Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for discussion of the June 26th edition of Kenversastions at: <a href="News-ID111150.asp" target="_blank">http://LaughingPlace.com/News-ID111150.asp</a>.
Originally Posted By dreesens Get real Ken. When we all saw the ballroom seen in Beauty we thought WOW they did that with computers, Tarzan had incredible backgrounds, but using computers on Lilo and Stitch to do anything more than the little bit they did would demean the story. In fact I commend Disney for the use of watercolors for the backgrounds. The surfing scenes were breathtaking, and the character development and story surpassed anything that has come out in years. Stitch is a HIT at my office, on my computer and will slowly, but surely become a character that will ingrain itself in the Disney ethos in the tradition of Timon, Tinkerbell, and Tigger, although I think he may be bigger. And... One of the best things about Lilo and Stitch from the parent of 3 and 5 year old children is that there really wasn't a true villian, no blood, gore or true nasiness. The story wasn't some dramatic good vs. evil thing. It wasn't trying to preach at us. (i.e. Spirit theme, four legs good two legs bad!) Lilo and Stitch is a fun story and I for one will be going again this weekend and am encouraging everyone I know to go see it. By the way is Kenversations just a Clone for Jim Hill? Trying to stir things up for the sake of conversation?
Originally Posted By Jim " I was let down, however, by the lack of what I call 'Wow Animation', the kind of stuff that makes me 'ooh and aah'. " I thought the WOW was in the beautiful backgrounds. I was also WOWed by the opening dance scene. The fit with the Hawaii-flavored music was wonderful. You are right, though, in that there is no PETER PAN flying sequence or FANTASIA 2000 volcanic eruption stuff; however, LILO AND STITCH has eye-candy appropriate to its needs. NEW GROOVE was very short on beauty shots (like, there's one); however, it has all the beauty shots it need . . . one. "Get real Ken." Come on, can't we play nice?
Originally Posted By Nobody "By the way is Kenversations just a Clone for Jim Hill? Trying to stir things up for the sake of conversation?" No, but I think they may use the same proof-reader.
Originally Posted By actingforanimators First, it's a great thing to see an opposing opinion on this site and I credit Doobie for having the editorial integrity to feature a differing opinion. That said….WOW! Did we see the same film, Ken? >> Instead, to introduce the film, Disney came up with an irreverent, hilariousadvertising campaign that inserted Stitch into classic scenes from such Disney animated hits as The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King. News media coverage of the film has pointed out something that is obvious to anyone who watches Lilo & Stitch. It ain't Tarzan.<< Isn't that a good thing? Media critics have no business being so reductive as to compare films to each other simply because they're animated. In no other film style/format are they so prejudiced as they are in animation, thinking "if it's a toon then it's just like every other toon." That's as uninformed as saying "if it's a painting it's just like every other painting." Or "if it's a song, it's just like every other song." >>What was known by many all along finally became apparent to everybody - the financial success of The Lion King will always be a rarity among hand-drawn animated features, not the rule. It can and probably will happen again, but it won't happen often.<< Why must all feature films be judged against the box office success of "The Lion King"? Is box office everything? Had "The Lion King" not made $400M+ would we keep hearing this argument? >>"Computer animation" films from companies like Disney/Pixar, Dreamworks/PDI, and 20th Century Fox/Blue Sky Studios are doing well. Cheaply made, lesser-quality productions for home video and even theatrical release are makingmoney. Thus, 20th Century Fox shut down Don Bluth's studio a while back << Not the reason Fox shut down, Ken. The studio was built in the Arizona desert for tax breaks, they failed to attract the industry talent that could produce a quality product, and partly because a considerable percentage of them had previously worked for Bluth with very bad experience. If you want to talk about working for Don Bluth privately off-line, feel free. Pixar and the CGI film boom did not shut down Fox. Bad management and poor product shut down Fox. >>Walt Disney Feature Animation has slashed staffing, cut salaries, and sought to make hand-drawn animated features for less money. As a side note, I see Sony is taking the forward-thinking step of creating the Sony Digital Animation Studio, which will work closely with Sony Imageworks, their digital effects house. Gee, maybe the folks who were let go when Disney shut down its Secret Lab (a move I have yet to understand), can staff Sony's new place?<< Not so forward thinking. Sony's unit is being reinforced and re-tooled by the two producers who started DreamWorks Feature Animation - Sandy Rabins and Penny Finkleman-Cox. That deal has been in the works for three years. Secret Lab was dismantled because it was not cost-effective in light of the reorganization of Disney Feature Animation, and the desire to not segment CG from so-called "traditional." >>Disney likes to compare this new film to Dumbo, a film that relied almost entirely on story, not animation innovations and lavish artwork. But while Dumbo had the standout "Pink Elephants" segment, there's nothing in Stitch that reminds me of that. Stitch was made for less money, with fewer artists, fewer drawings, and less flashy artwork. Like Mulan, it was primarily made at Walt Disney World, not in California. The idea is that it will be easier for the film to make "enough" return on the investment if less money is put into it to being << It is here that I part company with you most seriously. First of all, the cost reductions for "Lilo & Stitch" are primarily the result of no R&D in new CG elements, mapping, a screenwriter or screenwriters, and out-sourcing to other houses. No corners were cut for this film in terms of the method of production. The animation is on both ones and twos, standard to all Disney animation, with no held cels or frames. The characters actions ease in and out of movement moving from twos to ones to twos with the same fluid motion as any other feature. There were in fact not fewer drawings as you state. This is not limited animation in any way. The pointed reference to the fact that the film was made in Florida vs. California makes it appear that Florida's facility somehow a second class unit or less than in some way. To imply anything of the sort is ignoring the presence of dozens of valuable, gifted, tenured artists who have made significant contributions to the industry, including Andrea Dejas (whom Richard Williams has referred to as "the finest animator currently working in the business"), Ruben Aquino, Alex Kuperschmidt, Mark Henn, Stephanie Saint Foie, and . This is arguably both Dejas, Kupershcmidt's and Aquino's best work, just as many animators will point to the less flashy animation in Dumbo as Bill Tytla's best work (over his work on Chernabog.) The story that you say was what "Dumbo" relied on is still what is at the center of this film. I'll quote from something I've posted elsewhere here on the discussion boards: Among the story's great strengths is how it establishes the character/nature of both leads so completely in the first act - and then sets them in conflict with each other in the second act in an active, creative, surprising way. The resolution of the conflict feels natural without being overly predictable. In fact, the resolution seems less pat and less knowable in "Lilo & Stitch" than it did in "The Lion King", at least for me. (Though that's not intended as a criticism of the latter, a film I truly love and have great respect for. Instead I mean it more as an observation of the great strength of the former which takes big risks and makes VERY big, bold choices.) Character is revealed through action rather than explanation or stagnant narrative (or song - be it good song or bad song - and I'm a fan of the musical formula/format so put down the pitchpipes..err forks.) This story is ideal for its medium - film. A medium about moving pictures (and more critically in the case of animation - moving drawings) propelled forward through "show me" rather than "tell me." Its sentiment is genuine, its pathos is earned, and its humor springs from character truth rather than gags. I think you'd be hard pressed to find a more original and intelligent "screenplay" in any film for younger audiences (or even mature audiences, for that matter.) For my money, the "Lilo & Stitch" relies on strong relationships, earned pathos and comedy and is not dependent on technical flash for its appeal. From where I sat in the theatre, I found the film's backgrounds intricate, even more detailed than others, and the animation as elaborate as any feature of the past twenty years. The artwork of the film fully supports the story, rather than the other way around (one of the major problems I have with any and all of what DreamWorks has thus far produced) and I see plenty of "great material for incarnation of the concepts at theme parks." I'd truly love to read your critical perspective of the film's content and success on it's own merits, Ken, as I think you have an excellent critical eye and one that deserves a forum. But a great deal of the suppositions that you make in this article are far enough off the mark that I have to say I'm very surprised and confused by your comments. AFA
Originally Posted By actingforanimators oops....I should proof read ... AndreaS Dejas.... and StephanE Sainte Foi sorry about the gender reassignment there, Adnreas and Stephane. AFA
Originally Posted By CP173 I can't believe I'm about to post this, but here it goes: It's James TIBERIUS Kirk, not Thorin. Tiberius was an Emperor of Rome, and Thorin was one of the dwarfs in The Hobbit. That's it. I've finally gone over the trivia edge. If anyone needs me I'll be shouting at the idiots on Jeopardy.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan2 The lack of "wow" animation in L&S was what I liked BEST about it. To me, it had the simple pleasures and look of a great children's book. My 'oohh's" and "ahh's" were reserved for the end of the film, as in "Oooohh! That was such a great movie!" and "Ahh! I wish I could see it again right now!"
Originally Posted By Santa Monica I was so into the movie that I didn't really notice no eye popping Wow scenes. But I was wowwing at the story, at the heart, and at the beautiful surfing scene. I also love how the ship at the end goes through the mountains.
Originally Posted By SFH >>Get real Ken. When we all saw the ballroom seen in Beauty we thought WOW they did that with computers, Tarzan had incredible backgrounds, but using computers on Lilo and Stitch to do anything more than the little bit they did would demean the story. In fact I commend Disney for the use of watercolors for the backgrounds. The surfing scenes were breathtaking, and the character development and story surpassed anything that has come out in years. << I think I've been misunderstood. I enjoyed the film overall. I was just cautioning that if Disney expects to make every animated film at the same level of reduced budget, it may not fly. There was some outstanding character development and the characters were multidemensional. I also tend to agree with what Jeff K (as in Dreamworks SKG) says about the use of digitial v. hand drawn. In an earlier edition of my column, I stated Disney should use different media in each animated feature instead of thinking of films as either "hand-drawn" or "digital". >> By the way is Kenversations just a Clone for Jim Hill? Trying to stir things up for the sake of conversation?<< Not at all. Read previous editions of my column and other stuff I've written here to get a better perspective of how I feel about Disney. >>I was also WOWed by the opening dance scene.<< That WAS nice, and I did take notice. I also felt the animation of Nani's boyfriend (name escapes me right now) was very good, too. >>No, but I think they may use the same proof-reader<< Guilty, guilty, guilty. I always notice a bunch of mistakes AFTER the column is posted. Very sloppy on my part. I shoehorn writing the column between doing a bunch of other things. >>That said-.WOW! Did we see the same film, Ken?<< Like I said above, I actually enjoyed the film. If you want my full review of the film, e-mail me at KensList[at]flash[dot]net and I'll send it out to you soon. Just write "send me the film review" along with the e-mail address you want it sent to. >>Why must all feature films be judged against the box office success of "The Lion King"?<< I agree with your sentiments. I was just explaining the perspective of the "sharp-pencil guys" and the news media in why hand-drawn animation is getting less money invested into it. One of the newspaper articles specifically compared Tarzan to L&S are far as costs, staffing, etc. >> Not the reason Fox shut down, Ken. << My point was that less money is being put into hand-drawn animation. I loved Anastasia and enjoyed Titan A.E. >>Secret Lab was dismantled because it was not cost-effective in light of the reorganization of Disney Feature Animation, and the desire to not segment CG from so-called "traditional<< I talk about that in previous editions of the column. I think Disney should've created a single super-group of creativity that placed all sorts of artists (including writers) and animators together to work on: animated features that use whatever medium or media best fit the story; special effects, web sites; interactive games; theme park attractions, etc. (imagine the clash of egos!) >>No corners were cut for this film in terms of the method of production.<< Looks like I'd better start unsing footnotes! I was not saying the animation was shoddy or cheap per se, I was basing my comments on a newspaper's comparison of L&S with Tarzan (or maybe other recent features) about the total number of drawings used in production overall (not per second), the number of artists, etc. >> The pointed reference to the fact that the film was made in Florida vs. California makes it appear that Florida's facility somehow a second class unit or less than in some way. To imply anything of the sort is ignoring the presence of dozens of valuable, gifted, tenured artists who have made significant contributions to the industry, including Andrea Dejas (whom Richard Williams has referred to as "the finest animator currently working in the business"), Ruben Aquino, Alex Kuperschmidt, Mark Henn, Stephanie Saint Foie, and . This is arguably both Dejas, Kupershcmidt's and Aquino's best work,<< Let me make it clear that I in no way meant to imply that. I know that they are very talented Deja did incredible job on Lilo, for instance. But are you going to tell me it isn't less expensive to make animated feature in the Walt Disney World facility than in Burbank? Isn't the overhead and salaries/benefits at a lower cost out there? >>But a great deal of the suppositions that you make in this article are far enough off the mark that I have to say I'm very surprised and confused by your comments.<< Please- you and anyone else reading this -enlighten me when I'm off-base. That's the beauty of this forum. I'm not an animation insider. I write as someone who has been a Disney insider and is a fan, but I was never a Feature Animation insider. I've known people who have worked there, but that is hardly much. Hey, I clapped during and at the end of the film. I'm just overly hard on Feature Animation because I love their work and spend more time thinking about their work and taking a closer look at their work than any other films. I'm not checking any of this for spelling and mistakes. Hope it is readale! ;-) Ken "SFH" Pellman <a href="http://I.Pellman.com" target="_blank">http://I.Pellman.com</a> is my disclaimer. e-mail me at Kenversations[at]flash[dot]net for feedback on my columns. e-mail me at KensList[at]flash[dot]net to get my review.
Originally Posted By Jim in Pasadena CA Like theme park attractions, not every DISNEY ANIMATED FEATURE has to knock it outa the park every time -- in every aspect of the medium. 'Lilo and Stitch' showed great care, wonderful heart, a and a real sense of 'we want to do this right.' Love the notion that Chris Sanders was the director, the writer and the voice of Stitch. How much more in charge of a film can one person be? A recent movie with lots of WOW animation, but an irritatingly slow story line, forgettable characters, and no heart whatsoever -- 'Atlantis' And 'Treasure Planet' could be next on the list of doing the very same thing. [I don't think it's going to be very good]
Originally Posted By AladdinAZ SFH wrote: ">> Not the reason Fox shut down, Ken. << My point was that less money is being put into hand-drawn animation. I loved Anastasia and enjoyed Titan A.E." I was just about to post almost exactly the same thing.
Originally Posted By socalguy "Folks, when you are an adult, it is not the responsibility of anyone else - not your significant other, not the government, and certainly not a theme park company - to protect you from yourself or your physical anomalies. For children, it is the guardian's responsibility. The government should offer you some protection from others. A theme park has an obligation to provide a reasonably safe environment and experience, and to warn you when attractions may be physically taxing. Kathy, you've been very vocal and I feel for your son, but David's foot would have been fine if he would have just kept in inside. There was nothing wrong with the attraction itself. Representative Ed Markey (D-Mass), there are far more important and effective causes to spend your time on. Greg Hale, I'm glad your new position of Chief Safety Officer was created, and I believe Disney should provide a reasonably safe environment and should be held accountable if neglect results in injury or death, but please put a strong emphasis on asking guests to do their part." Ken, I think these are two of the most important paragraphs you've written in a long time. Adults need to be just that...adults. Stop whining and take some responsibility for their own actions. You're right...I hope Hale can work with Disney to remind guests to do their part. Disneyland is an amusement park, not a baby sitter.
Originally Posted By actingforanimators SoCalGuy is right, Ken. These are very well articulated arguments. If only we could count on everyone understanding and agreeing to them in practice and not just in theory. Sadly, the fact is that a litigious society forces a publicly traded company to protect its assets against a few people who manipulate the legal system to erase their own tragic stupidity. To do any less would be irresponsible on the part of the Corporate Officers and the Board who must answer to stockholders. It should be obvious, but in business the obvious is almost always a reason to guard against legal action. >>But are you going to tell me it isn't less expensive to make animated feature in the Walt Disney World facility than in Burbank? Isn't the overhead and salaries/benefits at a lower cost out there?<< No, it isn't any cheaper in terms of fixed costs such as union salaries, benefits, and materials. Those are fixed company wide, again in large part by union contracts, and are not different from state to state or facility to facility. In fact, if one factors in something as simple as what it cost to relocate Andreas to Orlando for two years in addition to his contractual salary (this is starting to sound like a math problem....) and the money invested in building a new state of the art facility in which to house Feature Animation Florida then the Florida unit most likely has yet to pay for itself. Having lived in both Orlando and Los Angeles, I doubt very much whether cost of living and local taxes represent more than a 6% differential. That's an offset of $60,000 of every $1M or $600,000 out of every $100 million. That's less than what Lilo took in on Monday of this week. Your points are well taken, Ken, and I respect them. I think Feature Animation should be held to the highest possible standards as they hold greater promise than any other division of any studio. I'm still not certain that your clarification changes anything of what I read as your driving theme and tone. I'll write you for your review as I'd like to read it. AFA
Originally Posted By davecobb <<I was let down, however, by the lack of what I call "Wow Animation", the kind of stuff that makes me "ooh and aah".>> Sorry, Ken -- gotta disagree with ya on this one. Too many times in the last slew of Disney films we had nothing *but* ooh and ahh" animation, but the same tired stories and outdated character politics underneath. Then comes Lilo & Stitch. Not only were the backgrounds and surfing scenes elegant and evocative, it was great to see human character design that was so warm, funny, approachable, and realistic -- without Barbie & Ken stylization. There was the unmistakable feel of human hands at work while watching L&S. L&S *exactly* reminded me of films like Dumbo and Bambi -- simple stories, elegantly told. As much as L&S seemingly "isn't very Disney" for all its edgy humor and quirky story aesthetics, it also is very much a return to classic Disney at the same time, for all the right, simple, sweet reasons. Quite an accomplishment in my book. DAVE
Originally Posted By Bill5925 Just to get my 2 cents in, I agree with ActingForAnimators. I feel story and character is much more important than "wow animation". In fact, it was the character animation, particularly that by Andreas Deja of Lilo, that really got to me. For my tastes (and that's really what we are talking about - personal opinions) L&S is the best Disney animated feature since Jungle Book. Regarding theme park safety - I agree with you. We should start forcing people to assume personal responsibility. We force it by not allowing lawsuits by people who failed to follow rules or use common sense. Sure, let the safety Czar make sure that adequate measures are in place to protect people. Sure, a lawsuit may be entitled when a person is injured through no fault of their own (Columbia accident?). Maybe Disney, Six Flags and others need better lawyers (did I really say that!) to aggressively fight frivolous lawsuits instead of just settling to avoid publicity. Finally, back to Lilo & Stitch. It is rated PG for a reason. Don't expect every 2 year old or 5 year old to love every minute. It can be frightening for a variety of reasons to some kids. Again, use a little common sense. Bill
Originally Posted By Nobody " >>No, but I think they may use the same proof-reader<< Guilty, guilty, guilty. I always notice a bunch of mistakes AFTER the column is posted. Very sloppy on my part. I shoehorn writing the column between doing a bunch of other things. " ...and I should have added, I tend to employ that same guy on a more than part-time basis. ;-)
Originally Posted By MaryJo RE: Lilo & Stitch - I couldn't disagree with you more. I hope we have more animated features like this, heavily sprinkled with classics on the level of B&TB, & TLK... We rarely watch an animated feature more than once when it's on the big screen, but my dd & I saw this one three times. I've never seen her (13) laugh so hard at something onscreen, and though she didn't tear up, she was touched by many of the scenes. RE: Safety @ DL - I agree with you.
Originally Posted By JimG Re "theme/amusement park safety": I do indeed agree that the _federal government_ has absolutely no regulatory right in this area. The *States* have the responsibility to oversee and institute any required criteria regarding "ride safety". The latter can be highly subjective, and must be a case-by-case consideration.
