I finished out the week meandering through the Disney Animation Studio, otherwise known as the "hat building" ...
Some Bolt crew members are nearing the end of their production gigs, while others are still deep into overtime.
A few months back a c.g. artist told me, "I don't see how the picture can make a November release, there's just way too much picture to get done, and way too narrow a pipeline,"but today several folks said:
"Oh, we're burning through shots. The studio will make the deadline. It always does."
But everyone is pretty solidly glued to the flat screens and keyboards, toiling away.
"One nice thing. There's overtime pay in abundance."
Posts
34 comments:
How's their thoughts on the film Steve? I saw that clip from the Disney Channel and it doesn't exactly instill me with faith. I hope it's good, but the designs look ehh.
Also, what have you heard about Lasseter and company doing another hand drawn pic? Any news? Please... I love their 2-D stuff.
They're running clips of Bolt in the front hall ... and an artist had his eight-year-old in his office, looking at pieces of the film on a computer.
What I've seen is lively and funny. Beyond that, I think its better that I keep my mouth shut.
Re another hand-drawn film: I think the Movers and Shakers will want to see how Princess does before making any firm commitments for more.
There might be something else in the hopper, but I don't know about it. (Frankly, I try to avoid knowing, since it's easier that way ...)
"Re another hand-drawnfilm: I think the Movers and Shakers will want to see how Princess does before making any firm commitments for more."
Wait a minute, I thought the official line on that is that animation (hand-drawn, cg, stop-mo, whatever) is a medium, not a genre ? And "it's all about the story" , etc.
When they announced that Hand Drawn Animation is Back at Disney John Lasseter said : ""The whole notion that the audience didn't want to watch hand-drawn animation any more was ridiculous. It would be like saying the audience didn't want to watch something made with a particular camera. Give me a break! It's storytelling. No one goes to a movie to see a particular technology. They go to see story and characters. They go to be entertained. What it was is that 2D became the scapegoat for bad storytelling."
So, what's with the "wait and see" for greenlighting more hand-drawn features?
The effect of the "wait and see how it does at the box-office" attitude towards hand-drawn animation sends the signal that if the 'Princess & the Frog' does poorly at the box-office then it will be written off as a failure because it is hand-drawn and therefore no more hand-drawn animated features will be greenlit at Disney . But what if 'Bolt' or 'Rapunzel' bombs or "under-performs" like 'Meet the Robinsons'? Will that also mean that those pictures will be interpreted as having failed because they are CG animated ?
It would appear that the "wait and see" position on greenlighting any more hand-drawn films says that someone at the Disney Co. does believe that Hand-drawn Animation is like a genre, just like Westerns, Musicals, Science-fiction , whatever. If a studio has a big bomb with a Western picture the decree goes out from the corporate towers "no more Westerns ; Western movies are dead at the box-office" ... until, of course, a film maker with guts and vision comes along and makes a hit Western , then suddenly the Western is rediscovered. (again).
I'd guess the "wait and see" is coming from the corporate types because they don't really believe what Catmull and Lasseter believe: "It's storytelling. No one goes to a movie to see a particular technology. They go to see story and characters. They go to be entertained. What it was is that 2D became the scapegoat for bad storytelling."
Oh come on, don't jump to conclusions. Who says the "wait and see" is about the medium? Remember they're doing a classic Disney musical again, which they haven't done in 10 years. Maybe they're waiting to see if kids and families still want those. If not, they might explore new territory with handdrawn.
Or there could be a whole other explenation to it.
It would appear that the "wait and see" position on greenlighting any more hand-drawn films says that someone at the Disney Co. does believe that Hand-drawn Animation is like a genre,
Exactly.
If hand-drawn features make good money, they'll make more.
If not, and the cgi stuff does a lot better, look for a lot more of those.
These folks aren't in this for the great love of the art. They're in it for Moo Lah.
I think what even Lasseter says in public and what he says to the animators and crew is different than what he is saying to corporate. I honestly don't think he believes his own schpeel sometimes.
There's no "schpeel" to Lasseter's convictions about story being the most important factor of a film's success and the medium not being a genre. Thats the absolute truth, but the truth is not something that resonates with corporate executives.
If the suits were making all the decisions, there wouldn't be a single intrepid move made by the studios at all. They would simply chase after what they perceive to be recipes for success and follow in the footsteps of people who garnered big returns by setting themselves apart with new ideas that translated into box office money. Corporate execs are, for the most part, spineless. They won't take any risks and instead follow trends. They need some kind of proof of a success before going along with something but that conflicts with the publics appetite. The public want to be surprised and dazzled with the new and you don't give them that by following trends.
I think Lasseter's commitment to hand-drawn animation is probably genuine. In the days before Disney's takeover, there was some indications that Pixar was interested in doing a hand-drawn feature (perhaps just to spite the Mouse House).
With the current move to stereoscopic films, it is possible that some executives are worried that 2D films would not fit in (even if they were shot in stereo).
The "Wait and See" mostl likely has to do with the economics of traditional animation. Disney's farming out lots of Frog Princess, and will continue (and accelerate) this process. Apparently, they aren't willing to pay top animators what they're worth, and see little value in the experience they can bring not only to a show, but to the young artists they hope to bring "up" through the ranks. That's why they're really having a VERY hard time finding enough talent to complete Frog Princess. Think I'm making this up? Ask any of the DOZENS of former traditional animators Disney has turned down for employment.
Interesting....
"Remember they're doing a classic Disney musical again,"
What's a "classic disney musical?" These started in the '80's. And only 2 (Mermaid and Beauty/Beast( could be considered "classic." And they're more Broadway than film musical (not a bad thing, just not the same as Disney films of the past with songs). What Disney film had a villain who sang a song up until 1986? NONE. Ratigan was, I believe, the first.
Although Cruella DeVille did have a song ABOUT her.
I really hope “Prinncess and the Frog” will not be a “voo doo-spiritism-real-black-magic homage”. Many afroamerican and religious people could have another excuse to protest.
"voo doo-spiritism-real-black-magic homage”. Many afroamerican and religious people could have another excuse to protest."
Why? So called "voo-doo" is primarioly Catholcism mixed with African ritualism. It's something positive African Americans brought to the new world. And it's no more offensive to religion (especially Catholics) than say, the southern baptist convention.
How far on production are they on 'Frog'??
Because, there are people who see something wrong about “spirit contact” and all this kind of stuff...it`s something bad.
Take for example this:
Leviticus 19:31
“‘Do not turn yourselves to the spirit mediums, and do not consult professional foretellers of events, so as to become unclean by them. I am Jahweh YOUR God.
What's weirder, watching a fairy tale, or QUOTING one?
Agreed! some guy spouting notions of raising the dead, walking on water, and turning water into wine is about as occult as they come!
granted. Voo Doo mysticism does not make for a family friendly blockbuster. however if its portrayed as the evil it is, and the villian uses that as his power, it makes for quite an effective and true bad guy only to be defeated by the light of the good guys.
remember Snow White. great villian because it was very well portrayed using the evil of black magic.
malificent, excellent representation of deceptive evil from hell.
anyway, Disney REALLY needs a hit, any kind of hit will do at this point. i think the last successful film was Lilo which was 7 years ago i think.
Please Ed and John pay attention to the release date! there will be no excuses! Nobody wants another “Prince Caspian” or “Speed Racer” kind of flops.
Disney needs a 2D hit, and a “clean” animated movie with the first black lead. Sadly for many people inside, it's only a business.
And yes, that's not so crazy. Hitler's wife was a “medium” ...his personal medium, and WW2 wasn't a fairy tale.
Ah... so magic in fairy tale movies leads to hitler.
Here's a big hint for those out there who still can't tell fantasy from reality: MAGIC ISN'T REAL. That Hitler apparently had the same problem separating fantasy from reality makes no difference. Hitler caused WWII, not ghosts, nor ghoulies nor goblins. Not the wolf-man or frankenstein, and certainly not a fairy princess movie about witches and dwarfs and a magic wishing apple.
I live in the real world. Feel free to join it at any time.
HEY! - Does anyone actually know what exactly is going on on 'Frog'? How far production is on the film??
How far on production are they on 'Frog'??
They're animating on two or three sequences, lots of layout going on, etc.
They've mostly moved past the "experimental" phase of the animation.
The "wait-and-see" approach is about economics in general, not just, "do audiences want to watch 2D animation." The question is, "Can Disney make a profitable 2D film." That means can they make the movie with a specific budget, and stick to that budget. Given that budget does it make enough at the money to justify the cost. Disney no longer makes art for the sake of art. Disney make movies to make money. If Disney can't stick to their budget, or if the box office draw is too small (especially compared to other animated movies, 2D and 3D), then they will not continue to make 2D animated films.
>>>I live in the real world. Feel free to join it at any time.<<<<<<
Ethnic cleansing, genocide, and terrorism. At the same time, humans are polluting the air, fouling the earth, depleting its resources, and driving countless species toward extinction.
“In no previous age have people shown so great an aptitude, and appetite, for killing millions of other people for reasons of race, religion or class.”
Is it possible that mankind is being manipulated by an unseen but powerful and sinister force?
...I think so.
“In no previous age have people shown so great an aptitude, and appetite, for killing millions of other people for reasons of race, religion or class.”
Not counting World Wars I and II.
But I quibble.
Re: Justin -
"The question is, "Can Disney make a profitable 2D film."
Then the question is a tautology: "either the films will make money or they won't" and it really has NOTHING to do with whether it's hand-drawn or CG.
Can Disney make a profitable CG film? (based on the reported production costs of "Chicken Little" I think it barely broke-even, if that, and "Meet the Robinsons" made even less). Hopefully "Bolt" will break through to be a genuine hit. But if it isn't does that mean that CG gets tagged with the provisional "wait and see" attitude to whether they'll make any more CG animated films ? Logically it should if we're going to say the same thing about "Princess and the Frog" and the future of 2D at Disney.
So if Disney can't stick to their budget or the box-office draw is too small they will not continue to make animated films.
Period.
So it comes back around to the question of why wait to greenlight more hand-drawn features based on how Princess and the Frog does? If Princess and the Frog bombs it's not because it is 2D animation anymore than if Bolt bombs it is because it is 3D.
"Is it possible that mankind is being manipulated by an unseen but powerful and sinister force?
...I think so."
Then you're kind of silly, without much perspective on world history. Believe it or not, we're living in the most civilized age of humanity ever. Our problems get amplified by instant news coverage, something that was not available in previous ages, but the reality is, never has humanity as a whole lived in a more advanced, stable time.
Massive catastrophes have happened continuously throughout world history. Horrific, brutal wars have been fought. The only difference today is the advanced technology of war, which can have a far greater effect. Human nature is neither better nor worse than in previous times.
But for all the negatives of today's age, there are equal or greater advances. Would you really like to live in a world without planes, computers, air conditioning, electricity, plumbing, medical treatments, etc.? If there's a dark, sinister magical fairy monster out there, trying to keep us down, he's doing a really bad job.
The idea of a cosmic struggle between the forces of good and evil has prompted endless speculation by writers and philosophers throughout history.
Your adored HIGH TECHNOLOGY, now can produce other kind of problems, they are able to create: lethal earthquakes, chronic diseases (AIDS), Fear and false wars (Sept 11, Irak), millions are living with hunger, in a petroleum dependent world . (though, free energy and new technology already exists)
Who is naive now?
Ah... so now earthquakes and the AIDS virus are man made?
Tell us more, Tinfoil Hat Man!
Lets stay on topic. Disney is in need of a hit.
its painful to think about all the money spent since the supposed end of 2D and the 3D films they have done fell far short of success. how many 3D films will it take before they blame the medium and not the story telling.
I don't think that John and Ed blame either medium.
IF Frog isn't a big hjit I suspect to save 2D from the scrap heap Lassiter's first spin will be to blame the directors - deservedly or not. Especially since their last two films BO have been less then stellar it might be easy. Better that then to blame the medium or the top dogs who hired the directors and oversaw every inch of the production (one would assume?)
Post a Comment