On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 11:16 PM, Mark Jeffries <[email protected]>wrote:
> The problem with "Gulliver" is that the studio meddled with the Fleischers > to make it more Disney-like instead of the funky urban vibe of a lot of the > Fleischer shorts. It didn't help that the studio by then was based in > Miami in an attempt to avoid the unions. Take the city boys away from the > big city and the heart of soul of their output was lost. > Paramount weren't being Philistines here. Since they were putting up the money and animated features were still unproven territory the execs wanted to make sure the movie would play to as broad an audience as possible. I agree with the others that the end result is not worth watching. I saw it decades ago in a theater and remember being disappointed with it. A new print is not going to help. Soon after the Fleischers moved to Miami a lot of the top writing and animating talent left the studio. For all of our romanticizing about the Golden Age of Animation, the creators never made good money and had no loyalty to their studios. So by the time they made Gulliver, the talent behind early Popeye and Betty Boop was no longer there. -- -- TV or Not TV .... The Smartest (TV) People! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
