DVDizzy Forum

http://jimhillmedia.com/blogs/floyd_nor ... ch-cg.aspx


What can Walt Disney Animation Studios do to save itself? Ditch digital
Floyd Norman is back with a column that's sure to cause some controversy. Since this Disney Legend is now suggesting that WDAS should abandon production of CG animated features and instead concentrate on reviving its hand-drawn animation unit

I’m going to apologize in advance for today's column because I'm sure that it's going to make a lot of people angry. I have a plan that some might call radical. But it’s a plan that I’m afraid we need. Tough times demand tough decisions, and here’s one to consider:
Get rid of digital animation at Walt Disney Animation Studios.

Yep. I said it. I think that WDAS should stop producing CG animated features and should instead concentrate on reviving hand-drawn animation.

Now, lest you think this is some kind of impassioned plea about the “purity” of hand-drawn animation -- think again. This is not some geeky, fan boy rant about which is the better cartoon medium. Far from it. This is pure business stuff. Corporate strategy, some might call it. Tough things that you gotta do when running a business during tough times.

Animation has been going through a fair amount of turmoil over the past few years. Some “business geniuses” had the bright idea that animation was going through a paradigm shift. This was all because a new tool had been invented. A tool that gave us the ability to move objects in a computer. According to these suits, this brilliant new tool was what would move animation moving to the next level. Hand-drawn animation had reached its limit, they said. Digital animation was the new paradigm. Hand-drawn was dead, and rightly so.


If today's audiences really think that hand-drawn animation is
old-fashioned, then who the heck is buying all of these?

Hold on a second. If hand-drawn animation is outmoded and passé, then how do you explain Disney's ability to continue to sell “Pinocchio,” “Sleeping Beauty,” and “Peter Pan” in every new technology that comes along? How many times has Walt Disney Studios Home Entertainment repackaged & resold the Company's old hand-drawn features on DVD with new added features or new digital transfers?

Kids watch these movies over & over again not because of the film-making technology involved, but because they’re good. The problem here isn’t with the mode -- it’s with the message. The reason that any one film fails at the box office isn’t because of the technology. It’s all about whether the stories are any good; whether the characters resonate with an audience. We have to care whether the hero wins and the villain loses. Unbelievably, it’s as simple as that.

So you see, this is not really a discussion of the merits of one film production method over another. Each has its points and that’s perfectly fine. I embrace both, of course, with the nod going to hand-drawn. But then again, that’s just me. However, we’re not here to discuss art. We’re here to talk business.

Serious question now: Does The Walt Disney Company really need a digital animation studio? You bet your megabytes they do. Luckily, they own the finest digital animation studio in the world. A company that consistently turns out some of the greatest animated features ever produced, and will -- in all likelihood -- continue to do so. Now comes the next tough business question: Are two such studios really a legitimate need?

The trouble is, Walt Disney Animation Studios is already getting lost in the crowd. That’s the problem with digital animation. There’s nothing that truly distinguishes one film from another. At one time, WDAS was unique. It was the premiere animation studio in the world. It was what everybody who aspired to be an animator wanted to work. Walt Disney, along with his incredible staff, set the standard and raised the bar so high, competitors could only dream of hopefully coming close. Once the leader in a business it completely dominated, Walt Disney Animation Studios is now reduced to playing catch up.


Walt never followed the competition. He was always too busy leading

In this ever-growing field of animated films from numerous competitors both foreign and domestic, The Walt Disney Company still has a hole card. A card that’s evident even now as work continues on WDAS' first hand-drawn animated feature in years. A movie that could restore Walt Disney Animation Studios' identity and remind audiences around the world that the Company they remember from their childhood is still very much alive. That it is already beginning to awaken from a deep digital slumber like some beautiful princess in a fairy tale.

Once again, this is not an artistic discussion. This is not a debate over which medium is more viable, or what audiences prefer. This is a business decision that will be made one day, and that day is quickly approaching.

From time to time, I’ve taken heat from angry CG guys for being too critical of their recent movie efforts. Most seem to think I was beating up on them because I had a vested interest in hand-drawn animated features. In truth, I was never taking issue with the medium -- rather the poor films that were being made. I have little doubt that -- with today's column -- I’ll once again be accused of “computer bashing.” As nervous technicians fear future downsizing and the loss of their jobs.

That said, I still think that it's time that Walt Disney Animation Studios grew up. It's time that WDAS realized that it's not the cool young kid on the block anymore. Get over it! So you’re not young, hip, or cool. Big deal. You’re still the great grand-daddy of feature animation. And that’s a very good thing to be. In fact, that may wind up being the very thing that saves Walt Disney Animation Studios.

So what to do? I think that WDAS should capitalize on its own historic legacy, remind would-be moviegoers of those not-so-distant days when hand-drawn animation was still considered magical. When the animators who worked at Disney were looked upon as artists. And it took decades -- not months -- to master this craft.



Finally, I have a question for all you executives and managers who keep looking at the bottom line. Which do you think is more expensive? Software and workstations or pencils and paper? Servers and digital infrastructure or wooden desks? Yeah, I know. There’s always digital post, but you get the idea.

Hand-drawn traditional animation is Disney’s past. But it can also be Disney’s future. What Walt Disney Animation Studios really needs to do is lead a modern renaissance of hand-drawn animation.

And when they do that ... Guess what? The magic -- because it is magic -- will return.

-


I agree completely with this article. With the upcoming animated Princess and the Frog, and, in some ways the computer aided Rapunzel that Disney will reclaim itself.
Don't get me wrong I have enjoyed many of Disney's Pixar movies and will continue to do so, but I think alot of us agree they lack the visual splendor and heart of the hand-drawn animation. The big reason for me is that you can see the talent, effort and hardwork that goes into creating such classics as Snow White, Bambi, Sleeping Beauty, Lady and the Tramp etc, but with CG it lacks these qualities big time.

But, what would you rather see from Disney in the future?

I think it's a reasonable idea considering that Disney will still get a good share of dough from Pixar's CGI films. With the two companies now merged...Disney can focus on its 2D revival and let Pixar be its CGI film department. Win-win I guess.

But I still think that you got to wait and see how this revival goes before jumping to crazy conclusions and such.

Amen Floyd Norman!!

I think he said what a lot of us here at UD feel, at least, that's the way I feel. I would love for the CG stuff to be only in the Pixar films. I wholeheartedly agree that Disney should return to traditional, hand-drawn animation for their feature films. Sure, times are changing and technology is going further and further. However, the traditional, hand-drawn animation is what started it all and honestly, I think that is how Walt would want it to be today.

I am so excited about The Princess and the Frog. I think it looks really great. I'm hoping this is a perfect formula. A princess movie + a return to hand-drawn animation = New Era for Disney. Hopefully it will be a big success for Disney and they will continue with traditional animation.

Here's hoping!!

I agree completely!!

WDAS has always known it's ups and downs, times when it was on the peak and times when it was in a slump. Times when they were apllauded by the critics and times they got dissed.
I'm quite sure soon they will be ' up' again.

I agree - - Pixar Animation should make the CG pictures and Walt Disney Animation the traditional hand-drawn cartoons (especially more folk and fairy tale adaptations).

And they should both leave the "sass" to DreamWorks.

I pretty much agree - only pretty much because while I do think "Rapunzel" and "King of the Elves" would work great in hand-drawn animation and (this is pre-judgmental) better than in CGI, now that I've seen "BOLT", I can't imagine it being done in traditional animation nor would I really want to.

Walt never followed the competition. He was always too busy leading

That's right, and they've been floundering for a while now. Disney needs to do what they've always been the best with, hand drawn. I'm glad that they closed the 2d studio but for my own selfish reasons . . . but it's time for a comeback.

Disney needs to go back to their roots in order to stand out from the crowd once again.

I don't know why, but all of Mr. Norman's recent posts seem to strike me as someone stating the obvious...Disney's future is in hand-drawn animation because Pixar is shouldering the CGI stuff? Yeah, no kidding. I'm scared to death of "The Princess and the Frog". That film needs to be to our era what Roger Rabbit was to the late80's, and I'm terrified it won't be.

I think Disney should stick to hand-drawn regardless whether PatF makes it at the box office or not. There so much CG animation around (not to mention Pixar which is a part of Disney)...
And most of the times movies don't fail because they're hand-drawn or CGI, they fail because they're not good...

Just my two cents

I was able to listen to Floyd doing a presentation at last year's SDCC and he pretty much stated the exact same thing when asked by an audience member what he thought about Disney doing CGI movies. Obviously it sounded a bit strange coming from a guy who had been seconded and worked on various Pixar films, but when you think about, maybe that was his point, as noted already; let Pixar do the CGI stuff and leave the main Disney corp to the hand-drawn output.

merlinjones wrote:I agree - - Pixar Animation should make the CG pictures and Walt Disney Animation the traditional hand-drawn cartoons (especially more folk and fairy tale adaptations).

And they should both leave the "sass" to DreamWorks.

Wow. You could have taken this right out of my brain, and I wouldn't have stated it as well. The above scenario is how it should be. Why can't they see it? Don't reinvent the wheel with WDAS doing CGI - leave it to Pixar. GO BACK to where the magic is.

Just as long as Lasseter doesn't turn WDAS into the studio for traditionally animated Pixar films. Too many people thought "BOLT" was a Pixar film. The distinction between the two studios needs to remain evident.

By en large, I agree with Floyd's article.

But I would like to ask that a Mod please edit the original post in this thread. It is a violation of copyright laws to copy/paste entire articles verbatim.

I believe the law allows one to quote up to 3 paragraphs (if I'm not mistaken) or to quote certain portions if it's in the context of a critical review or analysis.

Think how you would feel if you took the time to write such an informed, intelligent essay and gave permission for it to be published exclusively on an affiliate ad-supported website, only to have people copy/pasting (i.e. "stealing") the article verbatim and posting it on other sites.

Are you serious? A) The link precedes the article and B) if you spent the time writing a passionate plea concerning a company, would you not want that company's most passionate fans (i.e. us, here at forums like UltimateDisney) spreading the word so that eventually the company sits up and takes notice? If an article is relegated to one site, the amount of people reading it and discussing it will be far less


I am a writer, and I know I would want one of my articles re-posted elsewhere.

Neal wrote:Are you serious? A) The link precedes the article and B) if you spent the time writing a passionate plea concerning a company, would you not want that company's most passionate fans (i.e. us, here at forums like UltimateDisney) spreading the word so that eventually the company sits up and takes notice? If an article is relegated to one site, the amount of people reading it and discussing it will be far less


I am a writer, and I know I would want one of my articles re-posted elsewhere.

Yes, I take this very seriously. I have been a reporter, editor, critic, and columnist for a few websites and publications, and I've always been very vocal about plagiarism and extremely protective of my work as well as that of the websites I'm affiliated with.

And just because the link precedes the article doesn't mean anyone's going to bother clicking it because the entire article has already been posted here.

A link with a summary or quoting a few key paragraphs is really all that's necessary. And the people who run this site would never post the entire article verbatim on their front page without first getting permission from Jim Hill. It's not only the proper way to retain a level of professionalism and journalistic integrity, it's simply the right thing to do.

Furthermore, Jim Hill's site has copyright info in place at the bottom of every page on his site. And I feel fairly confident Jim would agree with my opinion on this, especially since Jim's site is affiliate ad-supported.

You may very well be a writer. But have you worked as a journalist, reporter, critic, or news editor? People who work in those positions know there are legal ramifications of taking someone else's article verbatim and reposting it without following the proper legal protocols to do so. And public forums aren't exempt from the law either.

Yes, but is this a news site, online journal, or a review site? No, it's a forum. I would understand and agree with you if UltimateDisney.com posted this on their main page, as that's a news site, but this is a forum - and a forum is a place to discuss. That's exactly what we're doing here, discussing this article.

While Mr. Hill may not agree with the article being re-posted, I believe that's Mr. Norman's call.

Who is to say this is not news aggregation? I do not believe there are solid laws on such a practice yet, as aggregation is tacitly news re-posting with linkage to the original articles, but not major re-writing or the need to follow usual copyright laws.

If I were Norman, I'd just be happy to see my article re-posted and being read. Hill's site has become a bit of a joke among Disney aficionados for the massive amounts of misinformation and empty promises over the years - so Norman's core audience may have missed ever reading it because they choose to skip Hill's site as a worthwhile resource. Here, his article will reach his core audience without the negative stigma from Hill's site.

What profession are you? The journalist, critic, reporter...?

Neal wrote:Yes, but is this a news site, online journal, or a review site? No, it's a forum.

I'm repeating myself but public forums are not exempt from the law either.

I didn't mean to make a "case" out of this. If I were a mod here, I would have already quietly edited the post in question with a note explaining why and that would've been it.

I serve as mod for three other websites and do the same thing there whenever a member posts articles verbatim.

Getting a good idea or an intelligent essay more exposure is always a good thing, but not at the expense of taking someone else's work from an exclusive source, especially involving sites that have advertisers.

What profession are you? The journalist, critic, reporter...?

I'm actually a performer by profession, but have also served as critic, reporter, columnist, and editor for a handful of media websites for over 10 years.

And now that we've completely hijacked this thread, I'll leave this to the mods to fix and thus avoid derailing the topic any further.

Me wrote:Who is to say this is not news aggregation? I do not believe there are solid laws on such a practice yet, as aggregation is tacitly news re-posting with linkage to the original articles, but not major re-writing or the need to follow usual copyright laws.

I realize you said forums were not exempt from the law but I tried to point out that most news 'aggregation' is.

Perhaps I'm just a naïve little 17-year-old boy. My only current work with journalism is being the moderator/head writer of my own two news sites with forums, writing weekly movie reviews for a newspaper in a town of 10,000, and being the editor-in-chief of my school's newspaper.

I haven't done any large-scale work yet, although I've been accepted into the E.W. Scripps school of journalism in Athens, Ohio.

And while I'd never plagiarize a movie review or allow verbatim news articles in the school paper, I still don't make the 'bad' connection here. To me, this is some good exposure on a related forum with a direct link - nothing wrong.

However, it's clear we have different viewpoints on this and that's just how it's going to be, so I'm dropping it now.

Interesting reply to the article here.