is the disney animated feature dead?

[dopey]

with monsters inc. opening nov. 2 (two weeks ahead of, ick, harry potter), i got to thinking about whether disney has lost its touch producing animated features.

monsters, i'm sure everyone knows, is a disney/pixar film that uses computer generated imagery (cgi). based on the previews, it looks like it a surefire hit.

well, the last big disney hit was toy story ii in 95 (toy story ii in 99 did ok). since then, disney released the following animated features: pocahontas, hunchback, hercules, mulan, tarzan, fantasia 2000, emperor's new groove and atlantis.

none of those animated featues was more than mildly successful. at least one of those was considered terrible. the latest, atlantis, is getting knocked around by the overrated, though critically acclaimed, shrek.

the last disney animated feature to do well was lion king in 94.

it reminds me of the dry spell disney hit after walt died. after jungle book in 67 (the last feature walt had a say in), disney put out the following: aristocats, robin hood, winnie the pooh, rescuers, fox and the hound, black cauldron, great mouse detective and oliver and company.

it wasn't until 89 that little mermaid came out. after little mermaid came rescuers down under, beauty and the beast, aladdin and lion king. with the exception of rescuers, those are great films.

these days, the only disney kids' films that do well are the computer generated ones. what gives? is it all because katzenberg left? what should disney do to get back on track?

 

[JAY-ROD]

Originally posted by dopey
with monsters inc. opening nov. 2 (two weeks ahead of, ick, harry potter), i got to thinking about whether disney has lost its touch producing animated features.

monsters, i'm sure everyone knows, is a disney/pixar film that uses computer generated imagery (cgi). based on the previews, it looks like it a surefire hit.

well, the last big disney hit was toy story ii in 95 (toy story ii in 99 did ok). since then, disney released the following animated features: pocahontas, hunchback, hercules, mulan, tarzan, fantasia 2000, emperor's new groove and atlantis.

none of those animated featues was more than mildly successful. at least one of those was considered terrible. the latest, atlantis, is getting knocked around by the overrated, though critically acclaimed, shrek.

the last disney animated feature to do well was lion king in 94.

it reminds me of the dry spell disney hit after walt died. after jungle book in 67 (the last feature walt had a say in), disney put out the following: aristocats, robin hood, winnie the pooh, rescuers, fox and the hound, black cauldron, great mouse detective and oliver and company.

it wasn't until 89 that little mermaid came out. after little mermaid came rescuers down under, beauty and the beast, aladdin and lion king. with the exception of rescuers, those are great films.

these days, the only disney kids' films that do well are the computer generated ones. what gives? is it all because katzenberg left? what should disney do to get back on track?

Hire back all the people they lost.

 

[Herbie53]

It's tempting to say that the traditional style animation is being eclipsed by the new technology. None of the pixar films have storylines that are dependant on computer animation. I can't think of any reason why Toy Story or A Bug's Life couldn't have been done in traditional animation. Maybe Disney is throwing the best scripts at pixar to help mainstream this style. (maybe they have completely different creative teams, I don't know) It could be that Disney is leaning toward this new medium.

If the above is true, we could be experiencing a transitional period at the end of which pixar style films will replace regular animation. Traditional animation is becoming more and more computer based so it seems like a natural progression. I guess its still anybody's guess!

 

[Tramp]

Originally posted by dopey

it wasn't until 89 that little mermaid came out. after little mermaid came rescuers down under, beauty and the beast, aladdin and lion king. with the exception of rescuers, those are great films.

I have to agree with Dopey about the stretch of films starting in 1989. When Little Mermaid, Beauty and Beast, Aladdin, Lion King and Hunchback came out, I really thought Disney was at the top of its game...they definitely had their first string animators working on these...not to mention the song writing was fabulous.

I just don't get the same feeling from the films they've produced since...Pocahontas, Mulan, Hercules et al, just don't have the same first class quality.... maybe it's the second string of animators, maybe it's trying to force a movie into production before its time.

 

[sillyspook13]

AHEM. Are you saying Robin Hood is bad? I think I'll go kill myself now.

 

[sillyspook13]

But in Shrek's defense, it is a VERY good movie. I would actually pay to see it more than once!

 

[<SRH>]

Actually from what I read somewhere, Toy Story 2 was considered a big hit. I think it had a record opening weekend. I don't think Disney has that much control, if any with what Pixar does, especially story. Also, I don't see computer animation replacing traditional animation anymore than sculpture replacing traditional canvas painting for example. I do like a lot of the newer movies, I think Mulan was very good. I do agree, a lot of their problems of late have to do with the absence of Katzenberg. When I was at the Florida animation building recently, they were speaking highly about the new movie they are working on.

 

[sillyspook13]

Winnie the Pooh??? Fox and the Hound??? Those are great classic movies!

Computer animation is used for only about 10% of Disney movies. And that is almost entirely for scenes that would be too difficult to do by hand, such as large crowds. Everything else is hand drawn (and drawn, and drawn, and drawn....).

I'm still upset by the Robin Hood thing. He's my hero!!!

 

[wdwmaniac]

I think Disney has good and bad years. It did good between 1989-to the Lion King. And also had some time period before. So there will be a rebirth for a few years. Then go down then up again.

 

[dopey]

oh, sillyspook, you poor thing.

how can i blast robin hood, winnie the pooh and fox and the hound when you attach a picture of yourself (i assume) with robin hood?

you seem so happy, so oblivious to the fact that you're posing with the leading character from a substandard disney animated feature.

what, copper (voiced by corey feldman and kurt russell!) wasn't available?

there's no way i can bring myself to criticize disney's direct-to-video fare now.

sheesh.