Stop the CGI remake plans - write to the Board of Directors!

[Jake Lipson]

Everyone's love affair with computer animation has gone too far - Disney is planning on remaking the classics in CGI. Reportedly, Pinocchio and Peter Pan are up first for shot-by-shot CGI redos "for a new generation to enjoy." This is not a rumor. I repeat, THIS IS NOT A RUMOR. In the recentNewsweek article says that "Eisner wants to extend the lives of Disney’s older characters by reanimating some classics for a new look. Imagine a 3-D Peter Pan soaring over a digitized London". Reportedly, this is referring to talks with top Disney talent in the past days.

It's time to stop this insanity, and I can only pray that if we show Disney what a huge mistake they are making we can end this before it gets any worse than it already is. Cheapquels I can live with. I can even take the occasional sub-par animated classic because nobody save Pixar is perfect. I've been trying to comprehend the recent shift to CGI in Disney's newest pipeline of projects. But this is too much for me to handle.

These are the names and addresses of the Walt Disney Company Board of Directors. I urge every single person on this board who cares at all about the future of Disney's animated properties to write to one or more of them. Ask friends, family, and coworkers to do the same. Those of us, myself included, who have delt with Disney in the past know that emails have seldom worked, so let['s use more traditional methods and pray that the snail isn't too terribly slow when we need him. If anyone can find company phone numbers, please call. It's going to take a huge effort to stop this - are you willing to give that effort? I am.

Here are the addresses courtesy the LaughingPlace.com forums.

Ms. Reveta F. Bowers
Head of School
Center for Early Education
563 North Alfred St.
Los Angeles, CA 90048

Mr. Robert F. Matschullat
Director
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521-4873

Mr. John E. Bryson
CEO
Edison International
2244 Walnut Grove Ave.
Rosemead, CA 91770

The Hon. George J. Mitchell, Senator (Ret.)
Partner
Piper Rudnick, LLP
901 Fifteenth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005-2301

Mr. Roy E. Disney
Vice Chairman
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521-4873

Mr. Thomas S. Murphy
Director
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521-4873

Dr. Leo J. O’Donovan
Director
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521-4873

Ms. Judith L. Estrin
President/CEO
Packet Design, LLC
3400 Hillview Ave., Building 3
Palo Alto, CA 94304

Mr. Sidney Poitier
CEO
Verdon-Cedric Productions, Ltd.
9350 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 303
Beverly Hills, CA 90212

Mr. Robert A.M. Stern
Senior Partner
Robert A.M. Stern Architects
460 West 34th St.
New York, NY 10001

Mr. Stanley P. Gold
President/CEO
Shamrock Holdings, Inc.
4444 Lakeside Dr.
Burbank, CA 91505

Mr. Raymond L. Watson
Vice President
The Irvine Company
550 Newport Center Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92658

Ms. Monica C. Lozano
President/CEO
La Opinion
411 W. Fifth St.
Los Angeles, CA 90013

Ms. Andrea L. Van de Kamp
Chairman
Sotheby’s West Coast
9665 Wilshire Blvd.
Beverly Hills, CA 90212

Mr. Gary L. Wilson
Chairman
Northwest Airlines Corporation
2700 Lone Oak Parkway
Eagan, MN 55121

Mr. Michael D. Eisner
Chairman and CEO
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.
Burbank, CA 91521-4873

Mr. Robert A. Iger
President and COO
The Walt Disney Company
500 South Buena Vista St.

Let me take this moment to thank each and every person who helps this cause. Together WE CAN make a difference and stop this nightmare before it's too late.

Thank You All.

-Jake

[Jack]

I'll be writing directly to Eisner and Roy - this is absolutely ridiculous. Walt must be turning in his grave.

[Maerj]

I'm in total agreement with Jake on this one. Cheapquels, okay. I disagree with the schepaquels based on the classic films like Snow White, Bambi, etc. But cg remakes of them... every generation knows these films already! This is a waste of time and money, just like that Psycho remake someone else mentioned. I'll be writing some of these folks too.

[Matty-Mouse]

I dont think its just Disney fans that have to worry about this. If this comes about then the media will go nuts. Its not just Disney fans that care about these movies, most of them have a place in everyones hearts and people will really speak out about this. Most people will say things like "Imagine if they re-made Gone With the Wind or The Godfather like this!"

"New Generation to enjoy", I think the new generation will enjoy the originals just as much if not more!

Do you guys think Roy Disney will want this? I don't. This is his dads and uncles hard work thier gonna tamper with.

[Prince Phillip]

My first reaction to this was, well negative, but then I think maybe this is not a totally terrible thing. I mean I don't think all the movies should be converted but a few might be good. It gives them a chance in some cases to improve what maybe they didn't accomplish the first time around, like making a human versoin of robinhood with a cool story, I don't think I've ever seen the existing one, but the fact that they are animals really turns me off. Also the same with Peter Pan. I love the story of Peter Pan but did not like the disney version, maybe they could write up a differnt script for it.
Also, I have to ask, is this really any different than them making a live- action version of 101 dalmations, which I personally didn't care for. Personally I'm a little angry dalmations made it on the Platinum list, but anyway...
I would love to see a CGI version of Sleeping Beauty. I think it is the only Fairtale worthy of this format. Aladdin might also make a good CGI movie in fact if I were going to pick a select few to be converted they would be:
Sleeping Beauty
Aladdin
The Back Cauldron (Ithink with a different script this has great potential as a CGI project)
Peter Pan

I don't know I guess there might be more. I figure as long as they don't replace the animated and as long as they only do a few, and I mean the ones that work with the format and are worthy of it, just embrace it. I think cheaply made sequels are worse. Lets just pray they do a good job, and that they are faithful to the originals when neccesary, and fix the faults that need to be fixed. You may wind up liking them.

(I hope you all don't hate me for saying this. Just trying to see the silver lining)

[Doug]

Reportedly, Pinocchio and Peter Pan are up first for shot-by-shot CGI redos "

Phillip, do you understand what that means? The movies will not be changed. Robin hood won't be made with people, they won't change the script for The Black Cauldron.

Do a little research on Psycho if you need more info on a shot by shot redo.

[Prince Phillip]

It really doesn’t change what I just said. I said that if they were redoing their animated classics, that they could improve some of them, in the case of Robin Hood by making them human. However, I do not think Robin Hood is worthy of a CGI transfer. I also said that not all the animated classics should be converted, JUST A SELECT FEW.

So what if they are shot by shot transfers, as long as it is the right movie, and they do a good job, AND it does NOT replace the original, what is the big deal? So, Psycho did not work, they should just give up with this idea. You know what they say if at first you don’t succeed…

I completely agree that it would be a waste of time and money to redo all the animated classics, as well as an insult to the artists, but it could also be a good thing, IF done RIGHT.

I still think a (shot by shot) CGI remake, could be made out of Aladdin and Sleeping Beauty, if nothing else. Can you imagine the Genie, or Maleficent? The CGI, could only enhance their power.

Anyway just give it a thought. Is there anyone who can see my, maybe naïve, opptomistic point of view.

Oh one more thing. Pinocchio and Peter Pan… BIG no no.

[Maerj]

The cool thing about the classic Disney animated fairy tales is that they look like story books come to life. CG animation looks more like puppets than storybooks. Look at Shrek, good movie, but the characters look and move like puppets! Its not bad thing, but it doesn't have the classic storybook look that these classic movies deserve. I would much rather see Disney put their time, money and efforts into producing all new stories, even if they are cg, than remaking already brilliantly done stories.

[fudge]

First time poster, long time reader. This latest thread has made me sign up to voice my disgust. This is a horrible, horrible idea.

Phillip, sorry I have to strongly disagree with you. This is a slap in a face to the Disney animators of the past; an insult to all the hard work, sweat, and love that the animators put into their films.

To just let a bunch of newbie CGI-hacks re-trace the classics and spit them out with 'fancy graphics' is not only a waste of time, but it will do NOTHING to improve the originals (not like they COULD improve it anyway) and it's a really stupid thing to do.

It doesn't matter which titles they do it with - it's a bad idea. Generations CAN and WILL enjoy the classics just the way they are for many years to come. That's why they're classics!

Thanks to the short-sightedness of the current Disney president, they will probably lock up the originals (since they don't respect them anyway) and make sure the only copies available to the public are the newly-CGI'd versions, since it's all about money and not respecting your history.

As for improving the story, it's pretty obvious the current regime at Disney know NOTHING about telling stories. The story is the most important thing, and all they are concerned with is how the final product LOOKS. This latest move completely proves that.

I guess I should have seen this coming when they started "enhancing" movies for IMAX - movies that weren't even that old.

Where the HELL is Roy Disney?!?

[Porce]

I hate this so much. What imbcille is responsible for this. Disney classics should NOT be remade, in any form, let alone CGI!

[Doug]

So, Psycho did not work, they should just give up with this idea. You know what they say if at first you don’t succeed…

I did not even hint towards this. I was merely unsure if you knew what a shot by shot remake was and was stating that it had been done for Psycho.

And Maerj, wasn't Pinocchio a puppet???

[Billy Moon]

Can you imagine the Genie, or Maleficent? The CGI, could only enhance their power.

I have to strongly disagree with you on this one. I have yet to see CGI of any kind that would have looked 2% as powerful/beautiful/magical as the animation in Sleeping Beauty.

[Loomis]

I don't think that remakes are bad in and of themselves. Some remakes can be really bad, but don't shoot every dog just got a few have fleas.

And once again, like sequels, they are doing nothing to tarnish the rep of the original or the animators.

Does the Gus Van Sant Psycho makes us think less of Hitchcock? Nope, the man was a genius.

As a poster here pointed out, 101 Dalmations has been remade as a live-action film by Disney, and Pinocchio has been redone a few times since then (the recent Italian one, and even Disney's Gepetto with Drew Carey!), and none of them have replaced the orginals.

Here is one - is 'Notre Dame' a lesser novel (or Hugo a lesser writer)because Disney made an animated musical out of it? I for one enjoyed both on different levels.

I for one appreciate the artistry of the originals even more. And I can appreciate newer versions if they are good too!

Unless the plan is to take the originals away and replaced them with these things, I don't see a problem.
Unless they plan to do a George Lucas and insert stuff into classics and call them 'definitive', I don't see a problem.

However, I do think this would be a misdirection of resources on Disney's part. Rather than extend the life of these characters through reanimation, they should extend the life of the characters by releasing them on a durable home format, and keep doing so with every new medium.

[2099net]

While I agree with Loomis on most of his points, here's my 2 pence:

Personally speaking - I don't think the shot-for-shot (which actually wasn't 100% shot-for-shot) remake of Psycho was a disaster. I do agree that it was somewhat pointless. Although I don't think the actual film in itself was ‘dumbing down’, its roots were down to Hollywood's pandering to the low expectations, low maintenance crowd. It was intended as a way of letting a ‘new generation’ experience a classic film. Because sadly, whether we like it or not, there is a vast percentage of the general public who refuse 100% to watch a black and white movie. (Personally, if they're so ignorant I say let the miss out!)

And the same sort of reasoning seems to be coming from Disney regarding their classic animated characters. Replace ‘colour’ with CGI and ‘black and white’ with ‘drawn animation’ and it reveals not only how superficial Disney’s argument is, but also how much contempt they have for the average moviegoer.

CGI is not the answer – it never was and never will be. Look at all the CGI production studios starting up in the past month even – Sony Imageworks, Luscasfilm, Dreamworks starting a 2 CGI film for every drawn animation film policy.

Pixar and ‘Shrek’ seem to have been the driving force behind the CGI boom – and they succeeded not because of the CGI, but because they are good movies (Personally I think very little of ‘Shrek’, but most people seem to like it, so what do I know? But you know what, out of all the positive word of mouth I’ve heard about ‘Shrek’ it’s been about the comedy, or the voices, or the script. I’ve never heard anyone praise ‘Shrek’ solely for the visuals).

Do Disney really think these films only succeeded due to being in CGI?

I do have a feeling that once this slew of upcoming CGI movies comes out, and some of them are not well-received (and believe me, thanks to the law of averages some of them will not be well-received) many studio's will back-peddle on their CGI commitments. Add to this the fact that the dividing line between ‘live action’ and ‘CGI animated’ movies is growing thinner and thinner each year due to advances in special effects technology and I strongly believe that CGI will be seen as unremarkable in 4-6 years time. While hand drawn animation will always appeal, and be seen as something special.

Personally I don’t think Disney is seriously considering a virtual remake of any of their properties in CGI. But I do think that upcoming sequels could quite easily be present well-loved 2D drawn characters in 3D CGI. Disney’s new mission statement seems to be ‘CGI, CGI, CGI’ – perhaps driven by the potential loss of Pixar.

Its sad that Disney want to follow the crowd – last time the Feature Animation studio was in trouble it inspired them to make a whole new wave of classic movies like ‘The Little Mermaid’ and ‘Beauty and the Beast’ while this time it just seems to be inspiring them to run their accounts and embrace any old popular trend, even if it ultimately will mean the all-important Disney ‘brand’ will loose its uniqueness – long term damage for a few years short term gain.

[Prince Phillip]

Well, I’m glad Loomis seems to see what I’m trying to say. Some how I thought he would. I am in no way encouraging this, but if this is what they plan to do, then I figure atleast look for the positive. I too did not care for Shrek and acknowledge that the graphics were horrendous, however, I have also seen CGI at it’s best: LOTR, Star Wars, and even some of the Pixar films. I would bet there is technology that we haven’t even seen yet.

These are NOT going to replace the originals! There is no way they ever could. I do not see how some of you could condone the production of cheaply made horrible sequels and yet frown on this. It is a way for them to make some money, but you know what I bet they won’t get far. And once they realize this is not the way to go the insanity will end. Do you all really think that the Disney company is going to expend all the time and money needed to convert these classics to CG?. No way. And you know what? They are not going to make you sit through them, either, but it seems to me they will not have too. I’m sure a lot of you are against it now, but I’m sure a lot of you will be in the theatres watching Pinocchio 3D, or atleast renting it. Some of the people on this board even buy the cheapquels just to buy them. I’d atleast rent them first, save money and be able to say you saw it once.

It is obvious to me that Disney is entering a dark age, but this might be good. Every so often a dark age is needed. And from them come the great Rennaissances. I don’t mean to come of mean or whatever, but it seems a lot of people are over critiquel, including myself at times, and then flip flop, and like I said I’m no exception. I know one thing, that if I was running Disney a lot of things would be different, but I’m not and they are running it this way, so I am just going to go with it for now, and count on things improving next decade… or maybe I should just say in the future. Eventually this whole CGI craze will wear off and Disney will return to its roots. And oh, one more thing, for those of you who said Shrek and the Pixar movies weren’t great because of the CGI, think again. While audiences may have liked the story and the ADULT humor of the movies, it was the computer graphics that initially pulled them in. I think Disney should go into hibernation for a while until the computer craze wears off, and just do their Pixar films for a while. I think that they are fighting a losing battle with critics and therefore the majority public.

I don’t know I’m tired, all I know is that I still enjoy many of their classics and as long as I have them to watch for years to come and can enjoy them with my future children, I will be happy. Peace out.

P.S. If you are going to resond to something I say, make sure you read the whole post to get a full understanding of what I am trying to say. Often times people respond to my posts and I don’t think they read the whole thing. Also, DOUG, I do not direct my responses to people say unless I mention their name. The Psycho thing was not directed at you.

[Matty-Mouse]

Its sad that Disney want to follow the crowd – last time the Feature Animation studio was in trouble it inspired them to make a whole new wave of classic movies like ‘The Little Mermaid’ and ‘Beauty and the Beast’ while this time it just seems to be inspiring them to run their accounts and embrace any old popular trend, even if it ultimately will mean the all-important Disney ‘brand’ will loose its uniqueness – long term damage for a few years short term gain.

Couldn't agree more!

[Maerj]

No one here is against CG movies and no one said that the Pixar movies weren't great. They all have been so far! Some of the folks on here didn't like Shrek, but most people found it entertaining.

I think that most of us feel like they are trampling over something that is held to be almost sacred. That is, the classics that helped to make Disney, and animation in general, what it is today. Personally, I just find the cg remakes to be a waste of time when they could be making all new movies.

Instead of lame sequels to their animated classics make dtv movies based on their tv shows! Lets have a House of Mouse movie special or even do a new Ducktales adventure! If you are going to do a sequel, just do it right. Good animation, good story and most of all do not contradict what happened in the previous film.

[Eeyore]

Insanity is exactly the right word for this. What a truly incredibly stupid idea.

Earth to Disney - It's not the medium, it's the message.

A crappy film done in CGI is *surprise* still a crappy film. It doesn't make the lousy plot, poor characters, or stupid songs and music any better. Similarly, a great CGI film like Toy Story *still* would have been a huge success had it been done in traditional animation.

What an incredible insult to the original animators. The Nine Old Men will be rolling over in their graves.

This will be a colossal failure. Anybody who was uninterested in the original story will still be uninterested, and most of us fanatics will be insulted and not go. I mean really, how many folks have said "Gee, I'd have gone and seen that Peter Pan movie, but it's *hand* animated. I hate that."?