Why do you think critics panned Disney animation features between 1966 and 1985?

Question

Specifically: The Aristocats, Robin Hood, The Fox and The Hound and The Black Cauldron. This period covered the time after Walt's death and before Eisner, Katzenberg and Wells took over leadership and the company.

I am writing a masters thesis on this topic.

Answer 1

Disney Studios was assumed to be conservative, Republican, and therefore not "politically correct," although that term had not yet gained general usage. That term was "borrowed" from the Soviets, who had only one party. You were either politically correct or an enemy of the state. So the Democrats, who had more clout in the media than the Republicans, made fun of Disney and considered their products too sweet and cute, not fashionably cynical.

Answer 2

It was a period of transition. While the "old men" animators were still around, their leader was not. New blood like Don Bluth and Tim Burton were brought in but left do to poor management. It took a while for someone to step in and turn Disney around.

As for the films, Aristocats is essentially a remake of 101 Dalmatians with cats. It also bears a striking resemblance to Gay Purr--ee, a 1962 film. Robin Hood apparently used dance routines and character designs already used in Disney films...for example, Little John is more or less Baloo in green clothing. Fox and the Hound featured an mostly new creative staff and an unhappy ending. Black Cauldron featured a villain raising an army of the dead....hardly traditional Disney fodder.