Keskustelujen arkisto

Well It might be worth buying.

Quote from user: RancidDuckI hope this helps.
Thank you very much!

The stories sound quite interesting. Hopefully they're not too modern. In Christmas times I like classic stories.

The artwork is Disney Studios style, as opposed to comic book style. Mickey narrates a lead into each "story", much as "Duck Album" and Mickey Mouse Album" did. The style is very modern to me- not giving the "old fashioned" Christmas feeling. The "stories" are too short to my taste to be called stories (4 pages). They weren't memorable to me at all. Nevertheless, at a cost of only $3.95, I think the book is worth having. The panels are in the style of 3-D or film cells, rather than 2-d artist-drawn panels. They look like air-brushed painting/colouring. But you can see for yourself, on the sample scan, below:

http://img227.imageshack.us/img227/1412/mmxmas2gq4.jpg
By rob_k at 2008-11-17

Quote from user: Charlie BrownBWT: There seems to be a DVD with the same title and stories?
This is the adaptation of the DVD movie.

I didn't know they had a comic of that! But I love the dvd, so I'm sure it's worth buying. :)

You'll notice an oddity I'd forgotten about. In the substory "Christmas Impossible," there's some dialogue for Scrooge that might come across as very peculiar...

In the film script, Scrooge criticized himself for being greedy, noting that he'd never been on "Santa's good list" and telling HDL "don't be like me." When writing my adaptation, I thought this bordered on out-of-character, and changed the dialogue somewhat so that Scrooge had simply missed being on Santa's good list for *one* year, and bashed himself only for those moments when he'd gotten *too* greedy.
At the very last minute, though, Disney censors demanded that the scene play closer to the cartoon, so they relettered a voice balloon to add in most of the Scrooge dialogue I'd removed. But unfortunately for consistency, the censors left some of my changed dialogue in the surrounding panels; the result being that Scrooge is completely inconsistent as to whether he'd been on Santa's list either never, or all years but one!

Honestly, Hedberg?it's less the *change* that I objected to, than the *mistake* in making the change that led to the dialogue being confusing.

I referred to our Disney supervisor as a "censor," but perhaps "editor" is a better term to use for the process as it applied here. Disney personell understandably wanted to make sure that my adaptation was close enough to their cartoon for their liking. I may not have agreed with the cartoon's interpretation of Scrooge, but I didn't make the cartoon; Disney was within their rights to tweak my story to more closely resemble it, if they wanted. We were their chosen licensee, and they were counting on us to adapt their work recognizably, insofar as no one else was going to do it!
Apart from being a writer, I've been an editor for many years, and have been called upon to pinch and tweak others' writing to make it acceptable to me?just as Bob Foster, Byron Erickson, John Clark, and in this case a Disney Feature Animation liason have pinched and tweaked my own writing over the years to make it acceptable to them.
True: it's possible for editors (and certainly censors) to "overedit" material, seemingly changing it just to change it. But other editors change things for good reasons, or at least understandable ones under the parameters of the moment. And if I'm going to dish it out, I ought to be able to take it, too! So I can see this situation from both sides.