[design219]

more here: http://www.hemmy.net/2006/04/26/disney-animation-reuse/

This would make a little more sense with digital, but if you are hand drawing and hand coloring, why copy so closely?

Anybody in animation know why they would do this?

[Dakarʒ]

Whoa. Good eye, whoever caught that.

[Kerrigan]

They were eating acid like candy back then, don't question their intentions because they won't make sense at all.

[Dakarʒ]

Well my guess is you could hire less technically proficient artists to trace the cells with minor modifications.

Does seem like a stretch, though.

[MacosNerd]

I'm guessing it an economic decision to cut costs by reusing scenes or backgrounds.

I guess it worked since we've not really heard about this till now and look how hold those animations ares. some at 40 to 60 years old

[Chuckit]

Maybe just some animation director giving himself a shout-out?

[moonmonkey]

I am so angry about his, I own (on DVD) the Jungle Book and Winnie the Poo and I feel cheated.
Both movies are no identical in my eyes and I shall be returning one of them.

[Laminar]

Without a smiley, I simply cannot decide whether or not you're serious, so I will respond to your post as if it was serious.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

Without a smiley, I simply cannot decide whether or not you're serious, so I will respond to your post as if it was serious.

LOL

[moonmonkey]

I managed to get a full refund, I asked to speak to the manager in the shop and she was very apologetic, I explained my issued and she said she would raise it with Disney and suggest they re edit and re release the offending movies which they are doing now. I have suggested which ever movie was released first, should be allowed to keep the scene, which ever one came afterwards should either remove the offending screen or re-animate with a different background.

Only at this time will I repurchase the offending movie.

[BasketofPuppies]

From Pinocchio until Beauty and the Beast, every Disney movie re-used animation from previous movies. Robin Hood is an especially big offender, not only taking much of its animation from previous movies, but also from previous scenes of Robin Hood.

Re-using animation is not limited to Disney, of course.

[andi*pandi]

it's silly to get upset over it.

[design219]

I don't think anybody is really upset over it, I'm just curious as why they would do that with traditional animation... since it is hand drawn.

[BasketofPuppies]

They did it because they were limited for time or money.

I don't see how this is any different from why someone would re-use computer-generated animation.

[design219]

Well that's what I'm saying, It seems like a lot more work than computer generated animation. Re-using models and surfaces is easy, but if you are hand drawing and hand coloring, why copy exactly?

[BasketofPuppies]

Because it still takes more time to create completely original hand-drawn animation than it does to copy previous work.

[ghporter]

Reusing original artwork is a long tradition in hand-drawn animation. There are quite a number of Warner Brothers cartoons that are exactly the same except for changing one of the characters; the action, background and everything else are identical.

Now look at the two contexts of the "copied" artwork. "Jungle Book" took Disney's animators years to create. Do you expect that they're going to throw away the pencil sheets? Especially when these films were created for a juvenile audience and not for repeated viewing, let alone the kind of scrutiny needed to compile the stuff on hemmy.net.