animated cartoons started sucking and I liked 'em about as much as the average bloke. Then I worked for them. And now I hate them with every fiber of my being. The thing that was most frustrating there is the employees for the most part are extrodinarily talented and care more about the product that anyone realizes, but they are trapped by the cooporate mess they got going there these days. I'm glad to see that they finally let the artists call the shots. I am estatic (though not surprised) to see they seemed to have done something really original and special. And I hope this proves to the Big Guys that the Little Guys should just be allowed to do what they do best. They deserve it.
LILO indeed by TomVee	Feb 26th, 2002 09:57:41 PM
Previews make this one look mighty fine indeed. ATLANTIS and EMPEROR were terrific. This looks to be at least as good, but who really knows for sure until it actually arrives in theaters? HERCULES was okay, TARZAN was okay, HUNCHBACK was okay. MULAN was also okay. BEAUTY & THE BEAST was okay, too. Never saw POCOHONTAS as the subject struck me as much too silly to make into a cartoon. I assume it was a dog. There's only one LION KING, however. None of the above begins to touch that one.
Top 10 things wrong with animation today by Victor_Laszlo	Feb 27th, 2002 04:30:13 AM
10. They're usually musicals. 9. Too much CGI. 8. Three words: Funny Animal Sidekick. 7. No original stories left. 6. Designed for "family" not for "entertainment value". 5. CLAMSHELL CASES when put to VHS tape. 4. Same formula as always: Boy character. Girl Character. Sidekick character. Bad guy. Henchmen. Good wins. The End. 3. TALKING animals. 2. Toy and restaurant tie-ins are more important than quality. 1. BIG-NAME CELEBRITY VOICE ACTORS. Really! Can't they hire voices we DON'T recognize rather than the biggest name that has a day off? NO More Celebrity Voice Actors in animation! Let the characters have their OWN personality, rather than simply being an animated version of "Big Star A" and "Kid-Loving Celebrity B." ****** Special bonus reason: Rosie O'Donnell.
Let Mongols be Mongols! by Wild At Heart	Feb 27th, 2002 05:25:26 AM
There was a lot of good stuff in "Mulan", but I was somewhat disturbed at Disney's attempt to turn the quite obviously Mongol -looking villains into neutral "Huns". Completely ball-less! Did anybody really visualise hordes of Anti-Mongol Defamation League cardholders storming the streets and demanding redress? Seriously, what the fuck? As for "Hunchback", while Victor Hugo's novel is a true classic, I am bewildered that the Powers that Be at Disney thought they could turn such a frigging bleak story into family entertainment. According to Disney's cookie-cutter version, Esmeralda the Gypsy, her sidekick goat, and Phoebus, the Captain of the Guard, are all bestest buddies. In Hugo's version, however, Phoebus is murdered by Frollo, who then seeks to pin the rap on Esmeralda, to scapegoat her and to punish her for arousing his earthly lust, and he does this by accusing her of slaying Phoebus as part of a rite of witchcraft, with the goat as her familiar and accomplice in evil. Now, I'm all for considered and sensitive "adaptation" of source material, but what Disney attempted to do in this picture was downright idiotic. ( let's not even mention the spin on "Pocahontas" ). Pixar and Studio Gibhli have produced films in recent times which are sentimental, but in a wholly positive and delightful way ( yes, I even enjoyed "Monsters Inc." which flirted dangerously with excessive cutesiness at times ). Whilst I found "Groove" refreshingly spirited for a recent Disney flick, in the end I felt it to be a fairly trite and forgettable exercise allround. I guess that's what I hate about the Mouse House these days. Nothing they produce has any depth or weight. At best it's pretty fluff, at worst it's execrable shyte. Basically I'm just over it. Disney is a greedy corporate entity that has made ITSELF outmoded, and does not deserve any pity as it flounders. It's just a Circle of Life kind of thing.
"pocohontas, hunch back & Hercules all exceed Lion King in quali by AggregateScore	Feb 27th, 2002 07:53:02 AM
No I'm sorry 'Jack but I just can't accept that. Hercules is a great fun film but no way in hell is it as gripping or as emotionally engaging as the Lion King. The other two just are'nt very good, bith positively dripping with sentimentality. The Lion King is, after all, Disney's take on Hamlet for god's sake.-----------------I do agree though that Disney over the past 5 years have been given an unnecesarily hard time. Most of the films are pretty good (Mulan, Tarzan etc.), but the problem is that they're not great. And when you're watching a film by the corporation who brought you B&TB, TLM, Aladdin, TLK, Fantasia etc (not to forget BTGMD, TSATS & Robin Hood), then you go in with very high expectations.----------------- ----Oh and I am the other Brit who happens to have seen Emperor's, and I absolutely love it. Its no classic, but then it has no pretenses to be. It sets itself up to be a funny film and it delivers-----"Uh-oh"/ "Let me guess: huge waterfall just ahead"/ "Yeah"/ "big sharp rocks at the bottom"/ "Most probably"/ "bring it on".
I wish Eternia Lad had told us just WHAT Stitch is on trial for. by WarDog	Feb 27th, 2002 09:55:06 AM
Not that it matters since he escaped. But it goes to laying out his personality and motivations. Is he just damned to be bad and violent and a destroyer because he was created that way, so it's not really his fault that he commited those "crimes?" I'd really like to know, because from hearing that he's an arch-criminal, and basically violent (just very good at covering it up) I have no sympathy for him. Or Disney either, for foisting this crap on little kids, who should be taught how to judge right from wrong, in spite of how CUTE it looks, goddammit. Fuck da Mouse for this kind of shit.
"Bug's Life" is NOT a Disney flick!!!! by minderbinder	Feb 27th, 2002 12:44:59 PM

Fair enough, " Bug's Life" is by Pixar, not Disney, but I st by SilenceofFreedom	Feb 27th, 2002 02:19:20 PM
And I hate disney too. That guy that mentioned the 10 things wrong with animation was right on the money.
No Character Depth by Filmjester	Feb 27th, 2002 03:35:56 PM
Disney's Tarzan, Atlantis, Dinosaur, and Pocohantus all have no character depth. Moulon did, yes I know I spelled it wrong, but only the main character. Disney decided to rely on the actors and animators talents, rather then the writers and now it seems their begining to realize that even for kiddies, story matters.
This guy's such a plant by Hud	Feb 27th, 2002 04:43:57 PM
I can hear the caterpillars in his armpits. I think The Iron Giant covered this territory nicely and kept the "cute" out of it, thank you. I work for Disney, so I hope the movie raises the stock price, but , does this movie rate such a loud, enthusiastic cocksucking?
Frollo in "Hunchback" had ISSUES, pal! by Drath	Feb 27th, 2002 07:33:11 PM
While I agree that the Lion King was the last time the Disney Formula of the '90s rebirth(songs, pop star singer, star vocals, tacked on love story, goofy sidekicks etc) actually worked, I don't think it was a great film. How could it be? There's no second act! The third act comes right on the heels of the first act. The resolution is abrupt, as if someone looked at their watch and said "Egad, we can't run for more than gasp 90 minutes!" And I wouldn't brag about its character depth either. Simba losing his father was traumatic, but like I said it wasn't taken as far as it could or should have been taken. And there was character depth in The Hunchback of Notre Dame as well. The formula had worn thin by then though, and the comedic Gargoyles felt forced upon the film. They pretty much ruined it actually. Let's hope Lilo and Stitch recaptures the magic. It sounds like it's exactly what Disney needs right now.
Kimba...err I mean Simba by Karen K	Feb 27th, 2002 08:53:06 PM
People still wont admit the fact that the Lion King was a story simply stolen from Kimba, the White Lion. Ah well. As for Frollo, I found him to be one of the WORST animated characters EVER in Disney history. The jerking, the TV style animation, the ROBES. It drove me up the WALL. But anyways... If anyone is to "blame" for Lilo and Stitch, that'd be Chris Sanders. MAN I love his designs.... SMOOTH... ROUND... REAL... I've heard mixed reviews about Treasure Planet but lets keep our fingers crossed eh?
missing the point by dsmittys	Feb 27th, 2002 10:26:36 PM
while some of the critiques of the merits of the most recent Disney movies have merit, most of you seem to be missing the point. Disney Animated movies are not made for your (or my) demographic. They are made for children. Thats why the stories are "simplistic" they need to be for young kids to get the main focus of the movie. And before one or more of you flame me for not giving kids credit for being more mature than they seem, I believe we do children a disservice when we force them into being more mature than they are ready for. Disney movies strike a balance between kiddie fare and adult fare to make movies that grown-ups can enjoy with their kids. Im all for holding Disney Animations feet to the fire to make quality movies but it is unfair to criticize them for not making the movies you want to see as an adult.
Well any movie that has AC/DC's "BBack in Black" as it's by RickSlamu2	Feb 27th, 2002 10:28:04 PM
has to be at least worth a look. Plus this Stitch looks like a hard rocken Bastard!
Fuck this site!! by ANGELS-EGG	Feb 28th, 2002 02:35:31 AM
3 damn posts ive sent and they dissapear into oblivion...The fucking gif animation interupts the typing..and the pop-ups are doing my head in... OLD FUCKING NEWS jeez ws told this place was the first for info.. Maybe disney are taking off my posts because I used to work for them as an aniator and make it clear that disney are a bunch of magpies (the simba/kimba,atlantis/nadia thing is in FACT accurate they DID rip them off!).
So sue me, I liked Pocahontas by holidill	Feb 28th, 2002 11:14:16 AM
I loved Mulan, loved Atlantis, and liked Hunchback of Notre Dame. Dinosaur was gorgeous to look at but needed a better storyline. Noe Disney let's get som Miyazaki films released NOW!!!!
A new 'classic' every year? by Blabbermouse	Feb 28th, 2002 03:55:00 PM
Maybe part of the problem is the sheer QUANTITY of animated features Diz is putting out these days. When I was a young'un, it was 3 YEARS between their cartoon pix. You consarn whippersnappers are so spoiled these days... Seriously tho, back when Eisner/Katzenberg started goosing up the Disney formula with livelier films (I guess from Great Mouse Detective on) I was overjoyed - but then their new approach turned into a new rut all its own. I was into it right up to 'Tarzan' - which was so neo-formulaic I couldn't stand it. ('Where do I belong?' hero (complete with 'I'm gonna be the bestest ape ever' childhood -yech!), 'funny' anny-mule sidekicks, handful of intrusive lite-pop songs - zzz). Even Diz started realizing it, which is why 'New Groove' & 'Atlantis' were non musicals. I'm a humongous Mark Dindal fan & I wasn't disappointed by 'New Groove' - ditching the serious villain/goofy sidekick team in favor of 2 goofs was BRILLIANT - Every moment of Yzma & Kronk's repartee was priceless. "Atlantis' was disappointing: a crackerjack opening act, an endless middle act & a confused 3rd act. (The Atlanteans needed a surface guy to show them how to get their act together? & just how old was that babe supposed to be any way?) And oh yeah Mr. Eisner, stop cheapening your library of classics with in-house, rehash 'sequels' one after another. Personally, I think producing & releasing 'B' animated features to counterpoint their 'A' productions is a good idea - but the B's should be a venue where the studio & their animation staff can experiment - trying NEW ideas & approaches, the more unconventional the better. (Either that, or at least PLEASE make a direct-to-video "The Return of Darkwing Duck" feature, okay? Then I'll stop complaining.)
Hey--Disney does use NEW voice talent in Lilo & Stitch! by wtg!fubar	Mar 2nd, 2002 10:26:25 PM
I saw a screening of Lilo and Stitch, and to those of you complaining Disney never uses NEW unknown talent----- Listen to LILO! That's not a "STAR" talking! I heard it's a little 9year old girl, and that this is the first big thing she has ever done!!! I say WTG!!!! If you saw a screening, or when you go to see the movie, you will hear this kid, and she will blow you away. I love Stitch!! But I loved the personality and feeling that you can hear in Lilo's voice!!! It's totally real- believable. This unknown and NEW talent is amazing, and I hope Disney realizes this and continues to use NEW talent, and even keeps this little girl going! She's that good! The whole movie rocks!! I did some checking, to see if it was true about a child doing the voice of Lilo, and I found out this name on a search- DAVEIGH CHASE. WTG DAVEIGH! all the best, fubar

Talkbacks

Eternia Lad takes in an early screening of Disney's LILO & STITCH!!!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks