no more traditional animation

darthdarrel

New Member
Original Poster
OMG can this be true? This was posted on doom buggies.com.
I feel like I've just had my guts kicked out.

It's been rumored that Disney would abandon it's traditional cel drawn animated features. Well, it looks like we have confirmation on that.
TechTV had a segment on Treasure Planet which included the line, "Disney has announced that Treasure Planet will probably be the last of Disney's big budget animated films".

This is what a friend from corporate had to say on the matter...


Quote:Disney is out of the traditional feature animation business. A lot of people have been fired, the rest are waiting. The era is over – until someone can rebuild the Company again.

The only traditional animation feature in the works is ‘Brother Bear’ (title subject to change) that’s limping along in Florida. I read over at Jim Hill’s site that the film’s release date has been moved up to next holiday season, but some of my sources say there’s still an internal debate about simply abandoning the film altogether. Whatever happens, the rumor remains strong that Florida Feature Animation will be closed when the film stops production.

The other films in the works are CGI movies, the first of which was supposed to be ‘My Peoples’. But that one's in so much trouble that it was pushed back a year (in a swap very similar to the ‘Lilo’ and ‘Treasure Planet’ fiasco). Eisner is convinced that traditional animation is dead and only CGI has a future. Rumors are that all pen-and-ink people in Burbank will be gone by Spring and the few that are left had better learn how to use a mouse.

The “animation” you will be seeing from Disney is typified by films like ‘Peter Pan 2’ and ‘Jungle Book 2’. These are really non-Disney made direct-to-video creations that are being given a theatrical release as part of the marketing campaign. Or at least that was the plan. ‘PP2’ pretty much flopped at both the box office and on the store shelves. The entire strategy is being rethought. In typical fashion only the marketing is being blamed for the failure, not the low quality of the film involved.

The current drive is to lower the costs of the direct-to-video films even more. The hot new plan is to recycle existing material. Both the Cinderella and the Tarzan movies are nothing more than episodes of Saturday morning series stapled together into “movie”. The new ‘Stitch’ sequel will follow that same pattern.

Eisner has yet to grasp, and he may be incapable of ever grasping, is that technology doesn’t make the movie, the story does. Whether the films are ink-on-celluloid, computer graphics or crayons & construction paper – the film’s going to fail if the story is bad. ‘Treasure Planet’ would not have been any better if it was 100% CGI (despite today’s spin coming out of Team Disney Burbank). But making a good movie requires the hard work of talented people. Eisner is only interested in quick and cheap.
I also heard that with the flop of treasure planet and the subsequent drop in disney stocks that there is pressure building once again to oust Eisner.
 

Maerj

Well-Known Member
I believe that we won't see any more big, big budget cel animated films for a while, but I don't believe that Disney will totally abandon the format. I know many good people who would be upset if that happened. Treasure Planet flopped because of either the marketing or because it was released on an extremely crowded movie weekend, NOT because its a bad movie. It was a very cool flick!
 

jcrb

New Member
I agree- Disney just picked a bad weekend-

I think the animation is not dead - but I think the well done animation dead until they get someone like Jeffery Kazenberg - new blood (Kazenberg was in charge of studios in 90's- now is partner of DreamWorks)
 

prberk

Well-Known Member
Roy needs to help. He even hosted the Fantasia 2000 that included wonderful uses of both types of animation.

The Lion King and B&B would both do just as well today if released (which is why they are both still on Broadway). Lilo and Stitch should have shown them the traditional animation (and CGI) is still viable, and flourishes with a wonderful STORY.

But most of all, they need to remember the late '70s and early '80s, when the same thing almost happened: animation was almost closed, due to lackluster box office and lack of interest. What saved it and turned the whole company around was the EMPHASIS on it that Eisner and Katzenburg put around '89. They poured a real effort into it, and into TRADITIONAL STORY TYPES (fairy tales and animal stories) that cross all boundaries. They let the artists excel, but with stories that had heard.

Finally, I also believe that the competition and lackluster marketing hurt this film. But more than anything else, comparisons with Atlantis may have hurt the most.
 

prberk

Well-Known Member
One more thing, and this applies to Imagineering and theme park development just as well as to animation and filmmaking:

Disney has to remember its bread and butter, and let cast members LOVE WHAT THEY DO. Fear and intimidation don't help the situation. Give current employees some rope, and let them learn to create again. That is what made "The Lion King," and that is what will save the company.
 

jmarc63

New Member
reading this really distresses me. I really thought that Disney would be the keeper of the flame when it came to traditional animation. I really hope this does not come to pass.
 

MKCustodial

Well-Known Member
So Shrek got the first Animation Oscar. Big deal, Snow White got the first one 70 years ago.

I've said this once and I'll say it again. CGI is very pretty and cool and all, but NOTHING is as pretty as traditional animation. Do you think Lilo & Stitch would be the same if it wasn't traditional watercolor?

DIsney is going to make the DUMBEST move of the century if they kill their traditional staff.
 

Testtrack321

Well-Known Member
There was something on another board about this, but it seems like it was said wrong. Tech TV said Treasure Planet was the last big budget animated movie of the SERIES. BTW, Lilo & Stitch wasn't big budget anyways...
 

Maerj

Well-Known Member
You know, the other thing that leads me to not believe that thing about not doing anymore cel animation is that it says Eisner wants to stop it.

He was the one who wanted to bring it back in the first place! Remember? He started Touchstone Pictures in order to generate enough revenue to start making at least one animated film a year. I don't think he would want to stop it just because of one movie not doing well. Maybe they need to go back and do another musical fairy tale type movie, those seem to go over better for them.
 

MKCustodial

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Testtrack321
There was something on another board about this, but it seems like it was said wrong. Tech TV said Treasure Planet was the last big budget animated movie of the SERIES. BTW, Lilo & Stitch wasn't big budget anyways...

You mean last as in latest?

And L&S may not have been big budget to produce, but I bet that advertisement stunt they pulled cost a pretty penny...
 

pheneix

Well-Known Member
Traditional animation is very dead if you talk to Michael Eisner. There is only one other project of any significance coming down the pipes is the Bear film, whose proper name escapes me at the moment. But still, that may be canned at any moment. Of course, we still have to cheap direct-to-video quality crap like Jungle Book 2 to look forward to, but who knows how long that will last.

Disney is hot on the whole CGI-thing right now, as they have several films in the works. The fact that the technology does really matter is completely falling on deaf ears (that's why films like Shrek and Lilo and Stitch outperform Treasure Planet even though one of them happened to be CGI).

The Florida Animation team is also about to be put on the chopping block, as they are not needed for the DTV mess.
 

Main Street USA

Well-Known Member
Disney has a couple of projects in the works right now, actually. One being the "bear film" that was mentioned above, and another is called "Home on the Range." What the size of the budget on this film is, I have no idea, but this picture I snuck at the animation tour is proof that they're working on it.
 

Attachments

  • pb270099.jpg
    pb270099.jpg
    55.2 KB · Views: 148

MrPromey

Well-Known Member
I think that traditional animation (for the time at least) is no longer going to be a hot commodity like it was in the past for mainstream audiences in theaters. I think there is still a place for it and that there probably will be a place for it for a good long time but much of the populous as a whole has shifted their attention to CG…

Just the same, I think there will remain an appreciation for traditional animation among fans of the art. There will just be less of a draw for it. Disney has been putting a lot of emphasis in their animated movies appearing in IMAX theaters over recent years. This may be an attempt at making a crossover (or at least a bridge to) a less commercial approach to these projects. Going all the way into this field and burning bridges behind them would obviously result in reduced revenue due to the limited availability of the venues and it certainly wouldn’t make all the fans who aren’t near an IMAX theater happy so I doubt there are any plans to dump the standard multiplexes but it seems obvious that Disney is trying to pose their traditionally animated movies as being something more than a commercial vehicle. Their willingness to explore projects like Atlantis and Treasure Planet which took obvious risks seems to be evidence of this.

Lilo and Stich did well because it was a movie on a budget that managed to do a lot with what it had. I don’t think it would have been considered much of a financial success if it had been made on the budget that Treasure Planet was.

I think the novelty of CG will eventually wear off much like the novelty of claymation (that has a somewhat similar look and feel) did and it will be viewed as simply another method for presenting an animated story. I don’t think Disney’s attempts to combine the best of both worlds with traditional animation and CG is entirely on the wrong track. As the ability for them to make the integration tighter and less obvious improves, I think traditional animation will find a place in popular cinema again but it may take a decade or more for us to see that happen and a lot can change in that amount of time.

Then again, what do I know on the subject?
 

JLW11Hi

Well-Known Member
Regardless of what will or will not happen, this is one of the saddest rumors I have been hearing about for the past year.

Ever since Toy Story cam out, I had that horrible thought in the back of my mind that CGI would eventually replace it all. I brushed that idea off, recalling the somewhat recent "golden age" of hand drawn animation that was to pave the road for animated features in the future.

The idea is not whether CGI makes it a better movie, it is what the audience prefers. And although all the progress in CGI technology is wowing at the box office, eventualy, people will be seeing films like Monsters Inc as a sign of the past (which is also a sad thought, but the public is always right...)

Still, CGI technology has made many steps in the animation process much easier and less time consuming. Yet at the same time, it brings up new problems and obstacles for creative minds to tackle. It seems that every time Pixar makes an new film, they have some new program for some kind of new effect (ie, the hair on Sulley or the water effects in Monsters Inc)

I do not nor have I ever disliked CGI animation. It just saddens me that these movies will eventually lead to the demise of hand drawn animation. Not because of the art itself, but because of the careers of the animators. I hope the current animators at Disney have background in CGI, too, so that if they get laid off, they will be able to move along with everyone into the future.

Still, it will be a sad day when I can no longer see hand drawings on the screen. I draw, which explains my concern on the issue. Drawing is a talent that is rarely appreciated. From my views, animated features bring in the most appreciation for people with these talents than anything else.
,
Still, drawing skills will be needed even as we move into the CGI age. Even if it means just doing sketches in storyboard, I feel it will survive. The basic principles of drawing are probably even used in CGI animation. As 3-D as the effects get, the animators are still working with a flat screen.

But how about Dreamworks?
 

pheneix

Well-Known Member
>>>I don’t think it would have been considered much of a financial success if it had been made on the budget that Treasure Planet was.<<<

That's why Eisner has tried to bury Lilo and Stitch as hard and as fast as possible.

>>>I think the novelty of CG will eventually wear off much like the novelty of claymation (that has a somewhat similar look and feel) did and it will be viewed as simply another method for presenting an animated story.<<<

Amen.

>>>Disney has a couple of projects in the works right now, actually. One being the "bear film" that was mentioned above, and another is called "Home on the Range."<<<

I had forgotten about Home on the Range, but apparently the accountants have too.
 

garyhoov

Trophy Husband
Originally posted by Main Street USA
Disney has a couple of projects in the works right now, actually. One being the "bear film" that was mentioned above, and another is called "Home on the Range." What the size of the budget on this film is, I have no idea, but this picture I snuck at the animation tour is proof that they're working on it.

That took some guts to get that shot! I've seen some very unpleasant confrontations involving photography on that tour.



Back around the time of Lion King, the animated features were events. They didn't have two or three theatrical released per year and countless direct to video sequels.

Rather than killing it, I'd like to see them trim down to one major release every two or three years.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom