Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

The future of 2D Animation' Apparently not Disney or Dreamworks... then where'

Hey folks, Harry here... I've had a lot of folks asking me to comment on this whole Roy Disney & Stanley Gold exodus from Eisner's Mouse of Ill Repute, and frankly... it's sad. I look in Roy's face and I see the entire history of DISNEY behind his eyes. I look into Eisner's face and I see the face of a man that seems to not represent those same ideals. DISNEY wasn't meant to be an evil corporation. It has just been drawn that way by current management.

One can only imagine the disgust that Roy must feel as he has seen Disney's animation division laid waste by micro-management, gestapo-esque security measures, test marketing of every minutae and the cut backs that force the very heart and soul of what made DISNEY such a great company... those folks that draw love & soul at 24 frames per second. The Ink & Paint departments. And what's the next Animated Classic to carry Disney's name? TEACHER'S PET! Joy.

Personally, right now I'm hoping that PIXAR just walks away... the same way that Roy and Stanley just walked away. Sometimes if you love something, you have to let it crash and burn on it's own accord, but then return to it when it's ready to be reborn, not based on spreadsheets, but based on ideas, soul and innovation. The very things that made the Disney Animation and the Disney Company so wonderful, for so many years.

Ok, sorry about the soap box... I know, you're curious about the headline... The Future of 2D Animated Film? Well, the odd thing is... the future for this seemingly "dying" form is nestled firmly in the alleged stake that has been so publicly thrust through its chest... PIXAR.

The word is that PIXAR is starting their own 2D Animation Division. A company that will use the PIXAR brand... that name which stands for supreme excellence, innovation and soul in animation today... and putting it behind the form that everyone there loves. 2D Animation.

The first film? Well, Brad Bird, who is wrapping up work on THE INCREDIBLES for Pixar is apparently going to be the goto guy on this to kick it all off. RAY GUNN!!! What is RAY GUNN? Here's what Moriarty gleamed from Brad Bird - 5 Years Ago!

MORIARTY What can you tell me about RAY GUNN, and is there any chance we'll ever see it?

BRAD Well, uh, I hope so. I think it could be a really great film. Essentially, for a long time I've believed that there is an audience for animation that Hollywood has been very slow in recognizing is there. The success of SIMPSONS and KING OF THE HILL say that there is an older audience for animation, but Hollywood tends to be very myopic, and it's change is slow. You can make the arguments for more distinctive, more adult animated projects on TV now, but you've still got all these preconceived notions to overcome trying to get it to features. IRON GIANT basically represents a halfway step for me between what Hollywood can understand about feature length character animation and where I think animation can go. It has enough of the stuff that Hollywood traditionally recognizes as being in a children's film, but hopefully we've been able to kind of squeeze some adult stuff in there in a way that doesn't put kids off. There was so much misinformation about RAY GUNN...

MORIARTY It was one of those projects that I kept hearing the name of over the years, so it's sort of taken on a life of its own if you know the animation community.

BRAD Well, it's two things that are hard to sell in Hollywood. Part of it is sort of film noir, even though to me it's only that in the surface details. Really, it's more of an action movie, and it had a substantial amount of comedy in it. I see it as being very mainstream, but Hollywood saw it as being almost experimental, like, "Whoa, what the heck is this?" In animation, you're always fighting against, "Well, that might upset a 5-year-old." My feeling is, "Well, then, the 5-year-old shouldn't go. Come on, can't we make some other things?" RAY GUNN was not it was PG, you know? Maybe PG-13.

This has been one of Brad's Passion Projects for quite some time and now... At the company that is most held responsible for the pronounced "DEATH OF TRADITIONAL ANIMATION" it is looking like it is getting a new lease on life... Odd, given 5 years ago, Steve Jobs apparently told Brad that 2D animation was "basically going the way of the Buggy Whip." Well, things change... PIXAR to me has always been about story, ideas and soul. If RAY GUNN has that, it's gold whether it is rendered, drawn or acted out with sock puppets. DISNEY may not have the spirit, heart or vision to see that, but thankfully everything that was once best about Disney pulses a healthy beat in the chests of everyone at PIXAR! Thanks goes out to "Kirby" for the heads up!

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:45 p.m. CST


    by lonecow

    Who cares?

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:46 p.m. CST

    Dare I say it?

    by BillEmic


  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:46 p.m. CST

    Oh God...

    by BillEmic

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:47 p.m. CST

    I spoke too soon

    by BillEmic

    Oh well, interesting article, I'd love to see any 2-D animated action/comedy from the creators of Iron Giant.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:48 p.m. CST

    What's so wrong about Teachers Pet?

    by Elwood Blues

    All I know about it is the trailer I just saw, but it looks like a total departure from anything I've seen Disney do before - which would seem a good thing since their films have become quite stale (with Lilo & Stich being an exception). Of course, as far as I know, Teachers Pet could be complete shit, but it's got an interesting voice cast and looks more aimed at adults then most usual Disney films (or perhaps I'm reading the film wrong). And isn't that what Ray Gunn would be, an animation film more aimed at adults? Someone tell me what I'm missing.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:58 p.m. CST

    2D was great up until they tried to make toons cool.

    by spidermanfreak20

    Cartoons are not cool. There cartoons. When I see the new Mickey Mouse of House or Looney Tunes its sad because they are always hip and skateboard trying to appeal to the 12 year olds who skateboard which is very few in America. Either way my favorite Disney 2d is the Little Mermaid. I think things changed after Aladdin once they got Robin Williams a big name to do voices. It worked well for the Lion King but shortly after the success went to Disneys head. They tried to cast films around big names doing voices when Disney has always been about the characters and the stories. And I dont know who said singing was not cool? You dont have balls until you can sing out spontaneusly and express yourself which is what was great about the old 2d films. I cant understand how people say they want a more grown up film with no singing. I mean now we have Smashmouth and Goo Goo Dolls on the soundtracks. Pixar is the best thign now but lets hope Finding Nemo didnt Find them Ego so to speak. I believe 2D can be good again if they make great stories with interesting characters and have some spontaneus singing it didnt work so much in Tarzan. It felt like they were singing as a means to pander kids or something. Singing just happens and its beautiful when its captured in musical sequences. Theres no choreographed dances or anything just a character like Ariel or Aladdin or Simba just getting that urge to sing and the world around them reacting and joining in. Thats a cartoon. Well maybe im rambling but I think 2D shouldnt die. I just think they try to hard to appeal to kids to hard and have an overall message. Like in Lilo in Stitich "Ohana means Family." Who gives a shit. And Elvis music? What kids do you know listen to Elvis or even know who he is? Honestly. But ask the kid if he knows the words to Under The Sea or Be Our Guest. Disney is trying to hard to be cool when they just need to focus on story.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 5:59 p.m. CST

    Wouldn't it be terrific if Pixar got big enough to buy Disney?

    by FrankCobretti

    Pixar means quality, just like Disney used to. From a former stockholder to a former board member, happy trails, Roy, and thanks for fighting the good fight.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:02 p.m. CST

    NB, re; kids 'n Elvis

    by FrankCobretti

    My 3-yr-old knows all the words to "Teddy Bear" & "All Shook Up" after being turned on to Elvis by -wait for it- Lilo & Stitch. So there you go.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:05 p.m. CST

    Disney's TEACHER'S PET looks like some really trippy shit!!!

    by godoffireinhell

    Holy crap! Well, at least the little kiddies don't have to take dangerous drugs to see fucked up shit like distorted floating cows and transvestite elfs ...

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:07 p.m. CST

    You misunderstood.

    by spidermanfreak20

    Your 3 year old did not hear the entire song of Teddy Bear in Lilo and Stitch or All Shook Up cuz they didnt play the entire songs.My guess is you played it for her and she learned it. Thats not on account of Disney. if Disney put in portions of I Wanna Hold Your Hand and Penny lane in their next film and you pull out your cd and she learns it thats got nothing to do with the film. Its them not coming up with good enough songs so they must put in pop hits of the Beatles people all know and love.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:11 p.m. CST

    This is GREAT news

    by Darquon

    Brad Iron Giant Bird also directed alot of the early Krusty the Clown sequences on the Simpsons. If The Incredibles is as good as we know it will be, Ray Gunn will be a hotly anticipated and highly successful 2D animated movie. IF Miyazaki can make Spirited Away in the 21st century, then 2D isn't dead.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:12 p.m. CST

    One more thing...

    by Darquon

    Remember when the guy from Human League said "The electric guitar is dead." ?? Who's laughing now?

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:13 p.m. CST

    The future of 2-D animation is in the lower right hand corner of

    by rev_skarekroe

    There's a little stick-man, and when you flip the pages he bounces a ball. Check it out! sk

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:34 p.m. CST

    the future is now

    by gorillaskull

    I hope that Pixar packs up and leaves the Disney Corp. The real talent and story driven 2-D animation is now with Dreamworks. I think of all the 2-D artists out there wanting a job in animation. I now know why Disney is ther last choice to send resumes. Sad day when the castle is being stormed by the all mighty dollar. Its sad not to see a Disney not in there namesake company. Give them hell Roy and good luck.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:53 p.m. CST

    The Future Begins Tomorrow!

    by ouagadougou

    "What do we want?" "2D-Animation!!!" "When do we want it?" "Real Soon!". When's that Buckaroo Banzai sequel going to me made?

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 6:58 p.m. CST

    Soul as a verb?

    by Silver Shamrock

    Whatever. And screw Eisner or whoever it was that decided to subject the American public to "Brother Bear." Haven't we suffered enough?

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7 p.m. CST


    by WaitAMinute a 2d animated feature. November 2005.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:14 p.m. CST


    by Smeg For Brains

    Pixar is doing what any real animation fans with such sway should. They are using the name recognition they have with the public to push the real animation art form (sorry, but CG animation at it's best is not a hundreth as artistic as hand drawn animation at it's finest, at least not as far as visuals, story is another matter). I hope they realize that much of the beauty of 2D animation is based on the backgrounds, and is also sucked away when the backgrounds are nothing more than big CG showpieces as in most "2D" animated films in America today. This is such awesome news and I am glad that it is coming from the group of guys that made me actually like computer animation by simply making good stories first. Pixar is the only 3D animation house worth anything. Their 3D animation is also the only stuff out there that comes close to the artistry of 2D animation, because they put so much love and creativity into giving their worlds a beautiful look of their own rather than just making it look like a distorted, but still hyper realistic universe, like in Shrek. As technically good as Shrek looked, it looked artistically awful. No sense of seeing into a real world, just some realistically rendered computer textures and detailed computer models. Even Pixars earliest shorts had more artistic care and beauty, even without technical advancements.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:14 p.m. CST

    Disney plays catch-up

    by Dr Lizardo

    The animation style in Teacher's Pet looks like Disney trying to do Cartoon Network or Nickelodeon. And there's the problem. When Disney was Disney, they didn't follow, they led. (Don't give the whole history of the Fleischer brothers in response, OK? I'm taking the long view here.) It was always a money-making endeavour, but it used to be one with some small sense of magic and taste. Now it's a money chase and nothing more.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:14 p.m. CST

    The future of 2-D animation is in Japan.

    by funnylookingdog

    If you're looking for exceptional 2-D animation you need only look to the far east. Many anime films have grown past the sterotyped big eyes, even bigger breasts, and hyper violence. Films such as Millenium Actress, Jin-Roh, Grave of the Fire Flies and Perfect Blue are exceptional films aimed at adults. Hopefully with the upcomming releases of films like Ghost in the Shell: Inocense, Steamboy, and the continued release of Miyazaki's back cattalog anime films will get a little more repect in America. As long as there are directors such as Kon, Shirow, and Miyazaki 2-D animation will be alive and well.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:16 p.m. CST

    Disney in Bed with Pee Wee and his Kitch Collection

    by Macstone

    I noticed that Paul Reubens is on the credits for Teachers Pet. They found kiddie porn at his house just a couple of years ago. Seems to me that Disney needs to be a little more careful who they associate themself with.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:16 p.m. CST

    I'm with ya on this Harry...

    by eternal76

    Not including Japanese anime, which rocks... But the quality of 2D animation has gone down in a flaming ball of shite... Dreamsworks doesn't have it, and I knew Roy couldn't be responsible for the lack of creativity over at the Magic Kingdom... I am sad to see him hang up his ears though... Fucking Eisner... And to think, I used to think he was so cool as a kid when he hosted Disney presents on ABC... makes me sick... but ray of light with Pixar opening up a 2D dept... Imagine if Roy joined them? Holy shit!!!

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:17 p.m. CST

    Oh, and ouagadougou?

    by Dr Lizardo

    It's not my goddamn planet, understand, monkey boy? But 10 extra points for a great and onscure screen name.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:19 p.m. CST

    Oh damn, I meant "obscure"

    by Dr Lizardo

    I'm turning into one of those posters who can't spell...

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:21 p.m. CST

    2-D isn't dead

    by FloydGandoli

    2-D isn't dead. In fact, I'll bet that Simpsons movie makes a big pile of cash if they ever make it.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:31 p.m. CST

    The future of 2-D animation is: Aqua Teen Hunger Force!

    by Lord Finesse

    Shake-zula, the mic rulah, the old schoolah you wanna trip, I'll bring it to ya. Frylock and I'm on top rock you like a cop Meatwad you're up next with your knock-knock.... Meatwad make the money see, Meatwad get the honeys G Drivin in my car, livin' like a star Ice on my fingers and my toes and I'm a Taurus.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:37 p.m. CST

    Jan or Feb?

    by Moa Kaka

    The add says coming January 16th, but the trailer says coming in February. What gives?

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:39 p.m. CST

    Jan or Feb - referring to "Teacher's Pet"

    by Moa Kaka

    Forgot to mention that part earlier.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:43 p.m. CST


    by ChaseSequence

  • I especially liked the part in Roy's statement about whoring out for short term gains. An obvious allusion to all these despicable sequels. I only hope I live to see Disney become what it once was again.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:46 p.m. CST

    you guys give head to every pixar movie ever made and then you c

    by MiltonWaddams

    if it's done right, who cares. let's complain about how the talkies ruined vaudville. tards.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:48 p.m. CST


    by ChaseSequence

    (oops) While I disagree with you on the point that "CG animation at it's best is not a hundreth as artistic as hand drawn animation at it's finest, at least not as far as visuals," I'm totally with you otherwise. Brad Bird made one of the finest traditionally-animated (well, for the most part) American cartoons ever with Iron Giant, and Pixar is no slouch in the story department. Once Pixar makes a bundle off a 2-D cartoon, five'll get you ten that Disney starts scrambling to start their own division back up. It's an absolute shame the Disney's obsession with branding, not creating, products has extended to its very origins. Fuck Eisner. Fuck him up his stupid ass.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:52 p.m. CST

    congrats Harry!

    by DawnOfTheDead

    That was one of the finest and truer rants you've made. I wholeheartedly agree with you on the whole Diznee issue...

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 7:58 p.m. CST


    by DawnOfTheDead

    FUCK YOU. You wish you had 1% of the genius of Reubens. He's not into anything he's been accused of, I'm a friend of his from his Sarasota years. You know as well as I that journalism sux...

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 8:26 p.m. CST

    Disney 2-D isn't dead... it'll just go into hibernation for 5 to

    by PattyOGreen

    Just like it did in the late 70s/early 80s. The quality of their animated movies was going down (though not as low as currently), then Black Cauldron happened and they called it quits for a while, simply re-released the hell out of their older stuff. They had a couple tries to get back on track with movies like Oliver and Company, but it really didn't kick back in until Little Mermaid happened along. Then they had that 5 year period or so where they could do no wrong, and after that, all the micro-management and other crap happened which has them going on life support right now. Someday, somewhere in the future, some creative souls will get the chance to make another great Disney animated movie and pull the animation department out of its coma, and until then, I have my older movies on DVD and video to entertain me. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I don't believe Disney can completely and eternally abandon their animation roots.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 8:26 p.m. CST

    The Future of 2D . . .

    by ChicagoRonin

    I agree with those folks who place the future of 2D animation in Japan. At least with regards to feature-length films. However, I think folks should also pay attention to a little French feature called "The Triplets of Belleville"; check it out at

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 8:30 p.m. CST

    Get the story straight, but not too straight.

    by Lobanhaki

    I enjoyed the disney characters when I was a kid. Actually, I was more in touch with them than with the movies It wasn't until Alladin that the Animated movies really became interesting for me. So I watched them as time went on. But I did notice the way things were heading. Box office totals were dropping, the costs of the movies were rising, and the story all seemed to look the same. The experiments seemed half-hearted. Disney had invested itself in a formula, so reinventing their approaches for each film did not appeal to them. And that may be what's killed their business for the time being. You've probably experienced what they lost the ability to make: a movie that redefines what you expect of it, rather than simply fulfilling it. Movies Like Master and Commander, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, Lord of the Rings, the Matrix, the Star Wars films. Instead of dealing with the audience through a mask of profit-oriented formalities, these movies dispensed with them and dealt with people on a basic, aesthetic, personal level. Eisner's micromanagement and insistence on certain mores killed the creativity by enforcing a pattern on the stories and the events that no matter how creative the production got, the audience only saw what they expected to see. Hopefully, the people up at Disney will realize that it isn't what people expect to be entertained by that gains their loyal viewership, it's what they don't expect to find entertaining, but do anyways.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 8:34 p.m. CST


    by gil-galad12

    It makes me sad to see Disney slowly going down the drain. After all, that company was almost like a "third parent" to me and probably will be to my kids. Remember the golden era of Disney? I agree with the guy who said 2D animation suffered when they tried to make cartoons "cool". Kids don't want to see the trash that's out in the world reflected in cartoons. Remember the Disney films in the 60s? They followed the same formula that had worked for years, steering clear of any reflection of the tumult of that decade. A heartwarming, innocent story that reaches kids. No "hip" characters, poop jokes, or "adult humor" (for ex. of this, see Cat in the Hat) needed. Just a great story. Why can't they just go back to that? Why do they think kids need cool characters and the newest slang to like a movie? Don't try to pander to every single person in the audience. Just make a kids movie. That's it. And I'm sorry, but the future of 2D animation (well for kids anyway) is NOT in Japan. The few anime movies and shows I've been able to sit through just lack any heart, and you can't care for the characters. I'm sorry, but they can draw really nicely, but they're horrible at making good stories. Anime still hasn't broken through to mainstream America (I don't think the average person even knows what manga means. I don't) except things like Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh. Don't look eastward for the next Disney. Anime just isn't good at reaching kids. Its either going to come out of Disney itself (hopefully) or out of Pixar. By the way, I haven't seen Brother Bear yet. Is it good anyone?

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 9:12 p.m. CST

    It doesn't surprise me, Eisner has always hated animation

    by TimBenzedrine

    When he came to Disney Studios almost 20 years ago, the first thing he did was kick all the animators out of the building they occupied since 1940. Until 1995, they had to work out of a warehouse in Glendale.Of course, he never had any trouble taking bows for other peoples hard work, or spending the company's profits when animation became the Studios greatest asset (some would say it always has been)but now that animation has been going through another troubled period, Eisner's solution has been to fuck the artists ( the ones LEAST responsible for their recent failures) once again. I had heard rumors about PIXAR buying up some of the animation tables Disney put up for sale last year, I was hoping that they had something like this planned. I'm glad somebody thinks that the great American art form of hand drawn character animation should continue into the new century. I wish Roy Disney well. I know he tried.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 9:22 p.m. CST

    spidermanfreak20, you misunderstood

    by FrankCobretti

    Lilo & Stitch made Elvis "cool" for my child, so he was very receptive when I dug out my old Greatest Hits CD. Granted, I built the house through my encouragement, but L&S opened the door.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 9:34 p.m. CST


    by XTheCrovvX

    Well, first off, Manga=Japanese comics. Simple as that. And second of all, while I happen to be a huge fan of anime, I agree with you on the reaching kids issue....I honestly can't name all that many purely kids anime out there...EXCEPT for Miyazaki's films, and ironically, it took a kick in the ass from Pixar themselves to get Disney to realize that and let Lasseter bring Miyazaki's stuff over here..... however, the fact does remain that when it comes to animation for adults, Japan is still the way-out-in-the-lead frontrunner....and until Americans stop seeing cartoons as JUST kids stuff, that's the way it'll stay for decades to come.....anyways....the main reason I'm replying....that whole thing about anime lacking heart, strong characters, and good usual, when my beloved medium comes under attack for unfound reasons, I must give the same list I give anytime someone calls anime based solely on Pokemon and Dragon Ball.....and the list is this....10 simple reasons not to pigeonhole anime: 1. Akira, 2. Ghost In The Shell, 3. Perfect Blue, 4. Samurai X Trust/Betrayal/Reflection, 5. Metropolis, 6. Grave of the Fireflies, 7. Serial Experiments Lain, 8. Ninja Scroll, 9. Cowboy Bebop, 10. Princess Mononoke. Watch a few of these first....then see if your opinion's the same...

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Pixar needs these guys help...

    by MemBirdman

    Not because I think Pixar needs help, but because these guys have already made a transition from solely 3D animation to making a 2D division. The company's name....Big Idea Productions.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 9:36 p.m. CST

    Straight to video releases.

    by slugerama

    I think Disney 2D animation started to die with straight to video releases. Sweet F.A spent on coming up with a decent story, and very poor animation,(compared to that of the theatrical releases). The search for the almighty dollar was put ahead of quality. If Pixar was to go down this road, it too may start to die a slow death.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 10:03 p.m. CST

    Right on PattyOGreen

    by Asimov's Brain

    You know, its true...the animation industry is cyclical. There's always a BIG lull, similar to what happened at Black Cauldron era disney, followed by a big boom, just like what happened when The Lion King hit it big. Then a lull. Then a boom. Lather rinse repeat. Eisner will get fired, or retire, Disney stock will drop...then some amazing talent will walk in the door (Brad Bird) and build the company to even greater heights. It's also true that Disney screwed the pooch with all of these super cheap-o direct to video crapfests. Not only do they suck, but they tarnish the originals so much that you feel like a fool watching them. Also, the Lion King, the holy grail of big box office animated flicks, kind of pooped on the whole industry. That's when Disney said "holy shit!" and started crapping out a new movie every year, rather than every two. Anyway, im rambling, so i'll leave you with a tip...wait until Disney stock hits an all time low (any day now, if Pixar leaves) and buy SHITLOADS of it. Sit on it, and in ten years you'll be a millionare. Just like me.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 10:03 p.m. CST

    Hi Guys!

    by chrth

    Sheesh, hasn't anyone here actually watched Teacher's Pet? It was a pretty nifty show. I mean, I won't be going to the theatre to see it, but I may go down to the library to rent me out some movies, if you know what I mean. If it were a woman, I wouldn't kick it out of bed, but I wouldn't be trying to pick her up at a bar either, y'know....ROTK soon, my precious...

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 10:04 p.m. CST

    It's just a pity

    by Goneburger

    Imagine if Brad Bird went and made something amazing like Grave of the Fireflies... 90% of society would just ignore it out of hand, as it would be an animated film, like so many did to the Iron Giant. I'm very happy to be reading his article there about the Iron Giant being sort of a halfway step between whatn he wants to do and what is accepted in western animation, because that's what i thought the movie was - it had fun moment, but it also had some very touching and moving moments, particularly towards the end. Go watch Grave of the Fireflies. Prepare to be very depressed and very very anti-war by the end of it. Then think this movie is 15 years old, and wish the american animation industry would catch up.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 10:20 p.m. CST

    The following is the text of Roy Disney's letter of resignation:

    by spidermanfreak20

    November 30, 2003 Mr. Michael D. Eisner, Chairman The Walt Disney Company 500 South Buena Vista Street Burbank, CA 91521 Dear Michael: It is with deep sadness and regret that I send you this letter of resignation from the Walt Disney Company, both as Chairman of the Feature Animation Division and as Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors. You well know that you and I have had serious differences of opinion about the direction and style of management in the Company in recent years. For whatever reason, you have driven a wedge between me and those I work with even to the extent of requiring some of my associates to report my conversations and activities back to you. I find this intolerable. Finally, you discussed with the Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors its decision to leave my name off the slate of directors to be elected in the coming year, effectively muzzling my voice on the Board

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 10:23 p.m. CST

    All together: I believe in 2D animation

    by pvecu

    This situation is quite strange, I mean, it

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 10:51 p.m. CST


    by RenoNevada2000

    As AICN long time resident token Buckaroo Banzai reference, I name your an honorary Blue Blaze Irregular for this Talk Back!

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 11:05 p.m. CST

    Ray Gunn! Hahahahahaha!

    by Jarek

    Ray Gunn is the name of the webmaster of So this is a funny name for a movie in my books.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 11:11 p.m. CST

    Anime isn't actually animated...

    by Holly_Wight

    There are lots of still images with mouths that move, but not a lot of actual ANIMATION. I don't get the attraction to it. I think it's the content. Some people are just easily impressed when they see cartoon boobies and blood.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 11:27 p.m. CST

    Pixar sucks

    by Rupee88

    Actually, they don't totally suck, but they aren't that great...John Lasseter at Pixar is great, but the other guys are nothing special...Bug's Life and Finding Nemo were just OK and very contrived. 2D animation is not is still great on TV with Simpsons, South Park, etc as someone pointed out. And there will still be 2D animated films from time to time too. CG is not that different from 2D still takes people to draw and create everything for the most part. Only retards think that computers create the films themselves. So CG vs 2D is a bit of a non-issue, imo....the story and characters are all that really count.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 11:29 p.m. CST


    by Rupee88

    Disney, Inc is a corporation, so of course it is cold and mercenary like all corporations are. Any warm, fuzzy Disney was just a skillfully manufactured image to get more of your money out of your pockets. Eisner is more of a hero to Disney shareholders than Roy Disney.

  • Dec. 1, 2003, 11:52 p.m. CST

    more from me...

    by gil-galad12

    To XtheKrovX. You know, even though I don't care for anime, I still really want to watch Akira, which many call the greatest anime ever, and Princess Mononoke (didn't it get an Oscar?). But I still appreciate the Japanese for their contributions to gaming (well don't like RPG's too much, too long and tedious, except FF7). But yeah, you got what I said right. The future of 2D animation can't be in the Simpsons, etc. or Anime. The future is of course in the hands of those who are beloved by kids. And reading that statement posted by Spiderman (thanks btw) it really makes me sad because every time a new Disney movie comes out I really, really want it to succeed. Just like I did with Looney Tunes: Back In Action, because I don't want those characters to die. Whatever next comes out aimed at kids, whether it be Shrek or whatever, it still can't compare to the magic that a Disney film like Pinnochio, Aladdin, or Snow White has. I agree with the people who say that Disney is just in a slump because of poor management, because Disney will be back.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 12:08 a.m. CST

    The conclusions are both too specific, and too broad.

    by Lobanhaki

    What is the state of 2-D animation? Watch your average anime film to find out. They're pretty good, creative, willing to take outrageous risks. That's why American audiences so love anime- it's energy. When you can get the same energy and compulsive creativity in your cartoon, you will do good business if you stick with it long enough for people to notice and take heed. Do yourselves a favor, Disney, don't just learn the animation techniques of the Anime artists- learn their approach- at least to figure out what they're getting at that you've lost. I believe that movies are too expensive and too rare of products to do anything but the finest job on. Anything less, is a waste of time and money.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 1:03 a.m. CST

    2D is undergoing a shift

    by Wild At Heart

    More and more 2D tv animation is being produced in Flash, a vector-based program which allows for very cheap and fast production. Now, cheap and fast doesn't necessarily mean bad. A lot of the earlier Flash (mostly web-based) animation seemed clumsy as people tried to work out what to do with it, but now more and more animators with 2D animation experience are getting on board and the quality of the output is rising accordingly. We may not see a lot of movies delivered this way (?), but we may see more and more influential creator-based, guerilla-style productions which will make an impact and then filter upwards into the mainstream cinema market. Who knows? It's still early days yet. But 2D sure as hell ain't dead. There are things you can do with a good eye, a bold stylistic vision, and drawn animation keyframes which you'll probably never be able to realise in 3D. It's just up to somebody to sell that to the public. I'm confident that PIXAR can do this, and for the sake of 2D - the public's all-important PERCEPTION of 2D - I hope they can.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 1:06 a.m. CST

    2D animation and the spirit of Walt lives, my friends, and his n

    by JohnnyBlueJeans

    That's right; Mr. Walt Disney of the 2 double-o's. funnydog nailed it earlier - you want 2D? Look east. FYI, Miyazaki's "Howl's Moving Castle" is out next year. There's your 2D future, you weenies.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 1:29 a.m. CST

    The future of animation is in a childs eyes

    by eclipsedman

    Unfortunately that is the truth. If they wont see it then no one will. The truth is in Iron Giants BO #'s, although it was loved by critics it bombed at the BO. Thats all that counts these days. Kids like the eye candy of 3D films and no amount of geeks seeing a animated film will make it worthwhile to the studios. If you wanna see the future of animation check out, thats where many animators are tlkin about the same thing and im sure you will get more real info. on the state of the industry and what to expect. Im hoping that Disney will make a comeback in the BO so that we continue to get more quality 2D films.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 2:59 a.m. CST

    "Well, then, the 5-year-old shouldn't go. Come on, can't we make

    by The Killer-Goat

    This is the best comment yet. And of course it gets overlooked every time by the generally accepted rule that "animation is purely for children". I still don't see how Japan can have such a broad range of subject matter in animation, where the US seems lacking and somewhat sterile overall. If you want an example of American tv animation that actually does a good job of bridging some of the kid/adult fare, check out the current season of Justice League. When Timm and Dini and Burchett had WB's unflinching support they made magic with the Batman series and features within the last decade, without resorting to purely simplistic kid-friendly topics, but entirely capturing the younger demographic's attention.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 3:10 a.m. CST

    holy cow... "cartoon boobies and blood."

    by The Killer-Goat

    what the hell are YOU watching? I've seen plenty of anime that rely on neither of those. And... (gasp), plenty of american studios use the std approach of "still images with mouths that move, but not a lot of actual ANIMATION." It's called COST and time. That's no basis for comparision by itself. But I certainly agree that the content is the more interesting of the elements. Which is what makes it so exasperating to see a Disney film with such potential content and totally missed execution. Believe it or not, there actually WAS a time when no Disney film was 'direct-to-video'. So are we seeing a dumbing of Disney or a wiser audience of late?

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 3:17 a.m. CST

    In fact, I wholeheartedly cite "south park" as an example...

    by The Killer-Goat

    of content being better than execution. The design and animation is near simplistic as you can possibly get, short of stick-figures. Which essentially supports the idea that you don't necessarily need good animation to produce an engaging story. Or rather, that good animation art is meaningless without creme-filling: without 'content' the animation is wasted. Disney has it backwards.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 6:18 a.m. CST

    Lost the plot


    The basic facts about Disney from my side of the fence are these. My Kids (who are twin 3 year old girls) know every word to every song in these movies: Snow White & The Seven Dwarves Sleeping Beauty Alice In Wonderland The Lion King Pinnochio They saw Lilo & Stitch and simply didn't connect with it on any level. They love Monsters Inc & we took them to the cinema for the first time to see Finding Nemo. They both loved it. The guy who said earlier that Disney tried to get too cool was spot on. Just give kids (in fact not just kids, all of us) some good chracters and a compelling storyline and leave the bells & whistles to take a back seat. Back to the old school that's what I say. I mean how old is Snow White now? 60, 65 years? And it's STILL finding a new audience while bollocks like Treasure "Planet" slipped from the memory instantly.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 7:05 a.m. CST


    by MonkeyBytes

    The truth is, Michael Eisner is one of the highest paid, most under-performing CEO's in the business world. He's been coasting since his heydays in the 80's, when he built his current dynasty. He makes big bucks running Disney into the ground while controlling the board, and the stockholders know it. Sadly, I don't think Roy's departure will make too much of a difference because Eisner will spin it into "he didn't agree with our NEW ideas". All this, and Eisner never chooses a successor because he knows someone with that much power will push him out. Of all companies, Disney should not be run by a Machiavellian like Eisner. Eisner dumbs Disney movies down for one reason...Merchandising. He's more concerned with Happy Meals than story, and a film that insults McDonald's will not fly. Pixar should expand to 2-D and bleed Disney's talent pool dry. Within a few years, Pixar will be Disney animation.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 7:21 a.m. CST

    Animation aint what it used to be... but film styles like Emporo

    by TheGinger Twit

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 7:36 a.m. CST

    by thegodfather

    the future of animation lies with whoever does that little cartoon of harry in the top left hand corner.Superb!

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 8:56 a.m. CST

    Innocence: Ghost in the Shell

    by Ulm

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 9:07 a.m. CST


    by Macstone

    I'm just not sure how seriously you expect me to take your response. I sympathize with you for having a friend in that kind of trouble; however, that does not make him innocent.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 9:13 a.m. CST


    by THE FAN


  • Dec. 2, 2003, 9:20 a.m. CST


    by THE FAN


  • Dec. 2, 2003, 9:29 a.m. CST

    so it starts when?

    by TheKingInYellow

    january 16th or in february? i love 2d animation. long live plympton! can't say i care too much for the style of 'teacher's pet'. it seems like a cheap, feature length saturday morning cartoon. my two cents!

  • Remember those crappy CG monsters in Sinbad, or the unnecessary CG sets in Treasure Planet (an underrated movie in my view)? It seems like the 2D animation that's really dying is the FX heavy event movies and not the medium of 2D. It'd be nice to see CG and 2D tools used to tell good stories as happened in The Iron Giant rather than as gratuitous eye-candy to make trailer fodder. Also it'll be nice to see some variety in style on the big screen. As people have mentioned, Simpsons and South Park and King of the Hill are all great 2D efforts on the small screen, and they are all visually and stylistically distinctive, something we rarely see with big screen animation anymore. ****************** It'd be very nice if Pixar could get a 2D studio going. It sounds like a pipe dream though. More power to them if they can get it going. I'd love to see them start to show variety in the look of their films. That may not make good business sense yet, corproate identity and all. But in the long run it could give them the versatility to survive when their current formula gets old with audiences. Some people hate it now. Finding Nemo had some strong detractors because of the formula at work. My feeling is that sometimes formula *works*, but it can't work every time. I may not like it in the next one. More may not like it in the one after that. Change isn't always bad. I was encouraged when I heard them say on the commentary for the Finding Nemo DVD that they were tired of the Outake reel gags, that it was growing lame, and they wanted to get out of it. They saw a problem and fixed it before it bothered more people than it pleased. If they stay ahead of the game like that, they'll do very well. I can only wish them success. I wish Disney long term success as well, but I don't know if short term success is what will get them that. Maybe it's true, they need to hit rock bottom before anything truly good can happen to them. I've been through it myself. I wish the good guys luck, whatever comes. The bad guys? Fuck 'em. They know who they are (and if they don't, fuck 'em anyway).

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 9:55 a.m. CST

    What you miss for not waking up at 8 a.m. on Saturdays

    by GilmoresRock

    I never post on here, but I have to stick up for Teacher's Pet. Anyone who's seen the show knows just what I'm talking about. The cartoon (which used to air on ABC's One Saturday Morning, and has since moved to the digital-cable-only Toon Disney) is one of the most well-written and well-animated "kid's shows" I've seen. The writing was always clever and intelligent (I've actually learned quite a few things from Teacher's Pet), smart and knowing enough to actually mock "proven" animation formulas (for example, big musical numbers, talking animals, etc.). The animation very experimental and surreal (most of you have probably seen Gary Baseman's work out there somewhere, even if you didn't know you were looking at Gary Baseman's work). Of course it's anyone's guess as to how well all of this will translate into film, but I'm just saying, don't knock it 'till you try it, and you really should try it.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 10:45 a.m. CST

    didn't CBS just walk away from this Ray Gunns movie?

    by Hud

    Harry, I respect what you say about Disney, but as a Disney employee, I have to say the company is so much bigger than a cartoon studio. it might be that Mr. disney is overly attached by sentiment and custom to his own small corner(stone) of a larger enterprise, but I credit Michael Eisner with saving Disney from ingestion by a much larger company years ago.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 11:06 a.m. CST

    Pixar + 2D = Great News!

    by Damitol

    I love good animation. 2D or 3D doesn't matter to me as long as it's got a good story and characters I care about (something Eisner & Co. forgot a decade ago). All Pixar, The Iron Giant, Cowboy Bebop, most anything from Studio Ghibli, and Futurama are a short list of my favorites, and I'm sure most if not all are on every animation fans' list. To read that Pixar is ready to seriously start working in 2D and see Brad Bird's name associated with it as well (AND knowing John Lassiter's friendship with Miyazaki-san) is amazing news! With two divisions at Pixar working on content (I assume Pixar would snatch up some prime Disney Florida talent when they get pink slipped in January) Pixar's name could soon elipse Disney as the #1 recognized brand for real quality animation in everyone's mind. As the 2D division grew, they could also be a prime channel for the best international animation in the U.S. Imagine if Pixar and Ghibli teamed up to make a film! I can't wait to hear more on Pixar's plans for traditional cell animation. So far they have given me no reason to doubt any decision they make.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 11:36 a.m. CST

    Hud, I may be mistaken here, but...

    by The Killer-Goat

    all the reports I'm seeing imply that the animation feature dept seems to be one of the ONLY divisions barely keeping afloat at this point. The ABC slots are apparently floundering, the theme parks are both bloated AND starving, and whether or not the Disney company made a stand on its own 2 feet or ended up being supported by another company, its image is on shaky ground right NOW. Eisner gets points for working the numbers and keeping the corporate side working hard, but his face has no business being plastered on the intro's of so many Disney dvd releases. He isn't the spirit of the company, he's just the accountant. A good one at one time, perhaps, but his current reputation is not exactly a positive thing for the company's image at the moment.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 11:43 a.m. CST

    How symbolic...

    by Cap'n Chaos!

    would it be if Pixar hired Disney? It could only be in an honorary-type position with no real power, but it would speak volumes to the industry and to Disney stockholders; Pixar is taking the reigns. When I was a kid, I wanted to work for Disney someday because it was supposed to be the pinnacle of animation. Now, I wouldn't go near them, but I would love to work at Pixar. The problem is not the failure of 2-D animation at the box office. While Treasure Planet may have bombed, Emporer's New Groove did well (it didn't come close to recovering production costs, but in many ways, that was Eisner's fault in the first place) dispite not being advertised well, Brother Bear is doing good business and Lilo and Stitch did great. And it did so without being a "traditional" Disney film, nor relying heavily on overbaked CGI to sell it. There's still good business in traditional animation for those that want to take the time and effort. Disney is no longer a place that wants to do so. Eisner doesn't see the $100 million plus draw of L&S; he sees the $300 million plus draw of Finding Nemo and thusly has decided, "Well shit. Screw this noise. I hate cartoons, anyway. We'll make money with those computer things. I just have to sign up contracts for merchandising." The minute Pixar has it's first 2-D theatrical hit, Disney will in freefall. In any case, I'm sorry to see Mr. Disney resign. He was the last bastion of decency in the company's ranks and one of the few people trying to restore creativity. He will be missed.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 12:01 p.m. CST

    damitol, re: asian co-venture

    by The Killer-Goat

    wasn't there speculation that Miyazaki, or some other proponent from the Ghibli studios, was in discussion for a near-future joint project with Disney? i thought AICN brought this up once. Perhaps this fell through, but after the dvd sales for the imported Ghibli movies appear to be moving along, it seemed a logical consideration.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 12:31 p.m. CST

    Hud, if there was no animation depepartment ,there would be no D

    by TimBenzedrine

    Take away the legacy of over 70 years of cartoons and the Disney Studios ceases to exist. What else are they known for? Cheaply made films? Sub par television programs? Top heavy management? It was the hard work of thousands of talented artists and writers that made your job at the studio (whatever it is) possible. Eisner and co. seem to think that Walt Disney's masterpieces were some kind of freak accident that could never be duplicated in a million years. Walt himself used to say, "I can only make these films with artists, bankers and accountants don't seem to be much help"

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 12:44 p.m. CST

    ELFQUEST where is this film already?!?! Bluth? Bird? Madhouse? D

    by StoneMonkey

    Make this film a reality already and quit with the kiddie stuff.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 12:50 p.m. CST

    the sacred art of 2D

    by buffys

    God, I am so sick of the 2D animation purists. 'oh animation aint what it used to be *sigh*' gimme a break! everything was supposedly better "when I was young", I'm sure cavemen would lament the loss of the old days when, as children, they'd sit by the fire staring at the charcoal stick men on their cave walls. Then spit with contempt at the upstarts who dared to introduce colours to their cave paintings. I can't tell who's more arrogant, the young or the old (its a pretty even match I think). Don't get me wrong, I love 2D but these claims that its somehow better than other forms of animation is ludicrous. I understand people being nostalgic about one style or another but GET A GRIP! theres nothing sacred about 2D (or for that matter 3D or stop motion). They are all 'just' story telling tools. A story is either told well or it isn't. In the end, as long as the artists are good, the style of animation used doesn't matter.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 12:54 p.m. CST

    You're not so crazy Lord Finesse! There's more Energy and just p

    by Klam Bake

    I just hope no one ever gets it in there head that any of the Adult Swim cartoons need to be seen in the theater. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 1:39 p.m. CST

    Teachers Pet

    by DukeDeMondo

    Hel, i think it looks interesting. A lot more interesting than Lilo & Stitch was anyway (even though they're using the same marketing techniques - old movies, new movies co-existing; changing of the guard, as it were). I might well go see it, not because the trailer was especially amazing (it was alright) but because i like the feel of it. Also, it reminds me of Duckman. Kinda same look about it. Cool. I'll be there. Maybe.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 2:16 p.m. CST

    Silly to talk about the death of 2d animation

    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    Its not like it was ever all the rage in the first place. What did we get when it was in its "prime," half a dozen flicks a year, with maybe one or two of them being worth watching? Seems to be what we're getting now.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Tell me I'm not the only one who thinks that "Teacher's Pet" loo

    by Puddin' Taine

    I mean, damn, it looks sort of funny, like if Tim Burton and the animators for "Rocko's Modern Life" decided to eat a bunch of peyote while watching Pinocchio. Uhhhhh, yeah...

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 5:37 p.m. CST

    Silver Age Marvel Comic style music video

    by TedSallis

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 7:29 p.m. CST

    2D Animation dead? Uh, where's the obituary?

    by Zone Zero

    Last I checked it's still alive and ownin' fools. What, you think that if it don't have a Di$ney logo on it that it won't be legit? F-U. I'm getting sick and tired of the entertainment monopoly that Di$ney has. Some ajpanese produced gem needs to break down the walls here and fast, or the only way we'll see quality shit is when we have to get it black market because Di$ney made it illegal through their lobbists. F**k Di$ney, F**k them up their stupid A**ES!

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 7:53 p.m. CST

    Of course 2D animation is going to thrive in Japan. It always h

    by Smeg For Brains

    Anime covers ALL genres. There is no such thing as anime in Japan. In japan anime is short for animation. Just as manga means "comics". only in outside of Japan were "anime" and "manga" co-opted to mean just Japanese animation or comics. Also there are hundreds of animated television series and films in Japan that are made for kids. Anyone who dismisses japanese animation as nothing more than violent porn cartoons is an ignoramous who doesn't have any idea what they are talking about. Anyone who thinks that japanese animation "isn't animation" and that just the mouths move is a blithering idiot, and an ignoramous, and they obviously haven't seen much japanese animation at all. Check out any Miyazaki film, or Memories, or Akira, or pretty much any japanese animated film released in the past 20 years, and you will see that they are masters at animation. They have a different style where they don't distort the objects as they are animated so it has no motion blur, and more of a strobe look, much like stop motion animation, but it is incredibly rendered in every frame. Almost any cell would be suitable for framing. Also in my last post I didn't mean that computer animation wasn't an artform, just that it takes much less artistry to create an impressive looking product. Pixar has shown that you can create technically impressive animation that also looks beautiful from an artistic point of view. Still watching an amazing hand drawn animated film, with beautiful hand painted backgrounds is 100 times more impressive from an artistic point of view than even Pixars amazing work.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 8:03 p.m. CST

    Michael Eisner is an EVIL CAPITALIST PIG

    by FD Resurrected

    Rest and breathe, Roy, you should join Pixar and Eisner's ass will be kick thousand times harder. Michael Eisner care for nothing but greed, and it drains the passion for quality art by creative teams which is the reason why Walt Disney Company is world-wide famous and wealthy. Without the passion and hard work of producing top quality art, Walt Disney Company under the management of Eisner and his cronies exemplify greed and no soul. Long live 2-D animation!

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 10:34 p.m. CST

    Smeg for Brains, I must give you props.

    by Zone Zero

    Amen on what you said, you do know what you're talking about. I have to agree 100%. But, you need to change your name because you aren't a smeg for brains what so ever.

  • Dec. 2, 2003, 10:57 p.m. CST

    "it takes much less artistry"?

    by buffys

    Smeg For Brains I was nodding fervently in agreement as i read your post until i hit this part, "I didn't mean that computer animation wasn't an artform, just that it takes much less artistry to create an impressive looking product.". I was originally trained (and still do) cell animation and have also done 3D stuff. The EXACT same artistry and creativity is involved in the character design, animation and story to be good. They are both really fucking painstaking and subtle, i'll admit there is a lot of crappy and artistically challenged 3D out there but that goes for cell animation as well. BTW, love your handle, I'm a dwarfer from way back ... hope the movie happens soon but more importantly that it isn't crap.

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 2:03 a.m. CST


    by Zone Zero

    I don't think that he meant any harm by his comments (referring to SmegForBrains) and may have been too much into the heat of the moment. Although, I do have to agree, it takes a HELL of alot of work to do 3D animated artwork. But, 2D animation, both Digital and traditional Pen and Ink are just as time consuming. I should know, I'm trying to learn the 3D Studio Max a former digital arts studen left on a computer I now have. Complex shite.

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 8:46 a.m. CST

    2D animation isn't dead

    by CarThatAteParis

    Miyazaki, Mamoru Oshii, Sylvain Chomet... Japan and Europe are producing some of the most incredible animated features ever. BTW, I'd be interested to know from some of you yanks if Belleville-Rendezvous got a release in America? That was one of the best films I've seen in years.

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 1:20 p.m. CST

    Traditional Disney-style animation lives on......

    by The Gipper

    only not at Disney. Don Bluth is carrying on the tradition that he learned when he worked at Disney. "Anastasia" anyone? That's one good looking animated movie. If only they could get a good distributor for their films and do something other than "The Land Before Time XXXVIII: Vengeance of Littlefoot" they would be all set.

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 2:27 p.m. CST

    The Legend of El Cid

    by Drath

    Has anyone seen the trailer for it? The main page is at: It's a Spanish animated movie that looks a lot like it wants to be a Disney movie in that Dreamworks kind of way. Not that I'm bashing it, I kinda hope it's good because I happen to like this particular style of character design. But those animal side kicks seem like left overs from a planned and abadoned Pocahontas cheapquel.

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 3:19 p.m. CST

    Understand this MacStone

    by Sheik Yerbouti

    Dawn of the Dead is a child porn addict themselves, you won't see a response because they don't understand the difference. I am not being funny here, it is actually quite sad, but if you go back through the posts that Dawn of the Dead has put on this site, there are some disturbing quotes. It maybe part of some unending joke, but my fear is that its quite real and a problem that needs to be sorted out. But I agree with you about Ruebens, and frankly I am shocked that Disney (who is so concerned about sanitizing everything for mass consumption) would find no problem in using a the work of a pedophile, while driving real creativity away simply because it isn't "safe for the whole family" Eisner's a tool.

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 3:54 p.m. CST

    on Paul Reubens on kiddie porn...

    by Evil McSatan

    What was actually found in his possession was a copy of the famous Rob Lowe sex video. And it was found in a box in his garage among hundreds of porno tapes. It seems like he's just more of an obsessive collector than a pedophile. Jesus Christ, did I just defend Peewee Herman?

  • Dec. 3, 2003, 11:31 p.m. CST

    I probably catch hell for this, but Dreamworks' Sinbad has some

    by Gere's AssGerbil

    Best 2D/CG merger I've seen in awhile. Check out the fight scenes early in the film. Extraordinary. I think this film was dismissed largely due to the lackluster, see-it-coming-from-a-mile-away ending. It's so lame it does kinda spoil what is a mostly entertaining, beautiful looking film. But it's got some good voice work and the jokes kept me chuckling pretty steadily. I'm assuming most here probably haven't seen it or there'd be more comments on it. If you really love animation, you owe it to yourself to have a look. Let the flaming commence.

  • Dec. 4, 2003, 12:34 a.m. CST

    No disrespect to computer animation...

    by Smeg For Brains

    ... I am just far more impressed with great 2D animation than great 3D. Has anyone ever seen the old 1953 animated version of The Tell Tale Heart, directed by Art Babbitt? That one short could absolutely never be done on the computer. Sure you could do something that looked similar, but it wouldn't be one millionth as impressive to anyone who knew even the slightest bit about animation of any kind. The artistry, and skill used to create that film by hand could never be duplicated on a computer. It would be just another peice of typical 3D animation. It is the most beautiful piece of animation I have ever seen. I guess I just think that 3D animation is inherently easier to use to get a better looking product, so it has to move to the next level of creativity, and beauty in order to be as anywhere near as impressive as the best 2D has to offer. Of course it is still a relatively new art form. I just wish that the makers of most CG animation would go for a more creative style rather than just always falling back on the crutch of making it look more "real". There is a way to make something look real. It's called live action. CG special effects for live action are great when done well (like in the Lord of the Rings), but who needs realistic bark on the trees in Shrek? Why not try to create a stylized world and represent that bark in an artistic way? If I want to see tree bark I will go out to my backyard and get some fresh air. If I am watching an animated film I want to see an artistic representation of a world, not a replication of the one I could go see for real (and would rather). Don't mind me, I just don't have much love for the animation in Shrek, as technically impressive as it may look.

  • Dec. 4, 2003, 12:34 a.m. CST

    No disrespect to computer animation...

    by Smeg For Brains

    ... I am just far more impressed with great 2D animation than great 3D. Has anyone ever seen the old 1953 animated version of The Tell Tale Heart, directed by Art Babbitt? That one short could absolutely never be done on the computer. Sure you could do something that looked similar, but it wouldn't be one millionth as impressive to anyone who knew even the slightest bit about animation of any kind. The artistry, and skill used to create that film by hand could never be duplicated on a computer. It would be just another peice of typical 3D animation. It is the most beautiful piece of animation I have ever seen. I guess I just think that 3D animation is inherently easier to use to get a better looking product, so it has to move to the next level of creativity, and beauty in order to be as anywhere near as impressive as the best 2D has to offer. Of course it is still a relatively new art form. I just wish that the makers of most CG animation would go for a more creative style rather than just always falling back on the crutch of making it look more "real". There is a way to make something look real. It's called live action. CG special effects for live action are great when done well (like in the Lord of the Rings), but who needs realistic bark on the trees in Shrek? Why not try to create a stylized world and represent that bark in an artistic way? If I want to see tree bark I will go out to my backyard and get some fresh air. If I am watching an animated film I want to see an artistic representation of a world, not a replication of the one I could go see for real (and would rather). Don't mind me, I just don't have much love for the animation in Shrek, as technically impressive as it may look.

  • Dec. 4, 2003, 12:58 a.m. CST

    Kim Possible

    by JungleJoe

    I know this is probably abyss fodder but i gotta get this out there my Sister came over one Saturday and she's 7 so naturally she wants to watch cartoons (and so do I) so i put on Kim Possible a cartoon about a high school girl who's also a super spy. We're watching it and for the most part it's alright, lots of action for me lot's of girl power for her fun for the whole family, but I noticed something that kinda bothered me, (but mostly made snicker to my self uncontrollably) what i noticed was a naked mole rat named Rufus who (i became convinced) is a phallic symbol I know what your thinking "what a prevert" and "you have a sick mind!" but hear me out the evidence is pretty convincing First of all the show is put out by Disney who is no stranger to hidden sex, in the movie The Rescuers there is a picture of a naked woman in the sewers, on the poster for the little mermaid (and on the cover of the original video release) on the castle in the center is a tower that looks unmistakably like a penis, when Simba plops down in the lion king he stirs up some dust that for some reason spell out "sex", and I'm told there is a moment in Aladdin when some one whispers "take off your clothes" but i have yet to hear it Second Rufus's relationship to Ron Stoppable, Kim Possible's goofy side kick. Rufus is Rons pet and for the most part lives in Rons pocket, though Ron is inept and clumsy Rufus is smart and always helpful to Kim in her missions. Third Rufus's favorite food is tacos (tee hee hee) Forth Rufus is a Naked Mole Rat (Heterocephalus glaber) who by them selves look pretty phallic it even has the Latin word phallus in its proper name and a common nick name for the mole rat is "walking sausage" Is Rufus a phallus? you don't need to be Frederico Fellini to connect the dots and see Rufus for what he is or maybe it was an Innocent mistake by Disney maybe as Freud put it a "cigar is just a cigar" if so it's still a funny thought and will likely go down in history along side the "Scooby and shaggy smoke pot" theory and the "smurf allusions to communism" and if nothing else i can rest assured that by telling you this, the next time i watch that show or or see the Mc Donald's toy of Rufus wearing a sombrero i won't be laughing alone dying of laughter Joe Fritts

  • Dec. 4, 2003, 8:43 a.m. CST

    Jungle Joe

    by Drath

    I hope you're joking, but even if you aren't you should share that theory with the people at this site: If it's new to you, read it and learn all about the Disney urban legends.

  • Dec. 4, 2003, 11:49 a.m. CST

    Thank you Drath,

    by TimBenzedrine

    The webpage you mentioned gave the most accurrate explanation behind the Little Mermaid video cover. I know this to be true because I know the artist responsible and it is simply not within his character to willfully and intentionally paint anything of an inappropriate nature. Unfortunately this is an urban legend that will probably never go away, because people automatically want to believe the worst. Another Urban myth explained: In the Lion King, where the letters S-E-X appear, apparrently that was an in joke gone wrong. The letters are actually "SFX", or "special effects", the department that handles things like blowing leaves, shadows and dust. The Rescuers actually did have a nude picture inserted into one frame, most likely done by a cameraman thinking it would never be detected at 24 frames per second (this was before home video where people can scrutinize animated films frame by frame.) It was only discovered when the film was transfered to video. I think they caught it in time and it was never released to the public that way, I've never checked, really. I used to have an old bootleg copy that was made from a 16mm rental version of the film, so I know it WAS there.I'm sure there are people that will swear it's still there. People see what they want to see.

  • Dec. 4, 2003, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Pee Wee Part 4

    by Macstone

    Actually Evil McSatan, I'm sorry but you are incorrect. What was found in his house was something called Kitch; which is child pornography. Some try to excuse by calling it art. The only reason the police found this "collection" is because an under-age male claimed to have been assaulted by Reubens and another actor (can't remember his name, but he played the principal in Ferris Bueller).

  • Dec. 5, 2003, 11:08 a.m. CST


    by tango fett

    i have lost all faith in disney. the last disney movie i saw that was actually very good was tarzan. emperor's new groove was cool and so was lilo and stitch, but they aren't as good as the older movies. as far as pixar goes, good for them. they should make 2d stuff along side their 3d stuff. can't wait for the incredibles.

  • Dec. 5, 2003, 8:14 p.m. CST

    Why it will fail? Pixar`s weaknesses will be revealed to the Wor

    by chien_sale

    Because what made Pixar`s movies stood-out(as well as Dreamworks`) is the CGI animation. Pure and simple. You really think Pixar`s stories in their films are better than what Disney has been doing? In Findind Nemo YOU HAD TWO HOURS OF A FISH TRYING TO FIND ANOTHER FISH!!! You call that a great concept, an innovative story that Disney could never do? Bullocks! The fact is, CGI Animated films is the new hot thing right now. And 2-D animated features can`t beat that. The truth is if you would take the Pixar stories with 2-D animations, their films would suck, nothing will happen. You can get away with a lot of stuff with CGI animation since people are so mesmerised by the technology, the beautiful effects.

  • Dec. 5, 2003, 10:28 p.m. CST

    To come in a little late, perhaps...

    by Absie

    I'm a high school junior who intends to go into the field of animation in college and a career, and Disney has been a part of my life ever since I was aware enough of my surroundings to appreciate movies. I've just read through each and every post on this discussion board, and have found myself quite touched by the realization that so many other people feel the same way about the animation industry that I've been feeling for the past few years. I may be naive in my understanding of business, but ever since groups of people began ganging up on me for being a Disney supporter, I've known something is wrong. The ordeal with Eisner sickens me, and the resignation letter post moved me nearly to tears. What is this world coming to, if the most noble, time-consuming and unique of arts is being repressed by its left-brained counterpart? I've been striving towards Disney for as long as I've been cartooning, and I can easily relate and sympathize with the animators who were laid off, simply because I know what it's like to be told that what I do (cartoons) is of no importance. I suppose I've rambled on enough. But I must say, especially to SmegForBrains and a few others, you have truly restored my faith in the industry, and I find it very comforting that I'm not the only one out there who feels that something has to change.

  • Dec. 6, 2003, 7:19 a.m. CST


    by tav

    hehe.. I know a lot of animators. *_*

  • Dec. 6, 2003, 6:27 p.m. CST


    by Tomiyama

    Yes, a sad day for Disney.Eisner is sadly out of touch. It seems to be so typical of modern Corporate America today. Most of these companies are being run by the middle aged baby boomers who are starting to run out of ideas. Eisner has been in his job for what? 20 years? It is perhaps time for a change, some new blood. Us Gen Xers are still working in these low level positions while the boomers are cranking out the same old stale material. Take Brother Bear, not a bad movie per se, but a letdown after a year of Finding Nemo and even most anime stuff that's out there. The same thing is happening to the place where I work (non entertainment), sales are flat, and they are putting out rebranded unoriginal product. Many of the bright Gen Xers are working for other animation companies or the video game industry where there is some new ideas. Corporate America will continue to stagnate until some new talent is lined up for creative spots. 2D animation is not dead, it is the story folks. Like the man says, it doesn't matter where it's computer, 2d or sock puppets it's still the story that counts.

  • Dec. 6, 2003, 6:49 p.m. CST

    Well, Eisner saved Disney

    by chien_sale

    Before him, they were nothing. Remember their films and animations divisions in the 80s? There was none. He made successful motion pictures for them plus he reinvented their animations as big businesses when Beauty and the Beast took everybody by storm. After that it was Little Mermaid, Aladin, The Lion King and so forth. Plus countless big life-action motion pictures to compete with the magor studios. With all these successes, The Disney nefew dares to bitch about Eisner? I would like to see him try anything and be half as successful at it.

  • Dec. 6, 2003, 7:48 p.m. CST

    If you'll notice...

    by Absie

    The letter from Roy to Michael included the idea that, while Eisner worked well with Frank Wells, he got out of hand when Wells passed away. The Lion King is dedicated to Frank Wells, according to the text that appears before the film begins. The Lion King was also the epitomized 'great' Disney movie, which was succeeded by Pocahontas and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, two (or at least one) which may have been in producion before Frank's death. I'm not entirely certain as to how far in advance the process goes, so don't take me up on that just yet, but it's just a hunch. There were only a few greats after The Lion King before the company started going downhill, beginning with Tarzan (in its use of trendy filler and a star-studded soundtrack). Every Disney movie following Tarzan has kept the same formula, which may or may not have anything to do with Eisner's takeover while lacking Frank Wells. What I'm basically implying is, I have no doubt that Eisner assisted the company in getting back on its feet. However, it seems that he shouldn't be doing it alone.

  • Dec. 6, 2003, 7:54 p.m. CST

    Getting old

    by Tomiyama

    Yes, Eisner did make Dis into something. Beauty and the Beast is a classic, no doubt he was very successful. He rebuilt disney. Wonderful. Terrific. But that was years ago. At his age, as well, who will be the next heir? Most of the talented folks have left. And it's the same throughout most of the other industries. :(

  • Dec. 7, 2003, 11:57 p.m. CST

    Good points Absi and Tomi

    by chien_sale

    Still, it`s not an excuse for people to start throwing tomatoes at Eisner. He had a good run. Heck a great run. Of course now may be the time to make a change. Eisner leaving, or someone that would have a good handle on how to refocus the business could be hired. Talking strikly only about the animation, 2-D is old-fashion enough that classic tales from Sinbad, etc...should be discarded. As well as the pointless songs(hey when the original cartoons were made there were songs because back then even in live motion pictures, people would break out into songs! That`s not happening anymore in 2003 is it?). Something edgier and original like Lilo and Stitch proved that 2-D can still be successful if the traditional crap is thrown out the window.

  • Dec. 9, 2003, 1:02 a.m. CST

    late on the subject, but...

    by Roxie

    I feel extremely passionate about this, to me 2D animation, especially the 'disney style' just connects with me, I can't explain it. Pixar is wonderfull with not just CG artistry but skill is nothing without a solid script. Brother Bear had a wonderful look to it, but the Phil Collins soundtrack (among other things) ruined it. If ever an animated movie called for a purely orchestral score, this was it.If they had just worked on it a bit more, it could've been a masterpeice but while not a terrible movie, fell short of it. Anyhow, I am a huge fan of The Iron Giant so the news that Brad Bird will be doing this caused me to squeal with joy. I am so glad we have 2D back, getting rid of it is like dumping the piano in favor of the keyboard. I'd like to point out that the 80s for Disney was a more "experimental time" and during that time they produced my all time favorite animated movie, The Great Mouse Detective. It was my favorite when I was 5, and at 18 it holds a special plac ein my heart:) smegforbrains, another dwarf fan here who loves your handle! My brother hits me if I use any British slang so it's nice to have the freedome to use it here.