Can Hayao Miyazaki Save Disney's Soul?

IronicGrin writes "Even hard-core House of Mouse apologists have to admit that Disney's Feature Animation division has lost its way. After a half decade of pathetic failures (Atlantis) and epic disasters (Treasure Planet), the company shut its fabled Orlando 2D animation studios last year and announced that it was jumping on the computer animation bandwagon. A big motivation for the move to CGI was, of course, the Magic Kingdom's tenuous relationship with Pixar--the source of all of Disney's recent animated hits. But Disney is overlooking a better example of just what its toon team has been doing wrong...right under its nose. Howl's Moving Castle, which opened this weekend to rapturous critical acclaim, is the third masterpiece from Japan's Studio Ghibli that Disney has released theatrically. Today's New York Times has a feature by A.O. Scott [reg required, blah blah] calling Miyazaki the "world's greatest living animated-filmmaker"; meanwhile, last Thursday, I wrote a column for SFGate.com on why Disney animation, 3D rendered or not, is doomed to irrelevance if it fails to (re)learn some basic lessons from Miyazaki and his cohorts at Ghibli. What do you think? Is Disney destined to fade to black, or can a little Ghibli flavor (mmm....Ghibli) get it back on track?"

Comments

Animators won't save Disney...

[MosesJones]

Because Disney isn't about animation anymore, its about Parks, Hotels, T-Shirts and films signed off by the sort of people who next week will sign off the building of a 500 room "luxury" hotel.

Until Disney drives its animation division as a seperate company run by people (business people) who understand that market it will be doomed.

Re:Animators won't save Disney...

[rtphokie]

ding ding ding.

The problem isn't format, it's story. Disney built it's business on story telling and seems to have completely forgotten how to do that.

Re:Animators won't save Disney...

[MightyMartian]

One only has to look at the difference between Pixar's releases and Disney's own animation. Disney's animated movies are so over-the-top and so attrociously written that it's little wonder that they've seen revenues falling in the 2D division. Sure Pixar's animation looks cool, but that's not the secret. The secret, as always, is the writing. Whatever the medium you're going to tell the story in, you still have to have good writing, good plotting, good characterization. Pixar's movies are clever, well-scripted and have elements that can amuse all the members of the family. Disney's movies seem targeted these days towards girls from about 3 to 8 years old.

Disney has become the most obvious symbol of the mediocrity that has taken over American entertainment. I don't have any problem with them dipping into the public domain, but look at the drivel they produce; the Hunchback of Notre Dame was truly a gag-worthy production. Pocahontas had no resemblence to history other than in name. Treasure Planet took one of the greatest adventure stories ever written and turned it into a muling pile of crap.

If Disney wants to get with the times, fire the first writer that says "Now here we've got to have a singing animal."

Re:Animators won't save Disney...

[Lord_Dweomer]

"Because Disney isn't about animation anymore, its about Parks, Hotels, T-Shirts and films signed off by the sort of people who next week will sign off the building of a 500 room "luxury" hotel."

While I agree about the hotels, I have to say (as I presented in a Brand Planning research project I did) I think you're dead wrong on the park. You see, what made Disney what is was in its glory days was the fact that no one else had the perfect balance between quality animation, and the park that brought it to life and let you experience the magic of Disney.

That was their unique selling point. And if you take a look at profits from their park, you'll realize how vital it really was. And while I can't find the actual figures now, it is also interesting to note that in years where the park took the biggest profitability hits, they also SEVERELY cut its maintenance budget. I felt this was a big factor, since nobody really wants to hang out in a park where half the rides are down, there's spiderwebs on dumbo's ears, and the puke still hasn't been cleaned up.

Another thing that hasn't really been happening with the parks lately is crosspromotion. They have an amazing chance to advertise for the park in the theaters and on DVDs for all of their stuff, but as far as I've seen, they don't ever do that. They need more movie tie-ins with the park, and they need to keep it relevant.

Part of the problem with this is that they don't seem to want to make the investment with rides/amusements based on new titles because they don't want to spend the money unless its a big hit, and frankly with the crap they've been putting out lately, I can't really say I blame them.

But unfortunately, business is about taking risks, especially if you're in the business of creativity. People are getting tired of Cinderella's castle. They want Howl's castle instead. I just wonder if Disney has enough balls to attempt it.

Re:Animators won't save Disney...

[centauri]

On the other hand, look at some of the wonderful movies they produce:

Both "Lilo and Stitch" and "The Emperor's New Groove" are hilarious and original, not to mention beautifully animated.

Saving Disney's Soul

[bigtallmofo]

As a start to saving their soul, Disney would have stop trying to extend copyrights every time Mickey Mouse is about to go into the public domain.

Their unconstitutional extension of copyrights in perpetuity has made them about as evil of a corporation as I can think of today.

Re:Saving Disney's Soul

[CoffeeJedi]

1) Micky Mouse is not going into the public domain. the earliest Mickey Mouse shorts would be going into public domain, not the character himself

2) extending copyrights is more evil than dumping toxins into drinking water? destroying local economies? exploiting slave-like and child labor to produce tennis shoes? profiting off of warmongering in the US and around the globe? yeah, that stuff's kinda bad... but trying to stop their IP from going into the public domain? THAT'S SO TEH EVIL!!!!!!1

not likely

[bersl2]

Disney is more likely to poison Studio Ghibli than Ghibli save Disney from its current evil incarnation.

I mean, come on: It's Disney; they can't do anything without the suits fucking somebody up.

Solution: don't focus on blockbuster/masterpieces

[shoppa]

The problem with Disney animation in the past decade has been its blockbuster successes.

After something like "Toy Story" or "Finding Nemo" or "Lion King" (which was not originally planned to be such a big hit!), every subsequent animated film gets compared to it. Not just box office revenue, but also reviews, relevance, etc. And of course, none quite measure up. So they cut animation spending, lay off animators, and shut down animation divisions.

The problem isn't that the subsequent films weren't good films. (Well, some weren't. Others were.) But the problem is that the blockbusters were too good.

Disney just has to get back into the cycle where they produce a range of quality animation (allowing some "duds" as well as non-blockbusters to get made). In this business world, where a single non-blockbuster means you shut down the division, this is indeed hard.

Is there something wrong with me?

[Max Romantschuk]

I liked (as in didn't hate and enjoyed watching) treasure planet and atlantis as well. Is there some fundamental reason why I shouldn't have?

Different strokes

[squarooticus]

You know what, I love lots of anime. I can do without the ninja chicks in bikinis and powered armor, but I personally consider Nausicaa to be the greatest animated film ever made, for example.

But to assume that anime would attract the same kinds of audiences as Disney's crap is ridiculous and unsupportable. No, their releases don't get especially good market support in the US from Disney, but most of the Joe Six-packs I know who've seen Princess Mononoke or Spirited Away thought they were either (a) boring as all hell, (b) pointless, or (c) impossible to understand.

Think what you want of these people, but this is the audience that is attracted to movies like Toy Story or Aladdin or any of the dozens of like films: very American, lots of "physical" humor, not especially deep. People want crap like what Disney produces; they just need to rediscover what makes good crap.

I'll content myself with being among the few Americans who enjoy anime, but I will never delude myself into thinking it might ever be mass-market fare in the US.

Re:Different strokes

[SparksMcGee]

Parent is correct in his assertion that anime is something of a "cult" following--granted, an absurdly, gigantically huge cult--but that it's still not quite mainstream enough to bring in the sort of bucks of American style animation.

More specifically, if you restrict yourself to anime, you've cut your audience--some people just won't see it or else consider it crazy, far out, and inaccessible (because, let's face it, a heck of a lot if anime is crazy, far out, and inaccessible, just in an entertaining way). And, like American animation, there is some very good anime (Cowboy Bebop, a choice I hope is non-controversial) and plenty of lame ones (I'm not going to cite any examples because that's just begging for flamewars. Think so some anime you hate and put it here). Hence, you've restricted your market by your choice of style, but anime is just that-a style. It's no guarantee of quality by any means, and Miyazaki has done some amazing work, (though let's be honest with ourselves--Mononoke and Nausicaa were more or less the same movie), but part of that may be because he hasn't whored himself out as a profit moachine, but rather as a dedicated animator, and you don't need to convert to and anime-based approach to find that, you just need a Disney willing to hire people (like those who work at, say, Pixar) who share his dedication.

And, though it's responding to flamebait, American animation isn't crap. I would go so far as to say that it's objectively better than Japanese animation. Please don't take this as an insult to anime, potential flamers, (Bebop is in fact my favoritest show ever, blah blah blah), merely an observation. The drawing in American animation tends to be less elaborate than that in anime (also somewhat less stylistically limited. It's a rare anime that doesn't include at least one of the following: drawing hair as an impossibly elaborate system of spikes sprouting of characters' heads, "expressive" eyes that take up half of people's faces, or chins likes knives). However, the animation is much better. The elaborate drawing required of anime, and in particular its frequent conversion from the still medium of manga, results in a great deal of scenes defined by minimal physical movement, or action scenes that jerk through a series of 1-second stills. Conversely, American animation, especially Disney, is always very, well, animated. Compare something like Trigun or DBZ (as examples of shows in which motion is very important) to Aladdin or Beauty and the Beast and the differences in the way motion is portrayed are just phenomenal, and there's more and smoother motion in American animation, hands down. Miyazaki's work is to some extent a partial violation of this tendency--Studio Ghibli's work at times reaches American fluidity--but the fact of the matter is that, in general, American animation is objectively better as animation. American animation tends towards the fluid and anime towards the static and elbaorate. I'm not saying either is "better," but any contention that work like Disney's represents "crap" represents the work of someone who enters a battle of wits unarmed.

Hmmm...

[gandell]

Disney has only made it worse by being unoriginal, stealing ideas, and making crappy movies.

I'm not sure that originality is Disney's biggest problem. After all, some of Disney's biggest 2D hits were based on fairy tales and fables (Beauty & The Beast, The Little Mermaid, and yes, Aladdin and The Lion King [based on Hamlet] ). No, I think the big problem is Disney can't seem to find something that audiences identify with anymore. In the 90's, that something was the production value of a cartoon with Broadway musical numbers combined with the best animation Disney had to offer, and decent story telling (Aladdin was nearly completely rewritten before it was ever released).

So far, Disney can't find that niche to milk it. Pixar has managed to find this formula without musical numbers. Can Disney do the same? So far, the answer seems to be a resounding no.

Re:Will Anime last?

[MasterOfMagic]

I'd hesitate to call any Miyazaki film "anime". While they certainly have many elements that anime has, they are much more than just anime. Every Miyazaki film I have seen has been good. While the anime "trend" may not continue to be popular in the United States for ever, the appeal of a good story is universal, and, as such, Miyazaki's films will still be popular after all of the anime series stop playing in the after-school, Saturday morning, and Cartoon Network rotations.

What Pixar and Miyazaki prove is that it's the story first. Only when you have a good, compelling story should you start looking at "implementation details".

Re:Will Anime last?

[TheWormThatFlies]

The point isn't that the Studio Ghibli movies are anime. They aren't succeeding because they are made by Japan in a Japanese animation style which is currently "in". They are succeeding because they are interesting, original stories with genuine charm, rather than schmaltzy, PC-laden cheese produced by the mangling of public domain works or historical events into unrecognisability.

The most successful and enjoyable things Disney has recently produced have been Lilo & Stitch and The Emperor's New Groove. They were good because they were interesting, original stories, not because of the way they were animated. So it's hilarious that Disney has decided that 2D animation is dead, and if they switch to 3D everything will be all better. As I recall, Treasure Planet was partially done in 3D. It still sank like a lead balloon.

I know what movies I'll be getting for my hypothetical future children.

Re:rapturous critical acclaim

[Guppy06]

That, or it means it kicks ass like Miyazaki's other works.

If it weren't for my "Don't buy stuff published by MPAA members" policy, I'd own at least Kiki's Delivery Service.

Re:Will Anime last?

[rekenner]

20+ year old fad, in America alone. anime will never die in Japan... But the question is if it can make money on this side of the ocean, I suppose...

The funny thing is, it's UNDER exposed in theaters. While I sure as hell don't want Disney to handle series, they'd have the power to get more anime into theaters. There are enough people ut there that it WOULD make money. The best part is, the risk would be much smaller, as Disney only has to make money over the cost of bringing it over (and I'd assume there'd be some royalties back to Ghibli).

Is it done? ... Well, lesse... I've had about... 3 movies in theaters near me in the last 5 years? That's a no.

(Note, any business stuff was pure conjecture... And I've been up for way too long)

The golden egg kept out of sight

[molrak]

Howl's Moving Castle may be the third Miyazaki film Disney has distributed in the U.S., but that doesn't mean much unless you live in a major metropolitan area. Those of us stuck outside the 20 largest cities in the U.S. are doomed to wait an additional six months for these title to come out on DVD. Apparently, Miyazaki is a taste that those of us in small towns to medium-sized cities just aren't cultured enough to understand. God forbid that Disney would actually do a wide release of these masterpieces, and actually back it up with advertising.

While the DVD releases have been good, I was under the impression that it was the boys at Pizar who got Disney to distribute Miyazaki's work in the U.S. in the first place. Not that I'm bitter or anything.

Re:Will Anime last?

[Kaorimoch]

To take that point further, as an anime fan of many years, it wasn't the animation that attracted me to anime. It was the stories. Some of the greatest anime series were original stories with deep involving plots that weren't just fomulaic or "safe". Series like Evangelion, Ranma, Full Metal Panic, Escaflowne have well thought out characters, original stories and brilliant scripts.

My belief is Disney fails with most movies because it tries to make a movie as appealing as possible to everyone (dialogue adults and children understand, adapting known stories rather than making it original, dumbing down) and tries so hard that it messes it all up. If it tried to be a little more "out there" with their storylines, it may have some success.

Re:Will Anime last?

[Maestro4k]

Currently anime has a fairly large following, but if Disney were to go that route and give up on conventional cartoons or CGI, what happens if anime is just a fad. It probably is a moot point, one of the things that gives anime (and manga) its popularity is the willingness to have mature themes and stories. Mature in this case doesn't mean pornographic, but stories that deal with real issues, emotions, struggles, etc. It's not uncommon to see titles targeted at young kids that deal with very serious issues (rape, bullying, love (and not puppy love either), even "alternate" relationships show up fairly frequently, especially if it's a CLAMP work.) Can you see Disney _ever_ being willing to explore a mature theme in a "cartoon" they make? They've walled themselves off into the G rating only corner and seem to like it there. That's not to say a G rated animation has to suck, just that Disney seems to think it can't have any mature themes period. Slapstick and musical numbers will save the day! (Or at least that seems to be what they think.)

Think about it, Pixar's films are great, they're extremely kid friendly but they _DO_ explore mature themes as well. The characters evolve, they learn new lessons, they're _NOT_ perfect. Some of the things in them will completely go over kids heads, but give the adults a good chuckle. Animation doesn't have to be watered down crap to be a good kid's movie. Disney used to know this (hell look at Bambi alone, can you imagine Disney of today doing a show where the main character's mother is killed shortly into it?) but they seem to have forgotten it completely. It's not just Disney doing away with their animation studio, it seems Disney has lost it's heart and soul.

It may help Disney pull through in the short term, but will it be a long term solution for the lack of good cartoons from Disney? I wonder how many years anime has left?

In general or the stuff that gets yanked up to target (and market) directly to kids? (e.g. Pokemon, Yu-Gi-Oh, etc.) In general I'd say the anime market will continue to grow, although it may slow some. There's a couple of generations of kids growing up now that know that the shows they love so much come from Japan and they'll be getting into anime and manga more heavily as they get older. The diversity of titles in anime alone can compete with Hollywood's offerings, so there's something for every taste.

While some in the business (*cough*AVD*cough*) like to proclaim doom and gloom at every chance they get (in particular about fansubbers), the market isn't showing any signs of falling apart. The main issues now are ones of success. Retailers are less willing to stock titles that don't start selling well right away. I personally wonder how big an issues that is though because more of the places that actually stock a decent amount of anime are more speciality stores, and they're going to understand that some titles pick up sales slowly.

Manga in particular is growing amazingly. Viz's Shonen Jump has done so well that they're launching a sister magazine called Shojo Beat targeted at girls. Shonen Jump graphic novels sell amazingly well (the $7.95 price point can't hurt). Even Del Ray has gotten into the business, starting out with some very high profile titles (Tsubasa Reservoir Chronicle, xxxHolic, both by CLAMP) and slowly expanding out. Their titles cost more than the industry standard $9.99 (at $10.99), but they also come with all the extras from the Japanese release (translated to boot), translation notes and tend to be a bit thicker in my experience.

Anime in and of itself is not just a fad, it's been growing for many years. Early fans used to watch whatever they could get, even if it was some Nth generation VHS copy of a show Raw (no subs) that you could barely watch. Thanks to fans, especially ones dedicated enough to do fansubs, and those who distributed them, the market continued to grow. In the last 5-6 years it's grown dramatically

Re:Will Anime last?

[ghostlibrary]

Problem is, reviewers like Stephen Hunter at the Washington Post just "simply do not get it" (his own words: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2005/06/09/AR2005060901951.html) and trash them in reviews. Seriously, he starts out by saying he's the wrong person to review it, then proceeds to give a negative review. What ever happened to "I don't get it, so I recuse myself", I'll never know.

Anyway, when I try to loan Miyazaki movies to my sister's kids, they never get to watching them-- because they haven't heard of them and "they're different". So a lack of marketing and a lack of a brand really make it suffer.

Too many parents rely on brand (e.g. Disney, Nickleodeon, HBO) as a filter for what they'll let their kids see. Too many kids only want to watch the branded stuff their peers mention.

It reminds me of a John Lasseter (sp?) interview about Pixar, when an executive asked (for Toy Story), "okay, what are the 8 songs?" The idea of doing a movie (to compete with Disney, no less) that didn't follow The Formula and include the marketable songs was considered folly.

So Miyazaki-type movies have an uphill battle because "they're different" and they lack the marketing bit to appeal to 'the consumer masses'.

Re:I'll go for...

[jandrese]

Sure, all you have to do is lobby Congress to extend copyright indefinatly. If that isn't stealing from the public domain, I don't know what is.

Re:Will Anime last?

[TomHandy]

I don't really understand this attitude, but it strikes me sort of like the people who don't like to refer to certain high quality comic books as "comic books".

"anime" simply means Japanese animation. I have no idea why someone would have the attitude that Miyazaki (and Studio Ghibli films in general) couldn't appropriately be called anime. What does it mean to be "more than just anime"? Does that mean that anime, as a baseline definition, only refers to Japanese animation that is just mediocre to average, and that the excellent Japanese animation should be referred to using some other term? Is this some hang-up that non-Japanese have about the use of the term anime (because, of course, in Japan, ANY animation, including non-Japanese animation, is anime, but that's a different issue). Heck, it's like saying that Miyazaki's Nausicaa manga shouldn't be called manga, because it's "more than manga".

I think I understand your point, that Miyazaki's stuff shouldn't necessarily be lumped in with some of the generic TV anime out there, but I think that point can be made without taking this attitude that "anime" isn't an appropriate word to describe what Miyazaki's films are.

Google never went through a Depression

[theurge14]

Or a World War.

Star Blazers, Speed Racer, Astroboy

[tekrat]

Will anime last? Will anime last?

Are you kidding?

I thought anime was just a fad during ROBOTECH. I thought I was the only one who worshipped at the altar of Star Blazers.

And this is back in the day when you couldn't get anime at the local Blockbuster, when the only way to see anime was to have a friend (or a friend of a friend of friend) send you copies of tapes that originated in Japan.

We sat in darkended rooms watching 10th gen copies of tapes that were so blurry by that time you could barely see the characters or hear the sound. Just look up the history of the CFO (Cartoon Fantasy Organization) for that bit of madness.

Yeah, anime is just a fad, that has lasted 30+ years so far in this country alone, with no sign of abating. Anime is now glutting the animation market, you can barely find a cartoon on TV or in the video stores that *isn't* anime or anime-based, or anime looking.

Cartoon Network, to their credit, is producing a lot of animation with a variety of styles, and much of it is quite good. But, their action-oriented stuff is generally anime-looking (teen titans, justice league, etc. etc.)

Star Blazers will have it's 25th anniversary IN THIS COUNTRY (the USA), in September. That's Star Blazers, not Space Cruiser Yamato.

And, despite the crude looking animation, it's still one of my favorite shows, one of the hallmarks of anime everywhere, and still a fairly strong seller on DVD because of the power of its storyline and characters.

Yeah it's fad. A Fad might be the current hupla surrounding the re-release of GATCHAMAN, which you might have seen as Battle of the Planets (or Eagle Riders or G-Force). I saw the DVD preview for that recently, and jumped out of my seat.

But anime appears to be here to stay. Consider the fans of Astroboy, now aging into their 50's, who are still fans of Astroboy, or who, at least, can fondly remember the opening song.

And what would your childhood have been without Speed Racer, currently enjoying a breif stint doing Geico Commercials (because everyone remembers the show!).

Yeah, anime is a fad. It's a fad that has already lasted an entire generation, and kids who've been fed a steady diet of Pokemon are now turning to Love Hina (as my nephew is), and then soon Evangelion.

I'd dropped out of the anime scene until I came across something called "Big O" on Cartoon Network. That show was so friggin amazing that I became an anime fan again, practically overnight.

I'm in my 40's. Please, tell me this is a fad. Because so far, it's outlasted my entire wardrobe.