Disney: Finished with Acetate and Cels?

[Grooveholmes]

http://www.aint-it-cool.com/display.cgi?id=14515

Disney to make two (2) more traditional features... and that's it? All Cg from there?

I don't know how much validity there is to this.. but wow, i never thought i would really see the day that would happen.
I guess it was inevitable really.
Personally i've gotten quite nauseaous from anything disney has had a hand in in the last 15 years or so. But even-so, traditionally animated disney movies have been common place occurance for all of us.
Mmmm, Maybe that's why Pixar is trying to break away, since Disney plans releasing its own cg features regularly? I wonder how much of a mix will have a 2d look and how much will be 3d.

[fletchgirl]

it's worse than that. i don't know about brother bear... whether it's even going to be made or not... Home on the Range is going to be the last traditionally made disney film in California. Disney in orlando is still (supposedly) going to be doing some, i believe My Peoples is supposed to be traditionally animated down there. yes it's sad, and yes, it's true, as MOST of their 2d animators in burbank were already laid off, and the rest are sceduled to go. Dreamworks also has no more 2d films scheduled after Sinbad, or so i've heard.

Actually, as far as Pixar goes, it's the other way around. Pixar has a five film deal w/disney. after that, they have always said they've wanted another distributor. Although right now, they're just haggling to get a better deal w/ disney. so Disney wants it's own 3d house. because 3d consistantly does better and "costs less" although, no one's bothered to point out that the latest 3d films have just BEEN better for the past several years, with the notable exception of The Iron Giant. The Iron Giant did horribly in the theatres though... many people blame it on marketing.. oh i forgot, the same goes for Lilo and Stitch. But i can tell you, if they keep making 3d films the way they've been making 2d films (except L and S)
They'll do just as bad. Disney is afraid because they don't have the entire animation market anymore... although many people don't realize that and still equate anything animated w/ disney. BTW, Brad Bird, the director of Iron Giant, is now at pixar, and i can't wait to see his film. NOT because it's 3d.

woo! there's my rant for the day.

[fletchgirl]

btw... they haven't used cells since little Mermaid. :D

[DragonGX]

Disney stole the idea for taht Aztec film with the llama.. the name escapes me right now, from one of my art teacehrs. he had known a guy at disney for soem time, and he ran the idea by him (hoping they would hire him) and a few months later they started advertising for it.. So needless to say I havent been very happy with disney for a while..

[fletchgirl]

yes, disney is not cool about that kind of stuff, did you guys hear about how they're pretty much single hand-idly changing the copyright laws because MIckey Mouse is up THIS YEAR for public domain? Their business end is NASTY. actually, they come to OUR portfolio day at OUR school then make US sign a contract saying if we see something like what was in our portfolio in a couple of years in a disney movie, they didn't steal it from us. it's in the CONTRACT!!!! for a PORTFOLIO DAY!!! unfortunately, many companys make you sign a similar contract when you show your stuff to them... but in this case, they were coming to us. rediculous. And if you work for these companys... ANYTHING you work on while you are there... ANYTHING, at ANYTIME... is theirs if they find out about it. this goes for every major t.v. and film company. i love animation... but i HATE the busines end. these companys were started to CREATE ART and entertain.... Walt Disney LOST money on almost every one of his classic films, but he kept making them. now, they don't carewhat they do as long as they make money and nobody else does.

I guess i wasn't finished ranting! :)

[Tedsuo]

As far as I know, while the Burbank studio will become only 3d, the Orlando studio will continue to make 2d animated films. Lilo and Stitch was made at Orlando, so I have high hopes for them.

As for Disney's chances in the 3d realm... let us not forget Dinosaur. A friend of mine animated on it, said it was almost as much of a nightmare to work on as it was to watch.

...on second thought, let's forget Dinosaur as quickly as possible. :)

[fletchgirl]

Yes, and some were transfered to orlando... and yes, PLEASE lets not mention the "D" word. i still consider it a remake of Land before time... only it ranks among the sequels of that movie. :P Oh, did you know that film came from a ride concept? yep! kinda like country bears.. nice that that came out two years after Marc Davis died. at least they waited... they're coming out with a haunted mansion, also. geez.

[gekitsu]

well... to be honest, it doesn't really bother me that much.

the recent disney films all lacked "soul" imho. they were faceless, flat... they came from one day to the next and disappeared just as fast.

anyone remember all the articles and things there were to read before little mermaid or lion king?
one was looking forward to seeing it, as it was one of the milestones of the disney history.
and i am not even talking about the golden age of disney... snow white, cinderella, fantasia that is...

[cucaracha]

On the other hand, people who have seen it, told me "The Treasure Planet" was one of the best things they ever saw from disney.

But CG only is annoying :/

[Tedsuo]

"Treasure Planet" was a total turd. The only reason to see it is the excellent animation between Jim Hawkins and John Silver. Glen Keane Reaffirms his position of "Animation God." What truly made that film annoying was the ammount of effort that was obviously put into it, and the good movie it could have been.

If Dinosaur was "Land Before Time: Part XVIII", then Treasue Planet is "Pirates of Dark Water: In Spaaaaaaaace."


-T

[fletchgirl]

yes, treasure planet... oh well, it wasn't as bad as atlantis. (not that that's hard....) the issue here is not whether CG is bad or good... it's that films should be made in the way that best suits them. there should be 3d films.. . Toy Story is a perfect example. i mean, the screen looked like plastic, it was great.... but it goes with effects too. CG does not look as good as models most of the time. they need a blend. like Titanic or Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor as a movie was terrible, but for the most part they seamlessly blended CG, models, and real planes and backgrounds. CG has it's place... it just shouldn't take the place of 2d all together. they really are doing this because CG films have done better... that's the worst idea i've ever heard. look a final fantasy. they thought it would sell on looks alone. and it sucked. and it bombed. it didn't matter that it was "new technology" it matters how good it is!!!! why can't they see that their films aren't going to do well if they have four or five major overhauls of the story?!!?? Like how "Emporer's new groove" came out of the planned inca epic "kingdom of the sun" If the story isn't good, fine, but don't start working on it then half way through decide that the story's going nowhere... errrg.....

The thing with CG is it looks so CLEAN. so perfect... which is why i thought Shrek didn't work for me visually... he was supposed to be dirty and disgusting and scary and instead he looked nice and clean and roundy. even the wax in his ears was clean. people said "ewwww" but only at the idea. it's not the same revulsion you get from say, Ren and Stimpy... same kind of jokes sometimes but they could just be pushed so much further. i don't think they push CG enough. their caught up on how theycan make things "realistic" if you're gonna make a realistic film with realistic characters, just shoot it live action. oh well...