Could there be a 2D film in the works at Disney?

[ichabod]

I found this over at LaughingPlace,

Well... this is one of those situations where a good deed pays off in an interesting way.

I helped a friend of a friend shop for cars today - all day - whew... because I have just enough sense about cars to be dangerous (i.e., more than she does, which ain't much to brag about). Nevertheless, the car we ended up buying - involving two extended visits with the owners, totalling about 2 and a half hours, well, these people were interesting. The wife (it was her car being sold) had nothing to do with the film business... but the husband, well, he did.

He was a senior exec at Feature Animation.

I have one friend left at Feature Animation, but he's in a spot where he was ahead of the curve on CG work... going back before Dinosaur... so he was never even classically trained, really, and they seem to be very content with him, his salary, and he's weathered a lot there. But he's never included in the news about "what's coming next".

This guy, though... he's - up there. Pretty much only reports to one guy, and you can guess who that is.

We talked at length about AMERICAN DOG, which apparently has a number of bits in it that will be redubbed (already) that are hilarious, but cannot be released in a Disney picture... But the scenes he's seen completed - a whole story reel and some completed sequences - he says this is the funniest movie Feature Animation has EVER done... very edgy... bizarre... and it will be toned back a bit, as I said.

His comment on RAPUNZEL UNBRAIDED was simply to the effect that it was the most detailed stuff he's EVER seen in animation, and that the background elements/immersive material will be very painterly and dense, while the characters have more of a cartoony feel to them, and that this DOES represent something of a triumph in the blending of a CG look into something more traditionally "Disneyesque" - an elegant evolution of the style.

Now, the final news - just announced, but not greenlighted, and I don't have a title, a story, or anything to that effect, sorry, but you heard it here first:

The first new 2-D animated project for Disney Feature Animation is apparently getting very close to being approved for serious development. The big concern is now "do we rehire those traditionally trained guys?" and they're already feeling a big "ouch" at the realization that they might have seriously gone into overkill on the downsizing - BUT, they're counting on core development with guys who "crossed over" into CG work, and ramping up, should this project be greenlighted, finding the best animators to produce the project.

I'm guessing Rhett is way ahead of me on this one, and maybe even has a title or story info... But this gentleman - entrenched in his position for a while now - was adamant that this "2-D" film is STILL not approved, but it does look like they will go ahead with it.

So for me, I feel some vindication in that I don't think they ever COMPLETELY abandoned hand-drawn... that they were keeping their minds open if the right piece came along... and with so many CG films in the pipeline now, the deal with Vanguard, and Chicken Little and American Dog looking good... and knowing that they DO have a core staff that has so much drawing skill... and so many tabled story concepts begging reconsideration ... Now that something is really moving forward for a project of this sort, it has to be encouraging that a mindset is open to this degree.

Even if this one doesn't bear fruit, in my mind, it's just a matter of time.

So could it be good news on the whole 2d front, even if it's not this has definitely whetted my apeptite for American Dog and Rapunzel!

[Wonderlicious]

Hopefully it is good news for 2D animation; I think that after a lot of 3D animation, people will begin to suffer from twodimensionalwithdrawal-syndrome and Shrek 2 will no longer be the most successful animated film of all time.

[Jack]

Its good news, if it is indeed true. I have a feeling though, that if Disney were to release another traditionally animated film, they would do it with low-key promotion, in a low amount of theaters and treat it as "sleeper release" or something. In juxtaposition, I can see them releasing all the CG films in huge theater counts and marketing campaigns. So in the end, I think it'll come back down to the train of thought, "3-D animation does better than 2-D,: when really the circumstances are stacked against the latter.

[2099net]

I can't see Disney doing this. They made people redundant and sold all the equipment. What could possibly be the logic for buying the equipment back and hiring the people back?

And if you were a Disney animator, would you actually want to go back, or get on with your life without Disney?

I think if Disney is to make an animated feature film, they'll just do it in DisneyToon Australia (maybe storyboarded in the US). They'll just throw more money at them (which will still be a fraction of the $100m plus of recent Disney traditional animated movies).

There is a slight chance, I suppose, that this could be a partnership with a new studio set up by ex-Disney employees, but they would not be working for Disney as such (sort of like Pixar).

[Sh00tingstar]

after seeing the lionking 3, (or 1/2 what ever it says on ur version) i feel that the animation coming from the austrailan studio isnt bad. Its only the stories that suck, and the bastardisation of the classics.

if disney were to do the above, storyboard etc a NEW concept, and provide extra resources for an overseas studio, i would be excited to see the finished product.

good thread guys, its reignited a glimmer of hope. i thought i was doomed to spend my days looking foward to only the 2d releases of Miyazaki, (not that thats a bad thing by ANY stretch of the imagination! i loove miyazaki, i just hope he stays alive long enough to keep producing more excellent features! ive only just discovered him in the last 7 years:S)

[PatrickvD]

this is just wishful thinking on someones part. Like 2099net said, they sold all the desks and I don't see them buying stuff back (wich would practically be admitting they overdid it with the lay-offs). Traditional animation is no more at Disney, but there's been great buzz on those upcoming CG movies and as long as they're good then thats fine. Technology doesnt really matter. Rapunzel sounds promising.

[Ciaobelli]

Lets hope the next Renaissance awaits us.

[PheR]

Could there be a 2D film in the works at Disney?

YES, but they are all sequels !!

[Kram Nebuer]

I'm glad to have read this topic! Thank you, ichabod! I hope they do greenlight it and just have two animation departments at the studio.

also, I agree with the post about Austrailia's animation. It does look good, but they seriously do need help in the story department. TLK 1 1/2 looked like the original animators did it. Who did THree Musketeers and Mulan II b/c those look really good too!

[Artlad]

correct me if I'm wrong.........but I was under the impression that Disney has not closed down Feature Animation in Burbank entirely, although they have reduced it to what amounts as a skelaton crew. So yes theyve sold off a lot of stuff but they havent gotten rid of everybody entirely. And the animation industry is a volitile one anyway. I was reading an article on the closing of the Florida animation studio and most of the animators were saying things like disney had been one of the few places in the industry where an animator could find steady work instead of hopping from project to project. So if Disney were to rev up Feature Animation (by that I mean 2-D) again, Im thinking there would be a lot of animators who would gladly jump at the chance to work for Disney again. (especially with Eisner leaving and all)

[2099net]

Something to remember is this too - at least two new animation studios have been formed by ex-Disney animators; Firefly and Legacy. Now, you can't just start up a production company and have no contracts or work. (unless they're just doing adverts).

Who's to say Disney isn't joining with one of these new traditional animation companies to make and release a film, just like they seem to have teamed up with many CGI companies (Pixar, Core, Shadedbox, Vangard)?

So there could be a new Disney film featuring traditional animation, made by "Disney animators", (co-)funded by Disney, but not made by Disney.

Hopefully, such an arrangement would result in less executive interference. Everybody wins! Animated films made by Disney animators under Disney Animator's creative control. Evil Eisner is a genius and has saved traditional animation! All hail Evil Eisner!

[Loomis]

I can't see Disney doing this. They made people redundant and sold all the equipment. What could possibly be the logic for buying the equipment back and hiring the people back?

Yes, I never wanted to complete discount the possibility of a return to 2D, but it is hard to ignore that the fact that the bridge has been burned, and the ashes sent to the four corners of the earth.

[Joe Carioca]

Something to remember is this too - at least two new animation studios have been formed by ex-Disney animators; Firefly and Legacy. Now, you can't just start up a production company and have no contracts or work. (unless they're just doing adverts).

Unfortunately, as far as I know, Legacy Animaiton has been shut down a few months ago.

[Artlad]

I can't see Disney doing this. They made people redundant and sold all the equipment. What could possibly be the logic for buying the equipment back and hiring the people back?

Yes, I never wanted to complete discount the possibility of a return to 2D, but it is hard to ignore that the fact that the bridge has been burned, and the ashes sent to the four corners of the earth.

yes but if we get someone who isn't insane after Eisner steps down they may do a 180. (heres hoping)

[boss]

IMO, traditional animation is ART... regardless of how good some cgi films are it is NOT art.

It will be a sad day if traditional animation art is lost.

[humphreybear]

Not that I think Bambi 2 is a good idea, but is all the work for Bambi 2 being farmed out? I thought that Andreas Deja was directing it?

[PatrickvD]

IMO, traditional animation is ART... regardless of how good some cgi films are it is NOT art.

I disagree, there's a lot of art academies where CGI animation is used to take it to new and different levels, tell them CG animation isnt art and your in trouble

[Artlad]

I agree. Art is the product of a creative person or people regardless of the medium used. Hand drawn animation is art, but so is CG animation because the computer is just a tool being used by the animators. They must still use all their creativity and skill to make something of it. That is art! For example: I painted my avatar there using the computer. But I still had to use my knowlege of color and lighting to get it to look good and it took just as long as it would have had I painted it a traditional way. Just because it was done on the computer doesn't make it any less artistic!

[PatrickvD]

I agree. Art is the product of a creative person or people regardless of the medium used. Hand drawn animation is art, but so is CG animation because the computer is just a tool being used by the animators. They must still use all their creativity and skill to make something of it. That is art! For example: I painted my avatar there using the computer. But I still had to use my knowlege of color and lighting to get it to look good and it took just as long as it would have had I painted it a traditional way. Just because it was done on the computer doesn't make it any less artistic!

I agree, and nowadays anything can be art, if toilet paper on a stick can be art, than so can CGI animation... especially Pixar. I just saw the Incredibles for the first time and my jaw is... on the floor...

[Loomis]

IMO, traditional animation is ART... regardless of how good some cgi films are it is NOT art.

I disagree, there's a lot of art academies where CGI animation is used to take it to new and different levels, tell them CG animation isnt art and your in trouble

Yes, I agree with Artlad here - art can be absolutely anything, and it would be unfair to limit it to ink and paint. Having recently be involved with a small scultpure prize, it is evident that everyone has a slightly different perception of what a scultpure is, let alone what art is. Art can be a chunk of wood you have found in the street, but it is the meaning you give it that makes it art. CGI is just as much art as traditional animation - although I must admit, it is not my favuorite kind of animated art.

I think the issue I have with the current situation is that they have abandoned one form of art in favour of another form. Why does there have to be one or the other? Simply because something is new, it doesn't necessaerily mean it is better. On the other hand, it doesn't mean it is bad either. Can't both co-exist peacefully?