Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Miyazaki's Future w/ Disney

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the wonder-where-this-will-go dept.

An anonymous reader sent us an interesting little article about Miyazaki and Disney. Disney of course owns the rights to distribute his films (like to pick a gigantic example Princess Mononoke) to worldwide audiences. Apparently lackluster profits from Mononoke may jeopradize future Miyazaki titles release in the US, which would be terribly unfortunate considering that in the end, the DVD release of Mononoke was absolutely wonderful (although its a somewhat dark film for Mouse) This is all tied to Spirited Away, his latest film which is apparently doing great things at the Japanese Box Office.

37 of 170 comments (clear)

  1. What a shame... by Captain_Frisk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What a shame it is that the big corporations have to market to the lowest common denominator. I too own the DVD of Princess Mononoke, and I love it. I think it really stinks that instead of getting quality movies released, Disney puts out crap like Atlantis, Spy Kids or most recently the Princess Diaries, because they know that people will pay for them.

    I read an article over at c|net yesterday discussing the idea of "critic proof" movies (they related it to Windows XP), movies that are commercially successful even though the critics hate them, like Tomb Raider, and most action movies. I dislike that they are willing to release movies like this. It seems like nearly everything released recently falls under this category. I haven't been to the movie theater in months.

    Captain_Frisk

    1. Re:What a shame... by JohnG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, I've taken quite the opposite view of yours alot. Not that current generation of movies are great, but that critics generally aren't worth a damn. If I wanted somebodies opinion of a movie, I'd ask my cousin, who has very similar taste in movies to me. Critics are paid to give an opinion on an almost entirely subjective matter. Everyone's likes and dislikes are different. Critics seem altogether pointless to me.

    2. Re:What a shame... by msobkow · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think you've nailed the biggest problem with North American movies lately.

      American productions tend to be un-funny "comedies" targetted at teen audiences, action flicks that can be enjoyed while intoxicated, and slasher/horror flicks that seem tame compared to the news.

      Canadian productions tend to be heavy dramas and histo-dramas that may educate, but rarely entertain.

      So-called "underground" productions seem to be stuck with studying street life, prostitution, and the war on drugs. Sometimes they have good characterization, but often a weak plot.

      As to "critic proof" movies, I never pay attention to what the critics say anyhow. I find I usually disagree with critics, not because they've done a bad review, but because we just don't have similar tastes. I kind of pity the critics -- do you enjoy a drama if you're in the mood for a comedy, action, or something else? Could you give a fair review of such a movie if you're forced to watch it in order to write a review for Friday?

      Lately at least 2/3 of my DVD purchases have been anime, whether traditional hand-drawn or CGI-enhanced. Even though the translations and voice tracks are often poorly done, the plot lines and characters are often interesting enough that I find them far better movies than what is produced locally.

      Unfortunately I don't think there is much we can do as long as North American companies focus on blockbuster hits instead of just making a reasonable profit. There are plenty of no-name talented actors and actresses that could carry a character through a well-written movie, but the investors insist on blowing millions on big-names and then whine when they don't make a few million profit back.

      --
      I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
    3. Re:What a shame... by stang · · Score: 3, Funny

      movies that are commercially successful even though the critics hate them, like Tomb Raider

      What do you mean, critics hate them? All the ads *I* saw for Tomb Raider said things like:

      • "Wow! Blockbuster movie of the Year!"
      • "Angelina Jolie is incredible!"
      • "The Must-See Movie Event of the Summer!!!"
      • "If you only leave your house once, do it and go see Tomb Raider -- holy cow, it's just that good!!!!!!!!!!"
      • "It changed my life forever!!"

      Oh, sure, the critic in the paper hated it, but who reads those guys, buried in back of the weekly calendar section? I mean, really, man.

      --
      "200 Quatloos on the newcomer!" "300 Quatloos against!"
    4. Re:What a shame... by JohnG · · Score: 2
      American productions tend to be un-funny "comedies" targetted at teen audiences, action flicks that can be enjoyed while intoxicated, and slasher/horror flicks that seem tame compared to the news."

      I certainly agree with this. I must be the only person alive who had no interest in seeing American Pie, 1 or 2. The comedy in the previews looks downright stupid (a guy having sex with a pie... in the kitchen... right next to the door that leads into the house.. that he doesn't live in alone? A guy not realizing that it's super-glue and not lubricant he has in his hand before actually appling the stuff to his genitals?) and the "funny" parts I was told about were all very predictable.
      Horror flicks are the same. It's ashame to see horror going for the eye candy (Jennifer Love Hewitt, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Rebecca Gayheart, etc.) instead of the kind of stuff that usually makes the weak stomached avert their eyes. Pretty women are fine, but make them the main attraction in a movie about pretty women, not about blood and guts.

      There are plenty of no-name talented actors and actresses that could carry a character through a well-written movie, but the investors insist on blowing millions on big-names and then whine when they don't make a few million profit back. This is another big problem. Not that I mind seeing the big actors. But that I mind seeing actors that can't act! You don't have to spend millions of dollars on a big name actor to find one with talent, they are all over the place, but so many movies, TV commercials, radio commercials, etc. can't seem to find them. In fact I think sucky acting, the insistance on sounding like a cartoon character, and WAY to much usage of the reverb filter is a requirement for radio commercials.

      OK, I'm done ranting for now. :)

    5. Re:What a shame... by jchristopher · · Score: 2
      Don't despair, the DVD release is not that far away!

      For anyone who hasn't seen this because it didn't make it to your town, consider renting the DVD of Memento. It's great.

    6. Re:What a shame... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, but it's what you DIDN'T see in the quote. One thing I'll never say about Tomb Raider is Wow! Blockbuster movie of the Year! When I saw how horrid she was, I said Angelina Jolie is incredible! You don't see acting that bad every day! The Must-See Movie Event Of The Summer!!! Sado-masochists everywhere agree! The studios would like me to say If you only leave your house once, do it and go see Tomb Raider -- holy cow, it's just that good!!!!!!!!! but they didn't offer me NEARLY enough dough. It changed my life forever!! I can never love theater again! It's all in the editing.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    7. Re:What a shame... by Jethro · · Score: 2
      I must be the only person alive who had no interest in seeing American Pie, 1 or 2.
      No, you're not. I wouldn't watch those movies unless someone paid me a decent amount of money to do so.

      I kinda want to watch "Rat Race" because Rowan Atkinson is in it, but it seems to be a really bad remake of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World".
      --


      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is kinky.
    8. Re:What a shame... by timster · · Score: 2

      Hmm. When I see a comment like this, my first response is to rabidly denounce you as a troll. But if I think about it, I know you aren't trolling. I know that you believe what you say, and in fact, I'd bet that the data you have supports that conclusion.
      The truth is, "anime" just means "animated stuff from Japan". It's the same "form" as animated stuff from anywhere else. The only difference is that there is a LOT of it. Which means "anime" is really too big of a word to deal with in any meaningful way.
      There are a lot of anime fans who don't understand this, and will happily watch just about anything and claim it is the best in the world. It usually isn't. Animated TV series typically have very low-budget animation and effects, just like any other TV show. An anime movie typically has highly detailed, beautiful imagery and crap for character development.
      There are exceptions... but don't judge the entirety of a country's film product based on crap like Akira. Try to get a feel for the scope of what you are saying.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    9. Re:What a shame... by nathanh · · Score: 2
      Critics are paid to give an opinion on an almost entirely subjective matter. Everyone's likes and dislikes are different. Critics seem altogether pointless to me.

      If the critics you listen to only give their opinion about whether the film was good/bad then you're listening to lousy critics.

      Good critics tell you about the film. They might talk about the quality of the filming or lighting or production. They might provide a quick history on the story or staging. They're likely to talk about the screenplay, who wrote it, what other screenplays they've written. They might talk about other films the director has worked on. They might talk about the actors and discuss the quality of their acting.

      And at the end, sure, they probably give the film a rating. This is their opinion. But they just spent several minutes giving you facts, so you can form your own opinion.

      Good critics are hard to find. There's only one pair of Australian film critics I bother listening to. The other "critics" have no idea what they're doing.

  2. Advertizing? by ajs · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've never seen an ad for Mononoke (though, of course, I own the DVD). It's interesting that Disney's compaining about sales but has never really pushed the film....

    1. Re:Advertizing? by Troy+Baer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've never seen an ad for Mononoke (though, of course, I own the DVD). It's interesting that Disney's compaining about sales but has never really pushed the film....

      Part of the problem with Disney's handling of Princess Mononoke was that they distributed it like they would an arthouse movie (i.e. relatively limited release, not much promotion), so that it was virtually guaranteed to not make money. Where I live, only the little hole-in-the-wall arthouse theaters showed it -- the big cineplexes didn't.

      What happens is that the corps have multiple tiers of products, and they really only put their energy into promoting their top-tier stuff in terms of expected ROI. This is kinda circular -- most times something won't become really popular unless it's promoted, but it won't be promoted unless the corps think it'll be really popular... This also shows up in the music biz -- take a look at how Hollywood Records (the Mouse again) promoted Queen's last album before Freddie Mercury died (read: they didn't), or how Elektra promotes 2nd-tier but solid-selling bands like Dream Theater (read: they don't). In DT's case, they've actually had trouble convincing Elektra to let them make new records because they don't go gold in the US right away, even though they do huge business in Europe and Japan.

      --Troy
      --
      "My life's work has been to prompt others... and be forgotten." --Cyrano de Bergerac
    2. Re:Advertizing? by Robotech_Master · · Score: 4, Informative

      Disney didn't just make the decision on the spur of the moment. They apparently did test-market it in some cities in Minneapolis, going full out on advertising and stuff there. Unfortunately, even with the ad campaign, it bombed, and Disney must have decided to cut their losses and not "throw good money after bad" on advertising. Too bad, but these things happen.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    3. Re:Advertizing? by ajs · · Score: 2

      Someone already pointed out the inanity of choosing the midwest to start form, but here's a thought: WHAT did they advertize?

      Mononoke is very hard to advertize correctly to the US, becuase what Anime fans like about it is 10 years beyond were most folks in the US sit on animation. If you think back ten years, what hooked the first wave of anime fandom (not the real early birds who were into Astro Boy and the wave of 80s movies like Yamatto, known in the US as the bastardized TV show Star Blazers).... I recall it being the fact that Akira was the first movie I'd ever seen that had serious, gritty action AND the freedom that comes from animation. I recall (now I feel like Kaga) some of the folks with me thinking that this was the future of US animation, and when you explained it to someone else that way, they really bit into it.

      So, how to advertize future anime? How about this (using Mononoke as an example):

      [black screen]
      V.O.: Remember the golden days of animation?
      [pause for a beat]
      [fade in still of woods from the beginning]
      V.O.: That's about to change!
      [quick cut to the same woods, with demon leaping out]
      [cut to Mononoke looking up, blood on her face, ping sound is heard, as her earring flashes]
      V.O.: From the east comes the story of nature's wrath...
      [cut to boars charging]
      [cut to riflemen fireing]
      V.O.: and human frailty
      [cut to Mononoke in any of the scenes where she's confused and looking for an answer around her]
      V.O.: The story of a princess of the forest
      [cut to Mononoke pulling down her mask, preparing to charge]
      V.O.: like you've never seen before!
      [music cuts in. something with strong precussion on each cut]
      [cut through many scenes of violence, leaping on rooftops, decapitation by archery. about 10-20 seconds]
      [music stops suddenly, or drops to something quiet]
      [fade in nightwalker walking through the treetops, silent for a moment, and then, quietly but forcefully]
      V.O.: This is where animated film grows up. Are you ready?
      [quick flash of Mononoke dropping from a roof, into a crouch]
      [end]

  3. BTW... by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...if all you've seen is Mononoke, you'd do well to see Miyazaki's other films as well. I call them films because to call them simply anime or (even worse) "cartoons" is like spitting on a Picasso by calling it a "drawing".

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
  4. Do you see why we want to pirate films? by Katravax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I first saw a fansub of Nausicaa in the eighties at GenCon, and though already a fan of anime, had never seen something so beautiful. Like many others, I fell in love with it, and wanted more.

    Thus the problem. How do you get a copy of a film that no one will distribute here? I'd be thrilled to pay just about any amount of money if someone would just sell the thing. Instead, we're forced to sneak around just to enjoy the art. I wrote Disney a letter thanking them for releasing Mononoke and Kiki (charming movie, even with Phil Hartman's Gigi), and telling them I hoped they would do the same high-quality releases for Miyazaki's other films.

    But nothing. We still have their wonderful Mononoke DVD release, and the so-so pan and scan of Kiki, of which every copy I've seen is too bright. They also distributed a widescreen Japanese-language Kiki with English subtitles -- but on VHS only. When I want to see any other Miyazaki films, I have no choice but to view pirated versions.

    I know my complaints are old, but they're also current. I am going to watch the movies, even if it means breaking the law. Isn't that a hoot? Having to break the law to watch a family-friendly animated movie. Of course Disney would throw a fit, and Studio Ghibli sure doesn't like it either, but I'm ready, willing, and able to give them money -- even if they want to overcharge -- but they won't sell them!

    So is it any wonder that fans of these movies pirate them when there's no legal option for obtaining them? Even Miyazaki fan sites, like http://www.nausicaa.net denounce piracy. But it's sort of two-faced, because that's the only option THEY have for watching the films too. It's very frustrating.

    1. Re:Do you see why we want to pirate films? by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2
      But nothing. We still have their wonderful Mononoke DVD release, and the so-so pan and scan of Kiki, of which every copy I've seen is too bright. They also distributed a widescreen Japanese-language Kiki with English subtitles -- but on VHS only. When I want to see any other Miyazaki films, I have no choice but to view pirated versions.
      You're forgetting the Manga Video Castle of Cagliostro DVD, which is also so-so in that it's not anamorphic, but it does have a new, accurate subtitle translation and a rather good dub on it.
      So is it any wonder that fans of these movies pirate them when there's no legal option for obtaining them? Even Miyazaki fan sites, like Nausicaa.net denounce piracy. But it's sort of two-faced, because that's the only option THEY have for watching the films too. It's very frustrating.
      Well, not quite the only option. The Miyazaki films are gradually coming out on DVD in Japan; if you can find a region-free player, you can order the Japanese versions, which also come with rather more extras (usually a whole extra disc) than you would find in a US version--with English subtitles, too.


      Also, it's worth noting that one reason Nausicaa.net denounces piracy is that they sort of have to, if they want to remain on good terms with Studio Ghibli and those people close to it, who are the ones who provide them with their information.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    2. Re:Do you see why we want to pirate films? by Katravax · · Score: 2
      You're forgetting the Manga Video Castle of Cagliostro DVD...

      I know, I left out My Neighbor Totoro too. Sorry :)

      Well, not quite the only option. The Miyazaki films are gradually coming out on DVD in Japan; if you can find a region-free player...

      I do actually have a region-free player (I got lucky and got one of the AD-600s before they patched the BIOS), but I'm ashamed to admit I don't know Japanese very well, and don't know how to order from a non-English web site. So maybe it's not as bad as I stated. But I would like to be able to order it from somewhere without having to jump through hoops, you know?

      Also, it's worth noting that one reason Nausicaa.net denounces piracy is that they sort of have to...

      That makes perfect sense, and I really can't fault nausicaa.net for denouncing piracy, but on most of the films listed there, it's clear there's no version sold in the USA. I'm just venting because I'd absolutely buy whatever films came available that had Miyazaki associated with them, and I'm quite willing to pay. I do know where to get pirated versions of them all (don't we all), but I'd rather not steal. However, I'm going to watch the movies I like, even if no one will sell them to me.

      There's something just twisted about the way this whole thing works, and I can't quite put my finger on it. I guess they'd be right in saying I don't have the right to watch whatever movie I want, but it still doesn't feel right. It's to the point I'd pay someone to order them from Japan for me because I don't know how.

    3. Re:Do you see why we want to pirate films? by Katravax · · Score: 2

      I am submitting your name for canonization. You are truly a saint and a hero. Thank you, thank you.

    4. Re:Do you see why we want to pirate films? by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2
      I do actually have a region-free player (I got lucky and got one of the AD-600s before they patched the BIOS), but I'm ashamed to admit I don't know Japanese very well, and don't know how to order from a non-English web site. So maybe it's not as bad as I stated. But I would like to be able to order it from somewhere without having to jump through hoops, you know?
      You don't need to know Japanese to order a Japanese disc. Check the resource list at the Nausicaa.net shopping page. I think there are some importers and some Japanese stores with English pages listed.
      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
  5. Indy and Corporate by perdida · · Score: 2

    I was thrilled to see Mononoke distributed in the United States and voiced by pro actors like Bill Thornton and Claire Danes.

    However, I took it with a grain of salt because of the nature of corporat culture.

    Consider a big company that makes cars, like Ford. It will sometimes innovate and sometimes fall back to basics, depending on the lemming-like groupthink patterns of middle management.

    Sometimes the lemmings will follow a rogue vp or engineer and make something new and brilliant, reaching out to a market of people in a different culture.

    Sometimes they will return to some archivally determined basic, conservative operations in an attempt to bring back the good old days.

    This cyclical pattern applies to media as well. If one accepts this dynamic, then it may be better for Miyazaki to produce independently, as he would have to conform to a corporate renaissance of classical Disney production standards to continue producing there.

    I'd rather he stayed independent than turn into a lemming.

    --
    Goat sex free since 2001
    1. Re:Indy and Corporate by ll1234 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Disney does not control Studio Ghibli! They simply have an agreement to distribute the films.[1]

      Miyazaki retains total control over his projects, although he's reaching That Age and probably won't direct another (feature-length) film after "Sen".

      [1]: http://www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/disney/

  6. The movie was not too dark. by Enonu · · Score: 2

    People take their kids to see violent films nowadays. I remember children as young as six when I went to see "Kiss of the Dragon." Talk about family material ...

    What was bizzare about the film is that it was culturally very different. Miyazaki has a small obsession with the relationship with man and nature, and his film go far beyond in exploring this than anything I've seen in the US. Afterall, who in the US would create a God character resembling a deer that gives and takes life as it walks about? It was differences like the above that made it hard for people to swallow, not the "darkness."

    While I'm here, I'll also rant about the dub for Mononoke. Claire Daines as the princess completely ruined it for me. Billy Bob Thorton's southern voice as an old Japanese monk type character put the icing on the cake. What a half-ass job for the voice actors Disney did.

    Enonu

  7. Weak theatrical release of Mononoke. by supabeast! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Given the weak treatment Disney gave the theatrical release of Mononoke, I can see why Miyazaki would be concerned. Disney spent a ton of money doing one of the best anime dubs ever, and then released the movie to a handful of arty theatres, most of which were located in major cites. Most of the US population never even had a chance to go see the movie.

    On top of that, advertising was weak, with short commercials restricted to slimly targeted timeslots.

    I almost wonder if Disney did this with Mononoke because they did not realize until AFTER buying the rights that it would be competing with Disney's own animated films, which of late have been generally poor compared to older films, and also bear a heavy semblance to anime style. Perhaps Disney is pushing Miyazaki's work to the back burner to protect the films where they get exclusive profits.

    1. Re:Weak theatrical release of Mononoke. by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2

      Actually, as the article points out, given Disney's prior reputation, Disney bought into Mononoke pretty much sight unseen, thinking it was going to be another family-friendly film. They bought a Porco Rosso in a poke, as it were, and it backfired on them. There's some speculation that Miyazaki maybe have made this dealbreaker film so different at least in part intentionally, out of a dislike of Disney's animated fare, though I could be misremembering on that point.

      --
      Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
    2. Re:Weak theatrical release of Mononoke. by Quikah · · Score: 2

      Disney test marketed Mononoke in Minnesota. Full release with advertising to all the mainstream theater chains. It bombed. They decided not to expand to a full release across the country, I don't blame them.

      They really should have chosen a different film to "debut" with. A re-release of Kiki or Laputa would have been a much easier sell. Mononoke is too foreign for American audiences.

      --
      Q.
  8. When English Dubs SUCK!!! by ed1park · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I HATE watching a great anime when the English dub sucks with those whiny American voices. So I usually switch it to Japanese and turn on the subtitles.

    But, guess what. While the English dub is done in dolby 5.1, the Japanese is done in stereo! AGGGHHH!!! (Ninja Scroll, Ghost in the Shell, and Akira come to mind)

    It makes me want to go out and buy the Japanese marketed version to see if it has english subtitles. :(

    You know, I wonder if such movies fail at the box office simply because of the crappy voices. Makes me cringe when I hear them.

  9. Oops! by Robotech_Master · · Score: 2

    Pardon, I meant to say given Miyazaki's prior reputation. Shoulda used the preview button...

    --
    Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
  10. Simple Solution by gad_zuki! · · Score: 2

    Don't go with Disney. Hayao Miyazaki's 1996 contract only seems to cover Mononoke and not Spirited Away. Also I hate to break it to some of the fanboys but anime is largely a fring/aquired taste here. Expecting mass american acceptance usually means accepting american style marketing, edits, etc.

    Considering where the anime DVD market is right now this thing is going to sell like hotcakes when released. I'd much rather have it on DVD, say in a few months, than wait for 4 theaters to play it nationwide pushing back the DVD release a year.

    The best part of going straight to DVD is you can still have your local arthouse theater showings at midnight and the fanboys and fangirls will come just to see it on the big screen.

  11. Re:Many brands to choose from... by ll1234 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "Princess Mononoke" _was_ released under Miramax in theaters. Then Buena Vista handled the VHS/DVD.

  12. That explains it! by HongPong · · Score: 2

    I was about to disagree with the parent post, about lack of advertising. Living in the Twin Cities, I remember seeing a ton of ads for P. M. You Are Correct, Sir!

    --
    --hongpong.com
  13. Re:This is Wonderful News by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

    Just as an interesting aside, it was Disney's 'Bambi' that spawned Japanese Animation.

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  14. Re:This is Wonderful News by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2

    Cuz that's the movie that Osamu Tezuka saw 80 times and decided he liked so much. Details

    --
    Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  15. Freedom vs Anime by Frank+T.+Lofaro+Jr. · · Score: 2


    I am glad we in the geek community can maintain such a united front against Disney and the rest of the MPAA even when they produce stuff we crave like anime. I am glad we can resist the urge to let our "geek portal" put up an article which would encourage the consumption of Disney and the MPAA's content right on the front page, with nary a reference to the freedoms that they are taking away. I am glad we don't have people here that want to get lots of DVDs of that stuff, in spite of Johannsen and others who put their livelihood and personal liberty on the line for freedom. I am glad we aren't supporting a technology like DVD which is so entwined with the DMCA, which is the law used to illegally arrest Dmitry Sklyarov under the legal theory that the DMCA has jurisdiction in Moscow.
    </sarcasm>

    Before you mod this down as offtopic, think, what are you supporting here?

    --
    Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
  16. That's because Atlantis is "inspired" by anime. by Thag · · Score: 2
    But then again look at Atlantis, it is not the happy singing disney we have seen in the past.


    That's because it was heavily influenced by the Gainax anime series Nadia: Secret of the Blue Water.

    Some fans insist that it was stolen broadcloth a la The Lion King, but not having seen Atlantis, I can't comment.

    Jon Acheson
    --
    All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
  17. A fringe taste except for Pokemon, DBZ, etc... by Thag · · Score: 2
    Also I hate to break it to some of the fanboys but anime is largely a fring/aquired taste here.


    Actually a lot of anime has become so much a part of American culture that Joe Sixpack wouldn't think of it as anime. Speed Racer, Astro Boy, Pokemon, Sailor Moon, Dragon Ball Z, Tranzor Z, Gigantor, Battle of the Planets/G-Force, etc.

    I agree though that Miyazaki should do everything in his power to avoid sending his new movie to The Black Hole of Disney.
    Jon Acheson
    --
    All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.
  18. Someone tell Disney's shareholders! by Thag · · Score: 2

    Honestly, how is paying for the rights for the movies then not releasing them (i.e. taking a loss on the whole package) somehow more profitable than doing moderately-successful releases to DVD?

    This is Disney being irresponsible with their shareholder's money, pure and simple.

    Can someone with the facts tell me, did Disney lose money on Mononoke? I really doubt it.

    If Disney had been releasing the movies one or maybe two a year on DVD, they'd be millions of dollars ahead by now. They could probably recoup their production costs on a subtitled-only DVD via sales at OTAKON alone.
    Jon Acheson

    --
    All opinions expressed herein are my own, and not those of my employers, who are appalled.