If balto had been from disney...

Started by EbonyPatriot on 16 Jan 2005, 02:41 UTC · 36 preserved posts

69-110513986716 Jan 2005, 02:41 UTC

This is proof that I have WAY too much time on my paws; and it's also proof that my mind, instead thinking up some great thought-provoking question, thinks up something pointless!

Anyway, my mindless stupid musing is: Suppose that Balto had been a Disney movie. How would thing about have been different?

83-108302525616 Jan 2005, 06:36 UTC

Two two thing come to My mind #1 It would have been a musical(That would not have been an Inproovmemt) #2 It would have been promoted properly and been the Lion King sized success it should have been(That would have been great)

100-109832446616 Jan 2005, 08:54 UTC

It would be promoted and everybody will know about it and if it is a success, Disney might make a sequel maybe better than WQ.

116-109430913216 Jan 2005, 11:18 UTC

I don't know, maybe better sequel and some songs.

69-110464574416 Jan 2005, 14:41 UTC

Animation wise, I don't really know what kind of difference there would be. However, I'm sure Disney would have put in a couple of songs in addition to Reach for the Light, and most likely have some of the characters sing. Knowing Disney, they'd probably put a song with lyrics in at the Heritage of the Wolf scene rather than stick with the orchestral music. *shudders and cringes*

Also, I'm not sure if the IRL parts at the beginning and end would have been IRL: if Disney had made it, they might be animated. *cringe* And I'm sure Steele would have been even more evil, and probably suffer an even worse fate at the end of the movie than just being hated by every other dog in Nome, since most Disney villans meet their death at the end of the movie.

On the other paw, like some of you have said, I think promotion wise, if Disney were in charge, Balto would have been a great success instead of being overlooked and underappreciated.

87-106196077916 Jan 2005, 16:26 UTC

IMO party the reason it was so under appreciated was because of the bad timing of it's release I mean releasing balto for the first time alongside the veru same time Toy story (not that i didnt mind TS mind you)made its debut wasn't very smart move on their part.. but I guess the staff felt confident The movie they worked so hard on would be just as successful. But it was pretty obvious who the corperate giant at this point. and Who was going to see what.. yeah when i went to see it for the first time there were a good amount of people..And yeah they liked the movie. despite the crying babes and people talking..but the people watching toy story.. man that places was just packed.. which isnt surprising..Disney was a powerful label, They dont need to know what the movie is about its got a disney sticker on they will see it.so people going to see toy story instead of balto.. well balto only got less than the repcect that it deserved..but still I was one tha remained loyal to this movie toy story or not..

115-108568278516 Jan 2005, 21:02 UTC

Quote

Two two thing come to My mind #1 It would have been a musical(That would not have been an Inproovmemt) #2 It would have been pramoted properly and been the Lion King sized success it should have been(That would have been gteat)

I must agree with that, and I would also add : worse animation (Amblimation had the best 2D animation ever made IMO), and much brighter colors (as in TLK).

67-106196056516 Jan 2005, 21:34 UTC

I agree with Winter. The Disney label is a powerful one. If Balto had been made by Disney, I think it would not have been a flop in the box office. Granted, Disney would have ruined it with having the characters sing, but at least it would have a been a successful in the box office.

87-106196077917 Jan 2005, 00:15 UTC

Yeah, Maybe if balto hadn't tried to compete with somthing like Disney maybe it would have done better. I mean on December 25th 1995 people went to the cinema were like lets see Balto?.. Hmm never heard of that. looks boring I don't think the kids will like that..whats this.... Toy Story hmm Disney! Oh yeah thats what we will watch! kids will love that one! and yeah Disney is a powerful label I mean look at Home on the Range. not exactly what I would call a quality of that one as for a full length feature film..What they were trying to do was try to use that simple edgy style of animation.. now in Emperors New Groove that style actually worked cause in that time disney was trying give it a certain style not seen in most disney films in a comedic way.. but on HOTR it looked more like they were simply trying to cut corners. it looked more suitable for telvesion than the big screen .. but goes to show you you stamp a disney label on it and people will swarm to it like flies to a bug zapper. and yeah Balto could have if any as popular as any of those other disney flicks wasnt after it flopped that people watched if for themselves on video or tv just for the heck of it and realized hey, this is actaully a good movie! And I know because so many people requested this movie to be realased on DVD when they starting that petition drive.. which lead to the release of the 2 sequels we all know afterwards

69-110464574417 Jan 2005, 01:58 UTC

That is my exact philosophy on the reason why Balto flopped so badly. It only grossed $11 million at the box office, a pathetic sum for any movie, compared with over $100 million for Toy Story. And (begin rant and my opinion) since Universal was run by a bunch of corrupt, epitome of bean-counter accountants who only cared about their stupid numbers and not on the movies themselves, (If you don't believe me, look at the LBT sequels) they looked at that $11 million and said, "Oh, this franchise isn't worth much, so let's not follow it up with too much in the form of merchandise, advertising, etc, since we won't get much money out of it because the public doesn't like it. This movie should be shoved into the archives."

83-106196071617 Jan 2005, 02:19 UTC

I'm going to agree with everything that has been said here. Some very good points were brought up. Other than the songs, and a slightly different style of animation (probably would have been less angular), merhandise would have been abudant. I mean there is quite a bit of Balto merchandise that was put out by Universal, but it wasn't promoted back in the day and now can only be found on Ebay. If Balto had been put out by Disney it probably would have been more sucessful and marketing would have been very saturated.

As for the animation, I don't think it would have been digital (in 1995 anyway). Traditional cell animation all the way and the 3D parts probably would have been about the same. All in all, I think the message of the movie would have been a lot weaker, and it would be a hero versus a villian sort of thing. While Balto would probably still be dealing with his wolf side, Steele would have been a stronger antagonist. If he had fallen off that cliff in a Disney movie, he wouldn't have gotten back up. In fact, one of my biggest surprises when I first saw that was that he did get back up and make it back to Nome before Balto did.

Other than the lack of merchandise and bad timing on Universal's part, I don't regret that Balto wasn't animated by Disney.

115-108568278517 Jan 2005, 06:34 UTC

I agree with all that...
I also forgot one very important thing : the soundtrack would have not been from James Horner...and there's no soundtrack better than the ones from James Horner IMO.

71-109168036917 Jan 2005, 18:51 UTC

James Horner is one of my top favs. I'm very glad that Disney didn't make Balto, and agree with most of all your points. Disney would also probably have used different people for the cast. I don't know if that was mentioned yet or not. Even Disney's worst did better in the B.O. than Balto and that's really sad.

I wish universal would remaster it and put in widescreen.

87-106196077918 Jan 2005, 04:38 UTC

They probably wouldnt have used James Horner probably Phil collins or #### i fergot his name one who did the Lion king soundtrack.. mneh now I fergot! most likely the music used in balto would probabably feature Hillary Duff, or Raven or somthin to that nature in an upbeat r&b Style :P * shudder*

83-108302525618 Jan 2005, 05:57 UTC

Tim Rice and Elton John did The Lion King's music. O.K. lets just assume that If Disney made "Balto" They used The same Voice Actors as Universal(I'm not trying to throw out the Very good point You made Greykitty. I just want to make a different point). I think that the original voices would have come back for the sequels

70-109096490518 Jan 2005, 23:32 UTC

But would they make lamer sequals with it than universal did with WQ? You know disney, they make bad sequals, but not all the time.

87-106196077919 Jan 2005, 00:27 UTC

AH Tim Rice! Thank you LOL god that slipped my mind.. he did a wonderful job on the Spirit soundtrack too

83-108302525619 Jan 2005, 06:41 UTC

Quote (WinterWinstar @ Jan. 18 2005,6:27)

he did a wonderful job on the Spirit soundtrack too

Oh You meant Who wrote the score

That would be Hans Zimmer I liked what He did on Spirt too :cool:

71-109168036919 Jan 2005, 15:05 UTC

Hans Zimmer is a good composer. He also did tlk. :P Sorry this was off topic.

115-108568278519 Jan 2005, 19:58 UTC

Quote

But would they make lamer sequals with it than universal did with WQ? You know disney, they make bad sequals, but not all the time.

Universal also make bad sequals, but not all the time... The proof is Balto 3...

87-106196077920 Jan 2005, 02:05 UTC

corrected again! thank you LOL I was too lazy to search the web Hahahaha

83-108302525620 Jan 2005, 05:57 UTC

Quote (WinterWinstar @ Jan. 19 2005,8:05)

thank you

You're Welcome

Considering what has been said on this topic I've come to this conclusion. Let Universal make Balto, and let Disney promot It :laugh:

100-109832446620 Jan 2005, 13:33 UTC

Ya, not only that, let the soundtracks still from James Horner, keep the original voice actors, and oh, no singing dogs/wolves.

83-108302525621 Jan 2005, 05:00 UTC

Quote (de_whitewolf @ Jan. 20 2005,7:33)

Ya, not only that, let the soundtracks still from James Horner, keep the original voice actors

The singing didin't bother Me(There wasn't to much of it),But I whole Heartedly agree with Your first Two points :cool:

69-110464574422 Jan 2005, 04:43 UTC

Well, at least most think that Disney wouldn't wreck Balto too much. But one thing that would be hard to swallow would be if Pixar made Balto in 3D. I wonder what that would be like...

100-109832446622 Jan 2005, 05:31 UTC

If that the case, my guess its gonna be trash.

83-106196071622 Jan 2005, 06:59 UTC

If Pixar made Balto? I think that would be interesting... Probably not as good as what we have now, but trash? I don't think so. It would just be different. I'm sure they'd do a good job rendering the characters at least.

115-108568278522 Jan 2005, 10:24 UTC

Quote

if Pixar made Balto in 3D

Don't ever say that :angry:

Objectively, I think it would have absolutely no common points with the current one...

116-109430913222 Jan 2005, 14:16 UTC

Quote (Silver Huskey @ Jan. 22 2005,1:59)

If Pixar made Balto?

I don't like pixar, no, I HATE pixar.

71-109168036922 Jan 2005, 16:48 UTC

Pixar makes good movies that have decent storylines, but I don't dig the 3-d as much as 2-d. 3-d to me seems like cheating. I know it takes a lot of effort to make a 3-d film, but 2-d films take a whole lot more effort and I like the less realistic look to them more.

83-108302525623 Jan 2005, 07:47 UTC

Quote (Greykitty @ Jan. 22 2005,10:48)

Thanks for Typing what I wanted to say Greykitty :laugh:

it saves Me a lot of work

78-110711749701 Feb 2005, 21:16 UTC

Hmmm... if Balto had been made by Disney, Steel would have made a return in the sequels again and again and again and appear to be defeated every time, but return once again, or else would have been killed.

There defintely would have been more music... I think that's what Amblin is gong for this go-round, actually. I mean, look at Wolf Quest. (Haven't seen WOC yet- missed it on CN, but I hear it has singing, too.)

The sequels probably would have been drawn better. For example, The Lion King's animation was great, and when it's DTV sequel came out, even though it was DTV, it was good quality and the animation still rocked. I know it's been said several times by several others that Wolf Quest's animation was lacking, and I agree. I liked the brighter tones (of course, I adored the slightly faded look to the original).

It definetly would have done better in the box offices. Disney's marketing campaign is always top-notch for one thing, and second of all, how many little kids will you meet that actually know what Amblin Entertainment is??? I was a Balto fan at age five, and I thought Disney made every movie in the world, even Balto! Recognition factor plays a big part in films, especially children's movies.

There probably would have been corny sidekicks. I know we have Muk and Luk as sidekicks, but they aren't like Disney sidekicks at all-not annoying, don't sing, don't babble on constantly, and don't seem to be there or just no apparent reason.

Well, that's my 2 cents.

69-110513986713 Feb 2005, 14:36 UTC

*Is kicking self for being so stupid as to have forgotten to put own opinon.*

I'm with Winter, many folks to go to see any movie with the Disney label, myself included. :;):

Not only would it have no doubt done better, it would also have more of a chance to prove its worth in re-releases. Why, Bambi and Fantasia both flopped miserably the first time out; but grossed more than their budget on re-realses. Even if it never saw the theatre again, Disney would put it out on video and DVD.

About it being a musical- I am not opposed to all musicals, PROVIDED THAT: A) The characters don't just burst into song in a sort of spur-of-the moment thing B)the songs aren't corny and most importantly C) they aren't sitting duck songs- that is, they move the story along.

That said, the animation would have probalby been rounder, the sequels better, and Steele would have fallen to his death. (Disney loves that way of killing baddies- it's a violent death that can be managed without a lot of blood).

Live long and prosper. :cool:

-EbonyPatriot

115-110950221427 Feb 2005, 15:33 UTC

I think that if Balto was a Disney film it would have been a weaker movie, laking feeling and "substance".
I watched Disney movies a lot in my early ages (from 6-10 years) but now they are in my "black list" (Like Microsoft, EA Games and a lot of others), because they aren't making things out of passion they are working just for the money.
I am tired of mass comercial items, and if Balto was made by them then it wouldnt make me like it because Disney uses a lot of cliche's while Spielberg's studio had a lot of originality and feeling.
To prove this compare the first movie and the second(it wasnt Speilberg's company because it dissapeared by then).
And i hate Disney for its musicals! They are all bad taste and instead to raise the quality of a movie they lower it.

87-111007619506 Mar 2005, 19:13 UTC

I agree with simbasGaurd

75-111045797911 Mar 2005, 03:37 UTC

Either way I would've seen the movie, I'm a die-hard fan of animated movies so it wouldn't matter. If it looks like something I'll like I'll watch it. Now it just plain goes without saying that Balto would've been a musicul if made by Disney. So...What would you all think the titles of these be?