Talk:Jeffrey Katzenberg/@comment-1672596-20151116133731/@comment-15571222-20151226003751

Ludicrous commentary! You are clearly very ignorant about how things worked during the Disney Renaissance. First off, Katzenberg assumed Disney when "The Black Cauldron", a mess of a film that was terribly received by both critics and public, was nearly at end of production. He tried to save the film by doing the only remaining option: edition. He cut out some minutes in order to tight the plot and was that. Then you say that he ruined the film? Ruin what? The film was a mess since the beginning of production. And then you say "At best, only six or four minutes out of the ten he cut actually would need to be cut." How do YOU know that? Were YOU in the editing room in 1984? Because Katzenberg was, and different of you, that is only doing guessing, he SAW these minutes and decided that they were not necessary.

To make your statements worse, you claim that "Aladdin" and "Beauty and the Beasts" were bad films, when both were not only extremely well received by both public and critics, but "Beauty and the Beast" was the first animated film ever to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards. Then you complain that "Beauty and the Beast" is too far from the original tale. So what? Do you think that "Sleeping Beauty" is close to the original tale, do you? Or "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs", by the way? Did you ever saw the version Purdum was doing? Obviously Katzenberg ordered the film to be rewritten, and thanks goodness he did it, because the fact that "Beauty and the Beast" was rewrote until it got far away from the original tale is one of the motives it is one of the most celebrated animated films ever. If you think that "Beauty and the Beast" should have been closer to the original tale, then it shows how you don't understand good storytelling. The same goes to your claim that the plot of "Aladdin" is a mess. Go read "Story Engineering" by Larry Brooks to understand what a good plot is (and let me tell you something, "Aladdin" has a tight, excellent good plot, clearly show by the exceptional critic reception it has).

And then it comes your ignorance at full force: you said Katzenberg "didn't even have much involvement in" "The Little Mermaid" and "The Lion King". WHAT? HAHAHA. Oh my God! Did you ever read some book about the Disney Renaissance, like "DisneyWar" by James B. Stewart? Katzenberg did have EXTREME involvement in "The Little Mermaid" and "The Lion King". He was the one who pushed "The Little Mermaid" into production, supervised EVERY little aspect of the film, and in "The Lion King", guess what, he not only coordinated the entire production of the film, but was the one who originally envisioned the film in late 1988.

Katzenberg may be narcissist, dictatorial, intolerable, pushed the production staff to exhaustion, and made decisions that may be considered bad when seen through contemporary eyes, but is a fact showed in box-office results and critic reception that when he entered Disney, the animation department was at rock bottom ("The Black Cauldron"), and when he left, it was on a historical top ("The Lion King"). During his management Disney created four culturally changing movies ("The Little Mermaid", "Beauty and the Beast", "Aladdin" and "The Lion King") and right after he left the company, all the films suffered in quality, beginning right after with "Pocahontas" and ending up with the tragedy that was "Home on the Range" and "Chicken Little" (before Lasseter and Catmull saved WDAS). The WORST thing that happened to Disney was Katzenberg left Disney.

You don't know what you talking about. Go read "DisneyWar" to start understanding how things worked at that time, you are clearly very ignorant and naive. You should be glad that he saved the animation department of closing down, like it would have happened after "The Black Cauldron" bombed. If it wasn't for Katzenberg insisting in doing a fairy-tale ("The Little Mermaid"), Disney Animation would be OVER since 1985.