WD Feature Animation is doomed!!!

Any topic that doesn't fit elsewhere.
User avatar
Joe Carioca
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2039
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 5:05 pm
Location: Brazil

WD Feature Animation is doomed!!!

Post by Joe Carioca »

Just check out this article from Laughing Place (by David Coenig). Pretty depressing, if you ask me...
Congratulations Mr. Eisner for destroying everything Walt tried so hard to accomplish ! :evil:
http://www.mouseplanet.com/david/dk030814.htm


Suspended Animation
Pencils down. Disney terminates traditional animation
Thursday, August 14, 2003
Unfortunately, the latest installment of Survivor doesn't take place at some remote tropical island. It takes place a lot closer to home… in beautiful downtown Burbank, under a giant Sorcerer's hat, at the Walt Disney Feature Animation building, where last week another group of stressed-out castaways were voted off the show.

Forget the official Disney line that Feature Animation boasts a staff of 1,000 to 1,500 artists. In Burbank, there are only about 60 traditional “2-D” animators left who actually pick up a pencil or a paintbrush, counting Layout, Animators, Clean-up and Background artists… and Disney has no 2-D projects currently in production for them to work on. (Disney has a like number of survivors holding on in Florida, where a half 2-D/half-CG (computer graphics) project tentatively called My Peoples is underway.)

The vast majority of Feature Animation's artists have been reassigned to a computer or shown the door. It all points to Disney's next two animated features (this fall's Brother Bear and next spring's Home on the Range) being their last.

The latest cutback came two weeks ago, after 13 traditional animators submitted five scenes they had done on computer to vie for six “3-D” spots left to cast on Chicken Little. “The real controversy of this,” noted an onlooker, “is that they were pitted against one another and the playing field wasn't fair. Those who just finished the training program called 'Boot Camp' were up against those who finished Boot Camp six months ago and had more time to finesse, complete and present a more finished test. Also, they purposely entered more people into the training program, anticipating that the majority would fail at learning the computer. Well, they were terribly wrong! They all did great. Now they're worried because they don't know what to do with them because they already hired animators from The Secret Lab (Kangaroo Jack, the dragons on Reign of Fire). They hired them on the superficial qualities that they could do a lot of footage. Forget the fact that they can't do a lot of character footage!”

Last week, six of the animators got the openings on Chicken Little. It looks like the other seven will get the boot. Consider the loss of talent:

Randy Haycock – character animator on Aladdin, Pocahontas, Lion King, Treasure Planet; supervising animator of Hercules' Baby/Young Hercules, Tarzan's Clayton, Atlantis' Princess Kida


Richard Hoppe – animator on Black Cauldron, Beauty & the Beast, Tarzan, Atlantis, Treasure Planet


James Lopez – animator on Lion King, Pocahontas; supervising animator of Hercules' Pain, Emperor's New Groove's Tipo


Shawn Keller – started in 1970s, character animator on Black Cauldron, Great Mouse Detective, Oliver & Co. , Little Mermaid, Treasure Planet; supervising animator of Atlantis' Cookie and Preston Whitmore


Mark Pudleiner – character animator on Hunchback of Notre Dame, Mulan, Hercules, Emperor's New Groove


John Pomeroy – started in 1970s and worked on Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh, Rescuers, Pete's Dragon, before leaving with Don Bluth; returned to Disney in 1990s to serve as supervising animator for Pocahontas' John Smith, Fantasia 2000's Firebird, Atlantis' Milo, Treasure Planet's Flint


Dougg Williams – character animator on Tarzan, Atlantis, Treasure Planet
Officially, most of the seven still “work” for Disney, since their contracts all end at different times (some extending into next year). But don't expect many of them to latch onto new projects too quickly, considering Michael Eisner's official decree: “2-D is dead.”

Sure, Eisner's ominous pronouncement is just words. Unfortunately, his actions speak just as loudly. Consider:

Disney only has two pictures left under its current deal with Pixar, and Pixar's terms for a proposed extension include paying Disney nothing more than a distribution fee—eliminating Finding Nemo-sized paydays for Disney, whether it retains Pixar or not.
With Pixar insisting their offer is firm, Eisner realizes he needs a backup plan—and he's seen how the average 2-D animated feature has fared versus the average 3-D offering.

What Eisner, et. al., is missing is that the most important factor in the success of an animated features has always been its story. A great concept, terrific characters, catchy music are important, too. The medium is absolutely the least important.

It's a lesson Disney forgot in the 1970s, when the Nine Really Old Men were doing pictures like The Aristocats and spending a lot less time crafting an original story than adding elegant flurries of animation.

That Finding Nemo is 3-D is the least important factor in its success. Yet, Disney is working on a short film now called Lorenzo the Cat (possibly for Fantasia 2006), which will be hand-drawn and then computer rendered—even though some who have seen the work-in-progress say the rendering “takes the life out of it.” The computerization is being done not to improve the film, but solely to give it a computer look.

Animation historians know that Disney's “golden eras”of animation were all kicked off with “princess stories” (Snow White, Cinderella, Little Mermaid).
If ever there were an opportunity for hand-drawn animation to show its stuff, it would be with a princess story.

Well, Disney has another well-known princess story in development—Rapunzel—but wants to use “motion capture,” the quasi-animated computer technique used in the sci-fi bomb Final Fantasy: The Spirit Within.

A few months ago, as production was winding down on Home on the Range, Disney sold off the animators' furniture.
Animators were still working on the production when their desks were spoken for. Those lucky enough to keep their jobs have been relocated to cubicles to work on a computer.

“I heard they kept the 'old' animation desks in a warehouse somewhere. They're almost like antiques,” said an insider. “The sale was a first come/first serve basis. It was quite haunting to see the majority of the newly-built animation desks just sitting there, waiting to be picked up. I can't imagine they will do 2-D animation any more, because the overhead alone in desks, etc., would be the budget!”

The empty offices were quickly usurped by unknown administrators and the 20+ vice presidents that now oversee Feature Animation.

Eisner has expressed interest in reanimating Disney's classic 2-D features in 3-D.
A computerized Pinocchio, anyone? (In fact, much of the 3-D character animation for Walt Disney World's upcoming Mickey's PhilharMagic was so bad—in particular Ariel from The Little Mermaid—it had to be reanimated by 2-D animators, then transferred into the computer.)

The tens of millions of dollars lost on Treasure Planet are fresh on Disney's mind—and executives are bracing for the worst with next spring's Home on the Range.
The film's production cost could exceed $175 million, in part due to story problems, a change in directors, and a delayed release (it was pushed back after Brother Bear.)

One insider said he wouldn't be surprised if Home on the Range is “criticized as Disney's worst film since The Black Cauldron. One of the notes that came back from the preview screening said that the movie 'was more boring than church!' It's a shame that Disney is going to go out with Home being the last example of what Disney can do.”

Feature Animation president David Stainton continues to stress, “We should have fun, because good films come out of a fun atmosphere!”Meanwhile, he spends his time trying to figure out whom to lay off next.
He hasn't exactly displayed Walt-like instincts for success, either. He had new plants placed on every staircase landing in the building, reportedly on recommendation of a Feng Shui consultant. He also was overheard to say he couldn't understand why Finding Nemo was such a big hit.

(That didn't stop them from hanging Finding Nemo window stickers all over the lobby at the Feature Animation building, as if they had absolutely anything to do with the picture. Do not expect Pixar, come April, to grace its lobby with pictures of cows from Home on the Range.)

Before leaving, Stainton's predecessor, Tom Schumacher, held a meeting in which he admitted that he didn't know where animation would be in five years. Will there still be hand-drawn animation? Will it all be done on computer? Will it use motion capture?
Astoundingly, Schumacher thought Disney would be just fine if it killed off traditional animation. He noted that he received several e-mail messages complimenting him on Ice Age. His attitude was that if so many people think that everything animated is from Disney, the Disney name must be in great shape and there was no need to worry.

That this encouraged him terrifies me. What those compliments would tell me is that, whether through others' advances or Disney's neglect, other studios have caught up to Disney. How long will Disney pretend that it has a competitive advantage in animation if people can no longer tell the difference between its products and those of its competitors?

Morale seems to be at an historic low.
Management views its talent as a liability instead of an asset. When Schumacher found out that one of the top animators was unhappy, his first response was not “What can we do to make him happy?” His reaction was, “Why doesn't he just leave?”

In some ways the exodus is reminiscent of the late 1970s, when Don Bluth got so fed up with the misdirected department that he rallied more than a dozen of Disney's best animators and quit. The main difference is that today if Glen Keane or Andreas Deja organized a mass walkout, instead of being angry, fearful and despondent, Feature Animation executives would probably throw a party. (Ironically, the day after the latest cutback, the animation building's lobby was decorated with balloons.)

Today's “survivors” are like the walking dead. Remember the residents of the Pridelands after Scar took over, waiting for the return of Simba?

Said one long-time animator: “I feel that what is going on—or rather not going on—at Disney is truly historic. Basically, Disney will never do hand-drawn animation again. Or at least not for a very, very long time and to the qualities and standards they have already established so far.”

Looking around his floundering surroundings, he added, “It's ironic that they modeled the building after a ship—with porthole windows and riveted doors... kinda like the Titanic. The only difference between Disney and the Titanic is that the Titanic had an orchestra!”
User avatar
indianajdp
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1813
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 7:10 pm
Location: Central Hoosierland

Post by indianajdp »

:( :(

The last of a dying breed seem to be hanging on for dear life.
What a shame.

Guess we could show our support for them by refusing to pay to see anymore CGI films.
" There's no Dumbass Vaccine " - Jimmy Buffett
Maerj
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 11:31 pm
Location: Ephrata, PA
Contact:

Post by Maerj »

That indeed is a very sad article. Mouseplanet.com tends to be overly negative though, I'm not saying that anything they say is untrue, but they do seem to play up the negatives.

I don't believe that 2D animation is yet doomed. If the next two films are successful, they will make more of them. That's why its important for everyone to see those movies. No one is going to boycott a movie just because its CG, but 2D can be saved if it makes money.

The art form of hand drawn animation is not dead. Just because there are oil paints doesn't mean that you can't paint with watercolors or acrylic. Just because there is ink doesn't mean that you can't still draw with a pencil. Just because there is computer animation doesn't mean that there can't still be cel animation, stop motion, claymation or a combination of styles and techniques.

In fact, that is probably how 2D animation can best survive on the big screen. If you take a look at another thread I posted in off topic called 'Wonderful Days' you can find a movie trailer that shows the combination of cg and 2D animation and models. The result is breathtaking. On Cartoon Network's Adult Swim there is a Japanese show called FLCL or Fooly Cooly which is a crazy concoction of animation styles and techniques and it is like no other animated series out there.

Hopefully, Disney is only putting 2D on the back burner for now. Perhaps if they wait a few years, the general public may grow bored with the 3D and might look for something different. If they choose the right story and tell it the right way, they could have another success with traditional animation. It would be a great shame to see 70 years of tradition to go away just like that...
User avatar
Choco Bear
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 12:36 pm

Post by Choco Bear »

so 2d is gone at disney
eisner i hate u!!!!! :x
:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
i guess i can look forward to all those sequels those are the only 2d we are gettin from them
i really hope this is not true :( what would disney think :cry:
User avatar
MickeyMouseboy
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3470
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 4:35 pm
Location: ToonTown

Post by MickeyMouseboy »

that article is made up. cause Michael Eisner said this 2 days ago when asked about the supposed death of 2-D:


"What's dead is bad storytelling," says Disney CEO Michael Eisner. "Technology doesn't make the movie; the story makes the movie. We've obviously done very well with computer animation and Pixar."
User avatar
2099net
Signature Collection
Posts: 9421
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 1:00 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by 2099net »

MickeyMouseboy wrote:that article is made up. cause Michael Eisner said this 2 days ago when asked about the supposed death of 2-D:


"What's dead is bad storytelling," says Disney CEO Michael Eisner. "Technology doesn't make the movie; the story makes the movie. We've obviously done very well with computer animation and Pixar."
That doesn't mean anything MMB - this topic is specifically talking about the death of 2D animation at Walt Disney Feature animation.

And it is happening.

FACT: Walt Disney Feature Animation has closed down most of it's offshoot animation facilities (with Walt Disney Feature Animation Paris being the latest to be closed - who did spectacular work on most of Tarzan and also most of Hunchback as well as segments for many more of the more recent animated films)

FACT - Disney Burbank is selling off most of it's equipment used to make 2D animated films.

FACT - Disney has taken a CAPS system from burbank and given it to ToonDisney in Australia

FACT - Disney is making lots of animators redundant or getting them to retrain for 3D animation. More worryingly many other jobs to do with 2D animation are being destroyed, with no offer of retraining (eg. Clean-Up staff)

Personally I don't think this is a really bad thing. But I don't think it's a good thing either. But it looks like ToonDisney (mainly based in Australia) will become the only 2D animation facility for Disney. I have no complaints about this - I think on the whole they are doing fantastic work on the much lower budgeted DTV films. I wouldn't be a bad thing if they were to be given more money in the future to make 'proper' 2D animated features. In fact it would be a very good thing IMOHO.

But 2D animation at Walt Disney Feature Animation is close, very, very, very close to being closed down.
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
User avatar
Loomis
Signature Collection
Posts: 6357
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia ... where there is no Magic Kingdom :(
Contact:

Post by Loomis »

2099net wrote:
But 2D animation at Walt Disney Feature Animation is close, very, very, very close to being closed down.
It is such a shame. Having just started to invest in old animation (both through Treasures and other means), 2D animation has such a great legacy. It would be a shame to see it go completely.

The Japanese continually show how a good film in 2D can be a viable dramatic form, and that thread with the Korean 2D/3D blend (Wonderful Days I believe it is called) the trailer shows just how good 2D can still look...

Hope they don't go for good.

Sequels and DTV - keepin' it real :P
Behind the Panels - Comic book news, reviews and podcast
The Reel Bits - All things film
Twitter - Follow me on Twitter
User avatar
Prince Adam
Anniversary Edition
Posts: 1318
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: The Great, Wide Somewhere (Ont, Canada)

Post by Prince Adam »

In response to the topic title:

:cry: :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
Defy Gravity...
User avatar
Sulley
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 453
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 8:41 pm
Location: Mt. Wannahawkaloogie

Post by Sulley »

:( I don't know what to believe. How very sad indeed. The "Animated Masterpieces" will most likely be no more after "Home." That is, at least for a while. Out of this terrible tragedy there can come good. The least of them being that some of us will be able to say we have ALL of the original 2D animated classics (44). But if the 3D is frowned upon by the general public, like if the future CGI movies bomb, Disney will lose much money, there will be an all-time low income and there will be a magnificent rebirth, like there has been in the past (hopefully). It will also make Disney concentrate more on the DVD Department, looking at what 2D they have left and make better releases of the best films, and turn out some great Treasures sets, perhaps including Song of the South. Anyways, something is bound to happen, and the studio WILL learn from it's mistakes. :wink:

Besides, Walt will haunt them if they don't, he's already starting to turn. :wink:
What would this wretched world be like without Disney?
User avatar
Luke
Site Admin
Posts: 10037
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2003 4:57 pm
Location: Dinosaur World
Contact:

Post by Luke »

I thought of the recent Eisner quote as well; maybe he just wasn't answering the question. I really hope Brother Bear does very well.
Captain Hook
Special Edition
Posts: 730
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 11:16 am

Post by Captain Hook »

This is so sad I'm ready to cry! :cry:

Okay, now that I'm finished, I think that there WILL be a rebirth, in about 10 years, where people go, "Let's go back to traditional animated features - remember Beauty and the Beast and Treasure Planet? We haven't had a movie like that for a LONG time."
User avatar
Inga Tu Schmista
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 7:06 am
Location: A Secret Bunker on Planet Turo

Post by Inga Tu Schmista »

Not that I'm obsessed or anything, but...

The success of Lilo & Stitch, which used animation techniques from the 1940's, shows that traditional animation isn't necessarily a dead horse. Treasure Planet bombed because the story was a bit lame and hackneyed. The jokes were forced and the animation was a bit too harsh. The second biggest problem was the lack of cross-generational appeal. TP seemed to be aimed exclusively at 9-12 year old boys. The animated films that work, 2-D or whatever, are successful because EVERYBODY wants to see them, not just a specific demographic.

But the biggest problem was....

...The lead character had a MULLET! Let that be a lesson to Disney: Mullets = box office failure.

Personally, I think if traditional animation is going to survive at Disney, it's going to be in Florida, not Burbank (If the Florida studio can ward off the bureaucratic deadweight that's so prevalent in Burbank).
Gantu: "You're foul! You're Flawed!"

Stitch: "Also cute and FLUFFY!"

~Lilo & Stitch
User avatar
Choco Bear
Gold Classic Collection
Posts: 473
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 12:36 pm

Post by Choco Bear »

Inga Tu Schmista wrote: But the biggest problem was....

...The lead character had a MULLET! Let that be a lesson to Disney: Mullets = box office failure.
:lol: i agree
User avatar
2099net
Signature Collection
Posts: 9421
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 1:00 pm
Location: UK
Contact:

Post by 2099net »

Didn't Tarzan have a mullet?
Most of my Blu-ray collection some of my UK discs aren't on their database
User avatar
MickeyMouseboy
Platinum Edition
Posts: 3470
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 4:35 pm
Location: ToonTown

Post by MickeyMouseboy »

we can always boycott all disney 3d projects and they will know 3d is not what's in!
Captain Hook
Special Edition
Posts: 730
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2003 11:16 am

Post by Captain Hook »

MickeyMouseboy wrote:we can always boycott all disney 3d projects and they will know 3d is not what's in!
Yeah! Another bake-off! :lol: Actually, I don't think I can... I HAVE to see Chicken Little, I'm quite sure that is one that I will buy on DVD. :D
User avatar
Matty-Mouse
Special Edition
Posts: 547
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 7:51 am
Location: UK

Post by Matty-Mouse »

Look at it this way...
In 2005 there will be 6 (at the least, 3 Dreamworks, 2 Disney and 1 Pixar) 3D animated movie's released and they cant all do well so that isn't looking to good for Disney this way either.

Pixar's film is bound to do well and if Dreamworks release a "Shrek" type of movie that will do well, Meaning the odds are stacked against Disney with "Chicken Little" and "Eglins Peoples" (or whatever the hell its called).

We still have hopes people.
Dust? Anyone? No?
Dust? Anyone? No?
Dust? Anyone? No?

Well thats actually low in fat so you can eat as much of that as you like.
User avatar
Loomis
Signature Collection
Posts: 6357
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 4:44 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia ... where there is no Magic Kingdom :(
Contact:

Post by Loomis »

Captain Hook wrote:
MickeyMouseboy wrote:we can always boycott all disney 3d projects and they will know 3d is not what's in!
Yeah! Another bake-off! :lol:
Chicken pie, anyone?
Behind the Panels - Comic book news, reviews and podcast
The Reel Bits - All things film
Twitter - Follow me on Twitter
User avatar
Inga Tu Schmista
Member
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2003 7:06 am
Location: A Secret Bunker on Planet Turo

Post by Inga Tu Schmista »

if Dreamworks release a "Shrek" type of movie that will do well
When is Shrek 2 coming out, anyway?
The sad truth is, I can't watch the first one anymore because I don't remember most of the "in" jokes (except for the digs at Disney), and the non-Disney ones I do remember seem kinda lame.

A more imporant question (because I do love conspiracy theories): Is Jeffery Katzenberg trying to kill traditional animation by releasing deliberately mediocre animated movies? :)

And no, Tarzan did not have a mullet (sho-lo) - his hair was all long.
Gantu: "You're foul! You're Flawed!"

Stitch: "Also cute and FLUFFY!"

~Lilo & Stitch
Maerj
Collector's Edition
Posts: 2748
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 11:31 pm
Location: Ephrata, PA
Contact:

Post by Maerj »

Inga Tu Schmista wrote:Treasure Planet bombed because the story was a bit lame and hackneyed. The jokes were forced and the animation was a bit too harsh. The second biggest problem was the lack of cross-generational appeal. TP seemed to be aimed exclusively at 9-12 year old boys. The animated films that work, 2-D or whatever, are successful because EVERYBODY wants to see them, not just a specific demographic.

But the biggest problem was....

...The lead character had a MULLET! Let that be a lesson to Disney: Mullets = box office failure.
I agree with you on the 'lack of cross-generational appeal' thing. It does seem that their animated films make more money when they do the fairy tale thing, but its still not a bad movie. It was released at a bad time without a good marketing campaign behind it. At least the DVD did pretty well!

I am assuming the mullet comment is intended as a joke... a real mullet is similar to a Melissa Etheridge style from the 80's or a Billy Ray Cirus cut or the Joe Dirt look. The lead character in TP had more of a modified skater-do than a mullet. Maybe if he would have let his ponytail out, it may have looked more like one, but that luckily didn't happen.
Post Reply