Talk:List of Walt Disney Pictures films

1952

I believe I recall seeing mention of the upcoming film 1952 on this list, but there's nothing there anymore and I don't see anything in the history. Perhaps I'm just crazy. Any reason this may have been removed? Not sure how to add it myself, but it seems this should be added to the list.

Source: http://www.deadline.com/2012/05/brad-bird-to-helm-damon-lindelofs-secret-shrouded-script-1952-for-disney/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kylemaddens (talk • contribs) 00:11, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

 Erledigt Added to TBA section. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 03:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorting

Would there be a way to not use color to sort the types of movies, in accordance with the policy WP:COLOR? - Rebel shadow 00:31, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Resolved

The color-coded but sorting method was removed. It may be aesthetically pleasing, but its removal is in accordance with WP:COLOR, its apparent irrelevance and triviality (film definitions are better addressed in the films' respective articles instead of here). ~ Jedi94 (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:COLOR there is a way on making the colors so they are colorblind friendly, I would do this myself but dont know much about it to do so. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

I'm not exactly that familiar with it either. Hopefully, a more knowledgeable editor will help us with the proper colors. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 17:16, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Okay and thanks for your understanding =). The colors do serve a helpful purpose here as not only are they better on the eyes but also link to the other lists through the TOC. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 18:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

No problem. I was only against their inclusion because of the serious issue with color blind readers. As long as that's addressed, I see no real problem in keeping them (they are nice to have). ~ Jedi94 (talk) 23:31, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Marvel Studios?

Why the heck is Marvel Studios releases included in this list? While they are the property of The Walt Disney Company, they are not Disney-branded (Walt Disney Pictures), but merely distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures just like any Touchstone Pictures release past and present. The fact that Buena Vista Pictures Distribution changed its name in 2007 to Walt Disnet Studios Motion Pictures may be the source of the confusion and inconcistency displayed on this page. My suggestion is to either remove the Marvel films, or to include all Disneynature, Touchstone, Hollywood Pictures, and Miramax Films (1993-2010). RicJac (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

The subject of including Marvel Studios films (The Avengers and onward) has been an ambiguous debate. At first glance, it would make sense to exclude them because they are not Disney-branded, altough there are third-party sources that mention Walt Disney Pictures in relation to the past two released Marvel films (Ex: Entertainment Weekly, ComingSoon, Movie Web, ComingSoon, etc.) In fact, they (along with Disneynature) are classified as part of the official Walt Disney Pictures' library at their offical website whereas Touchstone, Hollywood and Miramax films are not, and that's coming from the direct source.

My suggestion, which is one I hope satisfies editors on both sides is this: Include the Disney-released Marvel Studios films and the Disneynature films here but label them appropriately under their own "Type of film" category, such as is the case for True-Life Adventures. Here's what I mean:

Key to the colors used below

	Type of film
	Animated feature films (List)
	Films with live action and animation
	Live-action films
	True-Life Adventures / Disneynature
	Documentary films
	Marvel Studios
	TBA

What do you think? ~ Jedi94 (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The inclusion of Disneynature is sensible as it is clearly "Disney-branded" by any standard.

With respect to Marvel, it is not as easy. It appears that some of the non-Disney affiliated sites confuse WDP and WDSMP. As for Disney themselves there is a sort of historical parallel to this: in the late 80's and early 90's when several PG-rated Touchstone titles were seen as hip, modern and successful etcetera: they were often bundled together with Disney titles, as can be seen in the special "Disney, 50 years of Magic".

The list from the Disney Archives is of course equally official: but its list include features from all the labels... But as the title of this article is List of Walt Disney Pictures film, the line has to be drawn somewhere while striking a balance between an inclusionist and an exclusionist approach.

My solution would be to exclude the non-Disney-branded Marvel features from the list, but to make a note mentioning that those titles while not WDP/Disney-branded proper are included on official Disney sites with proper WDP/Disney branded titles. If future Marvel titles starts to bear the Disney name, as has been announced for the upcoming Star Wars film, then they should be included here without question. RicJac (talk) 08:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

That's a well-rounded solution that I'm in full support of. Just to make sure we understand each other, the suggestion is that we have the list include only these titles: 1) Walt Disney Pictures "Disney-branded films" 2) Disneynature, 3) Any Marvel/Lucasfilm films that are Disney-branded and 4) Mention the non-Disney branded Marvel films like The Avengers. If that's so then I'll begin to make some edits. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 18:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

We're in broad agreement, with the exception of the non-Disney branded Marvel Studios feature films The Avengers and Iron Man 3. What I argued for in my previous post was an inclusion of those titles in a "Notes" section due to the connection on contemporary Disney public marketing webbpages, but not in the list itself. I think it is important in an encyclopedic context on the List of Walt Disney Pictures films to make the crucial distinction between The Walt Disney Company films as in "Disney branded content" and "Non-Disney branded content", or else it opens up a slippery slope of endless discussions with no end in sight. RicJac (talk) 14:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, I did make a footnote highlighting the difference. But, you are correct. I did add them back to the list, only because I found out (while I was editing) that Thor: The Dark World was not being co-branded by Disney in the recent marketing materials, despite that it was "supposedly" going to be the first Disney-Marvel branded film. So, I figured that listing all the non-Disney branded Marvel films in a footnote would be chaotic since all future Marvel Studios productions (whether they are owned by Disney or not), will not have the Disney moniker on them at all. In other words, unless Disney's marketing changes, the footnote will just be an endless list that'll grow in time. If it were just The Avengers and Iron Man 3 as the only two non-Disney branded Marvel films, then I would have followed your suggestion down to the tee. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 02:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

But having a note explaining the brand inconsistencies on the current website would not necessitate the inclusion of the Marvel titles (which as you succinctly point out, would be an ever-expanding task) in the list per se, but rather following the description of what content is not included in the list. Besides there are more inconsistencies and blurring of lines, both in the past and the present, with [Disney Movies On Demand http://www.youtube.com/user/DisneyMoviesOnDemand/videos?view=0], featuring the PG-rated Touchstone Pictures film Sister Act and the R-rated Hollywood Pictures film Deep Rising in a decidedly Disney-branded context. But I would never suggest that it makes them pseudo-Disney branded. And I don't really see the need to treat the Marvel Studios titles any differently than other non-Disney branded content, despite their current high-profile status.

I could go on with a longer list of the blurring the supposedly rigid lines of demarcation between Disney-branded and Non-Disney branded content: but my point is, ever as before, that this list should, to maintain a semblance of consistency, only list theatrical releases which openly bear the Disney name: i.e. "Walt Disney presents", "Walt Disney Productions", "Walt Disney Pictures", "Disneynature", but not non-Disney branded features which since 2007 bear the end titles credit "Distributed by Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures". RicJac (talk) 07:52, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

The way you changed the footnote recently is fine by me. We'll leave it like that. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 19:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Of course 20% of people coming here will be looking for upcoming Marvel films as a part of this, e.g. looking for when Marvel films come out with respect to Star Wars and Pirates of the Caribbean. To suggest otherwise is lunacy. I watched Good Morning Vietnam two days ago and it had a massive Disney logo all over it - but apparently it's not on this list because it's not officially branded (or something) or maybe that's just on UK DVDs? I've only known of the Knightley "King Arthur" as Disney..? It matters because the new Star Wars films will be branded as Lucasfilm (and Bad Robot) not Disney so having those on the list and not the others is just silly. Kypzethdurron 08:13, 18th August 2013 (UTC)

Just to clear something up: According to an offical press release, the upcoming Star Wars films will be Disney-branded. They'll be released "under the Disney | Lucasfilm banner", similar to films released under the Disney·Pixar brand. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 20:04, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

If it matters, WDP is listed as the studio on things like Amazon Instant Video.

Article Name

I'm not ~so sure that the present article name is the optimal choice; given that for the 75 years that Disney has released feature films, 45 of those were either under the name of the co-founder/public persona and later former parent company name (Walt Disney Productions); and the fact that the "Walt Disney Pictures" name seems to have recently been reduced to simply "Disney" on new feature films.

My favored option would be "List of Disney branded films". RicJac (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Recently I moved the article's name from "List of Disney theatrical feature films" to "List of Walt Disney Pictures films" for two main reasons.

1) The former name was too broad and since this article only listed films from Walt Disney Pictures, then it was misleading.

2) I moved it to parallel all the other major studio articles with their own "list of films" pages. In the case of some of those studios (Universal, Touchstone, Fox and Paramount) they've all had different names over the course of their existence, and yet all of their "list of films" pages use the current studio's name.

As for the recent truncation from "Walt Disney Pictures" to "Disney", I believe that's a marketing strategy Disney is employing now, since the company is so hellbent with branding their products nowadays. It might also explain why such a move took two years to be completely realized. At first, it was just the Disney moniker above the film's title that was changed (beginning with Alice in Wonderland), then the opening logo was altered (The Muppets) and finally the poster and on-screen credits were shortened (John Carter). All this occurred while no announcement was made that the company was changing the legal name. Also, the logo found on their home media packaging was changed from "Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment" to read simply as "Disney", despite that not being the division's legal name. All of this has led me to believe that it's all just corporate marketing, therefore we would have to find more verifiable sources on that matter if we do decide to follow that path. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 02:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

First, legal names rarely conform to marketing as there is a thing called trademarks and fictitious business names. By the way, the actual name of the home entertainment subsidiary is still Buena Vista Home Entertainment, Inc.

Second, my proposal is not meant to emulate the current marketing voodoo heralded out from the hallowed halls in Burbank, but rather to trim down to what is the essential ingredient from 1938 to the present-day: the Disney name (or brand, label, banner etc.) and the unique connotations (for better or worse) that accompanies it. "Walt Disney Pictures" is nothing more than a 1983 creation which has recently fallen into disuse as a brand for new theatrical releases, apart from remaining the legal name of a subsidiary, analogous to the BVHE example above. It makes little sense to use a name which is neither in current use nor representative for a even a majority of the time period covered. RicJac (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Good point, they have been generically using the 'Disney' moniker lately on everything though. -- Rebel shadow 22:18, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Slightly on topic, any thoughts on renaming the List of Disney theatrical animated features page? -- Rebel shadow 23:24, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

This article should be renamed (or change the list to the films made by this unit) as it does not conform to Walt Disney Pictures films, which is Disney Studio's family live action unit started in 1950, renamed in 1983 to Walt Disney Pictures then incorporated. (Of course other live action units were formed for more adult fare and to increase output: Touchstone, Buena Vista, Hollywood, Caravan; and purchased: MiraMax and Marvel.) Spshu (talk) 19:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Formatting

The formatting of a couple of the tables really needs to be fixed. I'm not sure if I know how to fix it, or I'd do it myself. Alphius (talk) 04:30, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The page does need some more TLC. Could you elaborate on what tables need to be fixed? ~ Jedi94 (talk) 23:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I think it might have been the last couple, but it looks like they're fixed now. Alphius (talk) 04:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Cool. Often times, the tables are accidentally messed up by someone during editing. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 17:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Missing films

There are few films missing on the list and I can't add them in beta version :( maybe someone with superpowers could correct it. the ones I found: -The Lion King II: Simba's Pride ; October 27, 1998 ; Walt Disney Pictures, DisneyToon Studios -The Lion King 1½ ; February 10, 2004 ; Walt Disney Pictures, DisneyToon Studios, A. Film A/S -Bambi 2 ; February 7, 2006 ; DisneyToon Studios, Walt Disney Pictures -Mulan II ; February 1, 2005 ; SD Entertainment, Walt Disney Pictures -The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning ; August 26, 2008 ; Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment -Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp's Adventure ; February 27, 2001 ; Disney Television Animation, Walt Disney Home Entertainment hope someone will fix it :)

This article is devoted to theatrical Disney releases. The films mentioned above are direct-to-video films, which are not included on this list. For a more appropriate list, see List of Disney home entertainment. ~ Jedi94 (talk) 17:52, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Is that statement entirely true? Aren't you also including TV's "Wonderful World of Disney" movies as a theatrical releases?

Other Potentially Missing films

The Miracle Worker , 12 Nov 2000

Summer of the Monkeys, 30 Oct 1998 (which actually did have a Box Office release)

13:30, 16 March 2016 (UTC) --Linusvpelt (talk) 13:37, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2014

2001 - lady and the tramp 2: Scamps Adventure 94.15.168.121 (talk) 02:56, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

 Not done The article states:- "this list does not include films released by other existing, defunct or divested labels... ...nor any direct-to-video releases."
Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp's Adventure states it was a "2001 American direct-to-video animated film" so is not eligible for this list. - Arjayay (talk) 13:12, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Pixar

The list includes several animated films by Pixar that were produced before Disney bought Pixar (e.g. Toy Story, A Bug's Life, Finding Nemo, etc.). Those aren't "theatrical films released under the Walt Disney Pictures film label" and should be removed. Angr (talk) 22:56, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Those aforementioned Pixar films were all released by Disney under the Walt Disney Pictures banner during all of their original theatrical releases. ~ Jedi94 (Want to tell me something?) 00:05, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

The Lion King (2011)

Re-released of old films don't count as new films. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.147.198.171 (talk) 19:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Inspired by or Based on?

I believe there should be a distinction between a movie being inspired by or based on an original story. I say this because even Disney does not claim to have created "Frozen" BASED ON Hans Christian Anderson's original "The Snow Queen". The movie has INSPIRED BY in the credits and I believe this is a very important detail to be added to the page.

Here is a link to a screen shot of the credits from the movie.

--digitalbeachbum 11:16, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

what about The Return of Jafar and Aladdin and the King of Thieves ?

what about The Return of Jafar and Aladdin and the King of Thieves ? I think these two movies not mentioned in the list, and The Lion King II: Simba's Pride not mentioned also. --Abdulrahman Haddad (talk) 18:45, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Tarzan II not mentioned too. --Abdulrahman Haddad (talk) 18:49, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

They are direct to video, thus not listed. Spshu (talk) 20:54, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Education for Death

Notice that this is conveniently missing from just about every Disney list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.3.245.56 (talk) 17:45, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

This is a list of features, and Education for Death is a short. It's included on List of Disney animated shorts, for one. Trivialist (talk) 18:32, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2015

50.99.190.203 (talk) 15:20, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Kharkiv07^Talk 15:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Tru Confessions

Should: _Tru Confessions_ be included in the list? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.228.220.90 (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

• As Tru Confessions is a made-for-TV film, no. Trivialist (talk) 14:43, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Cinderella (1987 film)

Cinderella is a 1987 animated feature produced by Walt Disney Feature Animation and released by Walt Disney Pictures on November 20, 1987. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.51.84.128 (talk) 23:15, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

• You might be thinking of Cinderella (1950 film), which was re-released in 1987. Trivialist (talk) 23:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Dick Tracy (1990)

Should 'Dick Tracy (1990)' be included here? I didn't see it. I know it eventually fell to the Touchstone brand, but for the years when it was announced all the way leading up to its release, it was advertized as a Walt Disney Picture. It was produced at and financed by Disney Studios. I can link to a youtube of an old teaser for it that even says, "From Walt Disney Pictures, Coming Soon!" but I'm not going to take the time right now. Playerpage (talk) 00:08, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

No, this list is only for films released by Walt Disney Pictures (i.e. the Disney brand) during their theatrical release. Any changes in production should be mentioned at the film's specific article (which in this case, already is). ~ Jedi94 (Want to tell me something?) 02:49, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Walt Disney Pictures India

Since the acquisition of UTV Motion Pictures in India in 2012, Disney has been increasingly releasing Indian language films (mainly Hindi) under the Disney banner not only in India but internationally. The Walt Disney Company (India) is a subsidiary of The Walt Disney Company however the films are clearly released and marketed under an identical Disney logo e.g. see Khoobsurat (2014 film) and ABCD 2. The article states that "This list is only for theatrical films released under the Disney banner" however does not include any subsidiaries owned by Walt Disney Studios. It does however contain Pixar films and Walt Disney Animation Studios which are subsidiaries of The Walt Disney Company, which makes things confusing. On the 1st of October, an anonymous user with ip 65.129.93.104 removed my addition of the film ABCD 2 to the List of Walt Disney Pictures films page claiming "For the last time, that is not released by American Disney. It was released by Indian disney". The films Khoobsurat and Arjun: The Warrior Prince however are also released by Disney India and remain on the list however.

1. Which theatrical films of subsidiaries of Disney should be included in the list?
2. Should Indian language films produced by The Walt Disney Company globally should be included in the list?

Thanks koalajiv 01:45, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Theatrical films released on the under the Disney banner are the only ones that should be included on this list. In layman's terms, all theatrical films that are either; presented by "Walt Disney", "Walt Disney Productions", "Walt Disney Pictures" or "Disney"; includes the Disney production logo and/or on-screen credit in the film; or branded/marketed under the Disney moniker. Walt Disney Animation Studios and Pixar Animation Studios films (and for that matter, Disneynature) are included in this list because they are released under the Disney brand—the article's lead entails this.

In regards to Indian language films (and any foreign-produced films, for that matter), that should be left up to editors' consensus. Personally, I'm fine with including such films in this list, as long as they meet the aforementioned requirements (which ABCD 2 indeed does). ~ Jedi94 (Want to tell me something?) 03:11, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

The BFG update

DreamWorks Pictures is not co-producing the film anymore, but still serve as a copyright holder. 86.40.132.58 (talk) 19:00, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:04, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 December 2015

Please remove all Studio Ghibli films from this list. Disney was not in the production of these and only bought the rights to dubbed and distribute them. They are not under the Disney film production team 75.118.48.173 (talk) 03:13, 18 December 2015 (UTC) 75.118.48.173 (talk) 03:13, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. /wia🎄/tlk 03:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Erledigt Actually the anon IP is correct; the films were produced and distributed by Studio Ghibli, with Disney only the distribution partner in the United States. They had no active role in the production of the films, as stated in the respective articles for the films. --McDoobAU93 22:25, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Add "The Force Awakens" to list of films.

http://movies.disney.com/all-movies — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.181.153.102 (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

The film is indeed owned by Disney, but it was not released under the "Walt Disney Pictures" banner; instead, it was released under the "Lucasfilm" banner. As such, it would not belong on this list. --McDoobAU93 22:29, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Disney Channel movies

Is there any reason why movies from List of Disney Channel Original Movies don't seem to be listed here? Thanks. Daniel Carrero (talk) 22:11, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Yes, because those films were released directly to television and did not receive theatrical release. If you have a source that a particular film has been released to theatres (it has happened with some of the direct-to-video animated films that have been theatrically released outside of the United States), then that film could be added. --McDoobAU93 22:38, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 January 2016

I would like to add Rotten Tomato score to all the films listed, I thought it would be a nice detail to add. Littlenimoy (talk) 17:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. That may be worth adding, not sure, but either way, SPERs are for when you already have the changes ready, and you have consensus for the change. Thanks for understanding --allthefoxes ^(Talk) 21:19, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2016

The following movies need to be indicated as "Hybrid" with an 'H' (both live action and animated) Alice in Wonderland (2010) Oz, The Great and Powerful The Jungle Book (2016) Alice through the Looking Glass Braindud92 (talk) 15:13, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. I'm not sure that CGI elements count (or else most films would be hybrid). Films with live action and animation seems to imply hybrid films have entire scenes or sequences that are animated. clpo13_(talk) 23:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

The Chronicles of Magiriam: The Golden Owl

I can't find any information on this, and the cited source didn't mention it either. I don't think it's a real thing. Correct me if I'm wrong, sorry to bother you. 50.135.188.198 (talk) 21:37, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

It's been fixed. Thanks for pointing this out. --McDoobAU93 22:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 Sptember 2016

The following movie need to be indicated as "Hybrid" with an 'H' (both live action and animated) Pete's Dragon (2016 film) 82.38.157.176 (talk) 22:40, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Erledigt nyuszika7h (talk) 09:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 October 2016

The following movies need to be indicated as "Hybrid" with an 'H' (both live action and animated) The BFG and the upcoming Rescue Rangers &. Mary Poppins sqeuel.

82.38.157.176 (talk) 15:46, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Topher385 (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Policy on hybrid vs. live-action

What is the policy on stating a film is live-action over a hybrid? A lot of recent Disney fairy-tale films mix CGI-generated and live-action characters. CR85747 (talk) 04:15, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Hybrid or Live Action

I am under the impression that The BFG(2016) is a Hybrid film, including both Live Action and Performance Capture, and not Live Action alone, should this be changed? — 86.23.105.58 (talk) 22:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Edit: Just noticed a few other people are already talking about this, sorry for duplicate.

Enchanted sequel removal

Someone is removing the upcoming Enchanted sequel from the list claiming that it'll be released straight to video instead of in theaters without hard evidence. — FilmandTVFan28 (talk) 13:04, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Why isn't magic camp dated yet?

The release date has been announced ya know. Y'all can do it Jstar367 (talk) 00:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Remove Gigantic

It was canceled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.188.232.114 (talk • contribs)

Erledigt Appropriate and it's listed at List of unproduced Disney animated shorts and feature films. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Walt Disney Pictures films. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090104013132/http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/749/749557p1.html to http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/749/749557p1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Remove King of the Elves

It was canceled.

 Erledigt  Ivecos (t) 10:08, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Tarzan (live-action remake)

Walt Disney Pictures will be begin plan the live-action remake of the 1999 Walt Disney Feature Animation film Tarzan on February 2, 2018 (aka Groundhog Day). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.64.247.95 (talk) 19:45, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Noelle and upcoming streaming service

Why are movies like Noelle (2019 film), Magic Camp, The Sword in the Stone (film)#Live-action film adaptation, etc. still on here if they are no longer coming to theatres? :( —Cineplex^Talk 7:51PM, February 16, 2018

New Disney's movie produced in Russia

Please, add the new Disney's Russian movie The Last Warrior. Нечитайлер (talk) 23:10, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 23:54, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Walt Disney's studio really make his second movie in Russian Federation! Proof link: ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Последний богатырь — Preceding unsigned comment added by Нечитайлер (talk • contribs) 13:58, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

The Last Warrior

Please, add to this page new Disney's movie produced on Russia, The Last Warrior. How is this possible: The Book of Masters is, but The Last Warrior - no? This is also a Disney film.

Prooflink: http://ybw-group.com/#section-full-project?url=%2Fproject%2Fthe-last-warrior Нечитайлер (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. @Нечитайлер: before re-submitting this request a third time, please read, understand, and follow [[WP:RS|the policy on identifying reliable sources}}. The Russian Wikipedia and a non-independent web page are not significant or independent reliable sources. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:08, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

The section "Future releases" is inadequate

The section "Future releases", specifically the "In development - theatrical releases" subsection, is completely inadequate and borders on fan blog instead of an encyclopaedic article. Almost all the movies cited in the subsection are "supported" with the weakest of the references, some of them not even suggesting that the movie is (or still is) in production.

For example, the "Untitled A Bug's Life Sequel" is linked to an article which clearly states that the speculation of a sequel is based on a mere tweet. Other damaging entries are these which use very old references, without giving any further proof that such a (supposed) long-in-development movie is still in the works. One example is the reference used for the "Gargoyles" movie, which is dated from 2011, with no further suggestion whatsoever that the movie is still in production now in 2018.

The entire subsection needs to be redone, for it lacks the encyclopaedic rigour that each and every Wikipedia article needs to follow.

Tim Week (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

@Tim Week:. I have removed every movie in the the "In development" subsection with a source more than five years old. Movies are canceled by the studio all the time and there is no evidence any of these are still in development. I see no purpose of a "List of films Disney has purchased the rights to or have requested a script about" but those I deleted would belong there, not here. I could certainly support removing the rest of the subsection as well, enforcing a shorter source age limit, or limiting it to films with sources that it is under active filming/animation. Reywas92^Talk 07:54, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Who Framed Roger Rabbit?

Is Who Framed Roger Rabbit? not counted as a Disney release? LeftHandedGuitarist (talk) 12:20, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Although Who Framed Roger Rabbit was produced and released by Disney, it was released under the studio's Touchstone Pictures label, therefore it is on that corresponding list. This is only for films released under the Walt Disney Pictures label. ~ Jedi94 (Want to tell me something?) 17:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Tini: The Movie

Would Tini: The Movie (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tini:_The_Movie) be an appropriate addition to this page? C5mjohn (talk) 05:40, 28 November 2018 (UTC)