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