Eisner gave Animation the POISONED APPLE.

G

General Grizz

New Member
Original Poster
Two great successes, Finding Nemo and Shrek 2, came out during holiday times when kids are off of school and movies are at their peak.

Disney's two recent animated films, BROTHER BEAR and HOME ON THE RANGE, were released. . . in early November and in April??

Eisner has SABOTAGED animation.

By Christmas, the Florida studios were dubbed "a failure" because of the "great failure" of Brother Bear.

But what about what happened AFTER Christmas? The 300 million made off of Brother Bear? The fact that it was the #1 film in Germany for quite some time and its #4th greatest earning animated film in history?

Brother Bear was a BEAUTIFUL film. The animators and all associated put so much effort into it, and it showed. Who is Eisner to degrade it so much? Why is Eisner working for Disney?

And what about the lack of ads for Home on the Range?

Eisner said 2-D is dead because "no one likes it."

That's a lie.

2-D is "dead" because Eisner wants more cash. And he'll be willing to bring the entire Walt Disney Co. down with him.

The CEO is distrustworthy, and he won't even listen to his shareholders. A majority of stock votes could NOT get him out of office - only slapping us in the face when replacing George Mitchell (who recieved over 25% NO CONFIDENCE) as his position as Chairman. . . which he is STILL PAID FOR!

But back on track. . . Brother Bear was FAR from a failure, and it's "failing" status closed off the studios.

Eisner has ruined the careers of the 1400 animators who have brought us the art of two dimensional animation and unique story telling.

That's right. Those fellows who brought you the timeless Lilo and Stitch. Out of work? Seeking other places to use their magnificent talents?

Eisner. You and your blind board. Time to go.

Out of all companies, this would have been least expected from Disney.

And what now? Now that 2-D is dead, Disney opens up a cheap labor studio in INDIA??

Eisner, time to go. You gave 2-D the sleeping apple. It will come back and flourish, only to prove all of your "synergetic" and money-making tactics utterly wrong.

As a great ex-animator expressed, Disney was fine without you. Disney is failing with you. But Disney will live years after you're out of the picture - the way we want it.
 
Woody13

Woody13

New Member
Originally posted by General Grizz
That's right. Those fellows who brought you the timeless Lilo and Stitch. Out of work? Seeking other places to use their magnificent talents?
Click to expand...

I would think that such talented animators would be hired on the spot by other studios. However, they weren't. I wonder why?
 
prberk

prberk

Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Eisner gave Animation the POISONED APPLE.

Originally posted by Woody13
I would think that such talented animators would be hired on the spot by other studios. However, they weren't. I wonder why?
Click to expand...

Woody, this is misleading. Other studios have never been able (in recent years) to develop this kind of feature animation, so it is not like them to try. That is why.

What they HAVE been able to do, in the case of Pixar, is to use the type of quality and storytelling skills that they learned in Disney feature animation (and with Disney's initial support) to make wonderful CGI animation. Dreamworks succeeded in Shrek by playing off Disney conventions (still using knowledge they learned firsthand).

Griz was right to point out the success of Lilo and Stitch and Brother Bear. But I think even they could have been vastly improved -- especially Brother Bear. It was nicely-told and beautiful but not entirely seen as original because it hinted too muc of its heritage: Eisner was known to have asked for "The Lion King in the Pacific Northwest."

Disney has some successes, but has become too focused on making the product to match the marketing. ["Lion King worked, and we haven't done a movie about bears or set in the Northwest, so let's do one like The Lion King but set in the NW..."]

It does not study how its marketing of Beauty and the Beast sold a beautiful, universal story to both dating adults (with the rose and soft ads) and kids (with Lemaire and the other dishes in kids ads). Nor does it study how The Lion King become its own success: by being allowed to be a completely new story (after multiple rewrites meant first to satisfy the marketing crowd, before deciding to forget the marketing and let that be decided after getting the story straight first -- the very reason that merchandising lagged nearly a year after the movie came out, with scarcity itself helping to drive demand!).

Beutiful, well-done stories, with a company that believes in them and treats them as such, always have a better chance to work.

And definitely cheap, TV Disney animation and sequels have hurt the Disney name also. Something else that Pixar and the others have not done.
 
Woody13

Woody13

New Member
Re: Re: Re: Eisner gave Animation the POISONED APPLE.

Originally posted by prberk
... well-done stories, with a company that believes in them and treats them as such, always have a better chance to work.
Click to expand...

Agreed. However, most animators are pencil pushers, not story tellers.
 
G

General Grizz

New Member
Original Poster
Sit tight. . . from what I hear, Pixar may be opening up a 2-D studio, which will only mean good news for the fans of Pixar and the art of 2-D animation.
 
DisneyFan 2000

DisneyFan 2000

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by General Grizz
Sit tight. . . from what I hear, Pixar may be opening up a 2-D studio, which will only mean good news for the fans of Pixar and the art of 2-D animation.
Click to expand...

OMG!!! Disney of 2000 is coming! :sohappy:

Oh, BTW, here in Israel BB also made as the most selling Disney movie! I was really touched by that movie!

prberk, I have to disagree with your comment on BB. The only aspect which is similar is the dying parent. Other than that, the story is completely different, focusing on different issues.
 
Shaman

Shaman

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by General Grizz
Sit tight. . . from what I hear, Pixar may be opening up a 2-D studio, which will only mean good news for the fans of Pixar and the art of 2-D animation.
Click to expand...

Good for the fans of Pixar indeed...and if they do open up a 2-D animation studio, then perhaps when the first couple of hits come out under the PIXAR name...Disney will get the wake up call it needs...sad.

:(
 
speck76

speck76

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by General Grizz
Disney's two recent animated films, BROTHER BEAR and HOME ON THE RANGE, were released. . . in early November and in April??
Click to expand...

Brother Bear was released the same weekend that Monster's Inc. opened a few years earlier. I don't think that the premier date can be blamed for BB's failure. As for HotR, the movie had to be pushed back a number of times. I think opening a bad movie in a lower demand period is better, as less people will see it, therefore less people will think it is crap.

I think part of the problem is the marketing of the films. The ads that were run for HotR were very bad. This seems to be a trend over the last few years. Maybe it is time for a shake-up in marketing.
 
Shaman

Shaman

Well-Known Member
Re: Re: Eisner gave Animation the POISONED APPLE.

Originally posted by speck76
I think part of the problem is the marketing of the films. The ads that were run for HotR were very bad. This seems to be a trend over the last few years. Maybe it is time for a shake-up in marketing.
Click to expand...

I agree!!! And that goes not just for the animated movies, but for the live action stuff too...
 
speck76

speck76

Well-Known Member
That movie had some buzz.

Look back at the trailers for ENG...bad

I only saw the movie as an ex rented it. I thought it was good, but I would have never seen it based on the previews.
 
KevinPage

KevinPage

Well-Known Member
Grizz,

You are becoming the "Michael Moore" of WDWMagic.

Moore throws bombs at Bush
Grizz throws bombs at Eisner.

Both believe in conspiracy theories :lol:


(you know I mean this tongue in cheek - to a certain extent)
 
G

General Grizz

New Member
Original Poster
KevinPage said:
Grizz,

You are becoming the "Michael Moore" of WDWMagic.

Moore throws bombs at Bush
Grizz throws bombs at Eisner.

Both believe in conspiracy theories :lol:


(you know I mean this tongue in cheek - to a certain extent)
Click to expand...

I'll assure you what I write isn't ficticious. :rolleyes:

Again, no Stitch Great Escape for you! ;)
 
G

General Grizz

New Member
Original Poster
Nor did lay off animators.

What Eisner did was malicious. Now we have out-of-work artists who've brought smiles to hundreds of thousands looking for new jobs & having to support families, or leaving the field totally.

Shame on Eisner. And he doesn't give a mouse's worth, either.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom