u/Crescentbrush

Okay, this was originally gonna be another idea, but I decided to go with this one since it's kind of interesting. "Aida" is a 19th century opera set in the Old Kingdom of Ancient Egypt, focusing on a tragic romance between an Ethiopian princess and an Egyptian guard. American opera singer Leontyne Price ended up making a children's book inspired by the story (with art by Leo and Diane Dillon), to which Disney bought the rights. Disney wanted it to be another animated hit, and asked Elton John to do the music again, given the fact that "The Lion King" was such a big hit. However, Elton John was uninterested in doing another animated film, so Disney offered a stage musical instead, and John and Tim Rice signed on to make it, turning it into a rock opera-style musical.

Given the film never really went into production, there isn't much known about it; the best we get is art done by Ben Balistreri when he was at Cal Arts in 1996 and the head of the Character Animation Program Frank Terry gave the assignment of drawing the characters with animal sidekicks. A lot of people think it's official concept art. But let's walk it out here and make this "What If" a bit bigger than Disney making another movie.

Let's say Disney does greenlight "Aida"; they either got Elton John on board with it or someone else; perhaps Tim Rice and Alan Menken, or they repaired bridges with Stephen Schwartz and wanted him to do something similar to "The Prince of Egypt" (oh, the irony). Given the timing, perhaps Disney asks Roger Allers to direct this project rather than working on "Kingdom of the Sun"--or perhaps "Dinosaur" is cancelled despite Michael Eisner's interest. The film would likely be released around 2000, Unlike the original story, Disney wouldn't kill of the main couple, opting instead to give them a happily ever after. This would also be Disney's first African film (albeit not their first MENA first) with humans, and their first animated film with a black lead. I wouldn't be surprised if Disney wanted to get a famous face for this role--I'm sure they'd get a lot of attention for it--and it'd positively affect the box office. Though I wouldn't be surprised if Disney just went to Broadway again to find burgeoning stars and/or did open casting calls to find new talent because the creative team wanted a fresh face. Given the casting with "Aladdin," I think the black characters are the only ones whose VAs match their race; the Middle Eastern characters would likely have white or black VAs, which would be something to dispute years later, but likely doesn't affect the overall success of the film.

Let's say it's a success; in the OTL, "Dinosaur" is the highest-grossing film after "Tarzan" ($448 million) and before "Tangled" ($591million), making $349 million with the average Disney film making $219 million otherwise. The trajectory threatens to change a lot. If it replaces "Dinosaur," it likely steers Disney towards more epic films for the 2000s, meaning we could get Glen Keane's vision of "Rapunzel" earlier than the finalized version of "Rapunzel" (not "Unbraided"), as well as Indian take on "The Emperor's Nightingale," Paul and Gaëtan Brizzi's "Don Quixote," and perhaps "The Snow Queen" if there's a pressure to get it out of development hell. Of course, this means several of the 2000s films we got are either reworked or cancelled altogether--though since none of them affect Disney's style now, that's not important. Plus if Schwartz returns to do the music, he may work on other animated projects for Disney. Also worth noting that the film opens a door: Disney made a successful film with a female black lead. This could affect how they approach future films, as well as how Tiana is treated in her film. Maybe this is the film Disney focuses putting on Broadway before "Hercules" or "Tangled." The film likely doesn't effect "The Emperor's New Groove" since it was already retooled by this point, unless positive test screenings for "Aida" earlier in production encouraged Disney to keep trying with "Kingdom of the Sun." Then there's also the fact that during production, both films likely wouldn't be released in 2000 like "Dinosaur" and "The Emperor's New Groove" were, since KOTS and "Aida" would both be musicals. Given this, it's possible that Disney is able to push KOTS back (or just put it in a different slot to begin with), allowing for Allers to stay on and continue reworking it. If this is a success, he may even be able to work on "Tam Lin" without Eisner trying to sabotage it--MAYBE.

Of course, if not, Allers still has an out; if "Aida" and "Kingdom of the Sun" (or at least "Aida") are significantly successful, this is a statement to other companies that you don't have to rely on humor, that serious stories are still worth telling by American companies. In this perspective, Sony--the company who Allers went to with his "Tam Lin" idea next--might not have shut down Allers' "Tam Lin" project for being "too passionate"; maybe they would've felt emboldened by Disney's success with serious musicals and decided they wanted to roll the dice. Given that Allers was now making the film with Brenda Chapman, the production of the film likely influences how Chapman approaches "Brave"--which, given the years (announced to be working on "Tam Lin" in 2003 and "The Bear and the Bow" being announced at Pixar in 2008), would've been as soon as production on "Tam Lin" was finished, maybe even overlapping. Of course, this could amount to nothing for her, since Pixar may still give her the cold shoulder for making a "fairy tale princess film," but perhaps this is moved to Disney instead (a "What If" for another time).

And that's just for "Aida" replacing "Dinosaur." I imagine that if this replaced KOTS and is successful, it's not much different; more serious films and musicals are greenlit, but we miss out on the Inca musical. Allers' chances with "Tam Lin" are no greater or lesser (but greater than the OTL). IDK what this means for Pixar, though; whether Disney is using 3D tech or 2D, as long as they continue making financially successful films, I'm not sure if they'd create the position of CCO for Lasseter and let him take over, since the film wouldn't be in trouble. Perhaps they'd continue their contract with Pixar, or buy it out without giving Lasseter the position (again, another WI I already did).

I know I may be VERY optimistic in how the film effects cinema and animation, but I do think a serious success could've changed Disney and how American animation views serious films and musicals in the 2000s.

Most--but not all--of Disney's European-set films (at least when doing fairy tales and fantasy films) tend to be more vague in European settings. I do appreciate that in the modern age, Disney does seem to be getting a bit more specific settings, ie "Frozen" being Scandinavian-influenced and "Wish" being Iberian-influenced. I really enjoy it when Disney does specific cultures, so I really hope they continue that.

Not as branching as my 2nd post concerning John Lasseter, but this is something I've been thinking about. Disney films have been wrought with exec interference in the modern era, and it's gotten worse over time. With some films, the original directors and/or writers are reduced in their role or leave the project entirely. For example:

1. Before there was the turmoil that was "Frozen 2," there was "Kingdom of the Sun." Planned to be Disney's next big thing, it was an epic musical about an Incan emperor who trades places with a commoner who looks just like him--only for his royal advisor to find out, turn him into a llama, and blackmail the commoner so she can make him a puppet ruler and blot out the sun to restore her youth. It was to be directed by Roger Allers due to his success with "The Lion King," and Sting was brought on to do the music thanks to Elton John's success on TLK. But it was not to be; production was a mess and test screenings pretty much said there was too much going on. Things were added, things were changed, and Allers asked for an extension, believing the movie would be ready if he had more time. However, this was denied, and Mark Dindal was brought on to help move the film along--though Dindal wanted a more buddy comedy type film in contrast to Allers' mystical epic. Eventually Allers left the project, and Disney was fine with that; execs were disappointed with how their last couple serious musicals performed ("Pocahontas" and "The Hunchback of Notre Dame,"), and thus "Kingdom of the Sun" became "The Emperor's New Groove." In contrast to Disney's modern comedy, TENG is actually funny and witty, so I do appreciate it for its humor, though I regret Roger Allers not getting to work it out. Extra nail in the coffin: Allers was making an Irish take on the Scottish ballad of "Tam Lin" (a woman rescues a man from a fairy queen) and had Roy E. Disney's full backing, but due to corporate strife, Michael Eisner cancelled it. Allers took it to Sony, but Sony axed it when they felt the film was too serious and made Allers do the comedic "Open Season" instead. In an alternate universe, if KOTS had been made with Allers' vision in mind and been successful, it could've extended the Disney renaissance, maybe gave us new Disney princesses (the prince and his brother's love interests), and changed the trajectory of Disney. Perhaps more musicals would've been made before "The Princess and the Frog" and Disney wouldn't have felt as pressured to buy out Pixar and hire John Lasseter--though how that goes is anyone's guess (and the subject of my last "What If" post). Maybe "Tam Lin" would've been made if Allers had more than one successful Disney film under his belt and Eisner was more worried about losing a cash cow than fighting Disney.

2. Before we got the "Shrek"-influenced film "Tangled" and after the "Shrek"-influenced "Rapunzel Unbraided" was scrapped by Disney, Glean Keane's vision for the film was darker in tone, supposedly more akin to "The Hunchback of Notre Dame." Scrapped concepts from Keane's version during development included Bastion (Flynn's original concept that provided the inspiration for Kristoff), a softhearted thief who wanted to get out of the thieving business and had his own villain to contend with who was taking advantage of the chaos of the kingdom since Rapunzel was kidnapped; a Romani version of Bastion existed at one point who was more like Aladdin in personality; Bastion falling for Rapunzel quickly; Rapunzel being fearful of the outside world, being almost mute, aggressive, and staying in her tower for most of the film; and Gothel was supposed to be a twist villain that the audience genuinely liked. Unfortunately, Glen Keane suffered a heart attack and stepped down from the film two years before release, and it was eventually reworked into "Tangled." While "The Princess and the Frog" was the film to begin the Disney Revival era, "Tangled" went on to make more money and undoubtably affected Disney's approach to later films, notably it's cynicism with fairy tales and Disney's own history. However, in an alternate reality where Glen Keane had made his darker vision of the film, with a softer male co-lead and a more jagged female lead and a twist villain and a straightforward villain, it's interesting to think of how this would've changed the landscape for Disney. It'd not just be a return to classic Disney, but also show a maturity and unique perspective to their storytelling. If profitable, Disney might be less averse to their films lacking humor, thus avoiding future exec interference out of concern for more serious films.

3. Shortly after being announced as directors of "Raya and the Last Dragon" at the D23 expo, having been working on the film since 2015, Paul Briggs and Dean Wellins were later reduced to co-directors and replaced by Carlos Lopez Estrada and Don Hall, with Qui Nguyen coming in to tweak Adele Lim's script--with Don Hall and Qui Nguyen having to pause their work on "Strange World" to rework Raya. This is a tricky "What If," since what the original film was like is subject to rumor, and why a new team was brought on was never explored, nor is it heavily explained what scrapped concepts were specifically from Wellins and Briggs' vision. But I'll listen to the rumors for a second (and look at some of the concept art), and according to them, the film would've consisted of a female lead, a male lead, and a male dragon. The story was rumored to be more East Asian influenced, with some thinking Southeast Asia was made the setting at the last minute--but I don't know how true that is--and the threat itself is never explored, though concept art, deleted scenes, and interviews do mention scrapped concepts like a more villainous Namaari and the druun being able to shapeshift with humanoid forms. I personally don't know how good this movie could've been, but a part of me does assume that exec interference is why we have such a mixed message from the film. I can't speak on the worldbuilding, but I am curious as to why the film was changed a year before release.

While I don't include Pixar in my Disney movie discussions, I do maintain that "Brave" felt much more Disney than Pixar, and according to interviews, that was considered a negative over at THE OTHER STUDIO, and I do wonder if Brenda Chapman would've found more support asking Lasseter to bring it over to Disney, since she said herself it was inspired by fairy tales. Or at the very least if Pixar stopped micromanaging her and Mark Andrews was never brought on.

I know there's less interference with the shorts than the movies, but the idea still stands. Granted, "Us Again" sounds like it'd be more in-line with Pixar and Disney already covered the whole idea of youth with "Tangled," but I think it could've worked. Perhaps make it a more fantasy setting than a modern day one. And then "Versa" just screams "DISNEY MAGIC" to me.

I remember being so confused when this special came out--and I wasn't the only on. The advertisements made it seem like the cast was redoing the entire story, but in reality they were just playing the animated scenes and breaking to live-action for the songs. I remember a lot of people thought John Stamos would play Triton and were confused about him announced as Chef Louis. Honestly, I wish we just got the entire recreation of the animated film rather than just songs. I think "Beauty and the Beast" was a little better, though.

But that makes me ask: why did they stop doing these for 30th anniversaries? Was this a ratings thing, a money thing, or just a concern that future installments (ie "Pocahontas," "The Hunchback of Notre Dame," and "Mulan") wouldn't generate as much interest?

Worth prefacing this post with the fact that this ISN'T me listing off my gripes with "Wish" or bashing it--though I am not a fan of this film, that's another topic entirely. No, this post is moreso linked to to Disney's 100th anniversary film and things I wish they included to influence the story:

1. The Sorcerer's Apprentice--I honestly felt like this was the route we were gonna go when it was said Asha was going to audition to be Magnifico's apprentice. The original story via Disney's "Fantasia" is Mickey Mouse being an apprentice to the sorcerer Yen Sid, but is required to do chores while Yen Sid retires for the day. Mickey uses magic to try to shortcut it, but it ends up getting out of hand, with Yen Sid having to intervene. I think this would've tied nicely to Magnifico's statements about people not working hard to achieve their wishes and his frustration at people always wanting more.

2. The Fisherman and His Wife--A fairy tale about a fisherman who saves a magical fish who is thus indebted to him, the fisherman's wife has her husband make various wishes to better their (mainly her) lives, until her greatest wish has the fish send the couple back to their original impoverished lifestyle. Aside from being wish-themed, it does show the greed of humanity and how dependent people become when problems can be solved for them. Jennifer Lee said the film was about what to do when your wish isn't granted, and I do feel like this fairy tale could've created a strong backbone for it.

3. The Carnation--A fairy tale about a prince born with the power of wishing, AKA making anything happen simply because he wished for it. I shouldn't have to explain why this feels perfect for the film as the main influence, particularly with Starboy's character. I could've seen him taking influence from characters isolated from others by their parental figures (either for villainous reasons or out of concern)--plus the carnation is Spain's national flower. While Disney wanted the kingdom to have roses as the symbol for it's history with the company (ie "Sleeping Beauty" and "Beauty and the Beast"), I do think using carnations not only helped the worldbuilding with the Iberian influence, I think it creates a sense of unity. Or at the very least, have Asha wear carnations while everyone else wears roses.

4. Rumpelstiltskin--I think this deserves it's own film without being tied to wish, but I do think it'd be interesting if we had a villain who, when Asha can't get what she wants through Magnifico, gets her wish granted a Rumpelstiltskin-type figure--but unlike Magnifico, who doesn't charge payment, Rumpelstiltskin charges a price. It's a good callback to Hades, Dr. Facilier, and Ursula.

I feel like I've grown slowly more cynical as a Disney fan over the years, particularly with the revival era. For this post, I wanted to mention a trope Disney keeps doing that frustrates the heck out of me: their habit of mentioning something tragic about a rude or villainous characters' past, something that forms their fundamental identity...that is just given a quick blurb. It's not expanded upon or given flashbacks (unlike Alma in "Encanto" or Nick in "Zootopia"), and I feel like it very much causes a frustrating lack of connection and depth to the characters. Notably:

1. Flynn Rider--I'm not a Flynn fan due to him being the beginning of the "cynical male with optimistic female" trope Disney does that alienates me as a male Disney fan (especially in musicals), but I might have been able to like him a bit more if he got more attention. It's weird to me how Pixar execs pushed Disney to rename "Rapunzel" as "Tangled" and give Flynn Rider more attention for a male audience...but his character lacks the emotional moments that both Pixar and Disney are known for. While trying to manipulate Rapunzel into going back home and giving him the crown, she eventually saves their lives and he explains a bit about himself, that he grew up in an orphanage and idolized a rich hero from literature. This is all told to us, never shown--and worse, not even expanded upon when getting to Corona, due to it being the destination rather than the journey, and Flynn being a criminal trying to dodge the authorities...but then we see him go to various locations and dance publicly with Rapunzel, so IDK why they couldn't visit his orphanage or expand on him more. I often compare him to Nick Wilde, who I consider to be a better version in terms of writing, and many people say "Oh, Nick's story tied into the themes, so it was more important to see the flashbacks compared to fleshing out Flynn." My response: then why not make his story more tied into Rapunzel's? I feel like they sabotaged him during production since he started out as a nice guy forced into the life of being a thief and was trying to get out, and later on when Alan Menken tried to make songs tied to his parents, he was shot down (by execs or the creative team for the film, it wasn't said). He mainly just exists as a contrast to Rapunzel rather than feeling like a character on his own; I lump him with other thief characters that tick me off in animation
2. Maui--A demigod thrown away by his mother, his desire for pleasing humans was what caused him to steal Te Fiti's heart. However, this isn't explored beyond his talk with Moana after Tamatoa. Weirdly, it never comes into play; Moana does use his insecurity against him in order to help her restore the heart (similar to how Flynn manipulates Rapunzel's to get her to go home), but it's never dived into. The only humans we see are Moana's people, and none of them exhibit the selfishness of humanity that drove Maui to do this, and it's never really addressed how Maui was saved by the gods, but still went back to humans, who demanded things of him, and then discarded him when he inconvenienced them. Shouldn't Maui be more affiliated with the gods rather than going against them? And shouldn't humans be called out for their own hypocrisy? But Maui's the only one who has to change.
3. Magnifico--Alright, let's get this out of the way: Magnifico IS the villain of "Wish." That's undisputed. However, it never fails to boggle me that pretty much everything about Magnifico that provides some depth besides "2D villain" is brushed aside and never utilized: his point about people not willing to work for their wishes, concern over dangerous wishes, people being selfish and ungreatful, and more important of all, his childhood. It was part of the opening with the storybook and Magnifico shows a tapestry concerning the issue, but the details of his home being destroyed by selfishness never really play a role. Even when he becomes selfish himself, it's done in a heel-turn way and his past isn't brought up after Asha's interview. Honestly he reminded me of Alma, but Alma was done a lot better in her motivations and anxieties, whereas Magnifico feels like two different characters in the first half and the second half of the film: King Triton in the first half, Ratcliffe in the second half (I was gonna say Yzma, but he lacked her comedy). I can't blame Julia and Benjamin for how the songs turned out since they were pretty much not told anything, but "At All Costs" was the optimal time to expand on his past and goals--and Asha's pertaining to her dad.
4. Pawbert Lynxley--Everyone will argue this with me, but I found the new characters in "Zootopia 2" painfully two-dimensional. Concerning Pawbert, his whole deal is feeling like an outcast from his family, which fuels his villainy and wanting to make them proud. I think it's a neat idea, but the show, don't tell issue waves it's head. Before he was a twist villain, we always see Pawbert alone, selling the idea that he's isolated. However, his family are underutilized villains, being reduced to the background since they're rich and pulling strings from behind the shadows. As such, we don't see his interactions with his family. After his reveal, his dad does threaten him, but it doesn't connect to me why he craves their approval. The lack of interactions sells that he feels alone, but without the connection to his family, it just reads as self-imposed isolation--which it isn't. Then there's the whole hinting that Pawbert regrets his actions and could be reformed, which I find just as bad as Namaari's redemption, largely because Pawbert was a twist villain, so him having changing feelings doesn't register for me as much as if he had been shown as a villain from the start and slowly changed his mind (they kinda did that with Mayor Winddancer, but I also feel like that wasn't great).

I swear, every time I watch a Calxiyn video, I learn about Disney interviews that I would've never known about otherwise. In this case, I was introduced to a Lin-Manuel Miranda interview that kinda contradicts the plot of "Moana"--and the song he wrote "How Far I'll Go." I should note that while I like "Moana," it isn't a flawless film to me, and I recall how Lin-Manuel Miranda said he felt hesitant to express his thoughts and ideas when working on the film. However, this particular interview said something that was kinda confusing:

"I actually wrote a first draft of the song that eventually became “How Far I’ll Go,” called “More.” And it was a good song, it was perfectly fine, and [Moana] was sort of like, “All right, I’m hip to this island. I want to see what else is out there.”

But then, I think the key insight that really made the song what it is is: It’s not about not liking where she is and wanting to go somewhere else. She loves where she is. She loves her parents. She loves her island. She loves her community. And there’s this voice anyway*."*

So based on what Lin-Manuel Miranda said, the idea of "How Far I'll Go" is that Moana is perfectly happy with where she's at, but the ocean keeps calling to her. However, this seems rather contradictory to what we see up to this point, and even after; the film portrays the ocean calling to Moana not just as a magical being, but also because it's in her heritage and her blood. And on top of this, Moana is almost always distracted by the ocean that it never really sets in, and the lyrics "I'll be satisfied if I play along" implies she's pretending, that she's not happy. And it's weird, because her relationship with the ocean doesn't SEEM involuntary; it never seems like she's resisting the call, especially after she actually leaves her island. Not to mention the fact that everyone on her island is happy; no one seems to be negatively impacted by the lack of wayfinding and seafaring, which is why "Know Who You Are" (one of my favorite final songs in a musical) doesn't sit well with me since the parallels Disney wants to draw between Te Ka and Moana just aren't there, as Moana never became toxic or terrible due to not being a wayfinder--plus it's not necessarily fair to compare wayfinding to Te Fiti's heart, since Moana's people had gone many generations without wayfinding, so I don't they got used to life without it; it wasn't necessarily a part of them as much as part of their ancestors.

"Big Hero 6" maintains one of my favorite Disney films--even if they continue the egregious pattern of Disney killing off/separating brothers while sisters get to live and grow closer--and has one of the best ensembles in a movie. I have some criticisms with it, but I enjoy it enough to want Disney to make another superhero film.

I think they should take a page out of Pixar's book and make an original one though--not based on the same time period, but maybe being based on the 90s, since there was an explosion of superhero animated shows around that time. Also....I want it to be a musical. Not just because I LOVE musicals (when Disney does it right), but because I'm tired of the "you can't have a serious action film have songs." Characters singing doesn't automatically ruin the atmosphere, but if it's that serious, Disney could always hire several artists to make a concept album similar to "Black Panther" and "Suicide Squad" that plays during the scenes.

Also, as a superhero fan, if it was another team film (though I don't mind a solo hero or a hero and "sidekick"), I don't want them to be uniform in style/design; I prefer individual looks.