Keskustelujen arkisto

Hi, Mike and welcome to the Forum!
I had posted a link to your blog last year here, hopefully it brought you some traffic and possibly some nice comments.
There are people from all around the world on this forum, and the posters are very civil, so please feel free to check in from time to time. The new paintings you created for the updated Dumbo attraction in Florida look GREAT, and 100% true to the look of the film.
Keep up the outstanding work, and please let us know of any updates. Folks here love some ducks, mice and etc.

Hello DuckburgUSA,
Thank you for the warm welcome! Your comments were very appreciated on my blog and I'm very happy you enjoyed the pieces. Glad you enjoyed the DUMBO paintings too as it is one of my favorite Disney films, so rich in heartfelt scenes. It's fun to stumble into a site like this where so many people are familiar with the Disney "Ducks".

"DuckTale"s was wildly successful during it's premiere and throughout the run of the series so it was inevitable that it warranted a "feature" version. "Goof Troop" got the same excitement and backing from the studio due to it starring one of the original trio of the Disney Stock company of Mickey, Donald and Goofy. It also comes down to timing and perceived box office. The two that got feature treatment seemed to have the strongest fan base and name recognition at the time they were in production.
http://michaelperaza.blogspot.com/search/label/Saturday%20Morning%20Memories

Quote from user: Mike Peraza"DuckTale"s was wildly successful during it's premiere and throughout the run of the series so it was inevitable that it warranted a "feature" version. "Goof Troop" got the same excitement and backing from the studio due to it starring one of the original trio of the Disney Stock company of Mickey, Donald and Goofy. It also comes down to timing and perceived box office. The two that got feature treatment seemed to have the strongest fan base and name recognition at the time they were in production.
http://michaelperaza.blogspot.com/search/label/Saturday%20Morning%20Memories
In truth, I can understand the "argument from Stock Company familiarity" far better than I can the "argument from fan base." GOOF TROOP held its own in the ratings against Warners' original BATMAN series, but I can't recall any sort of organized GT fan base at the time... certainly nowhere NEAR as organized as the RESCUE RANGERS, DARKWING DUCK, and TALE SPIN fan bases. If Disney felt that A GOOFY MOVIE had big box-office potential, then why was it "stealth released" in the spring of 1995, with virtually no advertising support? Andy why completely change the appearance of Goofy back to what he looked like in some of the classic shorts?

Quote from user: Mike PerazaThere was actually quite a large fan base for "Goof Troop" when it initially ran and I would have to politely disagree with your assessment that it was a "stealth" release as it was announced not only during the Disney afternoon block but during prime time as well as a huge advertising campaign in various magazines and comics and throughout the theme parks. Goofy's design was never changed drastically from the classic shorts look because we used the "Jack Kinney" as our basic inspiration. If it ain't broke...
I remember the "It's hard to be cool when your Dad is goofy" ads for AGM, and that's about it. I wouldn't know about what went on at the parks. As for the GT fan base, I wonder what happened to it? Several of the older series appear to have held onto their fandoms far more successfully than GT.

I think they made a mistake. I don't see why Donald couldn't have played his Barks role and Launchpad have a much reduced role as a fool. I think Donald's voice is fine for longwinded speeches. I resent that The Nephews', Scrooge's, Daisy's and all other Ducks' voices became "non-ducklike", just so ALL the audience can make out clearly what they are saying at all times. It ruins the "realism" for me. And even Scrooge's Scots brogue was so toned down as to not be recognisable as Scottish. What's the point of using something so watered down as to be unrecognisable?
I'm tired of films being unrealistic (especially in US products). They are very egocentric, not really knowing much about the rest of The World. An early American Alfred Hitchcock film, "Foreign Correspondent" (1940) comes to mind, in which a Dutch diplomat is "kidnapped" by German (Nazi) spies before WWII. It supposedly takes place in Amsterdam and its surroundings. It was filmed mostly on a Hollywood lot, and so, most of the actors came from the L.A. area. The "Dutch" diplomat was played by an actor with a heavy German (SOUTH German, no less) accent, which sounded NOTHING like Dutch. When the heroes were in the Dutch countryside, all but one of the "Dutch" residents, and police, were clearly English speakers, who had learned their Dutch lines phonetically, and they sounded TERRIBLE. This was especially true of a little girl, who had the main foreign language part. She sounded like a schoolgirl on her first day of hearing a word in her soon-to-be taken language course (as if she'd never heard each of those words before). I KNOW personally, Dutch families that had members living in L.A. at that time. Couldn't the producer have found a few Dutch-speaking people to use in those scenes so as not to ruin the believability of that film? NO. The powers in the US film industry figure: Almost no Americans know the difference between a German and Dutch accent in English, or, indeed, the difference between the sound of those 2 languages. So why bother?
The same is true for me regarding Donald. Thousands of us grew up hearing Donald's and Huey, Dewey and Louie's quacking. But the new filmmakers and TV producers feel that it's only necessary to cater to the current batch of kids. Not enough of the current batch of American kids know what a Scotsman sounds like to bother catering to them. Maybe instead of being drafted into the military service, there should be forced work in the workhouses of Aberdeen for two years each. Aye, let them learn how a Scotsman really sounds, and maybe learn a wee bit about thrift, in the bargain!

The "official" reason was that Eisner and others in management at the time considered Donald part of Walt's original trio of stock along with Mickey and Goofy. Donald was to be a "big name" introduction for folks out there who were unfamiliar with Carl's world of Uncle Scrooge and then only make a cameo here and there if needed. It was also a concern that if the show was a failure they did not want to tarnish Donald's star image at the studio. Part of the mandate was that they wanted to have these "new" characters stand on their own without relying on old classic characters like Donald to draw all the interest and thus create a new fan base.
There has always on going concern about Donald's voice being hard to understand going back to "Wise Little Hen" but he was such a lovable hot head and the voice was such an individual display in the sea of so much relatable cartoon voice work that it was never changed.
Goofy went through the same discussions about using "Disney Stock" on a TV series when "Goof Troop" was brought up and it was only decided to go for it but only after much debate. Part of our argument for it was that Goofy had starred in plenty of made for TV episodes during the "World of Color" and so it was not that much of a reach to give it a try. Well. back to my pencils...