Talk:UPA (animation studio)
|WikiProject Film||(Rated C-class)|
|WikiProject Animation||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
There's a lot of language in this article that is clearly opinion (use of "the best", "the worst", etc. without citation, for example). It needs an overhaul, but I don't know enough about the subject matter to do it.Rhindle The Red 03:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Here's betting this article was written by a former UPA employee. 188.8.131.52 02:07, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
I've edited the article, hoping to address neutrality. Comments are appreciated. --Bigscarymike 04:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
The Plausible Impossible and other questions.
Hey, nice job on this, although it needs some citations. A few quibbles:
- One of your edits mentions something along the lines of a "slavish adherence to the laws of physics" by Disney. This strikes me as a slight distortion of Disney's stance. The Walt Disney anthology series had a 1956 show about “The Plausible Impossible” which discussed cartoon physics as not conforming to reality, but having roots in it.  Obviously the UPA article isn't the place to go into the nuances of Disney house style, but perhaps you can find a way to make the sentence a little more accurate.
- The article implies that Mr. Magoo's Christmas Carol was made as an episode of The Famous Adventures pf Mr. Magoo. I'm pretty sure it inspired the series rather than originating from it.
I'm going to give the article a once-over for Wikipedia style, but I'm not going to try to do much with it factually, since my knowledge is pretty much confined to the Magoo Christmas special. Feel free to keep going on your edits! -- Karen | Talk | contribs 23:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Karen, the emphasis on cinematic reality was most evident in Disney's feature films. This trend culminated in "Sleeping Beauty," which some critics claim may just as well have been made in live action. However, I agree that this may be better phrased, and I'll give it some thought. Thanks for the feedback. Also, my knowledge of Magoo comes to a screaming halt at the television point, so I haven't addressed that time period in my edits. Have at it! --Bigscarymike 21:54, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- OK, I've revised the "slavish adherence" line accordingly. --Bigscarymike 17:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Sourceless "red scare" allegation; paragraph tagged for removal
The following paragraph--along with the entire sub-section to which it belongs--lacks any sourcing whatsoever. The paragraph quoted below must be removed unless an editor can provide an adequate cite (and, no, some article from The Nation ain't gonna cut it; it has to be legitimate source, not a tool of Soviet propaganda).
- Initially UPA contracted with the government to produce animation, but the government contracts began to evaporate as the FBI began investigating Communist activities in Hollywood in the late 1940s. No formal charges were filed against anyone at UPA in the beginnings of the so-called "Red Scare", but the government contracts were lost as Washington severed its ties with Hollywood.
I'll check back in a week or two. If there's no legitimate source, then I shall remove this paragraph.
An impartial analysis can only conclude that this is standard anti-anti-communism rhetoric (the ideology that posited that anyone suspected of supporting communism or the Soviet Union was a.] automatically innocent and b.] the victim of so-called "red-baiters"; a pre-cursor of the equally fictional Clintonian "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy"). The lack of any citations for these allegations only strengthens this conclusion.
- I don't have the source in front of me, but I'm quite sure the UPA/Communism issue is documented in Maltin's chapter on UPA in "Of Mice and Magic." A number of UPA artists came under suspicion at the time.
- I welcome an impartial analysis...however, you seem to be communicating an ideological stance of your own here. I think the text states the issue fairly without implied judgement.
- Personally, I believe the 'red scare' information--it was so typical of those times. But this is an important and substantial fact, so it really does need a reliable source. I've added a WP:Citation needed. David Spector (talk) 01:48, 17 January 2014 (UTC)