Why Disney leaving animation for a few years is a GOOD THING

[KevinPage]

Now before anyone goes postal on me here, take a step back and think about it for a few minutes.

After the Jungle Book, the last movie Walt had a part in, Disney only produced 7 animated features until The Little Mermaid in 1989 (none of which are considered classics by any stretch of the imagination over a span of 22 years)

Since The Little Mermaid 14 years ago, 15 other animated films have been releases (including Brother Bear, not including Home on the Range or CGI Dinosaur), at least 1 every year (except '93) and 2 in '99.

Don't you see a little creative burnout happening? I think that is somewhat natural. Honestly, how many good and original stories can you come up with if you are putting out a movie EVERY single year.

It's the same thing with you favorite musical band. I'm sure you'd rather have an album every 2 years of higher quality then have them pump out album after album every year. It feels too forced and that is the opposite of creativity, letting things flow naturally from an artist, as opposed to thinking "oh, we need to put something out next year".

If you look at the release history of Disney animated films, 1989-96 was the peak time of the newest revival. After that, things started to slide (even though there were movies after that I enjoyed, I'm talking from a critic standpoint.)

Maybe it's time to pull back, recharge the batteries and not have as many releases. But then again, they might just be shifting it all towards the CGI venue and we will still see the same thing. Whether you can put together a CGI film faster than an animated one is another debate.

But if we have less Tarzan's, Treasure Planet's & Atlantis's, the animation world is a better place

 

[dxwwf3]

Originally posted by KevinPage
But if we have less Tarzan's, Treasure Planet's & Atlantis's, the animation world is a better place

I totally agree with your whole post except this one line. I personally think that Treasure Planet is Disney's best animated film since The Lion King and I like the other two movies alot too. But to each his own. I personally thought that Lilo and Stitch was Disney's worst animated movie made in my lifetime and it was a decent little hit. So who knows.

 

[Testtrack321]

I agree that Disney should scale back releases, but not on the department. I think one every 3 years would build up enough hype, plus it would allow for the DVD and other merchandise to sell better.

 

[General Grizz]

Can we not say this even more with SEQUELS? :lol:

And I HOPE that Disney will return to 2-D.

MODEL: BEAUTY AND THE BEAST.

 

[TURKEY]

Re: Re: Why Disney leaving animation for a few years is a GOOD THING

Originally posted by dxwwf3
I totally agree with your whole post except this one line. I personally think that Treasure Planet is Disney's best animated film since The Lion King and I like the other two movies alot too. But to each his own. I personally thought that Lilo and Stitch was Disney's worst animated movie made in my lifetime and it was a decent little hit. So who knows.

I love Tarzan and TP. Atlantis is decent, but all three are beautifully animated films.

I'm glad they released all three of them.

I think that if Atlantis and TP had been marketed better and had a better story, then Disney could be looking a smaller version of the mid 90s.

 

[prberk]

Originally posted by grizzlyhall
Can we not say this even more with SEQUELS? :lol:

And I HOPE that Disney will return to 2-D.

MODEL: BEAUTY AND THE BEAST.

Amen!

It is the cheap sequels that are helping the most to drag down the public view of Disney animation.

The feature films themselves need to be wonderfully crafted, and I do believe most of what started this post (i.e., that recent theatrical films have been subpar when compared to Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc.); BUT the biggest culprit, I believe, has been the fact that, between TV ('Toon Disney) and sequels on video, the overall public impression of Disney animation has gone back to seeming bland and only for children.

Some people expect the feature films to be better, but let's face it: not everyone notices the difference. And since Pixar and other CGI films are not swamped with cheap imitations all around, it makes them look even better; and consequently, traditional Disney animation seems (to the general public) even more bland and run-of-the-mill! That is why Walt created an empire without the cash cow of cheap sequels.

Cheap sequels and cheap TV are the most to blame for the current problems.

P.S.: And, yes, I mean "cheap" as the operative terms. Sequels can be good ("Toy Story 2," a Pixar production that was not allowed to be cheap); but most Disney ones are cheap imitations of the original film

 

[General Grizz]

Originally posted by prberk
Amen!

It is the cheap sequels that are helping the most to drag down the public view of Disney animation.

The feature films themselves need to be wonderfully crafted, and I do believe most of what started this post (i.e., that recent theatrical films have been subpar when compared to Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, etc.); BUT the biggest culprit, I believe, has been the fact that, between TV ('Toon Disney) and sequels on video, the overall public impression of Disney animation has gone back to seeming bland and only for children.

Some people expect the feature films to be better, but let's face it: not everyone notices the difference. And since Pixar and other CGI films are not swamped with cheap imitations all around, it makes them look even better; and consequently, traditional Disney animation seems (to the general public) even more bland and run-of-the-mill! That is why Walt created an empire without the cash cow of cheap sequels.

Cheap sequels and cheap TV are the most to blame for the current problems.

P.S.: And, yes, I mean "cheap" as the operative terms. Sequels can be good ("Toy Story 2," a Pixar production that was not allowed to be cheap); but most Disney ones are cheap imitations of the original film

Beautifully stated. It'll be pretty sad once mass TV 3-D sequels get in the works.

Home on the Range has, according to MousePlanet, the first " joke in Feature Animation history." Can you believe this? Disney seems to be getting worse and worse to the extremes: it's either kid (Brother Bear??) or teenage/adult (Emporer's New Groove/Home on the Range?)

It's really upsetting. We need the family films with a bit of everything -- yet staying in tune with the classic auras of the spirits of classics from the past (Snow White) to those of the near present (Lion King). Or...outside of Disney itself...FINDING NEMO.

Very disgruntling.

 

[KevinPage]

Very true. As good as the Pixar films have been. I'd like to see how well they do when everyone is doing CGI. If the stories are good, then things shouldn't change, but I can see the allure & cache of their films taking somewhat of a "hit". They have to, no one will continue a run like they had forever.

I'm guessing that with no more/less animated feature films, we will be seeing no more/less sequels and direct to video as well?

One could hope

 

[barnum42]

Releasing one feature length animated film a year was one of Walt Disney’s dreams (the man, not the corporation). The corporation has ditched Walt’s vision of EPCOT and the standards of upkeep he set for the parks. At least they have managed to keep one of his dreams a reality.

Naff, badly animated straight to video sequels are not applicable to the above statement. As others have mentioned, these make a mockery of the Disney name as a house of quality animated films.

Regarding the slating of Tarzan, Atlantis and Treasure Planet:

Tarzan I liked after a second viewing. On the first viewing I thought the opening was superior where the apes did not speak and wished the rest of the film followed suit.

Atlantis - I feel I’m in the minority here, as I loved Atlantis. Good characters, story and a different look.

Treasure Planet - I’ve only seen it the once and was not overly impressed. I did not hate it, but it did not do much for me.

 

[meeko_33785]

IMO, I think Disney has reached sort of a creative burn-out. I think the smartest thing for them to do it concentrate on the quality of the films they put out insteed of the quality. The "we've got to put out a new one every year" mentality just isn't helping the studio in the long run. I think they should start doing a film every 2 years and alternate with the PIXAR films (have a Disney out one year, then a PIXAR the next, and a Disney the year after that, etc.) And fewer sequels would be nice too.

And I have to say I liked Tarzan and Treasure Planet. Atlantis though.... let's just say I didn't buy it when it came out on DVD (and I bought Black Cauldron, if that tells you anything).

 

[DOUG]

They hit burn-out years ago. I've honestly liked ever film, with the exception of Dinosaur since then...it took a while for Emperors New Groove to hit me but it did eventually. Tarzan....happens to be one of my favorite. Lilo and Stitch did so well, because it was totally original. Chris Sanders created a story that wasn't permitted to be tampered with by Disney execs. Treasure Planet was a failure because it had been in production since the mid 80's. (A lot of story rewrites...that's all) Jeffery Katzenberg knew way back then that that movie wouldn't do well and wouldn't allow it to go into production.......he leaves.....and look at what happened. Biggest loss on a Disney film since god knows when. (Of course, he let Sinbad slip through the cracks at Dreamworks) Disney has also hurt themselves by trying to target specific audiences with their films...they shouldn't do that.....teenage boys......the worst audience for a cartoon....boys want to see things blow up...not cartoons. Anyhow......Disney is certainly taking time off......for those who haven't...........wave a goodbye to the following....most of the Burbank animation staff, the eitire Paris and Japan animation staffs and now the real hurt..........goodbye florida.