Discussion:
Disney as artist and visionary
(too old to reply)
ichorwhip
2009-02-23 04:58:52 UTC
Permalink
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt. I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done. "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."

I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved. It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with. As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean! So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other? Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.

I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too. A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!

"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
Don Stockbauer
2009-02-23 06:13:02 UTC
Permalink
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.  I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.  As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
My objection to Disney is that on that ride in EPCOT (the big sphere
thing - where as you progress in time on it it shows our advancement
in information technology) - from the ancient cave paintings on up
through the invention of the telephone, space flight, the personal
computer revolution - my big complaint is that they could have easily
done some public education about how all these PC's and all other
computers and all communication of any sort is that it's bringing
about the Global Brain. Yes. What a missed opportunity.
Don Stockbauer
2009-03-04 22:09:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Stockbauer
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.  I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.  As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
My objection to Disney is that on that ride in EPCOT (the big sphere
thing - where as you progress in time on it it shows our advancement
in information technology) - from the ancient cave paintings on up
through the invention of the telephone, space flight, the personal
computer revolution - my big complaint is that they could have easily
done some public education about how all these PC's and all other
computers and all communication of any sort is that it's bringing
about the Global Brain.  Yes.  What a missed opportunity.
But then, who listens to me?
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-23 13:00:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.
Eminently understandable.
Post by ichorwhip
I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done. "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
Bring some painkillers to the cinema.
Post by ichorwhip
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved. It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.
No, that isn't the reason for drawing attention to his actual
behaviour.
Post by ichorwhip
As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean! So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney"
But it isn't ABOUT the 'evil Disney', it's about acknowledging that
the dominant narrative concerning Disney is a constructed myth.
Post by ichorwhip
if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other? Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too. A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
Except that he was neither an artist nor a visionary but a business
mogul. Comparisons with Kubrick (or any other film-director, for that
matter) are frankly bizarre (it was reactionaries like Walt Disney
that drove Kubrick out of America). Rather, the camparison would be
with another mogul or studio executive. Walt Disney claiming artistic
'ownership' of the Disney films would be like Warner Bros' chief
executive claiming to be the 'artist' responsible for ACO, BL, The
Shining, FMJ, and Eyes Wide Shut, with Kubrick a mere subsidiary,
humble employee/functionary, summarily dispensible and irrelevant (of
course, not even that in the case of Disney, as Kubrick's Jewish
upbringing would have barred him from being ever employed by the anti-
Semite).

But you can't argue with myth: Disney is America's Santa Claus.

The only 'vision' Disney had was that of a spoilt 4-year-old child let
loose in a toystore: his legacy is to have infantilized two
generations of Americans, and quite a few others to boot.
Don Stockbauer
2009-02-23 13:48:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by ichorwhip
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.
Eminently understandable.
Post by ichorwhip
I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
Bring some painkillers to the cinema.
Post by ichorwhip
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.
No, that isn't the reason for drawing attention to his actual
behaviour.
Post by ichorwhip
As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney"
But it isn't ABOUT the 'evil Disney', it's about acknowledging that
the dominant narrative concerning Disney is a constructed myth.
Post by ichorwhip
if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
Except that he was neither an artist nor a visionary but a business
mogul. Comparisons with Kubrick (or any other film-director, for that
matter) are frankly bizarre (it was reactionaries like Walt Disney
that drove Kubrick out of America). Rather, the camparison would be
with another mogul or studio executive. Walt Disney claiming artistic
'ownership' of the Disney films would be like Warner Bros' chief
executive claiming to be the 'artist' responsible for ACO, BL, The
Shining, FMJ, and Eyes Wide Shut, with Kubrick a mere subsidiary,
humble employee/functionary, summarily dispensible and irrelevant (of
course, not even that in the case of Disney, as Kubrick's Jewish
upbringing would have barred him from being ever employed by the anti-
Semite).
But you can't argue with myth: Disney is America's Santa Claus.
The only 'vision' Disney had was that of a spoilt 4-year-old child let
loose in a toystore: his legacy is to have infantilized two
generations of Americans, and quite a few others to boot.
That's what you say.
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-23 16:13:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
But you can't argue with myth: Disney is America's Santa Claus.
Jean Baudrillard on Disneyland

Disneyland is a perfect model of all the entangled orders of
simulation. To begin with it is a play of illusions and phantasms:
pirates, the frontier, future world, etc. This imaginary world is
supposed to be what makes the operation successful. But, what draws
the crowds is undoubtedly much more the social microcosm, the
miniaturized and religious revelling in real America, in its delights
and drawbacks. You park outside, queue up inside, and are totally
abandoned at the exit. In this imaginary world the only phantasmagoria
is in the inherent warmth and affection of the crowd, and in that
aufficiently excessive number of gadgets used there to specifically
maintain the multitudinous affect. The contrast with the absolute
solitude of the parking lot - a veritable concentration camp - is
total. Or rather: inside, a whole range of gadgets magnetize the crowd
into direct flows; outside, solitude is directed onto a single gadget:
the automobile. By an extraordinary coincidence (one that undoubtedly
belongs to the peculiar enchantment of this universe), this deep-
frozen infantile world happens to have been conceived and realized by
a man who is himself now cryogenized; Walt Disney, who awaits his
resurrection at minus 180 degrees centigrade.

The objective profile of the United States, then, may be traced
throughout Disneyland, even down to the morphology of individuals and
the crowd. All its values are exalted here, in miniature and comic-
strip form. Embalmed and pactfied. Whence the possibility of an
ideological analysis of Disneyland (L. Marin does it well in Utopies,
jeux d'espaces): digest of the American way of life, panegyric to
American values, idealized transposition of a contradictory reality.
To be sure. But this conceals something else, and that "ideological"
blanket exactly serves to cover over a third-order simulation:
Disneyland is there to conceal the fact that it is the "real" country,
all of "real" America, which is Disneyland (just as prisons are there
to conceal the fact that it is the social in its entirety, in its
banal omnipresence, which is carceral). Disneyland is presented as
imaginary in order to make us believe that the rest is real, when in
fact all of Los Angeles and the America surrounding it are no longer
real, but of the order of the hyperreal and of simulation. It is no
longer a question of a false representation of reality (ideology), but
of concealing the fact that the real is no longer real, and thus of
saving the reality principle.

The Disneyland imaginary is neither true nor false: it is a deterrence
machine set up in order to rejuvenate in reverse the fiction of the
real. Whence the debility, the infantile degeneration of this
imaginary. It ~s meant to be an infantile world, in order to make us
believe that the adults are elsewhere, in the "real" world, and to
conceal the fact that real childishness is everywhere, particularly
among those adults who go there to act the child in order to foster
illusions of their real childishness.

Moreover, Disneyland is not the only one. Enchanted Village, Magic
Mountain, Marine World: Los Angeles is encircled by these "imaginary
stations" which feed reality, reality-energy, to a town whose mystery
is precisely that it is nothing more than a network of endless, unreal
circulation: a town of fabulous proportions, but without space or
dimensions. As much as electrical and nuclear power stations, as much
as film studios, this town, which is nothing more than an immense
script and a perpetual motion picture, needs this old imaginary made
up of childhood signals and faked phantasms for its sympathetic
nervous system.
Don Stockbauer
2009-03-04 22:12:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by Padraig L Henry
But you can't argue with myth: Disney is America's Santa Claus.
Jean Baudrillard on Disneyland
Disneyland is a perfect model of all the entangled orders of
pirates, the frontier, future world, etc. This imaginary world is
supposed to be what makes the operation successful. But, what draws
the crowds is undoubtedly much more the social microcosm, the
miniaturized and religious revelling in real America, in its delights
and drawbacks. You park outside, queue up inside, and are totally
abandoned at the exit. In this imaginary world the only phantasmagoria
is in the inherent warmth and affection of the crowd, and in that
aufficiently excessive number of gadgets used there to specifically
maintain the multitudinous affect. The contrast with the absolute
solitude of the parking lot - a veritable concentration camp - is
total. Or rather: inside, a whole range of gadgets magnetize the crowd
the automobile. By an extraordinary coincidence (one that undoubtedly
belongs to the peculiar enchantment of this universe), this deep-
frozen infantile world happens to have been conceived and realized by
a man who is himself now cryogenized; Walt Disney, who awaits his
resurrection at minus 180 degrees centigrade.
The objective profile of the United States, then, may be traced
throughout Disneyland, even down to the morphology of individuals and
the crowd. All its values are exalted here, in miniature and comic-
strip form. Embalmed and pactfied. Whence the possibility of an
ideological analysis of Disneyland (L. Marin does it well in Utopies,
jeux d'espaces): digest of the American way of life, panegyric to
American values, idealized transposition of a contradictory reality.
To be sure. But this conceals something else, and that "ideological"
Disneyland is there to conceal the fact that it is the "real" country,
all of "real" America, which is Disneyland (just as prisons are there
to conceal the fact that it is the social in its entirety, in its
banal omnipresence, which is carceral). Disneyland is presented as
imaginary in order to make us believe that the rest is real, when in
fact all of Los Angeles and the America surrounding it are no longer
real, but of the order of the hyperreal and of simulation. It is no
longer a question of a false representation of reality (ideology), but
of concealing the fact that the real is no longer real, and thus of
saving the reality principle.
The Disneyland imaginary is neither true nor false: it is a deterrence
machine set up in order to rejuvenate in reverse the fiction of the
real. Whence the debility, the infantile degeneration of this
imaginary. It ~s meant to be an infantile world, in order to make us
believe that the adults are elsewhere, in the "real" world, and to
conceal the fact that real childishness is everywhere, particularly
among those adults who go there to act the child in order to foster
illusions of their real childishness.
Moreover, Disneyland is not the only one. Enchanted Village, Magic
Mountain, Marine World: Los Angeles is encircled by these "imaginary
stations" which feed reality, reality-energy, to a town whose mystery
is precisely that it is nothing more than a network of endless, unreal
circulation: a town of fabulous proportions, but without space or
dimensions. As much as electrical and nuclear power stations, as much
as film studios, this town, which is nothing more than an immense
script and a perpetual motion picture, needs this old imaginary made
up of childhood signals and faked phantasms for its sympathetic
nervous system.
I'd say more it's all a Hofstadterian tangled hierarchy, wonderfully
simulating reality itself, and the Global Brain.

Blarp.

- Don
ichorwhip
2009-02-24 04:10:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by ichorwhip
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.
Eminently understandable.
I'm glad you see it that way.
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by ichorwhip
I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
Bring some painkillers to the cinema.
Huh huh huh!!!
You and me,
Chips and cokes
and a half O.C.!!!!!
(to the tune of Little Brown Jug)
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by ichorwhip
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.
No, that isn't the reason for drawing attention to his actual
behaviour.
SO what's your favorite Disney pic Mr. Henry? Stay on topic damn you!
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by ichorwhip
As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney"
But it isn't ABOUT the 'evil Disney', it's about acknowledging that
the dominant narrative concerning Disney is a constructed myth.
A revised myth sir, one that you are failing to see any middleground
in...sir.
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by ichorwhip
if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
Except that he was neither an artist nor a visionary but a business
mogul.
I take the greatest exception to this. Did not every Disney picture
in his lifetime meet his demanding approval and specific criteria?
Sure he was no director, but he directed his directors to deliver just
what it was he wanted. In fact he was a super-producer.
Post by Padraig L Henry
Comparisons with Kubrick (or any other film-director, for that
matter)
So now Kubrick is just a director?! He controlled every aspect of his
films. I think the comparison with Disney is fine in fact when you're
talking filmmaking. But if you don't like great animation I guess you
could bail out that way.
Post by Padraig L Henry
are frankly bizarre (it was reactionaries like Walt Disney
that drove Kubrick out of America).
Where on record is anything Kubrick had to say about Disney or visa
versa?
Post by Padraig L Henry
Rather, the camparison would be
with another mogul or studio executive. Walt Disney claiming artistic
'ownership' of the Disney films would be like Warner Bros' chief
executive claiming to be the 'artist' responsible for ACO, BL, The
Shining, FMJ, and Eyes Wide Shut, with Kubrick a mere subsidiary,
humble employee/functionary, summarily dispensible and irrelevant (of
course, not even that in the case of Disney, as Kubrick's Jewish
upbringing would have barred him from being ever employed by the anti-
Semite).
A total distortion of a young and ambitious American cartoonist who
made it huge. I don't think your comparison to the Warner Bros holds
the same kind of water I'm gargling. Disney did have artistic merit
and he has his fingerprints all over the things he decided were good
enough to bear his name. Fantasia was entirely his concept. There is
art in that goddamit!
Post by Padraig L Henry
But you can't argue with myth: Disney is America's Santa Claus.
That's funny! And this is a bad thing? Ever been to Disneyland? I
think you might find a place to hang yourself there as cold and grim
as you're being.
Post by Padraig L Henry
The only 'vision' Disney had was that of a spoilt 4-year-old child let
He worked his way up from nothing and if anyone spoiled him it was
brother Roy.
Post by Padraig L Henry
his legacy is to have infantilized two
generations of Americans, and quite a few others to boot.
You mean Disney poisoned the fruit punch? Hey I don't love him that
much. The Reverend Dim Donesy couldn't draw for shit!

I await your reply.

"Who on earth could that be?"
ichorwhip
"Peace is our Profession"
p***@yahoo.com
2009-02-23 16:31:33 UTC
Permalink
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.  I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.  As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
I watched the documentary " Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired" this
weekend. (Yeah, like I am watching this program to block out
politically traumatic events and social injustice). The documentary
showed an interview with Polanski who said that it was Disney's "Snow
White" that really influenced him. See, if it weren't for Disney, we
would not have Roman Polanski!

Bambi was traumatic but it is still my favorite.

One can have mixed feelings about many artists (including Kubrick who
could not draw worth a damn either) and still appreciate their work.
There is an American Masters program about the great choreographer,
Jerome Robbins on PBS this month. He was forced to name names;
however, I am in no position to judge or forgive him. His colleagues
and peers do and have - One thing is certain. Robbins was not
expendable.
But it isn't ABOUT the 'evil Disney', it's about acknowledging that
the dominant narrative concerning Disney is a constructed myth.
As if we did not know this prior to your postings. Thank you for
educating us. You know, you may boycott him and Robbins, if you wish.
Nobody is stopping you.

Gen
b***@yahoo.com
2009-02-23 18:17:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.  I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.  As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
I watched the documentary " Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired" this
weekend. (Yeah, like I am watching this program to block out
politically traumatic events and social injustice). The documentary
showed an interview with Polanski who said that it was Disney's "Snow
White" that really influenced him. See, if it weren't for Disney, we
would not have Roman Polanski!
Bambi was traumatic but it is still my favorite.
One can have mixed feelings about many artists (including Kubrick who
could not draw worth a damn either) and still appreciate their work.
There is an American Masters program about the great choreographer,
Jerome Robbins on PBS this month. He was forced to name names;
however, I am in no position to judge or forgive him. His colleagues
and peers do and have - One thing is certain. Robbins was not
expendable.
But it isn't ABOUT the 'evil Disney', it's about acknowledging that
the dominant narrative concerning Disney is a constructed myth.
As if we did not know this prior to your postings. Thank you for
educating us. You know, you may boycott him and Robbins, if you wish.
Nobody is stopping you.
Gen
And nobody will either, Gen. The Irish Juggernaut is in full force;
AMK's answer to Ignatius Reilly, is on a roll, his keyboard a modern-
day Big Chief tablet, attacking the capitalist swine when he's not
attacking the glove, which around here lately has been hard to
distinguish. Let's also not forget the swine who were the dominant
force in "Animal Farm": "All animals are created equal, but some
animals are more equal than others." (No doubt why Disney didn't make
the film version, the swine.) Oz, the all-knowing, all-seeing, has all
the answers... even if he has to write the questions himself!
Disneyland has never been the same for the proletariat when Khrushchev
was denied a visit there. Damn! Where's Myrna when you need her?

Boaz
("Mr. President, I smell a big, fat commie rat!")
p***@yahoo.com
2009-02-23 20:46:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.  I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done.  "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.  As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!  So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
i
"piop"
I watched the documentary " Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired" this
weekend. (Yeah, like I am watching this program to block out
politically traumatic events and social injustice). The documentary
showed an interview with Polanski who said that it was Disney's "Snow
White" that really influenced him. See, if it weren't for Disney, we
would not have Roman Polanski!
Bambi was traumatic but it is still my favorite.
One can have mixed feelings about many artists (including Kubrick who
could not draw worth a damn either) and still appreciate their work.
There is an American Masters program about the great choreographer,
Jerome Robbins on PBS this month. He was forced to name names;
however, I am in no position to judge or forgive him. His colleagues
and peers do and have - One thing is certain. Robbins was not
expendable.
But it isn't ABOUT the 'evil Disney', it's about acknowledging that
the dominant narrative concerning Disney is a constructed myth.
As if we did not know this prior to your postings. Thank you for
educating us. You know, you may boycott him and Robbins, if you wish.
Nobody is stopping you.
Gen
And nobody will either, Gen. The Irish Juggernaut is in full force;
AMK's answer to Ignatius Reilly, is on a roll, his keyboard a modern-
day Big Chief tablet, attacking the capitalist swine when he's not
attacking the glove, which around here lately has been hard to
distinguish. Let's also not forget the swine who were the dominant
force in "Animal Farm": "All animals are created equal, but some
animals are more equal than others." (No doubt why Disney didn't make
the film version, the swine.) Oz, the all-knowing, all-seeing, has all
the answers... even if he has to write the questions himself!
Disneyland has never been the same for the proletariat when Khrushchev
was denied a visit there. Damn! Where's Myrna when you need her?
Boaz
("Mr. President, I smell a big, fat commie rat!")
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations of
individuals, countries, groups, (usually American) and isms not to
mention preaching and pasting that irritates me. And Padraig never
sends any help manuals or parcels. I mean, if he really wants to help
us, why not send food, supplies, dark ale or chocolate? We do accept
donations in America - see also stimulus parcels. Please send food and
money now, I'm not kidding!

Gen
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-23 21:30:50 UTC
Permalink
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen? You don't actually
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy. And you began
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.

Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....

The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-23 21:39:07 UTC
Permalink
pretty darn funny stuff "UNENCYCLOPEDIA" entree on Disney

http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Walt_Disney


and Disneyland


http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Disneyland


dc
p***@yahoo.com
2009-02-23 22:45:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen?
I thought I was being perfectly clear.

You don't actually
Post by Padraig L Henry
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy.
I am not sure that is an insult considering the state of AMK. I
haven't posted here in a while. You didn't seem to mind my defense of
Rashid Khalidi. Oh, but wait, Prof. Khalidi is probably too moderate
for you. Edward Said too.

And you began
Post by Padraig L Henry
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.
Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....
The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
Where do I claim to know everything about Disney? Where do I write
that I even admire Walt Disney as a human being? I wrote that I liked
Bambi for god's sake, get a grip. You mean, I promoted sexism and
anti-Semitism when I saw Bambi as a child (during the 1960/70s?) I
questioned your statement that working class Germans could afford to
attend the cinema frequently (at least to the levels you implied)
during the war. How do you know how many of those millions of Germans
belonged to the working class? Did they fill out income surveys at the
bratwurst stand? How do you know each person's situation, what they
were thinking during whatever films they viewed, if even one family
member out of a hundred was hiding Jews or belonged to a resistance
group, however small it probably was. However, I don't disagree that
the majority of Germans and Austrians during that time bear a
responsibility for the extermination of the Jews and other peoples.
But I don't pretend to know what every family's circumstance was and I
cannot read minds. Apparently you are telepathic and you can read the
motives of millions of Germans, Americans, whenever and however you
want. All you do is judge, judge, judge (paste, paste, paste).
Stop calling me an anti-Semite you bastard; members of my family were
nearly sent to the camps due to my family's racial background and
political views. It's not only the political, Padraig, it is the
personal. And don't give me that Marxist shite about the political is
the personal is the political...

G.

P.S. Dad was British which meant members of our families were killing
each other during the 2 world wars but you accuse me of being a
fascist, the lowest thing that you could say - I suppose that soon you
will accuse me of being anti-Irish (!) because I am half-British.
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 00:04:50 UTC
Permalink
Gen, you've picked on the wrong poster to try and peddle and escalate
your twisted, hypocritical insults and ravings ... and now your're
only going to regret your error ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen?
I thought I was being perfectly clear.
No, you were being perfectly insulting, you smug little bitch.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 You don't actually
Post by Padraig L Henry
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy.
I am not sure that is an insult considering the state of AMK.
Your garbage is a contributary factor to that state.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I
haven't posted here in a while. You didn't seem to mind my defense of
Rashid Khalidi. Oh, but wait, Prof. Khalidi is probably too moderate
for you. Edward Said too.
What the fuck do you care about the Middle East? You talk bullshit
about having visited there as though this is a 'basis' for 'empathy'.
Listen, you little slut, your fellow Americans have spent the last
SEVEN YEARS visiting death and destruction on the Middle East, still
continuing (and even now escalating in Afghanistan). Don't you fucking
dare talk to me about imperialist/murderous 'empathy'. You're just
another prick-apologist for [you know what] ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
And you began
Post by Padraig L Henry
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.
Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....
The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
Where do I claim to know everything about Disney?
So you're not only a hypocrite, you're also amnesiac, forgetting what
you earlier wrote in this thread. Piss off, slut.

<some vacuous bullshit snipped>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Stop calling me an anti-Semite you bastard;
?? All your posts over the past few days attacking me and insulting
me are PRECISELY because you are an apologist for anti-Semites, from
Disney to Riefenstahl. You're not just a slut, you're a smug cunt to
boot. Fuck off.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
members of my family were
nearly sent to the camps
Boo hoo hoo. But they survived and you're the fucking abortive result.
Boo hoo hoo.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
P.S. Dad was British which meant members of our families were killing
each other during the 2 world wars but you accuse me of being a
fascist, the lowest thing that you could say - I suppose that soon you
will accuse me of being anti-Irish (!) because I am half-British.-
Who gives a fuck what you are. You've completely destroyed your
credibility here. Now piss off ...


[This is such ... FUN! We'll get Donald Duck to provide the
soundtrack!].
b***@yahoo.com
2009-02-24 00:34:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
Gen, you've picked on the wrong poster to try and peddle and escalate
your twisted, hypocritical insults and ravings ... and now your're
only going to regret your error ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen?
I thought I was being perfectly clear.
No, you were being perfectly insulting, you smug little bitch.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 You don't actually
Post by Padraig L Henry
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy.
I am not sure that is an insult considering the state of AMK.
Your garbage is a contributary factor  to that state.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I
haven't posted here in a while. You didn't seem to mind my defense of
Rashid Khalidi. Oh, but wait, Prof. Khalidi is probably too moderate
for you. Edward Said too.
What the fuck do you care about the Middle East? You talk bullshit
about having visited there as though this is a 'basis' for 'empathy'.
Listen, you little slut, your fellow Americans have spent the last
SEVEN YEARS visiting death and destruction on the Middle East, still
continuing (and even now escalating in Afghanistan). Don't you fucking
dare talk to me about imperialist/murderous 'empathy'. You're just
another prick-apologist for [you know what] ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
And you began
Post by Padraig L Henry
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.
Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....
The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
Where do I claim to know everything about Disney?
So you're not only a hypocrite, you're also amnesiac, forgetting what
you earlier wrote in this thread. Piss off, slut.
<some vacuous bullshit snipped>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Stop calling me an anti-Semite you bastard;
??  All your posts over the past few days attacking me and insulting
me are PRECISELY because you are an apologist for anti-Semites, from
Disney to Riefenstahl. You're not just a slut, you're a smug cunt to
boot. Fuck off.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
members of my family were
nearly sent to the camps
Boo hoo hoo. But they survived and you're the fucking abortive result.
Boo hoo hoo.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
P.S. Dad was British which meant members of our families were killing
each other during the 2 world wars but you accuse me of being a
fascist, the lowest thing that you could say - I suppose that soon you
will accuse me of being anti-Irish (!) because I am half-British.-
Who gives a fuck what you are. You've completely destroyed your
credibility here. Now piss off ...
[This is such ... FUN! We'll get Donald Duck to provide the
soundtrack!].- Hide quoted text -
I avoided resorting to name calling regarding these arguments. But you
won't let that stop you, Padraig. You insult Genevieve and call her
names. You are the lowest scum, a bully. Do you not have a wife to
slap around, you worthless Irish prick? You are worthless and a
coward, for only a coward would resort to the kind of insulting and
name calling you have resorted to.

You want to be right, to be King Of The Hill; the All-Knowing, All-
Seeing Padraig Henry. You want the world to kiss your Marxist Irish
ass, all the while you do nothing but spew your hatred.

Go ahead and come after me now, you Mick turd. Come after me with your
superior intellect. Let's just see some of that brilliance as you
safely sequester yourself behind your keyboard, far off in Ireland.
What's wrong, the IRA didn't think you had the balls to join their
group, so now you have to come after everone else?

Whatever credibility *you* may have once had, it is all gone now,
Padraig. You killed whatever was left with this last post. You are a
worthless, lowlife scum. Just another educated idiot who is out of
touch with the changing world.
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-24 00:42:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Gen, you've picked on the wrong poster to try and peddle and escalate
your twisted, hypocritical insults and ravings ... and now your're
only going to regret your error ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen?
I thought I was being perfectly clear.
No, you were being perfectly insulting, you smug little bitch.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 You don't actually
Post by Padraig L Henry
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy.
I am not sure that is an insult considering the state of AMK.
Your garbage is a contributary factor  to that state.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I
haven't posted here in a while. You didn't seem to mind my defense of
Rashid Khalidi. Oh, but wait, Prof. Khalidi is probably too moderate
for you. Edward Said too.
What the fuck do you care about the Middle East? You talk bullshit
about having visited there as though this is a 'basis' for 'empathy'.
Listen, you little slut, your fellow Americans have spent the last
SEVEN YEARS visiting death and destruction on the Middle East, still
continuing (and even now escalating in Afghanistan). Don't you fucking
dare talk to me about imperialist/murderous 'empathy'. You're just
another prick-apologist for [you know what] ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
And you began
Post by Padraig L Henry
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.
Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....
The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
Where do I claim to know everything about Disney?
So you're not only a hypocrite, you're also amnesiac, forgetting what
you earlier wrote in this thread. Piss off, slut.
<some vacuous bullshit snipped>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Stop calling me an anti-Semite you bastard;
??  All your posts over the past few days attacking me and insulting
me are PRECISELY because you are an apologist for anti-Semites, from
Disney to Riefenstahl. You're not just a slut, you're a smug cunt to
boot. Fuck off.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
members of my family were
nearly sent to the camps
Boo hoo hoo. But they survived and you're the fucking abortive result.
Boo hoo hoo.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
P.S. Dad was British which meant members of our families were killing
each other during the 2 world wars but you accuse me of being a
fascist, the lowest thing that you could say - I suppose that soon you
will accuse me of being anti-Irish (!) because I am half-British.-
Who gives a fuck what you are. You've completely destroyed your
credibility here. Now piss off ...
[This is such ... FUN! We'll get Donald Duck to provide the
soundtrack!].- Hide quoted text -
I avoided resorting to name calling regarding these arguments. But you
won't let that stop you, Padraig. You insult Genevieve and call her
names. You are the lowest scum, a bully. Do you not have a wife to
slap around, you worthless Irish prick? You are worthless and a
coward, for only a coward would resort to the kind of insulting and
name calling you have resorted to.
You want to be right, to be King Of The Hill; the All-Knowing, All-
Seeing Padraig Henry. You want the world to kiss your Marxist Irish
ass, all the while you do nothing but spew your hatred.
Go ahead and come after me now, you Mick turd. Come after me with your
superior intellect. Let's just see some of that brilliance as you
safely sequester yourself behind your keyboard, far off in Ireland.
What's wrong, the IRA didn't think you had the balls to join their
group, so now you have to come after everone else?
Whatever credibility *you* may have once had, it is all gone now,
Padraig. You killed whatever was left with this last post. You are a
worthless, lowlife scum. Just another educated idiot who is out of
touch with the changing world.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
All I gotta say to Boaz and Gen is Bravo...


and a Buffy quote:

"You know, I always say.... that a day without an autopsy is like a
day without sunshine." -- Buffy

dc
l***@gmail.com
2009-02-24 01:46:06 UTC
Permalink
I have no idea who you are, Mr. Padraig, and I don't particularly
care, anymore than you care who I am, but I don't come to a Kubrick
newsgroup to read the little rants of misogynist with insane notions
of his own quality. I don't post here because people like you trample
other opinions to death. You have the lunacy to accuse a person of ad-
hominem attacks and insults in one post, and then in the next you call
a woman a cunt and a bitch. Have you ever called a woman a cunt to her
face, sir? It takes a lot more than to do it from the safety of your
sterile little hole. The picture one takes away from your behaviour is
of a hunchback stuffed in a mirrored box, alternating your attention
between stimulating yourself to your own hideous reflection, and
working yourself into a frenzy over online news sites.

I recommend you get yourself laid, if you are capable of any sort of
human contact. This would necessitate stepping out into the world you
so despise, but you might find it a better release than pseudo-
intellectual tantrums. A tip -- don't use the word 'cunt'.

I doubt you can change a car tire, although I'm sure you can quote an
academic article on the subject.

Remembering that this newsgroup is about an interesting human being
who did something of worth with his time, let's consider what he might
have had to say about you. It's quite an easy exercise, because he
made a film about your type -- remember it? The one where the
solopsistic, juvenile, contemptuous misanthrope ends up frozen to
death, conquered by a child.

(I write this not because I care to join in the squabbling that takes
place in between the occasional tidbit of Kubrick news I find here,
but because your post in this thread is revolting and insane. You
alone are enough to prove the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory).
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 11:08:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@gmail.com
I have no idea who you are, Mr. Padraig, and I don't particularly
care, anymore than you care who I am, but I don't come to a Kubrick
newsgroup
You don't ever post here or contribute anything to the newsgroup, but
you have the gall to try and dictate what should or should not be
posted here. What an arrogant buffoon you are. Now have you something
worthwhile to post here?
Post by l***@gmail.com
(I write this not because I care to join in
More performative contradictions. You just have 'joined in' despite,
as you've already admitted, knowing absolutely nothing about the
origin of this dispute. But why should the truth get in the way of
your desire to hurl unprovoked abuse.
p***@yahoo.com
2009-02-26 17:35:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by l***@gmail.com
I have no idea who you are, Mr. Padraig, and I don't particularly
care, anymore than you care who I am, but I don't come to a Kubrick
newsgroup to read the little rants of misogynist with insane notions
of his own quality. I don't post here because people like you trample
other opinions to death. You have the lunacy to accuse a person of ad-
hominem attacks and insults in one post, and then in the next you call
a woman a cunt and a bitch. Have you ever called a woman a cunt to her
face, sir? It takes a lot more than to do it from the safety of your
sterile little hole. The picture one takes away from your behaviour is
of a hunchback stuffed in a mirrored box, alternating your attention
between stimulating yourself to your own hideous reflection, and
working yourself into a frenzy over online news sites.
I recommend you get yourself laid, if you are capable of any sort of
human contact. This would necessitate stepping out into the world you
so despise, but you might find it a better release than pseudo-
intellectual tantrums. A tip -- don't use the word 'cunt'.
I doubt you can change a car tire, although I'm sure you can quote an
academic article on the subject.
Remembering that this newsgroup is about an interesting human being
who did something of worth with his time, let's consider what he might
have had to say about you. It's quite an easy exercise, because he
made a film about your type -- remember it? The one where the
solopsistic, juvenile, contemptuous misanthrope ends up frozen to
death, conquered by a child.
(I write this not because I care to join in the squabbling that takes
place in between the occasional tidbit of Kubrick news I find here,
but because your post in this thread is revolting and insane. You
alone are enough to prove the Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory).
Thank you for having the courage to speak out against Padraig Henry’s/
Harry Bailey’s misogynist and sexist message. There was also an
implied threat here. Verbal abuse against women, which often promotes
and leads to violence against women, is as damaging and demeaning to
men as it is to women. Does any woman provoke, invite and deserve such
attacks? The word "provoke" implies that there are some behaviours
that justify verbal abuse and assault. These include disagreeing with
the person. When a man says "she provoked me", he is essentially
placing the blame on the woman in an attempt to escape responsibility
for his language and behaviour. This is no excuse for verbal abuse
intended to induce fear and silence. Provocation only exists in the
mind of the provoked. To the men and women on this forum who do not
support the language of sexism and violence against women (and men)
please report the offensive message by clicking on “More options” on
the far right hand side of the message; then click on “Report this
message.” It will not deter Padraig Henry/Harry Bailey from posting
but it is represents a vote against misogynist and sexist speech and
behaviour.
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-26 19:17:28 UTC
Permalink
This link has an interesting Forward written by Ray Bradbury, about
Walt Disney


http://www.scifistation.com/frames.html


dc
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-26 22:03:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Thank you for having the courage to speak out against Padraig Henry’s/
Harry Bailey’s misogynist and sexist message.  
It was neither misogynist nor sexist, but language entirely
appropriate to your deliberate - and continuing - abuse.

[This is soooo ironically comical in a series of threads where I'm
being attacked for daring to expose Walt Disney's sexism, racism, anti-
Semitism].
Post by p***@yahoo.com
There was also an
implied threat here.
Oh really? That if you continue hurling unprovoked abuse, I'll respond
in kind?
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Verbal abuse against women,
Calling you a 'cunt', a 'bitch', a 'slut' for your utterly
disingenuous verbal abuse (now escalated to an attempt to ban me)
simply because you are too manically arrogant to admit your original
error is entirely appropriate.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
which often promotes
and leads to violence against women, is as damaging and demeaning to
men as it is to women.
I think you need to reconsider your self-induced paranoia.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Does any woman provoke, invite and deserve such
attacks?
What 'attacks'? You're now adding further delusional insanity to your
ravings.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
The word "provoke" implies that there are some behaviours
that justify verbal abuse and assault.
This is usenet, not your local cafe. If you set out to verbally abuse
a poster, as you did in this and other threads, you can expect a
determined response.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
These include disagreeing with
the person.  When a man says "she provoked me", he is essentially
placing the blame on the woman in an attempt to escape responsibility
for his language and behaviour.
I'm entirely responsible for the language I'm using, and in your case
it's entirely appropriate, even more so with your latest post.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
This is no excuse for verbal abuse
intended to induce fear and silence.
YOU started this with your irrational and offensive ravings. You're
still at it now, attempting to intimidate with a base appeal to
'report' my responses, still giving vent to your incredulous
narcissism.

The fact that you don't even contribute anything to this newsgroup
(except passive-aggressive abuse when you've been proven wrong) makes
your pathetic retreat into victimization even more hilarious. And sad.
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-26 22:40:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Thank you for having the courage to speak out against Padraig Henry’s/
Harry Bailey’s misogynist and sexist message.  
It was neither misogynist nor sexist, but language entirely
appropriate to your deliberate - and continuing - abuse.
[This is soooo ironically comical in a series of threads where I'm
being attacked for daring to expose Walt Disney's sexism, racism, anti-
Semitism].
Post by p***@yahoo.com
There was also an
implied threat here.
Oh really? That if you continue hurling unprovoked abuse, I'll respond
in kind?
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Verbal abuse against women,
Calling you a 'cunt', a 'bitch', a 'slut' for your utterly
disingenuous verbal abuse (now escalated to an attempt to ban me)
simply because you are too manically arrogant to admit your original
error is entirely appropriate.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
which often promotes
and leads to violence against women, is as damaging and demeaning to
men as it is to women.
I think you need to reconsider your self-induced paranoia.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Does any woman provoke, invite and deserve such
attacks?
What 'attacks'? You're now adding further delusional insanity to your
ravings.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
The word "provoke" implies that there are some behaviours
that justify verbal abuse and assault.
This is usenet, not your local cafe. If you set out to verbally abuse
a poster, as you did in this and other threads, you can expect a
determined response.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
These include disagreeing with
the person.  When a man says "she provoked me", he is essentially
placing the blame on the woman in an attempt to escape responsibility
for his language and behaviour.
I'm entirely responsible for the language I'm using, and in your case
it's entirely appropriate, even more so with your latest post.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
This is no excuse for verbal abuse
intended to induce fear and silence.
YOU started this with your irrational and offensive ravings. You're
still at it now, attempting to intimidate with a base appeal to
'report' my responses, still giving vent to your incredulous
narcissism.
The fact that you don't even contribute anything to this newsgroup
(except passive-aggressive abuse when you've been proven wrong) makes
your pathetic retreat into victimization even more hilarious. And sad.
BTW, Gen, if you're so eager to continue escalating this (now accusing
me of being 'misogynist' and 'sexist' [when in actuality I've been
consistently the most pro-feminist poster on this newsgroup over the
past TWELVE YEARS, systematically confronting the easy sexist smugness
of countless posters here]), be my fucking guest ... And you still are
too horrendously mean-minded to even bother addressing the original
point of disagreement: that you were completely wrong about (what you
imagined to be) cinema attendance in Nazi Germany during the war, but
rather than simply concede your mistake (or even just have the good
sense to shut-the-fuck-up) you instead decided to begin a concerted
campaign of posting a series of abusive posts directed at me [ie
"BEWARE EVERYONE! Disagree with my personal anecdotes as the basis for
objective knowledge about the world and I'll forthwith insult you
personally at every available opportunity! And if you throw back at me
my insults I'll REPORT YOU!"].
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 11:01:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Gen, you've picked on the wrong poster to try and peddle and escalate
your twisted, hypocritical insults and ravings ... and now your're
only going to regret your error ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen?
I thought I was being perfectly clear.
No, you were being perfectly insulting, you smug little bitch.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 You don't actually
Post by Padraig L Henry
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy.
I am not sure that is an insult considering the state of AMK.
Your garbage is a contributary factor  to that state.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I
haven't posted here in a while. You didn't seem to mind my defense of
Rashid Khalidi. Oh, but wait, Prof. Khalidi is probably too moderate
for you. Edward Said too.
What the fuck do you care about the Middle East? You talk bullshit
about having visited there as though this is a 'basis' for 'empathy'.
Listen, you little slut, your fellow Americans have spent the last
SEVEN YEARS visiting death and destruction on the Middle East, still
continuing (and even now escalating in Afghanistan). Don't you fucking
dare talk to me about imperialist/murderous 'empathy'. You're just
another prick-apologist for [you know what] ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
And you began
Post by Padraig L Henry
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.
Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....
The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
Where do I claim to know everything about Disney?
So you're not only a hypocrite, you're also amnesiac, forgetting what
you earlier wrote in this thread. Piss off, slut.
<some vacuous bullshit snipped>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Stop calling me an anti-Semite you bastard;
??  All your posts over the past few days attacking me and insulting
me are PRECISELY because you are an apologist for anti-Semites, from
Disney to Riefenstahl. You're not just a slut, you're a smug cunt to
boot. Fuck off.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
members of my family were
nearly sent to the camps
Boo hoo hoo. But they survived and you're the fucking abortive result.
Boo hoo hoo.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
P.S. Dad was British which meant members of our families were killing
each other during the 2 world wars but you accuse me of being a
fascist, the lowest thing that you could say - I suppose that soon you
will accuse me of being anti-Irish (!) because I am half-British.-
Who gives a fuck what you are. You've completely destroyed your
credibility here. Now piss off ...
[This is such ... FUN! We'll get Donald Duck to provide the
soundtrack!].-
I avoided resorting to name calling regarding these arguments.
You didn't. Having lost the argument, as with Gen, having had your
factual errors and unreasonable arguments undermined, you both
resorted to ad hominems, in gen's case repeatedly and totally
hysterically. When that happens, when all reason is abandoned (cf
Kelps' posts) I respond by 'returning to sender' by throwing your own
abuse back at you. Gen has a history on AMK of doing this (ever since
the discussion about AI and morality, confusing the latter with the
Law), of immediately hurling personal abuse when her reasoning ability
fails her. I'll be re-posting the origin and sequence of the present
abuse escalation later, but it seems that you have now aligned
yourself with such an approach, with such personal abuse, with the
Kelpzoid loonies on this forum ie you are CONTINUING to escalate the
abuse, but I'll ignore your abuse as it is with Gen that the dispute
arose.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
But you
won't let that stop you, Padraig. You insult Genevieve and call her
names.
How convenient to turn causality on its head, Boaz. Gen began the
insults (on the Hollywood thread). I repeatedly attempted to reason
with her in spite of her continuing insults, yet she responded with
yet MORE offensive posts. At that point, it is pointless to continue
to reason with such people, but instead to apply some of their own
'medicine', so I threw her own insults back at her. Yes, she has now
been called a cunt, a slut, a bitch, and should this escalate further,
she'll be called much more, much worse, as will her 'defenders' -
because she is acting totally immorally, totally abusively, totally
opportunistically, and has absolutely no real interest in engaging in
civilized or progressive discussion. I don't ever recall having
insulted you Boaz because I've never had any reason to, as you don't
usually respond to reasoned argument by dismissing it and then
substituting abuse instead.

But now you've let yourself down. As to why you have such a libidinal
investment in denying the truth about a (dead) reactionary mogul like
Disney is anyone's guess, or as to why you rush to defend abusive
posters ....
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You are the lowest scum, a bully.
I'm - WALT DISNEY!!!!!!
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Do you not have a wife to
slap around, you worthless Irish prick?
Keep it up Boaz ... wife-beater, racist stereotyping. Sounds like
Disney, all right; he was both!
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You are worthless and a
coward, for only a coward would resort to the kind of insulting and
name calling you have resorted to.
You're describing Gen, Boaz, and now it is you who is resorting "to
the kind of insulting and
name calling you have resorted to."
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You want to be right,
That is what Gen (and others) want to be, especially when she is
wrong, resorting to abuse in a base attempt to 'prove' she's right.

<rest of Boaz's abuse snipped>

Boaz, defending someone like Gen given her ravings here destroys YOUR
credibility, as does your defense of such 'lowlife scum' as
Disney ...
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 12:09:02 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 24, 12:34 am, ***@yahoo.com wrote:
<snipped Boaz's fevered ravings and abuse>

Just to remind you once again about what the central problem is here,
as you've already side-stepped it:

In the light of Gen's unprovoked over-reaction, her abandonment of
rational discourse and resort to verbal personal abuse, it might be
worthwhile to re-examine what an 'argument' actually entails.

Rational and reasonable discussion and argument should entail
eradicating the words “opinion”, “feeling”, and “belief” and
"personal" from the vocabulary of such discourse. Few things irk more
than repeatedly seeing these words articulated in a post or hearing
them enunciated, ispe-digitism, as a basis for argument or as a
'self-
evident' proof of some claim. In and of themselves, of course, these
words are perfectly serviceable. However, there is a grammar behind
these words that is on the one hand a defense against entertaining
claims, and on the other hand corrosive to critical thought. Someone
might remark, “It is Plato’s opinion that…”, “Nietzsche felt…”,
“Saint
Thomas believed that…”, "My parents' experience was different ...",
etc. Why are these locutions forms of defense against thought and
corrosive to critical thinking? The common thread behind these forms
of enunciation is that they detach claims from grounds by which these
claims are arrived at. In other words, when a claim is treated in
terms of the signifiers “belief”, “opinion”, or “feeling”, it becomes
like the famous smile of Carroll’s Cheshire Cat detached from the
body
of the cat, floating about of its own accord. As a consequence, the
person can then conveniently ignore any of the reasoning or grounds
that lead to the claim, rendering themselves immune to any argument
supporting the conclusion or claim.


In short, since “everyone is entitled to their own opinion”, and
since
“everyone has their own beliefs”, the poster can then set their own
opinions in opposition to another poster claiming “while Leibniz
believes x, I believe y, so I don’t agree with Leibniz.” While
Padraig
is then deemed to simply 'believe' that cinema attendance in wartime
Germany increased (ignoring the fact that such a 'belief' is not a
belief, but a claim that is grounded on the actual attendance records
of those years), Gen simply 'believes' that it didn't increase while
resorting to the emotive and anti-intellectual device of then
introducting a personalized non-sequitur: relating a personal
anecdote
about her relatives, that relatives of hers endured extreme hardship
during that war. Here such views are protected behind an impenetrable
fortress and need never be challenged or subjected to any sort of
critical scrutiny. Given that one opinion is as good as another, the
poster can continue to cleave comfortably to their prior beliefs
without entering into any sort of becoming. Everything remains the
same. Not coincidentally, I find that those who most vigorously use
the language of “opinion”, “belief”, “feeling”, “perspective”, or
“perception”, are also the ones who tend to be unable to formulate an
argument. The reason for this is that they inevitably end up
summarizing the “opinions” of others – “Spinoza believed that God and
the world are one and the same” –without analyzing the arguments by
which the philosopher arrives at his position. Everything thus
remains
at the superficial level of an inventory of the philosopher’s
“opinions”, without any examination of just what line of reasoning
leads the philosopher to such a conclusion.


Rather than using such words as 'opinion', 'personal feeling',
'belief', etc, I prefer to use words like “claim”, “thesis”,
“position”, “assertion”, “argument”, etc. The point here is not that
this approach is always right or that it can never be mistaken.
Rather, the idea behind this foreclosure of words like “opinion” and
“perception” and their replacement by terms like “argument” and
“claim”, is to draw attention to supporting reasons for claims or how
thinkers arrive at claims. In other words, one does not argue against
a position by setting another position beside it like too books on a
bookcase ("Cinema attendance increased", "Cinema attendance did not
increase"), but instead strives to demonstrate the presence of
contradictions, false premises, invalid or weak arguments, etc.


I'm frequently astonished to discover - though hereabouts it's the
norm - that so many otherwise educated people do not know what an
argument is, nor what explanations and theories are. How strange
courses in the humanities must sound to their ears. For them an
argument is a disagreement between two people, a dispute, rather than
a set of reasons in support of a claim or a conclusion. What must
they
think when asked to examine a scientist's or a philosopher’s
argument? Likewise, for them a theory is an unproven guess or hunch,
rather than an explanation (a “why?” or “how?”) for some phenomenon
or
other. Upon hearing the word “theory”, they must immediately assume
that something unproven and undemonstrated is being referred to. As a
consequence, the following 'arguments' might be of relevance here:


1) The Relationship Between Theories and Facts: Theories are
explanations of facts and facts support theories. Theories do not, at
some point become facts, but always remain explanations or accounts
of
facts. A fact, by contrast, is some state-of-affairs in the world.
The
relation between theories and facts is thus not one of transition
from
one state (being a theory) to another state (being a fact), but is
rather a dialectical relation (not in the Hegelian sense), where the
two terms always refer to one another. Of crucial importance here is
the recognition that a theory is not less than a fact, but is in many
respects one of our crowning achievements as humans. Facts do not
speak for themselves, nor explain themselves. They are brute things
that sit there like rocks rising out of the desert. Thus, it is a
fact, as Lucretius observes, that water changes color as waves crash
or as the wind blows across it. Yet while this is an obvious fact
about the world, this fact does not explain itself. It requires a
theory to be explained, an account of what causes this phenomenon.
Lucretius’ brilliant explanation is that atoms do not themselves have
color, but rather color is an emergent property of relations among
and
combinations of atoms. Thus, when waves crash or wind blows the atoms
are combined in news ways generating the varieties of colors we
encounter. It is also a fact that the sun moves across the sky. Yet
there are a variety of theories through which this phenomenon can be
explained. We can take the counter-intuitive Copernican route and
explain this as an optical illusion produced by the spinning of the
earth as it revolves around the sun. We can take the intuitive
Ptolemaic route of explaining this by the rotation of the sun about
the earth. Or we can take the Homeric route of explaining this as a
result of Apollo dragging the sun across the sky. The strength of a
theory will be a function of both how many facts it is able to
explain
and predict. A theory that has been able to explain and predict a
number of facts will not be thrown out when it encounters a counter-
example, but rather it will be assumed that there must be a hidden
cause capable of explaining the anomalous fact in question until so
many anomalies mount that it is clear the theory must be mistaken. I
realize the philosophers of science will jump all over me for this
simplistic account of the relationship between theories and facts,
but
it is a good heuristic
hereabouts.


2) Arguments and Conclusions: As I remarked, many have little
conception of just what an argument is, entailing as it does an
understanding of the relationship between premises and conclusions,
as
well as the difference between deductive arguments and inductive
arguments. This latter distinction is especially important as it is
often assumed that the only way to “prove” a conclusion is
inductively
through observations of the world. A number of philosophical issues
and positions can’t be understood at all without a clear
understanding
of the difference between induction and deduction.


3) Truths of Reason and Truths of Experience: I find that clearly
making this distinction is one of the most challenging things. It is
impossible to understand much of anything, whether philosophical or
scientific, if it is assumed that the only truths are truths of
experience. In the absence of this distinction it will be assumed
that
the only way to prove something is through direct observation. This
can lead to extreme skepticism when someone recognizes that many
events are remote from us in time and space and therefore cannot be
observed (i.e., they refuse to grant that we can make inferences
based
on the regular structure of the world). Consequently, any form of
rationalism is only possible if this distinction is made so that the
nature of rationalist arguments can be understood. However, this
distinction is also relevant to non-rationalistic forms of inference.
Thus, for example, someone might protest that Lucretius cannot
“prove”
that the atoms exist because we cannot directly observe the existence
of these atoms. What this ignores is our ability to make inferences
from facts– as in the case of water changing color given above –
allowing us to legitimately conclude the existence of entities that
are not directly observed. It will be noted that this style is a
favorite of evolution deniers who argue from the premise that we
can’t
directly observe what took place in such remote history, therefore
warranting the conclusion that evolution is “just a theory” that
cannot be “proven”.
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 12:32:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Gen, you've picked on the wrong poster to try and peddle and escalate
your twisted, hypocritical insults and ravings ... and now your're
only going to regret your error ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by Padraig L Henry
Now further degenerating into an abusive, hysterical gloat-fest ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
It is his generalizations and one-dimensional characterizations
Whatever are you muttering about now, Gen?
I thought I was being perfectly clear.
No, you were being perfectly insulting, you smug little bitch.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 You don't actually
Post by Padraig L Henry
contribute anything of substance to this newsgroup, beyond an
occasional one line link to whatever takes your fancy.
I am not sure that is an insult considering the state of AMK.
Your garbage is a contributary factor  to that state.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I
haven't posted here in a while. You didn't seem to mind my defense of
Rashid Khalidi. Oh, but wait, Prof. Khalidi is probably too moderate
for you. Edward Said too.
What the fuck do you care about the Middle East? You talk bullshit
about having visited there as though this is a 'basis' for 'empathy'.
Listen, you little slut, your fellow Americans have spent the last
SEVEN YEARS visiting death and destruction on the Middle East, still
continuing (and even now escalating in Afghanistan). Don't you fucking
dare talk to me about imperialist/murderous 'empathy'. You're just
another prick-apologist for [you know what] ...
Post by p***@yahoo.com
And you began
Post by Padraig L Henry
this 'dispute' by indignantly raving that how dare I suggest that
cinema attendance in wartime Germany was at a very high level, was
business as usual, then proceeding to 'support' your attack not with
reasons but with an abusive and offensive tirade of insults. You seem
completely unable to address the original points in the other thread,
instead sinking into an amoral quagmire of passive-aggressive abuse.
Rather than admit that you were utterly wrong about cinema admissions
in wartime Germany, you instead engaged in a disingenuous attempt at
moral blackmail, in the ideology of victimization, in order to 'win'
an argument/disagreement: "My family suffered in the war, therefore
I'M AUTOMATICALLY RIGHT in whatever I claim, even if I'm wrong."
What's now even more hilarious is that you're claiming to 'know all
about Walt Disney' while then instantly disavowing such knowledge and
defending his obnoxious behaviour. I didn't think you were an
apologist for manic sexism, anti-Semitism, the systematic abuse of
employees, etc, etc; obviously I was wrong. But then, you are also an
apologist for Leni Riefenstahl's delirious fascism .....
The rest of your post is fatuous bluster
Where do I claim to know everything about Disney?
So you're not only a hypocrite, you're also amnesiac, forgetting what
you earlier wrote in this thread. Piss off, slut.
<some vacuous bullshit snipped>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Stop calling me an anti-Semite you bastard;
??  All your posts over the past few days attacking me and insulting
me are PRECISELY because you are an apologist for anti-Semites, from
Disney to Riefenstahl. You're not just a slut, you're a smug cunt to
boot. Fuck off.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
members of my family were
nearly sent to the camps
Boo hoo hoo. But they survived and you're the fucking abortive result.
Boo hoo hoo.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
P.S. Dad was British which meant members of our families were killing
each other during the 2 world wars but you accuse me of being a
fascist, the lowest thing that you could say - I suppose that soon you
will accuse me of being anti-Irish (!) because I am half-British.-
Who gives a fuck what you are. You've completely destroyed your
credibility here. Now piss off ...
[This is such ... FUN! We'll get Donald Duck to provide the
soundtrack!].- Hide quoted text -
I avoided resorting to name calling regarding these arguments. But you
won't let that stop you, Padraig.
On the contrary, you've abandoned argument and now resorted to filthy
insult, which will be met by hurling it back up your fucked-up ass.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You insult Genevieve and call her
names.
I'll gladly return fitting insults to loonies who hurl insult at me
rather than engage in civil discussion, yes indeed. And now it's your
turn ...
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You are the lowest scum, a bully.
Can't you come up with an insult that's a bit more original, Boaz, you
grabastic piece of amphibious shit!
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Do you not have a wife to
slap around,
Unlike a sexist little shit like you (and the anti-feminist, Leni-
Riefenstahl-loving Gen) I prefer to 'slap around' dumb, offensive
posters.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
you worthless Irish prick?
Why not add 'worthless Jew' to your racist quota as well, Boaz, being
such an admirer of anti-Semites like 'Uncle Walt. But then, I'm not
surprised: you're a Hollywood bum.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You are worthless and a
coward, for only a coward would resort to the kind of insulting and
name calling you have resorted to.
You wrote that with the help of an Overlook Mirror.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You want to be right, to be King Of The Hill; the All-Knowing, All-
Seeing Padraig Henry. You want the world to kiss your Marxist Irish
ass, all the while you do nothing but spew your hatred.
Your post is a spectacular example of 'spewing hatred', Mr Hollywood
bum.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Go ahead and come after me now, you Mick turd.
Just returning your turds until you choke on the peanuts.

<some stupidity snipped>
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Whatever credibility *you* may have once had, it is all gone now,
Padraig.
On the contrary, you've just destroyed your's.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
You killed whatever was left with this last post. You are a
worthless, lowlife scum. Just another educated idiot who is out of
touch with the changing world
Piss off, Boaz, you crazy American looney, apologist for the HUAC
madness, apologist for anti-Semitism, and apologist for disturbed
internet posters like Gen.

I'm sure your 'happy' now. Maybe a trip to Disneyland will sober you
up a little ....

[BTW, Gen is still a slut hereabout ... and you're her 'lowlife' pimp].
MP
2009-02-24 13:28:45 UTC
Permalink
Has this trend of rising cinema attendance during a time of conflict
or depression been present in any other countries?

I know the Nigeria's film industry- now the fastest growing film
industry in the world - is dependent on money from its poor, generally
impoverished audience.

http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/nollywood-booming-nigerian-film-industry

"Nollywood grew out of frustration, necessity and crisis: in the late
1980s and early 1990s, Nigerian cities became crime hotbeds. People
were terrified to go out on the streets, and this led to the closing
down of many movie theatres. Desperate for entertainment at home – and
unsatisfied with foreign imports from India and the West – Nigerians
turned to telling their own stories to stave off the boredom of
staying in."
MP
2009-02-24 13:42:55 UTC
Permalink
Mr. Disney and Mr. Kubrick

Two men with very different ideas on making films - and money (1960)

LONDON - Except for the fact that they both happen to be making films
about children, Mr. Walt Disney and Mr. Stanley Kubrick have little in
common. The children about whom they are making their respective films
have even less in common.

Mr. Disney's child star, Hayley Mills, plays identical twins who bring
their divorced parents together. Mr. Kubrick's child star, Sue Lyon,
plays Lolita, an American schoolgirl of twelve who seduces a middle-
aged man.

Mr. Disney and Mr. Kubrick clearly have somewhat different ideas of
what constitutes entertainment. Mr. Kubrick said that he would not
allow a daughter of his to see certain Walt Disney films because they
contained an excessive amount of violence and brutality. On the other
hand, he felt that any child who was too young to see Lolita wouldn't
understand it, and any child who did understand it was, for this
reason old enough to see the film.

Mr. Disney had some pretty sharp things to say about the current
preoccupation with themes of a sexual nature. "It's kinda disgusting,"
he said. "If you can't find anything to say about people except sordid
things you shouldn't make films. I always felt you ought to deal with
the nice side of life. I mean all the stuff about incest in the home,
well there's a lot of homes where that just doesn't exist. The reason
these sort of films are made is that the people who make them figure
they're gonna make some easy dough that way. That's the only reason
they make them."

Mr. Kubrick said he wasn't interested in making money. He had been
offered a million dollars plus 50 per cent of the profits to make
Lolita for Warner Brothers, but he had turned down the offer because
it would have meant handing over artistic control to a big Hollywood
studio.

He wanted to make Lolita his way. He could prove that he was not
primarily interested in making money: he had spent the first ten years
of his career as a director not making any. He had received no salary
for directing his two most highly praised films, The Killing and Paths
of Glory. Instead, he had agreed to work for a percentage of the
profits. As neither film has yet made a profit, Mr. Kubrick hasn't
made any money.

"For the first ten years of my career" said Mr. Kubrick, "I only
earned money for not directing films. I was paid to make a film for
MGM that never got made. And I was paid in full by Marlon Brando to
direct One Eyed Jacks, but we disagreed and I left. I started off by
making short documentaries with my own money and I sold them at a
loss."

Mr. Kubrick has, of course, been paid for directing his most recent
film, Spartacus.

Mr. Disney who created Mickey Mouse, at just about the time when Mr.
Kubrick was born, said he didn't have any money either. "All I have,"
he said "is in my studio. At present we own about 25 million dollars
to different lending agencies. I've got about 7.000.000 dollars tied
up in British productions alone and Disneyland represents an
investment of around 33 million dollars. But I personally haven't got
anything. We finally managed to pay off the mortgage on our home about
a year ago. To me, making films is sort of an obligation. I have a
studio to keep going. I have a staff of around 1500 people that I have
to keep employed."

To Mr. Kubrick the cinema is not just an industry but also an art.
"The reason I am making Lolita," he said, "is because I consider it to
be a masterpiece. "It would be hypocrisy for me to pretend that I am
unaware of the notoriety of the book, but I am not allowing that in
any way to corrupt the intention behind the making of the film. I have
absolutely no misgivings about it. I think it is a perfectly suitable
subject of entertainment. It is a great love story."

Mr. Kubrick said he had not yet decided whether Lolita and her middle-
aged lover would actually be seen kissing in the film. "We're thinking
about that," he said.

Mr. Disney said he was sad to see that even his old friend, Alfred
Hitchcock, had now begun to overplay sex in his films. "A film like
Psycho I just wouldn't want to see. I don't see why Hitch makes stuff
like that. Hitch don't need to. A while ago he wanted to shoot a
sequence in my Amusement Park, Disneyland. I can imagine what he
wanted to do. Have somebody pushed off one of my rides. I said no. I
don't hold with that sort of thing. Same as when I was approached to
let Hayley Mills, who's under contract to me, play Lolita. I wouldn't
want her to see it, let alone play it."

If any conclusion can be drawn from all this it is that there are some
films which are not fit for children to see and some that are only fit
for children to see. On the whole, I prefer the former.

The Insider's Newsletter, December 1960
MP
2009-02-24 14:31:08 UTC
Permalink
Before I started posting on AMK, I read hundreds of past posts. Every
now and then I'd come across one huge bitch-fest where everybody on
AMK was arguing with Padraig. But to me, reading his posts 3 or 4
years after they were written, all his points made the most sense. All
his points seemed proven with time, be they rants on AI, EWS,
Afghanistan, elections, Iraq etc.

Padraig's posts are like a Kubrick film. They require time to pass,
emotions to cool down and a later period of critical re-analysis.

On the flip side, just weeks away you were tearing into Christian
Bale's foul-mouthed tirade, Padraig. How is this different? Boaz and
Gen were needling you, but don't you think your "sluts", "cunts" and
"bitches" were over the top?

Oh, and one more thing, while Americans tend to find "cunt" as one of
the most offensive and shocking words, in Ireland it has the same
weight as a word like "bitch". The word is used far more often in
Ireland. So perhaps Padraig is desensitized to the word, or perhaps he
was genuinely being malicious and intended for it to get under your
skin and revolt you. I don't know.

But what's interesting is how powerful a single word can be. I
remember the first time I saw "The Shining". Jack's utterance of
"fuck" to his wife and Grady's "nigger" to Jack were shocking, and yet
I'd heard these words thousands of times before. What lent Kubrick's
"fucks" and "niggers" visceral power, were the way they undercut the
quiet normalacy of their scenes.
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 17:35:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by MP
Before I started posting on AMK, I read hundreds of past posts. Every
now and then I'd come across one huge bitch-fest where everybody on
AMK was arguing with Padraig. But to me, reading his posts 3 or 4
years after they were written, all his points made the most sense. All
his points seemed proven with time, be they rants on AI, EWS,
Afghanistan, elections, Iraq etc.
Padraig's posts are like a Kubrick film. They require time to pass,
emotions to cool down and a later period of critical re-analysis.
On the flip side, just weeks away you were tearing into Christian
Bale's foul-mouthed tirade, Padraig. How is this different? Boaz and
Gen were needling you, but don't you think your "sluts", "cunts" and
"bitches" were over the top?
Of course they're over the top, yes, they're supposed to be, but it's
Gen and Boaz who are acting like Bale in this instance. And need 'a
good talking to' ...
Post by MP
Oh, and one more thing, while Americans tend to find "cunt" as one of
the most offensive and shocking words, in Ireland it has the same
weight as a word like "bitch". The word is used far more often in
Ireland. So perhaps Padraig is desensitized to the word, or perhaps he
was genuinely being malicious and intended for it to get under your
skin and revolt you. I don't know.
Gen's approach to discussion is "most offensive and shocking" and
passive-aggressively intended to be "genuinely malicious". My response
to such abuse, when all possibilities of reasonable discourse break
down, is an explicit and specific (verbal) strategy of deflecting
their own abuse back at them. Sometimes it works, sometimes it
doesn't, but I don't choose it for simply pragmatic utilitarian
purposes, but as a DEFENCE of rational discussion. Gen [as with many
others who post here] imagines she can 'win' an argument she's already
lost by resorting to a smear campaign against the other poster, (which
should be fairly obvious to anyone who peruses the "Hollywood/
Propaganda" thread), the very anti-social and anti-intellectual
'tactics' that caused most of the early posters here to depart.

I don't know Gen, except as a poster here. 'Gen' is just an avatar;
whether the person using it is male, female, black, white, young, old,
straight, queer, American, French, Extraterrestrial, or a robot is
unknown to me and of little consequence.
Post by MP
But what's interesting is how powerful a single word can be. I
remember the first time I saw "The Shining". Jack's utterance of
"fuck" to his wife and Grady's "nigger" to Jack were shocking, and yet
I'd heard these words thousands of times before. What lent Kubrick's
"fucks" and "niggers" visceral power, were the way they undercut the
quiet normalacy of their scenes.
The same for this newsgroup: after Kubrick's death (and the parallel
growth of the internet), the newsgroup was invaded by trolls,
spammers, right-wing loonies, mental basket-cases, and posters eager
to include swear words and insults and threats in every sentence of
every post. I well recall the first viseral uses of 'fuck', 'cunt',
'slut' etc hereabouts. Of course, being called a 'commie' in America
is even more offensive, more visceral :-). It can completely destroy
careers and lives.
ichorwhip
2009-02-26 07:39:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by MP
Before I started posting on AMK, I read hundreds of past posts. Every
now and then I'd come across one huge bitch-fest where everybody on
AMK was arguing with Padraig. But to me, reading his posts 3 or 4
years after they were written, all his points made the most sense. All
his points seemed proven with time, be they rants on AI, EWS,
Afghanistan, elections, Iraq etc.
Padraig's posts are like a Kubrick film. They require time to pass,
emotions to cool down and a later period of critical re-analysis.
On the flip side, just weeks away you were tearing into Christian
Bale's foul-mouthed tirade, Padraig. How is this different? Boaz and
Gen were needling you, but don't you think your "sluts", "cunts" and
"bitches" were over the top?
Padraig admitted it was over the top. I think it was uncalled for and
unequal to the perceived insults dealt by Gen, which seemed mild in
comparison. I don't think she deserved this treatment at all
regardless of whether she has won or lost the original dispute having
to do with German movie attendance figures during WW2. The figures
seem to speak for themselves, and I really don't care about them much
because they don't surprise me. What does offend me is that my thread
has been derailed! Padraig clearly stated in his "Hollywood" thread
that Disney's artistry, which he seems to dispute, had no place in his
thread which soon zeroed in on Disney alleged corruption et al (don't
know how you can prove this when the guy was pretty much broke for
most of his life and cared nothing for personal fortune and everything
for his studio and work), his antisemitism, and his proclivity for
naming names and destroying people's lives etcetera. All the Disney
dirt in other words, is all Padraig wanted to discuss. Fair enough
then... So I cooked up this lil' counterthread in hopes of discussing
Disney's artistic merit and the films which bear his name and what
happens? I'm not given the same courtesy as to sticking to the
subject. I'm still left wondering if Padraig detests all of Disney's
films in and of themselves, and all the "cunts" "bastards" and
"pricks" in the world have come gushing in with much hatred and
resentment. Where's the argument in this as painstakingly defined by
Mr. Henry?
Post by MP
Oh, and one more thing, while Americans tend to find "cunt" as one of
the most offensive and shocking words, in Ireland it has the same
weight as a word like "bitch".
Still not nice either way although I am rather fond of "cunt." It's
like a one-word song.
Post by MP
The word is used far more often in
Ireland. So perhaps Padraig is desensitized to the word, or perhaps he
was genuinely being malicious and intended for it to get under your
skin and revolt you. I don't know.
I don't know either, but I do know that it has nothing to do with
Disney's work.

"Excuse me sir, Premier Kissov's calling again and he's hopping mad."
i
"piop"
ichorwhip
2009-02-26 06:35:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by MP
Mr. Disney and Mr. Kubrick
Two men with very different ideas on making films - and money (1960)
LONDON - Except for the fact that they both happen to be making films
about children, Mr. Walt Disney and Mr. Stanley Kubrick have little in
common. The children about whom they are making their respective films
have even less in common.
Mr. Disney's child star, Hayley Mills, plays identical twins who bring
their divorced parents together. Mr. Kubrick's child star, Sue Lyon,
plays Lolita, an American schoolgirl of twelve who seduces a middle-
aged man.
Mr. Disney and Mr. Kubrick clearly have somewhat different ideas of
what constitutes entertainment. Mr. Kubrick said that he would not
allow a daughter of his to see certain Walt Disney films because they
contained an excessive amount of violence and brutality. On the other
hand, he felt that any child who was too young to see Lolita wouldn't
understand it, and any child who did understand it was, for this
reason old enough to see the film.
Mr. Disney had some pretty sharp things to say about the current
preoccupation with themes of a sexual nature. "It's kinda disgusting,"
he said. "If you can't find anything to say about people except sordid
things you shouldn't make films. I always felt you ought to deal with
the nice side of life. I mean all the stuff about incest in the home,
well there's a lot of homes where that just doesn't exist. The reason
these sort of films are made is that the people who make them figure
they're gonna make some easy dough that way. That's the only reason
they make them."
Mr. Kubrick said he wasn't interested in making money. He had been
offered a million dollars plus 50 per cent of the profits to make
Lolita for Warner Brothers, but he had turned down the offer because
it would have meant handing over artistic control to a big Hollywood
studio.
He wanted to make Lolita his way. He could prove that he was not
primarily interested in making money: he had spent the first ten years
of his career as a director not making any. He had received no salary
for directing his two most highly praised films, The Killing and Paths
of Glory. Instead, he had agreed to work for a percentage of the
profits. As neither film has yet made a profit, Mr. Kubrick hasn't
made any money.
"For the first ten years of my career" said Mr. Kubrick, "I only
earned money for not directing films. I was paid to make a film for
MGM that never got made. And I was paid in full by Marlon Brando to
direct One Eyed Jacks, but we disagreed and I left. I started off by
making short documentaries with my own money and I sold them at a
loss."
Mr. Kubrick has, of course, been paid for directing his most recent
film, Spartacus.
Mr. Disney who created Mickey Mouse, at just about the time when Mr.
Kubrick was born, said he didn't have any money either. "All I have,"
he said "is in my studio. At present we own about 25 million dollars
to different lending agencies. I've got about 7.000.000 dollars tied
up in British productions alone and Disneyland represents an
investment of around 33 million dollars. But I personally haven't got
anything. We finally managed to pay off the mortgage on our home about
a year ago. To me, making films is sort of an obligation. I have a
studio to keep going. I have a staff of around 1500 people that I have
to keep employed."
To Mr. Kubrick the cinema is not just an industry but also an art.
"The reason I am making Lolita," he said, "is because I consider it to
be a masterpiece. "It would be hypocrisy for me to pretend that I am
unaware of the notoriety of the book, but I am not allowing that in
any way to corrupt the intention behind the making of the film. I have
absolutely no misgivings about it. I think it is a perfectly suitable
subject of entertainment. It is a great love story."
Mr. Kubrick said he had not yet decided whether Lolita and her middle-
aged lover would actually be seen kissing in the film. "We're thinking
about that," he said.
Mr. Disney said he was sad to see that even his old friend, Alfred
Hitchcock, had now begun to overplay sex in his films. "A film like
Psycho I just wouldn't want to see. I don't see why Hitch makes stuff
like that. Hitch don't need to. A while ago he wanted to shoot a
sequence in my Amusement Park, Disneyland. I can imagine what he
wanted to do. Have somebody pushed off one of my rides. I said no. I
don't hold with that sort of thing. Same as when I was approached to
let Hayley Mills, who's under contract to me, play Lolita. I wouldn't
want her to see it, let alone play it."
If any conclusion can be drawn from all this it is that there are some
films which are not fit for children to see and some that are only fit
for children to see. On the whole, I prefer the former.
The Insider's Newsletter, December 1960
That was interesting and not without some assorted ironies. Thanks
for posting it.

"...like two civilized senators."
i
"piop"
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-24 16:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by MP
Has this trend of rising cinema attendance during a time of conflict
or depression been present in any other countries?
Good question, MP. Cinema attendances reached their highest levels in
the US (about 4.5 billion admissions in the mid-1940s, but down to
around 1.4 billion today), in Britain (1.6 billion admissions at one
point in the mid-40s, whereas today its around 150m), in Australia,
among other countries, during WWII, peaking just after the war, and
then going into near-continuous decline (though the expansion of the
multiplexes - among other factors - modestly increased attendance in
most Western countries from the late 1990s).

It's also a function of the size and influence of the film industries
and film cultures (along with protectionist measures and/or state
censorship) in these countries too (for instance, after the collapse
of the Soviet Union [along with its film industry], film attendance
completely collapsed too, to the point that today admissions are a
mere 19 million in a country with a population of about150 million),
and as your example of the extraordinary, frenetic expansion of a
digital, low-budget, guerrila-style 'home movie' film-production
industry in Nigeria over the past decade makes clear (though measured
by DVD sales rather than cinema attendance, as Nigeria never had any
conventional film industry nor cinema infrastructure to speak of). So
that attendence levels are closely related to the relative size and
cultural importance/dominance of the country's film industry: per-
capita admissions are highest in such countries as the US, India,
France, Germany, UK, Canada, Australia, Spain, Italy, South Korea -
those with large film production sectors - and the lowest in those
countries with a small film sector (China, despite having the world's
largest population of around 1.5b only has around 140m in ticket sales
annually and a relatively small film industry; similarly with Eastern
European countries, and numerous countries in Africa, Asia, and South
America).

[But, needless to say, these are just 'stupid' and 'sterile'
statistics; those who prefer to rely on 'oral history' and rural
folklore will have a different story to relate ...].

"With its bans on the great Russian classics, on newsreels critical of
Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy, on
'references to controversial politics', 'relations to capital and
labor', 'subjects calculated or possibly
intended to foment social unrest or discontent' ... it is perhaps
hardly surprising that in 1937 Lord Tyrrell
could say to the exhibitors association: "We may take pride in
observing that there is not a single film showing
in London today which deals with any of the burning questions of the
day".-----Julian Petley, Cinema and State.
Post by MP
I know the Nigeria's film industry- now the fastest growing film
industry in the world - is dependent on money from its poor, generally
impoverished audience.
http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/nollywood-booming-nigerian-film-indu...
"Nollywood grew out of frustration, necessity and crisis: in the late
1980s and early 1990s, Nigerian cities became crime hotbeds. People
were terrified to go out on the streets, and this led to the closing
down of many movie theatres. Desperate for entertainment at home – and
unsatisfied with foreign imports from India and the West – Nigerians
turned to telling their own stories to stave off the boredom of
staying in."
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-23 20:55:06 UTC
Permalink
Someone should do a film where Jean Baudrillard, Derrida, Lacan,
Zizek, and other Pardraig's gurus and their disciples, go to
Disneyland.

Possible titles:

"Who Killed Bambi: Thoughts on enforced Facsist Toilet Training?"
"How Mickey Mouse betrayed the world: The Rat of California?"
"No Sleeping Beauty in Seattle"
"How I learned to Stop enjoying Life and Learned to became a Nutjob"
"The Sorcerer's Apprentice is a Zionist Thug"
"Gazaworld: Disney's secret plot from the Grave"
"The Teacup Ride tortures"
"A-Ticket Hypnosis, D-Ticket Nazis"


I'm sure better titles can be found.

dc
Bill Reid
2009-02-25 15:02:58 UTC
Permalink
Just a side note: I still marvel at the technical incompetence
of the Google(TM) Groups idiots...of course, since our little Quote
Monkey(TM) struggled to piece together some ORIGINAL (yet
still off-topic) "thoughts" on the very DEAD topic of Walt Disney,
Google(TM) Groups sends it out with the correct ASCII format
that my newsreader can automatically quote...and of course,
if our retarded little Quote Monkey(TM) could ever learn to
press the "correct" button when REPLYING to a message, his
replies would be OK too, but we've wasted a thousand bananas
trying to "cure" him and get no further with our studies...
Post by ichorwhip
I'm very torn about Uncle Walt.
Here we go, "Icky-Whipped"'s attempt at a non-non-sequitur post,
let's see how quickly it devolves into a muddled mess of cliches and
thoughtless platitudes...
Post by ichorwhip
I just want to ignore everything bad
about him, proven, misconstrued or false, and acknowledge the source
and inspiration of some of the greatest animation ever done. "Er... I
just want to die peacefully like with no... pain."
Whoops, a non-sequitur quote...just so we know it's really him?
Post by ichorwhip
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.
Of course, NOBODY said that, so now we KNOW it's the
real "Icky"...
Post by ichorwhip
It seems merely
convenient to bash Disney for being a red-baiter, name-namer and
fascist when in fact you hold nothing but contempt for his artistry to
begin with.
Idiot!!! Once again, this proves my point: that in order to WRITE
a coherent sentence, you must first have a coherent THOUGHT...
Post by ichorwhip
As for me, I think Disney's golden age is as important to
cinema, and animation in particular, as anything else, even Kubrick
and Lean!
Would you be willing to anonymously wish death and stalk
and harass people who disagree with that, like you "bravely"
do for Lean? I also like the exclamation point at the end of
that stupid statement, like the episode of "Seinfeld" where
Elaine gets fired from her job as a book editor for putting
exclamation points at the end of all the sentences in a book...

"I wanted to write something coherent and meaningful about
Walt Disney, but I failed!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
Post by ichorwhip
So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
What thread, only an idiot would respond to this drivel...oh wait,
several idiots did (that doesn't include me, since I just pointed out
correctly it's idiotic).

In any event, you're not the boss of me...or anyone!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by ichorwhip
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other? Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
Hmmmm, I feel an anecdote coming on...

There was a guy I worked with once MANY years ago, named
Hans. He was a illustrator, and had worked for Uncle Walt as an
animator after WWII, and had worked on most of the post-war
Disney animated classics. IN WWII, he was a German soldier
who lost a few toes to frostbite in the "Battle of the Bulge"...yes,
Walt Disney apparently gave preferential hiring treatment to NAZIS,
SO WHAT DOES THAT SAY ABOUT HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anyway, Hans told us one day about working for Disney. He
said that first you had to serve a two-year apprenticeship where
you had to pay DISNEY for the "training" you received. Then
when you "passed" the "training program" you got to work for FREE
for several years, then maybe, just MAYBE, you might actually
get paid...except Hans told us MOST of the animators got fired
at the end of their unpaid employment stints for "incompetence".

He DID say one of the greatests days of his life was the
day his Disney boss called him into his office, and congratulated
him, because now he was going to get to work for Disney for
FREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hans gave a few cells from like "Lady And The Tramp" he must
have stolen from Disney or something, then later on went all crazy
on my ass for some stupid joke I made, but that's another anecdote
and I don't even remember it really...
Post by ichorwhip
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
What "People"?
Post by ichorwhip
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too. A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
Everything went downhill after "Steamboat Willie" if you ask me...
Post by ichorwhip
"I've got no strings
To hold me down
To make me fret, or make me frown
I had strings
But now I'm free
There are no strings on me."
"When you wish upon a star"...nope, "Icky"'s still here...

Anyway, here's some space for foaming-mouthed "Icky"
response, full of "YOU'RE A LIAR DID HE DRIVE A MAGICAL
BORGWARD TOO TRYING TO LURE US WITH YOUR
POPEIL(R) POCKET FISHERMAN(TM) AGAIN THERE WAS NO
WWII YOU LIAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
idiotic non-sequiturs:







---
William Ernest "Hi Ho" Reid
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-25 22:36:13 UTC
Permalink
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney

This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young kid,
alongside Cinerama.

Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis



Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: Evolution


Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: Extinction

---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia (1940)

---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald Mountain

--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with Mickey

----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours 1

Dance of Hours 2

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
#1

#2

#3

----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky "Nutcracker"

#2

----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.

Disney was a true visionary.


dc
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-25 22:45:45 UTC
Permalink
"The two Fantasia films will be re-released as Platinum Editions on
DVD and Blu-Ray on March 2, 2010"


dc
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-25 23:54:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Disney was a true visionary.
Let's see what Disney biographer Neal Gabler has to say about this
'true visionary':

"Disney's search for perfection culminated with his vision for Epcot,
Mr. Gabler says, with a sober look at Walt Disney's anti-democratic,
Mussolini-esque model city, which Roy Disney made sure died when Walt
did."

"Disney was absolutely self-confident in his total belief in his
mission and vision, Mr. Gabler reports -- to create a perfect world.
In his definitive biography of Disney, Mr. Gabler calls it "the
eternal promise of cheerful solipsism." "


Gabler interviewed:
http://www.paulagordon.com/shows/gabler/NGablerConv6.ram
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-26 02:31:43 UTC
Permalink
Gabler who wrote the book Walt Disney: The Triumph of the American
Imagination

Q: Why Walt Disney?
A: When you write about someone as grandiose as Walt Disney, you may
tend to get a little grandiose yourself, so forgive me. But I had
always set the task for myself to examine the forces that helped
define American culture in the twentieth century and those individuals
who might be regarded as the architects of the American consciousness.
Walt Disney was certainly one of those forces and one of those
architects. His visual sensibility is arguably one of the two most
important in the last century, along with Picasso's, yet Picasso has
received dozens of biographies and Walt Disney had, when I began, not
received a single full-scale, fully-annotated biography. I wanted to
fill that gap in our cultural studies. I thought that if one could
understand Walt Disney, one could go a long way to understanding
American popular culture.

Q: One thing that strikes you when reading the book is that Walt
Disney never had any money. With all his success how is that possible?
A: It is astonishing that Walt Disney was always--and I do mean
always--in dire financial straits until the opening of Disneyland. The
primary reason wasn't that his cartoons weren't making money, because
they were--at least until the war in Europe when the loss of that
market meant disaster for the features. But even as they were making
money, the studio was losing money because Walt was constitutionally
incapable of cutting corners, enforcing economies, laying off staff.
The only thing about which Walt Disney cared was quality. He thought
that quality was the way to maintain his preeminence, though quality
also had the psychological advantage of letting him perfect his world.
The problem was that quality was expensive. To cite just one example,
Walt spent more than a hundred thousand dollars setting up a training
program for would-be animators, though even then the return was small
because Walt was so picky that very few of the candidates actually
qualified to work at the studio. Money meant very little to Walt
Disney. It was only a means to an end, never an end in itself.

Q: When did Walt first conceive of the idea for Disneyland and what
were the initial reactions to the idea?
A: It is very difficult to determine exactly when Walt hatched the
idea for Disneyland, though he seems to have been thinking about it
for a long time, at least since the early 1930s. Certainly by the time
he was taking his daughters, Diane and Sharon, to amusement parks on
Sunday afternoons in the late 1940s, he had formulated the idea to
establish a park that was clean and wholesome and where parents
wouldn't be afraid to take their children. The original plan was to
build the park on a plot adjacent to the studio in Burbank, where
there would be a train, a town square, an Indian village and
kiddieland rides, but as Walt's ideas expanded, so did the need for a
bigger plot. As for the reactions to his idea, Roy was initially
reluctant, as usual, and Walt's wife, Lillian, was firmly opposed,
though she had also been opposed to his making Snow White. Still, Walt
exaggerated the opposition as a way, I think of elevating his own
foresight and determination. In fact, as the plan grew closer to
realization, corporations sought to be included as lessees, and even
banks, that had been skeptical, became more receptive. When the park
opened, it was an instant success.

Q: What do you think has been Walt's most lasting impact/legacy on
American culture?
A: One could answer this question in a dozen different ways depending
on one's priorities, but I think his largest bequest is a matter of
the American mind. Walt Disney helped change the national
consciousness. He got people to believe in the power of wish
fulfillment--in their own ability to impose their wills on a
recalcitrant reality. That's what Walt Disney did all his life. He
managed to replace reality with his illusions--what some people now
refer to disparagingly as Disneyfication. He sold us on the idea of
control because Walt Disney was himself a master of control. We see
the results everywhere--from film to theme parks to virtual reality to
virtual politics.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is plenty of reason why the Red Scares occurred, starting with
the terrorist anarchist bombings in 1919 and 1920.


Anarchists in the 1936 Spanish Civil War



American communists were prasiing Stalin and he was found out to be a
maniac. Khruschev hated Stalin but he was nuts too. Naturally there
were Red Scares. We didn't want this shit in the US. Our country
didn't need the shit going on all over the world..

This shit still happens-neonazis vs anarchists in Prague





Stalin's death



was shouting, "We will bury You.".

1956

Khruschev and his "We will bury you" rant


Naturally people in the US were worried about these things. MCCarthy
had overwhelming approval at the time.

Boorish conduct


1959

50 megaton bomb testing



Disney talking about Khruschev


Disneyland construction
http://youtu.be/XeiaA43eD_o


http://search.live.com/video/results.aspx?q=khruschev+youtube&form=VIRE1&docid=298498130129&FORM=VARE5#docid=577986232429

1960:

http://search.live.com/video/results.aspx?q=khruschev+youtube&form=VIRE1&docid=298498130129&FORM=VARE5

Gary Powers spy incident



1964 Goldwater ad

http://search.live.com/video/results.aspx?q=we+will+bury+you&docid=561814110422&mid=4864E245C6B4CAD95E264864E245C6B4CAD95E26&FORM=VIVR7

newsreel




KKK in NYC


Anarchist, commies, nazis, KKK, islamic terrorists, street gangs,
drug lords, jealous fanatics of all kinds---- Just go away please.
We don't need your pathetic shit.



dc
Padraig L Henry
2009-02-26 03:23:12 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 26, 2:31 am, kelpzoidzl <***@gmail.com> wrote:
­-----
Post by kelpzoidzl
There is plenty of reason why the Red Scares occurred,
It's called paranoia, fascist paranoia, a sickness with which you are
terminally infected.
Post by kelpzoidzl
Anarchists in the 1936 Spanish Civil War
Ah, so now you're also a supporter of Franco's fascist Spain.

Is there any fucking murderous fascist whom you don't support?
Pinochet? Suharto? Pol Pot?


Kelps is the butt end of the collective insanity that seized the US
over the past 8 years of the neo-con Bush Administration.
-----------------------

The Oscar for Denial
And the winner is – The American People
By James McEnteer

February 24, 2009 "Commondreams" -- - Kate Winslet's Academy Award for
Best Actress in The Reader surely disappointed and outraged Ron
Rosenbaum. Amid the torrent of nonsense glutting U.S. media since the
movie award nominations were announced, Rosenbaum's objections to The
Reader were far more substantive and accusatory.

In his Slate column, Rosenbaum attacked the "essential metaphorical
thrust" of the film, which he said aimed "to exculpate Nazi-era
Germans from knowing complicity in the Final Solution." Rosenbaum
decried the notion of honoring "a film that asks us to empathize with
an unrepentant mass murderer and intimates that ‘ordinary Germans'
were ignorant of the extermination until after the war..."

Rosenbaum indicted "the Kate Winslet character's ‘illiteracy': She's a
stand-in for the German people and their supposed inability to ‘read'
the signs that mass murder was being done in their name, by their
fellow citizens. To which one can only say: What a crock!"

In fact it is a crock, a willful misreading of The Reader to lump it
in with a genre of films which exploit the Holocaust (e.g., Life is
Beautiful, winner of several Academy Awards). Bernard Schlink, author
of the novel on which the film of The Reader is based, told an
interviewer in December: "It's definitely not a movie about the
Holocaust. It's about a generation trying to come to terms with what
they had to learn about their parents' generation."

But Rosenbaum's Shoah sensitivities are Manichean. He concedes
nothing to the moral and emotional complexities within or between the
characters, especially in the film's central relationship between
Michael and Hanna.

Michael's passionate affair with the much-older Hanna at first uplifts
his adolescence. But when, as a law student, he witnesses her murder
trial, along with other former Nazi concentration camp guards, he is
devastated. Michael believes that Hanna has admitted to writing a
report about the death of 300 Jewish prisoners, trapped in a burning
church, in order to avoid revealing her illiteracy.

Michael tells his law professor (Bruno Ganz) that he has knowledge
relevant to the trial, perhaps in the defendant's favor. The older
professor urges Michael to speak up: You don't want to be like us and
do nothing do you? Here Ganz is referring to his own silent wartime
generation. But Michael cannot bring himself to visit Hanna during
her trial, even though he knows her illiteracy has probably condemned
her to a far greater penalty than her equally - or perhaps
surpassingly - guilty comrades.

The other guards have no moral sense. But they are rewarded for their
lies and stonewalling, receiving much lighter sentences than Hanna,
who simply blurts out the truth, takes the rap and ends up sentenced
to life in prison. She admits to having no moral sense, and therefore
must be the more strongly condemned. Does this really create undue
sympathy for Hanna, as Rosenbaum suggests? At the end of the film,
an escaped victim (Lena Olin) explicitly asks the adult Michael (Ralph
Fiennes) if he thinks Hanna's illiteracy mitigates her guilt. And he
says no.

As one of the law students in the film declares, the question is not
who knew about the extermination of the Jews. There were hundreds of
camps all over Europe. Everybody knew. "My parents, my teachers,
everyone." The question is, what did they do about it? The answer
is: Nothing. As the student says to the bemused Ganz: "The only
question is why you didn't all just kill yourselves?"

Rosenbaum incorrectly accuses The Reader of claiming that most Germans
were ignorant of the The Holocaust. The film's underlying assumption
is far more damning: everybody knew, but nobody acted on that
knowledge. Of course, as Samantha Power recounts in her Pulitzer-
Prize winning study of genocide, A Problem From Hell, the United
States was also well aware of Hitler's extermination of European Jewry
before and during World War Two and also chose to do nothing.

Power's book is a shocking indictment of American neutrality in the
face of evil, during the Holocaust and other systematic programs of
genocide all around the world - in Turkey, Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda,
Iraq and elsewhere - over the past hundred years. "The key question"
writes Power, after presenting hundreds of pages of documented
evidence, "... is: Why does the United States stand so idly by? The
most common response is, ‘We didn't know.' This is not true."

"Because the savagery of genocide so defies our everyday experience,
many of us failed to wrap our minds around it," Power's says.
"Bystanders were thus able to retreat to the ‘twilight between knowing
and not knowing.'" It was easier not to probe for certainty because
uncertainty did not demand action. Power concludes that America
failed to act against genocide not because the country lacked
knowledge or influence but because it did not have the will to act.
U.S. officials "were not prepared to invest the military, financial,
diplomatic, or domestic political capital needed to stop it."

Now the United States faces a new moral crisis, the subversion of our
own legal and moral values by high officials of our own government.
We are, in this moment. as awash in complicity and willful denial as
the principled middle-class denizens of the Third Reich. We are the
Good Germans of the new millennium in Bush America because we knew
about the illegal kidnappings and tortures, the self-serving legalisms
that subverted the Geneva accords and papered over Constitutional
lapses, the lies that led us into conquest and occupation. Starting
well before the invasion of Iraq - which millions around the globe
protested in unprecedented numbers before it occurred - we knew the
"weapons of mass destruction" and Saddam's connections to al-Qaeda
were bullshit excuses. But many millions of us tried to pretend that
we really weren't sure.

In his Sunday column entitled: "What We Don't Know Will Hurt Us,"
Frank Rich remarked upon this "American reluctance to absorb, let
alone prepare for, bad news. We are plugged into more information
sources than anyone could have imagined even 15 years ago... Yet we
are constantly shocked, shocked by the foreseeable." Or as Bob Dylan
put it, in the context of race relations a generation ago, "How many
times must a man turn his head and pretend that he just doesn't see?"

We know, deep inside us we know, as the Germans who kept their heads
down and tried to lead ‘normal' lives as genocide exploded all around
them, in their name, by their own government, knew, that our
government has committed terrible atrocities at home and abroad. If
we do nothing to bring these crimes to light and their perpetrators to
justice, then we are as guilty and worthy of moral condemnation as the
war generation of silent Germans whom Ron Rosenbaum rightly abhors.

For Bernard Schlink, this knowledge, that his parents' generation
denied, "makes me aware how thin the ice is on which we live."
Schlink believed that German culture and institutions like courts,
universities, churches, unions and political parties "all seemed so
solid." And yet it all broke down, "relatively easily." In America
too. Somehow we allowed our government to invade a country that had
committed no aggression toward the United States. We allowed our
government to declare an emergency in order to violate human rights of
many thousands of individuals, to commit torture, to incarcerate
people for years without trial or hearings of any kind. And today we
continue the violence in Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan. We
continue to jail and abuse individuals without charges. And we all
know it's wrong. And it's time to deal with it before our "land of
the free" is irreparably compromised.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy has laid out The Case for a Truth
Commission (Time, Feb 20). As Leahy says: "For much of this decade,
we have read about and witnessed such abuses as the scandal at Abu
Ghraib, the disclosure of torture memos and the revelations about the
warrantless surveillance of Americans. We need to get to the bottom
of what happened--and why--to make sure it never happens again... to
find the truth....

"But to repair the damage of the past eight years and restore
America's reputation and standing in the world, we should not simply
turn the page without being able first to read it.... We need to get
to the bottom of what went wrong after a dangerous and disastrous
diversion from American law and values. The American people have a
right to know what their government has done in their names."

It's not just our right. It's a fundamental need. German society is
still - and may always be - in recovery, not just from the atrocities
committed in its name, by its leaders, but from the silent
acquiescence of the millions who lacked the will to speak up against
what they knew was wrong. To sweep the crimes and excesses of the
Bush-Cheney years under the rug would destroy the American soul. The
world needs the American sense of justice now more than ever. But we
forfeit our moral authority if we do not take responsibility for the
crimes of the Bush-Cheney years. Karl Rove continues to flaunt
congressional subpoenas to testify. He figures he can stonewall
indefinitely, that there will be no day of reckoning for lawless U.S.
officials. We must do everything in our power to prove him wrong.

James McEnteer is the author of Shooting the Truth: the Rise of
American Political Documentaries (Praeger 2006).
kelpzoidzl
2009-02-26 04:09:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Padraig L Henry
­-----
Post by kelpzoidzl
There is plenty of reason why the Red Scares occurred,
It's called paranoia, fascist paranoia, a sickness with which you are
terminally infected.
Post by kelpzoidzl
Anarchists in the 1936 Spanish Civil War
Ah, so now you're also a supporter of Franco's fascist Spain.
That is the title of the video................. "Anarchists in the
1936 Spanish Civil War"........................." Not me praising
Franco. Watch the video.
I don't support fascists, commies, terorists, including you. problem
with all these out marching the street and blowing things up is that
thye are too gutless to work for a living and do anything they can
actually be proud off. They just want to feel better about themsel
ves so they want to control others to fill the void.
Post by Padraig L Henry
Is there any fucking murderous fascist whom you don't support?
Pinochet? Suharto? Pol Pot?
I hope you all reborn together to continue your wars against anything
good, Karmic justice will prevail and you will switch sides---it's
all the same. Pinheads on methadrine and other wonders,


dc
ichorwhip
2009-03-05 07:56:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David. Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.


"Go ahead General."
i
"piop"
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-05 09:05:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.

To be a completist here is the last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is




dc
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-05 19:04:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.

Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
section:

"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'

"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.

"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes. Others objected that no one would take the dinosaurs
seriously and that the segment would be derided. Walt pondered this
charge and for a while he considered making the whole sequence comic.
'It will be safer and we will have more fun making it, and I think we
will make something good,' he told his story department in an abrupt
about-face, and then he began to imitate how dinosaurs walked,
hobbling around the room with bent knees and sticking out his rump.
Within a week, though, Walt had regained his bearings and was back
uninhibitedly free-associating to the music: 'Something like that last
WHAHUMMPH I feel is a volcano -- yet it's on land. I get that
UGHHHWAHUMMPH! on land, but we can look out on the water before this
and see water spouts' At the end, he said, 'there's a sort of stop...
pulsating like an old steam engine... Chuh! CHUH!... CHSSSSSH.' He got
himself so worked up as he listened that he blurted, 'Stravinsky will
say: "Jesus, I didn't know I wrote that music." ' "

Moving further along in the book, Gabler describes Stravinksky's visit
to the Disney studio in Burbank to see the final cut of the "Rite of
Spring" sequence:

"Yet for all his alleged objections at the time, Stravinsky returned
to the studio on October 12, 1940, to see the final cut, after which,
he said, he stormed out. The studio's version, once again, was
different. When Walt suggested that Stravinsky visit the animators,
Woolie Reitherman [an animator] remembered them laughing and joking
while the track of The Rite of Spring played backwards on the
Movieola. 'Doesn't sound bad backwards either,' Stravinsky quipped.
Stravinsky returned to the studio yet again on October 23 to discuss
the possibility of having the studio animate 'Renard,' an old piece of
his, and would up selling the rights to that, Fireworks and The
Firebird. 'Doesn't sound as if he's very sore, does it?' Walt remarked
wryly to the Los Angeles Times."

Following this paragraph is a footnote by Gabler that says: "Also
contradicting Stravinsky's supposed outrage was the fact that he
cordially welcomed Disney executive Don Niles to his home in September
1942 when Walt had dispatched Niles to discuss renewing the option on
Stravinsky's music. Niles reported that Stravinsky was 'happy to
negotiate a new option,' though he thought the war obviated the
necessity for doing so, and that Stravinsky 'stated that he would be
only too willing to make his services available to us,' at an
appropriate fee once the war was over. Memo, Don Niles to Walt, Re:
Stravinsky Option, Oct. 1, 1942, N Folder, Walt Disney Corr., Inter-
Office, 1938-1944, N-Q, A1630, WDA."

Gabler also points out that "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" was originally
conceived as one of his "Silly Symphony" shorts, but was expanded when
he met with Stokowski, when it was discussed to perhaps make a feature
film of short pieces based on classical works. Also, Dopey was
originally considered to play the apprentice. I think it worked better
to use Mickey in the long run.

Boaz
("As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures.")
p***@yahoo.com
2009-03-05 22:17:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes.
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.

Gen

"Standing ovations have become far too commonplace. What we need are
ovations where the audience members all punch and kick one another."
George Carlin
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 01:19:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes.
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part? What in the ballet triggered this? I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"

Boaz
("Are you referring to the background score?")
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 04:10:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes.
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part? What in the ballet triggered this? I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
Boaz
("Are you referring to the background score?")- Hide quoted text -
Stravinsky wrote an autobiography and a memoir.with conversations.
Both very interesting.


http://www.amazon.com/Igor-Stravinsky-Autobiography/dp/039300161X

http://www.amazon.com/Memories-Commentaries-One-Igor-Stravinsky/dp/B000FA4UMY/ref=pd_sim_b_2

Yeah it was a real riot I think they took Rite of Spring as an insult
to humanity.

Fantasia 2000 has some annoyances and is not as great as the original,
but it tries to continue the Fantasia legacy. I was disappointed
when i first saw it, but liked it better after a few viewing over the
years. Gotta give credit to their animators. I'm sure they had to
cut corners due to the increased costs of doing animation of the
Fantasia level and it shows. . Some of it is higher tech but in
general it is not as consistent or as textured as the original. The
celebrity appearances are a distraction. I think the music choices
aren't as brilliant and the segments lack the story content of the
original But it has it's beauty..

I still want to watch it on a big screen on my current system. i might
even learn to like some of the music better.


dc
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 05:03:40 UTC
Permalink
<some snipping here>
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes.
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part? What in the ballet triggered this? I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
Boaz
("Are you referring to the background score?")- Hide quoted text -
Stravinsky wrote an autobiography and a memoir.with conversations.
Both very interesting.
http://www.amazon.com/Igor-Stravinsky-Autobiography/dp/039300161X
http://www.amazon.com/Memories-Commentaries-One-Igor-Stravinsky/dp/B0...
Yeah it was a real riot I think they took Rite of Spring as an insult
to humanity.
It would be funny to find out more details as to what it must have
looked like.
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000 has some annoyances and is not as great as the original,
but it tries to continue the Fantasia legacy.  
Walt wanted to do a series of "Fantasia" films; he even wanted to add
on new segments to the original film when it would be re-released to
theaters. But WWII (and the animators' strike) put an end to that
idea. Also, Walt was spreading his line of credit thin again, what
with his animators working on "Dumbo," "Pinocchio" and "Bambi" in
their new Burbank studio. It's too bad too, but the timing was lousy
for Walt. He received praise from most of the artistic community for
"Fantasia." Even Sergei Eisenstein admired Disney's films.
Post by kelpzoidzl
I was disappointed
when i first saw it, but liked it better after a few viewing over the
years.  Gotta give credit to their animators.  I'm sure they had to
cut corners due to the increased costs of doing animation of the
Fantasia level and it shows. .  
That's true. Most of that came from Eisner's office. Walt never looked
at the books, and then when Roy tried to get him to look at them Walt
brushed him off and told him it was his job to find the money. Eisner
tried to keep one eye on the books and the other on the creative side,
and it shows. "Fantasia 2000" was made after Eisner had chased
Katzenberg out, so the striving for quality that was a hallmark for
the company when Katzenberg ran Animation was gone by then, and Eisner
was allowed to micromanage the production to his heart's content.

Part of why the animation lacked the look of the original (besides the
costs) was because the Nine Old Men, who were the cream of the crop of
animation at Disney, were either retired or gone. A new generation
tried their best to keep the tradition going (CalArts grads and the
like), but they were hemmed in by the restrictions of both time and
money.
Post by kelpzoidzl
Some of it is higher tech but in
general it is not as consistent or as textured  as the original.  
They still did hand-drawn animation then, and it was at times done
pretty quickly compared to what was done with the original.
Post by kelpzoidzl
The celebrity appearances are a distraction.  I think the music choices
aren't as brilliant and the segments lack the story content of the
original  But it has it's beauty..
True. The colors and some of the designs are, in some places, quite
beautiful.
Post by kelpzoidzl
I still want to watch it on a big screen on my current system. i might
even learn to like some of the music better.
dc
All in all, I think it was a tough act to follow. I need to see it
again myself.

Boaz
("For now it was lovely music that came to my aid.")
p***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 18:51:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes.
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part?
Um, I don't know and I don't want to speculate ;)
But members of the audience were fighting with each other; apparently,
some people were defending Stravinsky's work. Remember, this was 1913
and this was revolutionary music to audiences who were used to hearing
more conventional classic music and viewing more conventional
classical ballet.

What in the ballet triggered this?

Mating rituals were mimed and danced. Let me quote Wikipedia:

"Le Sacre du Printemps (The Rite of Spring, with music by Igor
Stravinsky) (1913): Nijinsky created choreography that exceeded the
limits of traditional ballet and propriety. For the first time, his
audiences were experiencing the futuristic, new direction of modern
dance. The radically angular movements expressed the heart of
Stravinsky's radically modern scores. Unfortunately, Nijinsky's new
trends in dance caused a riotous reaction at the Théâtre de Champs-
Elysées when they premiered in Paris. As the title character in
L'après-midi d'un faune the final tableau (or scene), during which he
mimed masturbation with the scarf of a nymph, caused a scandal; he was
accused by half of Paris of obscenity,[citation needed] but defended
by such artists as Auguste Rodin, Odilon Redon and Proust."
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
I don't know what to think. Anyway, thanks for posting this about
Stravinsky.

Gen
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 20:05:13 UTC
Permalink
It amazes me that even today many of the big child stars of the Mickey
Mouse Club go on to be huge millionaire "celebrities." Brittany
Spears, Myley Cyrus etc.

It may be a much different time, but Disney is still effecting the
generations.

dc
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 20:16:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes.
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part?
Um, I don't know and I don't want to speculate ;)
But members of the audience were fighting with each other; apparently,
some people were defending Stravinsky's work. Remember, this was 1913
and this was revolutionary music to audiences who were used to hearing
more conventional classic music and viewing more conventional
classical ballet.
 What in the ballet triggered this?
"Le Sacre du Printemps (The Rite of Spring, with music by Igor
Stravinsky) (1913):  Nijinsky created choreography that exceeded the
limits of traditional ballet and propriety. For the first time, his
audiences were experiencing the futuristic, new direction of modern
dance. The radically angular movements expressed the heart of
Stravinsky's radically modern scores. Unfortunately, Nijinsky's new
trends in dance caused a riotous reaction at the Théâtre de Champs-
Elysées when they premiered in Paris. As the title character in
L'après-midi d'un faune the final tableau (or scene), during which he
mimed masturbation with the scarf of a nymph, caused a scandal; he was
accused by half of Paris of obscenity,[citation needed] but defended
by such artists as Auguste Rodin, Odilon Redon and Proust."
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
I don't know what to think. Anyway, thanks for posting this about
Stravinsky.
Gen- Hide quoted text -
I don't have it to quote, but the description of that night in
Stravinsky's autobiography was fascinating.

dc
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 20:40:18 UTC
Permalink
<snipping some excess baggage here>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part?
Um, I don't know and I don't want to speculate ;)
Even if it isn't as I imagine, the idea still strikes me as funny.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
But members of the audience were fighting with each other; apparently,
some people were defending Stravinsky's work. Remember, this was 1913
and this was revolutionary music to audiences who were used to hearing
more conventional classic music and viewing more conventional
classical ballet.
It's possible the younger generation of ballet audiences were getting
it; while the older, stuffy ones were outraged. "It was old age having
a go at youth."
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 What in the ballet triggered this?
"Le Sacre du Printemps (The Rite of Spring, with music by Igor
Stravinsky) (1913):  Nijinsky created choreography that exceeded the
limits of traditional ballet and propriety. For the first time, his
audiences were experiencing the futuristic, new direction of modern
dance. The radically angular movements expressed the heart of
Stravinsky's radically modern scores. Unfortunately, Nijinsky's new
trends in dance caused a riotous reaction at the Théâtre de Champs-
Elysées when they premiered in Paris. As the title character in
L'après-midi d'un faune the final tableau (or scene), during which he
mimed masturbation with the scarf of a nymph, caused a scandal; he was
accused by half of Paris of obscenity,[citation needed] but defended
by such artists as Auguste Rodin, Odilon Redon and Proust."
Good for them. Yeah, I guess in 1913 (one year before WWI) the older
generation would still be thinking in 19th century terms. I wonder
what these same people who shouted "Scandalous!" would have thought if
they'd seen Disney's version in "Fantasia"?
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
I don't know what to think. Anyway, thanks for posting this about
Stravinsky.
Your welcome. I wonder if this was in the film version of "Nijinsky"?
I never saw it, so I can't say. Did you ever see the film, Gen?
Otherwise, such a riot would look interesting, if not somewhat
comical, on film.

Boaz
("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!")
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 21:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
<snipping some excess baggage here>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
Gen
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part?
Um, I don't know and I don't want to speculate ;)
Even if it isn't as I imagine, the idea still strikes me as funny.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
But members of the audience were fighting with each other; apparently,
some people were defending Stravinsky's work. Remember, this was 1913
and this was revolutionary music to audiences who were used to hearing
more conventional classic music and viewing more conventional
classical ballet.
It's possible the younger generation of ballet audiences were getting
it; while the older, stuffy ones were outraged. "It was old age having
a go at youth."
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 What in the ballet triggered this?
"Le Sacre du Printemps (The Rite of Spring, with music by Igor
Stravinsky) (1913):  Nijinsky created choreography that exceeded the
limits of traditional ballet and propriety. For the first time, his
audiences were experiencing the futuristic, new direction of modern
dance. The radically angular movements expressed the heart of
Stravinsky's radically modern scores. Unfortunately, Nijinsky's new
trends in dance caused a riotous reaction at the Théâtre de Champs-
Elysées when they premiered in Paris. As the title character in
L'après-midi d'un faune the final tableau (or scene), during which he
mimed masturbation with the scarf of a nymph, caused a scandal; he was
accused by half of Paris of obscenity,[citation needed] but defended
by such artists as Auguste Rodin, Odilon Redon and Proust."
Good for them. Yeah, I guess in 1913 (one year before WWI) the older
generation would still be thinking in 19th century terms. I wonder
what these same people who shouted "Scandalous!" would have thought if
they'd seen Disney's version in "Fantasia"?
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
I don't know what to think. Anyway, thanks for posting this about
Stravinsky.
Your welcome. I wonder if this was in the film version of "Nijinsky"?
I never saw it, so I can't say. Did you ever see the film, Gen?
Otherwise, such a riot would look interesting, if not somewhat
comical, on film.
Boaz
("Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!")
My memory of the Stravinsky autobiography was that it was totally
condemned almost unnanimously.
And much of the audience just got up and left, riots in the aisles
and riots spilled out into the streets. I read the book in high
school, so it's been along time.

The book has photographs. I know it showed the theater I don;t
remember if there were actual photos of the riots. I wish I knew
where my copy of the book is. It was the hard cover, not the
paperback.
I may still have it in a rubbermaid box somewhere, but I have too
many boxes of books in a stroage shed, it would take all day to check
through them---too much work.


Ebay has a copy with autograph Buy it now price $1499.00


http://cgi.ebay.com/Igor-STRAVINSKY-Autograph-Music-Quote-in-Autobiography_W0QQitemZ380094570989QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?_trksid=p3286.m20.l1116


dc
p***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 22:04:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
<snipping some excess baggage here>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part?
Um, I don't know and I don't want to speculate ;)
Even if it isn't as I imagine, the idea still strikes me as funny.
Really, it doesn't strike me as funny...just interesting that people
cared enough about ballet and classical music to get into fist fights.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
But members of the audience were fighting with each other; apparently,
some people were defending Stravinsky's work. Remember, this was 1913
and this was revolutionary music to audiences who were used to hearing
more conventional classic music and viewing more conventional
classical ballet.
It's possible the younger generation of ballet audiences were getting
it; while the older, stuffy ones were outraged. "It was old age having
a go at youth."
Maybe some older people loved it, maybe some younger people hated it,
I don't know. We do know that the younger members of the audience
probably ended up enlisting or being drafted.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 What in the ballet triggered this?
"Le Sacre du Printemps (The Rite of Spring, with music by Igor
Stravinsky) (1913):  Nijinsky created choreography that exceeded the
limits of traditional ballet and propriety. For the first time, his
audiences were experiencing the futuristic, new direction of modern
dance. The radically angular movements expressed the heart of
Stravinsky's radically modern scores. Unfortunately, Nijinsky's new
trends in dance caused a riotous reaction at the Théâtre de Champs-
Elysées when they premiered in Paris. As the title character in
L'après-midi d'un faune the final tableau (or scene), during which he
mimed masturbation with the scarf of a nymph, caused a scandal; he was
accused by half of Paris of obscenity,[citation needed] but defended
by such artists as Auguste Rodin, Odilon Redon and Proust."
Good for them. Yeah, I guess in 1913 (one year before WWI) the older
generation would still be thinking in 19th century terms. I wonder
what these same people who shouted "Scandalous!" would have thought if
they'd seen Disney's version in "Fantasia"?
I wonder what Nijinksy would think? He might be horrified too!
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
I don't know what to think. Anyway, thanks for posting this about
Stravinsky.
Your welcome. I wonder if this was in the film version of "Nijinsky"?
I never saw it, so I can't say. Did you ever see the film, Gen?
Otherwise, such a riot would look interesting, if not somewhat
comical, on film.
Are you talking about the older one with Alan Bates and a couple of
real ballerinas? I've never seen it and it is not on DVD. I would like
to see it and I have the updated/unedited "The Diary of Vaslav
Nijinksy."
Apparently there is a film or "dramatic documentary" (you know how I
love those) :( directed by Paul Cox and based on Nijinsky's diary.
It seems strange that nobody has directed a good film about him.

Gen
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-07 00:10:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
<snipping some excess baggage here>
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Interesting; I was never aware of a Disney/Stravinsky connection. One
always thinks of Stravinsky and Balanchine!
The Rite of Spring was originally commissioned by Serge Diaghilev's
Ballets Russes with choreography by Nijinsky. When it premiered in
Paris in 1913, there was a riot in the theatre.
I remember reading about this riot elsewhere. All I can imagine is a
group of old, stuffy people in tuxedos and evening gowns throwing
their programs, opera glasses and maybe even their embroidered seat
cushions around the theater. Riot? The upper classes rioting? Weren't
the upper classes the only ones who could afford to attend the ballet
for the most part?
Um, I don't know and I don't want to speculate ;)
Even if it isn't as I imagine, the idea still strikes me as funny.
Really, it doesn't strike me as funny...just interesting that people
cared enough about ballet and classical music to get into fist fights.
Maybe. Or maybe they were just clinging to arcane ideas that, in their
minds, were some sort of "gospel" that one had to believe in, in order
to appreciate art -- or at least their idea of what constituted "art."
Perhaps these people didn't like their beliefs challenged in this way.
But I still can't help but think it must look funny to see these
"patrons of the arts" get their knickers in a twist over a ballet.

But look at how so many people were upset with "2001" when it first
came out. I think the critic of the Saturday Review said it best when
he not only tagged "2001" as the "motion picture of the decade," but
that it was also "an extraordinary masterpiece that had gathered into
one dynamic image a major challenge to some of the assumptions that
dominated serious writing for at least a hundred years."

I'm also reminded of an incident in college where two Humanities
professors came close to getting into a fistfight when one started to
discuss the dead body in "Blow-Up," while the other one steadfastly
believed there was no body at all and that it was a figment of David
Hemmings' imagination. Even Randy "The Ram" would have enjoyed this
match.

I don't want to come off like the Anarchist Quarterback from MAD
Magazine ("Ha! What do I care about rules! Down with rules! Down with
football!"), but it is interesting to see how a new art form
challenges those who think they are already an authority on the
subject and they get all bent out of shape about it. An art form where
people cannot remember the last time it was challenged has been such
an art form for too long. Perhaps the people attending the ballet that
fateful night were not out so much to see Art (all though they might
have let themselves believe that) as they were there for Complacency.
While going for the purpose to see a "new" ballet, they were probably
there to really see just More Of The Same -- S-O-S-O-S: Same Old Shit,
Only Stronger.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
But members of the audience were fighting with each other; apparently,
some people were defending Stravinsky's work. Remember, this was 1913
and this was revolutionary music to audiences who were used to hearing
more conventional classic music and viewing more conventional
classical ballet.
It's possible the younger generation of ballet audiences were getting
it; while the older, stuffy ones were outraged. "It was old age having
a go at youth."
Maybe some older people loved it, maybe some younger people hated it,
I don't know. We do know that the younger members of the audience
probably ended up enlisting or being drafted.
Hopefully not because of their opinions of the ballet! ;-)
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
 What in the ballet triggered this?
"Le Sacre du Printemps (The Rite of Spring, with music by Igor
Stravinsky) (1913):  Nijinsky created choreography that exceeded the
limits of traditional ballet and propriety. For the first time, his
audiences were experiencing the futuristic, new direction of modern
dance. The radically angular movements expressed the heart of
Stravinsky's radically modern scores. Unfortunately, Nijinsky's new
trends in dance caused a riotous reaction at the Théâtre de Champs-
Elysées when they premiered in Paris. As the title character in
L'après-midi d'un faune the final tableau (or scene), during which he
mimed masturbation with the scarf of a nymph, caused a scandal;
It could have been worse, I guess; it could have gone from a pax de
deux to a standing sixty-nine. ;-) Like the line the British officer
made about the French in "The Last of the Mohicans," where he said the
French would rather "get drunk and make love with their faces."
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
he was
accused by half of Paris of obscenity,[citation needed] but defended
by such artists as Auguste Rodin, Odilon Redon and Proust."
Good for them. Yeah, I guess in 1913 (one year before WWI) the older
generation would still be thinking in 19th century terms. I wonder
what these same people who shouted "Scandalous!" would have thought if
they'd seen Disney's version in "Fantasia"?
I wonder what  Nijinksy would think?  He might be horrified too!
Perhaps the dancing hippos in "The Dance of the Hours" might have
horrified him even more! ;-)
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by p***@yahoo.com
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I also can't
help but think of something out of the Marx Brothers' "A Night at the
Opera," with Harpo tearing off the skirt of one of the dancers and
Groucho watching approvingly from the audience and saying, "Now we're
getting somewhere!"
I don't know what to think. Anyway, thanks for posting this about
Stravinsky.
Your welcome. I wonder if this was in the film version of "Nijinsky"?
I never saw it, so I can't say. Did you ever see the film, Gen?
Otherwise, such a riot would look interesting, if not somewhat
comical, on film.
Are you talking about the older one with Alan Bates and a couple of
real ballerinas?
Yes, that one.
Post by p***@yahoo.com
I've never seen it and it is not on DVD. I would like
to see it and I have the updated/unedited "The Diary of Vaslav
Nijinksy."
Apparently there is a  film or "dramatic documentary"  (you know how I
love those)  :(   directed by Paul Cox and based on Nijinsky's diary.
It seems strange that nobody has directed a good film about him.
Gen
I did some quick checking on the IMDb, and found that Herbert Ross
directed the film. He was a good director and all, but never one to
rock the boat. I doubt that 1913 incident was in the film, and if it
was it might not have amounted to much. I'm surprised this movie
doesn't show up on cable now and then, even if run late at night as a
cure for insomnia.

The IMDb said in their Trivia section that Ken Russell was offered the
chance to direct the film. Now THAT would have been worth seeing! Had
he done it, not only would there have been a riot, it would have been
over-the-top, Ken Russell style.

I also found this bit of information in the IMDb Trivia section:

"Executive producer Harry Saltzman had wanted to make a film about
Nijinsky for many years, first attempting to produce a version in 1970
with partner Albert R. Broccoli, starring Rudolf Nureyev, written by
Edward Albee, and directed by Tony Richardson I. This project was
eventually shelved. This 1980 version had a completely different
script and cast."

With Albee and Richardson involved it probably would have made a more
interesting film as well.

But I still can't get out of my head the image of a riot among the
rich that would not have been out of place with Chaplin, Keaton or The
Marx Brothers (or even, for that matter, Chuck Jones or Tex Avery).

Boaz
("I have never seen such behavior in the War Room before!")
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 01:18:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Lest we forget the brilliance and artistry of Walt Disney
This segment of Fantasia, was my biggest influence as a young  kid,
alongside Cinerama.
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 1: Genesis
http://youtu.be/-gZbMOq_Ge8
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 2: http://youtu.be/UGdK9jpn19w
Fantasia 1940 - The Rite of Spring - Part 3: http://youtu.be/M16zasqydUE
---------------------------------------------------------
Toccata and Fugue in D Minor - Fantasia http://youtu.be/a1z12_Ps-gk
---------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia - Night on Bald http://youtu.be/V8Ca_edg6RE
--------------------------------------------------------
Fantasia The Sorcerer's Apprentice with http://youtu.be/LD8HDta7Z_4
----------------------------------------------------------
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/jTxR-wn2kho
Dance of Hours http://youtu.be/GQ4TcFfAqPk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------­­­­--------------
Fantasia -Beethoven 6th-Pastoral  (I love this--my favorite Beethoven)
http://youtu.be/pFFsvmMXqHE
http://youtu.be/kp79L7BNro8
http://youtu.be/wGjVq2voJSY
----------------------------------------------------------------
Disney's Fantasia No2(1) Tchaikovsky http://youtu.be/hMFPLtE4h5k
http://youtu.be/vfVBuaDXytY
----------------------------------------------------------------
etc.
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes. Others objected that no one would take the dinosaurs
seriously and that the segment would be derided. Walt pondered this
charge and for a while he considered making the whole sequence comic.
'It will be safer and we will have more fun making it, and I think we
will make something good,' he told his story department in an abrupt
about-face, and then he began to imitate how dinosaurs walked,
hobbling around the room with bent knees and sticking out his rump.
Within a week, though, Walt had regained his bearings and was back
uninhibitedly free-associating to the music: 'Something like that last
WHAHUMMPH I feel is a volcano -- yet it's on land. I get that
UGHHHWAHUMMPH! on land, but we can look out on the water before this
and see water spouts' At the end, he said, 'there's a sort of stop...
pulsating like an old steam engine... Chuh! CHUH!... CHSSSSSH.' He got
himself so worked up as he listened that he blurted, 'Stravinsky will
say: "Jesus, I didn't know I wrote that music." ' "
Moving further along in the book, Gabler describes Stravinksky's visit
to the Disney studio in Burbank to see the final cut of the "Rite of
"Yet for all his alleged objections at the time, Stravinsky returned
to the studio on October 12, 1940, to see the final cut, after which,
he said, he stormed out. The studio's version, once again, was
different. When Walt suggested that Stravinsky visit the animators,
Woolie Reitherman [an animator] remembered them laughing and joking
while the track of The Rite of Spring played backwards on the
Movieola. 'Doesn't sound bad backwards either,' Stravinsky quipped.
Stravinsky returned to the studio yet again on October 23 to discuss
the possibility of having the studio animate 'Renard,' an old piece of
his, and would up selling the rights to that, Fireworks and The
Firebird. 'Doesn't sound as if he's very sore, does it?' Walt remarked
wryly to the Los Angeles Times."
Following this paragraph is a footnote by Gabler that says: "Also
contradicting Stravinsky's supposed outrage was the fact that he
cordially welcomed Disney executive Don Niles to his home in September
1942 when Walt had dispatched Niles to discuss renewing the option on
Stravinsky's music. Niles reported that Stravinsky was 'happy to
negotiate a new option,' though he thought the war obviated the
necessity for doing so, and that Stravinsky 'stated that he would be
only too willing to make his services available to us,' at an
Stravinsky Option, Oct. 1, 1942, N Folder, Walt Disney Corr., Inter-
Office, 1938-1944, N-Q, A1630, WDA."
Gabler also points out that "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" was originally
conceived as one of his "Silly Symphony" shorts, but was expanded when
he met with Stokowski, when it was discussed to perhaps make a feature
film of short pieces based on classical works. Also, Dopey was
originally considered to play the apprentice. I think it worked better
to use Mickey in the long run.
Boaz
("As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures.")- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Good read.

I own virtually all high budget versions of The Rite of Spring. It's
been my favorite music since I saw Fantasia as a little kid, including
those recorded performances conducted by Stravinsky himself and
another version also conducted by Stokowski and even though the
Fantasia version is only a partial and rearranged version and some
complain about it and Stravinsky supposedly flipped out, it has
alwasy been my favorite and I can never get use to any other version
in that segment.. The moment the gentler dinosaur cock their heads
as the T-Rex appears to kill them, the horns come in, is just so
incredible and other versions just always lack the same intensity and
nuances i am so used to.. Of course other versions have their own
high points and contain the entire piece.

Here is the part I mean:


Here is the same segment where someone added a different version
conducted by Ricardo Muti. the horns are weaker, and some subtlies
and vigor is lost.. but the Typani are insane (in a good way) It has
it's own appeal.but lacks the nuances of the Fantasia version..





In retrospect the more I think that the closest thing to a precedent
for 2001 A space Odyssey is Fantasia.



dc



Stravinsky knew what it was like to be criticized for a work of
art....At the premiere of The Rite Of Spring, the audience broke into
a riot. He was hated and scorned. It might have been an initial
shock to his system, calling it "excrable" and the change of theme
from the ballet, but I bet once he got past that he saw it for what it
was a timeless work of art doing honor to his piece...but then he
still had a feud with Walt Disney--maybe it was exaggerated and maybe
it was over money.

Reminds of Kubrick's various arguments with indignant hired help of
reknown...and some whio claim they weren't paid or paid enough....:)
Wonder how Strauss would have felt with Blue Danube or Also Sprack
Zarathrustra? The latter seems to fit, but would he have gone berserk
about Blue Danube?

But what a clash of great masters Stravinski and Disney!
Needless to say neither Stravinsky nor Strauss's fame was hurt by
being in these films...

Both Disney and Kubrick were not deterrred from using there own very
different interpretation of great music.in each of their revolutionary
masterworks.

I am waiting for the new versions of Fantasia/Fantasia2000---I have
only the VHS as well and i gave away my last tape player long ago. It
was great watching it again on YouTube. It may even be true that
Fantasia influenced Kubrick in some way to use the Classical scores,
ichorwhip
2009-03-06 03:39:07 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 5, 1:04 pm, ***@yahoo.com wrote:

<snip>
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes. Others objected that no one would take the dinosaurs
seriously and that the segment would be derided. Walt pondered this
charge and for a while he considered making the whole sequence comic.
'It will be safer and we will have more fun making it, and I think we
will make something good,' he told his story department in an abrupt
about-face, and then he began to imitate how dinosaurs walked,
hobbling around the room with bent knees and sticking out his rump.
Within a week, though, Walt had regained his bearings and was back
uninhibitedly free-associating to the music: 'Something like that last
WHAHUMMPH I feel is a volcano -- yet it's on land. I get that
UGHHHWAHUMMPH! on land, but we can look out on the water before this
and see water spouts' At the end, he said, 'there's a sort of stop...
pulsating like an old steam engine... Chuh! CHUH!... CHSSSSSH.' He got
himself so worked up as he listened that he blurted, 'Stravinsky will
say: "Jesus, I didn't know I wrote that music." ' "
Moving further along in the book, Gabler describes Stravinksky's visit
to the Disney studio in Burbank to see the final cut of the "Rite of
"Yet for all his alleged objections at the time, Stravinsky returned
to the studio on October 12, 1940, to see the final cut, after which,
he said, he stormed out. The studio's version, once again, was
different. When Walt suggested that Stravinsky visit the animators,
Woolie Reitherman [an animator] remembered them laughing and joking
while the track of The Rite of Spring played backwards on the
Movieola. 'Doesn't sound bad backwards either,' Stravinsky quipped.
Stravinsky returned to the studio yet again on October 23 to discuss
the possibility of having the studio animate 'Renard,' an old piece of
his, and would up selling the rights to that, Fireworks and The
Firebird. 'Doesn't sound as if he's very sore, does it?' Walt remarked
wryly to the Los Angeles Times."
Following this paragraph is a footnote by Gabler that says: "Also
contradicting Stravinsky's supposed outrage was the fact that he
cordially welcomed Disney executive Don Niles to his home in September
1942 when Walt had dispatched Niles to discuss renewing the option on
Stravinsky's music. Niles reported that Stravinsky was 'happy to
negotiate a new option,' though he thought the war obviated the
necessity for doing so, and that Stravinsky 'stated that he would be
only too willing to make his services available to us,' at an
Stravinsky Option, Oct. 1, 1942, N Folder, Walt Disney Corr., Inter-
Office, 1938-1944, N-Q, A1630, WDA."
Gabler also points out that "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" was originally
conceived as one of his "Silly Symphony" shorts, but was expanded when
he met with Stokowski, when it was discussed to perhaps make a feature
film of short pieces based on classical works. Also, Dopey was
originally considered to play the apprentice. I think it worked better
to use Mickey in the long run.
Boaz
("As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures.")-
Fascinating stuff Boaz, thanks. What can you briefly relate about
Disney's connection to Prokofiev via Gabler? There is this rather
wonderful dramatisation of their first meeting and Walt's intro to the
sublime "Peter and the Wolf.":



The actor/pianist that played Prokofiev really did a great job I
thought. Wonder who he was... Anyways, any tidbits you can give us
on this would be greatly appreciated.

"I felt all the malenky little hairs on my plott standing endwise..."
i
"piop"
Sensitivity
2009-03-06 05:52:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
<snip>
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by kelpzoidzl
Disney was a true visionary.
dc
This might be the best post you've made yet David.  Thanks for
sticking to the point for once.
"Go ahead General."
i
"piop
I always stick to the point.
To be a completist here is the  last half from the Night on Bald
mountain, where it melts into Ave Maria, so here it is
http://youtu.be/CEwmfLvq9z0
dc
Yes, thanks for posting these links, Dave. Right now I only have the
VHS copy of "Fantasia," but I understand a new DVD (including Blu-Ray)
will be out next year.
Here is what Gabler said about Disney making "The Rite of Spring"
"The sequence that really fired Walt's imagination, however, was
Stravinksy's The Rite of Spring. Walt had already contacted Stravinsky
in April 1938 about the possibility of using The Firebird in The
Concert Feature [it's original working title], though that plan was
ultimately scrapped. But Stravinsky's name arose again in September,
when Walt, [music critic Deems] Taylor, and [Loepold] Stokowski were
poring over scores and Walt suddenly asked if there was a piece of
music to which they could stage 'something of a prehistoric theme --
with prehistoric animals.' Taylor immediately answered, Le Sacre du
Printemps, and Walt, without pausing, began to visualize: 'There would
be something terrific in dinosaurs, flying lizards and prehistoric
monsters.' When Stokowski had the piece played, Walt was estatic,
'This is marvelous!' he said, and once again described prehistoric
animals and cavemen. 'This prehistoric thing would be something
entirely different from anything we have done. It would be grotesque
and exaggerated.'
"Now Walt was soaring. If The Concert Feature provided a new direction
from his previous work, The Rite of Spring provided a new direction
from anything else in The Concert Feature. When some who attended the
studio concert griped that the piece was too long and downbeat, Walt
dismissed their complaints -- 'The happy ending again!' -- and
rhapsodized, 'I feel there is an awful lot we wanted to do for a long
time and never had the opportunity or excuse, but when you take pieces
of music like this, you really have reason to do what we want to do.'
What Walt wanted to do was to trace the history of the earth beginning
with the creation and ending with man triumphing over his environment
by using his intellect -- not only animation as an act of creation but
animation as Creation itself. It should look, he told one animator,
'as though the studio had sent an expedition back to earth 6 million
years ago,' and at Joe Grant's [an animator who specialized in
caricatures] suggestion, he decided to ask the esteemed science
fiction writer H.G. Wells to vouch for the film's scientific accuracy.
Though Walt later gave up the idea of man's evolution and triumph --
one associate said he didn't want to antagonize Christian
fundamentalists -- he never surrendered the basic idea of a cosmic
cataclysm that would test the bounds of animation. 'That's what I see
in the last half,' he said. 'Continual volcanoes -- the sea was lashed
into a fury. Get the volcanoes and the lava and the sea and everything
-- the animals trying to escape. End that with the big blowup
somewhere. Something blows up so big to finish the fourth side [of the
record] there.' In effect, Walt was playing the sorcerer's apprentice,
orchestrating the forces of nature.
"Of course, this was Walt's personal interpretation of the music.
Stravisnky had written The Rite of Spring not as a musical rendition
of creation or evolution but as a celebration of pagan Slavonic
rituals, and some of Walt's own staff felt that reimagining the score
this way did an injustice to the music, though Walt tried to justify
himself by saying that Stravinsky had once admitted he was striking
primitive themes. Others objected that no one would take the dinosaurs
seriously and that the segment would be derided. Walt pondered this
charge and for a while he considered making the whole sequence comic.
'It will be safer and we will have more fun making it, and I think we
will make something good,' he told his story department in an abrupt
about-face, and then he began to imitate how dinosaurs walked,
hobbling around the room with bent knees and sticking out his rump.
Within a week, though, Walt had regained his bearings and was back
uninhibitedly free-associating to the music: 'Something like that last
WHAHUMMPH I feel is a volcano -- yet it's on land. I get that
UGHHHWAHUMMPH! on land, but we can look out on the water before this
and see water spouts' At the end, he said, 'there's a sort of stop...
pulsating like an old steam engine... Chuh! CHUH!... CHSSSSSH.' He got
himself so worked up as he listened that he blurted, 'Stravinsky will
say: "Jesus, I didn't know I wrote that music." ' "
Moving further along in the book, Gabler describes Stravinksky's visit
to the Disney studio in Burbank to see the final cut of the "Rite of
"Yet for all his alleged objections at the time, Stravinsky returned
to the studio on October 12, 1940, to see the final cut, after which,
he said, he stormed out. The studio's version, once again, was
different. When Walt suggested that Stravinsky visit the animators,
Woolie Reitherman [an animator] remembered them laughing and joking
while the track of The Rite of Spring played backwards on the
Movieola. 'Doesn't sound bad backwards either,' Stravinsky quipped.
Stravinsky returned to the studio yet again on October 23 to discuss
the possibility of having the studio animate 'Renard,' an old piece of
his, and would up selling the rights to that, Fireworks and The
Firebird. 'Doesn't sound as if he's very sore, does it?' Walt remarked
wryly to the Los Angeles Times."
Following this paragraph is a footnote by Gabler that says: "Also
contradicting Stravinsky's supposed outrage was the fact that he
cordially welcomed Disney executive Don Niles to his home in September
1942 when Walt had dispatched Niles to discuss renewing the option on
Stravinsky's music. Niles reported that Stravinsky was 'happy to
negotiate a new option,' though he thought the war obviated the
necessity for doing so, and that Stravinsky 'stated that he would be
only too willing to make his services available to us,' at an
Stravinsky Option, Oct. 1, 1942, N Folder, Walt Disney Corr., Inter-
Office, 1938-1944, N-Q, A1630, WDA."
Gabler also points out that "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" was originally
conceived as one of his "Silly Symphony" shorts, but was expanded when
he met with Stokowski, when it was discussed to perhaps make a feature
film of short pieces based on classical works. Also, Dopey was
originally considered to play the apprentice. I think it worked better
to use Mickey in the long run.
Boaz
("As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures.")-
Fascinating stuff Boaz, thanks.  What can you briefly relate about
Disney's connection to Prokofiev via Gabler?  There is this rather
wonderful dramatisation of their first meeting and Walt's intro to the
http://youtu.be/QaHc01uwGXg
The actor/pianist that played Prokofiev really did a great job I
thought.  Wonder who he was...  Anyways, any tidbits you can give us
on this would be greatly appreciated.
"I felt all the malenky little hairs on my plott standing endwise..."
i
"piop"-
The Piano scene looks older then the Intro with Disney.. Pretty
amazing.

I haven't seen this in years. Amazing. Peter and the Wolf was shown
before Fantasia. I hope all this is on the anticipated DVDs.

Are we sure it's an actor? Prokofiev lived till 1953. Could Disney
have had Prokofiev return in 1949 or something? The playing is
remarkable and the likeness seems close. Maybe they snuck him out of
the USSR.

The real Prokofiev




dc
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 05:59:16 UTC
Permalink
Last post on friends computer....forgot to change google screen name.

dc
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 07:39:22 UTC
Permalink
<snip some stuff here>
Post by ichorwhip
Fascinating stuff Boaz, thanks.  What can you briefly relate about
Disney's connection to Prokofiev via Gabler?  There is this rather
wonderful dramatisation of their first meeting and Walt's intro to the
http://youtu.be/QaHc01uwGXg
The Gabler book doesn't go into a lot of detail about the meeting,
except what was said here:

"[Walt] was also excited about the prospect of animating Sergei
Prokofiev's "Peter and the Wolf." As Walt would later relate it, some
years earlier Prokofiev had visited the studio, played the piece for
Walt while a translator narrated, and told him that he had written it
expressly for the purpose of having Disney animate it. Now Walt
intended to."

It's hard to say how much of that is true and how much of that "re-
enactment" was, as Kevin Brownlow has said of Lean and other
filmmakers, "The Four Horsemen of the Apocrypha" (Walt's attempt to
visualize the movie while listening to the music was a bit hokey).
That was an actor playing "Prokofiev."

As for performing on piano, it reminds me of this story: When Sir
Thomas Beecham suggested to Michael Powell to make a film version of
Offenbach's "The Tales of Hoffman," Beecham sat down at the piano and
performed the whole damn opera, singing all the roles too, for Powell,
which convinced him to make a film of it. So I'm sure there is more
than a shred of truth to what Prokofiev did when visiting Walt. And
Prokofiev was no stranger to writing music for films. His first taste
was with Sergei Eistenstein, when the two collaborated on "Alexander
Nevsky," which, if not one of the best, was one of the most
influential film scores ever created. Prokofiev also did the scores
for both of Eistenstein's "Ivan the Terrible" films (there was to be a
third, but Stalin didn't like the way Ivan was portrayed in the second
film -- too close to home, perhaps -- and it only got past the test
stills and conceptual artwork stage before it was shelved, and then
Eisenstein died of a heart attack shortly after that). Anyway, I'm
sure Prokofiev had written this music to be as "visual" as possible
for the film medium.
Post by ichorwhip
The actor/pianist that played Prokofiev really did a great job I
thought.  Wonder who he was...  Anyways, any tidbits you can give us
on this would be greatly appreciated.
The Gabler book doesn't say anything but what I posted above. I think
it was a re-enactment. It looked very "staged." If Prokofiev had
performed for Walt, it isn't likely that there would have been a
Technicolor camera at the ready to record the performance, with hot,
hot lights bearing down on Prokofiev as he performed the music "cold"
for Walt. No, the cuts (setups, coverage) suggest that this was a "re-
enactment," all staged, shot on a set to look like the room where the
real Prokofiev performed.
Post by ichorwhip
"I felt all the malenky little hairs on my plott standing endwise..."
i
"piop"-
The Piano scene looks older then the  Intro with Disney..  Pretty
amazing.
I think it was meant to look that way. It's hard to tell on YouTube
regarding the picture quality.
I haven't seen this in years. Amazing.  Peter and the Wolf was shown
before  Fantasia.  I hope all this is on the anticipated DVDs.
No, "Peter and the Wolf" was made after "Fantasia," even though
Prokofiev composed and performed it for Walt in 1938. Funny you should
post the link to "Love For Three Oranges," since Walt had wanted to do
an interpretive animation piece of that for "Fantasia" too. Gabler's
book lists some of the other music, including Stravinsky's
"Petrushka," Wagner's "Ride of the Valkyries" (Walt had wanted to
incorporate some of Wagner's "Ring" music when he considered buying
the rights to Tolkein's "The Hobbit," which is interesting when you
realize that in "The Fellowship of the Rings" Howard Shore
incorporates a kind of "Ring"-style score for the part where Sauroman
cuts down his forest to create the Orcs in his huge, muddy underground
lair), Berlioz's "Roman Carnival," Musorgsky's "Song of a Flea," and
even Gounod's "Funeral March of a Marionette," which Alfred Hitchcock
later used for the theme music of his TV show.
Are we sure it's an actor?  Prokofiev lived till 1953.  Could Disney
have had Prokofiev return in 1949 or something?  
I'm sure it was a re-enactment. Disney looked too old in that footage.
Check any photos of him in 1940 and before, and you'll see that he is
much younger than he is in his blue sweater in this piece.
The playing is remarkable and the likeness seems close.  Maybe they snuck him out of the USSR.
The real http://youtu.be/mlwYfMU-kkM
dc
Prokofiev died in 1953 (for what it's worth, the same day Stalin
died), and this "re-enactment" looks as though it had been shot about
that time. Also, if you listen carefully, Disney does say, "The late
Sergei Prokofiev" in his introduction. Disney was the master of
illusion, so no doubt he brought in a "ringer" to double for Prokofiev
for this film piece.

Boaz
("As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures.")
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 10:31:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I haven't seen this in years. Amazing.  Peter and the Wolf was shown
before  Fantasia.  I hope all this is on the anticipated DVDs.
No, "Peter and the Wolf" was made after "Fantasia,"
What I meant was it was shown in the theater like they used to show
cartoons before the feature, before Fantasia played.when I saw it the
second time or third time, when I was old enough to really appreciate
Fantasia.

I saw it at 3 years old in 1950 as a very little kid, but I have no
memory if there was a short cartoon beforehand. I just remember being
transfixed by it and frightened as well. Then saw it again when I
was older, I think 11 or 12 and i think they had Peter and the Wolf
playing first. I saw it again sometime in the late 60's and I think
they also showed Peter and the Wolf beforehand.also. I know i've
seen it in print somewhere that they liked to show that before the
Fantasia feature. Fantasia was brought back again (late 80's?)much
later, I know I took my kids to it.


dc
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 17:54:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by b***@yahoo.com
I haven't seen this in years. Amazing.  Peter and the Wolf was shown
before  Fantasia.  I hope all this is on the anticipated DVDs.
No, "Peter and the Wolf" was made after "Fantasia,"
What I meant was it was shown in the theater like they used to show
cartoons before the feature, before Fantasia played.when I saw it the
second time or third time, when I was old enough to really appreciate
Fantasia.
I wouldn't know. Sorry. It probably was, since Disney was always
trying to maximize his profits by re-issuing his movies with something
slightly different to go along with it, to kind of "spice" things up.
Post by kelpzoidzl
 I saw it at 3 years old in 1950  as a very little kid, but I have no
memory if there was a short cartoon beforehand.  
Well, this was WAY before my time. My only recollection of it was on
TV.

For many kids, "Peter and the Wolf" would be their "introduction" to
classical music. Not so much the animated film, but the music itself,
with just the narration. I remember in grade school we'd be herded
into the "all-purpose room" (has a nice egalitarian ring to it,
doesn't it?), and gather around to listen to the record on the
school's only pitiful, portable picnic player. Some of us (myself
included) were already familiar with the music via the Disney version
on TV. My family also had a collection of classical records at home,
so I was no stranger to this or any music from the Masters. Also, I
doubt our teachers were aware of the connection between Disney and
Prokofiev, probably thinking that Disney merely "copped" the music for
"another one of his cartoons."
Post by kelpzoidzl
I just remember being
transfixed by it and frightened as well.   Then saw it again when I
was older, I think 11 or 12  and i think they had Peter and the Wolf
playing first.  I saw it again sometime in the late 60's and I think
they also showed Peter and the Wolf beforehand.also.   I know i've
seen it in print somewhere that they liked to show that before the
Fantasia feature.  Fantasia was brought back again (late 80's?)much
later, I know I took my kids to it.
dc
As Gabler pointed out, Disney had always considered "expanding"
"Fantasia" so it would include such works as "Peter and the Wolf" and
anything new that would come along. But it never worked out, due to
WWII, the Strike and the demands of keeping the Big Bad Wolf from the
door of the studio to put it into receivership. Disney took advantage
of television as a way of showing his old stuff to get the revenue to
build Disneyland, his next big visionary project. Walt's focus was on
that, leaving the day-to-day studio operations to other people.

When Walt died the studio operated like a ship without a compass for
many years. Those who were still in charge tried to second-guess
Walt's preferences in live-action features, but all but discarded the
animated films. By the late '70s the animation people were thrown out
of the Animation Building, booted off the lot, and had to set up shop
in nearby Glendale. That's a long, ugly story that isn't in Gabler's
book, but it is widely known to those who were there or who went
through it. I believe someone is working on such a book at the present
time.

Boaz
("I mean, Joe's here doing a job, a contract it is, two years... and
we made like an arrangement, didn't we Joe?")
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 10:56:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Prokofiev died in 1953 (for what it's worth, the same day Stalin
died), and this "re-enactment" looks as though it had been shot about
that time. Also, if you listen carefully, Disney does say, "The late
Sergei Prokofiev" in his introduction. Disney was the master of
illusion, so no doubt he brought in a "ringer" to double for Prokofiev
for this film piece.
Boaz
("As I slooshied, I knew such lovely pictures.")
That clip is amazing. The actor is so believably Prokofiev.

I guess everyone grew up with Disney, because they released all the
great films every few years, for every generation ---all those great
cartoon features and the nature documentaries. For my generation most
everything revolved around him.--including Mickey Mouse Club, He was
on TV as long as I can remember. Snow White, Pinnochio, Bambi, Dumbo,
Wind in the Willows, 20,000 Leagues, Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan,
Lady and the Tramp, Vanishing Praire and others, not to mention the
many cartoons and comics. I think they will always be watched because
they are all masterpieces.

dc








.
ichorwhip
2009-02-26 05:27:00 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 25, 9:02 am, "Reidiot®" <***@happyhealthy.net> wrote:

So the disgraced fool returns for another petty attempt and failure at
vengeance. Talk about non-sequiturs! So did you ever get that tax
bill paid deadbeat?

Oh and on your idiotic complaints about your stupid cheap newsreader
that doesn't work right. At least it works some! Unlike you ya
freeloading hobo....
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.  
Of course, NOBODY said that, so now we KNOW it's the
real "Icky"...  
Jeezus what an idiot. What part of "I get the idea" did you not
understand? And furthermore, I begin to doubt you've read any of the
other content of this thread saying stupid things like this.
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.  
What thread, only an idiot would respond to this drivel...oh wait,
several idiots did (that doesn't include me, since I just pointed out
correctly it's idiotic).
Wrong again idiot. Take your wacky vendetta elsewhere you no networth
soup kitchen refugee.
 
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other?  Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.  
Hmmmm, I feel an anecdote coming on...  
Hmmmm, I feel unsourced anecdote from creepy deadbeat crackpot being
mostly snipped.

...except Hans told us MOST of the animators got fired
Post by Bill Reid
at the end of their unpaid employment stints for "incompetence".  
Something you're familiar with no doubt.
Post by Bill Reid
Hans gave a few cells from like "Lady And The Tramp" he must
have stolen from Disney or something, then later on went all crazy
on my ass for some stupid joke I made, but that's another anecdote
and I don't even remember it really...  
That sounds more interesting than the crackpot anecdote from another
crackpot.
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.  
What "People"?  
Jeezus what a vacuous fool! You can not have read a thing in this
thread beyond what I've written. Either that or you're just plain
ignorant and dumb. I think both.
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too.  A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)  
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!  
Everything went downhill after "Steamboat Willie" if you ask me...  
It's no surprise. BTW, I'm sure you'd love Superjail on Adult Swim.
It's nearly as vile and ghastly as you are.
Post by Bill Reid
"When you wish upon a star"...nope, "Icky"'s still here...  
You shouldn't be here, disgraced fool. Reidiot® wouldn't lay down his
king so it had to be shoved up his bootie. Now why don't you go wait
for your stimulus package to arrive while you're sitting in the shit?
Post by Bill Reid
William Ernest "Hi Ho" Reid
Once again for those taking notes: Idiot and Deadbeat.

"Now then, Dim, what does that great big horsy gape of a grin
portend?"
i
"piop"
Bill Reid
2009-02-28 21:41:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
So the disgraced fool returns for another petty attempt and failure at
vengeance. Talk about non-sequiturs!
Indeed! "Vengeance" for WHAT, exactly?
Post by ichorwhip
So did you ever get that tax
bill paid deadbeat?
As I've said at least a dozen times, I NEVER had an unpaid tax
bill...however, if you want to check, it's possible it HAS been paid
now (no thanks to Michael "Lubow" Tenenbaum, who promised to
send the $500 to pay it, but like everything else "he" says, it
apparently was just another of his goofy lies).
Post by ichorwhip
Oh and on your idiotic complaints about your stupid cheap newsreader
that doesn't work right. At least it works some! Unlike you ya
freeloading hobo....
Google(TM) Groups is sending out incorrect text formats, in addition
to being the posting software choice of retards and freaks and stalkers
and spammers everywhere...on the other hand, due to my recent computer
systems upgrade, we'll see if the new software works any better with the
brain-dead Google(TM) Groups output (I doubt it, it really isn't supposed
to according to the "standard")...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
I get the idea that there are those who don't appreciate a speck the
fine creations that Disney strove for and achieved.
Of course, NOBODY said that, so now we KNOW it's the
real "Icky"...
Jeezus what an idiot. What part of "I get the idea" did you not
understand?
The part where you bring up a boring topic again using a
lame straw man...if you only had a brain, you might have
something worthwhile to say...
Post by ichorwhip
And furthermore, I begin to doubt you've read any of the
other content of this thread saying stupid things like this.
Nah, I've done myself a favor and skipped all the banal
idiotic flame wars over this boring non-issue, and I've been
doing a lot of work transferring files to my new computers
in the last week and haven't had the time to spank the
Usenutz as much as I should lately...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
OK, I will admit that I'm not THAT big a Disney fan...I'm an
adult, and basically I was born an adult, and have always had
adult tastes, and Disney mostly made kid stuff...I mean, the
animation is amazing, but the stories put me to sleep, and
generally I prefer live actors...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
What thread, only an idiot would respond to this drivel...oh wait,
several idiots did (that doesn't include me, since I just pointed out
correctly it's idiotic).
Wrong again idiot. Take your wacky vendetta elsewhere you no networth
soup kitchen refugee.
You and your "kind" are the ones who travel the Internet
spreading hate, as you very well know. I have never stalked
or harrassed or threatened anybody, unlike you and your "kind"...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
For instance, how can anyone look at Fantasia and call it mediocre on
one hand and have any idea of what fine art is on the other? Indeed I
feel that to work under Disney was a privelige for any serious artist.
Hmmmm, I feel an anecdote coming on...
Hmmmm, I feel unsourced anecdote from creepy deadbeat crackpot being
mostly snipped.
OK, suit yourself, it's about as intelligent a response as screaming
"ITZ A FAKE HANS IS A MADE UP NAME THERE WAS NO BATTLE
OF THE BULGE!!!!"
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
...except Hans told us MOST of the animators got fired
at the end of their unpaid employment stints for "incompetence".
Something you're familiar with no doubt.
You know, when I worked as a newspaper reporter at age 17, the
friggin' paper ripped me off on my "working lunch" pay, which I didn't
find out about until I quit (because I could make more money doing
just about anything else), so I filed a complaint with the labor
board, and they had to pay me AND dozens of other people
for all the money they hadn't paid properly over the years...then
when I was REALLY in need of a job and went back there looking
for work, they didn't want to hire me for some reason (some people
get funny like that when you sue them)...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Hans gave a few cells from like "Lady And The Tramp" he must
have stolen from Disney or something, then later on went all crazy
on my ass for some stupid joke I made, but that's another anecdote
and I don't even remember it really...
That sounds more interesting than the crackpot anecdote from another
crackpot.
Hans went totally beserk with EVERYBODY, just started screaming
and yelling at everybody over nothing, so they fired him...I'm not sure
what triggered that behavior, because for several months he seemed
very mellow, then all of sudden, it was like a war flashback or something...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
After all imagination and creativity are never a concern of The
People.
What "People"?
Jeezus what a vacuous fool! You can not have read a thing in this
thread beyond what I've written. Either that or you're just plain
ignorant and dumb. I think both.
A little from column "A", a little from column "B"...why do you
think it is so important to read the drivel that's posted here? We've
already established by unanimous vote that the group is completely
intellectually bankrupt these days, you said so your own stupid self...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
I'm a big fan of Pinocchio too. A.I. really reminds me of it! ;-)
Just check out the detail in Geppetto's shop and be dazzled if you
dare!
Everything went downhill after "Steamboat Willie" if you ask me...
It's no surprise. BTW, I'm sure you'd love Superjail on Adult Swim.
It's nearly as vile and ghastly as you are.
I became one of those latter-day "Family Guy" fans, that's pretty
ghastly, but sometimes just friggin' hilarious beyond belief...satire
is probably the best use for animation, but any and all irony in this
world escaped Uncle Walt...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
"When you wish upon a star"...nope, "Icky"'s still here...
You shouldn't be here, disgraced fool. Reidiot® wouldn't lay down his
king so it had to be shoved up his bootie. Now why don't you go wait
for your stimulus package to arrive while you're sitting in the shit?
Nah, I think I'll attach some people's homes, that'll stimulate MY
"economy"...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
William Ernest "Hi Ho" Reid
Once again for those taking notes: Idiot and Deadbeat.
I'd say you're being too hard on yourself, but you're really
understating all your horrible qualities...
Post by ichorwhip
"Now then, Dim, what does that great big horsy gape of a grin
portend?"
That he's about to post some pointless non-sequiturs on the
Kubrick group?

---
William Ernest "A Bit More, He's Still Kicking" Reid
ichorwhip
2009-02-28 23:53:13 UTC
Permalink
On Feb 28, 3:41 pm, "Reidiot®" <***@happyhealthy.net> wrote:

O big surprise, another ludicrous "whitewash" from Tom Non Sequitur.
Why can't you just shut up and go away? Oh I know, I know... "Dad...
It's the treatment."
Post by ichorwhip
So the disgraced fool returns for another petty attempt and failure at
vengeance.  Talk about non-sequiturs!
Indeed!  "Vengeance" for WHAT, exactly?
You know what exactly. I really don't want to waste my time
explaining what is already well known and obviously so for like the
hundreth time to an obtuse and stupid stubborn turd like you.
Post by ichorwhip
And furthermore, I begin to doubt you've read any of the
other content of this thread saying stupid things like this.
Nah, I've done myself a favor and skipped all the banal
idiotic flame wars over this boring non-issue, and I've been
doing a lot of work transferring files to my new computers
in the last week and haven't had the time to spank the
Usenutz as much as I should lately...
Just as I thought, more bullshit camouflage over your specific
target. So you traded in your ol' 486 for a real machine(s) eh? What
you got to play your fuzzy warbles on say Pentium 2 from the
thriftstore? Delusional Deadbeat can't even afford a tax bill
(definitely tied to him yet, despite all his loony denials!) and he
expects us to believe that he has a deskful of "new computers" and
something worth transferring to them. GWAHAHAHAHA! So yer
transferring all your "trophies" collected all these years on abUsenet
eh? What a worthless craptop you must have. So do you actually have
a computer fast enough now to get rid of dial-up? Not that you could
ever afford DSL or cable...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
So let this thread not be about the "evil Disney" if you
please, and about the Disney that has marveled "us" so many times.
OK, I will admit that I'm not THAT big a Disney fan...
Wow! Are you trying to stay on topic? Wow!
I'm an
adult, and basically I was born an adult,
GWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! You kill me!
and have always had
adult tastes, and Disney mostly made kid stuff...I mean, the
animation is amazing,
Good, good... I'm amazed that you can even see that and admit it.
"What's that supposed to be some kind of sick joke?"
but the stories put me to sleep, and
generally I prefer live actors...
That's fair enough. I can't believe the progress you're making.

<pointless non sequiturs and anecdotes elided, babysteps!>
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
What "People"?
Jeezus what a vacuous fool!  You can not have read a thing in this
thread beyond what I've written.  Either that or you're just plain
ignorant and dumb.  I think both.
A little from column "A", a little from column "B"...why do you
think it is so important to read the drivel that's posted here?
I do not. Either you'll read it or you won't. I care little which
although reading seems worse for you because of your poor
comprehension and supposed intellectual dishonesty, which could be
just mental retardation. What I do think is that if you're going to
"stalk" and attack someone at least know what the hell you're talking
about first. And have your lies straight too! Idiot!
I became one of those latter-day "Family Guy" fans, that's pretty
ghastly, but sometimes just friggin' hilarious beyond belief...satire
is probably the best use for animation, but any and all irony in this
world escaped Uncle Walt...
Like you can see the irony in anything at all... GWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
So what's your favorite character on "The Family Guy?" I bet it says
a lot about you.
William Ernest "A Bit More, He's Still Kicking" Reid
"Well, it's disgusting. It puts you off your food."
i
"piop"
Bill Reid
2009-03-03 15:24:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
Post by ichorwhip
So the disgraced fool returns for another petty attempt and failure at
vengeance. Talk about non-sequiturs!
Indeed! "Vengeance" for WHAT, exactly?
You know what exactly.
No, I don't, really. I'm not even "mad" at you for wishing death
on me, I just like to point it out occasionally when you idiots get
all full of yourselves and start babbling about how intellectual and
posh you are...it's kind of like pricking a balloon and watching
it fly loonily all around the room, if the balloon streamed out racist
vulgar non-sequiturs...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by ichorwhip
And furthermore, I begin to doubt you've read any of the
other content of this thread saying stupid things like this.
Nah, I've done myself a favor and skipped all the banal
idiotic flame wars over this boring non-issue, and I've been
doing a lot of work transferring files to my new computers
in the last week and haven't had the time to spank the
Usenutz as much as I should lately...
Just as I thought, more bullshit camouflage over your specific
target. So you traded in your ol' 486 for a real machine(s) eh? What
you got to play your fuzzy warbles on say Pentium 2 from the
thriftstore?
Oh, the brand and models aren't that important, 'cept I like to
withhold information like that from looney stalkers like you mostly
cuz it makes you SOOOO crazy (I just don't get the stalking, but
it's hilarious how far off-base you loons are, what with property in
"Campbell CA" that I don't own)...I will note they are an American
brand that I have found to be VERY reliable over the years, so
much so that I only buy computer equipment from that AMERICAN
company.

I will also reveal that my quest to buy a Toyota Prius was
stymied a couple weeks ago when I actually went to take a
test drive. I actually never drove the thing, I got in it, and
decided immediately that it wasn't for me. So now I guess
I will just buy the new version of the same car car that is
my current daily driver (Japanese, but MADE in America),
since again, I am VERY satisfied with that brand and its
features...and just to get you all red-faced in frustration,
I'm NOT telling you the actual brand, you looney stalker...
Post by ichorwhip
Delusional Deadbeat can't even afford a tax bill
(definitely tied to him yet, despite all his loony denials!) and he
expects us to believe that he has a deskful of "new computers" and
something worth transferring to them. GWAHAHAHAHA!
You so crazy...
Post by ichorwhip
So do you actually have
a computer fast enough now to get rid of dial-up? Not that you could
ever afford DSL or cable...
DSL? Man, are you living in the stone age...and please don't
get me started on the topic of the phone and cable companies...I
am NOT satisfied with THOSE American companies...

I also got one of those little USB TV tuners (AMERICAN brand) for
the home office computer, because I only have cable connections
in the living room and was relying on a little TV (AMERICAN brand)
that I bought for $1 at a garage sale 15 years ago to watch broadcast
TV while I "work", but our idiotic federal government invalidated my
$1 investment in the "public airwaves". I connected the tuner to a
$3 set of rabbit ears that I had laying around, and was quite surprised
to pick up 22 stations for 48 channels total of digital TV in my VERY
challenging reception environment...I was so stunned by the high-definition
content I actually wound up full-screening movies I would never
watch normally...still, I'm mad that I had to spend 38 times the $1
I spent for my TV to continue to watch TV in my home office...
Post by ichorwhip
What I do think is that if you're going to
"stalk" and attack someone at least know what the hell you're talking
about first. And have your lies straight too! Idiot!
I love it when you talk to yourself...do you actually yell this stuff
out loud and maybe bang on the walls when you go into your self-beration
mode?
Post by ichorwhip
I became one of those latter-day "Family Guy" fans, that's pretty
ghastly, but sometimes just friggin' hilarious beyond belief...satire
is probably the best use for animation, but any and all irony in this
world escaped Uncle Walt...
Like you can see the irony in anything at all... GWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!
So what's your favorite character on "The Family Guy?" I bet it says
a lot about you.
MAYBE it does (but not anything you'd be able to understand or
articulate correctly)...generally, anything with the baby and the dog
is golden (though when I FIRST watched it, I found the concept of
a talking baby to be soooooo annoying I couldn't make it though
five minutes of the first episode, but it got MUCH better).

---
William Ernest "Cool W-Hip" Reid
ichorwhip
2009-03-05 08:28:22 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 3, 9:24 am, "Reidiot® the Deadbeat" wrote:>
Post by Bill Reid
No, I don't, really.
Idiot.

<snipped the repetitive false blathering of a true MORRON>
Post by Bill Reid
but it's hilarious how far off-base you loons are, what with property in
"Campbell CA" that I don't own)...
Okay idiot. Then how do explain your big fat stupid lawsuit having
exactly the same address of record on it as this place "you don't own"
or whatever? (This ought to be funny, brace yourselves!)
Post by Bill Reid
I will note they are an American
brand that I have found to be VERY reliable over the years, so
much so that I only buy computer equipment from that AMERICAN
company.
Prolly not.
Post by Bill Reid
I will also reveal that my quest to buy a Toyota Prius was
stymied a couple weeks ago when I actually went to take a
test drive.
Yeah, right... Can't even pay a lousy $500 tax bill and's shopping
for Prius, got it, yeah huh...
Post by Bill Reid
 I actually never drove the thing,
Dealer took him for a homeless person "judging by the horrible smell."
Post by Bill Reid
I got in it,
Sure, like they let wet toothless sewer rats in Priuses...
Post by Bill Reid
and decided immediately that it wasn't for me.
That decision wasn't even made with you penniless waif.
Post by Bill Reid
 So now I guess
I will just buy the new version of the same car car that is
my current daily driver (Japanese, but MADE in America),
Prolly a Yugo.
Post by Bill Reid
since again, I am VERY satisfied with that brand and its
features...
And then you woke up.
Post by Bill Reid
and just to get you all red-faced in frustration,
I'm NOT telling you the actual brand, you looney stalker...
Because it will sound even more like a lie if you get too specific
bullshit talker...
Post by Bill Reid
DSL?  Man, are you living in the stone age...and please don't
get me started on the topic of the phone and cable companies...I
am NOT satisfied with THOSE American companies...
Bog what an ignorant idiot! What in the hell does any of this mean
thou grate obfuscator?

You don't have broadband because you're mad at the providers? What a
dumbass phony deadbeat!
Post by Bill Reid
I also got one of those little USB TV tuners (AMERICAN brand) for
the home office computer, because I only have cable connections
in the living room and was relying on a little TV (AMERICAN brand)
that I bought for $1 at a garage sale 15 years ago to watch broadcast
TV while I "work",
Good use of quotations there big faker...
Post by Bill Reid
but our idiotic federal government invalidated my
$1 investment in the "public airwaves".  I connected the tuner to a
$3 set of rabbit ears that I had laying around, and was quite surprised
to pick up 22 stations for 48 channels total of digital TV in my VERY
challenging reception environment...I was so stunned by the high-definition
content I actually wound up full-screening movies I would never
watch normally...still, I'm mad that I had to spend 38 times the $1
I spent for my TV to continue to watch TV in my home office...
Jeez, yeah every precious dollar must be saved for your nasty potted
meat and Old English 800's... Pathetic cheapskate!
Post by Bill Reid
MAYBE it does (but not anything you'd be able to understand or
articulate correctly)...generally, anything with the baby
That's because you are Stewie isn't it? You little paramecium
football headed Nazi!
Post by Bill Reid
and the dog
is golden
Ewwwww! What's golden from your dog?
Post by Bill Reid
(though when I FIRST watched it, I found the concept of
a talking baby to be soooooo annoying I couldn't make it though
five minutes of the first episode, but it got MUCH better).
It's never risen to any sort of decency at all and relies strictly on
fat jokes, vacuous non sequiturs and feeble campy references to
Brianshit best left forgotten. It's worth a laugh for the shock value
I must admit, but overall Family Guy is for toilet paper.

Quagmire that idiot.
Post by Bill Reid
William Ernest "Cool W-Hip" Reid
You can have Cool W'hip on your Poopberry Pie.

"Why you slimy little maggot! You make me want to vomit!"
i
"piop"
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-05 09:23:10 UTC
Permalink
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.

pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99



pt2



pt3




pt4





reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5





pt6





pt7




1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99




dc
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-05 09:45:14 UTC
Permalink
And this classic




a redux




dc
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-05 19:40:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.
pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
http://youtu.be/T7LHXleiKQw
pt2
http://youtu.be/5FAqwiK2wow
pt3
http://youtu.be/dnxLtADSmIw
pt4
http://youtu.be/GaXr-WDp3UM
reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5
http://youtu.be/XVOKHrXUN1c
pt6
http://youtu.be/Kf0XYJpbTqU
pt7
http://youtu.be/aHqHShB29Cs
   1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
   2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
   3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
   4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
   5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
   6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
   7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
   8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99
dc
Thanks for this too, Dave. I saw "Fantasia 2000" when it first came
out nine years ago. It was okay, but not as impressive as the
original. The animation was much better (as was the technology that
did it), but it lacked the daring Walt's original version had. The
worst part (for me and many in the audience) was the "Pomp and
Circumstance" portion. The narrator said the choice of music and the
subject (Donald as Noah with the Ark) was one that was "personally
selected by Michael Eisner," the (at the time) president and CEO of
The Walt Disney Company. Eisner was always "getting his hand in
everyone's pie," micromanaging anything and everything in the company.
One of the reasons the quality of the animated films declined in the
late '90s was because Eisner had chased out Katzenberg, following
Frank Wells' death in a helicopter accident. Katzenberg had been
instrumental in reviving the Animation Studio (e.g., "The Little
Mermaid," "Pocahontas," "Beauty and the Beast," "The Lion King," to
name a few), and after Wells' untimely death a power struggle ensued,
not unlike that when Lenin died and Stalin chased Trotsky out of
Russia. Anyway, Eisner proceeded to micromanage every production,
including the animated films, and their quality declined, their
content veering between bland and boring. When the narrator said the
Noah and the Ark piece was "personally selected" by Eisner there was
this quiet but collective groan in the audience (I saw it at an
Academy screening, not at the studio). In fact, the only piece that
anyone seemed enthusiastic about was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice,"
largely because it still had Walt's fingerprints all over it, in a
manner of speaking. The other pieces for "2000" were well-made music
videos that didn't do much to "expand the boundaries" of animation
that the original did. And with today's computer technology there are
numerous possibilities for someone to take music and to incorporate it
with animation in a way that would be "shattering," to borrow a term
from Kubrick. All it will take is the right person at the right time
with enough guts and vision to pull it off. Maybe with Lasseter in
charge of Animation now that may be a possibility, once we see where
the industry itself will be during this recession.

Boaz
("Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.")
ichorwhip
2009-03-06 02:39:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.
pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
http://youtu.be/T7LHXleiKQw
pt2
http://youtu.be/5FAqwiK2wow
pt3
http://youtu.be/dnxLtADSmIw
pt4
http://youtu.be/GaXr-WDp3UM
reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5
http://youtu.be/XVOKHrXUN1c
pt6
http://youtu.be/Kf0XYJpbTqU
pt7
http://youtu.be/aHqHShB29Cs
   1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
   2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
   3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
   4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
   5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
   6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
   7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
   8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99
dc
Thanks for this too, Dave. I saw "Fantasia 2000" when it first came
out nine years ago. It was okay, but not as impressive as the
original. The animation was much better (as was the technology that
did it), but it lacked the daring Walt's original version had. The
worst part (for me and many in the audience) was the "Pomp and
Circumstance" portion. The narrator said the choice of music and the
subject (Donald as Noah with the Ark) was one that was "personally
selected by Michael Eisner," the (at the time) president and CEO of
The Walt Disney Company. Eisner was always "getting his hand in
everyone's pie," micromanaging anything and everything in the company.
One of the reasons the quality of the animated films declined in the
late '90s was because Eisner had chased out Katzenberg, following
Frank Wells' death in a helicopter accident. Katzenberg had been
instrumental in reviving the Animation Studio (e.g., "The Little
Mermaid," "Pocahontas," "Beauty and the Beast," "The Lion King," to
name a few), and after Wells' untimely death a power struggle ensued,
not unlike that when Lenin died and Stalin chased Trotsky out of
Russia. Anyway, Eisner proceeded to micromanage every production,
including the animated films, and their quality declined, their
content veering between bland and boring. When the narrator said the
Noah and the Ark piece was "personally selected" by Eisner there was
this quiet but collective groan in the audience (I saw it at an
Academy screening, not at the studio). In fact, the only piece that
anyone seemed enthusiastic about was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice,"
largely because it still had Walt's fingerprints all over it, in a
manner of speaking. The other pieces for "2000" were well-made music
videos that didn't do much to "expand the boundaries" of animation
that the original did. And with today's computer technology there are
numerous possibilities for someone to take music and to incorporate it
with animation in a way that would be "shattering," to borrow a term
from Kubrick. All it will take is the right person at the right time
with enough guts and vision to pull it off. Maybe with Lasseter in
charge of Animation now that may be a possibility, once we see where
the industry itself will be during this recession.
Boaz
("Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.")-
I fairly agree with your assessment of Fantasia 2000 although I found
"The Steadfast Tin Soldier" sequence to be quite a highlight.
Shostakovich's 2nd Piano Concerto is indeed a precise fit for the
story and the expressiveness of the characters and the overall design
begins to approach that old great Disney stuff. That sinister
smecking Jack-in-the-Box has caused how many nightmares now I wonder?
Also liked the final number quite well in "The Firebird." Pretty
sensational. I think Walt would have approved. Oh, and I can not
hear "Pomp and Circumstance" and not think of Alex being delivered to
the Ludovico Center. Weakest part of Fantasia 2000 true, but one of
the funniest parts of ACO to me. That exaggerated quick march ending
in a loud double footfall floors me every time!

"Well, I wonder if you'd mind signing these transfer documents, sir."
i
"piop"
Don Stockbauer
2009-03-06 02:51:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.
pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
http://youtu.be/T7LHXleiKQw
pt2
http://youtu.be/5FAqwiK2wow
pt3
http://youtu.be/dnxLtADSmIw
pt4
http://youtu.be/GaXr-WDp3UM
reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5
http://youtu.be/XVOKHrXUN1c
pt6
http://youtu.be/Kf0XYJpbTqU
pt7
http://youtu.be/aHqHShB29Cs
   1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
   2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
   3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
   4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
   5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
   6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
   7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
   8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99
dc
Thanks for this too, Dave. I saw "Fantasia 2000" when it first came
out nine years ago. It was okay, but not as impressive as the
original. The animation was much better (as was the technology that
did it), but it lacked the daring Walt's original version had. The
worst part (for me and many in the audience) was the "Pomp and
Circumstance" portion. The narrator said the choice of music and the
subject (Donald as Noah with the Ark) was one that was "personally
selected by Michael Eisner," the (at the time) president and CEO of
The Walt Disney Company. Eisner was always "getting his hand in
everyone's pie," micromanaging anything and everything in the company.
One of the reasons the quality of the animated films declined in the
late '90s was because Eisner had chased out Katzenberg, following
Frank Wells' death in a helicopter accident. Katzenberg had been
instrumental in reviving the Animation Studio (e.g., "The Little
Mermaid," "Pocahontas," "Beauty and the Beast," "The Lion King," to
name a few), and after Wells' untimely death a power struggle ensued,
not unlike that when Lenin died and Stalin chased Trotsky out of
Russia. Anyway, Eisner proceeded to micromanage every production,
including the animated films, and their quality declined, their
content veering between bland and boring. When the narrator said the
Noah and the Ark piece was "personally selected" by Eisner there was
this quiet but collective groan in the audience (I saw it at an
Academy screening, not at the studio). In fact, the only piece that
anyone seemed enthusiastic about was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice,"
largely because it still had Walt's fingerprints all over it, in a
manner of speaking. The other pieces for "2000" were well-made music
videos that didn't do much to "expand the boundaries" of animation
that the original did. And with today's computer technology there are
numerous possibilities for someone to take music and to incorporate it
with animation in a way that would be "shattering," to borrow a term
from Kubrick. All it will take is the right person at the right time
with enough guts and vision to pull it off. Maybe with Lasseter in
charge of Animation now that may be a possibility, once we see where
the industry itself will be during this recession.
Boaz
("Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.")-
I fairly agree with your assessment of Fantasia 2000 although I found
"The Steadfast Tin Soldier" sequence to be quite a highlight.
Shostakovich's 2nd Piano Concerto is indeed a precise fit for the
story and the expressiveness of the characters and the overall design
begins to approach that old great Disney stuff.  That sinister
smecking Jack-in-the-Box has caused how many nightmares now I wonder?
Also liked the final number quite well in "The Firebird."  Pretty
sensational.  I think Walt would have approved.  Oh, and I can not
hear "Pomp and Circumstance" and not think of Alex being delivered to
the Ludovico Center.  Weakest part of Fantasia 2000 true, but one of
the funniest parts of ACO to me.  That exaggerated quick march ending
in a loud double footfall floors me every time!
Yes, yes, but....why did they wear their jockstraps on the
outside???????

"Your snake? Why...it had....like an ...accident...it did."
ichorwhip
2009-03-06 04:24:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Stockbauer
Post by ichorwhip
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.
pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
http://youtu.be/T7LHXleiKQw
pt2
http://youtu.be/5FAqwiK2wow
pt3
http://youtu.be/dnxLtADSmIw
pt4
http://youtu.be/GaXr-WDp3UM
reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5
http://youtu.be/XVOKHrXUN1c
pt6
http://youtu.be/Kf0XYJpbTqU
pt7
http://youtu.be/aHqHShB29Cs
   1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
   2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
   3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
   4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
   5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
   6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
   7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
   8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99
dc
Thanks for this too, Dave. I saw "Fantasia 2000" when it first came
out nine years ago. It was okay, but not as impressive as the
original. The animation was much better (as was the technology that
did it), but it lacked the daring Walt's original version had. The
worst part (for me and many in the audience) was the "Pomp and
Circumstance" portion. The narrator said the choice of music and the
subject (Donald as Noah with the Ark) was one that was "personally
selected by Michael Eisner," the (at the time) president and CEO of
The Walt Disney Company. Eisner was always "getting his hand in
everyone's pie," micromanaging anything and everything in the company.
One of the reasons the quality of the animated films declined in the
late '90s was because Eisner had chased out Katzenberg, following
Frank Wells' death in a helicopter accident. Katzenberg had been
instrumental in reviving the Animation Studio (e.g., "The Little
Mermaid," "Pocahontas," "Beauty and the Beast," "The Lion King," to
name a few), and after Wells' untimely death a power struggle ensued,
not unlike that when Lenin died and Stalin chased Trotsky out of
Russia. Anyway, Eisner proceeded to micromanage every production,
including the animated films, and their quality declined, their
content veering between bland and boring. When the narrator said the
Noah and the Ark piece was "personally selected" by Eisner there was
this quiet but collective groan in the audience (I saw it at an
Academy screening, not at the studio). In fact, the only piece that
anyone seemed enthusiastic about was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice,"
largely because it still had Walt's fingerprints all over it, in a
manner of speaking. The other pieces for "2000" were well-made music
videos that didn't do much to "expand the boundaries" of animation
that the original did. And with today's computer technology there are
numerous possibilities for someone to take music and to incorporate it
with animation in a way that would be "shattering," to borrow a term
from Kubrick. All it will take is the right person at the right time
with enough guts and vision to pull it off. Maybe with Lasseter in
charge of Animation now that may be a possibility, once we see where
the industry itself will be during this recession.
Boaz
("Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.")-
I fairly agree with your assessment of Fantasia 2000 although I found
"The Steadfast Tin Soldier" sequence to be quite a highlight.
Shostakovich's 2nd Piano Concerto is indeed a precise fit for the
story and the expressiveness of the characters and the overall design
begins to approach that old great Disney stuff.  That sinister
smecking Jack-in-the-Box has caused how many nightmares now I wonder?
Also liked the final number quite well in "The Firebird."  Pretty
sensational.  I think Walt would have approved.  Oh, and I can not
hear "Pomp and Circumstance" and not think of Alex being delivered to
the Ludovico Center.  Weakest part of Fantasia 2000 true, but one of
the funniest parts of ACO to me.  That exaggerated quick march ending
in a loud double footfall floors me every time!
Yes, yes, but....why did they wear their jockstraps on the
outside???????
"Your snake?  Why...it had....like an ...accident...it did."- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Yet another Don sequitur...
b***@yahoo.com
2009-03-06 05:15:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.
pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
http://youtu.be/T7LHXleiKQw
pt2
http://youtu.be/5FAqwiK2wow
pt3
http://youtu.be/dnxLtADSmIw
pt4
http://youtu.be/GaXr-WDp3UM
reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5
http://youtu.be/XVOKHrXUN1c
pt6
http://youtu.be/Kf0XYJpbTqU
pt7
http://youtu.be/aHqHShB29Cs
   1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
   2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
   3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
   4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
   5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
   6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
   7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
   8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99
dc
Thanks for this too, Dave. I saw "Fantasia 2000" when it first came
out nine years ago. It was okay, but not as impressive as the
original. The animation was much better (as was the technology that
did it), but it lacked the daring Walt's original version had. The
worst part (for me and many in the audience) was the "Pomp and
Circumstance" portion. The narrator said the choice of music and the
subject (Donald as Noah with the Ark) was one that was "personally
selected by Michael Eisner," the (at the time) president and CEO of
The Walt Disney Company. Eisner was always "getting his hand in
everyone's pie," micromanaging anything and everything in the company.
One of the reasons the quality of the animated films declined in the
late '90s was because Eisner had chased out Katzenberg, following
Frank Wells' death in a helicopter accident. Katzenberg had been
instrumental in reviving the Animation Studio (e.g., "The Little
Mermaid," "Pocahontas," "Beauty and the Beast," "The Lion King," to
name a few), and after Wells' untimely death a power struggle ensued,
not unlike that when Lenin died and Stalin chased Trotsky out of
Russia. Anyway, Eisner proceeded to micromanage every production,
including the animated films, and their quality declined, their
content veering between bland and boring. When the narrator said the
Noah and the Ark piece was "personally selected" by Eisner there was
this quiet but collective groan in the audience (I saw it at an
Academy screening, not at the studio). In fact, the only piece that
anyone seemed enthusiastic about was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice,"
largely because it still had Walt's fingerprints all over it, in a
manner of speaking. The other pieces for "2000" were well-made music
videos that didn't do much to "expand the boundaries" of animation
that the original did. And with today's computer technology there are
numerous possibilities for someone to take music and to incorporate it
with animation in a way that would be "shattering," to borrow a term
from Kubrick. All it will take is the right person at the right time
with enough guts and vision to pull it off. Maybe with Lasseter in
charge of Animation now that may be a possibility, once we see where
the industry itself will be during this recession.
Boaz
("Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.")-
I fairly agree with your assessment of Fantasia 2000 although I found
"The Steadfast Tin Soldier" sequence to be quite a highlight.
Shostakovich's 2nd Piano Concerto is indeed a precise fit for the
story and the expressiveness of the characters and the overall design
begins to approach that old great Disney stuff.  That sinister
smecking Jack-in-the-Box has caused how many nightmares now I wonder?
Also liked the final number quite well in "The Firebird."  Pretty
sensational.  I think Walt would have approved.  Oh, and I can not
hear "Pomp and Circumstance" and not think of Alex being delivered to
the Ludovico Center.  Weakest part of Fantasia 2000 true, but one of
the funniest parts of ACO to me.  That exaggerated quick march ending
in a loud double footfall floors me every time!
Every time I hear "Pomp and Circumstance" I think of graduation --
high school and college. Eisner's tastes were all in his mouth. There
are numerous musical works that could have been much better than "Pomp
and Circumstance," which someone I used to work with long ago would
call "Pomp and Circumcision." I'll leave it to you do conjure up your
own imagery for that!

But, as I said earlier, I prolly need to watch it again. There was
some nice artwork and a few good segments, but I think overall it
could have been much better.

Boaz
("Oh, yes, I understand you are fond of music.")
Don Stockbauer
2009-03-06 05:39:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by ichorwhip
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Post by kelpzoidzl
Fantasia 2000---Disney continues the visionary genius after Walt's
passing.
pt1
1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
http://youtu.be/T7LHXleiKQw
pt2
http://youtu.be/5FAqwiK2wow
pt3
http://youtu.be/dnxLtADSmIw
pt4
http://youtu.be/GaXr-WDp3UM
reprises Sorcerors Apprentice in next two (different version of Music)
pt5
http://youtu.be/XVOKHrXUN1c
pt6
http://youtu.be/Kf0XYJpbTqU
pt7
http://youtu.be/aHqHShB29Cs
   1. Symphony No. 5 Chicago Symphony Orchestra 2:54 $0.99
   2. Pines Of Rome Chicago Symphony Orchestra 10:14 Album Only
   3. Rhapsody In Blue Philharmonia Orchestra 12:35 Album Only
   4. Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro,Opus 102 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 7:26 $0.99
   5. Carnival Of The Animals, Finale Chicago Symphony Orchestra 1:57
$0.99
   6. The Sorcerer's Apprentice Philharmonia Orchestra 9:37 $0.99
   7. Pomp & Circumstance, Marches #1,2,3, & 4 Chicago Symphony
Orchestra 6:22 $0.99
   8. Firebird Suite Chicago Symphony Orchestra 9:13 $0.99
dc
Thanks for this too, Dave. I saw "Fantasia 2000" when it first came
out nine years ago. It was okay, but not as impressive as the
original. The animation was much better (as was the technology that
did it), but it lacked the daring Walt's original version had. The
worst part (for me and many in the audience) was the "Pomp and
Circumstance" portion. The narrator said the choice of music and the
subject (Donald as Noah with the Ark) was one that was "personally
selected by Michael Eisner," the (at the time) president and CEO of
The Walt Disney Company. Eisner was always "getting his hand in
everyone's pie," micromanaging anything and everything in the company.
One of the reasons the quality of the animated films declined in the
late '90s was because Eisner had chased out Katzenberg, following
Frank Wells' death in a helicopter accident. Katzenberg had been
instrumental in reviving the Animation Studio (e.g., "The Little
Mermaid," "Pocahontas," "Beauty and the Beast," "The Lion King," to
name a few), and after Wells' untimely death a power struggle ensued,
not unlike that when Lenin died and Stalin chased Trotsky out of
Russia. Anyway, Eisner proceeded to micromanage every production,
including the animated films, and their quality declined, their
content veering between bland and boring. When the narrator said the
Noah and the Ark piece was "personally selected" by Eisner there was
this quiet but collective groan in the audience (I saw it at an
Academy screening, not at the studio). In fact, the only piece that
anyone seemed enthusiastic about was "The Sorcerer's Apprentice,"
largely because it still had Walt's fingerprints all over it, in a
manner of speaking. The other pieces for "2000" were well-made music
videos that didn't do much to "expand the boundaries" of animation
that the original did. And with today's computer technology there are
numerous possibilities for someone to take music and to incorporate it
with animation in a way that would be "shattering," to borrow a term
from Kubrick. All it will take is the right person at the right time
with enough guts and vision to pull it off. Maybe with Lasseter in
charge of Animation now that may be a possibility, once we see where
the industry itself will be during this recession.
Boaz
("Yes, I'd like to hear it, HAL. Sing it for me.")-
I fairly agree with your assessment of Fantasia 2000 although I found
"The Steadfast Tin Soldier" sequence to be quite a highlight.
Shostakovich's 2nd Piano Concerto is indeed a precise fit for the
story and the expressiveness of the characters and the overall design
begins to approach that old great Disney stuff.  That sinister
smecking Jack-in-the-Box has caused how many nightmares now I wonder?
Also liked the final number quite well in "The Firebird."  Pretty
sensational.  I think Walt would have approved.  Oh, and I can not
hear "Pomp and Circumstance" and not think of Alex being delivered to
the Ludovico Center.  Weakest part of Fantasia 2000 true, but one of
the funniest parts of ACO to me.  That exaggerated quick march ending
in a loud double footfall floors me every time!
Every time I hear "Pomp and Circumstance" I think of graduation --
high school and college. Eisner's tastes were all in his mouth. There
are numerous musical works that could have been much better than "Pomp
and Circumstance," which someone I used to work with long ago would
call "Pomp and Circumcision." I'll leave it to you do conjure up your
own imagery for that!
But, as I said earlier, I prolly need to watch it again. There was
some nice artwork and a few good segments, but I think overall it
could have been much better.
Boaz
("Oh, yes, I understand you are fond of music.")
"Maudy, Gol-durn it, wuddent thet thar last scene some kinda baby
feller jes uh floatin out in space???? beats awl ah done ever saw, an
ah ben a lotta places , yessiree. jes wut in tha HELLwuz thet
supposed ta mean? Is it lak one uh them thar roarshack tests or
sumpthin, ah mean is Kubrick jes a tryin ta tell us thet a supremely
advanced individual would be childlike and all? No inhibitions, jes
breaks awl kinds uh social norms? Is thet wut it means, Maudy. Let's
git tha hell back to tha ranch, cows knead milkin."

"OK."
ichorwhip
2009-03-06 09:19:23 UTC
Permalink
On Mar 5, 11:15 pm, ***@yahoo.com wrote:

<a snip>
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Every time I hear "Pomp and Circumstance" I think of graduation --
high school and college. Eisner's tastes were all in his mouth. There
are numerous musical works that could have been much better than "Pomp
and Circumstance," which someone I used to work with long ago would
call "Pomp and Circumcision." I'll leave it to you do conjure up your
own imagery for that!
Briss! Yeah, there are so many other classical pieces that come
before "Pump and Circumscribe" that I would have loved to have seen
done. One magical piece that wasn't on the shortlist of Fantasia
might-have-beens is the scherzo third movement of Schumann's Fourth.
It has a such a great bombast tempered with alternating sweet delicacy
that just conjures up images of say Hannibal crossing the Alps with
his elephantine regiments. Rimsky-Korsakov's "Scheherazade" is a no-
brainer as well, indeed a full length feature could and should still
be given the Fantasia treatment. I'll throw in Dvorak's "New World"
as well. This is some grand music for telling stories with. Oh and
Brahm's 4th first movement too... Okay, I'm spent.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
But, as I said earlier, I prolly need to watch it again. There was
some nice artwork and a few good segments, but I think overall it
could have been much better.
Oh you ought to. It's got some residual power and beauty. BTW wasn't
that short Saint Saens segment, from "The Carnival of the Animals"
actually hand drawn? Sure looks like it, and that was a funny and
inventive little piece. Gershwin's "Rhasody in Blue" in the style of
Al Hirschfeld is praps the most emotionally manipulative of the lot,
but I still thought it was at least okay. "The Pines of Rome" segment
is beautiful but the music never really hooked me. There's the
Beethoven interpretive abstract piece, which is fairly cool, but kind
of obvious. And I think we've mentioned them all, even the reissue of
the "Sorcerer's Apprentice," which is one of the greatest pieces of
animation ever done.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Boaz
("Oh, yes, I understand you are fond of music")
"I want to marry a lighthouse keeper. And live by the side of the
sea."
i
"piop"
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 12:24:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by ichorwhip
<a snip>
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Every time I hear "Pomp and Circumstance" I think of graduation --
high school and college. Eisner's tastes were all in his mouth. There
are numerous musical works that could have been much better than "Pomp
and Circumstance," which someone I used to work with long ago would
call "Pomp and Circumcision." I'll leave it to you do conjure up your
own imagery for that!
Briss!   Yeah, there are so many other classical pieces that come
before "Pump and Circumscribe" that I would have loved to have seen
done.  One magical piece that wasn't on the shortlist of Fantasia
might-have-beens is the scherzo third movement of Schumann's Fourth.
It has a such a great bombast tempered with alternating sweet delicacy
that just conjures up images of say Hannibal crossing the Alps with
his elephantine regiments.  Rimsky-Korsakov's "Scheherazade" is a no-
brainer as well, indeed a full length feature could and should still
be given the Fantasia treatment.  I'll throw in Dvorak's "New World"
as well.  This is some grand music for telling stories with.  Oh and
Brahm's 4th first movement too...  Okay, I'm spent.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
But, as I said earlier, I prolly need to watch it again. There was
some nice artwork and a few good segments, but I think overall it
could have been much better.
Oh you ought to.  It's got some residual power and beauty.  BTW wasn't
that short Saint Saens segment, from "The Carnival of the Animals"
actually hand drawn?  Sure looks like it, and that was a funny and
inventive little piece.  Gershwin's "Rhasody in Blue" in the style of
Al Hirschfeld is praps the most emotionally manipulative of the lot,
but I still thought it was at least okay.  "The Pines of Rome" segment
is beautiful but the music never really hooked me.  There's the
Beethoven interpretive abstract piece, which is fairly cool, but kind
of obvious.  And I think we've mentioned them all, even the reissue of
the "Sorcerer's Apprentice," which is one of the greatest pieces of
animation ever done.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Boaz
("Oh, yes, I understand you are fond of music")
"I want to marry a lighthouse keeper. And live by the side of the
sea."
i
"piop"
Disney cartoons did covers of many other pieces.

Some too familiar.

But had I been able to pick music for a Fantasia including the
storylines I'd pick:


Bolero-- I always associated it with Napoleon because my first album
of it had had a painting of Napoleon on the cover.



Concierto de Aranjuez -by Rodrigo(Yepes playing) I love this piece.








Marche Slav, could have been a great story.




The Planets by Holst (so overused but still amazing) could be half a
movie.

1812 Overture--ditto

Finlandia--quite a story behind that.

The Unanswered Question -Ives.


or

Ives Symphony #4






Raga Bhimpalisi--(Shankar playing)

Itsuki no Komoriuta --played by KOGA MASAYUKI (Shakuhachi)
http://www.komuso2.com/audio/574%20---%20Track%201.mp3

dc
kelpzoidzl
2009-03-06 22:36:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by kelpzoidzl
Post by ichorwhip
<a snip>
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Every time I hear "Pomp and Circumstance" I think of graduation --
high school and college. Eisner's tastes were all in his mouth. There
are numerous musical works that could have been much better than "Pomp
and Circumstance," which someone I used to work with long ago would
call "Pomp and Circumcision." I'll leave it to you do conjure up your
own imagery for that!
Briss!   Yeah, there are so many other classical pieces that come
before "Pump and Circumscribe" that I would have loved to have seen
done.  One magical piece that wasn't on the shortlist of Fantasia
might-have-beens is the scherzo third movement of Schumann's Fourth.
It has a such a great bombast tempered with alternating sweet delicacy
that just conjures up images of say Hannibal crossing the Alps with
his elephantine regiments.  Rimsky-Korsakov's "Scheherazade" is a no-
brainer as well, indeed a full length feature could and should still
be given the Fantasia treatment.  I'll throw in Dvorak's "New World"
as well.  This is some grand music for telling stories with.  Oh and
Brahm's 4th first movement too...  Okay, I'm spent.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
But, as I said earlier, I prolly need to watch it again. There was
some nice artwork and a few good segments, but I think overall it
could have been much better.
Oh you ought to.  It's got some residual power and beauty.  BTW wasn't
that short Saint Saens segment, from "The Carnival of the Animals"
actually hand drawn?  Sure looks like it, and that was a funny and
inventive little piece.  Gershwin's "Rhasody in Blue" in the style of
Al Hirschfeld is praps the most emotionally manipulative of the lot,
but I still thought it was at least okay.  "The Pines of Rome" segment
is beautiful but the music never really hooked me.  There's the
Beethoven interpretive abstract piece, which is fairly cool, but kind
of obvious.  And I think we've mentioned them all, even the reissue of
the "Sorcerer's Apprentice," which is one of the greatest pieces of
animation ever done.
Post by b***@yahoo.com
Boaz
("Oh, yes, I understand you are fond of music")
"I want to marry a lighthouse keeper. And live by the side of the
sea."
i
"piop"
Disney cartoons did covers of many other pieces.
Some too familiar.
But had I been able to pick music for a Fantasia including the
Bolero--  I always associated it with Napoleon because my first album
of it had had a painting of Napoleon on the http://youtu.be/2aK68IdDuGM
Concierto de Aranjuez -by Rodrigo(Yepes playing)  I love this piece.
http://youtu.be/ZlR7v6t3o5k
http://youtu.be/RxwceLlaODM
http://youtu.be/OwBrv20CZDA
Marche Slav, could have been a great story.
http://youtu.be/oy-bDe6PBp0
The Planets by Holst (so overused but still amazing) could be half a
movie.
1812 Overture--ditto
Finlandia--quite a story behind that.
The Unanswered Question http://youtu.be/trkFgIMC-Ks
or
Ives Symphony http://youtu.be/tPpeMsGs6IM
Raga Bhimpalisi--(Shankar playing)
 Itsuki no Komoriuta  --played by KOGA MASAYUKI (Shakuhachi)http://www.komuso2.com/audio/574%20---%20Track%201.mp3
dc- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I see in a 2006 thread an AMK a poster named "Read Failed Stats by
Noam Chomsky"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.movies.kubrick/browse_thread/thread/b47a78a977005d85/6b9aa7465956beb7?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=stravinsky+rite+of+spring+dc#6b9aa7465956beb7

said , regarding The Shining music:

" I thought he would use Ligetti for some of the music and I thought
he would use
Stravinsky's "The Rite of Spring." Years later I would see Vivian's
film and find that RoS was an initial idea, or "placeholder" music
piece for the final maze scene. "

I didn't know that.

dc
Bill Reid
2009-03-07 18:17:10 UTC
Permalink
ichorwhip <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:226cd2bd-1857-47c9-85a9-***@i2g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
On Mar 3, 9:24 am, "Reidiot® the Deadbeat" wrote:>
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
No, I don't, really.
Idiot.
Yes, you truly are.
Post by ichorwhip
<snipped the repetitive false blathering of a true MORRON>
You wouldn't happen to be named "Michael" would you? I must
admit the alt.fan.howard-stern "Michael Marrone" has quite the way
with words, but I still contend guys pretending to be their own
imaginary wives and not knowing the difference between a
"quintillion" and a "trillion" is some pretty "morronic" stuff...when
I FINALLY get the software from my ISP for my new computer
I might be able to start contributing to the "Morron Quote Of
The Day" threads again...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
but it's hilarious how far off-base you loons are, what with property in
"Campbell CA" that I don't own)...
Okay idiot. Then how do explain your big fat stupid lawsuit having
exactly the same address of record on it as this place "you don't own"
or whatever? (This ought to be funny, brace yourselves!)
Oh, yeah, absolutely hilarious. Right off hand I could think of three
or four reasons that might be, but again you prove you are SEVERELY
retarded...just for starters, ever consider the possibility that's a rental?
Sheesh...in any event, your looney stalking is again VERY creepy...ever
wonder why I have no interest in the squalid details of YOUR miserable
life (except to share with the "authorities" for the purposes of personal
protection)?
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
I will note they are an American
brand that I have found to be VERY reliable over the years, so
much so that I only buy computer equipment from that AMERICAN
company.
Prolly not.
Brilliant. Let me guess, you've never worn lace-ups in your life...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
I will also reveal that my quest to buy a Toyota Prius was
stymied a couple weeks ago when I actually went to take a
test drive.
Yeah, right... Can't even pay a lousy $500 tax bill and's shopping
for Prius, got it, yeah huh...
Well, I have my priorities...if I get evicted, I'll have to live in my car,
so might as well get a comfy one, and the Prius is NOT comfy...

As a matter of fact, I'm going to be spending about $45,000 CASH
for "new stuff" in the next few months in my effort to jump start the
economy (actually my effort to replace a lot of my old crap with new
improved crap).
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
I actually never drove the thing,
Dealer took him for a homeless person "judging by the horrible smell."
Well, it takes one to know one...most car salesmen are pretty pathetic,
but that doesn't stop me from driving a hard bargain with them, reducing
their already meager commission. They were offering $3000 off the
Priussesssess which the guy said was the first time they ever sold the
things for less than sticker + dealer markup (those cars are now the
most popular cars in this area, replacing the previous most popular
car, the Hummer). Unfortunately for me, if I buy the same kind of car
I drive daily now, it's gonna cost me about $6000 more than a Prius,
cuz they're more expensive in the first place and they AREN'T offering
much in the way of "deals" on those cars cuz they really don't have to
(oddly enough in these times)...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
I got in it,
Sure, like they let wet toothless sewer rats in Priuses...
You know, I worked as a car salesman, for two weeks, when I was
on vacation from my newspaper job when I was a kid. The first thing
they told me was that you can never tell who's got money; sometimes
somebody will come in looking homeless but carrying a brown paper
bag full of cash to buy the car with, and a lot of well-scrubbed-looking
"yuppies" (in those days) have horrible credit and can't get a loan
or even make the down payment...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
and decided immediately that it wasn't for me.
That decision wasn't even made with you penniless waif.
I'm sure you THOUGHT that sentence made sense...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
So now I guess
I will just buy the new version of the same car car that is
my current daily driver (Japanese, but MADE in America),
Prolly a Yugo.
Yugos were made in Yugoslavia, but you didn't know that, or
anything else for that matter...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
since again, I am VERY satisfied with that brand and its
features...
And then you woke up.
Bought any good books lately? Oh, yeah, that's right, I almost
forgot why you are SOOOOOOO concerned about "finances"...the
empty bookshelf and the non-running car...OK, if it makes you feel
better, go ahead and babble about my non-existent overdue tax
bill some more...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
and just to get you all red-faced in frustration,
I'm NOT telling you the actual brand, you looney stalker...
Because it will sound even more like a lie if you get too specific
bullshit talker...
So do you ride a bike to get around, or what? How's public
transportation there? It just keeps getting better here, and there's
also a bike path separate from the city streets that runs for 30
miles through many of the industrial areas where I've worked
that I get on two blocks from here...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
DSL? Man, are you living in the stone age...and please don't
get me started on the topic of the phone and cable companies...I
am NOT satisfied with THOSE American companies...
Bog what an ignorant idiot! What in the hell does any of this mean
thou grate obfuscator?
It means we've got essentially T3-speed fiber-optic connections here,
something like 100 times faster than "DSL". It also means that when
they installed the fiber-optic cables a couple years ago, the idiotic
phone company cut my phone service, and there was no way I could
contact them on another phone cuz they never answered the support
line after 1 1/2 hours. I had to find the idiotic technicians in the
access hole and get them to fix the problem; if I hadn't found them,
I may have NEVER had phone service again (but I'm sure they'd
keep sending me a bill).

This was NOT an isolated incident; the phone company has been
cutting my wires and wrecking my phone service DELIBERATELY
for years as part of their "marketing" for whatever high-speed service
they were pumping at the time...I've gotten completely sick and
tired of re-connecting my phone line after they cut the wires to
DELIBERATELY degrade it...and the cable company is also
similarly unreliable and dishonest...
Post by ichorwhip
You don't have broadband because you're mad at the providers? What a
dumbass phony deadbeat!
Isn't that why nobody drives Yugos anymore? Everybody got mad at
the brand cuz they suck? Is that a hard concept to understand? Do you
make your purchasing decisions differently? If you get lousy dishonest
service from a company, do you go back for more of the same? Have
you bought several more non-running cars from the guy who ripped you
off on the first one?
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
I also got one of those little USB TV tuners (AMERICAN brand) for
the home office computer, because I only have cable connections
in the living room and was relying on a little TV (AMERICAN brand)
that I bought for $1 at a garage sale 15 years ago to watch broadcast
TV while I "work",
Good use of quotations there big faker...
Well, like Usenet, it's a distraction, and I should really get rid
of both...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
but our idiotic federal government invalidated my
$1 investment in the "public airwaves". I connected the tuner to a
$3 set of rabbit ears that I had laying around, and was quite surprised
to pick up 22 stations for 48 channels total of digital TV in my VERY
challenging reception environment...I was so stunned by the high-definition
content I actually wound up full-screening movies I would never
watch normally...still, I'm mad that I had to spend 38 times the $1
I spent for my TV to continue to watch TV in my home office...
Jeez, yeah every precious dollar must be saved for your nasty potted
meat and Old English 800's... Pathetic cheapskate!
It's the principle of the thing...this digital TV thing is a ridiculous rip-off
of the American public...you wouldn't understand the concept of principles
since you have none...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
MAYBE it does (but not anything you'd be able to understand or
articulate correctly)...generally, anything with the baby
That's because you are Stewie isn't it? You little paramecium
football headed Nazi!
Stewie has an unpaid tax bill? I'm one year old?
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
and the dog
is golden
Ewwwww! What's golden from your dog?
"Spit on me, Brian." Also, could you curb your non-sequiturs?
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
(though when I FIRST watched it, I found the concept of
a talking baby to be soooooo annoying I couldn't make it though
five minutes of the first episode, but it got MUCH better).
It's never risen to any sort of decency at all and relies strictly on
fat jokes, vacuous non sequiturs and feeble campy references to
Brianshit best left forgotten. It's worth a laugh for the shock value
I must admit, but overall Family Guy is for toilet paper.
OK, you're not a fan...I actually agree with you that it has NO
"redeeming social value" and is basically just bad taste for the
sake of bad taste, which really DID bother me at first, but since
that's true of almost all the crap on TV at least it makes me
laugh SOMETIMES...
Post by ichorwhip
Quagmire that idiot.
Go giggidy yourself. What's funny is that "Family Guy"
is the TV equivalent of your horrible vulgar racist cruel non-sequitur
posts that are full of much LESS than feeble campy references...the
big difference is that "Family Guy" occasionally has some
INTENDED entertainment value; your posts are quite worthless
except for your sputtering red-faced attempts at self-worth of
any kind...
Post by ichorwhip
Post by Bill Reid
William Ernest "Cool W-Hip" Reid
You can have Cool W'hip on your Poopberry Pie.
"Would you write a letter of recommendation for me to
the University of Phoenix?"
Post by ichorwhip
"Why you slimy little maggot! You make me want to vomit!"
So, did you like the "Family Guy" episode where they all
had the contest to see who could not vomit the longest after
drinking Ipecac(TM)? How about the one where Peter chases
Meg around backwards farting in her face until she finally passes
out and vomits on the floor? How can you deny the quality
of THAT entertainment?

---
William Ernest "I Think I'm Going To Be Sick" Reid
ichorwhip
2009-03-09 05:11:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Reid
Post by ichorwhip
Okay idiot. Then how do explain your big fat stupid lawsuit having
exactly the same address of record on it as this place "you don't own"
or whatever? (This ought to be funny, brace yourselves!)
Oh, yeah, absolutely hilarious. Right off hand I could think of three
or four reasons that might be, but again you prove you are SEVERELY
retarded...just for starters, ever consider the possibility that's a rental?
Ever consider the possibility that you're just dancing around the
facts in a feeble attempt at truth deflection?

Truly tiresome rubbish...

<A giant snip of hot air including ballchinned Peter Griffin's farts
earmarked for Meg to get Al Gore off my back>
Post by Bill Reid
William Ernest "I Think I'm Going To Be Sick" Reid
"Get me something to be sick in!"
i
"piop"
Lubow
2009-03-11 02:45:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill Reid
As a matter of fact, I'm going to be spending about $45,000 CASH
for "new stuff" in the next few months in my effort to jump start the
economy (actually my effort to replace a lot of my old crap with new
improved crap).
You claim to have $45K to spend but didn't you plead IFP* to get the
SUPERIOR to partially waive the $350 fee to sue someone? And I am
willing to bet you had to state your IFP status UNDER OATH. I think
the SUPERIOR court in San Jose should be made aware that someone was
not exactly truthful under oath in time for the order to show cause
(OSC) hearing on April 16th, 2009.

*IFP:
In forma pauperis (IFP) is a legal term derived from the Latin phrase
in the character or manner of a pauper. In the United States, the IFP
designation is given by both state and federal courts to someone who
is without the funds to pursue the normal costs of a lawsuit or a
criminal defense.

-- Black's LawDictionary, p. 701 (5th ed. 1979).
kelpzoidzl
2015-03-14 01:27:25 UTC
Permalink
When all is said and done, FROZEN. Is the best film since EWS.

I wonder if commies anal-y -sis condemns that film for obvious Nazi propaganda and mind control.

Hard to not imagine Padraig sitting somewhere, pecking out long diatribes on a keyboard about how building snowmen, is Code for secret nazi "Fire and Ice" dogma.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...