John Lasseter PERSONALLY handling a new hand drawn film about...wait for it...

WDWFREAK53

WDWFREAK53

Well-Known Member
automation85 said:
I agree that The Princess and the Frog, and this new Pooh Adventure, will not make kids suddenly switch to liking 2-D animation. But as a kid, I remember that a movie kept my attention if it had a lot going on. The only problem with the old style of movie making was that it didn't move fast enough for my Nickelodeon-washed mind. A 2-D film could just as easily keep a little kids attention if it had a lot going on. Remember that most kids are a lot less judgemental about details than most adults.

They go for the ride, if the ride is worth going on. 3-D, 2-D, whatever...kids want entertainment with a few simple gags thrown in. And as for gimmicks...I think the 3-D glasses resurgence is absurd...3-D animation works for certain films...but the glasses just don't work...and I feel really disappointed when I hear that they are rereleasing 90's "classics" in 3-D...as if the original wasn't good enough. I can accept it in the parks...but that's where it should end.

Sorry about going way off topic there.
Click to expand...


I agree with you about the 3D...although I wouldn't say that the glasses don't work. UP! and Meet the Robinsons was as crystal clear as I have ever seen 3D. Again though, it should only be used if it will "plus" the movie or if it's necessary to convey the story. In either of those cases, it wasn't necessary.
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
TalkingHead said:
What are you talking about? Do you mean Pooh has mega-franchise potential? Yeah, here's another obvious statement: I think these Disney theme parks might catch on, too...
Click to expand...

EPCOT Explorer said:
But isn't Pooh already that?
Click to expand...

:brick:

I compare it to the Batman series for instance. It was just OK when Tim Burton was a part of the franchise but the last two reimagined versions of the franchise are pitch perfect. Now I'm not suggesting the WtP franchise could make that magnitude of a leap but this could develop into a "mega-franchise" as far as animation goes.

And "talkingHead", you might want to think before you post.
I have no such expectations from you EE. :lol:

Class dismissed.:wave:
 
EPCOT Explorer

EPCOT Explorer

New Member
jt04 said:
:brick:

I compare it to the Batman series for instance. It was just OK when Tim Burton was a part of the franchise but the last two reimagined versions of the franchise are pitch perfect. Now I'm not suggesting the WtP franchise could make that magnitude of a leap but this could develop into a "mega-franchise" as far as animation goes.

And "talkingHead", you might want to think before you post.
I have no such expectations from you EE. :lol:

Class dismissed.:wave:
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Well...Did you explain that? Am I suposed to know what's on the mind of jt every waking second?:lol::lol:

Scary thought...:lookaroun
 
J

Just Plain Mark

New Member
As far as I understand it, My Friends Tigger and Pooh (which my daughter really enjoys) is ending, so there won't be anything Pooh related until this movie is released, and right now, that's all the Pooh there is. Which means I have a hard time understanding the earlier comment that Disney is shoving Pooh down anybody's throat.

As for the CGI/hand drawn debate, I've just had a hard time enjoying the Pixar films as much as I enjoyed the hand drawn stuff. That's not to say I didn't enjoy some of them (Toy Story, Bug's Life, Monsters), but I've never been as impressed with Nemo, or Incredibles (really didn't like it), or Cars, or Ratatouille. But part of that may be the move away from musical numbers within the movie. I think CG is cleaner/better detailed/brighter, but also colder.

To me, handrawn v CGI is similar to the issue with CD's and records, its not just a matter of nostalgia, there's also a tangible difference between the two.
 
TalkingHead

TalkingHead

Well-Known Member
jt04 said:
I didn't think I needed to. Thought it spoke for itself.:shrug:

By the way, and speaking of Tim Burton, he is bringing back "Dark Shadows"......interesting.

Oh and have you seen this......

http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2009/jun/04/music-magic/?partner=RSS
Click to expand...

Hey genius, your initial statement was confusing because it seemed so...well, stupid. Pooh already is a mega-franchise. Movies, Direct to Video sequels, merchandise, and attractions. What about that don't you understand?
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
TalkingHead said:
Hey genius, your initial statement was confusing because it seemed so...well, stupid. Pooh already is a mega-franchise. Movies, Direct to Video sequels, merchandise, and attractions. What about that don't you understand?
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

It does not meet my definition of "mega-franchise" by any stretch. Pirates, Star Trek, Indy are mega-franchises of live action.

WtP has that potential in the world of animation. Think Toy Story for example and Cars. It has yet to live up to that level.
 
protiius

protiius

Member
great news! though i'm not a big pooh fan, i am a HUGE fan of the hand drawn method of film production...i hope this ushers in a second coming of the hand drawn films!!
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
protiius said:
great news! though i'm not a big pooh fan, i am a HUGE fan of the hand drawn method of film production...i hope this ushers in a second coming of the hand drawn films!!
Click to expand...

That is what The Princess and the Frog and Rapunzel will be.
 
WDWFREAK53

WDWFREAK53

Well-Known Member
Just Plain Mark said:
As far as I understand it, My Friends Tigger and Pooh (which my daughter really enjoys) is ending, so there won't be anything Pooh related until this movie is released, and right now, that's all the Pooh there is. Which means I have a hard time understanding the earlier comment that Disney is shoving Pooh down anybody's throat.

As for the CGI/hand drawn debate, I've just had a hard time enjoying the Pixar films as much as I enjoyed the hand drawn stuff. That's not to say I didn't enjoy some of them (Toy Story, Bug's Life, Monsters), but I've never been as impressed with Nemo, or Incredibles (really didn't like it), or Cars, or Ratatouille. But part of that may be the move away from musical numbers within the movie. I think CG is cleaner/better detailed/brighter, but also colder.

To me, handrawn v CGI is similar to the issue with CD's and records, its not just a matter of nostalgia, there's also a tangible difference between the two.
Click to expand...


I agree with you about the musical numbers within the movie. Even within the Disney 2 Animation there was a few that went against the musical numbers. (I'm not talking about songs within the movies...I'm more talking about songs that the characters sing within the movies.)

For instance, hearing Phil Collins sing in Brother Bear is fine...but the song Koda (Tell everybody I'm on my way....) sang was so much better and really tied in with the movie. (It doesn't feel as much as a "Oh let's add a song here because we have no dialogue and want to show some flashy scenes" as much as being a part of the movie.).

I definitely agree that CGI movies lack these and they should be brought back. Toy Story 2 almost got it right with the Sarah McLaughlin song during the "Jessie getting tossed to the curb" scene...but it still didn't tie in well because the characters weren't singing it.
 
imagineer boy

imagineer boy

Well-Known Member
I don't think kids really care about what medium their movie is in. What kids really want are loveable characters, a good story, adventure, funny humor, and lots of colors.

Alot of exectives think all kids want are just CGI movies with lots of fart jokes. Bu that's not true, a ton of CGI flicks are flopping big time including Delgo which was the biggest box-office disaster of all time.
 
Missing20K

Missing20K

Well-Known Member
I would venture a bet that if Pixar did a 2D, hand drawn, animated film (yes I know this will never happen, just go with me) that it would do incredibly well.

Their attention to detail and story telling are nearly without peer in Hollywood these days. Few companies create such compelling, well told stories.

Regardless of medium, they understand movie-making. I feel confident in even saying they could make a great live action film.

It just seems like they don't take kindly to failure (not box office success/failure, but the creative kind). Pixar produces films they are extremely proud of (it comes across in the interviews, conventions, and DVD commentary) and when anyone does anything with an enormous sense of pride and creativity, and an unrelenting pursuit of perfection, the end results will be successful.

Ok, I'm done.
 
krankenstein

krankenstein

Well-Known Member
SirGoofy said:
Fixed for correctness. :D
Click to expand...

Nope, while I enjoyed WALL*E, the emotions I felt at the end weren't anything compared to what I felt during Bolt. Maybe it is because I am an animal lover, but Bolt had me completely hooked and, yes, I shed a tear or two. WALL*E didn't come close to putting me in that emotional state. :shrug:
 
EPCOT Explorer

EPCOT Explorer

New Member
krankenstein said:
Nope, while I enjoyed WALL*E, the emotions I felt at the end weren't anything compared to what I felt during Bolt. Maybe it is because I am an animal lover, but Bolt had me completely hooked and, yes, I shed a tear or two. WALL*E didn't come close to putting me in that emotional state. :shrug:
Click to expand...

It did for me...:eek::eek::lol:

Two Robots falling in love is pretty original.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom