tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post5185112968534002546..comments2024-03-29T02:18:35.303-07:00Comments on TAG Blog: Sequels cost how much?!?Steve Huletthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05537689111433326847noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-54220187636715140392007-03-12T17:13:00.000-07:002007-03-12T17:13:00.000-07:00Not sure which sequels you're talking about, but s...Not sure which sequels you're talking about, but so far the only major CG animation sequels that have been done or are being done have stayed with their original studios, so much of the crews <I>is</I> the same (Toy Story 2 and 3, Shrek 2 and 3, Ice Age 2, Madagascar 2). <BR/><BR/>The Disney DTV sequels are a whole 'nother kettle of fish, and I don't think the mega-paydays for voice talent will ever apply in those cases.Kevin Kochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14678528568112279975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-68753800352037063812007-03-12T09:44:00.000-07:002007-03-12T09:44:00.000-07:00As a kid, I don't remember ever caring about who d...As a kid, I don't remember ever caring about who did what voice.<BR/><BR/>I wonder if today, the children get exited about actors doing voices for animated features or not.<BR/><BR/>My 5 year old niece couldn't care less about this. She's happy to go see the movie, and see the characters animated.<BR/><BR/>And most of the time, it's not the same artists working on the sequels, as studios get rid of artists a soon as a project's done.<BR/><BR/>Rufus.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-11699096744297531802007-03-12T09:08:00.000-07:002007-03-12T09:08:00.000-07:00The statement that by the time DW formed, Katzenbe...The statement that by the time DW formed, Katzenberg was paying celebs huge salaries for voicework is false. I've seen some of the contract offers to big name voice talent for those films, and they were SAG scale.<BR/><BR/>It's also false that the DW artists were given rich deals. The pay at Disney (and when the company formed, at Warner Bros. Feature Animation) was significantly higher. I know, because I was there.<BR/><BR/>Now, about changing the perception of management . . . do you have some mind control techniques you can help us implement?Kevin Kochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14678528568112279975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-81375441368674735872007-03-09T10:49:00.000-08:002007-03-09T10:49:00.000-08:00A few thoughts -In the golden age, the actors lend...A few thoughts -<BR/><BR/>In the golden age, the actors lending their voices were radio people and the like. It wasn't like Gable and Bogard were going in to do Dumbo. So you really can't look to that era as any comparison.<BR/><BR/>In the 60's and 70's, more well know people were doing voices, but again, Phil Harris and Louis Prima we're not exactly the top box office draw.<BR/><BR/>For awhile, under the new Eisner/Katzenberg regime, actors with actual box office clout could be persuaded to "do it for thier kids" for some minimum (though well over scale) amount. <BR/><BR/>Then, with Aladdin, Williams did it for his kids and little money, but saw his name expoited for promotion without his consent.<BR/><BR/>Mosr importnantly, with Aladdin, the town saw that these movies were making a boatload of cash. Of course the rules started changing. <BR/><BR/>By the time Dreamworks started, Katzenberg embraced the idea of celebrity voices and paying them handsomely so they would play ball and go on Oprah to promote it. Of course, they were also luring some lucky artists over with relatively rich deals, so it was all relative, I guess. <BR/><BR/>Once animated features started to become the top grossing movies of the year, the "do it for fun" era was officially over as far as actors go. Sadly, we live in an era where Paris Hilton can get a quater of a million dollars to show up at a club opening for 15 minutes. Even sadder, artists seem to be considered "below the line" in animated movies, even though they are the line. I would think changing that perception from management would be the job of this guild, would it not?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-39881173291722910092007-03-09T05:45:00.000-08:002007-03-09T05:45:00.000-08:00Celebrity voices may have always been used, but it...Celebrity voices may have always been used, but it seems like they were at a lower frequency. I mean, most of these CG films are FULL of celebrity names. It seems like ten, fifteen years ago, you had one B-list celebrity and a crew of theatrical people and voice over talent.C.Edwardshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05735347770456047370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-54032831476737732472007-03-08T12:42:00.000-08:002007-03-08T12:42:00.000-08:00Wow, a sarcastic, anonymous commenterer who didn't...Wow, a sarcastic, anonymous commenterer who didn't understand my post. Will wonders never cease?<BR/><BR/>Let me try again to explain why this development <I>is</I> both shocking and potentially dangerous for our industry. <BR/><BR/>Celeb voices have been used for many decades in animation. It's nothing new. And those celebs being catered to, and used in the advertising, is also something that goes back a ways. But the deals those celebs got in live action (like HUGE up-front paychecks PLUS back-end percentages of the grosses) have never been part of the animation industry.<BR/><BR/>Those practices have helped turned live-action filmmaking into a financial crapshoot, where tentpole films that appeal to virtually every possible demographic (and therefore the lowest common denominator) have become the norm.<BR/><BR/>From what I can tell, the live-action celebs venturing into animation weren't the ones insisting on these new, massive paychecks. The system that was in place worked fine. Voice actors got good money (SAG scale, plus standard residuals) for easy work, the studio got a crucial part of the film at a resonable price. And suddenly, in just the last few years, studios started making crazy deals with a wide variety of celeb actors.<BR/><BR/>Animated feature films are already more expensive than live-action films on average, and they already take much, much longer to complete. It's a precarious business, with a lot of failure. Now that many of these films will suddenly have a much higher bar to reach before they can become profitable is something that, frankly, endangers our industry. It's not business as usual, and it's something that's worth calling attention to.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and Steve K. -- it's not just the sequels that have voice talent suddenly getting much bigger paychecks. And if we never had sequels, we'd never have The Godfather 2 and Toy Story 2. Sequels aren't the issue. It's about the financial viability of major animated feature films, now that many of these films are suddenly 30% more expensive to make with zero added value.Kevin Kochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14678528568112279975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-37276899226233871272007-03-08T11:27:00.000-08:002007-03-08T11:27:00.000-08:00I'm a bit concerned that the president of our unio...I'm a bit concerned that the president of our union is so shocked, shocked I tell you, that big name actors have leverage when negotiating sequel paydays. You better run if you want to catch up to your turnip truck Kevin.<BR/><BR/>Since when is the pay scale in any field of entertainment fair? Once the movies started getting promoted with the actors names writ large on the posters, the die was cast. Don't forget, they are getting paid not only for the job they are doing but also for the studio's right to use their "brand" to promote the movie. Remember what happened when Robin Williams did Aladdin for scale, then Disney tried to promote it with his name?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-84446221099838325762007-03-08T10:15:00.000-08:002007-03-08T10:15:00.000-08:00Here's a solution - STOP MAKING SEQUELS!!Here's a solution - STOP MAKING SEQUELS!!Steve K.https://www.blogger.com/profile/12666158274505730209noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-49822057852584562202007-03-07T17:11:00.000-08:002007-03-07T17:11:00.000-08:00I think we're mostly on the same page, but when yo...I think we're mostly on the same page, but when you say it's been happening "for a while," that's the part that isn't really true. Voice talent getting huge paychecks for animation is very much a recent phenomenon. <BR/><BR/>And I don't think we can be so sanguine about it. Saying "let the studios pay the price later..." could mean those studios will get the hell out of the business. Or it could mean they'll try to keep costs down not by being better negotiators with actors, but by squeezing rank and file animation professionals even harder than they already have been the last 5-6 years. <BR/><BR/>The studios may have no one to blame but themselves, but when studios "pay the price," it really means the studio's employees will pay the price.Kevin Kochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14678528568112279975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-83235810872352649632007-03-07T15:21:00.000-08:002007-03-07T15:21:00.000-08:00Kevin, i think you misunderstood my comment. Or e...Kevin, i think you misunderstood my comment. Or else I dont understand your reply. <BR/><BR/>I was trying to say that most everyone (at least the ones I've dealt with) has known for a while that celebrities are getting big paychecks for their voices when doing sequels.. (imo, it is because they realize they have the studio on the hook the second time around and then also see what kind of money animated films can make these days.) <BR/><BR/>The studios have no one to blame but themselves. Let them pay it and then pay the price later when the film underperforms.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-24606728555675114262007-03-07T14:50:00.000-08:002007-03-07T14:50:00.000-08:00I agree, until I read this article I was unsure wh...I agree, until I read this article I was unsure what the Dreamwork's president was talking about when he said that sometime back. "Lure the talent back?" What the hell, out of all the things that it takes to make an actual promising animated feature, voice acting would be on one of the lowest parts of my list...publicity or not. <BR/><BR/>Ah well, as long as we keep getting animated features with jungle creatures led by lions and penguins making political statements, the industry looks good, no?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-51912263963655741282007-03-07T13:53:00.000-08:002007-03-07T13:53:00.000-08:00Was already known? No, I don't think so. Virtual...Was already known? No, I don't think so. Virtually everyone in the industry I've talked to has assumed for years that voice talent gets huge money. Until recently, they haven't, even if they were celebrities. And I don't think anyone would have guessed that, in literally a few years, the costs of these films have exploded by $20-40 million, just to get voice talent to do a repeat gig.<BR/><BR/>As for rigging and whatnot, I didn't imply that it was free in the sequel. Just that the total rigging and modeling costs should be cheaper, or at worst about the same, compared to the original.<BR/><BR/>The point is, a CG feature sequel should be no more expensive, and if thoughtfully done, significantly cheaper than the original. But they're not, not by a wide, wide margin.Kevin Kochhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14678528568112279975noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-52899768226882445452007-03-07T12:54:00.000-08:002007-03-07T12:54:00.000-08:00and execs ragged about the high cost of drawn movi...and execs ragged about the high cost of drawn movies...$170 million, that is obscene.<BR/><BR/>so when CG flicks begin to tank...I can't wait to hear the spin their excuses...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-22906998.post-11166506153325564602007-03-07T12:34:00.000-08:002007-03-07T12:34:00.000-08:00Although you can re-use a lot of the old stuff fro...Although you can re-use a lot of the old stuff from the previous movie. There are things that a studio *may* want to do over. Take for instance, character rigging. There may be enough advances between the time to make the two movies that the software has advanced enough that it makes sense to re-rig the characters. Not that this adds a significant cost to the sequel, it shouldn't be assumed that character rigging wont change between projects.<BR/><BR/>But yeah, that extra cost is going to the voice actors. Wasn't that already known?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com