• TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    56 minutes ago
    • The accusation for Aladdin is complicated and is based on The Thief and the Cobbler.
    • On the other hand, your instincts are entirely right about The Lion King, and when I say “YMS eviscerated it”, I mean that it’s the most comically ridiculous yet superficially believable accusation of plagiarism you could possibly come up with. This is genuinely worth 147 minutes of your time, and it’s one of the funniest videos I’ve ever watched. One of the comments summarizes it best: “Damn, can’t believe kimba invented Africa, and real life just ripped them off like that.”
    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 minutes ago

      I see. From wikipedia:

      In 1973, a promotional booklet was released with a public announcement by Williams about the status of his project:

      Nasrudin was found to be too verbal and not suitable for animation, therefore Nasrudin as a character and the Nasrudin stories were dropped as a project. However, the many years work spent on painstaking research into the beauty of Oriental art has been retained. Loosely based on elements in the Arabian Nights stories, an entirely new and original film is now the main project of the Williams Studio. Therefore any publicity references to the old character of Nasrudin are now obsolete.

      So it seems the Thief and the Cobbler was based in part on the Arabian Nights, and the original plot was also from Arab folklore.

      So in other words, Aladdin is merely based on the same work of classic literature, which I believe is public domain. So allegations of plagiarism are foolish, unless all references to Arab folklore are now off the table too.

      One of the comments summarizes it best: “Damn, can’t believe kimba invented Africa, and real life just ripped them off like that.”

      That’s pretty funny. I might watch the video another day. From your comment I gather enough to conclude that the main premise of the accusation is “Shakespeare told by animals,” and I concur that that’s laughable.