Hand-Drawn Animation Dead at Disney

[Sotiris]

The CGI is actually really good for a first-time company. The animation improved a lot throughout these 4 years.

The animation is outsourced to Prana Studios in Mumbai, the same studio that animates the Tinker Bell films for DisneyToon Studios.

[PatrickvD]

The CGI is actually really good for a first-time company. The animation improved a lot throughout these 4 years.

The animation is outsourced to Prana Studios in Mumbai, the same studio that animates the Tinker Bell films for DisneyToon Studios.

Except this time around they had one intern animate the entire thing.

[estefan]

Believe it or not, quite a number of people associated with Disney and DreamWorks worked on Legends of Oz, including Will Finn (who co-directed it), Lisa Keene, Simon Wells and Shannon Tindle. I've actually seen the movie, but being under embargo, I can't say whether the movie showcases their talent. But I tend to prefer people go see movies and form their own individual opinions, rather than just blindly agreeing with one or two people who've seen it or basing their whole opinions entirely on trailers and advertising (which aren't put together by the filmmakers, but rather the distributor's marketing department).

[Sotiris]

Believe it or not, quite a number of people associated with Disney worked on Legends of Oz, including Will Finn (who co-directed it), Lisa Keene, Simon Wells and Shannon Tindle.

You're forgetting Ken Duncan, the Disney animator who supervised Meg and Jane amongst others, who worked as a character designer on the film. If you look at his drawings, they are immensely more appealing than the final product.

Untitled.jpg (33.86 KiB) Viewed 5000 times

[PatrickvD]

But I tend to prefer people go see movies and form their own individual opinions, rather than just blindly agreeing with one or two people who've seen it or basing their whole opinions entirely on trailers and advertising (which aren't put together by the filmmakers, but rather the distributor's marketing department).

But the animation on display in the trailer looks atrocious.

I love animation, so I don't enjoy suffering through needlessly cheap animation. I will wait for reviews and more opinions in case it's a Hoodwinked type of deal, where the actual film was incredibly entertaining in spite of its horrible visuals.

But so far, this looks bad. I hope that's an opinion I'm entitled to form based on trailers.

Oh and those character designs look lovely. But no surprise there. If Disney has trouble translating amazing hand drawn character designs to CGI, it's only logical that other studios fail even harder.

[FigmentJedi]

Bad animation aside, Legends of Oz rubs me the wrong way because there's so much actual Baum material to adapt into film and they go with some mediocre fanfic level book created by one of Baum's descendants that's too reliant on the original book.

[Disney's Divinity]

But I tend to prefer people go see movies and form their own individual opinions, rather than just blindly agreeing with one or two people who've seen it or basing their whole opinions entirely on trailers and advertising (which aren't put together by the filmmakers, but rather the distributor's marketing department).

But the animation on display in the trailer looks atrocious.

This. While some could argue you can't judge characters/story by the trailer, going to see the film won't change the fact that the animation seen in the trailer is horrendous. Maybe there would be one or two scenes that aren't horrendous, possibly? But the animation in the trailer will be there.

[TsWade2]

Excuse me, I don't mean to be a party pooper, but this has nothing to do with Legends of Oz. This is about us fans in a crisis of DIsney losing creativity of hand drawn animation. Hand drawn must come back. And those current Disney family are hopeless for not saving that wonderful artistic medium.

[ce1ticmoon]

Believe it or not, quite a number of people associated with Disney and DreamWorks worked on Legends of Oz, including Will Finn (who co-directed it), Lisa Keene, Simon Wells and Shannon Tindle. I've actually seen the movie, but being under embargo, I can't say whether the movie showcases their talent. But I tend to prefer people go see movies and form their own individual opinions, rather than just blindly agreeing with one or two people who've seen it or basing their whole opinions entirely on trailers and advertising (which aren't put together by the filmmakers, but rather the distributor's marketing department).

I agree with PatrickvD and Disney's Divinity entirely.

I said it is beyond-horrendous-looking. That is an opinion, of course, but is one I'm confident would be shared pretty universally. Of course, I can't speak for the film as a whole, but the poor visual development and animation is sure to be a huge hurdle to overcome if I were to see the film. Character animation is a huge part of the "performance" in animated films; if that is not done well, the film itself is sure to suffer as a whole. Just the same as if a well-written live-action film is acted by actors who can't act.

It's certainly a valid opinion to hold. However, I would never go all the way and declare it is a bad movie without seeing it.

[Warm Regards]

So apparently The Flintstones are getting a theatrical release via Warner Bros.

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=118027

A new big screen take on the modern stone age family is on the way from Warner Bros. Animation. The Hollywood Reporter today brings word that Chris Henchy ("The Campaign") is providing the screenplay with Will Ferrell and Adam McKay executive producing through Gary Sanchez Productions.

A comical take on a prehistoric family, "The Flintstones" ran for six seasons, setting a record for a primetime animated series that would not be beat for nearly thirty years (when it was overtaken by "The Simpsons"). The franchise was previously brought to the big screen as a live-action film in 1994 and was followed by a sequel, The Flinstones in Viva Rock Vegas in 2000.

Seth MacFarlane was developing an animated reboot of the property a few years ago, but plans for it ultimately failed to move forward.

Although no date for the new film has been announced, Warner Bros. did, just yesterday, put down two placeholders on their release calendar for unspecified animated project. The first will arrive February 10, 2017 and the second is set for February 9, 2018.

I must admit that I am curious to see where the direction will go on this one. Waner Bros. confirmed that their other future releases besides this (The Lego Movie 2, Storks, and Smallfoot) will be 3D. I'd like to think that with such a classic product, they'll do hand drawn, but they could very well go CG or even the Peanuts route.

So we shall see.

[Sotiris]

I'd like to think that with such a classic product, they'll do hand drawn, but they could very well go CG or even the Peanuts route.

I highly doubt it will be anything other than CG. There's a slim chance it could be Flash-animated, but I wouldn't count on it. It's odd though the report doesn't specify the medium. I suppose animation nowadays equals CG by default unless stated otherwise. By the way, the Peanuts route is the CG route. There's no 2D animation involved with the Peanuts movie. Let's not confuse style with medium.

[TsWade2]

I'd like to think that with such a classic product, they'll do hand drawn, but they could very well go CG or even the Peanuts route.

I highly doubt it will be anything other than CG. There's a slim chance it could be Flash-animated, but I wouldn't count on it. It's odd though the report doesn't specify the medium. I suppose animation nowadays equals CG by default unless stated otherwise. By the way, the Peanuts route is the CG route. There's no 2D animation involved with the Peanuts movie. Let's not confuse style with medium.

You hope killer, you!

[disneyprincess11]

Yowsers!!!!!! Legends of Oz has a ZERO on Rotten Tomatoes.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/legends ... ys_return/

So much for their franchise plans.

[Fflewduur]

^"Eye-gougingly ugly?" Man. Harsh reviews.

[MeerkatKombat]

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/legends ... hys-return
Dorothy's Return has an overwhelmingly disliked rating on Metacritic of 18 out of 100. That is dire.


OUCH.
Edit: Removed Burns. It was saying something that I don't necessarily feel.

[Warm Regards]

Oh, but don't you guys see, this means CG is no longer viable. No one cares for the medium even though they used an identifiable story as their premise.

( As if they care about a CG bomb. How much did production cost again? I have the feeling that they'll break even, at least.)

[Sotiris]

How much did production cost again? I have the feeling that they'll break even, at least.

The film was produced for 70 million which is actually much higher than the average Tinker Bell film whose budget range from 30 to 35 million. It's really odd that despite the higher budget and the use of the same animation studio, Legends of Oz looks worse than the Tinker Bell movies. I don't get it.

[TsWade2]

Good! This proves everybody is sick and tired of CGI and want hand drawn animation back.

[Fflewduur]

Oh, but don't you guys see, this means CG is no longer viable. No one cares for the medium even though they used an identifiable story as their premise.

( As if they care about a CG bomb. How much did production cost again? I have the feeling that they'll break even, at least.)

No way a cheap animated film opening to such crappy reviews will make back its budget and its marketing costs, opening at the beginning of the summer season--if it lasts a full month in theaters, it'll be a minor miracle.

Good! This proves everybody is sick and tired of CGI and want hand drawn animation back.

The snark is gratuitous and pointless.

[TsWade2]

The snark is gratuitous and pointless.

Well this is how I feel about it.