What kind of crack was Tezuka on when he made this shit multiple times?

What kind of crack was Tezuka on when he made this shit multiple times?

Attached: leo.jpg (480x360, 18.85K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=3uw6tHkgOQQ
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

e-celeb didn't mention it but did anyone else notice the buddhist themes in the material?

As a black guy while most of the depictions were pretty damn racist some of them like he blind guy were pretty decent

Didn't see a problem with him either desu. Was kinda surprised how much different it was.

Apparently it was good enough that Disney stole it, repackaged it, made millions and built an empire.

Attached: the lion king plagiarism.webm (1280x720, 2.99M)

Watch the YMS video that debunks that myth

Tezuka must feel so happy. What an homage!

Tezuka is an interesting case where his depictions of races were mostly due to his genuine lack of knowledge, rather than any actual malicious intent. The dude grew up with 30's cartoons, which were actually racist for the time, and that's all he had to work with. Once he started traveling internationally and actually meeting other people for himself, he toned down the caricatures severely, if not outright removing them. The characters in later works like Alabaster or Melody of Iron are a far cry from the caricatures from his early days.

Attached: James_Block.png (243x441, 72.07K)

based adum

Bambi was Tezuka's favorite film apparently

Attached: 20170613130158.jpg (657x448, 118.43K)

OH NO NO NO NO NO!
youtube.com/watch?v=3uw6tHkgOQQ

disney is an evil corporation
disney is morally and creatively bankrupt

but in this one, its a clear case of it being the other way around. tezuka was inspired by western media especially disney and made kimba. simba was then released and made it big. then after that new media of kimba was intentionally made to mirror simba in order to cash in on its fame. decades later theres a whole generation of hipsters who want counter culture credit for liking the "real" simba instead of the mainstream one

>2 hours long
Can I get a tl;dr? I have no doubt that the webm is a bunch if cherrypicked scenes that try to make the plagiarism look worse than it really is. I'm sure they are relatively different movies plot-wise. However I also have no doubt that Disney was aware of the Kimba movie, copied some of the key visual designs and refused to acknowledge doing so. Does this youtube video attempts to prove that Disney couldn't possibly have seen Kimba?

It's worth it just to see the craziness in Kimba

Completely different story and characters, the ones in Kimba only have superficial resemblance to the ones in the Lion King, and many of the characters in Kimba and one-off side characters that aren't important at all.

>Completely different story and characters
I already acknowledge that I expect the story to be decently different plot-wise. I talk about the possibility of Disney being exposed to Kimba and copying key visual designs. Do you want to talk about the possibility of Disney being exposed to Kimba and copying key visual designs?

>Can I get a tl;dr?
Almost everyone in the world has always been stupid or ignorant. Not really a big surprise, but that's the general idea of the controversy. But the verdict is this: they are very different, and most people who have a stance on the issue are know-nothings.

They're not key visual designs though, the bird is completely different, the warthog is a character from like 1 episode, the evil lion is a very minor character.

Like maybe they saw some of it? But a lot of it can likely be attributed to just the setting and the nature of the story.

They didnt copy anything honestly. Some people who worked on lion king did see kimba but it had no impact. The biggest thing to debunk the "they copied kimba" shit is claw/scar. The only reason they are similar is because of looks and even then its all just common tropes (evil being dark and evil having a facial deformity ). Also claw isnt even an important villain. Hes cut out of tons of kimba movies and series. Could you have lion king without Scar though? Any similarity between the two is coincidental. Its literray the "simpsons did it" shit

this. laughed like a madman at the shitty dubs and just overall questionable content

>Completely different story and characters
Well, yeah, of course. Disney plagiarized the story and characters directly from Hamlet.

"any similarity between the two is coincidental"

Attached: shot.jpg (1280x694, 181.37K)

>the warthog is a character from like 1 episode, the evil lion is a very minor character.
What does that have to do with a copied design? I mean you outright deny that the bird is similar and that's fine, I respect that, you think the birds look visually different and you can have that opinion. But you don't even deny that the warthog or lion look different. You immediately switch to arguing that they don't appear for long on screen. What did you mean by this?

They had the gall to sue the studio behind kimba too I believe.

There are tons of shots of characters looking over cliffs in kimba. Also thats just a random cliff in kimba not an important location. Again its just "simpsons did it"

Cease and desist not sue. But it was still retarded on disneys part.

The bug eating is the biggest give away that someone who worked on LK watched Kimba.

eating bugs was the biggest part of Kimba being able to coexist with his herbie friends.

>What kind of crack was Tezuka on when he made this shit
Better yet, what kind of crack was Disney on when they shamlessly plagiarized Tezuka's work and refused to acknowledge it?

They even managed to get Lion King fanbois to parrot their stance. I'm betting we'll have a couple of rabid ones on this thread soon enough defending their crime.

It still amazes me how fundamental the belief that "The Lion King Ripped Off Kimba" was to so many people that didn't even bother to watch Kimba.
It's like talking to flat earthers.

Have you even watched kimba?