My Concerns About WDFA...

[DisneyJedi]

Yes, I am very concerned for the company. And I know they said they'd release a hand-drawn movie once every two years. But I'm still feeling concerned that they might screw us over.

Whatnot with them releasing Gnomeo and Juliet next year with that new Pooh movie. And no news of a 2D movie coming in 2013.

[MutantEnemy]

Well, they don't really owe us anything to be honest. I am just glad traditional animation is back in any form. I think we should wait until they announce future projects before jumping to conclusions.

[Racer_prince]

Well, they don't really owe us anything to be honest. I am just glad traditional animation is back in any form. I think we should wait until they announce future projects before jumping to conclusions.

Exactly. They've only confirmed up until 2012. Give it some time. And even if WDAS future endevors are not handrawn, is it really so terrible if the movies themselves are good?

[DisneyJedi]

Well, I'm just a little concerned because you know how The Princess and the Frog was a financial hit, but not as much as the guys at the studio expected it to be? Yes, it was successful, but only moderately.

Well, they don't really owe us anything to be honest. I am just glad traditional animation is back in any form. I think we should wait until they announce future projects before jumping to conclusions.

Exactly. They've only confirmed up until 2012. Give it some time. And even if WDAS future endevors are not handrawn, is it really so terrible if the movies themselves are good?

Don't get me wrong, I love CGI and all. But it's just that I love hand-drawn more and the last thing I want is for 2D animation to be obsolete. ESPECIALLY AT DISNEY!

[Margos]

Whatnot with them releasing Gnomeo and Juliet next year with that new Pooh movie. And no news of a 2D movie coming in 2013.

I was not aware that that Gnomeo thing was actually a Disney production. I thought it was only to be distributed.

[Goliath]

Well, I'm just a little concerned because you know how The Princess and the Frog was a financial hit,

No, it wasn't. Ice Age 3 was a financial hit, The Chipmunks 2 was a financial hit. PatF was not.

[toonaspie]

I think it's time to accept the fact that we might not see any good American 2D animated films for quite some time...unless Disney does come up with a good story fit for 2D. Other countries such as Japan will continue to dominate the 2D animated film market. And Disney will continue to have Pixar churn in the big bucks. Disney will likely continue to make 3D films for its canon regardless of whether or not Tangled becomes a success.

[DisneyJedi]

I think it's time to accept the fact that we might not see any good American 2D animated films for quite some time...unless Disney does come up with a good story fit for 2D. Other countries such as Japan will continue to dominate the 2D animated film market. And Disney will continue to have Pixar churn in the big bucks. Disney will likely continue to make 3D films for its canon regardless of whether or not Tangled becomes a success.

So that "one 2D animated film a year" thing WAS a lie?!

[jpanimation]

So that "one 2D animated film a year" thing WAS a lie?!

Not exactly. I think you're getting a little too excited. Disney has only announced Winnie the Pooh for 2011 and Reboot Ralph (formally Joe Jump) for 2013. They have nothing locked in for 2012. The movies they had planned for that time slot ran into production problems, they couldn't have predicted that, and I'd much rather them shelve the project than rush out a ill-conceived film (just to make the hand-drawn quota, but at the same time, when that ill-conceived hand-drawn production bombs at the box office, what do you think they'll blame it on again?). Snow Queen has been on and off production for years, it's a troublesome project, and to rush it now just to make a hand-drawn quota would be a bad idea. When Snow Queen finally comes out, I want it to be the best it can be, even if it takes a few more years.

You also have to consider this, they fired all of their traditional animators and dumped all the equipment. They only brought back the bare minimum for The Princess and the Frog and none of that has changed since (considering the box office numbers). They only have enough animators to work on one hand-drawn film at a time. Since they haven't finished Pooh, I'm sure they're in no hurry to announce one of the films in pre-production that may end up being shelved if they aren't up to snuff. Just look at how long it took Reboot Ralph (formally Joe Jump) to get a date.

As for Gnomeo and Juliet, I think that is like The Wild, in that it's an animated production of some other company that Disney just helped finance (and probably distribute in the US). It is definitely NOT a product of WDFA.

[DisneyJedi]

Well, I'm just a little concerned because you know how The Princess and the Frog was a financial hit,

No, it wasn't. Ice Age 3 was a financial hit, The Chipmunks 2 was a financial hit. PatF was not.

Well Ice Age 3 SHOULDN'T have been!! What I don't understand is why it was!! Seriously, I can understand AatC2, but IA3?! What are people, stupid?! There wasn't a single thing I really thought was special about it.

BTW, technically, PatF wasn't a "flop". Look at how much it made back domestically (a little over $104 million against a $105 million budget), compared to Treasure Planet (a little over $38 million domestically against a budget of $140 million) and Home on the Range ($50 million domestically against a budget of $110 million). I didn't include international numbers because to some studios, only domestic numbers matter. And I didn't include Brother Bear in the comparison because I don't know how much its budget was. Granted, PatF's numbers would have been more impressive if it wasn't competing with Avatar or the Squeakquel. If this was released this summer and Tangled was pushed back to 2011, you think the domestic numbers on PatF would've been better than they are now?

[jpanimation]

And I didn't include Brother Bear in the comparison because I don't know how much its budget was.

even two perceived "flops" like Treasure Planet and Brother Bear, both of which still did incredible numbers on home video and in the latter's case was more readily embraced outside America.

Disney Feature Animation Florida never made a flop, as films were made considerably cheaper there, unless I have the wrong numbers (in which case I'd like to see the correct ones):

Mulan Production Budget: $90 million Worldwide Gross: $304,320,254

Lilo & Stitch Production Budget: $80 million Worldwide Gross: $273,144,151

Brother Bear Production Budget: $85 million Worldwide Gross: $250,397,798

$30-40 million should be added to the price on all these productions for the marketing costs (then subtract what theaters took and your left with what Disney earned). I won’t include DVD and merchandise sales. While not all of the Florida productions were “hits”, they certainly were NOT "flops". Compare those numbers to what should really be considered "flops":

Treasure Planet Production Budget: $140 million Worldwide Gross: $109,578,115 (or $91,800,000?)

Home on the Range Production Budget: $110 million Worldwide Gross: $103,951,461 (or $76,482,461?)

All the Burbank animated features made this decade have cost over $100 million to make, making their profit margins smaller, but those two films were the only two to actually flop. The Princess and the Frog is estimated to cost around $105 million to make, even with all the budget cutting procedures being thrown in place. That price is actually pretty good considering the government inflated (or devalued) our dollar since then and the old idiots who were running the show threw out all the old desks and equipment and fired all the establish animators.

What a stupidly long off-topic rant about perceived flops but it just kind of irks me to constantly hear them mistakenly being called flops (unless the numbers I have are wrong, in which case I'd like to be presented with the correct numbers).

Bold numbers come from boxofficemojo.com, numbers in parentheses and in question are from www.the-numbers.com.

Those are the numbers I came up with during some research. BTW, I don't remember Goliath ever calling The Princess and the Frog a "flop," just not a "hit" (there is a difference and he is correct). Also, all the production budget information, including The Princess and the Frog's $105 million, doesn't include the $30-40 million average spent in marketing, just as the gross doesn't include DVD and merchandising sales.

[mawnck]

What are people, stupid?!

You're starting to catch on.

[AladdinFan]

The Princess and the Frog Production Budget: $105 million Worldwide Gross: $267,028,812

http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=pri ... hefrog.htm

The Princess and the Frog on Home Video
DVD Units Sold: 3,991,158
Consumer Spending: $62,968,367

http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2009/FROGP-DVD.php

[Goliath]

Well Ice Age 3 SHOULDN'T have been!! What I don't understand is why it was!! Seriously, I can understand AatC2, but IA3?! What are people, stupid?! There wasn't a single thing I really thought was special about it.

I agree with you, but you've basically given the answer already yourself: the audience is stupid. Call me elitist, but I really think it's true. If you look at the box-office top 10 right now, Toy Story 3 is at no.1, but what's in the other slots? The Karate Kid, The A-Team, Get him to the Greek and Shrek Forever After.* I mean: how much dumber do you want to have it? Remember that Transformers was a smash hit, and that was about cgi-rendered cars that could transform into robots and then went fighting each other, for the love of God!!

* Source: http://www.imdb.com/

BTW, technically, PatF wasn't a "flop". Look at how much it made back domestically (a little over $104 million against a $105 million budget), compared to [...]

Comparing it to other flops doesn't make it any less of a flop. I know you like the film a lot, but that's no reason to ignore the fact that it bombed. It didn't even make back it's budget in the US. That's bad. Really bad. We're not helping Disney by denying their films didn't perform well.

Granted, PatF's numbers would have been more impressive if it wasn't competing with Avatar or the Squeakquel. If this was released this summer and Tangled was pushed back to 2011, you think the domestic numbers on PatF would've been better than they are now?

I don't know, but there's always going to be competition from other movies. And the fact is, these don't even have to be particular good movies, because Chipmunks 2 outperformed Princess and the Frog. Besides, do you really want Disney movies perform well because of the lousy competition? Or do you want them performing well despite good competition? There's no honor in the former situation, but all the more in the latter.

[amazon980]

Did we forget about Ramayana? will that be 2d or cgi?

[DisneyJedi]

Well Ice Age 3 SHOULDN'T have been!! What I don't understand is why it was!! Seriously, I can understand AatC2, but IA3?! What are people, stupid?! There wasn't a single thing I really thought was special about it.

I agree with you, but you've basically given the answer already yourself: the audience is stupid. Call me elitist, but I really think it's true. If you look at the box-office top 10 right now, Toy Story 3 is at no.1, but what's in the other slots? The Karate Kid, The A-Team, Get him to the Greek and Shrek Forever After.* I mean: how much dumber do you want to have it? Remember that Transformers was a smash hit, and that was about cgi-rendered cars that could transform into robots and then went fighting each other, for the love of God!!

* Source: http://www.imdb.com/

BTW, technically, PatF wasn't a "flop". Look at how much it made back domestically (a little over $104 million against a $105 million budget), compared to [...]

Comparing it to other flops doesn't make it any less of a flop. I know you like the film a lot, but that's no reason to ignore the fact that it bombed. It didn't even make back it's budget in the US. That's bad. Really bad. We're not helping Disney by denying their films didn't perform well.

Granted, PatF's numbers would have been more impressive if it wasn't competing with Avatar or the Squeakquel. If this was released this summer and Tangled was pushed back to 2011, you think the domestic numbers on PatF would've been better than they are now?

I don't know, but there's always going to be competition from other movies. And the fact is, these don't even have to be particular good movies, because Chipmunks 2 outperformed Princess and the Frog. Besides, do you really want Disney movies perform well because of the lousy competition? Or do you want them performing well despite good competition? There's no honor in the former situation, but all the more in the latter.

Now that I think about it, I don't know who's more stupid. The audience, or the guys in charge of Disney who keep pitting their movies against good/crappy competition. All I know is that all this crap that's been happening to Disney is all that stupid Hitler reincarnate, Michael Eisner's, fault for making hand-drawn animation frowned upon and getting Disney Channel turned into some place for shitty shows.

And Goliath, the fact that PatF was a little under $1 million away from gaining back its budget and considered a "bomb" isn't making me feel any better! In fact, this is why I am concerned for the future of hand drawn!

[Margos]

Did we forget about Ramayana? will that be 2d or cgi?

Isn't the question rather.... Is it happening?

[DisneyJedi]

Did we forget about Ramayana? will that be 2d or cgi?

Isn't the question rather.... Is it happening?

Does that idea even exist?

[Margos]

Isn't the question rather.... Is it happening?

Does that idea even exist?

It did for a while, at least. I'm not even 100% sure what it was supposed to be about. But they definitely did talk about it for a while.

[Goliath]

All I know is that all this crap that's been happening to Disney is all that stupid Hitler reincarnate, Michael Eisner's, fault

Okay, can you act normal from now on, please?