I ran across this screed, attached to a new Rapunzel picture moments ago:
I don’t want to give the impression that I’m fully let down by this first shot from RAPUNZEL brought to us today by disneypixar.fr. It looks like perfectly fine, standard, 3D animation at its absolute adequacy. What disappoints me is this notion that Disney has to create 3D animated films when they had a perfectly fine 2D animated film hit theaters just a short month ago.
PRINCESS AND THE FROG should have been the launching point of a whole new Disney venture into 2D animation, a re-visitation of the amazing period of time the company had from THE LITTLE MERMAID to THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME. RAPUNZEL seems right up the alley with these other films ...
Maybe Kirk didn't notice, but TP&TF, as much as I like it (and I do) has sort of stalled on the launching pad. And as Mr. Corliss pointed out in TIME Magazine, the CGesque Alvin and the Chipmunks has eaten the 2D feature's lunch after five days of release.
Now. Do I like this? Hell, no. But do I acknowledge reality? Yeah, I find that a useful activity, being rooted as I am in the world of actual events.
But that isn't the point of my gripe about Kirk's sour post. My gripe is that Rapunzel has been on the Disney schedule as a freaking CGI feature since the time of Chicken Little, back when David Stainton was running the division and the company announced it was through doing hand-drawn features.
So after seven years of development and story work, to think that Diz Co. is going to throw out years of labor to satisfy some fan-boy's desire that the conglomerate make their next fairy tale in his preferred format is silly at best, and brain-damaged at worst.
If The Princess and the Frog were climbing toward a $300 million domestic gross after a month of release, they would still be making the picture as a CGI release.