DVDizzy Forum

There have been two posts on TAG blog that have claimed as such:

I've actually been told that WDAS's death is near.

An executive "implied" that there was a reason that WDAS features are put against blockbusters upon release while Pixar always gets the "better" release dates. People at the company have stopped believing in WDAS's commercial power and basically want it out as they regard the studio a significant casuality.

It first starts with a gap in the release schedule, then you get one feauture every 2 years,then...

Well, to be honest he didn't say they will actually close the studio but he did say that there is a plan to reduce feautures produced by WDAS significantly, like one in every 2 or 3 years.

Only if Tangled does really really well maybe the fate of the studio can be salvaged.

BREAKING NEWS:

It's official; after 2011, WDAS will only produce one feature every two years!

So, it's Winnie the Pooh in 2011, Reboot Ralph in 2013, and the new feature in 2015, and so on...

Link: http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... house.html


Do you think this could be true?

Please, no! I hope not!!

(Does that mean animated movies or movies of any kind all together? )

.... While Pixar will produce 2 features every year?

Ukrainian wrote:.... While Pixar will produce 2 features every year?

I guess so, given that the rumor turns out to be true. What is certain is that they are having two films in 2012: Brave and Monsters Inc. 2.

Kraken Guard wrote:Please, no! I hope not!!

(Does that mean animated movies or movies of any kind all together? )

Animated movies only. WDAS is Walt Disney Animation Studios. Disney wouldn't give up their cheaply made, profit making, sub par live action releases. I don't remember the last good live action release.

Coolmanio wrote:Animated movies only. WDAS is Walt Disney Animation Studios. Disney wouldn't give up their cheaply made, profit making, sub par live action releases. I don't remember the last good live action release.

Prince of Persia

But i dont want them to give up on the Animated Stuff! Even though it seems like they did that long ago..

Never give up, never surrender! (To much Galaxy Quest.. )

I can't honestly imagine a world where this would be true. I think the studio is trying to reinvent itself, and that is why we are seeing some possible gaps in the pipeline. It seems to me, from almost all other sources, that the studio is beginning to become very picky about what projects they choose. They know that the studio has been underperforming and they want some of the success from the 90's back.

I think the studio would be able to recapture major success if it weren't for the Disney brand name holding them back. Marketing and all the success's of the franchises they've put out is keeping them from really exploring their potential.

That comment section is a verbal bloodbath.

Methinks morale is not that high over at the Mouse House.

Kraken Guard wrote: Prince of Persia

Haven't seen it, don't want to see it, heard it was bad.

I dislike how much of a company Disney is. They would rather release a few live action movies in order to gain a couple millions of dollars, knowing that these movies might not be well recieved, (Sorcerer's Apprentice, not well recieved by critics or public alike), then spend a few years developing a good animated movie (Princess and the Frog, 4 years for development, was well recieved by critics) even if it is a "disappointment" at the box office ($150 Mill is a disappointment? To some studios that is a godsend.)

It just irks me, as it probably does to everyone else.

I don't care how often they release movies. Every 3 years was pretty much the norm in the 60s/70s/80s. I only care about the quality of the movies.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:I don't care how often they release movies. Every 3 years was pretty much the norm in the 60s/70s/80s. I only care about the quality of the movies.

This.

Not once in the 60 years before the 50 years before the 90s did Disney put out a movie year after year after year after year. At some points, it was 3 or 4 films a DECADE. And guess what? They were, for the most part, better films than what we've been getting in the past decade.

Well, i sure hope this isn't true..

Im beginning to think The Happiest Place on Earth is beginning to have a not-very-happy looking future..

I wish it were the other way around. I'm not a big fan of Pixar's films (with the exception of Ratatouille) and I can hardly watch any of their films more than once, while I absolutely adore 2-D films. Oh well

I'm actually not sadden by this news, if it's true. I want them to make high quality movies and it seems to me unlike the 90s where they were releasing them year after year, that Disney has not gotten back into the habit of making great film after great film. Also I hope that the animators will not be rushed as much as they were before, I mean they had to use animation from Sleeping Beauty at the end of Beauty and the Beast because of time.

Hey, if it improves the quality of their films, have at it.

Coolmanio wrote: I dislike how much of a company Disney is. They would rather release a few live action movies in order to gain a couple millions of dollars, knowing that these movies might not be well recieved, (Sorcerer's Apprentice, not well recieved by critics or public alike), then spend a few years developing a good animated movie (Princess and the Frog, 4 years for development, was well recieved by critics) even if it is a "disappointment" at the box office ($150 Mill is a disappointment? To some studios that is a godsend.)

It just irks me, as it probably does to everyone else.

Wow, they would rather make as much money as possible. That's new.

As you might know, the animated movies Disney makes still aren't doing that great. 150 million is a disappointment when you figure out what it cost to make the movie.

Walt Disney planned to release an animated feature every year after Snow White. He succeeded for a while, but even he had to cut back.

1940 Pinocchio
1940 Fantasia
1941 Dumbo
1942 Bambi
1942 Victory Through Air Power
1942 Saludos Amigos
1943 Saludos Amigos (wide release)
1944 The Three Caballeros
1945 The Three Caballeros (wide release)
1946 Make Mine Music
1947 Fun and Fancy Free
1948 Melody Time
1949 The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad
1950 Cinderella
1951 Alice in Wonderland

The first five are considered the best animated films ever made, but everything after until Cinderella rarely show up on anyone's "best" lists. When Alice flopped, even Walt had to step back and go on a more staggered schedule...

1953 Peter Pan
1955 Lady and the Tramp
1959 Sleeping Beauty
1961 101 Dalmatians
1963 Sword in the Stone
1967 Jungle Book

Post-Walt, this trend continued...

1970 Aristocats
1973 Robin Hood
1977 The Rescuers
1981 The Fox and the Hound
1985 The Black Cauldron

The point is, gaps in releases isn't neccessarily a bad thing. It doesn't guarantee good movies, but I think Disney animation was hurt by a glut of films in the marketplace. The idea of Disney animation as an "event" was hurt by the Direct To Videos and the glut of animation in theaters.

So, I'm cautiously optimistic that this plan will lead to Disney animation becoming an event again, and will lead to a rise in quality and a rise in appreciation.

I'm sad, but if it improves the quality of the output then so be it.

But they still wont bring back that money if they dont shred the public's perception of them.

Shred, rape, destroy.........etc.

Actually, I think that this decision has nothing to do with the quality of future Disney films. Mouse's best masterpieces were made in rush, do you guys remember it?

^You are right, it has to do with the fact Pixar makes more $$$. If something makes more money, you put as many resources as you can into it.