DVDizzy Forum

Hollywood Reporter

The writer-director of Disney's "Lilo & Stitch" is set to shoot a project for the studio's arch-rival, DreamWorks Animation.

Chris Sanders will direct "Crood Awakening," a comedy set in the stone age, was written by English comedy legend John Cleese and Kirk De Micco ("Racing Stripes").

A release date for "Crood" has not been set. DreamWorks plans to release the film in stereoscopic 3-D, as well as 2-D.

DreamWorks originally announced "Crood" in 2005 with British studio Aardman Animations, which at the time had a five-picture deal with the studio. That unprofitable relationship was severed in late January after three releases: "Chicken Run," "Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit" and "Flushed Away."

lighthousemike wrote:A release date for "Crood" has not been set. DreamWorks plans to release the film in stereoscopic 3-D, as well as 2-D.

2-D? I wonder if the article made a typo... I thought Dreamworks had stopped making 2-D films in favor of cgi...

Lucky Dreamworks. I wonder when Disney will realize the talent that they let get away.

This is such sad news. I don't really like Dreamworks and it's heartbreaking to see a Disney vet working for them. And now it has happened too many times ... all my favourite Disney artists are winding up elsewhere. The next thing we need is Glen Keane working for Dreamworks Animation.

Chris Sanders in DreamWorks? Did Disney let him go, or did he leave?

Bebopgroove wrote:

lighthousemike wrote:A release date for "Crood" has not been set. DreamWorks plans to release the film in stereoscopic 3-D, as well as 2-D.

2-D? I wonder if the article made a typo... I thought Dreamworks had stopped making 2-D films in favor of cgi...

I think they mean 3-D as in "3d Glasses" and 2-D as in CGI put projected "flat" on a screen.

I'm annoyed by this news. I thought Aardman comissioned and owned the rights to Crood Awakening.

Prudence wrote:Chris Sanders in DreamWorks? Did Disney let him go, or did he leave?

He left Disney due to creative differences with Lasseter & Catmull over his film American Dog. The new director for the film is Chris Williams.

Bad move on Disney's part, they let one of their best people go.

Escapay

I actually believe he's better for Dreamworks.

Though L&S was fun, I felt he was sort of holding back his humor and quirkiness. He can go crazy with his vision at Dreamworks, while Disney can continue making Disney films.

I'm a John Cleese and Chris Sanders fan, so this oughta be good. I'm a Disney boy, but I'm not anti-other animation studios. I've actually liked a lot of Dreamworks animated films (The Shrek movies, Madagascar, Over the Hedge) and I look forward to this film, even though it is sad that American Dog won't reach it's full potential, judging by the toned down and less quirky version now in production.

I usually prefer Disney, but I like certain DreamWorks movies a great deal. There was such a mania last summer over whether Cars or Over the Hedge was the greater movie. Don't slice me, but I preferred Over the Hedge. It had a fun soundtrack, a character I could easily relate to (Gladys Sharp), and I simply liked the whole cast better than most of the Cars cast.

The arguments over which movie was the better were ridiculously intense and not needed. There was no similar plotline; they were simply both CGI movies produced by different companies and released around the same time.

I apologize for going a bit off topic, but I needed to "rant." (Twas a bit too calm for a real rant.)

PatrickvD wrote: He can go crazy with his vision at Dreamworks, while Disney can continue making Disney films.

No offense, but the last 4 words, "continue making Disney films" made me cringe. Why do people KEEP assuming Disney movies should have a formula or wish they did? It's better if Disney doesn't have a "formula". If Disney makes a good movie, who cares if it's part of the formula? My point: Disney ISN'T a formula.

Now about Chris Sanders, I'm pretty disappointed. However, I would be fine with him leaving if he at least directed American Dog. If he directed that film, THEN left to Dreamworks, I would at least be happier as he would make one last "official" movie for Disney. Unfortunately, from what we have heard of Lasseter's and Williams' story so far, they've drained all the fun, freshness and originality from Sanders' version.

There IS a Disney formula: High quality films the whole family can enjoy together. That's the formula. However, they've deviated from that formula many times since Walt's passing. The parks have suffered from the same formula deviations over the past several years, separating what is for kids, teens, and adults, following the common media's example, and often throwing quality out the window. I stick with Disney though, as it's already in my blood, they're lower quality stuff is often still better than the other studios' efforts, and they still turn out a gem now and then. I'm not opposed to other animation studios either though, and I do think I got more enjoyment from "Over the Hedge" than from "Cars," though "Cars" was still very good and has grown on my since I bought the DVD. It's just the weakest of the PIXAR films though.

High quality is NOT a formula. High quality can range to a bunch of things. If you were giving a filmmaker advice, you wouldn't say "make a great film" or "make a high-quality film". That's very vague advice and not at all helpful to that person. A formula is something detailed like "a big-budget fantasy starring young kids" or "a big-budget science-fiction adventure", now those weren't the most detailed explanations of course, but those were much more detailed than just "great films".

The "family films" arguement can get controversial, but I don't see them as a formula either. "The Wizard of Oz" and "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" are considered "great family films", but can you even begin to compare them? They're even different genres from each other as one is a fantasy while the other is more of a dark comedy(at least Road Dahl's and Tim Burton's versions are).

Now, Disney has been around for so long and has change styles and innovated to different formats so many times, you can't lump everything from "Steamboat Willie" to the upcoming "Meet the Robinsons" together. I find people who do lump everything Disney has ever done as one "formula" kind of ignorant. It'd almost be like if someone wrote a book called "Movies". That's certainly going to be a very long book or a not very detailed one.

The point is, I don't see one formula that Disney has to make. And I think Chris Sanders was a great artist at Disney, because as far as Lilo and Stitch being "too quirky", well I know someone who claimed it was one of Disney's more depresing films recently. Tis a shame he's gone, but not much we can do.

It IS a formula. It's one plus one, high quality plus all-ages friendly, even if it isn't a plot formula.

It's true that you can't lump everything from Steamboat Willie to Meet the Robinsons into the "Disney Formula" of high quality/all-ages friendly films, but you can lump the stuff from Walt's day into it. After Walt died, they deviated from the formula now and then.

Very sad reading this, as Lilo & Stitch is one of my favorite animated movies. I recently saw a clip on Youtube from the 2-disc version,Chris Sanders is extremely talented and hilarious. A dumb move made by Lasseter, the new American Dog sounds like a Toy Story plot,compared to the original.

Wonder what will happen to the Lilo & Stitch world next,after all he created it..

Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:

PatrickvD wrote: He can go crazy with his vision at Dreamworks, while Disney can continue making Disney films.

No offense, but the last 4 words, "continue making Disney films" made me cringe. Why do people KEEP assuming Disney movies should have a formula or wish they did? It's better if Disney doesn't have a "formula". If Disney makes a good movie, who cares if it's part of the formula? My point: Disney ISN'T a formula.

actually, it sort of is. I believe I've tried to explain this to you in the past before. It comes down to knowing what you are and stand for as a studio, so the audience knows as well. I'm not saying there's a standard formula, but there has to be that something the audience can recognise and identify with.

Every studio needs an image, an identity. Pixar has one, Disney has one and Dreamworks has one as well. Right now I think Chris Sanders fits in better at DW