Slashdot Mirror
Disney Shuts Down 2D Animation Studio
sofakingl writes "As mentioned in this Slashdot article, Disney has been planning to shut down their 2D animation studios. Just recently, Disney shut down their Florida studio, with some animators transferred to Disney's Burbank studio, and others being left out of a job. This has brought criticism from Roy Disney, the nephew of Walt Disney. And to top it off, Disney may be facing new competition from Legacy Animation, a new animation studio that was formed by ex-Disney animators."
-- Walt Disney
This is on the front page of Legacy. How ironic. Or insulting, depending how you look at it.
Standing on the shoulders of giants.
Mabey some of those animators, now that they have some time on their hands, will decide to group together to work on some non-family animation here in the US. Limiting the scope of animation to family friendly themes is such a waste of the artform, in my opinion.
stuff
It's kind of sad. I love watching The disney version of the Jungle Book because the backgrounds are so detailed and lush. There is a certain warmth to 2d animation, at least I think there. Who knows though, maybe I'm just being a technophobic jackass. I say the samething about records as opposed to digital media. There is a certain je ne sais quoi to it, know what I mean?
"Bomb" is a relative term in the movie industry. A truely flop or bomb or dud movie is defined as a movie that cannot make in gross revenues what it cost to produce. Computer technology is reaching the point where it's soon going to be cheaper to produce a Pixar movie than to pay hand animators to make a 2d movie...
They close down their 2D studios, and it looks like they won't be renewing their deal with Pixar. They're closing the studios down because "it isn't profitable", as I recall.
And what's Pixar doing? Possibly opening a 2D animation studio.
I think it's the Disney studios that aren't profitable anymore, since most of the good animated movies out of Disney in the past 5 years or so were from Pixar...
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
Stupid, noone cares if it's 2D or 3D, it's the story which is important, I've liked quite a few animations from both camps lately. With Toy story 3D was cool because it was new, that isn't the case any longer, and sure shrek looks nice, but I have no troubles whatsoever with Mulan either for example.
3D doesn't have to be better than 2D, just look at the game industry, the only good 3D game I can figure out is Quake and maybe WarCraft3 but that's not any 3D i count, it works like 2D. The rest of the games are blown away by old Amiga titles.
yet to be a successful American full-length animated feature which wasn't considered a "family" movie in the US.
Beavis and Butthead do America - think it mae around $80 million which isn't too shabby - and definitely not one for the liitle kiddies!
South Park Movie - also did around the $75 million mark.
Don't sound too shabby to me!
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
I got to talk to Don Bluth, the saviour of classical animation, (if it were not for him classical animation would have died a long time ago) at Comic-Con two years ago. He was one of the nicest persons I have ever met. He drew me Dirk the Daring from Dragon's Lair in about 5 seconds, perfect. He told me that Roy Disney came to his studios in Ireland (at the time) and essentially told him "Join us, or Die." So enough of the B.S. that Roy Disney is trying to save classical animation. He is just pist that they forced him to retire. The worst part about the termination of the Florida animation unit, is that they actually churned out two hits in their short lifespan. So it's b.s. that Disney needed to shut em' down to save money. Classical Animation is not dead, it just has had a few set backs in the past few years. It will return. I wish Disney would use Miramax and make an adult animated film.
"Jeremy, you need to get to an internet cafe and cut and paste some appropriate sentiments about me from the world wide
How exactly is this the same "mistake" as the computer game industry? Disney is cutting it's traditional animation division not for any technical reason, nor as some artistic statement on whether 2D animation is better than 3D annimation.
The traditional animation division of Disney has been a financial failure for Disney for several years now. "Road to El Dorado" cost $95 million dollars and has recouped only $50 million dollars. "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" cost Disney over $100 million dollars and ended up with a total box office of $83.5 million dollars at box over the course of 20 weeks. Even adding rentals, which totalled less than $11 million dollars, "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" was entirely a financial failure. What else has the divison produced recently? Treasure Planet in 2002 for a friendly cost of $140 million dollars and has received $38 million at box office and around $4 million from rentals. Would you fund a division that has lost $150 million dollars over the past 3 years on features alone?
Incredible amounts of market research modified scripts have essentially killed North America's last traditional cell animation studio. Disney's cell animation scripts lack direction, coherence, and even an audience (they try to pander to all ages and end up appealing to none).
To reinterate, the fact that the division used traditional cell animation had nothing to do with why the division is being closed. That being said, cell animation in North America has essentially died for now -- Disney was the last major cell animation house on the continent, and yes, that is somewhat sad.
"The mouse factory," as his studio was known in the forties, like the rest of Hollywood, was in the business of making money out of dreams. It is possible to acknowledge real affection for the enterprise and its products. But at the same time, we should recall details such as the ugly labor disputes that took place at Disney studios during the forties.
Hand-drawn animation was all but shut down once before, as I recall. In the fifties, Walt Disney shifted the emphasis to live-action movies (and mixtures, as in "Mary Poppins.") Animation wasn't abandoned altogether, but the stuff between 1955 ("Lady and the Tramp") and 1981 ("The Fox and the Hound") was cheaply done and not top-drawer. You didn't have those luscious Chris-van-Allsburg-quality backgrounds, the animation was jumpy and more like Saturday morning cartoons than the classic Disney animation oeuvre.
I believe the survival of animation at Disney depended in part on the new technology of xerography--pencil drawings were photocopied onto cels instead of having to be laboriously inked.
Walt Disney himself didn't have any special affection for animation. It happened to be the business gimmick that worked for him and got him on the road to success. When he was asked late in life what he was proudest of, he answered that it was what he had built--the buildings, the companies, the infrastructure, the businesses.
And, when it came to animation and movie production, he was always a bit of a gadget freak. Or technology enthusiast. He would be just as pleased with Pixar's technology now as he was with the multiplane camera that pushed the envelope in the, let me think, late thirties? For Pinocchio? Used in that amazing over-the-rooftops opening sequence.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
When I heard this news in the LA Times I thouhgt glossed over it. I don't think this is about 2D or 3D. The fact of the matter is that the good scripts are being made in 3D. The talent is going to shops like Pixar and the results are first and foremost excellent stories and characters. 3D animation costs more than 2D to produce so this is not about making it cost effective. Nemo would have grossed the same amount of money if it was traditionally animated. pete
> but the fact remains that there has yet to be a
> successful American full-length animated feature
> which wasn't considered a "family" movie in the US.
> Ever.
Fritz The Cat: $700k to make, grossed $90 million. Definite profit for the film company. BIG hit in 1970.
Not sure if Bakshi is bending the numbers there, but that's straight from the horses' mouth; (p.45, "Tenacity of the Cockroach", interview with R.Bakshi, ISBN 0-609--80991-1)
I was floored when I saw it as a kid. It was like bugs bunny on PCP, armed and naked.
I dug Bakshi's other feature animated films too; American Pop, Hey Good Lookin, Coonskin. None of those are "family entertainment" (probably not considered 'hits' either, but still great) And some liked 'Wizards' and 'Lord of the Rings'. Not sure the numbers on those. All features, all animated, all american.
> The closest you could possibly get is "Heavy Metal"
Hoo, there are a few good sequences, but so much of the animation was Filmation quality-wise (read: bad)
*digress*
At least WDP's Hercules had some good character design vis-a-vis Gerald Scarfe. But I have to see past the Disney characters to enjoy it for that. I still have the excerpted animated sequences from "The Wall" (Scarfe un-Disneified); those are absolute classic sequences of animation. Those two flowers having sex was intense.. must've taken them forever to animate. And the eagle and marching hammers kicked ass. Too bad there wasn't more of that animation, and less of that kid running around in trenches.
This is one of the main reasons why Roy E. Disney (Chairman of Disney Animation Department and member of the Disney board of directors, and Walt's last remaining relative in the Disney empire) resigned in a big melt down last November.
In his resignation letter (available here) Roy E. Disney blasted Michael Eisner with, "This company under your leadership has failed in many ways:" then of the many things he slams, specifically bombasts Eisner for "The perception by all of our stateholders -- consumers, investors, employees, distributors, and suppliers -- that the company is rapacious, soulless, and always looking for the 'quick buck' rather than long-term value which is leading to a loss of the public trust." and "Your failure to establish and build constructive relationships with creative partners, especially Pixar, Miramax, and the cable companies distributing our products."
All in all, it's a great letter, rather well written, and my brief highlights don't do it justice. He tells the world that Michael Eisner is a no-good egomaniac who's systematically destroying the legacy that Walt built by not taking risks, going for the quick buck, and releasing sequels rather than using the briliant writing talent already available inside the animation complex.
Now here's how the animators feel. There was a letter of support written recently by Disney's top animators Tim Hauser (writer of the OSCAR nominated short Runaway Brain), Steve Moore (director, OSCAR nominated short Redux Riding Hood, Emmy nominated special Olive, the Other Reindeer), and Dave Pruiksma (supervising animator, Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid, Hunchback of Notre Dame, The Lion King, etc.) and it was signed by over 4200 members of the animation community:
The whole scandal is great reading. I recommend checking out savedisney.com (Roy E. Disney's website.) Then while you're feeling indignant that the little spark that Disney still had was purposefully extinguished, go sign the petition then if you're still feeling indignant, purchase some "Roy was right." messenger bags and wear them to Disneyland or Disneyworld the next time you go as a show of support, cause the appropriate behavior to news like this -- a boycott -- just isn't going to happen. So buy the bags, and be obnoxious at the parks.
Anyway, Roy's email address is on the web. You can email him here.
I found the storyline in Shrek to be quite lame. It's as if they just wrote down a bunch of stuff one afternoon to give them a reason to do the computer animation. Same thing for Monsters, Inc. Capturing screams for energy? Give me a break.
I think the computer animation aspect of these films still excites people enough that they are forgiving of these flaws. Plus, the characters, individually, are usually funny enough.
I haven't seen any 2D cartoons recently, but I imagine they are not much better or worse, story-wise.