Slashdot Mirror
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?"
No. Actually, anime is for people who like it. If that's kids then fine. If its adults, then fine.
...no.
Any company that can justify stealing from the public domain with no intention to return anything to it has clearly not only drawn up a contract with satan but has also disputed the subclauses, delivered the first two goats, renegotiated paragraph three and taken the whole legal department on a field trip to hell to learn new techniques.
Beep beep.
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.
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
PS: Here's an excellent series of articles about what went wrong with Disney feature animation.
just like they abused their relationship with Pixar. IIRC, the announcement that they were closing their 2d animation studio came right before Pixar announced that after their current contract was up they would be bolting from Disney? Why? Because that asshat Eisner assumed that Disney was invincible and Pixar would come crawling to Disney no matter how much they were abused.
I still don't think Disney learned their lesson. Eisner didn't have one creative bone in his body, all he did was bleed dry whatever he could(and took a lions share of cash for himself) while Disney's main properties languished. I suspect the same will go for this relationship.
Monstar L
Of course I could be completely wrong and anime would be more than just a fad, in which case this would be a good move for Disney. I guess that's the gamble.
There's no emoticon for what I'm feeling! -- CBG, "The Computer Wore Menace Shoes"
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.
I'm a big tall mofo.
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.
At least the 2D-animation disney that we used to know. They have been pushed off the market by far superior and widespread Japanese animation that fills the same market. Disney has only made it worse by being unoriginal, stealing ideas, and making crappy movies.
pointless trolling aside, Disney won't learn anything until they put the parks, all its seperate businesses, and the almighty dollar aside, and hire someone who cares about movies, not the attendance in Disney world. those "pretentious quasi intellectual twats" are the people who still want a movie worth seeing, so I'm sure you loved treasure planet.
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.
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?
.: Max Romantschuk
If Walt Disney were alive today, and saw what was happening to his company, he'd be rolling over in his grave!
Wait a minute...
It's sad to see the state that Disney is in. My fiance is an animator, so we've had our fair number of trips down to Orlando. She knows a number of animators, most of which have been fired.
A lot of the animators have started up their own studios though. I think Firefly Studios is one? Regardless, I think the Disney that Walt had imagined is long gone and far from coming back. They need to stop pumping out sequels and start creating movies with good stories.
It doesn't matter what medium the movie is delivered in; it's the story that delivers.
The greatest experience we can have is the mysterious.
- Albert Einstein
The Disney that produced all the most beloved classics was a company started and run with an iron hand by one individual individual with a clear creative vision. Walt Disney was not the avuncular character we all saw on Wonderful World of Disney, but he was, in addition to being a shrewd businessman and (reputedly) chain-smoking tyrant, a person intimately involved in the creative process.
These days Disney is just another mega corporation run by MBAs and Financial types. The movie segment is a small part of their empire which primarily leverages old intellectual property (think "classic Disney films").
Save their soul? I think not.
Why does every company seem to think they need to use CGI in animation these days? Even the very best use of it still make it look out of place, nothing looks as good as everything being drawn in the same fashion.
I like muppets.
What are you talking about? Just about all I ever do is watch cartoons and have sex or have sex and watch cartoons or have sex while watching cartoons and I have no intention of changing my lifestyle just because I'm turning twelve next month.
A lot of Disney's animators are already big Miyazaki fans; you can see the influence of Miyazaki's films in movies like Lilo and Stitch and Atlantis. It's almost a cliche that whenever Miyazaki is mentioned to people who've never heard of him, someone will pipe up with how much Disney animators respect him. But the animators don't create in a vacuum.
I think you can lay more of the blame for Disney's failures on Disney's management. They need to get out of the way and let the creative elements create. Maybe with Michael Eisner's departure this year we'll see some changes for the better.
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
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.
[ home ]
Miyazaki may be an ubelievably great artist, but his movies will not bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in movie sales, and billions in merchandizing. Therefore, no, Disney won't consider Miyazaki, or his approach, a significant asset to the company as a whole.
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.
Mercy was given to me by Christ...I must give the same to others.
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.
Wasn't Disney animation in the same situation at the beginning of the 90s? Reduced to output like 'The Black Cauldron' (rated Worst. Feature. Cartoon. Ever. at the time). How did they get out of the trough last time?
-- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
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.
You're only as smart as your brain.
Setting aside the fact tht TS and FN were not, properly, Disney films, I don't think that the hits are the problem. Someone at Disney has given up on animation. There have been pretty good films (not ohmygodgottaseeita100times good), and the young audience doesn't really care that much about the nuances of story line.
The best example recently is the Heffalump movie. It's a little-kid movie, not the traditional epic, but its great for little kids (I'd say under 5, maybe up to 7 or 8 depending on the child). We saw it with my 2 year old in the theater. When it came out on DVD, we got it. So, if you were head of marketing, and you had a fairly big DVD release, how would you handle the marchandising? Lots of Roo and Lumpy stuffed animals, right? Midshare, get the kids playing with them. Give them something tangible to reinforce the whole Pooh franchise, right?
WRONG! Not only do most of the retail outlets have nothing in the Pooh line except - maybe - a stuffed Pooh bear that isn't tied to the release at all, but even the freakin' Disney Store online doesn't have a Lumpy. None. Nada. Zilch. Now, they did have two Lumpys in the local Disney Store . And those were left over from the shipment after the theatrical release, when the original (meager) shipment of Lumpy and Roo sold out in about a day and a half. Flew off the shelves, according to the DS worker.
No, in my opinion somebody at the top has purposely set the 2D animations up to fail.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
There's much irony in the fact that in his heroic years, Disney used to be a victim of intellectual property rights abuse. First, he was "outlawyered" by his coworker Charles Mintz who basically stole rights to Oswald, The Lucky Rabbit, leaving Disney seemingly without any chance. To get out of this predicament, Disney had to hastily invent another character and thus Mickey was born. But even then, major Hollywood studios have had a virtual monopoly on sound and Disney had no option but use a patent-infringing system known as Cinephone to create the first Mickey Mouse cartoon.
One might expect that being a victim of abuse, Disney should never be abusive to the others. However, in real life it's almost always the opposite. When you are a victim, you don't dream about the perfect world, where nobody is a victim - you dream of the world where YOU are no longer a victim. I think this could partially explain this company's attitude to patents, copyright and trademark. "There was no mercy for me - why should I have it now for anyone?"
Redubbing and distributing other people's works is all Disney is good for these days. They will probably never get back to their glory days because the suits appointed to run the company just can't understand what makes a good animated feature.
I don't think Miyazaki can save Disney's soul either. He's a creative type who makes what he wants to. Disney don't make what they want, they make what their demographics tell them people want. Until Disney changes this, they will change nothing.
Interestingly Disney are required by contract not to cut or change any of Ghibli's films without explicit approval from Ghibli. However John Lasseter of Pixar is the main man behind getting Disney to distribute Ghibli's work in the US which explains why they have been released relatively unharmed.
Disney's contract with Ghibli requires them to not edit it. Localization in the dub is allowed, as long as the story doesn't take a big hit, but nothing else.
Rumor is, Miyazaki even sent them a genuine katana with a note to that effect attached to drive the point home.
world's greatest living animated-filmmaker
Why the need to qualify? Why not consider the possiblity that Miyazaki could be the greatest living filmmaker, period?
Of course, the very idea that an artist or an piece of art can be "best" is simplistic, like the idea that you can rank movies by stars. But you can group artists into categories for some purpose, and that in some cases there are categories with only one artist in them. And there's no doubt that among all the animated filmmakers working, Miyazaki is unique in a number of ways. But the very supercategory of animated films is not in my opinion very useful. And in the long term it's going to be harder and harder to draw the line between animation and live action.
So let's look at other ways in which Miyazaki is unique.
He's perhaps one of a kind in the category of filmmakers whose works combine serious artistic merit and broad popular appeal. Or how about this category: makers of narrative driven films that unfold at modest to very slow pace, yet are capable of holding the attention of both adults and very young children?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Disney's contract with Ghibli prohibit them from editing the movies.
You bring an interesting point to the table. Disney's official slant on the dvd is that it's based on Hamlet, but for those who want to see what he's talking about, here's the link.
Mercy was given to me by Christ...I must give the same to others.
"Lion King" (which was not originally planned to be such a big hit!)
The Lion King wasn't planned to be a big hit but it was, of course it wasn't really their movie at all, just a prettier version of someone elses, likely.
The rock, the vulture, and the chain
Sorry...that didn't work.
THE LINK
Mercy was given to me by Christ...I must give the same to others.
2D animation is never going to die. Even now as we speak there are new 2D animation companies sprining up all over the world in the most unlikey countries and places. Part of this is because the tools needed to do an animated show/series/movie have gone down considerably. Movies like Spirited Away are also excellent proof that the genre is not dying -- but it is changing.
What is it we always argue about here on Slashdot the most? Big companies, inflexible to change. The Disney franchise is huge, and the formula for making animated shows and movies has served them so well for so long that it has blinded them to the changes happening around them. Ghibli is small (as say compared to Disney) so they are constantly reinventing their art and their storytelling, as are countless hopeful companies around the world which are all likely contenders to be the next Pixar of hand drawn animation.
Even should the unthinkable happen, and traditional hand drawn animation go the way of the western movie genre, you can take some comfort in the fact that hand drawn 2D animatiors are essential in the creation of 3D shows/series/movies. Many 2D animators become excellent 3D animators with some training, and many animators are still hired to make storyboards and animate complex scenes for the 3D animators.
I can't imagine what such a note would say that would drive the point home, unless it went something like this:
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Its always been a company with a brief spurt of serious creativity followed by a long period of expert sucking.
Disney is back where they were in the 70's. One bad family movie after another. One forgettable animated feature after another.
I think what is more suprising than their fall now is the fact that they stayed at the top during so much of the 90's. They had several decades of nothing prior to that.
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.
What makes Miyazaki so great is not the fact his work is 2D, or that it's anime, it IS that he's a storyteller. While the current 'fad' of Computer Animation may help a company like Pixar, their belief in quality story over special effects and marketing is what makes their movies. John Lasseter, Pixar's executive producer, is a huge fanboy of Miyazaki. Pixar walks the talk of every other animation company out there, they put story first. Can Disney do the same? No, not until they stop creating characters around age demographics and market appeal, period.
As far as I am concerned, Disney has always been about seducing children to the dark side. After all, Mary Poppins was a witch who took her charges to a meeting of her coven. Then there are films like "bedknobs and broomsticks". Or clips like Mickey as the sorcerers apprentice. Can anyone think of a Disney film that has promoted faith in God... didn't think so. The trouble is that our whole culture has become so hedonistic and pagan, that the devil no longer *needs* Disney, he has video games teaching children to cast spells and make pacts with demons before most of them can read.
"Sic Semper Path of Least Resistance"
They bought the rights to two fine series of cartoons done much more imaginatively than whatever they have been pumping out -- Rocky and Bullwinkle and Betty Boop. They make a little revenue from them, but they keep the characters shackled so as not to compete with the mouse or Ted Koppel.
Kids still love "The Little Mermaid," "The Lion King," and "Beauty and the Beast." These are all viable franchises, both as animations and as stage shows. Why? Because they tell a good story.
It's all up to Disney. The 2D animation form is highly relevant and even the work Disney was doing just a few years ago is popular.
Does anyone really believe that the success of the Pixar films is due primarily to the technology they employed?
I'm not suggesting that Disney should go in for "South Park" style material, but the success of "South Park" shows that even the crudest "limited animation" techniques--a la UPA in the 1950s--can achieve commercial success today.
If Disney's institutional memory has forgotten how to make good 2D animations in just a few short years, OK, but that's their own failure and they shouldn't blame it on the technique itself.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Another question: there have been four Pooh theatrical releases over the last four years. For the fourth one, how much promotion is required? How much is acceptable?
Pooh has been everywhere in recent years. That alone could be why Disney didn't market the movie. Maybe they didn't need to.
I don't think they're setting up 2D to fail. At this point, they're just ignoring it. Why push Pooh when you know that The Incredibles is guaranteed to do well and bring in buckets and buckets of merchandising money?
Goo goo g'joob.
It's all about the stories, stupid.
Seriously, one has only to look at cartoon network to understand that the stylistic medium is hardly the prime determinate of quality. Ranging from Futurama, Family guy, Justice league and others to ATHF, PowerPuff Girls, Ed, Edd, & Eddie back towards your Trigun and BeBop and the insurmountably great Samarai Jack. You can quickly surmise that how the characters are drawn hardly relates to the quality of the show and/or movie.
Disney has truly grown decrepit in it's stories, loosing a huge portion of the charm and power it's former greats (Bambi, snow white, pinochio, Dumbo, cinderella, lady & the tramp, sword int he stone, sleeping beuty, 101 dalmations, etc...) to the current onslaught of crap.
Pizar's astounding sucess stems NOT from it's medium of choice but through it's incredible story telling captivation.
I Personaly am saddened that one of the great artistic styles truly pioneered by disney itself will slowly fade and possibly die simply because disney is incapable of hiring talented writers. I love anime, however there's a great degree to be said about all the various styles out there including what is literally the heart of being a "cartoon". While realism in films such as Akira are astounding and well appreciated, the fluidity and artistic impressionism of films such as fantasia, Beuty and the beast and even others (south park, simpsons, etc...) shouldn't be sacraficed.
Suffice to say, no matter what form of animation Disney uses it will all go to squat if they don't change how they produce their storyboards.
--Idiots, Every single one of YOU, A flaming mass of conglomerated morons, hey wait a second, isnt that how RAID works?
I can tell you what spelled the death of Disney.
Direct to video
My kids would rather see Land Before Time XIX than Cinderella 2. Has Disney (not Pixar) even released any animation over the last three years that didn't have a number after it?
My kids certainly don't have the fondness or loyalty to Disney that my siblings and I had in the seventies...
need i say more?
indierock / punkrock band photos and more... http://www.digitaldefection.net
This really bugs me, I am in the animation world. Not as a bean counter, not as an animator. But as an editor and sound engineer.
I totally agree that disney has to go back o its roots and to drop a whole lot of execs and most important of all. To DUMP the disney formula.
The one that has, songs every 5 minutes, and a stupid comic relief.
Walt, bless him, was a man that believed that it was the story combined with the imagry that created a picture. He put HIS company on the line many times to get a picture out.
Mind you he also had some fantastic failures as well. But in the heart of it, WALT was the business man along with Roys father, and they fought tooth and nail sometimes. But now we have people who are NOT animation people trying to control the movies with demographics and test markets and control groups.
Treasure planet and Atlantis were not bad movies. I have seen the original art and the scripts and was amazed how much was dropped and changed for fear of offending kids.
I think that a main point in this continent is that Animation is catagorized unto itself. Any movie that is CG or 2D is just animation. But if we look into it we see that there are Dramas, Comedy, Childrens, Horror, and all varieties of animation.
Example. The animated Spawn series. Faithfull to a point of the original comic, it was merely catagorized as animation. But it is hell and gone from being disney family. Its down right brutal and horrific. gives the Sopranos a run.
Family Guy, is NOT for kids. But people THINK that it can be.
If you do a comparrison to the way Miyazaki makes films and the way Walt made films, you will see nearly identical methods and approaches, and passions for what they are doing. Asking, "Will this be the best picture it can be?" instead of "Is this picture rigged well enough to maximize profit from its varied demographics?"
Animation is Art , AND animation is business. One has to come before the other, and if done correctly the money will follow it.
Eisner came in with a grand plan to cut costs. It worked in the beginning, the profit margin went up. But they were hoping that the quality would stay up. Tough, but good quality needs a lot of cash and love thrown at it. The management went the way of the bean-counters rather than that of the creative types. Thus, creativity went slowly, but surely, down the drain.
Maybe Disney can be saved... but it'll have to die first. I mean it'll need a big disaster for it to find its creative roots again, and shake off all the other entertainment industries it sucked its tentacles into.
BTW, they're not alone in following this venue. Shrek-makers Dreamworks SKG are following the same lead. 2 movies a year... pump, pump it out! (BTW, CEO Jeff Katzenberg is a manager from Disney) He's counting on cooped-up creators to pump out the juice. How long until they run out of breath? They already planned two more shrek derivatives...
Misleading titles? Inflammatory blurbs? Keep in mind that Slashdot is a tabloid.
Or a World War.
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.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Frankly, there is no way the movie is going to make any money in the U.S. It looks like it will actually make less money than Spirited Away. And the reviews are such that I doubt it will get an Oscar either.
You can complain that this is due to the movie's limited release, poor marketing, yada yada, but the sad truth is that this movie has just opened about 20% wider than Spirited Away, and has made about 20% less money in those theaters. Where are the legion of fans? And since people are tending to like the film less, there won't be superior word of mouth either.
Ok, bringing this back to Disney, if a movie that makes over 220 million world-wide can't command a word-of-mouth of over a few million bucks in the US, what does that say about potentially *less* popular 2D offerings in the US? It means a lot of marketing money, for less punch. Better to spend the marketing money on 3D, where people are still vaguely interested just for the pretty graphics (though this fad is indeed dwindling).
That all said I am a huge Miyazaki fan, visited his museum in Japan, watched all the movies many many times... I am however realistic. I will pimp the movie to all my friends but I roll my eyes whenever someone mentions a conspiracy to keep Miyazaki down in the US.
A small feature on the Pixar Exhibition at the Studio Ghibli Museum: http://www.nausicaa.net/miyazaki/museum/pixar/
Go and see Totoro.
Then tell me.
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
If the earliest Mickey Mouse cartoons went into the public domain, the character itself would also become public domain. Although more recent Mickey cartoons would still be copyrighted, anyone could start making their own new Mickey Mouse cartoons. Or t-shirts, or watches, or lunch boxes... One would only need to be careful to derive their Mickey drawings etc. from the public domain works, rather than later versions.
I am a little disappointed with his latest films. They all have the creativity and beautiful animation that he's known for, but the stories are kind of lacking. If he stayed on track with his older films, he could have owned Disney.
the rapturous critical acclaim is among critics who don't know jack about Miyazaki and don't have the frame of reference to tell his good works from his bad works. Most critics are going to say it's amazing because they don't want to be seen as 'Dunb' or 'Out of it'
c le?AID=/20050609/REVIEWS/50601002/1023) this is an inferior movie when compared to his other works.
Among people with a clue (for example Roger Ebert who is very knowledgeable about the director and very animation friendly http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti
p.s I feel Miyazaki is horribly overrated some of his stuff is ok but most of his work leaves me completely cold.
I grew up on Disney cuz of my mom (of course). But I also got a early dose of anime not in this country. The earliest anime ive watched is Mazinger Z, Gatchaman, Candy Candy (chick stuff) and some others i cant recall. Now I liked that stuff too cuz it was different look and feel. But as I got older I got smarter. One thing that pissed me off was that American cartoons didnt follow continuity and didnt have a ending (like smurfs). I started looking for toons that had more plot and thats what attracted me to Anime. The only few american toons to follow plot and have an ending was Gargoyles, Exo Squad (anyone ever seen this on dvd.. of course not!). Gargoyles was by far Disney's best item.. but it was "TOOK DARK". WAAAAAAA we'll scare of little kids and they will think Disney is evil.. Ah if they only knew. And for the record Im not totally bashing Disney. They are just lacking massive creative substance. I did enjoy and do own things like Toy Story 1 & 2 and Definitely enjoyed The Lion King (even though they somewhat ripped that off, Kimba...) This is what i think of disney. Yes they are a money grubbing empire.. But nothing will save Disney. It has become Cult-like no different than star Trek or Star Wars. What will keep Disney going is that the current disney fans will have children who will show them the world of Disney. So disney fans breeding disney fans. If I evever had kids Ill show them both Disney and Anime.. I'll let them choose and embrace what they want to. I figure as anime becomes more popular and starting to ensnare younger audiences thats whats taking away from the Disney Empire. As someone pointed out earlier eventually Disney will be nothing more than a place where you go to visit (at $50-$75 a head) and buy loads of merchandise.
There's no Freedom like UFP-dom
Animation alone cannot pull in the audience. What is lacking is *storytelling* and that takes writers.
Disney has lately been doing quite a lot of something that they pooh-poohed in the discussion on at least one DVD: more of the same. If cute spotty dogs sell once, sell 'em again. Some days it seems that everything coming out of Disney is "a II movie". Don't give us more dwarves. Let stories end, and tell new ones.
I haven't seen _Treasure Planet_ so I can't say whether it's good or bad, but I've seen the trailer and the concept miserably fails the laugh test. The animation is darned good but what it's telling me is *stupid*.
When most of your new stuff is either ridiculous or retreaded, don't expect to do well.
It fails to mention that The Lion King is not Disney's original story, but was instead plagiarized from Kimba the White Lion.
By reading this you acknowledge that you have read it.
"And Miyazaki can put warm, fuzzy messages about friendship, family, loyalty, etc. into his movies without triteness, cloying sentimentality or song-and-dance routines"
You've hit the nail on the head for a key reason why Miyazaki's film work so well - they often manage to create an emotional response in the viewers. This is no mean feat as most live action movies cannot achive this same goal. This emotional connection delivers an experience that the audience recognizes as truth without feeling that they have been manipulated - something song and dance rarely can deliver.
So, maybe he's onto something here. The characters in his stories struggle, but don't fall into the trap of demonizing their enemies. It's touching, really. He's not saying that Good will vanquish Evil, he's saying Good can transcend the very division of the world into Good and Evil.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.