Hand-Drawn Animation Dead at Disney

[SWillie!]

I find your reasoning highly problematic. Just because a company is run by a group of people instead of a single individual, doesn't not mean they should not be held accountable for their actions. I would even argue that corporations must be more severely penalised than an individual since their impact is far greater.

What one does for a living has direct implications to one's character. You cannot distance yourself from your actions, rationalizing it as merely performing your job. If your job entails doing something illegal or morally reprehensible then you share part of the blame. You become a willing accomplice and you need to be held accountable for that.

I agree, they SHOULD be held accountable. That's why I don't defend the decision to let these guys go. But CAN they be held accountable? How? Who? It's too involved an operation to point the finger at any person. They can't simply fire everyone. It's a shitty situation all around. Nobody WANTS to have to do this type of thing. How would you hold them accountable?

[milojthatch]

You guys act like 2-D animation(Disney that is) is your life support to keep you alive, and if it is taken away, you'd die.

I don't think anyone is going to die because hand drawn is dead, but a lot of people probably will be turned off to anything new that Disney makes animation wise.

[Sotiris]

It's too involved an operation to point the finger at any person. They can't simply fire everyone. It's a shitty situation all around. Nobody WANTS to have to do this type of thing. How would you hold them accountable?

I was talking about corporate ethics in general but in this case it's clear that Iger and Rasulo spearheaded the operation. This round of layoffs were solely motivated by corporate greed. How else would you explain layoffs at a time when the company is financially thriving?

We can hold them accountable through criticism; by not excusing their actions with remarks like "they're only doing their job", "everyone does it ", and the classic "it's business, not personal".

[SWillie!]

I was talking about corporate ethics in general but in this case it's clear that Iger and Rasulo spearheaded the operation. This round of layoffs were solely motivated by corporate greed. How else would you explain layoffs at a time when the company is financially thriving?

Exactly. That's why I didn't understand how it turned into yet another Lasseter-bashing extravaganza, when he was more likely on the artists side here. This decision was made by money.

We can hold them accountable through criticism; by not excusing their actions with remarks like "they're only doing their job", "everyone does it ", and the classic "it's business, not personal".

Yes, that's fair. Again, I don't agree with the decision - I don't support it and I'm not trying to excuse it. I'm simply stating the facts, because so many here go overboard with conspiracy theories and apocalypse prophecies

Unfortunately, the fact of the matter is that Iger is doing his job the best way he feels he can - and to the people that "matter", he will have yet another year of a nice increase of profit, with record breaking dollar signs. It sucks that those with the power aren't always able to find a middle ground.

[TsWade2]

Okay. I'm sorry I act like a spoiled little Shirley Temple brat. But I think found something, but it's just a rumor. I heard that Ron and John's upcoming South Pacific movie is going to be based on Rumplestilskin called the Name Game. But I'll take it as a grain of salt, for now.

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2013/03/07/ ... name-game/

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/ ... n-20130307

http://www.therotoscopers.com/2013/03/1 ... -not-dead/

[Super Aurora]

that been shot down already. Sotris the info-bot already confirm that was false.

[TsWade2]

that been shot down already. Sotris the info-bot already confirm that was false.

Okay.

[DisneyJedi]

I'm probably sounding like a broken record by now, but......

If hand-drawn animation were TRULY dead, (1) They wouldn't have even bothered making The Princess and the Frog or Winnie the Pooh (the two pretty much proving that, despite not being big moneymakers like Cinderella or The Lion King per say, hand-drawn was far from dead at Disney), (2) Paperman wouldn't have even had both hand-drawn and CGI merged in it, (3) Disney would have laid off ALL of their 2D animators, (4) They wouldn't be looking for interns that can even do hand-drawn animation for the internship this summer, and (5) I'm sure they would have said that they were done with hand-drawn animation altogether by now.

Again, sorry for sounding like a broken record, but some of you are being too stubborn to even realize that not only is hand-drawn NOT dead at Disney, it's the furthest thing from, really. At least, that's the way I see it.

[Kyle]

broken record would be an understatement.

[DisneyJedi]

broken record would be an understatement.

Yeah, I thought someone would say that. But seriously, though.

[SWillie!]

Jedi, all your points are true, except this one:

(5) I'm sure they would have said that they were done with hand-drawn animation altogether by now.

After the immense backlash they had after they "announced" that they were putting traditional animation behind them back in 2004/2005, if they were planning on doing the same thing, they most certainly wouldn't shout it from the rooftops this time around. They would just kind of let it fade out. Which, to be fair, is more or less what seems to be happening.

I think after pages and pages of this discussion going in circles every time it's revived, the biggest question left at this point is: what exactly is your personal definition of "dead"? Given the state Disney is in now (with no real 2D production in sight, possibly a short or two, and experimentation with hybrids) many would choose to call it "dead". As for me, I don't think it's necessary for Disney to have a traditional film come out every year, or every two years, or even more. Back in Walt's days there were at least a few times where there were four or five years between features. That didn't mean that animation was "dead" - just that they were taking their time with the films. I'd rather see a really, really great traditional film from Disney every five to ten years than a lot of mediocre ones just for the sake of doing traditional animation.

So, for me, I won't consider the medium "dead" at the studio until they literally put every pencil down, are not doing any shorts, any hybrids, until none of the animators are trained in traditional animation. I would rather look forward to what happens in the future than get irritated that they aren't giving us more more more. But I can understand why others would think otherwise, and consider Disney's 2D current state "dead". It's just a matter of opinion at this point. Don't let others change yours.

[Semaj]

As for me, I don't think it's necessary for Disney to have a traditional film come out every year, or every two years, or even more. Back in Walt's days there were at least a few times where there were four or five years between features. That didn't mean that animation was "dead" - just that they were taking their time with the films. I'd rather see a really, really great traditional film from Disney every five to ten years than a lot of mediocre ones just for the sake of doing traditional animation.

The lot of you here seem to forget that Disney once produced volumes of animated shorts between their next features.

[SWillie!]

The lot of you here seem to forget that Disney once produced volumes of animated shorts between their next features.

That's a fair point, for sure. But I think that idea has been taken over by Disney TV animation. But regardless, my point still stands that, for some of us, it's enough to look forward to the product that will come in the future, whether that be next year, or in five years.

[Elladorine]

The lot of you here seem to forget that Disney once produced volumes of animated shorts between their next features.

Regularly-produced theatrical shorts ceased when the market began to shift toward television. Not just by Disney, but all studios that didn't even focus on creating animated features (I believe Walter Lantz was the last to hold out until around 1970). And of course, most television animation has been outsourced for decades now since it's cheaper to produce. We eventually got direct to video, and now have video games and even the internet, thus new homes and new markets for the medium. The world of hand-drawn animation has completely changed and I'm not sure what the answer is. Unfortunately, high-quality, hand-drawn animation is not cost-effective and at this point I'm sure it's hard to justify having Disney's top 2D artists give their all into small projects that don't generate much profit, if any.

Paperman was well-received, highly-acclaimed, and even popular with audiences. It does an amazing job of exploring new technologies and justifying that there's still a place for hand-drawn animation (or at least the look of it). But as a short, how much money did it make? And look at How to Hook Up Your Home Theater. While an excellent short, how many people outside of the animation community even know it exists? And what about Lorenzo? How many people outside of the industry have even seen that thing? And while I'm not saying they shouldn't have been made (I'm most definitely glad that they were), I'm surprised that the execs let them happen. They give the artists a chance to experiment, try new techniques, and stay fresh for when they work on the real money makers, but I could definitely see a large corporation looking down their noses at them as a waste of time.

Who knows what the future will bring, but at least there is still plenty of traditional art involved with creating CG, even if we don't get to enjoy it in the finished product. I would like to see traditional animation get the occasional revival in features or in hybrid films, and to see it push forward instead of looking back (which is admittedly what happened with their last two hand-drawn "revival" DAC's, no matter how enjoyable they might have been). Great animation still requires an amazing amount of talent, and great films still require an incredible amount of collaboration. And even though I still have a preference for hand-drawn, I appreciate the level of work and skill that go into creating the more recent films.

Then again, I'm always looking on the bright side of things.

[milojthatch]

Now this is just mean!

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/bad-ideas/di ... 81223.html

[Sotiris]

That's why I didn't understand how it turned into yet another Lasseter-bashing extravaganza, when he was more likely on the artists side here. This decision was made by money

I didn't accuse Lasseter for the layoffs. It's obvious that the orders for that came from above. I am holding him partially responsible though for not fighting harder to keep hand-drawn animation at Disney.

Now this is just mean!

While I don't think they did that on purpose, the timing is rather unfortunate. They should have predicted that this little giveaway would be considered insensitive at a time like this.

[Disney's Divinity]

As for me, I don't think it's necessary for Disney to have a traditional film come out every year, or every two years, or even more.

Nobody has ever expected it to be that way; another exaggeration. I don't expect another 2D film to be out in a mere "4 or 5 years" either. That would be expecting a film by 2016, which is not going to happen. Also, I think your excuse that the films are better with more time between is an empty assumption. Usually, the same people do not work on every film at Disney. (Of course, John Lasseter will stick his hand into every Disney film from here on out, so I guess maybe that's what you were thinking of.) They could take 20 years to put out another film and it could be irredeemably awful. It took 5 years for TP&TF to finally come, after all, and many people here hated that movie.

I would rather look forward to what happens in the future than get irritated that they aren't giving us more more more.

I'm not irritated, despite you telling me I am repeatedly. I'm just giving my own outlook on Disney's "future," which for the most part there is no reason for me to look forward to with positivity.

Now this is just mean!

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/bad-ideas/di ... 81223.html

"To celebrate the layoffs"....

[TsWade2]

Now this is just mean!

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/bad-ideas/di ... 81223.html

You're right! That is mean! Whoever said that must be a big idiotic jerk!

[DisneyJedi]

Now this is just mean!

http://www.cartoonbrew.com/bad-ideas/di ... 81223.html

.... My respect for them went down a HUGE notch.

[Elladorine]

The "celebrate" comment was obviously sarcasm.