Another Golden Age of animation

DisneyAnimation88 · Post by **DisneyAnimation88** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:30 am

Do you think Disney Animation could possibly be entering another "Golden Age" or "Renaissance" in their history.

With the critical and commercial success of Princess and the Frog and Tangled, Disney Animation is enjoying a success I never thought it would have again. While I haven't seen Tangled myself as it hasn't been released here, the response to it on the forum seems to have been brilliant, while some critics have likened it to films like Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King. Princess and the Frog apparently didn't make as much money as Disney would have liked but the critical response was also very good. With the success of the two films, could Disney be building momentum going into their future releases or could this be a false dawn? How big a role has John Lasseter played in this success? In years to come, could we come to look at this as the beginnig of a renaissance similar to that of the 1990's?

rodis · Post by **rodis** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:53 am

While I enjoyed Tangled tremendously, I can't compare it to the animated classics simply because it's 3-d. So I don't know, its success may open the door for further 3-d movies, which means nothing to me.

mariadny · Post by **mariadny** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 12:14 pm

Enchanted- Awesome Disney comedy
Tiana- 2d, music, princess...Enjoyable
Rapunzel- 3d, yes, but traditional story, Menken, princess, fairy tale, great numbers (box office), awesome reviews....

I don´t know, but Disney has come back.

Semaj · Post by **Semaj** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:02 pm

That's what Disney has been anticipating since Lasseter consumed control of their animation division.

In fact, Disney has gone thru a series of hills and valleys since the time of its founding. It's first high period was the 1930's, the second (often overlooked) was the 1950's, and the third was the 1990's.

As of now, Disney's track record has become more consistent, and it looks like the general public is slowly regaining confidence in their films. However, I think we will need to wait a couple years before we can say whether this comeback is official.

DisneyAnimation88 · Post by **DisneyAnimation88** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:05 pm

I like the plans for the films Disney have planned for the future, especially King of the Elves. Mort also sounds interesting, definitely a story I didn't think Disney would do but perhaps that's a sign of how things are under Lasseter; the studio is willing to push the boundaries of the audience's expectation for the benefit of a strong story. Taking a break from fairytales isn't a bad thing, even though the two most recent films are of that genre and have been very successful. I like that animation now has a sole, recognised figure to guide it in Lassester, someone who seems to have one of the best understandings of the modern audience in cinema today. Two films in and things seem to be changing for the better so I have real confidence that that can continue into the future.

mariadny · Post by **mariadny** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:30 pm

Yes, but they have to make more fairy tales, they are their speciality.
Snow Queen, Princess and the Pea, Donkey Skin...
There are so many wonderful stories.

Remember...Disney in crisis = Cinderella is the salvation
Disney in crisis (70's and 80's) = Little Mermaid is the salvation
Now, Disney in crisis = Tiana and Rapunzel.....the salvation.

Disney can´t forget fairy tales.

DisneyAnimation88 · Post by **DisneyAnimation88** » Mon Jan 24, 2011 6:44 pm

I agree but those eras you listed were not built on just fairytales; Dumbo, Pinocchio, Peter Pan, 101 Dalmatians, The Lion King, Hunchback of Notre Dame. None of those films were fairytales but they were as equally memorable and of the same quality of Disney's best fairytales. Originality is never a bad thing and in Lasseter, Disney has someone whose made a film dynasty based on original ideas and stories.

Wonderlicious · Post by **Wonderlicious** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 5:45 am

Although the success of Tangled may be an indication (as well as the modest success of The Princess and the Frog), I don't want to completely jump up and shout "yes, Disney is back!". For the record, while I can see general patterns of boom-and-bust in Disney's history, I find the idea of pigeon holing films into eras of success a bit problematic. It paints each film with the same brush no matter what their success or quality; reasonably popular films like Robin Hood and Lilo and Stitch can scoffed as pieces of dirt by Disney fans due to their overall eras being considered lesser, whereas good but less entertaining films such as Pocahontas or Tarzan can get off reasonably lightly due to being released in an era considered as golden. It also places rather lofty expectations on certain films; I think that a lot of the disappointment with the actual reception of The Princess and the Frog stemmed from the fact that so many people were anticipating it to be Disney's salvation, and not simply a film with modest success. Obviously, Tangled seems to prove that confidence in Disney is increasing, but I'm not going to say we have another "golden age".

mariadny wrote:Yes, but they have to make more fairy tales, they are their speciality.
Snow Queen, Princess and the Pea, Donkey Skin...
There are so many wonderful stories.

Well, of course, there's Dumbo, Bambi, The Lion King, 101 Dalmatians and many others, which are all simple, whimsical animal-related fables, equally a speciality of sorts, and without a princess, fairy or Victorian/Medieval backdrop in sight.

If I ever wanted Disney to do any more fairy tales in the near future, I'd want them to tackle ones that don't focus so much on princesses or female heroines, mostly for variation purposes, and also because there are very few obvious stories with female leads left (The Princess and the Pea is around 400 words long and perhaps better suited as a short or featurette, and Donkey Skin covers themes of incest that would provide controversy even if they were removed). Instead, I would go more for child or animal based ones, or ones involving high adventure. There'd ultimately be enough storybook familiarity for those who want it, while ultimately not providing a retread of what's been done before.

Escapay · Post by **Escapay** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 3:58 pm

Wondy wrote:For the record, while I can see general patterns of boom-and-bust in Disney's history, I find the idea of pigeon holing films into eras of success a bit problematic. It paints each film with the same brush no matter what their success or quality; reasonably popular films like Robin Hood and Lilo and Stitch can scoffed as pieces of dirt by Disney fans due to their overall eras being considered lesser, whereas good but less entertaining films such as Pocahontas or Tarzan can get off reasonably lightly due to being released in an era considered as golden. It also places rather lofty expectations on certain films; I think that a lot of the disappointment with the actual reception of The Princess and the Frog stemmed from the fact that so many people were anticipating it to be Disney's salvation, and not simply a film with modest success. Obviously, Tangled seems to prove that confidence in Disney is increasing, but I'm not going to say we have another "golden age".

Agreed. A couple years ago, for the sake of giving the age a name, I said it would be "The Age of Overestimating the Success". And to be honest, I still think it will be. It's probably best to wait a good 5-10 years before we look back on 2007-2012 and call it an age of anything. And even then, any name "assigned" to it would be debatable according to how each fan feels.

albert

PheR · Post by **PheR** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:02 pm

with Winnie the Pooh next in line and pretty much nothing official after that, I don't think so...

AladdinFan · Post by **AladdinFan** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:58 pm

Disney are now making good movie.

Chicken Little: Bad
Meet The Robinsons: Good
Bolt: Good
Princess and the Frog: Excellent
Tangled: Excellent
Winnie the Pooh: I bet it's going to be good

Goliath · Post by **Goliath** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:31 pm

For that to happen, Disney will first have to deal with the fact they no longer have a monopoly on putting out animated features. There never has been this much competition for Disney. In the 1980's and 1990's, Don Bluth was never a serious contender, but nowadays, there are so many animation films put out every year, that Disney has to learn how to deal with that. And it has to learn how to be a pioneer again, instead of the follower it still is now.

DisneyJedi · Post by **DisneyJedi** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:44 pm

Goliath wrote:For that to happen, Disney will first have to deal with the fact they no longer have a monopoly on putting out animated features. There never has been this much competition for Disney. In the 1980's and 1990's, Don Bluth was never a serious contender, but nowadays, there are so many animation films put out every year, that Disney has to learn how to deal with that. And it has to learn how to be a pioneer again, instead of the follower it still is now.

I think you forgot the other animated films of the 90s that tried to be- if not out-Disney- Disney. One example Quest for Camelot, which despite being a terrible movie, still has a spot in my heart.

Goliath · Post by **Goliath** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:49 pm

DisneyJedi wrote:I think you forgot the other animated films of the 90s that tried to be- if not out-Disney- Disney. One example Quest for Camelot, which despite being a terrible movie, still has a spot in my heart.

I had indeed forgotten about them --and that's actually exactly proving my point.

Elladorine · Post by **Elladorine** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 6:57 pm

Well, it may be interesting to note that Disney animated films were monetarily beaten out by certain rivals in the 80's:

The Care Bears Movie vs. The Black Cauldron (1985)
An American Tail vs. The Great Mouse Detective (1986)
The Land Before Time vs. Oliver & Company (1988, same release day!)

Of course some have longer holding power than others, and there's much more competition to be found today.

Flanger-Hanger · Post by **Flanger-Hanger** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:01 pm

Comparing Tangled's performance (or any of the top 5 animated films of 2010) with Frog's only underlines again how poorly that movie did. If there's any startng point for a needlessly labled period, it begins with Tangled and only Tangled.

DisneyJedi · Post by **DisneyJedi** » Tue Jan 25, 2011 8:24 pm

Flanger-Hanger wrote:Comparing Tangled's performance (or any of the top 5 animated films of 2010) with Frog's only underlines again how poorly that movie did. If there's any startng point for a needlessly labled period, it begins with Tangled and only Tangled.

Well, Princess and the Frog did okay. True, it didn't recoup its budget domestically, but it at least crossed the $100 million mark and almost earned back its money, only a few hundred thousand shy. Plus, audiences and critics loved TPatF.

I just hope that Tangled's performance doesn't "prove" that the public "wants" only CGI movies.

Disney's Divinity · Post by **Disney's Divinity** » Wed Jan 26, 2011 2:14 pm

Golden Ages have build-up though, which is why a lot of people think Oliver & Company and Who Framed Rodger Rabbit had a lot to do with The Little Mermaid’s success (besides the fact that it was just a great film). Disney’s had that lately, too, with Bolt, Enchanted, and TP&TF before Tangled.

DisneyAnimation88 · Post by **DisneyAnimation88** » Wed Jan 26, 2011 3:29 pm

It will be interesting to see how successful Disney's future films will be considering we won't be seeing a fairy tale for a while, at least if the current schedule doesn't change. With the last two films being successful and both being fairy tales, I'd like to see how films like Reboot Ralph and King of the Elves will be received.

milojthatch · Post by **milojthatch** » Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:14 am

Goliath wrote:...Don Bluth was never a serious contender...

I don't know that I can agree with that. Keep in mind that Don's films of the 80's were doing REALLY well, much better then Disney's. Even the documentary "Waking Sleeping Beauty" points this out. Keep in mind that "The Land Before Time" was released the same day as "Oliver and Co." and beat it, and not barley either. Disney did not come back until AFTER "The Little Mermaid." Had that film not been made, history very likely would have gone differently...

As for this being a new "Renaissance," I'd love to agree, but it seems to me such titles are normally given AFTER the time period, more of a looking back then during. Although in this day and age, folks do seem to want to name time periods as they happen. I think it could turn into that, but we need to wait say 5 years or so and see how it shaped up. Let's let the next several films come out before we start giving it that title. But I very much hope it is that said!

DisneyJedi wrote:
I just hope that Tangled's performance doesn't "prove" that the public "wants" only CGI movies.

Amen.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Another Golden Age of animation

Another Golden Age of animation