How do Disney compare to Dreamworks SKG?

[Jules]

Personally, I'm completely enamoured with the Disney films. I've come to see Dreamworks as monsters who try to destroy my most cherished source of animated films. (They're always picking on Disney)

I know it's wrong to think like this, but I can't seem to help it. When I see a Dreamworks film, I don't enjoy it as much as I should. In fact, I havn't seen a lot of Dreamworks features: Prince of Egypt (1998),Antz (1998), Shrek (2001), Shrek 2 (2004) and Madagascar (2005), the latter being the one I disliked most.

But I did like Shrek 2, Antz and The Prince of Egypt.

I want to see the rest of the Dreamworks films, like Shark Tale (which I've heard is really bad), Spirit, The Road to El Dorado and Sinbad.

That way. I'll be able to judge better.

[271286]

I really think Disney/Pixar is superior when it comes to CGI... Dreamworks got it right with Shrek and Shrek 2, but they dont have what it takes to continue doing great films with a good story...

I recently bought Madagascar, and I think it's an OK movie, mostly because of the great voice talents, but I was a bit dissapointed with it... It seems all dreamworks can do is make movies with comedy - and in the end it gets to much when all a movie really has of qualities is comedy... It gets shallow...

[Hogi Bear]

Isn't Dreamworks SKG the studio unit that made Gladator and films alike, which is now a property of Paramount (Viacom). So, I'm guessing you mean Dreamworks Animation and although Shrek and others before it were made in the SKG unit, I think they've been transfered to being a Dreamworks Animation property.

Anyway, not that any of the above matters.

I think the fact that Dreamworks pokes fun at Disney a lot, is just due to the fact that when it comes to classics and classic scenes, it's more than likely Disney made them (animation wise) and also because they have the richest history in the animation world. Even in the Simpsons they make fun of Disney (so to speak).

Road to El Dorado was a good movie from what I remember (haven't watched it in a while).

Anyway, in comparing, the landscape always changes in the future.

Edit: Welcome to the Forums as well Julian! I also think movies when not viewed in connection to anything else, can be good (or whatever).

[Timon/Pumbaa fan]

Isn't Dreamworks SKG the studio unit that made Gladator and films alike, which is now a property of Paramount (Viacom). So, I'm guessing you mean Dreamworks Animation and although Shrek and others before it were made in the SKG unit, I think they've been transfered to being a Dreamworks Animation property.

Well for the most part, you're right. However Shrek was not made by Dreamworks Animation. It was made from PDI/Dreamworks which was 40% owned by Dreamworks. Then in 2004, PDI/Dreamworks was formed into Dreamworks Animation. So in other words, the Dreamworks Animation segment of Dreamworks Animation were the people who created "Shark Tale", "Father of the Pride", all of Dreamwork's 2D films and the upcoming "Over the Hedge". The PDI/Dreamworks segment of Dreamworks Animation, though, created "Antz", "Shrek", "Shrek 2" "Madagascar" and the upcoming "Shrek 3" and Madagascar 2". Then Aardman(the creators of Wallace and Gromit and Chicken Run and the upcoming "Flushed Away") is completely different and works like Pixar, before they were bought by Disney that is.

Confusing, no?

[Hogi Bear]

Thanks for the clarification Timon/Pumba fan. It's not confusing, although Madagascar 3, is I'm guessing meant to be 2?

[Jules]

Confusing, no?

No Timon/Pumba Fan, you explained quite clearly.

The good thing about Blu-Ray is that if you have a DVD collection, it won't become worthless, because present day DVD discs will play on Blu-Ray players.

That's good, isn't it?

[2099net]

Well, they both make animated films, but they have different ideas of what an animated film should be.

I'm no big fan of Shrek (or Shark Tale. Or...), but you can see throughout all of Dreamworks Animation's films, they've generally played and aimed at a more jaded, and cynical audience than Disney's films do (The only exception would be Prince of Egypt, but that was a cynically driven Oscar® bait movie anyhow, so it cancels itself out) Where as Disney like to play on and capture the innocence of children and childhood.

So while this means you get films with innuendo and farts, you also get a little more to appeal to the not-so-innocent older cinema viewer. The strongest examples being Antz and Road to El Dorado. Sadly, most of their films still revert to simplistic mush and morals by the end of the picture, which sort of ruins the effect.

Go and think about the situation in the world today, and go and watch Antz and A Bug's Life. Now, which of those two films is more in-tune with the world, has more relevence to today and actually has a message beyond an often repeated kiddie moral? I strongly believe, Antz is the better film. I don't care so-much about ugly CGI designs, the fact that two "Ant" moves were released round about the same time. I care that I can watch Antz and have it still challenge my brain.

It's a shame after a such a good opening film from Dreamworks, they seem to have dumbed themselves down into a formula for their animated films just as unimagnative and identifyable as Disney's Princess formula (In DW case, its Motormouth sidekick, nurotic main character, modern covers of classic songs, PG baiting innuendo, pop-culture parody, happy ever after ending)

[Wonderlicious]

I have mixed feelings on Dreamworks (though they lean more towards positive than negative). I loved The Prince of Egypt and the Shrek movies, whilst having faults, were fun. However, I didn't like Shark Tale at all (I actually finished it two thirds through), and I can understand why some people will dislike the films. In overall terms of animation, I have to admit that if you consider Pixar/Studio Ghibli/Modern Disney as the modern version of the WB cartoon studio or Walt's studio (for both, I mean the two studios from around 1930 through the late 60s), then Dreamworks can look a little bit of a Hanna Barbera in comparison; fun entertainment and nice eye candy is available, yet it doesn't seem great when in motion. In my opinion, whilst the realistic creations of Shrek look nice, they look awquard in motion compared to the more cartoony designs of Monsters, Inc and The Incredibles.

I should also add that I will never fully class Aardman films as Dreamworks films, however. I understand that there's a distribution deal. To tell the truth, Wallace and Gromit personally seem to stir more images in the mind of the BBC than Dreamworks, due to the Beeb showing the original featurettes on both of the two principal BBC channels during special events such as Christmas. And by the way, Aardman are one of the coolest animation studios around today, and if classed as separate from Dreamworks beat them any day.

[Jules]

I have not seen Shark Tale, but have seen Madagascar. Madagascar feels rather stale in terms of story and humour. I think Dreamworks' Shrek 2 was much better.

I don't know who will agree or disagree with me about this point, but I feel that Chicken Little, though not on par with the Pixar films, is definately superior to Madagascar. It is more imaginative, for one thing, and its frenetic pace makes it wonderful and exciting...maybe also helping to conceal its shortcomings, as I have read in some critics' reviews.

What do you think?

[toonaspie]

Here's the thing you gotta know about Dreamworks though. They had no intention to be Disney-like at all. The animated films they make were adultish films mainly for kids and adults where as Disney made kiddish films for all audiences. I think Dreamworks was badly influenced by films such as Hunchback of Notre Dame and Atlantis which were too adultish for kids to swallow. They would make films such as El Dorado and Sinbad without thinking in advance "now who the hell would be remotely interested in seeing this?" Nobody, really. They both couldve worked much better as live action films. Maybe they were fooled by the box office success of their first film Prince of Egypt, one that became easily successful because of their built-in audience. (cough "Christians" cough)

Those were all PG films. Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron was Dreamworks only G rated 2D film. It's a real shame that this film was highly unrecognized and under appreciated because I considered it one of Dreamworks better animated films. The film has plenty of drama and heart for adults to enjoy and its easier, I think, for kids to swallow than some of the crazier stuff that comes out of Disney.

As for Dreamworks' CGI films, there's a serious lack of originality. Seriously, how many CGI animal buddy comedies do we need?! Shrek is the only original CGI film to come out of that studio and theyre milking the hell out of it. I like the Aardman stuff that Dreamworks distributes such as Chicken Run though.

Whatever the hell Katzenberg was doing to rebel against Disney it aint working, he's only brought Dreamworks down to Disney's level (from the bad years). And should Disney manage to recover from the recent years of slump, Dreamworks will be screwed.

[numba1lostboy]

Disney is miles better than Dreamworks. Aside from the Shrek movies and The Prince of Egypt, Dreamworks' animated movies are crap.

Antz- a stupid mockery of a Bug's Life.
Shark Tale- a stupid mockery of Finding Nemo.
Madagascar- just a really stupid movie.

Dreamworks animation is very innappropriate and vile.

Shark Tale relied on WAY TOO MANY African American jokes, which made the movie totally ridiculous...but I guess that's what you get with Will Smith.

Madagascar was just plan stupid. The animation itself was atrocious!! I couldn't get past it. If a show or movie has bad animation, I just cannot watch it (i.e. Proud Family, Atlantis, Madagascar, and King of the Hill).

lol...my friends are MAKING me get off, so I'll expound later.

[Timon/Pumbaa fan]

Madagascar was just plan stupid. The animation itself was atrocious!! I couldn't get past it. If a show or movie has bad animation, I just cannot watch it (i.e. Proud Family, Atlantis, Madagascar, and King of the Hill).

I respectfully disagree actually. While Madagascar wasn't the greastest non-Disney animated film ever made, I have to say I really enjoyed it. IMO, it was better than the 2 Shrek films combined!

I was just glad it didn't rely on pop-references you could hear 10 times funnier on "The Simpsons" or "Family Guy".

[magicalwands]

I look at Disney and Dreamworks to have two different types of animation film directions. Disney is the more fantasy & magical type; whilst Dreamworks is the more wild and "hip" type.

I have to agree that Disney is the far superior studio for animation because most of what Dreamworks films depend on is comedy. I know that comedy is a genre but I think they only make jokes because they can't stick a great and dramatic scene in there.

Disney needs to go back to 2D animation; they just can't do great films with CGI. Imagine The Lion King in CG , well there's an example on the Lion King menu of 3D zazu. Even if I am going to Pixar, I have to admit that CGI just doesn't have the soul traditional animation has. Take the zazu example again, when they play the music in the background during his flight, it just isn't the same as if they had made him 2D.

Sorry for going on about Disney...but all in all, Disney is the more superior filmmaker with its magical movies (if they go back to 2D) whilst Dreamworks is the more comedic filmmaker, who has the enjoyable once in a while laugh at a movie theatre...but I would rather watch an old Disney film over that any day.

[memnv]

I like Dreamworks movies and Disney Movies. They poke fun at each other. Have you noticed the new Disney Film coming out soon The Wild pokes fun at Madagascar

[2099net]

Antz- a stupid mockery of a Bug's Life.
Shark Tale- a stupid mockery of Finding Nemo.
Madagascar- just a really stupid movie.

I can't see how anyone can all Antz "stupid" see My earlier post. As for Shark Take being a mockery of Finding Nemo, you may as well say Lilo and Stitch is a mockery of E.T.

[PatrickvD]

Antz- a stupid mockery of a Bug's Life.
Shark Tale- a stupid mockery of Finding Nemo.
Madagascar- just a really stupid movie.

I can't see how anyone can all Antz "stupid" see My earlier post. As for Shark Take being a mockery of Finding Nemo, you may as well say Lilo and Stitch is a mockery of E.T.

I agree, though the idea of two CGI fish movies may sounds the same, thankfully they have nothing more than that in common. And Finding Nemo is obviously the better movie.

Antz was unfunny and unappealing. Very unappealing in my opinion. My brain has never felt challenged after watching a Dreamworks film anyway. Pixar and Dreamworks have one thing in common. They take the most simple and chiclé story set ups for their films. However, Pixar has the ability to make each scene fun and pure entertainment. Dreamworks does not. Well, for the most part. Some of their films shine here and there, but never the full 100% like Toy Story or The Incredibles.

I'd even say Antz was one of their worst films. not the worst... that title goes to El Dorado... I was literally watching that film with my mouth wide open wondering what the heck Katzenberg, Elton John and the entire story department were thinking when they made that trainwreck they call a movie. Prince of Egypt had a certain quality, but they went to the bottom with El Dorado. Terrible. The songs are SO bad..... it makes me laugh just thinking about the opening song... so very bad.

[Aladdin from Agrabah]

Maybe they were fooled by the box office success of their first film Prince of Egypt, one that became easily successful because of their built-in audience. (cough "Christians" cough)

Spielberg and of course Katzenberg are Hebrew. So, they tried to make a film targeting the hebrew audience, not the Christians.They tried to make a film that would hail their race, they don't give a damn about Christians. Well, Moses is a part of Christianity of course, but the Hebrews still wait for the Messiah, they don't believe in Jesus.So Moses is one of their greatest heroes. The film's philosophy was completely hebrew IMO, not christian. Then again, you're still right, hebrews are a built-in audience as well.

[2099net]

Antz was unfunny and unappealing. Very unappealing in my opinion. My brain has never felt challenged after watching a Dreamworks film anyway. Pixar and Dreamworks have one thing in common. They take the most simple and chiclé story set ups for their films. However, Pixar has the ability to make each scene fun and pure entertainment. Dreamworks does not. Well, for the most part. Some of their films shine here and there, but never the full 100% like Toy Story or The Incredibles.

I'd even say Antz was one of their worst films. not the worst...

Antz is a fantastic film with a cracking script. It's pure satire throughout, and very "adult". Everytime is see it, I enjoy it more.

It deals with such issues the need for personal freedom, individuality and free thinking; war as a political tool - used to control the massess; social classes; false heroes hyped up by a desperate media (again to help control the masses) and finally ultimate corruption.

In fact, the issues and questions it raises are more valid today than when the film was made.

In addition to this, we have wonderful parodies of/homages to Metropolis , Starship Troopers, 1984, any 1950's War movie you can mention, any Vietnam movie you can mention and even War of the Worlds (the fable of Insectopia which is similar to the deluded dreams of some of the fleeing humans plans for an underground Utopia in the novel). And of course, it has the feel of a Woody Allen film.

The problem with Antz is, it's not, and never was, "a family film".

[Kossage]

Some of the Dreamworks films have been quite nice. Here's what I thought of some of them:

The Prince of Egypt was and still is a thrilling movie in many ways. The animation (scenes such as Moses meeting God, the plagues, the Red Sea to mention a few), the music with both songs (When You Believe is a very nice song, and I enjoyed the other songs too as every song had its strengths) and score (Zimmer's theme for God is quite touching, and there are some very epic choral moments involved in the score too to constrast the tender parts). The actors do a good job and the adaptation of the story works.

The Road to El Dorado is quite nice too. Sure, it doesn't reach the same proportions as TPoE, but it is witty at times, has funny protagonists, some interesting concepts, beautiful animation (the famous scene when we see El Dorado for the first time etc), nice songs and score and enough dramatic moments to make it a thrilling visual ride (like during the jaguar chase scene).

Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron is, in my opinion, too underrated a film. True, it isn't the best out there, but it certainly isn't the worst. I like the idea of the animals not really talking (unless you count the protagonist's thoughts), and I like the "brothers under the sun" theme in it when we see the Indian guy and the horse become friends. Even the villain surprises us in the end, and although I find Spirit at times too confident (although the Colonel vs. Spirit scene in the fort was quite thrilling), there are enough dramatic moments where we see him beaten (like the beautiful "Sound the Bugle" song scene). Music works here, and although Zimmer's electronic score does get on my nerves at times, it does have some nice melodies which are derivated from Bryan Adams's interesting songs. Animation is once again very good in my opinion (I enjoyed the nice CGI camera move in the beginning when it sweeps down and "flies" through the American countryside and ends up with the horses).

Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas is one of those underrated films too. True, it might not appeal to the youngest kids, but I found it very bold and interesting concept with surprisingly much wittiness and breathtaking animation at times (the Syracuse scenes, the Tartarus scenes and of course the thrilling climax(es) to mention a few). The CGI monsters do look a bit off at times, but there's that sense of adventure which is accompanied by the wonderful robust, swashbucklin' score by Harry Gregson-Williams (the score clearly took my breath away while I was watching the film in the cinema, especially during those grandiose moments in the film when everything turned quite epic). The story itself is interesting albeit not the most faithful adaptation of the legend, but the execution scenes and such clearly showed the strength of mixing animation, script, acting and score together in a wonderful way.

Shrek and Shrek 2 are nice films as well. The scores are quite nice (I especially like Fiona's theme, and the musical numbers in the second film such as "Fairy Godmother Song" and "Holding Out for a Hero" are quite funny and thrilling too) and the animation is okayish. It took me a while to get used to the Disney bashing these two films have, but it does make Shrek what it is, and in the end the stories these comedies have do have some touching scenes (like at the end of the second film). I wouldn't rank these movies next to the most classic Disney films, but they are certainly worth a watch and can make you laugh at times.

I've seen other Dreamworks films too, but the ones I listed here are the ones I liked the most. Sure, Dreamworks still hasn't reach the quality of the best Disney classics, although especially The Prince of Egypt came pretty close (I still shiver whenever I hear the wonderful "Deliver Us" song at the beginning of the film). They have their strengths and weaknesses, and most of the Dreamworks films are quite good in their own right. Of course this is just my opinion.

[DisneZ]

I look at Disney and Dreamworks to have two different types of animation film directions. Disney is the more fantasy & magical type; whilst Dreamworks is the more wild and "hip" type.

I have to agree that Disney is the far superior studio for animation because most of what Dreamworks films depend on is comedy. I know that comedy is a genre but I think they only make jokes because they can't stick a great and dramatic scene in there.

Disney needs to go back to 2D animation; they just can't do great films with CGI. Imagine The Lion King in CG , well there's an example on the Lion King menu of 3D zazu. Even if I am going to Pixar, I have to admit that CGI just doesn't have the soul traditional animation has. Take the zazu example again, when they play the music in the background during his flight, it just isn't the same as if they had made him 2D.

Sorry for going on about Disney...but all in all, Disney is the more superior filmmaker with its magical movies (if they go back to 2D) whilst Dreamworks is the more comedic filmmaker, who has the enjoyable once in a while laugh at a movie theatre...but I would rather watch an old Disney film over that any day.

I agree.

First of all Disney/Pixar is way better at the storytelling and character development IMO. Dreamworks CGI's are based on simple concepts and are then filled with jokes and gags.
It worked with Shrek, because of the fairytales parodies and Shrek being the rude Anti-hero and the stand-up like performance of Eddy murphy's donkey. Shrek was new, fresh and completely the opposite of dinsey and fairytales. That worked. But Shark tale was a dissapointment and Madagascar wasn't great either.
While I think that Toy story, Monsters Inc. the Incredibles and Finding Nemo were all great because of their mix of humor, characters, story and emotion.
Talking about emotion and ambiance, just listen to the constant sound effects and music of finding nemo to make you feel the scene and create the underwater illusion. Just great!


Yes, 2-D has a soul or a feeling to it 3D could never reproduce, simply because they're not the same!
Just as how a beautiful Painting differs from a good photograph.
I hope Disney realises that simply because of the invention of the photocamera people didn't just stopped loving Paintings.
If Disney thinks it through in a smart way it should turn out to be real profitable to keep producing handdrawn animation on a less frequent scale. Specifiic projects can be assigned to the medium that supports it the best.
Cars in 3-D but a fairy-tale in poetic 2D handpainted style along with musical elements.
However I fear that with the closing of the last studio's in Australia it will be hard to back-track.

Can't we start a site or petition for this somehow? Or maybe we can appeal to Roy Disney who still seems to have lot's of influence and has a soft spot for Disney's once Core business and current business foundation...