Moana 2 (Disney Animation - November 2024)

[LittleBuford]

Which gives it about $100M profit. That's good.
However, I worry about what these signals to the suits in Burbank and the future of in house animation.

Why do you keep ignoring the various responses you've already received with regard to this worry of yours?

Burbank is going to be fine.

Vancouver is still in-house.

 

[BrianLo]

Great! Hopefully even more work comes to Vancouver.

The California studios aren’t going anywhere and Vancouver makes a heck of a lot more sense than Florida.

 

[DisneyWarrior27]

Great! Hopefully even more work comes to Vancouver.

The California studios aren’t going anywhere and Vancouver makes a heck of a lot more sense than Florida.

Don’t you diss the work Disney Animation in Orlando did on Mulan and Lilo & Stitch.

 

[BrianLo]

Don’t you diss the work Disney Animation in Orlando did on Mulan and Lilo & Stitch.

Dissing the location choice, not the former team. Florida has very limited Hollywood connections. Forcing a square peg because Disney World was there…

Vancouver is a bustling offshoot of Hollywood and talent.

 

[Disney Irish]

Why do you keep ignoring the various responses you've already received with regard to this worry of yours?

Burbank is going to be fine.

Vancouver is still in-house.

I believe he has a bunch of us on ignore, or just doesn't care about facts because it doesn't fit his narrative that Disney is "outsourcing its animation".

 

[Farerb]

I believe he has a bunch of us on ignore, or just doesn't care about facts because it doesn't fit his narrative that Disney is "outsourcing its animation".

It might not outsource it's animation, but you can bet that the Vancouver employees make less than those who are at Burbank.

 

[Disney Irish]

It might not outsource it's animation, but you can bet that the Vancouver employees make less than those who are at Burbank.

That still doesn’t mean it’s some lesser quality product, as that is what this whole negative connotation surrounding “outsourcing of animation” is about.

 

[DisneyWarrior27]

My thing is will Disney outsource work from Canada if it means getting back the Toon Boom Harmony system they used for The Princess and the Frog, How to Hook Up Your Home Theater starring Goofy, The Ballad of Nessie, and Winnie the Pooh (2011) if they turn Tiana’s Disney+ series from a story with the animation style of Paperman into a fully 2D/hand-drawn theatrical film sequel to The Princess and the Frog for a wide theatrical release in Thanksgiving 2029?

We’ll just have to wait and see.

 

[LittleBuford]

It might not outsource it's animation, but you can bet that the Vancouver employees make less than those who are at Burbank.

"The hiring range for this position [animator] in British Columbia, Canada is C$100,300 to C$145,420 per year." That's about $75,000 to $103,000. I have no idea how that compares to the same job at Burbank. Google tells me the cost of living is lower in Vancouver, so that should be factored in.

Animator (Contract) at DISNEY

Learn more about applying for Animator (Contract) at DISNEY

www.disneycareers.com

 

[Phroobar]

It might not outsource it's animation, but you can bet that the Vancouver employees make less than those who are at Burbank.

It's been reported that Vancouver artists make half of California artists and less benefits but the cost of living there is almost the same as California.

 

[DKampy]

It's been reported that Vancouver artists make half of California artists and less benefits but the cost of living there is almost the same as California.

It makes sense to have a studio in Vancouver.,. If you have not been paying attention…. It’s been basically a 2nd Hollywood the last few years… but go ahead and ignore what other posters are saying to fit your narrative

 

[Disney Irish]

It's been reported that Vancouver artists make half of California artists and less benefits but the cost of living there is almost the same as California.

And you have actual proof via actual pay scales and benefits packages this is indeed the case? Because otherwise this is just more nonsense to try paint some narrative which is unfounded. Also this still doesn’t mean the product is some lesser quality product just because it’s not done exclusively by animators in Burbank.

And in case you still missed it I’ll repeat it, this is still WDAS not some outsourced animator.

 

[Chi84]

And you have actual proof via actual pay scales and benefits packages this is indeed the case? Because otherwise this is just more nonsense to try paint some narrative which is unfounded. Also this still doesn’t mean the product is some lesser quality product just because it’s not done exclusively by animators in Burbank.

And in case you still missed it I’ll repeat it, this is still WDAS not some outsourced animator.

Earlier in this thread there was an article from IGN based on information from 10 anonymous employees who had been laid off.

I have no idea how to gauge the credibility of some reports.

 

[LittleBuford]

The other thing that I think needs to be borne in mind is that the success of Moana 2 isn’t easily replicated. It would not have done nearly as well had it not been riding on the back of a much-loved original. It’s not like the powers that be at Disney will now think to themselves that anything made at Vancouver is bound to make them big money. And since the next sequel, Zootopia 2 (also likely to do well because of the IP to which it’s connected) is already being worked on at Burbank, it’s even less likely that they’ll decide to abandon their flagship studio.

 

[Disney Irish]

Earlier in this thread there was an article from IGN based on information from 10 anonymous employees who had been laid off.

I have no idea how to gauge the credibility of some reports.

Ah yes the IGN article, the one that provides no real shred of evidence on anything especially since it was about Pixar and not the Vancouver branch of WDAS and how their pay and benefits stacks up against their Burbank counterparts.

 

[LittleBuford]

Ah yes the IGN article, the one that provides no real shred of evidence on anything especially since it was about Pixar and not the Vancouver branch of WDAS and how their pay and benefits stacks up against their Burbank counterparts.

I’m not sure why you’re framing the article in that way. It quotes anonymous sources without putting any particular spin on what they say. What specific issues do you have with it?

 

[Disney Irish]

I’m not sure why you’re framing the article in that way. It quotes anonymous sources without putting any particular spin on what they say. What specific issues do you have with it?

Well first the article has nothing to do with the conversation at hand, which was about Moana 2 and WDAS Vancouver being used. So that is first and foremost my issue with it being used now multiple times in this thread as some proof of anything regarding this movie.

Second it reads as several disgruntled former employees coming to talk about the "bad times" because they are upset they got laid off, they literally talk about being "f'd financially" so yeah framing, but no quotes from current employees that confirm anything that is being claimed. But even if we just accept most as true, none of it reads as something out of the ordinary for a studio. For example the narrative that employees were being pushed during "crunch time" as being unusual, well duh have none of them EVER worked on project based work before. When you're up against a deadline that is what happens, you are pushed during crunch time to finish the project even so much as extra resources being added to make sure it gets finished. Or the narrative that Pixar was on its last leg and going to be shutdown if IO2 wasn't a success, which I find laughable at best. Just because a few employees felt that way doesn't make it true.

Basically its reads as the normal spin to try and paint Pixar negatively by former employees.

 

[LittleBuford]

Basically its reads as the normal spin to try and paint Pixar negatively by former employees.

I didn’t read it that way. It even quoted a current Pixar executive who, like you, disagreed with what the anonymous sources were claiming.

 

[Disney Irish]

I didn’t read it that way. It even quoted a current Pixar executive who, like you, disagreed with what the anonymous sources were claiming.

I guess we read different articles then. Because its framed in a way to try and paint bad working conditions that aren't confirmed by anyone currently working there, only anonymous sources that were laid off, ie disgruntled former employees. The fact that they talk about being "f'd financially" should be all the indication you need on why this is spin.

 

[LittleBuford]

The fact that they talk about being "f'd financially" should be all the indication you need on why this is spin.

That’s a quotation, not the framing of the article’s own author. We’re heading down a very slippery slope indeed if we’re going to start criticising journalists for the things their sources say.