If Disney made Balto

VividEnigma · **Posted:** Tue May 12, 2009 3:25 am

I would've probably liked it better as a Disney film XD Well, I don't really know. TLK is the best movie I have ever seen (at age 13, it is still my favourite movie and has been for 5 years). When I was a kid, I loved LBT (Land Before Time) but I don't know what you Disney-bashers are talking about, hat movie was IMMENSELY kiddy.

TLK, on the other hand, had the death of the most respectable character. I don't know why you say none of the kids would've got sick. The only thing is, Balto is based on a true story, so I actually think Disney would've been closer to the true story in some respects. I don't think Balto would've been half wolf, in fact I don't think wolves would be in it at all. Because, you know, the real Balto had nothing to do with wolves.

Let's face it- had it been a Disney movie, Jenna would've been so much cooler. And not anorexic. How great would that have been? Because Disney does focus a lot more on love plots (which I think is awesome (I'm a sucker for romance)) and usually makes some awesome female characters (but then again, it does come out with some terrible ones).

And I do honestly think that, if Disney made it, it would be called "Togo" rather than "Balto".

Zion Dreamer · **Posted:** Tue Jun 02, 2009 1:22 pm

I do really care who of made it i do know disney of made it more plot like but if disney made it we all wont be in love with the balto we see now and i rather keep it the way it is then risk seeing disney make it worse or better

Of Wolfdog And Man · **Posted:** Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:59 am

It's a scary thought to think about. The movie Balto may not have been a historian's look at the 1925 serum run, but at least it was no fairy tale. Even with the millions of dollars and untold amount of manpower behind Disney, I don't there's anything that Disney could do to make Balto a better movie than it already is.

Aloha Husky™ · **Joined:** Wed Jun 03, 2009 1:11 pm **Posts:** 10

I agree, Sheba.

But ALL Disney movies only include the father. So Jenna would be a bit forgotten.....

VividEnigma · **Posted:** Fri Jun 05, 2009 12:00 am

Aloha Husky™ wrote:

I agree, Sheba.

But ALL Disney movies only include the father. So Jenna would be a bit forgotten.....

And it's not like they forgot about Jenna in Balto 2 and 3 AT ALL...

Jadewolf · **Joined:** Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:35 am **Posts:** 115

well...te first balto would have singing in it -_-

Cavaliermon · **Posted:** Mon Sep 21, 2009 5:36 am

Balto would come a musical 8D
Because Disney makes so many musicals

steet · **Posted:** Wed Sep 23, 2009 5:11 am

Dragon Tamer wrote:

I find it strange that people automatically maintain that Disney would have an all-musical movie where nobody got sick. I've seen Disney movies with no music, and I've seen ones where characters died.
Let's take this seriously, folks. Disney deserves some credit.

I agree entirely with this. Not all Disney animated films are "musical", take Basil of baker street or for example.
As for being dark, same thing. Has anyone seen "The Black Cauldron"?
Lastly, one should remember that a lot of people from Amblimation came from Disney first (Don Bluth being the first, even though he didn't work on Balto)

But I agree that NOWADAYS, Disney wouldn't make it like this. (they would probably do a live action or a CGI film...)

Hybrid Misfit · **Posted:** Fri Sep 25, 2009 5:25 pm

AOL_user wrote:

If Disney made Balto, the audience wouldn't have focused on the story, the moral, nothing. The movie would've just been another big commercial attraction just like Toy Story, Lion King, and most all their other movies. That's all Balto would've been was just more commercial fame for the company. Just another movie to have amusement park rides named after and bedroom slippers designed for.

I mean, sure, we'd have better sequels than we do now; but is it really worth it?

More Commercial? I think perhaps the franchise would be more widely commercialized and marketed but the movie itself I doubt would be lost in it's own commercialism. Most of Disney's classic movies are very good and aren't commercial in and of themselves but are heavily marketed. There is no marketing inside "The Lion King" itself, it was a large commercial success and outsold every other traditionally animated movie but it's moral is not lost because of this. So I don't exactly get your point when you say the movie would have been a "commercial attraction".

LilCinnamon · **Posted:** Fri Sep 25, 2009 5:39 pm

I think universal made it well. i dont think disney would make balto have wolf in any of him if disney made it. and it might of had like 10 sequels! LOL

Hybrid Misfit · **Posted:** Sat Sep 26, 2009 2:48 pm

AOL_user wrote:

I'm trying to say: Disney doesn't need anymore fame. I think it has more than any other motion picture company on Earth. It just seems to me that Balto doesn't need to be involved in that kind of commercialism.

Well that maybe true and in the end the discussion is just that, a discussion, Disney didn't make Balto and most likely won't buy the franchise outright. Disney has a huge catalog of characters and that catalog will only get bigger over time.

Animation Source Forums

If Disney made Balto