Daniel — thanks … I read that announcement about “Disneynature” with great reserve. There’s a whole new crop of mediocre nature docs out there, perhaps spurred on by the increasing # of HD TVs (I know I watch more of them on mine). Many of them are just the same old same old, however.

Anyway, I read about this somewhere, I can’t remember now, and I’m just not convinced that Disney helped us become environmentalists. Given the overwhelming number of factors in the twentieth century (starting with Teddy Roosevelt preserving public lands to Earth Day to the creation of the E.P.A. to the extremely important “No Littering” campaigns of the seventies, to regulations on pollution, to the banning of CFC’s, to the publication of Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring etc, etc, etc) that contributed to environmental awareness, and the fact that in over a century millions have been involved in moving us towards better conditions for the planet, I find it a little insulting to all those people to give the credit to some furry animated animals. David Whitley disrespects the complex and interconnected mechanisms that produced environmental awareness on a semi-global scale to sell a book with a premise he knows will work for many who do not know the efforts made by so many in the areas of resource depletion and land degredation (the dust bowl happened before the Bambi movie and farming methods were changed as a result of that, not because of Thumper), acid rain, pesticides, nuclear testing - none of which were ever covered in a Disney movie.

Sorry if I sound a little pissed, I assure you it’s not with you Rick. It’s with David Witless and his hokey, condescending ideas.

These days, as the studio has become an entertainment conglomerate, much of the heart is gone.

I always found it funny how people watched these types of films, like BABE, and then, after the film, went and ate pork chops and apple sauce without a gripe.

I am partial to Disney films though. Especially the high caliber productions like FINDING NEMO.