DVDizzy Forum

Hmmm.....
So Snow Queen is back in production as a cg film?I don't think the medium is the problem.It's like denying the real problem with the film.Like what they did with Tangled, Rich Ross thought that it wouldn't appeal to boys because of the "princess" tittle role.That wasn't the problem.The problem was the release date being close to HP. Why do they think that their problems with Snow Queen would be solved if the use cg?

^Because they're freakin' greedy idiots! That's why!

DisneyJedi wrote:^Because they're freakin' greedy idiots! That's why!

I don't think Disney see CG as a solution; if a story is weak or doesn't work, CG won't change that. If someone at Disney has finally come up with a way of making this film work and wants to do it in CG I don't see a problem. I don't mind how they make it, hand-drawn or CG, if they can finally get this film made after so many years of cancellations and speculation.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I don't think Disney see CG as a solution; if a story is weak or doesn't work, CG won't change that.

Apparently they do. Otherwise they would have resumed with Snow Queen as a hand-drawn feature as it was originally envisioned.

I think it's quite obvious that the management there views hand-drawn animation as unprofitable. That's why most artists/directors pitch CG ideas or stories. It's because they know that they have a better chance getting their movie greenlit if they do so. Also, they feel that if they make a CG film they have better chances in their movie being a success. I believe that this mentality has been cultivated and promoted by the management at WDAS.

The fact is that neither the management nor the artists there are willing to take a risk by producing more hand-drawn feature films.

Perhaps you're right, only time will tell. Either way, if the films are entertaining and of the quality that is synonymous with Disney I don't mind whether they're CG or hand-drawn, regardless of how much I love the hand-drawn medium. The fact is that for the past decade or so, Disney have attempted to make Snow Queen several times and failed because of issues with the story; if they can figure out a way of fixing those problems and making a good film, I personally don't mind if it's CG.

DisneyJedi wrote:^Because they're freakin' greedy idiots! That's why!

oh god....here we go again!


Only way Disney is going to go bad to 2D animation is if they get someone or find someone who can grow a pair of fucking balls. Steel brass balls. Which Disney is apparently lacking atm.

Sotiris wrote:

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I don't think Disney see CG as a solution; if a story is weak or doesn't work, CG won't change that.

Apparently they do. Otherwise they would have resumed with Snow Queen as a hand-drawn feature as it was originally envisioned.

I think it's quite obvious that the management there views hand-drawn animation as unprofitable. That's why most artists/directors pitch CG ideas or stories. It's because they know that they have a better chance getting their movie greenlit if they do so. Also, they feel that if they make a CG film they have better chances in their movie being a success. I believe that this mentality has been cultivated and promoted by the management at WDAS.

The fact is that neither the management nor the artists there are willing to take a risk by producing more hand-drawn feature films.

But that's not fair to anyone; fans and animators alike!

And by the way, I say they are greedy because that's all they care about; making money and NOT good movies!

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:Perhaps you're right, only time will tell. Either way, if the films are entertaining and of the quality that is synonymous with Disney I don't mind whether they're CG or hand-drawn, regardless of how much I love the hand-drawn medium. The fact is that for the past decade or so, Disney have attempted to make Snow Queen several times and failed because of issues with the story; if they can figure out a way of fixing those problems and making a good film, I personally don't mind if it's CG.

This.

And come on guys, we don't even know for sure if they're working on it again AND if it's going to be a CGI movie.

^But how do we KNOW neither rumor is true? Hmm?

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:Either way, if the films are entertaining and of the quality that is synonymous with Disney, I don't mind whether they're CG or hand-drawn

It's perfectly acceptable to feel that way. Personally, I do mind if they're CGI and not hand-drawn.

I do love hand-drawn animation as much as you and I do believe that it will continue. Call it blind faith, delusion or wishful thinking but I think we will see a hand-drawn feature again.

DisneyAnimation88 wrote:I do love hand-drawn animation as much as you and I do believe that it will continue. Call it blind faith, delusion or wishful thinking but I think we will see a hand-drawn feature again.

But I can't be satisfied with just one hand-drawn Disney feature every 10 years (and that's even an "if"). I want WDAS to have a steady pipeline of projects and a solid plan and strategy to keep the medium alive and viable.

For a time, WDAS seemed the only Hollywood studio left willing to do that but now that seems like a unrealistic expectation. I knew their initial "one hand-drawn feature every two years" plan, was too good to be true.

Sotiris wrote:
But I can't be satisfied with just one hand-drawn Disney feature every 10 years (and that's even an "if"). I want WDAS to have a steady pipeline of projects and a solid plan and strategy to keep the medium alive and viable.

For a time, WDAS seemed the only Hollywood studio left willing to do that but now that seems like a unrealistic expectation. I knew their initial "one hand-drawn feature every two years" plan, was too good to be true.

I agree! If Disney can't go through on a promise, then they shouldn't make promises of things that they can't fulfill instead of lying to us nonstop!

I feel this bears repeating, because most people here don't seem to realise it. Maybe it's my studio executive mentality, but film is a BUSINESS. Ever since the early days of cinema, it was created to make money. And the fact of the matter is, computer animation currently takes in more money than hand-drawn animation. I think that's even the case in Japan, where hand-drawn animation is still big (though, anybody, feel free to correct me on that last point).

Well, the Disney company started with a man who wanted to do something that no one else thought would be profitable - a full-length hand-drawn cartoon. He has repeated quotes about he doesn't care about money, but art. So, if the Disney company is to stay Disney, it would have to keep up all this, including the hand-drawn art aspect.

estefan wrote:I feel this bears repeating, because most people here don't seem to realise it. Maybe it's my studio executive mentality, but film is a BUSINESS. Ever since the early days of cinema, it was created to make money. And the fact of the matter is, computer animation currently takes in more money than hand-drawn animation. I think that's even the case in Japan, where hand-drawn animation is still big (though, anybody, feel free to correct me on that last point).

So, in other words, the guys at Disney lied to us about their "1 hand-drawn film every two years" deal. And by the way, I thought films were created originally for entertainment purposes?

I personally wouldn't mind CG or Hand Drawn,
but then again I feel that a 2d movie is needed to carry the company back on top of the animation industry.

so disney are going to have
kote in cgi
wreck-it ralph in cgi
and now snow queen ???


is that true ?

Disney Duster wrote:Well, the Disney company started with a man who wanted to do something that no one else thought would be profitable - a full-length hand-drawn cartoon. He has repeated quotes about he doesn't care about money, but art. So, if the Disney company is to stay Disney, it would have to keep up all this, including the hand-drawn art aspect.

Walt also has quotes about not caring about the art - only the entertainment. Something like "I let the experts tell me what my film means, and I just make it how I want to."

So, he wasn't necessarily out to make "art"... more "entertainment".

And Walt Disney definitely cared about money. He actually grew a certain dis-taste for Fantasia for many years, due to how much it bombed.

estefan wrote:And Walt Disney definitely cared about money. He actually grew a certain dis-taste for Fantasia for many years, due to how much it bombed.

I thought that on Alice in Wonderland's reception he said that?