DVDizzy Forum

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:10 am**

milojthatch wrote:
SWillie! wrote:Pixar isn't the studio you should be worrying about. Part of me hates to say it, but let's take a good look at which animation studio's lineup over the next few years looks most promising.

When we look at Pixar, we see Toy Story 3, Cars 2, and Monsters, Inc. 2. Bear and the Bow looks to be the light at the end of the tunnel that is the next few years at Pixar. (Although yes, I realize that the sequel films all have potential to be outstanding. Except Cars.)

And then we look at Disney, where they seem to be running around as if Mickey has been kidnapped and someone made Miley Cyrus king of the Magic Kingdom. Tangled will hopefully knock everyone's socks off, but unless Disney execs get their heads ________________, at the moment, there really isn't much to be overly excited about at WDAS.

And then we have Dreamworks. How to Train Your Dragon is getting some AMAZING early feedback, and with 2-3 movies coming out per year, there's only room for more like it. I think Dreamworks will slowly but surely take the reign as "best animation studio" over Pixar in the next couple years. I hope I'm wrong, because I am a Disney fanboy and I'm proud of it, but even as a Disney fanboy, I have to admit that Dreamworks films look the most promising at the moment.

And to answer the initial point of the thread, it's stupid to hate on Pixar. Like it's been said, Pixar is what Disney used to be. They have the same values and produce the same quality that Disney has throughout the majority of it's history.
If we are talking Dreamworks, then let's rember that coming up they have "Shrek 4," a "Puss in Boots" spin off, "Kung Fu Panada 2," "Madagascar 3," and a sequel to whatever else Katzenburg feels like later.

Don't fault Pixar for playing the sequel card all of a sudden when Dreamworks and Disney have both been doing it for years.

Well, I'm not trying to fault Pixar... Like I said, I know the upcoming sequels have the potential to be just as good if not better than the originals. But the thing is, Pixar has been on top for the last decade because of their originality, and because of their "heart". And in the next few years, I'm worried Pixar may start to see it's first drop in numbers.

And yes, I'm aware that Dreamworks has a whole slew of sequels coming up, but they also have some really intriguing original ideas coming, too. Like the Croods, MegaMind, Guardians of Childhood, and of course How to Train Your Dragon. In my opinion, they have by far the most impressive lineup in the next few years.

And while we're all in the mood for Oscars, I think Tangled is going to have to be REALLLLLLY good in order to get attention over HTTYD, because I don't know how many of you have been following news about it, but it really is getting some impressive early reviews. As in, "the best CG movie so far, period."

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:30 pm**

CampbellzSoup wrote:Princess and the Frog was an amazing return to form, and if that's how 2D ends well at least it went out with a bang instead of like Home on the Range.

Reminder: 2D animation is not going to end at Disney anytime in the near future. John Lassetter is running the show at WDAS now and, as already stated, as a major supporter of 2D animation and will insist on continuing to churn out 2D films in addition to CGI films.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:40 pm**

WDWLocal wrote:
CampbellzSoup wrote:Princess and the Frog was an amazing return to form, and if that's how 2D ends well at least it went out with a bang instead of like Home on the Range.
Reminder: 2D animation is not going to end at Disney anytime in the near future. John Lassetter is running the show at WDAS now and, as already stated, as a major supporter of 2D animation and will insist on continuing to churn out 2D films in addition to CGI films.

Can we please get that in writing? PLEEEEEEASE?

I really hope you're right. But let's pretend for a second that Tangled comes out this November, and makes $600 million worldwide. WOW! Awesome! Okay, now Winnie-the-Pooh comes out next year, and while we all come back here and rave about how great it is, it only brings in $100 million worldwide.

What goes through the executives' heads then? Keep in mind they have about the intelligence of a normal person's pinky finger. Why, it must be because audiences don't want to see traditional animation, of course!! But Mr. John Lasseter, great as he is, tries to explain to them once more his story story story pitch. But, we've tried that already John. Remember what happened?

And artists start turning in pencils for computers once again. And we weep openly.

Not what I want, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 8:55 pm**

SWillie! wrote:
WDWLocal wrote: Reminder: 2D animation is not going to end at Disney anytime in the near future. John Lassetter is running the show at WDAS now and, as already stated, as a major supporter of 2D animation and will insist on continuing to churn out 2D films in addition to CGI films.
Can we please get that in writing? PLEEEEEEASE?

I really hope you're right. But let's pretend for a second that Tangled comes out this November, and makes $600 million worldwide. WOW! Awesome! Okay, now Winnie-the-Pooh comes out next year, and while we all come back here and rave about how great it is, it only brings in $100 million worldwide.

What goes through the executives' heads then? Keep in mind they have about the intelligence of a normal person's pinky finger. Why, it must be because audiences don't want to see traditional animation, of course!! But Mr. John Lasseter, great as he is, tries to explain to them once more his story story story pitch. But, we've tried that already John. Remember what happened?

And artists start turning in pencils for computers once again. And we weep openly.

Not what I want, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Well, of course it's not the animation's fault that the movie may fail or not do so great. It more likely depends on marketing strategies, competition against other movies or basically the storyline.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:45 pm**

DisneyJedi wrote:
SWillie! wrote: Can we please get that in writing? PLEEEEEEASE?

I really hope you're right. But let's pretend for a second that Tangled comes out this November, and makes $600 million worldwide. WOW! Awesome! Okay, now Winnie-the-Pooh comes out next year, and while we all come back here and rave about how great it is, it only brings in $100 million worldwide.

What goes through the executives' heads then? Keep in mind they have about the intelligence of a normal person's pinky finger. Why, it must be because audiences don't want to see traditional animation, of course!! But Mr. John Lasseter, great as he is, tries to explain to them once more his story story story pitch. But, we've tried that already John. Remember what happened?

And artists start turning in pencils for computers once again. And we weep openly.

Not what I want, but I wouldn't be surprised.
Well, of course it's not the animation's fault that the movie may fail or not do so great. It more likely depends on marketing strategies, competition against other movies or basically the storyline.

Yes, that's what I'm saying. You and me understand that. Executives, however, don't want to hear that their marketing strategies aren't working, or that Avatar is a better film, or that more creativity needs to be hired to help the storyline. They want to blame the easiest thing to blame. And so that's why I won't be surprised if, after a number of "failures" (meaning, movies that don't miraculously make a quadrillion dollars), the execs pull the plug on hand drawn animation once again.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:46 pm**

^I know I'll get flamed for this but I disagree completely that it's not the animations fault. The times are/have been changing and 2D is seen as a dinosaur.

Just look at what color film did to black and white film. It came along in the mid-1920's as a new experimental deal used for certain scenes in movies. Until the late 1930's, it was still seen as a form of a gimmick. Then, as movie studios started moving towards mostly color in the late 40's/early 50's, it was down to a very small percentage. By the 1960's, Black and White films in the US is where 2D was now, almost extinct from the mainstream.

You can pick other forms of media and do the same thing (widescreen movies over take fullscreen ones, shows filmed in HD vs SD, MP3 to the CD, ect.) Times change and the way things are done change as well. Some of these changes for good, some for worse, but it happens with progress. The public has shown they want CGI and the bottom line agrees with them.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 9:51 pm**

pvdfan wrote:^I know I'll get flamed for this but I disagree completely that it's not the animations fault. The times are/have been changing and 2D is seen as a dinosaur.

Just look at what color film did to black and white film. It came along in the mid-1920's as a new experimental deal used for certain scenes in movies. Until the late 1930's, it was still seen as a form of a gimmick. Then, as movie studios started moving towards mostly color in the late 40's/early 50's, it was down to a very small percentage. By the 1960's, Black and White films in the US is where 2D was now, almost extinct from the mainstream.

You can pick other forms of media and do the same thing (widescreen movies over take fullscreen ones, shows filmed in HD vs SD, MP3 to the CD, ect.) Times change and the way things are done change as well. Some of these changes for good, some for worse, but it happens with progress. The public has shown they want CGI and the bottom line agrees with them.

To an extent, this makes sense. But, I would argue that moving from hand drawn animation to CGI animation is more comparable to moving from photography to film. They are two different beasts. When photoshop was invented, did acrylic paint disappear? No, the majority of "fine artists" still use hands-on materials.

I think it will take a few years, but if Disney persists with it, I think hand-drawn animation can find a nice comfortable spot with American audiences. Right now, obviously, CG is exploding. But it will be a relief to have at least some hand drawn in there every couple years.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:09 pm**

I'd really love it if Disne kept churning out hand-drawn movies. Besides, I have a friend who actually WANTS to animate at Disney. It's her lifelong dream, and the last thing I want is to see her dream crushed like a watermelon.

Posted: **Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:57 pm**

SWillie! wrote:To an extent, this makes sense. But, I would argue that moving from hand drawn animation to CGI animation is more comparable to moving from photography to film. They are two different beasts. When photoshop was invented, did acrylic paint disappear? No, the majority of "fine artists" still use hands-on materials.

I think it will take a few years, but if Disney persists with it, I think hand-drawn animation can find a nice comfortable spot with American audiences. Right now, obviously, CG is exploding. But it will be a relief to have at least some hand drawn in there every couple years.

The audience could careless if the how it is done, at the end of the day they are seen as cartoons. If they are hand drawn or made with a computer, it the same category. It's an evolution of a medium. I hope I'm wrong here as I love 2D, but it's days are beyond numbered.

I also argue they completely different then photoshop artwork to hand-drawn art. Hands-on are is done to be one of a kind to sell it at a higher price. If an artist were to do a work on the computer, no matter how amazing, it would have almost no value to collectors or museums.

One other thing is something that Pixar always says that has always bothered me. The audience doesn't care about the story when it comes to going to theaters. Crap movies raking in hundreds of millions of dollars prove that. Thus why I firmly believe that CGI will stay as it is a big drawing point, even more than the story. However, they are right when it comes to a movie that has home viewing staying power over time, which is why I love them.

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 8:32 am**

DisneyJedi wrote:I'd really love it if Disne kept churning out hand-drawn movies. Besides, I have a friend who actually WANTS to animate at Disney. It's her lifelong dream, and the last thing I want is to see her dream crushed like a watermelon.

I do too...

I've wanted to ever since I first understood that BatB was made of drawings... Maybe if they shut it down me and your friend can start our own studio haha

and pvdfan: I suppose you're right about the difference between fine art and digital art... unfortunately. And I do agree that traditional animation will never be what it once was, but I do feel fairly comfortable with how most industry professionals seem to see the matter. I've talked to Shawn Kelly, one of the founders of the amazing online school Animation Mentor, about what he thinks about 2D's future, and he restated what I've heard a lot of professionals say: that hand drawn animation will never disappear, persay, but will become much more specialized, almost like stop-motion is today, with maybe one hand drawn film being done every few years. And honestly, I think that's how it should be. That's how it was done in Walt's day, right? More time spent on each movie = a better movie. I just hope Disney sticks with it.

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:29 am**

WDWLocal wrote:
CampbellzSoup wrote:Princess and the Frog was an amazing return to form, and if that's how 2D ends well at least it went out with a bang instead of like Home on the Range.
Reminder: 2D animation is not going to end at Disney anytime in the near future. John Lassetter is running the show at WDAS now and, as already stated, as a major supporter of 2D animation and will insist on continuing to churn out 2D films in addition to CGI films.

Therefore, I find it very disconcerting that WDAS's website has absolutely ZERO mention of any future projects. This long after TPATF they should have something up there for their next two projects at least!

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:46 am**

Yeah, with The Snow Queen indefinitely shelved yet again there are no current hand-drawn animated projects scheduled (except for the Pooh project which has only a 30 million dollar budget, making it a very safe move). Quite saddening, especially considering that Lasseter really wants to do more hand-drawn, but the Disney execs were scared off (as read in that PatF interview with Ron Clements and John Musker).

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:36 pm**

It's not fair to blame everything on Pixar anyway. Disney would have been even worse off without their fiancial backing.

I am starting to lose faith in Disney's future, but I'm waiting for the day that they announce a mind-blowing animated film that will sweep us all our feet. What a perfect way to lift everyone back up. The only problem with that is when they do it.

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:03 pm**

toonaspie wrote:Oh man if a Pixar film had been nominated the same year Spirited Away did and won, I swear there would rioting in the streets. And then it deifinitly prove that the Best Animated Feature category is rigged.

Actually, I think Spirited Away is one of the most overrated movies ever. It was soooo boring. I could never understand the universal appeal.

toonaspie wrote:There are just some cases where another studio's work CAN outdo Pixar. The first year of this category Shrek defeated Monster's Inc.

While Monsters Inc. was a far better movie. I don't like the rumors of a possible sequel to it. The story was closed. A sequel isn't needed.

toonaspie wrote:And oh yeah, I'm willing to bet a good number of people on these forums have Aspergers considering the way we bicker over this so much.

I noticed there are a lot of people with Asperger on this forum. I don't know why that is; it's just something that I noted. On the Dutch forum which I advertise in my signature, there are surprisingly many people who are (very) religious. Sometimes you have to wonder why a forum attracts so many people from a certain "group".

Oh, by the way, I don't have Asperger. I just like to bicker.

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:02 pm**

Asperger's has nothing to do with bickering. And yeah, I just came here because I like Disney movies. Only after I got here did I discover that fellow Aspies posted regularly.

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:27 pm**

ajmrowland wrote:Asperger's has nothing to do with bickering. And yeah, I just came here because I like Disney movies. Only after I got here did I discover that fellow Aspies posted regularly.

and there some members on here who have Asperger Syndrome...it just hasn't been diagnosed to them

I also think now a days Autism in general is becoming too over diagnosed....you never see just ADHD anymore or ADD....

Althoguh I can get why people don't use ADHD term as much....they'll be asked too much so...hows the resolution on it?

Anyway...there are probably people at Disney/Pixar Hollywood who also have Aspergers...its jut not diagnosed.....or some sorta mind thing...then again in my opinion There's not enough sane to take care of the insane anyway and I believe there is no such thing as "normal" and if anyone says they are "normal" they are in fact the crazy ones.

Posted: **Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:32 pm**

haha the last part is too true

People and their expectations

Of course, I've done my homework and I know for certain that my diagnosis was correct.

Posted: **Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:22 am**

Goliath wrote: Actually, I think Spirited Away is one of the most overrated movies ever. It was soooo boring. I could never understand the universal appeal.

Oh, by the way, I don't have Asperger. I just like to bicker.

I'm with you. Did not get Spirited Away at all. I tried watching it 3 or 4 times. Japanese with subs, dubbed....nothing. Probably my least favorite of the Miyazakis I've seen.

and yes, we know.

Posted: **Fri Mar 12, 2010 12:24 am**

Julian Carter wrote:Go ahead. Call me names.

JUUUUUUULEESSSSSSSSSSSS

Posted: **Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:27 am**

I loved Spirited Away but it's not my favourite, Laputa and Princess Mononoke are much better in my opinion. Ghibli has been the best in 2D animation for the best part of the past 15 years. I don't see them moving to CGI anytime soon.

DVDizzy Forum

Sometimes I Wish Pixar Never Existed

Re: Sometimes I Wish Pixar Never Existed

Re: Sometimes I Wish Pixar Never Existed