Why the movies are failing.

[Dr.Seeker]

This is my plan for fixing the movies (please don't reply about management production costs e.t.c. as I have no idea whats going on and I'd rather just talk about the films themselves)

1a. Similar to the arguement about disney rides, these are polarising the market. The classics bring adults and children together with something they can all enjoy. This needs to be fixed.

1b. The way this is done nowadays is by using comedy which is the universal uniter.

2a. The jokes are sometimes inappropriate e.g. on the trailer for 'Home on the Range' there was a joke about "Yeah they're real so quit staring" (a cow referring to her own udders). What the hell is going on! Since when does Disney do jokes about breast enhancement???!!!!

2b. Speaking of that trailer, I didn't laugh once. And simply I am not going to see a film which doesn't even make me chuckle.

2c. The plots have become tamer. Once the conclusion meant love, defeating a truly evil villain , and restoring a kingdom. As far as I can make out there is no love, a villian of a Warner Bros. Short proportions, and saving a farm. A farm. No magic just a stinkin farm!!!

2d. The villian himself is 2 dimensional, boring and hes evil plot is...well I really can't remember.

I realise this has become a dig at 'Home on the Range' (Which has shamelessly used animals as they believe this is the 'winning formula' as Lion King was. I disagree) Anyhoo these points can be used for most recent failures.

Treasure Planet-Disney went back to using classic stories as with the little mermaid. But clearly this wasn't the secret.

Brother Bear- Used magic to see if this is what the audience wanted-it wasn't.

In a closing metaphor, Walt had a secret recipe which had satisfied hungry moviegoers for years. When he died he kept his recipe with him. As Eisner and others have tried to recreate this with the same ingredients but end up failing.

 

[xfkirsten]

I agree. I am of the opinion that what is really missing in Disney's most recent releases is the romance. They aren't making anymore stories with that fairy tale-like love story. And while not every successful movie needs one (eg The Jungle Book and Peter Pan), to have this many animated films in a row without it seems a bit boring. No variety, if that makes sense.

Also, I think they need to return to the true musical style, which they haven't done since Mulan.

-Kirsten

 

[General Grizz]

Musical, romance, comedy, and quality will win 2-D animation back if they get the right creative team. It looks like the Princess theme that started with Little Mermaid, into Beauty, Aladdin, etc., had much to do with it (romance), but there were always the sidekicks, the laughs, and the drama.

Home on the Range lacks. It lacks a true story. And maybe it shouldn't have been put in production before the storyline was fully finalized (MANAGEMENT's fault; fire management, not the animators!). Atlantis lacked. It lacked characters and a welcoming feel. Treasure Planet lacked. It was more Atlantis-feeling, and also solely advertised as action-based. Emporer's New Groove? A comedy. Tarzan? I just didn't like it.

Brother Bear and Lilo and Stitch are the closest we've gotten to a Disney classic since Mulan (all from Walt Disney Feature Animation Florida, I WONDER!). While they are great, there could be another step --

And that's back to the romance, the comedy, the action, and the musical all in one. 3-D will wear off, as well, if it doesn't show these qualities.

As for the films, why not have a musical film ala Mary Poppins? A lot of what they're making looks too realistic and less whimsical, which is to be a turn off for me.

 

[xfkirsten]

True! Disney films of late have been too centered on one particular genre, I think - Home on the Range being too much comedy, Atlantis and Treasure Planet too much action. When I think back on what's considered Classic Disney, each film had a good balance of romance, action, and comedy, without being able to say that any one of those was really much more prominent than the other.

I agree, too, that Lilo and Stitch and Brother Bear were the closest they've come in recent years. Coincidentally, they're also the only two Disney animated films from this decade that I've had any interest in buying on DVD.

I remember when I was on my College Program, a bunch of us went to Downtown Disney on opening night of Treasure Planet to see it... and besides us, there were only two other people in the theater. At a mid-evening show. Opening night. AT Disney. What does that say about TP?

This past April I was at DL with a couple of other board members and some other DL fans. And we all agreed that NONE of us cared to see Home on the Range.

What do these two stories show? Somewhere along the line, Disney has alienated their fans. The same people who used to be excitedly waiting in line on opening day now don't care at all to go see the films. That's a pretty sad sign right there.

-Kirsten

 

[General Grizz]

They're also trying to alienate the attractions. NOT GOOD.

I agree, too, that Lilo and Stitch and Brother Bear were the closest they've come in recent years. Coincidentally, they're also the only two Disney animated films from this decade that I've had any interest in buying on DVD.

Same here!

As for 1989-today, I own Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, (skip skip skip), Fantasia 2000 (skip skip skip), Lilo and Stitch, and Brother Bear.

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

OK I'll let myself play stupid for a moment.... TLM is already out on DVD??? When? Why? How? I want it baaaad! Ursula won't get out of my head! :zipit:



As for Disney movies, well you pretty much summed it up. They abandoned the formula and BAM! Failure after failure (L&S and BB are exceptions). Treasure Planet was booooooring! :snore: I really did enjoy BB but I have no desire to see HotR. Weird....

 

[xfkirsten]

They're also trying to alienate the attractions. NOT GOOD.



Same here!

As for 1989-today, I own Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Lion King, (skip skip skip), Fantasia 2000 (skip skip skip), Lilo and Stitch, and Brother Bear.

LMAO! Those are the exact same ones I have, although I also have Pocahontas, Hercules, and Hunchback because I got them for free. Would never have actually paid for them though.

Oh, I do have The Rescuers Down Under (1990) too, mainly because of the score and the beautiful animation.

-Kirsten

 

[xfkirsten]

OK I'll let myself play stupid for a moment.... TLM is already out on DVD??? When? Why? How? I want it baaaad! Ursula won't get out of my head! :zipit:

Yup! It came out a few years ago, but has since gone out of print. There are probably still copies available at www.half.com or on eBay.

-Kirsten

 

[General Grizz]

I have the home video from when it first came out. . . heh.

 

[xfkirsten]

I have the home video from when it first came out. . . heh.

As do I, with the "special" castle. :lol:

-Kirsten

 

[imagineer boy]

Yeah, Disney needs to make a movie with as much care and quality that went into Snow White.

Hey, wait a minuite, I have an idea. Instead of complaining about Disney's recent bad movies, why not start some sort of group project? We'll pretend we work at Disney, and make the story outline for some kind of animated feature based off of a classic fairy tale like Henzel and Grettle. Not to mention with very good quality. What do you guys think?

 

[Shaman]

This past April I was at DL with a couple of other board members and some other DL fans. And we all agreed that NONE of us cared to see Home on the Range.

What do these two stories show? Somewhere along the line, Disney has alienated their fans. The same people who used to be excitedly waiting in line on opening day now don't care at all to go see the films. That's a pretty sad sign right there.

Home on the Range was the first BIG Disney animated movie that I didn't go see at the theater...as a fan I've given Disney the benefit of the doubt each time after Mulan...and the movies weren't bad...but they weren't Disney either. Atlantis had so much potential and they fumbled....Lilo-Stitch was great...not an original story...but it was good...Brother Bear...was great too...could have been a lot better if not rushed...I'm a loyal fan...but I'm not going to pay $6.50 to see Home on the Range...or even rent it for that matter...because it doesn't catch my attention...its not Disney...its some cheap replica....

I went to see Shrek 2...and I saw the huge crowds for that movie...the crowds that use to come and see the Disney animated release...the movie was a THINKING MOVIE...and it was an animated movie...a family movie...Dreamworks, Pixar making movies like this and not Disney...WHATS HAPPENED?!

 

[Legacy]

I went to see Shrek 2...and I saw the huge crowds for that movie...the crowds that use to come and see the Disney animated release...the movie was a THINKING MOVIE...and it was an animated movie...a family movie...Dreamworks, Pixar making movies like this and not Disney...WHATS HAPPENED?!

They figured out the formula. Pixar and Dreamworks have discovered the importance of sympathetic characters and good story telling (Dreamworks is better with characters; Pixar is better with story). The Lion King was the last classic to utilize the two in tandem. Lilo and Stitch was successful because of the characters. Brother Bear was powerful because of the story. Both of those still weren't weak in the other area though. Since Mulan they have sorely lacked in one or both of the criteria needed for a classic, and they have paid for it. Until someone with stroke realizes what made the classics classic, we are going to be forced to sit through 3-D versions of Home on the Range.

 

[626]

2b. Speaking of that trailer, I didn't laugh once. And simply I am not going to see a film which doesn't even make me chuckle.

You didn't miss much. I didn't laugh once during the entire movie. I chuckled twice. How low has Disney gotten? It seems that recently Disney has been trying to make another Toy Story (ie a non-musical buddy film) The thing that they are missing is what drew me to Disney in the first place. Wonderful stories, music, animation and characters. To me, Home On The Range felt like they were trying to force a square block through a round hole. It just didn't make sense. It didn't belong in the same company that gave us The Lion King, Beauty And The Beast and more recently Lilo & Stitch. They really need to get back to what made them big to begin with. Bring back the musicals! Bring back the Romance! Bring back the fun! Bring back everything except for eisner!

 

[careship]

OK, I know, I am the crazy one of the bunch...While I see flaws in many movies from DIsney, I have only found 1 that will NEVER make it into my home (Home on the range, I hate Roseanne Barr and I felt the same way about the "these are real" comment on the trailers and I refused to see it my hubby gave in and took the boys and they hated it)and I have every Disney movie ever put on video or DVD since 1991. My boys love Treasure Planet and Atlantis and I did too, but these IMHO were made for boys, not girls and not families. Hope that makes sense. The ideas were great, they weren't the best, they could have done better, but they were still really good movies. The difference between them and say Aladdin? The level of greatness. Meaning the time and attention put into the entire process. The newer ones were rushed IMHO. Had they taken the time to develop the story properly, the animators would have had a better feel and love for the story and these too could have been great movies. You know what I think honestly was the best thing to come out of Disney in a long time was non-animated, it was Miracle. They did a fabulous job with this movie and they put heart and soul into it. That's what is missing in Disney right now and it can all be contributed to M.E.

On a funnier note: Miracle 2 coming soon to DVD. The movie about how Eisner lost his job.

 

[General Grizz]

On a funnier note: Miracle 2 coming soon to DVD. The movie about how Eisner lost his job.

That's one sequel I would buy!!

 

[speck76]

Maybe they just need to redefine success

Prior to TLM, the animated films were not HUGE moneymakers...the failures that are being made now are still grossing more than many of the earlier films (even adjusted for inflation)

The bigger problem is with the other studios that WDC owns, mainly Touchstone, which has focused much of its budget on event films, which are now a dime a dozen, and when they do fail, it really hurts.

Touchstone did its best when it was producing cheap films with a good story, like "Pretty Woman".

Anyway, back to my earlier point. Take a look at the 1st run gross of 2-D films over the last 20 years.

1985 The Black Cauldren $21,288,692
1986 The Great Mouse Detective $25,388,794
1988 Oliver & Company $53,279,255
1989 The Little Mermaid $84,355,863
1990 The Rescuers Down Under $27,931,461
1991 Beauty and the Beast $145,863,363
1992 Aladdin $217,350,219
1994 The Lion King $312,855,561
1995 Pocohontas $141,579,773
1996 Hunchback of Notre Dame $100,138,851
1997 Hercules $99,112,101
1998 Mulan $120,620,254
1999 Tarzan $171,091,819
2000 Fantasia 2000 $60,655,420
2000 Dinosaur (not 2-D) $137,748,063
2000 The Emperor's New Groove $89,302,687
2001 Atlantis: The Lost Empire $84,056,472
2002 Treasure Planet $38,176,783
2002 Lilo and Stitch $145,794,338
2003 Brother Bear $85,336,277
2004 Home on the Range $49,042,520

Now, even the failures of the last few years are doing better than the 1980's films, most better than TLM, but the real failure is not the gross, it is the bad story. (If you dive in to what these films made overseas, almost every one made money)

Also, the production costs have gone throught the roof...TLK had an estimated cost of $45 million before markets, Treasure Planet's cast was aroung $125 million....why so much?

 

[DisneyFan 2000]

You just reminded me of Oliver&Co! As a small kid I LOVED that movie!


I know for a fact that TLM, TLK, Aladdin and BB made more than that. Maybe I have international figures + VHS/DVD sales? I also believe Lilo & Stitch and BatB made more money.... I'm quite certain I've read different figures. (from official sources... Just can't remember where) :veryconfu


I agree about TP being pricey but I believe that $45m isn't THAT much for an animated movie.... (TLK)

 

[speck76]

The figures I got were from first run only...many of the films had multiple runs. (check out www.boxofficemojo.com) Also, many of the films made hundreds of millions of dollars overseas, which may have been included in some numbers that were previously published.

I agree that TLK was not too much....that was kind of my point. Why could they make TLK for only $45 million, whereas it now costs mure than $100 million for most of the films over the last few years. I know inflation is involved, but inflation is not THAT MUCH. If they could control the costs a bit more, and produce GOOD films for $50-60 million, they would not need them to make hundreds of millions to be profitable.

The other point was even if they spend $100 million+ on these films, they are not spending the needed energy/creativity on the story or the characters, so where the money is being spent...it is just being wasted. (whether the film is animated on not, they don't need to break the bank to make a good movie)

 

[careship]

I know that they like to use celebrity voices. I however find that to be overkill. They pay way too much money to use someones voice for as little time as it takes the person. I preferred many unknown voices because then the characters are just as written rather than overshadowed by the person who voiced it. Does that make sense?

Alot of money can be saved that way. They should also use money more wisely when marketing a film.