DID PIXAR KILL HAND-DRAWN ANIMATION??
No, Brandon my lad. Bad hand-drawn animation, uninspired and limp, killed hand-drawn animation.
Think about it. There was Quest for Camelot. There was Atlantis and Home on the Range and any number of other tepid, hand-drawn candidates from Disney and DreamWorks Animation .. and from which audiences stayed away in droves.
Is this because Pixar's CG films were all that people wanted to see? I think not, because when a zesty, older-style offering like Tarzan rolled down the pike, audiences flocked to see it. This wasn't so much because CG was the medium of choice, but that Bug's Life and Monsters, Inc. were better made and owned more interesting characters and stories.
Because, Brandon old top, it ain't the medium, but the quality of the tale that lies beneath the textures and surfaces. Tangled would have done well whether it was hand-drawn or CG. Hell, with Glen Keane supervising the animation, it was the closest thing we've had to hand-drawn in years.
But at that point, hand-drawn feature animation was O-VER.
Produce a picture that the public wants to see, and it won't matter whether it's CG or hand-drawn. Except that studios won't sink money into hand-drawn features anymore because they view CGI as a far better bet. (And the box office keeps proving it.)
The market for hand-drawn animated features withered away a long time ago, when a string of stinkers left a bad smell in movie-goers nostrils. Sad, but the way it is.