DVDizzy Forum

DisneyJedi wrote:Well, I think it's downright dumb how people say hand-drawn animation is more expensive than another medium like- per say- CGI.

Bull. Crap. There are PLENTY of CG films that are well over +$150 million. Don't ask me how that makes sense.

But no one brought up CG except you, this is strictly about paper/cels versus flash (or comparable software).

Well, I don't mind if it's in flash animation. It's better than using that bland CGI animation on Mickey Mouse Clubhouse.

Semaj wrote:
Winnie the Pooh had a $30 million budget, which Disney could've very easily earned a profit from if they hadn't put it up against Harry Potter.

I'm pretty sure it only cost that much because they had pre-existing character designs to go off of. Even if it went up against Harry Potter and didn't gross Avatar numbers, at least Pooh managed to make back its production cost, most of the box office gross coming from American Theatres. And I'm sure it made even more money by the time the Blu-ray and DVD hit store shelves.

Clip from the next short "Tokyo Go".

Sotiris wrote:Clip from the next short "Tokyo Go".

Nice. Thanks....or should I say, Arigatō.

You can watch the full short "Tokyo Go" here. (US only)

Sotiris wrote:You can watch the full short "Tokyo Go" here. (US only)

Once again, that was awesome. I love the ending. A way to remember to Walt Disney.

Oh,man these shorts just keep on getting better and better.There so full of spirit and personality that it makes me giddy.I am glad they are coming out on as Mickey turns 85 because this is one of the most active sides of Mickey I have ever seen.

Tokyo Go now up!:

http://blogs.disney.com/oh-my-disney/20 ... ocialmedia|||

Mickeyfan1990 wrote:Tokyo Go now up!:

http://blogs.disney.com/oh-my-disney/20 ... ocialmedia|||

Whoops! You beat me to it. Sorry.

No need to apologize. But quite alright.

Not one of my favorites but its not bad either. It just felt a bit too random, like there was no story to tell.

TsWade2 wrote:Well, I don't mind if it's in flash animation. It's better than using that bland CGI animation on Mickey Mouse Clubhouse.

Now see, I think Mickey Mouse Clubhouse does justice to the design of the classic characters in 3D form. Mickey Mouse looks great in that show because he designs come through in the third design. So in terms of aesthetics, Mickey Mouse Clubhouse is great. But animation wise it is poor because the performances have been dumbed down. The concept of the show really drains a lot of the personality these characters have, so what we have is the very basic when it comes to character animation. If the movie Hotel Transylvania has taught us anything is that CG animation is capable of showing off exquisite cartoon animation, deformation and squash and stretch effect. So really, the issue with Mickey Mouse Clubhouse is that animators are given very little to do with these characters. In short, much like in any other animation medium it all comes down to the performances.

As for these new shorts, they are beyond brilliant. Yeah, not all of them are perfect, but what I love is that Disney finally had the balls to greenlight a project in which Mickey Mouse is a vibrant character. I hate how they let the other characters be the ones with full on personalities while Mickey Mouse stayed behind being the always smiling corporate icon. I love that in these shorts Mickey is getting into misfortunes, he is angry, he is embarassed and goes through a lot before he gets his happy ending. They are creative and very hilarious, just exactly what we need to re-invigorate these characters.

pap64 wrote:Now see, I think Mickey Mouse Clubhouse does justice to the design of the classic characters in 3D form.

I beg to differ. The designs don't translate nearly as well as in 2D. The designs in MMC look even worse than those in Mickey's Twice Upon a Christmas.

pap64 wrote:Mickey Mouse looks great in that show because he designs come through in the third design.

pap64 wrote:So in terms of aesthetics, Mickey Mouse Clubhouse is great.

Far from it. It looks like cheap plastic imbued in fluorescent coloring with bad lighting and even worse rendering; utterly tasteless. How could one argue that MMC is aesthetically pleasing is beyond me.

Sotiris wrote:

pap64 wrote:
Far from it. It looks like cheap plastic imbued in fluorescent coloring with bad lighting and even worse rendering; utterly tasteless. How could one argue that MMC is aesthetically pleasing is beyond me.

I know, right? MMC CGI animation is horrendous. Even though, I like Mickey Mouse Works/House of Mouse better than MMC, But I like the new shorts they've been doing. The shorts may n0t be better than House of Mouse, but it's better than that ridiculous MMC. I even call the clubhouse a preschool prison. Silly, I know.

According to sources, they are making only 19 episodes. What's up with that?

Big Disney Fan wrote:According to sources, they are making only 19 episodes. What's up with that?

I assume that if they're successful enough, Disney will order more. By the way, one of the shorts will be seven minutes long.

Sotiris wrote:

Big Disney Fan wrote:According to sources, they are making only 19 episodes. What's up with that?

I assume that if they're successful enough, Disney will order more. By the way, one of the shorts will be seven minutes long.

Oh, I hope so. I hope so.

Big Disney Fan wrote:According to sources, they are making only 19 episodes. What's up with that?

I was just about to ask how many of these were planned. I thought we were only getting a handful. Pleased to hear its a lot more than that.

Big Disney Fan wrote:According to sources, they are making only 19 episodes. What's up with that?

So far that's all that planned. But, should they be successful (which they already appear to be so far), there should be a good chance they'll make more perhaps even consider giving it a half-hour series (that seems unlikely but come on! Who wouldn't want to see that happen?).