DVDizzy Forum

Call my latest statement stupid or dumb or whatever I don't care. I see nothing wrong with wanting 2D animation to return.

And of course I have no idea what goes on there ! I don't work there ! I'm not a animation expert or whatever just a simple Disney fan that loves and treasures the 2D feel and classic feel of the old original Disney cartoons and movies.

I don't wish " ill " upon the company and those who make the movies, I just want a simple 2D movie to come out every two or so years like they originally actually promised us.

And you do realize with 2D now dead fans are going to loose interest in Disney movies anyways right ?

thelittleursula wrote:Call my latest statement stupid or dumb or whatever I don't care. I see nothing wrong with wanting 2D animation to return.

And of course I have no idea what goes on there ! I don't work there ! I'm not a animation expert or whatever just a simple Disney fan that loves and treasures the 2D feel and classic feel of the old original Disney cartoons and movies.

I don't wish " ill " upon the company and those who make the movies, I just want a simple 2D movie to come out every two or so years like they originally actually promised us.

And you do realize with 2D now dead fans are going to loose interest in Disney movies anyways right ?

Only a very small minority will lose interest. You and others like you on this forum are not representative of the fanbase or the audience as a whole.

qindarka wrote:Only a very small minority will lose interest. You and others like you on this forum are not representative of the fanbase or the audience as a whole.

Indeed. Most fans are unbiased. lovers of animation of all kinds whether its hand drawn with pencils or digital tablets, polygons or puppets. Animation is animation and they all have merit. The only thing I'll never warm up to is motion capture, but most don't even count that.

qindarka wrote: Only a very small minority will lose interest.

Your kidding right ? Look up on Youtube and see how many Disney fans crave for the 2D feel to return and look how many people are upset about 2D not longer being possible in the 2D is dead page.

thelittleursula wrote:

qindarka wrote: Only a very small minority will lose interest.

Your kidding right ? Look up on Youtube and see how many Disney fans crave for the 2D feel to return and look how many people are upset about 2D not longer being possible in the 2D is dead page.

They are still not representative. Of course, the hardcore 2D group are very vocal but make up only a small proportion of the fanbase. The rest will go on buying tickets to CG films, just look at some of their box-office grosses. If the 2D only fans were really that numerous, you'd think that TPATF and Winnie the Pooh would have done better. Or earlier films such as Atlantis and Treasure Planet for that matter.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8HthczxPTRM" frameborder="0"></iframe>

qindarka wrote:
They are still not representative. Of course, the hardcore 2D group are very vocal but make up only a small proportion of the fanbase. The rest will go on buying tickets to CG films, just look at some of their box-office grosses. If the 2D only fans were really that numerous, you'd think that TPATF and Winnie the Pooh would have done better. Or earlier films such as Atlantis and Treasure Planet for that matter.

Movies are made for entertainment and your not going to see a movie that doesn't entertain you. 2D or 3D. Not everybody would of been keen to see a young girl befriend a Crocodile and not everybody is going to want to see a giant who is a video game character. Though if you look up on YouTube there is plenty of Disney fans that would prefer 2D animation over the newer 3D. It may not be millions and millions of people, but it's quite a few.

Because when Treasure and Atlantis came out we would of been at 5- 10 years old and we wouldn't of been able to you know drive etc.
I'm speaking about my generation here. And I still don't see what's wrong with asking for a small wee 2D movie now and again. It's not like it's going to kill anybody....

Also I heard that Princess and the Frog did WAAAY better than Chicken Little, Blot and Meet the Robinson's. So there you go.

thelittleursula wrote:Also I heard that Princess and the Frog did WAAAY better than Chicken Little, Blot and Meet the Robinson's. So there you go.

And Tangled did better than Princess and the Frog. To an executive at the Walt Disney Company that is the statistic that matters. Disney today isn't the Disney we grew up with, creativity has been shunted to the side to make way for MBA's and money-minded executives who would rather bleed every penny they can out of crappy franchises like Hannah Montana and High School Musical than give opportunities to those creative minded people who are actually in tune with what we as Disney fans all want. Hand-drawn and CG animation can co-exist within WDAS, that was John Lasseter and Ed Catmull's plan when they took over the studio, the problem is that one medium makes more money than the other from today's audiences so those MBA's will be thinking "why let them make any more 2D films when CG makes more money?" This attitude is prevelent all through the company, from animated and live-action films to the theme parks.

thelittleursula wrote:Also I heard that Princess and the Frog did WAAAY better than Chicken Little, Blot and Meet the Robinson's. So there you go.

False.

Chicken Little and Bolt both outgrossed The Princess and the Frog.

Hey,guys I know this might seem random but what was the orginal premise when this was Joe Jump and Reboot Ralph.Because if I remmeber when it was Reboot Ralph that it was just a video game chracter who is game jumping into other games because he wanted to be more revelant in the modern age.It might sound random but I am curious about what the other premises would have been like.

And about the effort put into this movie I think this would actually accidentally labelled as a Pixar or even Dreamworks movie if it didn't have the logo.It might go into some pop culture concerning video games but it seems to actually be for a good reason and actually know what they are talking about.I mean these guys really busted their butts researching the history of video games.From the early years to the now prevalent first person shooters.

I mean they even tried their best matching up with the graphcis with the right era as well.Its basically the history of video gaming with Disney doing Pixar level research and care for actual story and design.I mean it might have some immature humour but at the same time it does seem to go out of its way to be a family film rather than a kiddy flick.Because the grown folk in the audience would only know the older parts of gaming.

Heres something itneresting to know.My uncle was actually working for Atari when it was still big.My uncle actually was apart of when American video gaming was still strong. He held a high position in Atari and actually knows alot about the early years of video gaming.

PatrickvD wrote:

thelittleursula wrote:Also I heard that Princess and the Frog did WAAAY better than Chicken Little, Blot and Meet the Robinson's. So there you go.

False.

Chicken Little and Bolt both outgrossed The Princess and the Frog.

anf besides lets not put chicken little and bolt on the same level. Patf was wayyyy better than the former but not so much the latter

jazzflower92 wrote:And about the effort put into this movie I think this would actually accidentally labelled as a Pixar or even Dreamworks movie if it didn't have the logo.It might go into some pop culture concerning video games but it seems to actually be for a good reason and actually know what they are talking about.I mean these guys really busted their butts researching the history of video games.

To be fair Disney have almost always put a lot of effort into researching their films. Directors, producers and animators are flown all over the world to ensure that they understand any differents cultures or customs that they are going to represent and a lot of research goes into selecting any stories they choose to adapt so they can't really be slighted on that. Perhaps it's more noticeable on Wreck-It Ralph because of the classic video game characters featured in the film but they do put a lot of effort into their research.

If Wreck It Ralph was a school report I would give it at the lowest an A- and at the highest an A.I mean yeah Disney does when it likes put research into their projects.It might not get everything right but they do their best to actually see some actual research put into their projects.I mean way back in Bambi they looked at real deer to capture their motions for the film.

I remember talking to an animator who worked at the studio that used to be open at Disney's Hollywood Studios in Florida and he told me about the research trips they took to China when they were making Mulan and I was amazed at just how intricate some of the research they do is.

Walt flew his Cinderella crew to France for that film.

Disney Duster wrote:Walt flew his Cinderella crew to France for that film.

I didn't know that. I think Walt really instilled that sense of the importance of research in developing his animated features and that contributed a lot to their quality. John Lasseter is apparently the same, he has directors and animators do a lot of research in their own development. I would have loved to have been involved in the Wreck-It Ralph research, there might not have been a lot of travelling to other countries but they probably logged playing those classic video games which must have been great fun.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:Walt flew his Cinderella crew to France for that film.

I didn't know that. I think Walt really instilled that sense of the importance of research in developing his animated features and that contributed a lot to their quality. John Lasseter is apparently the same, he has directors and animators do a lot of research in their own development. I would have loved to have been involved in the Wreck-It Ralph research, there might not have been a lot of travelling to other countries but they probably logged playing those classic video games which must have been great fun.

There were many interviews that seem to show that the people working on this seem to have been fans of Donkey Kong when it first came out.Heck,even one of the animators note that they based the story of Ralph on a little known tidbit about Donkey Kong.

It was that Donkey Kong was actually the abused pet of Jumpman and the fact that he stole Jumpan's girlfriend to get back at him.Like with Ralph the only reason he is wrecking the building is because his home was build over by the Niceland building.So,yeah they defiantly did their reasearch.

Yea don't anybody say Disney is now doing Pixar level research, they've always done extensibe research since the likes of Snow White. Good to see that's one thing that hasn't changed at Disney to this day, unlike so many other things.

Some people tend to feel that those animation research trips are thinly-veiled holidays for the artists.

All I know is that if I were employed at Disney Animation, I'd kill to go on an animation research trip.

LySs wrote:<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8HthczxPTRM" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Kind of a fun song . . . I wonder if this will play at the beginning with some sort of montage?

Thanks for posting!