Disney Animation lost Treasure (Part II)

[Jacques Muller]

In my first thread "Disney Animation the lost Treasure" I ventilated my anger over the fact that the grand tradition of Classical Disney character Animation is disappearing before our eyes. Perhaps lots of readers wondered what I was talking about; On the surface it seems that we've never seen so much Disney animation popping up from the various animation studios around the world. Perhaps, the public at large doesn't see much difference between the atrocious trash animation shown on the various Disney channels and the Grand Classical Animation produced in feature films or in the best shorts between 1938/1955. What the public doesn't know, possibly, is that the management, confused over the fact that the late traditional hand drawn animated feature films produced by the studio have had a hard time recouping their initial investment figures. yet, they are wondering how practically all recent 3D films such as Shrek, Toy Story, Monsters Inc, Ice Age, to name a few, are the new block busters of Animation. They stupidly attribute this fact to the new look of 3D over the "Traditional" look of Hand Drawn Animation. Without realising that the last Hand Drawn films have suffered mostly from poor scripts. Once again, it is the story that counts first, not the way it is manufactured. Otherwise, the Miasaki films wouldn't have the great successes they have encountered internationaly. What the public probably ignores is the fact that Disney management is dumping almost entirely, but for the exception of Florida ( for now) its traditional Animation unit. If it costs too much and doesn't sale, just blame it on the animators. The grand tradition of Animation Burbank style of 80 years, is dying, replaced by rows and rows of computers. It's simple you put hundreds of young computer nerds who don't mind working nights, days and weekends for a king size box of pop corn and a free Coke, and there it is : the new Disney Animation Department of the futur. Of course, better not mention the $350 Million blunder of "Wild Life". The project that was supposed to be produced next to "Dinosaur". Recepee : you set up a very expensive computer Animation facility to produce series of expensive 3D features. You cook up the 1st one "Dinosaur", while the next project "Wild Life" is being developped in secret by a bunch of uninspired story people. During the process, you never ever bother to check if story B is going to be fitting for the Disney sceal of approval. Oooopsss! Two years later, when you ask to see the story reel, you suddenly realise, that the "Wild Life" story is totally out, with jokes and sexual inuendos that would make a soldier from the french foreign legion blush. Never mind, when the crew A finishes"Dinosaur", you just tell them :"Sorry, we haven't got a next project for you to work on, you can go home now". That the sort of things that happens at Disney : a $350 Million blunder. But somebody has to pay for it, so if Animation costs so much and doesn't pay, why not blame it on the animators?. Hence the idea to replace them with computers. Computers don't ask for vacations, benefits, maternity leaves etc...they don't go on strike either.
One last remark if I may, Uncle Walt used to say in his many TV appearances -"I would like that we bare in mind that all this started from a Mouse" meaning : from the Mickey Mouse cartoons. It is striking to me that the Disney organisation today, tha 60 or so $ Billion corporation doesn't offer one single Animator or Artist position on its job offer listings. What you see instead is Technical engineers, lawyers, analysts etc...etc...certainly Walt would never have built his Empire with such people; as he onced said :-"you don't make those animated films with accountants". Well Mr Eisney does it today. What a man!; my only suggestion to him would be, why doesn't he pack up his office and leave, with his Millions under the arm. We certainly don't need him!

 

[prberk]

Hey, I am sorry that you have had to see the animator's art trashed. I agree with you in a lot of ways, although I do think that the economy is adding confusion to the problems at the top. Disney has had to make serious cuts overall to stay profitable and thus stay alive, since September 11 and the downturn in tourism especially.

I also have to give Mr. Eisner (and Jeffrey Katzenburg, former studio head, now head of Dreamworks studio) props for reviving animation during its Second Golden Age ('89 - '93 or so, with Little Mermaid/Beauty and the Beast/Aladdin/Lion King).

My problem, then, is why they haven't continued to look to that model for inspiration. I have to wonder if Katzenburg took that with him (along with some animators and story artists) when he left...

Anyway, I especially agree with you, though, when you say that story matters more than the medium. You are right to remind us that Dinosaur is not that great. It is never mentioned along with Shrek and Toy Story and Monsters, Inc., when people make the argument that it is CGI that is important. Likewise, they rarely mention Lilo and Stitch when making the argument that traditional animation is dead. What IS dead is bad stories or good ones that are not cared for in the marketing.

Walt did not like sequels. And this current trend in subpar sequels is not an argument, either, against traditional animation. It is an argument against BAD and mundane animation of any sort!

I firmly believe that the business needs to let the cash cows support the innovators and the artists, because otherwise the cash cows run out of milk in the long run. We need both fresh and original (Lion King) as well as classic (Beauty and the Beast) stories executed by artists and musicians that love their art. We saw that with Lilo and Stitch, and we reaped the rewards.

Also, don't forget that Walt, in The Walt Disney Story, said that, like the failure of Alice in Wonderland, all failures can be followed up with something else that will succeed... but ONLY, he said, IF THE STORY HAS HEART, and thus characters that we (and I mean all ages) care about. Beauty and the Beast proved that all the way to an Academy Award nomination and a Broadway play and stuffed animals and bedtime storybooks and.... money!!!!

Imagine that... a good story gracefully executed and marketed .... makes MONEY!!!

 

[Jacques Muller]

Lost Treasure reply

I couldn't agree more with what you said; In effect, eventhough making money is paramount in this business like in all business, you have to allow your artists to stay fresh and to renew their style while endeavouring all the time into new realms. I think the japanese directors like Miasaki for instance, show missed oportunities for Disney Animation. The much more cinematic approach of his films would have been an interesting direction to investigate with Disney quality Animlation. Look at what Dreamworks is doing with more realistic designs etc..;I am not saying those are the only ways. I just suggest that an overbaring management without a vision suffocated creativity ( with a few exceptions, Beauty & the Beast, Lilo & Stitch, Lion King ) where he should have sparkled innovation. They were so very afraid of change. The public at large has become fed up of the candies from the candy store, they want strong coffee and coarser meals. Don't forget that this medium has barely been explored. There so much that could be done with Animation. The sad story is a Management so obssessed with money that they have no more vision on the creative artistique side. It has become a sausage factory!