Originally Posted By Doobie This topic is for discussion of the April 8th edition of Kenversastions at: <a href="News-ID111120.asp" target="_blank">http://LaughingPlace.com/News-ID111120.asp</a>.
Originally Posted By Pam Hi Ken~While I do not have the facts and figures down as you have, I have to state that I also mourn the letting go of ANY Disney animator worth his salt. Sad! Your story brought home the reality of the real people involved, not just reported numbers. In regards to Disney FA, I personally find no equal to the quality of SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS. The soft tones and quality of the film's animation has never again been duplicated, in my mind. While I have enjoyed the computer animation stories and am impressed with the art form, I am unable to get cozy with the FA that employs it - because of the screen's high-tech FEELING that I am constantly aware of. I am just putting my two-cents worth in here Ken, sorry I don't have clue one about The Secret Lab! Betcha someone here will though! Thanks for a wonderful column.
Originally Posted By LymanH As a Disney Animation Junky and one aspiring to land a job in the creative field, it saddens me to see Disney taking it's current course. Not only in animation but in it's theme parks. I was shocked when I found out Return to Neverland was done by the TV devision. I have no desire to see that film as I go see Disney films for first and formost the artistry. I love the way they wow me. I guess that won't be happening soon. I wonder how long it will take the powers that be to realize what many of us already know. That as you cheapen the products you produce you cheapen the brand name you've spent years to create. Here's for hoping they'll realize this sooner than later.
Originally Posted By Jim Ken, I think you are so right. It is a shame that some of the most talented people in the film industry are losing their jobs. And why? The Disney Company have lost sight of how to think out of the box, that in the long run, quality pays off, and that every trend has its slumps. Artistic quality first, then the money will follow! Disney will have another hit. Things will change again! It did after THE BLACK CAULDRON years, but what will they do their artists in the meantime?
Originally Posted By LORDSOFTRUNK In recent years the Disney Executive Branch has pretty much stopped looking toward what the fans of the company have to say about animated features. An animated feature takes at least 4-5 years to produce, in that time, tastes in movies change and the general opinion of the company has changed over that amount of time. The amount of bad animation features including the half-assed DTVs and boring storylines have forced the company into a recession, just on the film side of things. Pixar seems to be the only thing that is Disney's saving grace, but what about when the contract is up? Then Disney is going to be in real trouble. Disney execs know that people will turn away if they produce enough stuff that goes as far as insult people's intelligence. For example take a look at the "UPENDI" sequence. That one sequence is enough to make any animation enthusiast puke up his own dinner. If Walter E. Disney saw that sequence, I dare say that he would believe "Maybe We've Gone Too Far!" It's also another reason why people are just fed up with the crap that the animation department has been producing over the last few years. Atlantis being the worst film since The Black Cauldron. The moral around the animation department is at an all time low and Michael Einser and company can look in the mirror and know that. The fans for instance, at least I think have grown out of the magic of Walt Disney. At least on an eye to ear notice. If Michael Einser ever wants to get back into the game, he's gonna have to get his head out of the mouse's stock and back into the creative department. That makes good good sense. Here's what I would do: 1. Take at least one year and six months off of the animation bussiness, besides the Pixar deal. When the deal runs out, don't release one animated feature for at least an entire year, that includes DTVs. This will give Disney fans a break, I feel they've been bombarded with the mouse long enough in all directions and they need a break. 2. During that break, come up with a great idea aka TLK and don't mess up this time around. Well that's all I have to say about it.
Originally Posted By Flick Ken, you are missing the point. You know the old saying about the 3 rules of real estate, "Location, location, location". Same thing is true with a movie. Great animation can't help a bad story. Shrek would have been a hit regardless of the animation because the story was well written. Writers make a good movie, not animators or actors. CGI is better, faster and cheaper than cell animation or stop action. However as you well know, many bad CGI movies have been made. A well written story is better than all the animators that have ever lived.
Originally Posted By arstogas It's amazing that most Disney fans forget their history. Animation has had MUCH darker times, namely, the second World War. Disney Feature Animation (and I still have a few friends there) after the layoffs, STILL will be much larger than it was in the days before Eisner and Wells and Katzenberg came on. With fewer artists, a reduced schedule of animated features will be the result, which is what even the most ardent Disney fans think is a good idea. I feel bad for the animators who will have to go job hunting, but if we're talking about Disney as a whole here, there IS no catastrophe. There is NOTHING (regardless of what Jim Hill or Al Lutz would like to hysterically report) seriously indicating that hand-drawn animation is going away at Disney. There IS evidence that the medium will evolve and we will have new visual approaches to the films. Heck, even Lilo and Stitch is using beautiful watercolors for the backgrounds, and using computers to get a "watercolor look" in the characters. There will be 3D and handdrawn pictures and everything in between, as is appropriate to the story. Disney's management will change over time too, and some will appreciate their animators more than those in there today. Time changes all things, and History is really the best place to gain a perspective on this thing. Oh, one of the reasons we've never had a movie that looks like Snow White is because the backgrounds were rendered in Guache... it has a very distinctive, fairy tale like look... the colors are layered and kind of glow. This was also the ONLY Disney animated feature where the backgrounds were rendered in that medium.
Originally Posted By SFH >>Ken, you are missing the point. You know the old saying about the 3 rules of real estate, "Location, location, location". Same thing is true with a movie. Great animation can't help a bad story. Shrek would have been a hit regardless of the animation because the story was well written. Writers make a good movie, not animators or actors. CGI is better, faster and cheaper than cell animation or stop action. However as you well know, many bad CGI movies have been made. A well written story is better than all the animators that have ever lived.<< This is why I wrote: "Make sure the medium follows the characters, settings, and stories instead of dictating them." As a writer, I KNOW it takes an engaging, solid story. Without that, all there may be is eye candy, and that works for about one viewing. Ken "SFH" Pellman <a href="http://I.Pellman.com" target="_blank">http://I.Pellman.com</a> <==disclaimer and stuff
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan2 UPENDI? = A musical sequence in the Lion King II direct to video release that was, I guess, supposed to be the "Hakuna Matata" catch phrase hit of the movie. If anything is truly threatening the traditional animated Disney feature film, it isn't Shrek or Ice Age. It's Disney itself. By oversauturting the market with a slew of low grade straight to video sequels, they tarnish their brand. The audience suffers, loses interest in the product, and the cash stops flowing. But ultimately, the animtors who must now try and find work in a field as specialized as a medical career are most directly impacted. And another part of the problem (besides story problems with Atlantis and peculiar character design choices) is that for some unknown reason, Disney insists on releasing their films in the peak of the summer movie season. Shrek and Ice Age, wisely, opted to debut at a tradtionally dead time at the box office.
Originally Posted By Jim I would have to agree about the "dangers" of the direct-to-video stuff that is hitting the market. The success of PETER PAN II is troublesome. I would also like to suggest that we are now in the time of computer animation that BEAUTY AND THE BEAST was for traditional animation. Eventually, people will lose interest in wacky computer-animated stories loaded with humor. It will get stale, and the market will drop. It will still be successful, but in comparision to TOY STORY, TOY STORY 2, SHREK, etc., it will pail.
Originally Posted By ChipandDale Hi Ken, was a thought provoking article. I still feel the most important part of a story is if it has a good story line. It may have great marketing character but if those characters have no heart yhen I think the character will ultimately fail. That is something the current Disney Execs just don't get, all they see is how much profit it can rake in. So many of what we now think of classics failed to produce their first time out. What endeared them to us is they had a good story line and characters we all could identify with. As the old saying goes that those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I feel for those animators because it just goes to show you that the Disney people haven't learned their lessons yet.
Originally Posted By Disneybrad "Disney insists on releasing their films in the peak of the summer movie season." True, Lion King Being the exception, the biggest Disney Films for the 90's were all fall releases. The Little Mermaid Beauty and the Beast Alladin Lion King's delayed summer release was such a hit, all Disney Tradiaiotn animated films since have been summer relases, ENG the exception, and all have been concidered disapointing by most.
