Talk:Walt Disney Classics/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive of discussions that ended on or before September 1, 2006 Canadiana 15:28, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Contents

Canadian video releases

I never heard of these Canada-only Walt Disney Classics video releases! Are these all false info? I never found any on eBay (they have Canadian sellers). --Wile e2005 14:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

  • I really have no clue. I put the Canadian section there to stop the anonymous users, and partially because they may be true, who knows. Imaxination 80--Imax80 16:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
    • We are going to need some proof, though. --Wile e2005 20:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
      • You can tell if a release is Canadian, you got to look at the stock numbers, usally there is a 1 or a 3 next to it. If all else fails to get this question answered, we'll have to ask the anonymous user. Imaxination 80 --Imax80 20:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • That's not how you can tell if a release is Canadian. All U.S. and Canadian video covers since about 1984 have one of those release numbers beside the stock number. You'll find it in the very small print on the back of the cover at the bottom. It's probably a better indication of whether you have a "first edition" than comparing logos, etc. The highest one I've seen is the Masterpiece Collection version of Mary Poppins, which is 023-7. I'm going to warn you now that I'm planning to add Mary Poppins to this page soon. It was part of the Classics collection and Disney considers it to be an animated movie, even though it's mostly live action. Canadiana 14:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

False Info

An anonymous user is contributing wrong info, and redundant information. The Sword in the Stone first came to video in America in 1986 because there is a trailer for The Journey of Natty Gann video release (1986) on it. Also, there was 1989 cover of Sleeping Beauty, that's a lie, and this user keeps vandalising the titles with "&" instead of "and." We have to stop this. User:Imax80

  • That is when one reverts the article. —tregoweth (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
    • I think that Skymac207, the user who is contributing wrong info to this page (as well as the Logos of the Walt Disney Company page), should be banned for vandalism! Who agrees with me? Gabrielkat 18:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
      • It was an anonymous user, eh kept starting editing conflicts when I would do all the changing myself and it made me frustrated. Imax80
        • Now there is another one onboard, but I am changing everything in sections.
  • Is the Canadian video thing false info? --Wile e2005 15:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion debate

This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Doc ask? 23:02, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Now that this page is never going to go, we should add more info. 4.245.215.92 01:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
    • Articles can be re-submitted for deletion. —tregoweth (talk) 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

This is not a message board for discussing logos.

This page is intended for discussing the Walt Disney Classics article. If you want to compare your various video collections, please find an appropriate discussion area somewhere else. This is not the place for that. —tregoweth (talk) 15:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

  • The problem is, there is nowhere else. Imax80
    • Wikipedia is not a BBS or forum. I'm sure there's somewhere out there that you can start a message board or discussion group (Yahoo! Groups comes to mind). In any event, this isn't the place. —tregoweth (talk) 00:46, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
      • I Guess That's why wile E2005 or Gabrielkat uses this talk page anymore. I know that wile E2005 uses youtube, but when I try to create an account, it won't let me. Imaxination 80
        • Next time, tregoweth, let me archive a talk page BEFORE you remove the unneccesary crap, please. --Ryanasaurus0077 22:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Why no foreign release dates?

I really want a foreign release date section so anonymous users don't randomly come on here and put wrong info on the US section, there has to be a foreign section for the video releases. Imax80

  • Where is everybody, on vacation or something? Imax80

How do you archive a talk page?

Well, how do you do that? I wanted to do that with the previous Walt Disney Classics page. Imax80

Nobody edit the US section

Please don't change any release dates in the USA section because they are all right, because somebody removed the original print dates of Robin Hood and Pinocchio. Please don't do this, they actually did come out in the mid-1980s. Imax80

Why does the anonymous user change the US section?

This is frying me, some anonymous user is constantly saying that Pinocchio and Robin Hood weren't the mid 1980s and Aladdin was October 1993. Will somebody make this guy stop?

We must stop this because only I, Rynasuarus0077, Gabrielkat, and Tregoweth know that Robin Hood and Pinocchio were the mid 1980s. Imaxination 80.

Also, the anonymous user thinks that Lady and the Tramp was released to video in Europe in 1987 (same year as the US release), whereas it was actually released there in 1988 and 1992. Gabrielkat 21:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

He's starting to act like that Skymac207 or whatever his name is. He keeps saying Aladdin was October, it was September I believe, right? Imax80 18:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Citations

If you provide references that show where you got your information, it will be much easier to tell what information is correct. —tregoweth (talk) 18:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Even though I have almost every Classics release, is there a way you can put Disney A to Z as source on the page? Imaxination 80 --Imax80 20:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, but I can't promise anything; I'm not as interested in Disney as I used to be (or, for that matter, as you all are. :) ) —tregoweth (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. And can you please tell that annoying anonymous user to stop remvoing the 1984-85 release dates of Robin Hood and Pinocchio, he's ticking me off by arguing. Thank you. Imaxination 80 --Imax80 22:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm starting to get really mad at this anonymous user

This anonymous pest keeps removing the original release dates of Robin Hood and Pinocchio. He just won't stop. He keeps arguing. I am sick of changing this page. He doesn't believe me when I say I have the 1984-85 video releases of Robin and Pinocchio.

We really have to stop him, he's ticking me off by constantly deleting those two releases, will somebody help me make him stop?! Imaxination 80 --Imax80 02:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Screencaps for the PAL and Japanese print logos?

I think, since the article has the American print logo, we should have the PAL and Japanese versions. Also, we need to expand the Japanese section.

Urgent Question

Why on my Aladdin and Fantasia videos is there no Classics logo? Did the UK rebrand the series as Walt Disney Home Video (not 1993)?

So I had my hopes up for nothing?

I know the YouTube video of the logos well, but any download?

What's this?

When a video starts, prehistoric text comes up, possibly telling you the date it was made. Is this true? --The Track Master 21:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I Think I've Seen it I Don't Know -- Damess

I think it must be the date. --The Track Master 15:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Alice In Wonderland, Dumbo, and The Sword in the Stone 1991 VHS have 1988 "Sorcerer Mickey" Classics logo

We all know this one. You see, in 1991, Disney had so many new releases is that they were lazy when it came to 1991 re-releases of Dumbo, Alice, and Sword, so they initially put the old tapes in the clamshells, but as the tape masters were outdated, they made the new versions in later 1991 with the 1988 Logos. Imax80 01:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Whoops. --The Track Master 12:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the 1991 version of Alice was still using the 1986 cover artwork. Plus, the 1991 cover for Dumbo is mostly a remake of the 1984 cover artwork, so the old tape master fits well with that. --Wile e2005 01:57, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Actually there was a 1991 Alice cover, same cover artwork, but the stock number was 36V instead of 036. And actually, yes the '91 Dumbo cover is a remake of the '84 cover. The only difference is that the 1984 cover has the controversial crows and not the back of the Casey Jr. train on the front cover. Imax80 21:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Weekdays

Someone just apparently added the days of the week of release dates in the article. Does anyone really ... care about those? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 00:49, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, some people. --The Track Master 19:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I finally got the anonymous user to stop

After that anonymous user constantly saying Aladdin was October 1, 1993, I edited to September and 27 and wrote an edit summary scolding him if he keeps it up, he'll be labeled as a troll. Now he's not going to change the page again. If he does it again, what should we do? Imax80 03:32, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Isn't anyone going to help me? Imax80 19:00, 31 July 2006 (UTC)


Maybe I Can :) Damess 14:31 pm, 31 July 2006

  • I will, too. I'm an excellent trollbuster if I may say so myself. You see, my anger knows no bounds. (Smile) --The Track Master 19:16, 6 August 2006 (UTC)


Lady and the Tramp VHS worth $200?

Could I please get a link to a reference or references for this info:

"Lady and the Tramp (October 6, 1987) #582 (worth $200 USD)( Last One To Use The 1984 Classics Logo)"

C&R 00:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

eBay. It already sold, so we can't cite it. Imax80 03:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


I cannot find anything on the internet about the old Lady and the Tramp VHS. Why is this thing so rare? It is rare, correct?

C&R 11:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Yes, it's out of print and uncommon today. It is rare because there are hardcore Disney video collectors that not many know of. I for one happen to have a copy of the 1987 Lady and the Tramp VHS and I can't find it on eBay that often. --Imax80 20:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the info.

C&R 11:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Your welcome, any other questions about early Disney videos, ask them now, I know a lot about it. Imax80 15:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

At www.youtube.com, how is 3 Sorcerer Mickey Classics logos opening from 1988-1994 works?

  • What? Imax80 15:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Cover Art

  • Can Someone Help Me Upload Some Cover Art & I Need Some Help Uploading The One I Have - Damess 16:44 , 10 August 2006
    • Many articles on Disney films on Wikipedia have them. Imax80 15:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)


What?

On The Fox & The hound Video I Borrowed From My Cousin It Only Has The Preview For The Lion King But When I Rented It , It Has The The Preveiw Of The Lion King And The Preview Of The Return Of Jafar. I'm Confused ... -- Damess

  • I have the two versions. Later printings would show the two previews together. Imax80 20:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


FBI warning on the classics series

Orange-Red: US: December 1984- November 1991 UK: 1986- October 1992 Japan: 1988-1994. The FBI screen shows a red vertical bar going down on a white backround with A red exotic bold font on the side. And than a another screen with a Orange-Red backround with white writting saying "Licnsed for private Home."

Pine-Green: US: July 1991- January 1998 UK: 1993- 1998 Japan: 1995-1998. The FBI screen shows a a white box on a pine-green backround and it says FBI in green writting in that white box. Another screen with the same bckround saying "Licensed for private Home."

1988-1994 logo is on youtube.com

  • Hey did you know that the 1988 black diamond logo is on youtube.com.

Will the 1992 version with distored music is uploaded with the proto-type version. Hey can some one post the 1992 version with clean music on youtube.com, and can anyone who is a user of Youtube.com upload the 1991,1992,1997,and the 2000 Feature Presentation screens?

Removal of "Canada" section

I have removed the following section, which seems to be made up of entirely false information:

Canada
In addition to the U.S. titles above, the following titles were released in Canada.

Actual Disney productions (as opposed to some movies Disney licensed from elsewhere) have always been released simultaneously in the U.S. and Canada. There is no evidence that any of these were released in Canada prior to their release in the U.S. or that any of these were ever released with a "Classics" logo. AS verified from Canadian rental copies, #211 is Son of Flubber, #241 is Country, #414 is The Light in the Forest, #037 is Old Yeller, and the other stock numbers I've never seen. It also doesn't seem plausible that Disney could have shipped 4 titles on 4 different dates over a 5-day period in October, 1988. That just doesn't make sense. I expect that all of this information is a fabrication disguised to look like legitimate information.

The other dates in the article are either identical or close to the dates I have. One complication is that Disney for many years had a Nationally Advertised Availability Date (N.A.A.D.) which was 3 days later than the actual Street Date. It seems that both types of dates appear in thias article, but I think it would be better to standardize on the advertised date. Any opinions on this? Canadiana 17:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Well, in the past, we had anonymous users contributing those release dates and plugging the US Section with it, so we made the Canadian section to stop them. Imax80 22:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Exact Release Dates

We don't have the exact release dates for the following titles-

  • Dumbo (initial and re-release)
  • The Sword in the Stone (re-release)
  • Alice in Wonderland (initial and re-release)

Can we get those dates too, also we have to archive the talk page pretty soon.

  • Why do we have to archive this soon? --Ryanasaurus0077 19:10, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Unusual Things on videos

  • The 1984 classics logo on Pinocchio took a long time to fade.

(Anyone seen this)

    • Yes, it's on my copy of Alice in Wonderland (1986 slipcase version) --Ryanasaurus0077 13:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • The 1986 Alice print had red FBI warning slideshow instead of fade.

(Anyone seen this)

    • Yes, I saw it when I rented it in 2005. (I bought the slipcase version last month.) --Ryanasaurus0077 13:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • The 1984-85 prints of Robin Hood and Pinocchio had 1984 classics logo was a bit off screen.

(Anyone seen this)

  • The 1992 Rescuers print has 1992 version of 1988 classics logo with distorted music in it.

(Anyone seen this)

  • Yes of coruse I have because all Rescuers prints have distorted music in the classics logo.

A question

Are any of you interested in the actual movies, or just things like the packaging and logos? —tregoweth (talk) 01:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

  • To put it short,"Excellent movies, collectable tapes." Of course I love the actual movies. My top favorite movies of all time are either by Disney, or by Pixar. The logos and packaging are interesting as well, but the movies are more worth it. Man, why would you think that? Imax80 05:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
    • I was just wondering, since most of the discussion here seems to be about everything but the movies. —tregoweth (talk) 11:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
      • I once mentioned audio quality on Lady and the Tramp. Shall we archiv ethis soon? Imax80 17:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Nationally Advertised Availability Date and date conflicts

I realize that there have been edit wars here in the past about date conflicts. Part of the problem is that Disney had a policy of giving two different dates for every new release from about 1990 (I think) until at least 1994.

The date in advertising, press releases, news stories, etc., was the Nationally Advertised Availability Date (NAAD). If you find citations to document the date, this is almost certainly the date you will see, so I have started to standardize on this date. I have added a footnote to those entries for which I have printed evidence that the date is an NAAD.

The other date, was a "Will Call" date, three days earlier than the NAAD. The purpose of this arrangement was to make it fair for all retailers. The movies were shipped from wholesalers on a Tuesday (maybe always a Tuesday), but the advertised date was a Friday to give smaller stores and more remote stores time to receive their shipments before consumers would arrive looking to buy their copies. All stores were allowed to put the movies out for sale on the Tuesday though, three days earlier than the official advertised date. Unless they were close enough to a wholesaler to get same-day shipping, the only way for stores to actually get product on the "Will Call" date was to drive to the wholesaler and pick up their copies (hence the designation "Will Call").

For Aladdin, I have a press kit repeating the October 1 date over and over and I have also added a footnote to a New York Times story which you can read online, also giving the October 1 date. Since there have been repeated attempts to change this to a September 27 date, I can only conclude that October 1 is the NAAD, so I have added the footnote for this entry also. In fact, no copies should have been sold before September 28, so if you have a copy sold on September 27, I think the store broke the street date. If you see anyone changing the date from October 1, change it back and refer them to this note. Canadiana 15:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

  • So, the NAAD is effectively the street date? —tregoweth (talk) 16:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
In fact, the "Will Call" date was the real street date, but all printed material aimed at consumers listed the NAAD as the availability date. During this period, Disney avoided using the term "street date." Well-behaved retailers with no history of abusing the privilege were often actually able to get the videos the day before the "Will Call" date, but could not start selling them before the Will Call date. I remember people gleefully reporting on Usenet in the early 1980s that they had picked up their videos before the advertised date and felt like they got away with something illicit.
At some, point most studios switched to Tuesday release dates, and eventually all did. Somewhere in this process, Disney switched to having combined "Will Call/NAAD" dates on the same day (Tuesday).
In the last several years, there have been only a handful of titles released on any day other than Tuesday. For example, one of those asteroid-detroys-the-earth movies was released on a Friday the 13th for unexplained reasons. Canadiana 20:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Talk Page Should Be Archived

Any opinions? Imax80 22:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

No, the talk page should not be archived. If you try to edit the whole page and you start to get a message saying that the page is getting too big, that's the time to start thinking about archiving it, but we're not even at the thinking stage yet. Archiving the page is very disruptive to ongoing discussions, and should only be done when absolutely necessary. When the page needs to be archived, only the topics that are no longer being discussed should be archived. Canadiana 06:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)