Slashdot Mirror
Dreamworks Dumps Wallace and Gromit
Tiger4 writes "Aardman Animation and Dreamworks are splitting their relationship. Apparently Dreamworks feels they lost money on 'Wallace and Gromit: Curse of the Were Rabbit' and 'Flushed Away.' So off to their separate ways they go. Aardman is going back to stop motion and clay, Dreamworks will be staying with their CGI ways." In addition, Aardman Animation announced that a new Wallace and Gromit film is in the works.
good riddance to CG where it's neither needed nor wanted.
Sorry, but Dreamworks is just a name now. SKG sold out quite awhile ago.
The road to tyranny has always been paved with claims of necessity.
Oh well Gromit lets have a cup of tea and a nice bit of cheese. The UK still loves you Ardman
...when winning an Oscar just isn't enough.
What luck for rulers that men do not think. - Adolf Hitler
If "Tottie" is in the next movie, I'm getting it for sure. What a doll ;-)
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40707000/jpg /_40707970_w3.jpg
"...everybody knows Hollywood's made of cheese".
"They're crackers! We've forgotten they're crackers!"
"No more Americans -- more trouble than they're worth! I could just fancy some cheese, Gromit. What do you say? Cheddar?... All's well that ends well, that's what I say. Uhmm... I do like a bit of gorgonzola..."
"It's the wrong company Gromit. And they've gone wrong"
Plus raised eyebrows and a pained look from Gromit of course!
----------------------------------- My Other Sig Is Hilarious -----------------------------------
The best two animated films Dreamworks put out since Toy Story and they're dropping the production company? I guess we can look forward Shark Tale 2: Out of Water, Farther Over the Hedge and Madagascar II: Kung Fu Panda (one of those is actually the real name for a planned sequel). Didn't Were Rabbit win a freakin' Oscar?
Exactly how unprofitable was it?
Very, very unprofitable:
Production Budget: $30,000,000
Worldwide Gross: $185,724,838
"When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
Hmmmm let me see, cost you 30 million to make, you take in 185 million world wide, lets thats 150 million in profit? Ohh wait is that the Net, the Net Net, or the Net Net Net...?
I am seemingly unclear, you invest 30 make 185, lets see uhmmm 6 x 30 = 180... I guess 6 times your investment is not good enough.
Am I missing something here?
Hey KID! Yeah you, get the fuck off my lawn!
I don't have numbers handy but it was a huge hit in the UK but a fairly minor one Stateside. Nick PArks said he had a lot of trouble keeping the British humnour in as Dreamworks wanted to excise it under the impression it wouldn't travel well to the US. The fact that the film wasn't a hit vindicated their position in their mind. Parks knew the chances of making the next one the way he wanted was about nil.
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
I wish I were that unsuccessful.
Wallace and Gromit and Aardman's other work are such uniquely funny creations (notably, with the exception of the horrid Flushed Away) that I am very happy to see them separate from the marketing machine of Dreamworks. Hopefully this means we will be getting more of that subtle, relaxed British humor as opposed to try-hard material based on focus-group approval ratings that you can expect from a U.S. behemoth like Dreamworks. Not to say that the latter doesn't have its place in the entertainment industry, because it does - as has been proven by the many excellent achievements of this company - but coupled together with Aardman, there is no synergy, just mutual deprecation.
This announcement is just the "official" one. The decision to dump Aardman was made years ago when Katzenberg was frustrated by Aardman's inability to turn Tortoise & The Hare from a deeply flawed concept (a mockumentary) into something American audiences would want to see. Aardman's refusal to relinquish the merchandise rights for W&G to Dreamworks was the final straw. Since then, we've just been seeing death spasms of this relationship.
I'm not saying either party is in the wrong, but the whole deal was a disaster waiting to happen. The surprise success of Chicken Run gave everyone rose-tinted glasses. Katzenberg only ever really wanted W&G.
Maybe Aardman can do Cinderella 4: Citizens on Patrol.
Katzenberg just doesn't understand Park's humour at all (he spells it humor for a start), and is responsible for just about every missed note in both Chicken Run and particularly Flushed Away. It was nice to have their cash to play with, but if it means yet more painfully compromised films which make stupid decisions in a failed attempt to appeal to Americans, then good riddance.
Now Dreamworks can go back to concentrating on dire, 'hip' CG extravaganzas with all the lasting appeal of a rotten pear.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
The British psyche has long had a soft-spot for all things Aardman and their distinct style of claymation, coupled with quintessentially UKian humour. Check out this example and the many others from those unflappable blobs.
Well, not any more. I think aardman got what they needed - they became a slightly better known in america. The curse of the were-rabbit was a very funny film, but when you compare it to Aardmann's other stuff, it has some noticeable lackings. The humour isn't quite as good, and goes for the guaranteed laugh rather than the actual funny stuff.
Aardmann are an excellent creative company and the last thing they need is a company like dreamworks breathing down their back.
That said, dreamworks are good, I loved the Shrek films, but what they needed to do with aardman is just leave them alone and let them exercise their own creativeness. However, they've decided to dump them now, and I don't think that will really make much of a difference.
.sigs are for losers
Oi! You leave Neil and Christine alone, thank-you very very much!
Saucy bugger.
So they took a successful formula, interfered with it and then blamed the original formula when it didn't work? What kind of screwed up logic is that?
Hollywood Logic?
Their conclusion was that they didn't interfere with it enough.
>>Nick PArks said he had a lot of trouble keeping the British humnour
Easy solution here... Get a bunch of celebs to do a terrible dubbed version with "Americanized" jokes. Arnold Schwarzenegger an play Wallice etc... This will be a huge box office hit, and make tones of money.
They can then double the US revenue by also selling and/or screening the real version with the origial sound track.
Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated up.
Actually from what I heard, the real problem was that the studios just didn't like working with eachother.
I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
This will require some knowledge of Boolean logic or basic Algebra.
A loss is a negative profit. We can express this as Loss = -Profit.
A profit is a negative loss. We can express this as -Loss = Profit.
Proofs of this are outside the scope of this post.
Navicula hydraulica plena anguilarum est. Omnes castelli tuus nostri sunt. Ed elli avea del cul fatto trombetta.
Their liaison with Dreamworks got Aardman (write it correctly, people!) through a very difficult period after their warehouse (and workplace) burnt down. Now that they're back on their feet doing a few experimental things in the US, they can go on doing things in plasticine, using British humour. I'd say praise them both !
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
Taken at face value, that is $155m *profit*.
Not according to Hollywood math. The poster was making a joke, but I guess that sadly it was way over your head.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I think that should have been "What ho, Gromit - bit of a whoosh there, eh, lad?"
AT&ROFLMAO
I always wonder why companies do this. Why did they partner with Aardman in the first place? Surely it was the British humour that made Chicken Run and the W&G shorts successful.
No they don't. When I worked at a movie theater we made $.25 from a $6.50 ticket. That's why concession prices are so high.
You lousy foreigners! I'd get up out of my Barcalounger and pound the bejesus outta you for insulting us but I'm too tired and my ankles hurt and I'd spill my bag of Cheetos and my Coke and I'd miss the game on TV. Never mind. I'm content. I don't care about transfats, global warming, or genocide. That's all for sissy liberals. Wallace and Grommit, hah! Any Hanna-Barbara is far better.
Obviously a case of Hollywood accounting.
I've been nothing but disappointed with Disney, Dreamworks, and Pixar for quite a while - they're like autophagous cannibal machines, endlessly devouring themselves and their own Hollywood culture, vomiting up ersatz ambergris and defecating marketing material.
Disney's the worst offender, mining myths and legends in the public domain since the dawn of their existence, keeping everything and giving nothing back, extending copyright law into infinity to protect their stupid fucking Mouse. I'm glad they're mostly eating themselves, now.
Curse of the Were-Rabbit had a lot of pop culture references, but never lost itself. The Iron Giant was an incredible film, but I can't say I liked the Incredibles in the same way. Both were comparatively unsuccessful.
People love crap.
Don't take it personally if Flushed Away didn't get the same box office that other movies in that market usually do. They did the full marketing job on it, complete with MacDonalds and Breakfast Cereal tie-ins. Fortunately, this shouldn't affect their ability to continue producing films.
Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others. -Groucho Marx