There's this from Bleeding Cool regarding future projects in the Hat Building:
... I did take a second to enquire about what [Disney veteran Burny] Mattinson will be working on next. And while it’s early days for his new project, it does sound like the perfect follow-up to Pooh.
He said:
I am working on just an idea of my own which is basically a Mickey, Donald, Goofy feature film idea. We have to present it first to the bosses to get the green light. ...
As it happened, I talked to Mr. Mattinson a bit of a while ago (the audio for which will appear here next Monday and Tuesday) and we chit-chatted about projects that he's developed and worked on over the years that never made it to production. One of those projects -- in the 1980s -- was Mickey, Donald and Goofy in a version of The Three Musketeers. As Burny said when we spoke:
"That earlier version was a lot different than the direct-to-video version that came out a long time later. Ours was going to be more action-oriented, like the book."
It's a shame that Burny's version never got made. But then, I've long thought it sad that the Mouse, the Duck and the Goof haven't made it into anything longer than a featurette. They deserve a format that's longer. They deserve to have their own full-length franchise.
Who knows? Maybe Mr. Mattinson will make that happen. He's got Mickey-Donald-Goofy storyboards in his office that look spiffy.
Posts
42 comments:
That could be a fun project and I'm sure Burny will come up with some great ideas for a Mick-Don-Goof movie , but ... again it's more of this looking- over-the-shoulder to the past stuff. Is Disney Animation just not interested in even trying to do something new with 2D animation ?
Supposedly the "What would Walt have done ?" conservatism almost killed the place during the late 60's and the 70's . Is this all happening again ?
Steve, could you please answer me whether the three shorts (aside from the next Prep & Landing) that WDAS has in production are all CGI or is any of the three hand-drawn?
try to do something new with 2D animation ?
Hand drawn is dead. Move on.
And.... Would the Disney company ever allow anyone to make Mickey short that is true to his character?
Me thinks not.
I think it would be better if they would make a short or a half-hour special out of it instead of a full-length feature.
I don't think Mickey, Donald, and Goofy could sustain a full-length feature. I mean, "The Three Musketeers" was descent enough for a DTV release but not for theaters.
Supposedly the "What would Walt have done ?" conservatism almost killed the place during the late 60's and the 70's . Is this all happening again ?
It wasn't WWWD that killed off the Ron Miller 70's, it was the constant "answer":
"What would Walt have done?...Jungle Book! :) "
As for those worrying about Pooh AND Mickey, get over it--
It's going to take a lot of grass-roots fundamentalism to get Chicken Little out of the studio's system, and "reinvigorating" the core characters in purer form is going to end up as part of it.
Early press columns on the project speculated on "Just look at the way they tried to reinvent Mickey for the video game!"...Yes they did, and the test audience hated it. Modern audiences know Mickey's character, they just can't quite pinpoint it in detail--That sounds like just the sort of challenge for the new regime to fix.
Instead of going around in circles with this stuff I wish they'd simply do something…anything!
The Mickey, Donald Goofy ideas sound terrific, but what are the chances of this stuff ever happening? Mouse House, please, please prove me wrong!
I think it would be amazing if they could do a 2D full feature of Mickey, Donald, and Goofy. The three musketeers was a good try, and the Prince and the Pauper, as great as it was, I wish it could have been extended. I wish all the luck that this gets made. I always thought since they did so well on the Goofy films that maybe they could have done a Mickey film too. Don't give up on this idea!
(And before anyone makes a comment about this. I have no idea what kind of money the Goofy movies brought in, it's my own personal opinion that it did well since my friends and I like it so much.)
Disney doesn't loose money...ever.
Yes, all he has to do is get it approved by the Disney management team. That means plenty of overpaid, talentless stars, input from ancillary marketing,unctuous show-tunes, and a bland and insipid plot involving a heroic struggle where Our Hero and his comic sidekick are pitted against Evil Big Business and end up saving the planet. All lines will be shouted at the top of their lungs. Could this be the formula which killed 2d in the first place rearing its ugly head? Its also the formula which will kill 3d if they dont look out. But hey...its jobs, who cares whether its art or not. Sign me up for a cushy sinecure, I'm not fussy.
Steve, could you please answer me whether the three shorts (aside from the next Prep & Landing) that WDAS has in production are all CGI or is any of the three hand-drawn?
Don't know. Nessie is hand-drawn and about to come out. Beyond that, I'm without info.
I don't pay a lot of attention most of the time. Ain't my department.
The Goofy movies were enjoyable. Not sure I have much interest in seing one with Mickey. Donald, on the other hand...
Disney has incredible star power in the characters they own. Yet, what do they do? Venture into areas that simply don't fit the company culture. The Marvel acquisition for example. What a brain dead decision.
Still, the executives feel the need to reinvent Walt's company as if Disney ever needed their boneheaded input. I don't have a lot of hope for the current management.
Hey man!? Are questioning the wisdom of Disney's CEO? After all, they've never made questionable desitions before...right? Especially when it comes to lining their pockets with gold...
Man Floyd, you have a great way of making this Disney artist feel really down
Its a good thing that everything I SEE is fun, exciting, and pushing boundaries. Because if I only read your comments and didnt have first hand knowledge, I'd think Disney was doing terrible.
Thanks "Inside the Hat"... as a typical student hoping to be there one day, it's nice whenever comments like yours pop up, because the majority of everything posted online is from the vocal, grumpy minority.
I'd be MUCH more interested in an Epic Mickey movie. The game's a hit, its story is awesome and has the potential for a great, kickass, memorable family film, and the game not only brings back Mickey in his best version, it marks the triumphant return of Oswald the Lucky Rabbit! There's no way it could miss.
I liked the Three Musketeers movie, but honestly, I can see why it was sent directly to video. Not that it wasn't good (I own a copy) but it wasn't different or exciting enough to warrant a big-screen release. Come on Disney, do Epic Mickey! I'd be at the theater on opening day - hell, I'd camp out at the entrance!
**Yes they did, and the test audience hated it. Modern audiences know Mickey's character, they just can't quite pinpoint it in detail--That sounds like just the sort of challenge for the new regime to fix.**
The "test audience" you mentioned saw the earlier, darker version of Mickey for the video game, where he'd practically turn into a rat when you made him act meaner. Disney corrected that, and as a result, the Mickey that's in the game is a huge hit with gamers - he's still good-hearted but with a mischievous streak. THAT Mickey could be a star all over again...if Disney has the brains and balls to give it a real try.
**Disney has incredible star power in the characters they own. Yet, what do they do? Venture into areas that simply don't fit the company culture. The Marvel acquisition for example. What a brain dead decision.**
Truer words were never spoken, Mr. Norman. The Muppet purchase was even dumber. Yet THOSE characters are getting a movie (and a bad one, from what I'm hearing) while Walt's mouse stays out of the spotlight. "Brain-dead" even begin to cover it. Thanks for your clear-eyed assessment of the current workings of the company you obviously love. Caring criticism beats fan-boy fawning any day.
Whats wrong with the Marvel acquisition?
I think a Disney animated X-Men (or something) would be awesome. Imagine The Incredibles, but cooler.
Anyhow. Enough of this Disney bashing (even though its Floyd's favorite sport). Why dont we talk about how The Croods got delayed by a year because of story problems?
^The Incredibles is way cooler than anything Marvel's ever done.
Why dont we talk about how The Croods got delayed by a year because of story problems?
It has been delayed? I haven't heard a thing.
Although, I don't find it surprising since I've been told from a few people that have seen an early screening of "The Croods" recently that it was awful.
I get a feeling that a lot of people are expecting "The Croods" to suck which will prove their point that Deblois is the storytelling genius behind the duo's success and Sanders is unworthily getting all the attention and praise. They are saying that Sanders is all about quirky characters and visuals with no substance.
Since I've never actually worked with Sanders, could anyone verify this? Is it actually true or are these just nasty rumors driven by envy?
"The Incredibles is way cooler than anything Marvel's ever done."
Funny...I don't think the incredibles would have happened had Marvel not done the Fantastic Four in 1961, you ignorant fanboy.
The Incredibles is way cooler than anything Marvel's ever done.
Hey now, Ditko-era Spider-Man was pretty awesome.
And there certainly wouldn't have been an Incredibles without Marvel's Fantastic 4!
"A Goofy Movie" was a great modern take on classic Goofy. So... it can be done, old properties can live on in valid projects..
I don't find it surprising since I've been told from a few people that have seen an early screening of "The Croods" recently that it was awful.
Care to name names? Or you just going to throw out vague rumor-mongering on an anonymous basis?
Because I've heard a different story from the picture's crew.
They are saying that Sanders is all about quirky characters and visuals with no substance.
Since I've never actually worked with Sanders, could anyone verify this?
Ed Gombert thinks that Chris S. is a first rate talent, and Ed is one of the best story guys in the biz.
Did Ed Gombert ever see American Dog? He might change his mind if he saw Chris' reel for that train wreck.
**"The Incredibles is way cooler than anything Marvel's ever done."
Funny...I don't think the incredibles would have happened had Marvel not done the Fantastic Four in 1961, you ignorant fanboy.**
Yeah, and the Four wouldn't have existed without the success of Superman, so what's your point? The Incredibles was a big hit, as opposed to The Silver Surfer and Fantastic Four movies, which were both HUGE flops. Audiences just weren't interested, imagine that. If Disney wanted superheroes, it should have continued to invent its own rather than buy them, BECAUSE, as the box office proved, "The Incredibles" was cooler than ANYTHING Marvel's ever put out.
I agree with Ed Gombert that Sanders is a first rate talent. And, unlike most of the dweebs on this thread we've actually worked with him on a number of Disney films.
Finally, if you think I'm tough on Disney you have no idea what the old man would say if he saw how screwed up his company was today.
"They are saying that Sanders is all about quirky characters and visuals with no substance.
"
True. Great in small chunks, but no larger form. Great boarder, so-so director.
"American Dog" traditionally animated (directed by Chris and Dean) would have saved definitely this art form. "How to train your dragon" and "Lilo & Stitch" are their proofs.
Perhaps Sanders is all about quirky characters, but at least he tries to be original. "Bolt" was a mix of "Inspector Gadget "(Penny, Brain the Dog, Doctor Claw),Toy Story(Mittens is Jessie, Bolt is Buzz),101 Dalmatians("Thunderbolt Adventure Hour" TV Show)and Animaniacs(Rita, Goodfeathers)SAD
Did Ed Gombert ever see American Dog? He might change his mind if he saw Chris' reel for that train wreck.
The naivety of this statement shows it was written by either a fanboy or a studio tool who's never been very close to the actual creative process. The entire purpose of doing a story reel is to see the problems. EVERY animated film has problems at this stage. Sometimes those problems seem insurmountable (as was the case with Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King). Sometimes the original director/story team/writers can solve the problems, sometimes other people are called in.
It happens on every major animated feature film, as John Lasseter was very frank about in the past (before he was sainted by the media and the Pixar PR machine).
And sometimes the problems in the broken story reel are solved by substituting bland, cliched story choices and characters (as was the case with American Dog's transition to the mediocre Bolt).
Floyd: If Walt were alive today, he'd care far less about animated films, and would wonder why there werent hundreds of Epcots/future cities around the country and world with the Disney name on them. His ideas and goals were far beyond animated films when he died.
Steve: Croods has been delayed for a year because the story isnt working. If you're getting other info, you're getting bad info (as usual)
**Floyd: If Walt were alive today, he'd care far less about animated films, and would wonder why there werent hundreds of Epcots/future cities around the country and world with the Disney name on them. His ideas and goals were far beyond animated films when he died.**
True. But he'd still want to make GOOD animated films. And I bet he wouldn't have bought Pixar (not slamming it, just saying), much less the Muppets or Marvel. He would have had HIS company take CGI to new heights, because he was ever the innovator and risk-taker. Innovation and quality were the things he loved, not acquiring off-label properties and pleasing stockholders. I think Floyd's right - he'd be disappointed with the company as it is today. It's lost its soul.
" (as was the case with American Dog's transition to the mediocre Bolt)."
B.S. american dog was UPGRADED to Bolt's mediocrity. It was a horrible story reel--and every few months I watch my dvd copy to remind myself how awful it was, and what a great improvement Bolt was on every front. Not a great movie, but FAR better than the mess of american dog.
I think Floyd's right - he'd be disappointed with the company as it is today. It's lost its soul.
I think to a certain degree Disney has, but Disney Animation hasnt. They have shown with PATF, Tangled, Prep and Landing, Bolt, and Pooh that they are getting their soul back. Bumpy ride, but its happening. Especially with Tangled. Instead of dreading whats coming from DAS, now, Im looking forward to their upcoming movies.
Just back from attending a "Leftist Rally" in downtown Los Angeles.
The talented artists at Disney animation know I've no beef with them. I'm speaking of the Disney management, and I think you know who they are.
I do respect the comments of Mr. Norman, however despite looking at the past saying 'this is how it was' it might be better to look at the Disney company 'this it what could be'. There is obvious strain between the creative artist and corporate business but you cannot have one without the other. We celebrate the success of Walt Disney but it was the partnership of Walt and Roy Disney that made this company what it is today. It does seem that today the business side has more influence which has negative effects in the animation outlet. It will come to a point where a reset will happen which has happened before.
Animation is a tough career, no doubt about that. The ones who are stubborn and persistent in their craft will be able to make changes for the better. These are challenges that will strengthen the industry and either we ride them out and or do something to face them head on.
(Once again this is a lowly student's opinion, so try not to bash my ideals so much. I hardly know Walt Disney but based on other people's accounts and biography is how I draw my conclusion.)
I know this many won't like this, but artists cannot have complete freedom without considering the business side. I point out in example, Osamu Tezuka, "Godfather of Anime" as he had major influence in Japanese animation but bankrupt his Mushi Productions studio with personal projects. Or if that example isn't good enough, Hayao Miyazaki has been quoted to hate certain technology. Because of this he never wanted his films on VHS or DVD. His idea is to go to a theater once to see his film and have that experience live with you.
Not to say all artist cannot have good business sense but you cannot have one lone person make 'all' the decisions. It's a collaboration.
B.S. american dog was UPGRADED to Bolt's mediocrity. It was a horrible story reel--and every few months I watch my dvd copy to remind myself how awful it was, and what a great improvement Bolt was on every front. Not a great movie, but FAR better than the mess of american dog.
Perhaps you could rip it and upload that reel on Youtube? No one will never know who has leaked it, plus you'll make lots of fanboys really happy.
And you can prove your point too!
No, I doubt he can do that, because I doubt he actually has a DVD of those reels. I doubt that very, very highly.
Anonymous Thursday, March 24, 2011 10:52:00 PM sez:
"try to do something new with 2D animation ?
Hand drawn is dead. Move on."
---
Unnecessarily cynical and untrue.
Change that broad generalization to "Hand drawn is dead (probably) or in a permanent state of retrogression at Disney " and you'd be closer to the mark. (but even there I'll try to be optimistic and hold out some hope that the Disney Animation Studio will eventually find a way to nourish and continue it's legacy of hand drawn animation in fresh ways)
Floyd - just curious, do you consider John Lasseter an animator still (since he's still doing some directing and all), or do you now consider him management?
Post a Comment