Hand-Drawn Animation Dead at Disney

[disneyprincess11]

Not-Disney, but it is something! The Spongebob Squarepants Movie 2 will be MOSTLY 2D/hand-drawn, with some CGI.

https://twitter.com/paultibbitt/status/ ... 3753423872

[Sotiris]

Ed Catmull in his new book Creativity Inc. talks about the aftermath of The Princess and the Frog's box office results and confirms that WDAS will no longer be producing 2D features.

When The Princess and the Frog was released, we believed we had made a good film, the reviews confirmed that belief, and people who saw it loved it. However, we would soon learn that we had made a serious mistake—one that was only compounded by the fact that our movie opened nationwide just five days before James Cameron’s science fiction fantasy Avatar. This scheduling only encouraged moviegoers to take one look at a film with the word princess in the title and think: That’s for little girls only. To say that we are making a great film but not listen to the input of experienced colleagues within the company imperiled the quality we were so proud of. Quality meant that every aspect—not just the rendering and the storytelling but also the positioning and the marketing—needed to be done well, which meant being open to reasoned opinions, even when they contradicted our own. The movie had come in under budget, which is the rarest of achievements in the entertainment business. The quality of its animation rivaled the best ever done by the studio. The film was profitable, as we’d kept costs down, but it just didn’t make enough to convince anyone at the studio that we should pour more resources into hand-drawn films.

While we’d had high hopes that the film would prove that 2D could rise again, our narrow vision and poor decision-making made it seem like the opposite was true. While we thought then—and still think today—that hand-drawn animation is a wonderfully expressive medium, I realize now that I got carried away by my childhood memories of the Disney Animation I’d once so enjoyed. I’d liked the idea of celebrating, right out of the box, the art form that Walt Disney himself pioneered.

After The Princess and the Frog’s somewhat lackluster opening, I knew we had to rethink what we were doing. Around that time, Andrew Millstein pulled me aside and pointed out that our double-barreled approach—reviving 2D while also championing 3D—was confusing the people within the studio we fundamentally wanted to encourage to focus on the future. The issue with 2D was not the validity of the time-honored art form but that Disney’s directors needed and wanted to engage with the new. In the aftermath of the merger, many people had asked me whether we were going to have Disney do 2D and Pixar 3D. They were expecting Disney to do the old stuff and Pixar to do the new. In the wake of The Princess and the Frog, I realized how important it was to nip this toxic way of thinking in the bud. The truth was, Disney’s directors respected the studio’s heritage, but they wanted to build on it—and in order to do that, they had to be free to forge their own path.

[estefan]

I don't think that's what he means at all. I think he's saying that maybe the next step for hand-drawn animation is to do something new with the medium (akin to Paperman or what Blue Sky is doing with Peanuts) and not simply tell the same old stories as before. I think once they come up with a revolutionary and new story that would be well suited for hand-drawn, that's when they will use the medium or the Paperman technique.

[TsWade2]

I don't think that's what he means at all. I think he's saying that maybe the next step for hand-drawn animation is to do something new with the medium (akin to Paperman or what Blue Sky is doing with Peanuts) and not simply tell the same old stories as before. I think once they come up with a revolutionary and new story that would be well suited for hand-drawn, that's when they will use the medium or the Paperman technique.

Estefan, you're a life saver.

Ed Catmull in his new book Creativity Inc. talks about the aftermath of The Princess and the Frog's box office results and confirms that WDAS will no longer be producing 2D features.

Sotiris, you know better than that.

[unprincess]

why cant a studio do 2(or 3 or 4) types of animation? How does this "confuse" the people working there?
and who are these "Disney directors" that wanted to move on from 2d? ( well I think I have an idea of who they might be, but ...wont go into it now)

[TsWade2]

why cant a studio do 2(or 3 or 4) types of animation? How does this "confuse" the people working there?
and who are these "Disney directors" that wanted to move on from 2d? ( well I think I have an idea of who they might be, but ...wont go into it now)

Because they're being a bunch of..................never mind.

There has to be a way to get Disney back doing hand drawn animation.
I don't think petitions will work, but there has to be another way.

[ce1ticmoon]

I don't know... I guess I could be interpreting it wrong, but it seems like they acknowledge that there are a bunch of factors that contributed to the "disappointing" box office returns, including bad scheduling and an alienating title, yet they still consciously decide to blame it on the medium.

And personally, I find a whole lot of wrong with that last paragraph:

After The Princess and the Frog’s somewhat lackluster opening, I knew we had to rethink what we were doing. Around that time, Andrew Millstein pulled me aside and pointed out that our double-barreled approach—reviving 2D while also championing 3D—was confusing the people within the studio we fundamentally wanted to encourage to focus on the future. The issue with 2D was not the validity of the time-honored art form but that Disney’s directors needed and wanted to engage with the new. In the aftermath of the merger, many people had asked me whether we were going to have Disney do 2D and Pixar 3D. They were expecting Disney to do the old stuff and Pixar to do the new. In the wake of The Princess and the Frog, I realized how important it was to nip this toxic way of thinking in the bud. The truth was, Disney’s directors respected the studio’s heritage, but they wanted to build on it—and in order to do that, they had to be free to forge their own path.

Honestly, the only toxic way of thinking I see here is considering 2D to be "the old." As if the only way to move forward is to engage in CGI/3D filmmaking. There's so much room to do new things in both mediums. CGI isn't a successor to hand-drawn; it's just a newer alternative (and a tool for doing things that can't be done in a strictly handrawn film).

I agree with unprincess that there should be nothing "confusing" about the studio engaging in both mediums. I mean, I have nothing against WDAS working with CGI, at all. I'm a fan of what they're doing now. But what they're talking about here just does not seem genuine to me.

[Sotiris]

I think he's saying that maybe the next step for hand-drawn animation is to do something new with the medium (akin to Paperman or what Blue Sky is doing with Peanuts)

Except he never says or suggests that in any way. In fact, in the entire book, there isn't a single mention of Paperman, its technique or the desire to do something new with the medium.

Also, what Blue Sky is doing with Peanuts has nothing to do with hand-drawn animation. Just because they're staying faithful to Schulz's character designs and use effects that mimic hand-drawn lines does not mean it involves actual hand-drawn animation. You could claim they're trying to bring a certain hand-drawn sensibility to the CG animation but that's a different story. Needless to say, that can never replace the real deal.

I think once they come up with a revolutionary and new story that would be well suited for hand-drawn, that's when they will use the medium or the Paperman technique.

That's just an excuse for not doing 2D animation. And a flimsy one at that. Almost any type of story can be told with hand-drawn animation.

Why cant a studio do 2 (or 3 or 4) types of animation? How does this "confuse" the people working there?

I agree. It doesn't make any sense.

And who are these "Disney directors" that wanted to move on from 2D?

Even if there were directors who wanted to work strictly with CG (probably because they don't believe 2D can be profitable), there were directors who still wanted to continue with 2D features like Musker & Clements but were denied that opportunity.

It seems like they acknowledge that there are a bunch of factors that contributed to the "disappointing" box office returns, including bad scheduling and an alienating title, yet they still consciously decide to blame it on the medium.

Exactly. Quite hypocritical and disingenuous.

Honestly, the only toxic way of thinking I see here is considering 2D to be "the old." As if the only way to move forward is to engage in CGI/3D filmmaking. There's so much room to do new things in both mediums. CGI isn't a successor to hand-drawn; it's just a newer alternative.

[TsWade2]

Seriously, we must make a campaign to save disney hand drawn animation. I just don't understand why this thread didn't work: http://www.dvdizzy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1392

[Disney's Divinity]

Frozen was a revolutionary story that was intended to be made as a 2D film until TP&TF "underperformed" (ie: would never have performed well enough in their eyes for the company not to extinguish 2D anyway, considering they were already deadset against it).

The only way I can guess 2D will be made by Disney again is if the 3D films start to flop repeatedly, too, proving that the flops of the 2000's had nothing to do with the medium. Even then, 3D will never be "killed" like 2D effectively has been at the studio.

[TsWade2]

Frozen was a revolutionary story that was intended to be made as a 2D film until TP&TF "underperformed" (ie: would never have performed well enough in their eyes for the company not to extinguish 2D anyway, considering they were already deadset against it).

The only way I can guess 2D will be made by Disney again is if the 3D films start to flop repeatedly, too, proving that the flops of the 2000's had nothing to do with the medium. Even then, 3D will never be "killed" like 2D effectively has been at the studio.

Or maybe wait until the new CEO comes and tell him that we need hand drawn animation back.

[estefan]

I think Frozen is great, but I wouldn't call it revolutionary. It still follows the template set by the 90s Disney musicals, even with its trope twisting. I think Disney needs to prove hand-drawn animation doesn't necessarily have to be relegated to musicals and fairy tales, which I think is what Catmull is getting at. It needs to be something special and unique to use hand-drawn animation, otherwise the general audience will think the medium can only tell that one type of story. Something akin to a Lilo & Stitch, which doesn't follow what we expect from Disney and hand-drawn animation.

In regards to Peanuts, I've said this before, but I think that movie's eventual success will lead to more openness to trying different types of computer animation, specifically ones that seek to emulate hand-drawn animation. And I can see a director making the argument that using paper and Cintiq is actually cheaper to emulate Peanuts' look than computer. What executive wouldn't want to approve a cheaper way of emulating a hit movie's success?

[Sotiris]

I think Frozen is great, but I wouldn't call it revolutionary. It still follows the template set by the 90s Disney musicals, even with its trope twisting. I think Disney needs to prove hand-drawn animation doesn't necessarily have to be relegated to musicals and fairy tales, which I think is what Catmull is getting at. It needs to be something special and unique to use hand-drawn animation, otherwise the general audience will think the medium can only tell that one type of story. Something akin to a Lilo & Stitch, which doesn't follow what we expect from Disney and hand-drawn animation.

So, something like Big Hero 6? Oh, wait. They went with CG for that one too.

[Semaj]

In regards to Peanuts, I've said this before, but I think that movie's eventual success will lead to more openness to trying different types of computer animation, specifically ones that seek to emulate hand-drawn animation. And I can see a director making the argument that using paper and Cintiq is actually cheaper to emulate Peanuts' look than computer. What executive wouldn't want to approve a cheaper way of emulating a hit movie's success?

For me, that translates into a jobs issue.

A lot of talented artists and aspiring artists can't find work because too many studios have found a be-all, end-all in computer art.

[TsWade2]

In regards to Peanuts, I've said this before, but I think that movie's eventual success will lead to more openness to trying different types of computer animation, specifically ones that seek to emulate hand-drawn animation. And I can see a director making the argument that using paper and Cintiq is actually cheaper to emulate Peanuts' look than computer. What executive wouldn't want to approve a cheaper way of emulating a hit movie's success?

For me, that translates into a jobs issue.

A lot of talented artists and aspiring artists can't find work because too many studios have found a be-all, end-all in computer art.

There has to be a way to show Disney that we want hand drawn animation. Forgive me to be a broken record, but there has to be a way. I wish Disney should see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnfovseVSaQ Even though they are too greedy to see this.

[disneyprincess11]

Sotiris, why do you have to make this thread to make us hand drawn animation fans miserable?

TsWade, not to be rude, but please don't do this.

[TsWade2]

Sotiris, why do you have to make this thread to make us hand drawn animation fans miserable?

TsWade, not to be rude, but please don't do this.

I already got rid of that for the last minute. Don't worry.

[Lady Cluck]

Keep preaching the truth TsWade2! No need to censor yourself, Disney should burn in hell for what they've put us through!

[TsWade2]

Keep preaching the truth TsWade2! No need to censor yourself, Disney should burn in hell for what they've put us through!

Agreed. Especially Bob Iger.

[disneyprincess11]

Keep preaching the truth TsWade2! No need to censor yourself, Disney should burn in hell for what they've put us through!

Agreed. Especially Bob Iger.

I'm really tired and I'm going to bed, so I'm just going to leave this. Really sorry to be rude, but...