SCREEN-L Archives

May 1994


Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
"Richard J. Leskosky" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Thu, 12 May 1994 17:26:06 -0500
text/plain (32 lines)
>To John Thomas (and other Disney-interested folk):
>I guess the point of my earlier posting was that the studio
>heads in the 1930s and 1940s, including Disney, had an
>individualistic power that doesn't seem to apply today.
>Thus, Disney himself had the ability to grab his creative
>personnel at his whim (in the story John told, a good whim)
>and make ad hoc changes in movie scripts and productions.
>How does the story go about the studio head who used the
>"butt squirm" theory of movies -- if his butt squirmed too
>much while he was watching a movie, it was a bad movie?
>And although many of the movies produced under the classic
>studio system may have had a style all their own, I wonder
>about the working conditions of such systems.  Wasn't
>Disney notorious about squelching individual recognition
>among his artists?
>Matt McAllister,
>Virginia Tech
The critical rear end belonged to Harry Cohn of Columbia.  As for Disney
squelching individual recognition among his artists, that depends on what
you mean:  his animators received appropriate screen credits for their work
and for the time (i.e., the credits in Walt's time weren't as
detailed/interminable as they are today), but in publicity about the studio
Walt was usually the only one named.
Richard Leskosky
University of Illinois