MovieChat Forums > Saving Mr. Banks (2013) Discussion > Such a horrible man Disney was

Such a horrible man Disney was

posted 9 years ago by KristenStewartForever
42 replies | jump to latest

Exactly. Exactly. The real Disney was an SOB. He betrayed Travers. Hurt her. And stabbed her in the back. Just wanted money. Not even giving a *beep* about her father. He didn't care if she was honoring her father. All he cared about was making money. Especially when he promised her no animation and put it in. He ruined her father's honoring. For his own benefit. All she got from it was money. That's not enough. For such an important thing to her, she should've been given final say. But Disney was an SOB. If I was Travers I would've said "if you ask me one more time for rights to my film, I'll file for harassment I said no." Or even better, I would've sued Disney for breaking his promises he made her. He promised her no animation. And lied to her. That's enough rights to sue. Her books were not for children. They were meant for others. Nothing for kids. I feel so bad for Travers. I am 100% on her side. Cartoon penguins. So stupid and against the authors wishes. And no, I don't I don't give a crap that that's what happens when you sell rights. He harassed her to sell him the rights and tricked her. He should've been sued for what he did. No. If you are promised something then you should be granted that promise. What Disney did was say "I promise you. No cartoons, no animation. I swear it. Please give me the rights." She signs it and he went "ha! I lied! I got what I want! Cartoons are going in! Haha!"

[–] Blackjack254 9 years ago

Walt Disney and his company is a godsend.

I'm sorry you and your idol don't approve of him. Why isn't your screen name "Pltraversforever"?

You want an example of "Horrible people" by your standards?

Try Universal Studios, Todd Browning, and Bela Lugosi for taking Bram Stoker's Suspenseful, emotional, and atmospheric "Dracula" Novel, and heavily butchering it, Censoring it, Stupifying it, and Castrating it beyond recognition and essentially throwing it in the trash.

At least Mary Poppins got a more faithful stage play, as you so claim, but to this date, the Bram Stoker "Dracula" has NEVER gotten a faithful, big screen adaption that really does it justice.

How you can make the world a better place:
Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

[–] bmbdsm 9 years ago

I can't believe I'm saying this again, but...

If the books weren't meant for kids, then I guess all of the libraries and bookstores I've been in in my lifetime have got it wrong, because they put them in the children's section (this is sarcasm, BTW).

No book can be filmed exactly as is, because then you'd have an extremely long film (as I've mentioned before, if GONE WITH THE WIND were filmed as is, it would take a whole week to view the entire film; no human being was made to watch a movie that long). Especially in those days, there were many things against Disney from creating an accurate MARY POPPINS:

1. Censorship- in those days, EVERY producer or studio had to submit any script or material that they planned to film to the Hays Office (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Production_Code), then the leading censorship board of the day (although they were winding down at that time, eventually giving way to the MPAA ratings used today). They would go through the script and inform the studio of any lines or situations that they deemed inappropriate. Even when the film was finished, they had to submit the film to the board, and they had to take anything out that was deemed inappropriate, or else the film wouldn't get released. Unless you pleaded your case as to why certain things should stay in, you had to obey (a fine had to be paid in order for "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn" to stay in GONE WITH THE WIND; Alfred Hitchcock put up many, many fights to keep things in his movies). It didn't matter if you were the most famous studio or filmmaker in the world, every one had to do this. I'm pretty sure there were things in the books that the Board did not approve of; even something as innocent as MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS had problems.

2. Technology- Disney was probably the most technologically advanced studio at that time (special-effects wise), but I'm pretty sure that there were things even Disney couldn't do. Many films had to change situations in material to work with the technology of the day.

We heard you the first 5 million times you posted how you hate Disney. We get it. You don't like the man. Just post it once, and be done with it. Seriously, it's getting annoying. Of course, I know you're going to ignore everything we've said. I've probably wasted my time typing all of this out.

[–] KristenStewartForever 9 years ago

You're right. I am ignoring you.

And I'm not saying it needs to be filmed exactly as is. But it needed to be filmed the way Travers wanted it. To honor her father.

[–] QueenZod 8 years ago

Then she should have built a film company and made the film herself.

[–] KristenStewartForever 9 years ago

Not to mention, he stole Travers glory for the books. It should've said "P.L. Travers' Mary Poppins. Screened by Walt Disney." Now hardly anyone knows who Travers is because of him. Everyone knows Disney. Sadly, no one knows Travers. He stole her glory. Hello?? It's HER work. Not his. And in all seriousness, he should've only made changes with her consent. Her work. Doesn't matter if she sold the rights.

[–] nannyjo 9 years ago

hardly anyone knows who Travers is because of him.

I respectfully disagree that no one knows her because of Walt Disney. I think it is BECAUSE of Walt Disney and the movie that millions more people know of her at all.

Travers wrote 18 books, according to Wikipedia (And if you read it on the internet it MUST be true! ;o) ) Not a huge lifetime volume of work, by any means, to be known as a prolific author. Everyone in the world, however, knew that Walt Disney wasn't a writer. As his page says, he was a "entrepreneur, cartoonist, animator, voice actor, and film producer." People knew at the time he didn't write any of the stuff he was producing. They knew, as we all do, that SOMEONE else wrote it: Travers!

I think it is because of Disney and the movie that millions more people know of Travers, at all, honestly. The popularity of the movie had to have had an affect on her books sales during her lifetime. The books are now fifty or so, years old. I feel the reason people may still know of them is likely due to the movie. How many other books and authors have gotten lost in history in that same half a century? Disney kept that from happening to Travers.

[–] My_Name_Is_Lydia 9 years ago

You're trying to reason with someone who is incapable of being reasonable. Good try, though. You make excellent points.

[–] scootergirl9988 8 years ago

Do you think the A.A. Milne estate is whining and crying that Disney kept Winnie the Pooh alive for generations that didn't even know who Winnie the Pooh was?

Countless people didn't even know Mary Poppins was a book until the movie came out, and countless people then went on to buy those books thanks to the exposure the Disney film brought. Did Travers refuse the profits from those sales? No, she didn't, just as she didn't turn down 5% of the movie's gross. That was $1,150,000, the equivalent of $11,864,000 in today's dollars. Not too shabby for a book that people had lost interest in.

"Nothing is more ill bred than trying to steal the affections of someone else's dog."

[–] Ken1260 8 years ago

I agree with you, if not for the movie, nobody today would even know who P L Travers even was so her legacy is tied to the movie whether she liked it or not.

[–] louiseculmer 7 years ago

the film gave sales of the books a massive boost. i can remember them coming out with the film covers. she is more famous because of the film, not less.

[–] KristenStewartForever 9 years ago

Zip it

[–] Blackjack254 9 years ago

I can tell when you get owned because you don't even try to rebuff. you just tell people to shut up.

How you can make the world a better place:
Don't shop at Wal-Mart.

[–] mcgmcgmcg 9 years ago

As I understand it, Walt Disney had his head Cryogenically Frozen at the time of death so he can wake up in the future and butcher some more kids stories written since his demise.
I strongly urge you to do the same with a note attached to your ear for the scientists to wake you up when Walt wakes up so you can tell him to go forth and multiply.
I'll buy you a hat for when you are awoken.

No cash here!! Here, no cash!!! Cash, no!!!! Robbo? No Cash!

[–] scootergirl9988 8 years ago

As I understand it, Walt Disney had his head Cryogenically Frozen at the time of death

That's just an urban legend. Walt Disney was cremated and his ashes interred at Forest Lawn Memorial Park.

"Nothing is more ill bred than trying to steal the affections of someone else's dog."

[–] My_Name_Is_Lydia 9 years ago

Oh my freaking GOD! You're still on this? Aren't you bored and sick of yourself yet?

No signature required

[–] pastorjwallen 8 years ago

I love Walt, and the the magic he helped bring to life. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I can say that, in my opinion, anger, rage, and bitterness will not bring anyone else closer to your point of view.

------------------------------

-= J =-

[–] Augustus_Octavian 8 years ago

She took the money and sold out her legacy. It is on her.

[–] KristenStewartForever 8 years ago

No. Him. Forever. He betrayed her and her father.

[–] bmbdsm 8 years ago

No. Him. Forever. He betrayed her and her father.

I beg to differ...

http://www.orlandoweekly.com/orlando/fact-checking-saving-mr-banks-with-disney-historian-jim-korkis/Content?oid=2240838

Film: Travers left Hollywood without signing the rights agreement, and Walt Disney flew after her on the next plane. Disney finally persuaded her by bonding over their mutual daddy issues.
Fact: “Walt did not immediately hop on a plane to follow her to England when she left, but the contract was quickly signed. … It is doubtful that Walt even knew anything about her father or her issues about him. There is certainly no evidence that the topic ever came up. Travers herself was prone to denial about anything unpleasant. … Walt never considered his years delivering newspapers for his father in Kansas City as traumatic, but just considered it hard work. As a skinny 9-year-old boy, he did struggle with snowdrifts higher than he was.”

How could he betray someone he didn't even know about?

[–] KristenStewartForever 8 years ago

Believe me. All he cared about was money. He didn't care about Travers. He Just wanted money and her work.

[–] KatrinaW 8 years ago

If that was the case, then she never would have signed off on it.

[–] KristenStewartForever 8 years ago

He tricked her!! Do you not get that? It was trickery! He made her all these promises, got her guard down, got the rights and went back on his word.

I love you, Kristen Stewart. :) You are so beautiful and talented. I would love to perform with you.

[–] ciaran2002 8 years ago

Why are you so sure? Did you participate in any of their negotiations, to make such vehement allegations? From biographies and interviews, P.L Travers seemed to be a more horrible person than Walt Disney, I wouldn't dismiss WD based on P.L's account of their collaboration. But anyway, I don't like the way you aggressively try to force your opinion on others, and as such I can't take you seriously.

[–] scootergirl9988 8 years ago

He "tricked" her? How? Did she not read the contract? Did she not have a lawyer look it over before signing it?

The fact of the matter is that Disney didn't need money. He was rolling in it thanks to his studio and, even better, Disneyland, the income from which finally gave him freedom from borrowing from the money lenders. Travers, OTH, did need money and she signed over the rights to "Mary Poppins" so she could get some. She was free to sell those rights to someone else but then again no one else was pounding down her door to try to get those rights. Only Disney.

BTW, she didn't turn down the 5% of the gross that was part of that contract even though she was "tricked", did she? Yeah, she HATED that movie and everything associated with it...except for the MONEY.

"Nothing is more ill bred than trying to steal the affections of someone else's dog."

[–] gcarras (2727) 5 years ago

Hopefully she WON'T! I think you're joking (with all due respect, to use a much used idiom used in MARY POPPINS itself by Mr.Banks, and with all due repect also applies to hopefully she (Kristen Stewart) won't (perform) with YOU.

[–] bond_98 8 years ago

Walt Disney wasn't a saint. But where would animation be without him.

[–] KristenStewartForever 8 years ago

Doesn't matter for P.L. Travers. The poor woman hated animation. That was the whole point. Disney promised her no animation and lied.

[–] An_Animator 8 years ago

The poor woman hated animation.

I feel sorry for her. Animation is awesome! Too bad she couldn't appreciate it.

[–] scootergirl9988 8 years ago

Well then. She should have sold the rights to someone else. Oh, that's right. No one else was willing to pay her as much as Disney, if anyone else was even interested in making a movie from her books, that is.

If she cared so much about her creation she should have continued to live in gentile poverty instead of selling the rights to one of the most powerful Hollywood studios of the day, a studio which pretty much guaranteed success and therefore making her 5% of the gross demand worth one helluva lot more.

Take your crocodile tears somewhere else. No one here is buying it.

"Nothing is more ill bred than trying to steal the affections of someone else's dog."

[–] KristenStewartForever 8 years ago

Oh, shut the hell up. I'm right.

[–] RSpanish 8 years ago

Actually, you are wrong. So shut up and go elsewhere. No one here cares about your opinion of Disney or PL Travers.

Gil Fulbright For President
http://honestgil.com/

[–] gcarras (2727) 6 years ago

Correct, RSpanish!

[–] loverboylove 8 years ago

I absolutely agree with you.

[–] AssetsonFire 7 years ago

Wrong! Disney was a kindly, diffident man who treat his employees like close pals and looked a lot like Tom Hanks and would never dream of screwing someone over. I know this because it's in the film and films don't lie.

~.~
There were three of us in this marriage
http://www.imdb.com/list/ze4EduNaQ-s/