Peter Pan (1953) (The Signature Collection)

[Scottie]

Peter Pan - YouTube

[The Mad Kiwi]

I hope they can finally give this movie a new "making of" documentary. It's crazy that every release has recycled the same 16-minute featurette since 1998. I guess, technically, the commentary IS a documentary since it's comprised of all the same interviews as that featurette, but it'd still be nice to get a new one.

Can we also get The Walt Disney Christmas Show on home video at long last? That special was really designed to promote the 1952 re-release of Snow White, but the beginning of it showed first looks at the Disney versions of Peter Pan characters, so the connection's there.

A clip from The Walt Disney Christmas Show - YouTube

[pikachufan1336]

Originally Posted by The Mad Kiwi

I hope they can finally give this movie a new "making of" documentary. It's crazy that every release has recycled the same 16-minute featurette since 1998. I guess, technically, the commentary IS a documentary since it's comprised of all the same interviews as that featurette, but it'd still be nice to get a new one.

Can we also get The Walt Disney Christmas Show on home video at long last? That special was really designed to promote the 1952 re-release of Snow White, but the beginning of it showed first looks at the Disney versions of Peter Pan characters, so the connection's there.

A clip from The Walt Disney Christmas Show - YouTube

As great as that would be I doubt it. Disney's policy of those making of documentaries are: "If it's not broke, don't fix it", or at least nowadays.

Besides, even if it's been around since..... I don't know Czarist Russia, the making of doc is fine on it's own. Nearly all of Disney's documentaries of their making of movies gloss over one thing or another (Alice gaining a cult following, Walt Disney's troubled production of Sleeping Beauty, any political commentary regarding their more sexist/racist movies, etc.).

But the Christmas show would be great, they have Alice's in their blu ray why not Peter Pan?

[RebelPrince1986]

The Signature Collection seems to be following pretty closely to past collections. I'd say it's safe to say we will see a couple surprises over the next 7-8 years of these releases, but don't get your hopes up to high of anything beyond what the Diamond Editions were and the Platinum's before them. On top of that, pay close attention to Disney's live-action reboot calendar, because I feel like that will be giving us some hints of things to come.

Snow White - Fall 2009 & Spring 2016 (roughly 6 years)
Beauty and the Beast - Fall 2010 & Fall 2016 (roughly 6 years)
Pinocchio - Spring 2009 & Spring 2017 (roughly 8 years)

Next? I'd guess...
Fantasia - Fall 2010 & Fall 2017 (7 years)
Bambi - Spring 2011 & Spring 2018 (7 years)
The Lion King - Fall 2011 & Fall 2018 (7 years, just in time for the fast tracked live-action film)

Continuing to follow the Diamond's schedule, this would put Lady and the Tramp and Cinderella most likely for 2019. Peter Pan and The Little Mermaid in 2020. The Jungle Book and Sleeping Beauty in 2021. 101 Dalmatians and Aladdin in 2022. Looking at this list you will notice that every film except for Lady In the Tramp has a live-action counterpart in the works, which leads me to believe at least some of the bigger titles will be released around the time of their live-action version. Lady and the Tramp appears to be the only outsider with no live-action film in the works, so I'd guess it's probably the most likely to be wiggled around the schedule.

New additions?
Rumors have circulated about some of the new renaissance films eventually making their way to this collection, I would guess that 2023 will either be a year of transition to a new collection title with the same films OR a continuation of the Signature Collection with newer films such as Frozen, Tangled and Zootopia near their 10 year anniversaries.

[pikachufan1336]

Originally Posted by RebelPrince1986

The Signature Collection seems to be following pretty closely to past collections. I'd say it's safe to say we will see a couple surprises over the next 7-8 years of these releases, but don't get your hopes up to high of anything beyond what the Diamond Editions were and the Platinum's before them. On top of that, pay close attention to Disney's live-action reboot calendar, because I feel like that will be giving us some hints of things to come.

Snow White - Fall 2009 & Spring 2016 (roughly 6 years)
Beauty and the Beast - Fall 2010 & Fall 2016 (roughly 6 years)
Pinocchio - Spring 2009 & Spring 2017 (roughly 8 years)

Next? I'd guess...
Fantasia - Fall 2010 & Fall 2017 (7 years)
Bambi - Spring 2011 & Spring 2018 (7 years)
The Lion King - Fall 2011 & Fall 2018 (7 years, just in time for the fast tracked live-action film)

Continuing to follow the Diamond's schedule, this would put Lady and the Tramp and Cinderella most likely for 2019. Peter Pan and The Little Mermaid in 2020. The Jungle Book and Sleeping Beauty in 2021. 101 Dalmatians and Aladdin in 2022. Looking at this list you will notice that every film except for Lady In the Tramp has a live-action counterpart in the works, which leads me to believe at least some of the bigger titles will be released around the time of their live-action version. Lady and the Tramp appears to be the only outsider with no live-action film in the works, so I'd guess it's probably the most likely to be wiggled around the schedule.

New additions?
Rumors have circulated about some of the new renaissance films eventually making their way to this collection, I would guess that 2023 will either be a year of transition to a new collection title with the same films OR a continuation of the Signature Collection with newer films such as Frozen, Tangled and Zootopia near their 10 year anniversaries.

I seriously doubt the new renaissance movies, sure they're successful (all of the movies of the 2010s so far except for Pooh Bear are after all), but unlike the other movies they are born into a very lucrative form of home entertainment, so much that vaulting them would be pointless. Similar to how Alice and Dumbo are never going to be on signature.

Speaking of Which, Disney has a tendency to release Fantasia on the '---0 year (it's tradition). So as much as I would love it to be this year, it probably won't be for a while. With that said, it's about 50/50 chance it will be released on signature, since it was never released on Platinum or Diamond, it will probably be on its own thing. I know they've announced it as signature but they've done this before.

Cinderella has been out of the Vault for almost 5 years now so I doubt they'll release it again so long as its still available. In other words, we might be getting SB and Peter Pan before Cinderella. Either that or Disney will decide to stick with the traditional schedule anyway. If that does I can't imagine it making as much money as it usually does, since it's been available for so long.

I made an argument on the Pinocchio form that if they insist on keeping up the signature line up, and because they don't vault their movies anymore, they might as well expand it, but Disney is so stubborn with this stuff, so that probably won't happen.

At this point all we can do is be patient and do some wishful thinking (and it never hurts to call customer service and ask).

My best guess:

Fall 2017: The Lion King
Spring 2018: Bambi

then ????????????????

[Morsoth]

Disney Newby Question: What's the difference between the version already released and the 'Signature' edition? Does it means it will have a remaster, new bonus content, or only a new cover?

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by Morsoth

Disney Newby Question: What's the difference between the version already released and the 'Signature' edition? Does it means it will have a remaster, new bonus content, or only a new cover?

It will more than likely be the same master used for the Diamond Edition but with a new cover.

Occasionally bonus content is dropped from the Diamond Edition for the Signature releases. There may be one or two new things added, however, but not enough to warrant repurchasing a film.

[Scottie]

From Disney's Signature Collection website. http://www.disneysignaturecollection.com

[TheSegaMan]

Next year is the 65th anniversary of Peter Pan, so I figured a re-release would happen then. That would make the most sense to me at least. Then again Disney is Disney and god only knows what they are planning.

[Tragically]

Following

[Poya]

Is there ANY possibility they can restore this to how it originally looked in theaters and not the artificially clean/overtly bright mess the BD was:



If not, can they at least remove that godawful Red Man song?

[shinobipopcorn]

If Alice in Wonderland is anything to go by, they're probably not going to redo the colors. (See that thread for the complaints on how saturated it's become.) As for the song, they didn't take out the controversial parts of Pinocchio and as sad as it is, I don't think Disney cares about offending Native Americans as much as they care about offending African Americans. Hence the edits to Fantasia and the sequestering of SotS but not this one.

[Poya]

I mean, look at Tink. She’s supposed to be overexposed and glowing. Why is she this dull-looking? Some speck of light she turned out to be.

[shinobipopcorn]

The last shot does look hideous compared to the first shot, I agree.

But we're also talking about the same people who butchered Cinderella and cleared the Sword in the Stone's blu-ray release.

[stevemcqueen83]

Originally Posted by Poya

Is there ANY possibility they can restore this to how it originally looked in theaters and not the artificially clean/overtly bright mess the BD was:

I hate the BD colors as well

I remember selling my 2002 Special Edition DVD just before the Platinum Edition DVD came out in early 2007, thinking "it's a Platinum Edition, so the movie will look the best it can". After seeing the Platinum restoration I regretted that so badly and went and re-purchased the 2002 DVD.

Shame the Diamond Edition used the same awful transfer, here's hoping for the Signature release...

[meremortal]

I'm not much of a technical guy with these things but thought the colors looked a bit different too. Perhaps they're closer to the original cells and maybe they're a mile off. I don't know which is more correct but I've also started to collect the older dvds of a few of the classics just because.

[Poya]

According to sources and pictures from the time it came out, the 1990 LD/VHS is the most accurate and detailed of them all.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by shinobipopcorn

If Alice in Wonderland is anything to go by, they're probably not going to redo the colors. (See that thread for the complaints on how saturated it's become.) As for the song, they didn't take out the controversial parts of Pinocchio and as sad as it is, I don't think Disney cares about offending Native Americans as much as they care about offending African Americans. Hence the edits to Fantasia and the sequestering of SotS but not this one.

I would really prefer if they don't change any thing from classic films to make a film more pc. I want the films as close to the original as possible and that includes songs or sketches that might be inappropriate if made today. I am just not a fan of white washing film history and trying to hide past mistakes.

[shinobipopcorn]

Originally Posted by veritas

I would really prefer if they don't change any thing from classic films to make a film more pc. I want the films as close to the original as possible and that includes songs or sketches that might be inappropriate if made today. I am just not a fan of white washing film history and trying to hide past mistakes.

I prefer films to be intact as well, however I don't approve of picking and choosing which groups are okay to slight. What Disney should have done is something similar to what WB did with the Looney Tunes sets or even what they themselves did on the old Pinocchio release. Acknowledge that the products came out in different time eras, that they were stereotypical, and that these are not the right way to treat the people depicted.

I mean, for crying out loud they have an anti-smoking ad that I have to sit through every time I watch Return to Oz and that has an adult character that puffs a pipe for two seconds in 1899 when that was an appropriate adult activity. They can't come up with something to acknowledge how horribly racist "What Makes the Red Man Red" is?

[jeangreyforever]

Originally Posted by meremortal

I'm not much of a technical guy with these things but thought the colors looked a bit different too. Perhaps they're closer to the original cells and maybe they're a mile off. I don't know which is more correct but I've also started to collect the older dvds of a few of the classics just because.

The Blu-Ray and DVD look nothing like the original cells either. Both have shoddy restorations.

Originally Posted by shinobipopcorn

If Alice in Wonderland is anything to go by, they're probably not going to redo the colors. (See that thread for the complaints on how saturated it's become.) As for the song, they didn't take out the controversial parts of Pinocchio and as sad as it is, I don't think Disney cares about offending Native Americans as much as they care about offending African Americans. Hence the edits to Fantasia and the sequestering of SotS but not this one.

Agreed. I find this film far more racist than Song of the South. Imo, if one is banned then so should the other, and vice-versa as well with if one is not banned, then the other shouldn't be either. If Native Americans had a group to represent them with as much political power as the NAACP, then I'm certain this film would be hidden away or the sequence would at least be deleted. It's not a very good song anyway so it wouldn't be a real loss.