home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   rec.arts.sf.movies      Discussing SF motion pictures      28,343 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 28,255 of 28,343   
   Kevrob to Paul S Person   
   Re: A bottomless pit of plagiarism   
   20 Jul 25 07:54:21   
   
   XPost: rec.arts.sf.fandom   
   From: kjrobinson@mail.com   
      
   On 6/16/2025 11:16 AM, Paul S Person wrote:   
   > On Sun, 15 Jun 2025 13:22:48 -0400 (EDT), kludge@panix.com (Scott   
   > Dorsey) wrote:   
   >   
   >>>> Disney has long been in the business of taking old classics and=20   
   >>>> copyrighting them as their own.  Many of them not technically=20   
   >>>> plagiarism, since the originals were never copyrighted.  Snow White and=20   
   >>>> Cinderella, to name two off the top of my head.   
   >>>   
   >>> IANAL, but my understanding of this would be:   
   >>> 1. The stories as such are not copyrighted.   
   >>> 2. A particular book containing the stories may be copyrighted as   
   >>> regards any essays, notes, illustrations, etc added to the book by its   
   >>> publisher.   
   >>> 3. A movie based on a book is copyrightable as such, whether the book   
   >>> was copyrighted or not. Of course, if it was, the rights to make the   
   >>> movie would have to be acquired.   
   >>   
   >> My objection is not necessarily that they are using old stories from the   
   >> public domain.  Shakespeare did that.   
   >>   
   >> However, having read both Othello and the story _Un Capitano Moro_ that the   
   >> plot was taken from, I think Othello is a far better work.  Shakespeare took   
   >> a good idea with a mediocre workup and turned it into something great.   
   >>   
   >> Disney, however, takes great works and ruins them.  That's my objection.   
   >> Whoever decided to tack a happy ending on to Hunchback of Notre Dame   
   deserves   
   >> to be thrown in the catacombs.   
   >   
   > When the Disney film came out, on another newsgroup, this point was   
   > raised. One regular disappeared for a week, and reported he had   
   > watched every movie version of /Hunchback/ he could find. The results   
   > (as I recall them):   
   >   
   > 1. The villain is sometimes split (as in the Disney film) and   
   > sometimes is not (as in the book).   
   > 2. Phoebus sometimes dies half-way through (in which case he is   
   > replaced by another character -- no, not Quasimodo) or he makes it to   
   > the end (as in the Disney film).   
   > 3. Esmeralda survives in all movie versions (but not in the book,   
   > where she is hanged).   
   > 4. The book's ending has never been filmed. For the curious, this   
   > involves a coffin being opened and finding in the skeletons of a young   
   > woman and a horribly deformed man in an embrace.   
   > 5. Quasimodo and Esmeralda never end up together; Esmeralda ends up   
   > with Phoebus (if he survived) or his replacement (if he didn't).   
   >   
   > The conclusion from this extensive research was:   
   >   
   > The only real difference between Disney's version and the other movie   
   > versions is -- the talking gargoyles.   
   >   
   > So you can complain about the ending if you wish, but your complaint   
   > applies to all the movie versions the person doing this could find and   
   > watch.   
   >   
   > IOW, there is an established tradition of how the book is filmed, and   
   > the Disney version stands well within that tradition.   
   >   
   > Note that most versions of Dracula end in England because they are   
   > based (directly or indirectly through an earlier movie's script) on a   
   > stage play, not the book. And I don't think these are isolated cases.   
   >   
   > This makes a certain amount of sense, as the playwright has already   
   > reduced the story to something that can be shown in a reasonable   
   > length of time.   
   >   
   >> And Disney does not really give credit to the sources... so many people   
   today   
   >> think Cinderella was originally a Disney story.  That is another layer of   
   >> shame.   
   >   
   > IIRC, at least one attibutes the story to a French author in the   
   > titles.   
   >   
   > Disney does appear to prefer the French versions to the German   
   > versions. No evil stepsisters getting their eyes pecked out by birds   
   > in Disney!   
      
   The Disney family traces its origins to Normandy. They made a point of   
   that when they launched their European park.   
      
   --   
      
   Kevin R   
      
      
   --   
   This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.   
   www.avg.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca