Is Hand Drawn Animation Dead Again?

[TsWade2]

Forgive me if this part of my obsession, but is hand drawn animation dead again because The Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh are box office failures?

[estefan]

The Princess and the Frog made its money back from its worldwide theatrical release. And the DVD and Blu-Ray sales were huge, so that's hardly a box-office failure. Also, Winnie the Pooh broke even.

And Disney has no official announcement about cancelling hand-drawn animation at the studio. About nine years ago, we didn't know it was done until it was officially announced that Home on the Range would be the last one. And then two years after Range came out, then Disney said a new hand-drawn animated feature was in production. So, no, I don't think hand-drawn animation is dead. Not at Disney, nor anywhere else.

Look at the work produced and distributed by Studio Ghibli, Sylvain Chomet, GKIDS. Not to mention, Mark Dindal's partly hand-drawn project at DreamWorks. Many shorts also still use hand-drawn animation, like those produced by the National Film Board of Canada.

I know a lot of Disney's fans are panicking, because the plan was for there to be one every two years. But I would rather the artists at the Disney artists take time to make a worthwhile story that would be great for hand-drawn animated films, then to quickly put one together just to meet a quota. I can't really imagine a video game-centric project like Wreck-It Ralph in hand-drawn animation, as it would be required to use many different styles of computer animation. And with Tangled widely considered the most beautiful computer-generated film yet made, it makes sense to continue the experiment with Frozen/The Snow Queen.

We still have yet to see what this Paperman will look like and from why I hear, it could be something that will utilise the best of both worlds. Ditto the rumoured Clements/Musker project, which apparently be use this new animation process.

[TsWade2]

The Princess and the Frog made its money back from its worldwide theatrical release. And the DVD and Blu-Ray sales were huge, so that's hardly a box-office failure. Also, Winnie the Pooh broke even.

And Disney has no official announcement about cancelling hand-drawn animation at the studio. About nine years ago, we didn't know it was done until it was officially announced that Home on the Range would be the last one. And then two years after Range came out, then Disney said a new hand-drawn animated feature was in production. So, no, I don't think hand-drawn animation is dead. Not at Disney, nor anywhere else.

Look at the work produced and distributed by Studio Ghibli, Sylvain Chomet, GKIDS. Not to mention, Mark Dindal's partly hand-drawn project at DreamWorks. Many shorts also still use hand-drawn animation, like those produced by the National Film Board of Canada.

I know a lot of Disney's fans are panicking, because the plan was for there to be one every two years. But I would rather the artists at the Disney artists take time to make a worthwhile story that would be great for hand-drawn animated films, then to quickly put one together just to meet a quota. I can't really imagine a video game-centric project like Wreck-It Ralph in hand-drawn animation, as it would be required to use many different styles of computer animation. And with Tangled widely considered the most beautiful computer-generated film yet made, it makes sense to continue the experiment with Frozen/The Snow Queen.

We still have yet to see what this Paperman will look like and from why I hear, it could be something that will utilise the best of both worlds. Ditto the rumoured Clements/Musker project, which apparently be use this new animation process.

Okay. Thanks estefan. You're the greatest.

[DisneyMatt89]

Isn't there supposed to be a full-length Mickey film coming out in the next few years? I couldn't imagine it not being hand-drawn.

[TsWade2]

Isn't there supposed to be a full-length Mickey film coming out in the next few years? I couldn't imagine it not being hand-drawn.

Well, even though it's been on shelved right now, but I guess you're right. Maybe as soon as Mickey Mouse Clubhouse popularity dies down.

[milojthatch]

I second estefan's comments! It's not dead, just not as young and vibrant as we remember it.

[Flanger-Hanger]

Also, Winnie the Pooh broke even.

With home video sales maybe, but there's no way it did so at the box office. It cost $30 million to make and earned $33 million worldwide. Since Disney only got about half of that, it was more like a flop by definiton.

And I don't care what anyone says about it "not trying to be a blockbuster", if a movie involving the world's second strongest character brand can't even make $27 million in it's entire domestic run, you've got to be embarassed. John Carter made more in its opening weekend, and had far worse advertising and was not released on the same day as a Harry Potter movie.

Winnie the Pooh came across as pointless busy work for the animators while Disney tried (and failed) to muster enthisiasm for furture hand drawn efforts. I saw it opening day and liked it, but there wasn't really much to it in the end and including it in the official "Cannon" is insulting to pretty much everything made before it.

[milojthatch]

Also, Winnie the Pooh broke even.

With home video sales maybe, but there's no way it did so at the box office. It cost $30 million to make and earned $33 million worldwide. Since Disney only got about half of that, it was more like a flop by definiton.

And I don't care what anyone says about it "not trying to be a blockbuster", if a movie involving the world's second strongest character brand can't even make $27 million in it's entire domestic run, you've got to be embarassed. John Carter made more in its opening weekend, and had far worse advertising and was not released on the same day as a Harry Potter movie.

Winnie the Pooh came across as pointless busy work for the animators while Disney tried (and failed) to muster enthisiasm for furture hand drawn efforts. I saw it opening day and liked it, but there wasn't really much to it in the end and including it in the official "Cannon" is insulting to pretty much everything made before it.

Ok, hold on a second there. If you look at a bigger picture, the "Pooh" franchise, so far as films, since "The Tigger Movie," have been making less each picture. "Winnie the Pooh" did better in the US then the film right before it, "Pooh's Heffalump Movie." The last film actually showed a slight reverse in that trend in the US.

"Pooh" is a major Disney franchise, but it is also one that is closely associated with the pre-school crowd, as well as one that the powers that be have been over saturating the market with. The 2011 film had a lot going against it, and if you want to get frank about it, did a really good job when you keep in mind all of it's handicaps. It's breaking even/ very slight box office success says nothing about movie goers interest in hand drawn and everything about how they feel about "Pooh." Let us also keep in mind it was actually up for more awards and found more critical praise then the two "Pooh" films ahead of it ever did. The film was a modest success, but still a success none the less. It was also the first "Pooh" anything I've personally enjoyed since the cartoon show from the late 80's/ early 90's and the best film since the original, in my humble opinion.

Now, if Disney was smart, they'd lay off of him for a lot longer. However, I somehow doubt that will end up happening. We already have "Tales of Friendship with Winnie the Pooh," so they are already off to the next thing.

[slave2moonlight]

That's totally true about the market just plain being over-saturated with Pooh. Had they not made the Piglet or Heffalump movies, or at least, not sent them to the bigscreen, and maybe not had so many Pooh TV shows, I think the last movie would have done better. However, it's a really great film (so is Princess in the Frog). I would rather watch it than MOST CGI animated features, aside from most of PIXAR's stuff. However, I'm not totally sure it was better than "The Tigger Movie", in all honestly. In some ways, sure, but I have to give a lot of credit to The Tigger Movie for making a Pooh feature with a single plot that was a very strong one, and it was a great movie in general. "Winnie the Pooh" was great, but I don't feel it was as strong as Tigger Movie story-wise. I think they were torn between having a feature-length story like Tigger Movie and yet being like the classic, and I think they overused the concept of being in a storybook.

Anyway, as for 2D animation, it just seems that, after all the complaining we did until they finally gave us a couple more, nobody really wants to do it anymore. Not that I've been keeping track of what is "in production" these days, like I used to when I was a college student, but that's how it feels as a movie goer, like they just don't want to make those kinds of movies. Is it still just because they think they won't make money back? I don't know. I just feel like now it's because they just see them as old-school or something. Visually unimpressive or limited, maybe. But, for me, all this CGI stuff still is too similar looking, and what makes me like or dislike a movie still turns up with CGI. There still are good ones and bad ones and ones inbetween. I liked the Lorax, but I thought the musical numbers were terrible... The theater I went to showed the original, 2D version before the film, and I really took more away from seeing that one (I had never seen it before, either, so it wasn't really nostalgia; in fact, the music was a bit dated, ha, but still better than the music in the CG one).

Something else though. Traditional animation is all over television now, and a lot of it is "adult" stuff. People might be seeing it in a specific light now, of a new kind I mean. Here in the U.S., I mean, the populous seems to have a dimwitted attitude of labeling things like "cartoons". Used to be they were "for kids". Of course, you still hear that said about the features, or anything with puppets, etc... Maybe now they are starting to view traditional animation as "for television" now. I don't know. Just an idea. I think they're starting to see the TV stuff as being for varying ages, which was a step up, I guess, but maybe now they just see traditional animation as something they can watch at home. And Winnie the Pooh, too.

[Jules]

Not to mention, Mark Dindal's partly hand-drawn project at DreamWorks.

I'm afraid Mark Dindal is no longer on board for Me and My Shadow. He quit over creative differences.

[Neal]

Is traditional animation dead when it comes to hollywood level animation studios (Blue Sky, DreamWorks, Disney, Pixar, Illumination, Sony) - yes.

The U.S. film climate is not conducive to hand drawn, apparently. Seems that while it can survive in short form (shorts/television/direct-to-dvd) - funding feature length animation is just too much of a gamble. Kids these days prefer the flashiness of CG.

Is traditional animation dead when it comes to foreign and/or independent studios? No. Not now, and not for the long foreseeable future. France, Spain, Japan and South Korea are putting out multiple new hand drawn films each year. Many of which receive dubs or at least english subtitled DVDs.

Honestly, if you actually care about hand drawn animation as a medium as opposed to just pining for classic Disney - you have many options, you just need to seek them out. Disney is the last studio to look to for traditional animation nowadays.

For example, two of the oscar nominees: Chico & Rita, A Cat in Paris

Other major upcoming animated features:

From Cartoon Saloon ("Secret of Kells") comes "Song of the Sea":

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/VdCabgJQpbA" frameborder="0"></iframe>

"Le Tableau" (CG and hand drawn, ala 'The Nutcracker' from "Fantasia/2000"):

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/h3gPNuTA3CY" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Studio Ghibli - "From Up on Poppy Hill":

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0ZOAhWbzll4" frameborder="0"></iframe>

"Zarafa":

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/HW1ue7vx4j0" frameborder="0"></iframe>

From Mamoru Hosada ["Summer Wars" and "The Girl Who Leapt Through Time"] - comes "The Wolf Children":

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/H5V6P7xw8XA" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Independently being produced here in the U.S. comes "War of the Worlds: Goliath":

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/SS5z37vp_78" frameborder="0"></iframe>

"The Suicide Shop":

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/o7trY8xhnus" frameborder="0"></iframe>

Multiple in-works projects from the studio Headless Productions:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/8h2qjg6KfaM" frameborder="0"></iframe>]

Next up from the studio behind "A Cat in Paris" - "Aunt Hilda":



From the studio behind last year's "The Rabbi's Cat" comes "Aya of Yop City":




Outside of the U.S. traditional animation is on par with and perhaps even surpassing the number of CG/other medium productions. A little research goes a long way in proving Disney is not where you'll find the medium we cherish most.

[Sotiris]

Many of which receive dubs or at least english subtitled DVDs.

I'm afraid that's not really the case. The only ones that get a home video release in the States are anime and the very few features GKids distributes.

[Flanger-Hanger]

Ok, hold on a second there. If you look at a bigger picture, the "Pooh" franchise, so far as films, since "The Tigger Movie," have been making less each picture. "Winnie the Pooh" did better in the US then the film right before it, "Pooh's Heffalump Movie." The last film actually showed a slight reverse in that trend in the US.

Better yes, but not by any margin that should excite anyone. Heffalump made $18 million in 2005 dollars vs. new Pooh's $26.7 million gross last year. It's a roughly 50% improvement when not adjusting for inflation, but even ignoring that the actual gain is less than $9 million. Again, not very impressive. Even Piglet's Big Movie made more money when adjusting for inflation ($3.6 million difference without).

"Pooh" is a major Disney franchise, but it is also one that is closely associated with the pre-school crowd, as well as one that the powers that be have been over saturating the market with. The 2011 film had a lot going against it, and if you want to get frank about it, did a really good job when you keep in mind all of it's handicaps. It's breaking even/ very slight box office success says nothing about movie goers interest in hand drawn and everything about how they feel about "Pooh." Let us also keep in mind it was actually up for more awards and found more critical praise then the two "Pooh" films ahead of it ever did. The film was a modest success, but still a success none the less. It was also the first "Pooh" anything I've personally enjoyed since the cartoon show from the late 80's/ early 90's and the best film since the original, in my humble opinion.

Awards (or the derserving of them) mean nothing in determining financial success, which is what I was talking about. I liked the movie too, but that doesn't mean the movie made its money back at the box office, or that it reversed the attitudes of the movie being considered pre-school fodder as you suggested. Disney's treatment of the franchise as that was probably responsible for the movie's chosen release date and low earnings. I understand the movie's handicaps, but not overcoming them beyond critical reognition (which neither reflects earnings or general public acceptance) is not something I would consider successful. In fact, making so little BO revenue even after the priase it got was more depressing IMO.

Now, if Disney was smart, they'd lay off of him for a lot longer. However, I somehow doubt that will end up happening. We already have "Tales of Friendship with Winnie the Pooh," so they are already off to the next thing.

Agreed, Pooh still makes boat-loads of money for Disney in merch and as long as channels (TV, movies, video) exist to sell such items Disney will continue to put out more of him.

[oldtimer12347]

Forgive me if this part of my obsession, but is hand drawn animation dead again because The Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh are box office failures?

This sort of question comes up every couple months or so (not just this site, but basically almost all the animation forums I've seen/been on), and the answer is the same each time: no.

Again, hand drawn declined in the first place because of bad story-telling in those films, mostly the ones from after 1995, NOT because people didn't care about hand drawn anymore. PATF and Pooh were a step up from Disney's 2000-2004 films, but both were still not nearly as strong enough to get hand drawn rolling again like it did before. Also remember that there's never going to be a time where there is only one type of animation, and that's how it should be. Even back in the 50s and 60s, stop motion and claymation had its place in the animation world, those styles didn't take over. In fact, CG was not even made to replace hand drawn animation, a lot of people may not know that, but it's true, it's simply just another medium for storytelling which happened to become just as popular as hand drawn was pre-1995. Which one remains on the top depends on the 'strength' they put in their films (which is obviously CG right now). Just remember though, even if CG currently dominates the theaters, hand drawn is still common on tv.

Besides, even if hand drawn animation is really 'dead' (which again is far from the case), sure it be sad to see it go, but that doesn't automatically mean the quality of the movie's writing goes with it. Their have been bad hand drawn films too (like Disney's Home on the Range and Don Bluth's post 1990 work, except Anastasia maybe). I don't care if a movie is 2D, 3D or 10D (assuming the medium the movie gets animated in is done well), as long as the quality of the films itself story and character wise remains strong.

[estefan]

Again, what oldtimer said. I personally find we're in a golden age of animation at the moment, not because of the mediums being used but because I've noticed most of the animated films coming out are on the good side. Not to mention, the different studios are applying their own individual styles. If you go back to the nineties and earlier, it seems like every other studio was playing by the Disney rulebook and doing fairy tale musicals and because they spent so much time trying to be Disney, their films lacked a certain something.

You look like DreamWorks and Blue Sky and Illumination and Sony, they have their own individual styles rather than copying others. Last night, I was even thinking about how in the past year and a half or so, they've actually produced a film each in a different style: hand-drawn (with The Illusionist), computer-animated (with Arthur Christmas), stop-motion (The Pirates! Band of Misfits), hybrid (The Smurfs) and motion-capture (The Adventures of Tintin). Each of these did something different in their own way.

I know many here bemoan Disney's animation unit not being the top of the kingdom anymore. But I don't see that myself. I see Disney as being part of (to quote Glen Keane here) an exciting time for animation: Disney, Pixar, Aardman, Sony, Studio Ghibli, DreamWorks, Nickelodeon, Animal Logic, Blue Sky, Illumination, Sylvain Chomet, GKIDS and others all coming out with good films that also attract widespread attention. We live in age where every one of the major studios has their own animation unit or subsidiary. We even have people like Elton John and Robert Rodriguez being inspired and founding their own studios and producing animated films. Live-action filmmakers like Gore Verbinski, Wes Anderson, George Miller and Fernando Trueba all jumping into the animation pool. I love that there's a new animated film coming out practically every month. I've probably departed from the original thread topic, but I think animation is at its brightest right now.

[Neal]

Many of which receive dubs or at least english subtitled DVDs.

I'm afraid that's not really the case. The only ones that get a home video release in the States are anime and the very few features GKids distributes.

I disagree. Is the level of distribution at a level that I would like it to be? No. But there is a two-fold answer to that:

First, many films actually are released state-side, JUST based off of what I posted above the following films from the same creators are available in the States (being redundant here, but):

Secret of Kells
Summer Wars
The Girl Who Leapt Through Time
Raining Cats and Frogs

And there are other recent 2D features released in the States:

The Illusionist
Redline
First Squad
Evangelion 2.0
My Dog Tulip
Azur and Asmar
Sita Sings the Blues
Lotte from Gadgetville
Tales from Earthsea
Ponyo
Legend of the Millenium Dragon

Coming Soon DVD:
The Secret World of Arrietty
Mia and the Migoo

Coming Soon Theatrical:
A Letter to Momo




Secondly, perhaps I'm the only one willing to go to this "extreme" because I am an animation collector/researcher - but importing is not that hard. The majority of PCs and Laptops these days have built-in region-free DVD players. Macs allow you to change a region 4 times, with the 5th time becoming permanent (unless you alter your OS settings)... for me, I did something rather inexpensively and wholly legally: bought a region-free Blu-ray player. The player only cost $160 and it is so easy to use. On the menu there's a "configure player" option that when clicked lets you choose any DVD number region or any Blu-ray letter region. When you do this, importing opens a world of possibilities - being as many traditionally animated films are released overseas with english dubs or subtitles that never come here (or if they do, only many years later such as with Tales of Earthsea).

Here are just some recent 2D features I imported that did not come Stateside:

Nocturna
Welcome to the Space Show
Ocean Waves & Only Yesterday [not recent but from Studio Ghibli]
Summer Days with Coo
Mind Game
Chico & Rita

... and that's just recent films (2007 to present) - if you dig into the films of the world and are willing to go back a few decades, there are SO many excellent traditionally animated films of all genres and maturity levels to enjoy

[DisneyMatt89]

For those saying that Winnie the Pooh did poorly in theaters, that's kind of a moot point considering the competition it had this summer for kids/family films. Just off the top of my head Cars 2, Mr. Popper's Penguins and Kung Fu Panda 2 were all in theaters at the time, and it came out the SAME DAY as Harry Potter, which there was no question was going to dominate the summer.

[DisneyMatt89]

EDIT: Sorry, double-posted.

[DisneyJedi]

Not to mention, Mark Dindal's partly hand-drawn project at DreamWorks.

I'm afraid Mark Dindal is no longer on board for Me and My Shadow. He quit over creative differences.

Well, that's just perfect! [/sarcasm]

And by the way, just because Princess and the Frog and Winnie the Pooh didn't do so hot in theaters domestically does NOT mean that hand-drawn is dead. It's just.... it's going to take time to get back into circulation after a five-year long hiatus, especially in the States.

And in all honesty, I heard that one The Tale of Desperaux was supposed to be hand-drawn (I think) and a bit darker than the final product, not to mention done be Sylvain Chomet, but executives kept fucking with his ideas and he left.

[estefan]

You know, the new director of Me and My Shadow could be good. You never know. Like him, Jennifer Yuh Nelson was just a storyboard artist and she managed to knock it out of the park in her first feature directing gig. You never where great directing talent lies and Alessandro Carloni was head of story on How to Train Your Dragon and served as a story artist on both Kung Fu Pandas. I think he will do a good job.

Also, in regards to Winnie the Pooh's gross, it was a quiet and innocent family film and so I don't think Disney was expecting a massive gross anyway. It's better to compare to similar well-meaning and quiet films like Ramona & Beezus, another film that didn't light up the box office but I imagine the studio is more than happy with how it did.