Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

Jim Hill on the future of Disney Animation via a Stockholder's Meeting in Hartford!

Ahhh, Disney lives. Sort of. by MCVamp	Feb 26th, 2002 04:21:09 AM
The Lilo & Stitch/Lion King teaser is pretty obvious, and has been spoiled elsewhere, but it looks to be fun. As for "chicken little," I wonder if The Secret Lab is still Disney's direct CGI division (Dinosaur) since I'd heard somewhere that they had closed the department down. The reason I mention this is the Tron: Killer App teaser on the Tron DVD set. I guess it was just a massive layoff. Chicken Little? Um, okay. The 3D Mickey sounds a lot more exciting. Treasure Planet had better kick Atlantis's ass six ways from Sunday though (I already have faith in Lilo and Stitch.)
"...was quite simply the balls, Harry." Right. by Lenny Nero	Feb 26th, 2002 04:27:40 AM
I can guess what that means, but I have no idea WHY it means that. Am I missing something? This should be another running AICN joke. "This movie was quite simply the balls, Harry!"
My Lion King/Lilo and Stitch idea... by woemcats	Feb 26th, 2002 05:19:08 AM
When Rafiki holds Simba up over Pride Rock for all to see, Stitch shoves him off and they fall down screaming. Mufasa: Get your own movie!
Long live the mouse by CrapHole	Feb 26th, 2002 05:31:22 AM
They may be money grubbing fools but I sure do love Disney and all their marketing magic.
Disney just wants your money and they'll do anything to get by Regis Travolta	Feb 26th, 2002 05:34:34 AM
Occasionally something good and worthwhile makes it through the creativity-destroyo machine there but those good projects are fewer and much farther between than in years past. Treasure Planet sounds like one of the good things. But Mickey's Philharmagic? Another brainy zany attraction from those funloving Disney Imagineers! Bring back Mortimer Mouse the no good louse!
A seamless mix of CGi and traditional animation? by Heleno	Feb 26th, 2002 06:28:05 AM
After seeing last year's Atlantis, I am not sure that this works any more. They did it fine in Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin etc., with just a little CGI to enhance the wide shots, but for my money Atlantis was scrappy and you could see the joins in the animation - the almost-defiantly 2D characters looked odd against sometimes elaborate CGI. Just my opinion, but it really brought home to me the dangers of mixing techniques without finesse. Look at Titan AE for similarly jarring styles.
Eisner is the anti-Christ by SCOTT1458	Feb 26th, 2002 09:04:41 AM
Not to mention a socialist. Can't wait for them to bumb his ass out there. Pixar is WAY to good for them, hope they get out as soon as possible.
I'd spank mickey by scroggX	Feb 26th, 2002 09:34:11 AM
Disney's gonna die.
ChickenLittle by LeeScoresby	Feb 26th, 2002 09:35:57 AM
This is actually great news...Mark Dindal directed the EXCELLENT movie Cats Don't Dance for Warner Bros. which deserved to be a huge hit. It was the last picture Gene Kelly ever choreographed and the villian is by far my favorite of any animated film. The man is funny.
The 3D Mickey was supposed to be Pixar... by Teko	Feb 26th, 2002 09:43:04 AM
I talked to some Pixar folks back in '99, and they were talking about projects Disney was pushing them to do: a Bugs Life sequel and a 3D movie for Mickey's 75th. I imagine that with the bad blood between them these days (especially Pixar's declaration of No More Sequels), caused Diz to take it up themselves. As far as Disney goes, if TP and Lilo don't remind moviegoers that traditional animation can be as exciting as CG stuff, nothing will. Although Dindal has done no wrong, so I'm looking forward to "chicken little"....
snore........ by twan_deeth_ree	Feb 26th, 2002 09:45:27 AM
CGI Chicken Little? CGI Mickey Mouse? WTF? I don't know the running cost for a feature length CGI movie these days, but I'd imagine it's in the $75 million range. There aren't any better ideas out there to spen $75 million on? Can you say original idea? Jesus, what a bunch of lame shit. I'm still waiting for my full-length CGI action movie (and Final Fantasy doesn't count, it was more of a cock-eyed philosophical treatise than an action movie - but still pretty to look at).
Makes sense. by Monkey Handler	Feb 26th, 2002 09:58:16 AM
Eisner and the mouse house need to make some inroads into the CGI animation market. No-one is going to see 2d animated movies anymore, and the success of Shrek and Ice Age (presumably), have really put Disney's balls in the ringer. Ten years ago nobody could compete with Disney when it came to animated movies, now Dreamworks etc have proved that Disney no longer has a monopoly. CGI animation is a new market, and Disney has a very limited track record there - thus it is an area where competitors can make a name for themselves fairly quickly. Traditional animation in the last few years has been making less and less money - Atlantis, Emperor's New Groove, Road to Eldorado, etc. At the same time Shrek & Monsters Inc have brought in shitloads of cash. With this in mind Eisner is probably right to pursue more CGI projects, and get the Mickster into the CGI arena. They are trying to associate Disney's defining character with the new animated medium. In understand the thinking behind this, but I hope Disney don't achieve the sort of monopoly they had with animation pre Prince of Egypt.
Damn those guys... by Damitol	Feb 26th, 2002 10:43:59 AM
Disney succeeded in getting into my blood at a very early age, and I therefore keep giving them chance after chance. I read an article on "Chicken Little" (here?) and even though the idea sounded interesting, you just know that they will throw in 8 bad, forgettable songs (even though one will be nominated for an Oscar because there are so few songs written specifically for movies anymore) and target the "jokes" at 4 year olds. I've yet to read anything that excited me about "Treasure Planet" and although the teasers for "Lilo and Stitch" are wonderful, I really wonder - especially in light of the knee jerk deleting of the "Stitch stealing an airplane" scene after 9/11 - how "bad" (thus funny) they will really let Stitch be. OK - I'll admit the 3D Mickey did make me go "hmmmmmm...", but the point is that Disney continues to promise something magic, then delivers watered down, formula films that ultimately disappoint. It begins and ends with the story guys. 2D, 3D or 4D - if the characters aren't engaging, the jokes aren't funny to all age groups and the plot isn't timeless and doesn
I think they set up us the balls... by Z-Man	Feb 26th, 2002 11:17:07 AM
The Mickey thing, in execution, actually sounds pretty good, but I don't really understand why they'd want to put Mickey into cgi. Since Pixar is a division of Disney, and since most folks who aren't simply the balls deep in Disney trivia think of them as one company, Disney Animation should really stick with the great art of hand-drawn.
Pixar not part of Disney by Swungdash	Feb 26th, 2002 12:03:49 PM
ZMan, Pixar is not a division of Disney. They simply have a distribution deal through them. When the deal is up, Pixar can strike up a new deal with whomever they choose, or start their own distribution company (which Disney did when they created Buena Vista after getting sick of getting the short end stick from RCA and others...hmmm, sounds familiar).
Pixar AIN'T a divison of Disney. by minderbinder	Feb 26th, 2002 12:11:17 PM
It's a separate company, the mouse house is just a distributor. And they only have a five picture deal, after the next one Pixar may affiliate with a different studio or just (hopefully) strike out on their own.
Disney sucks by Dairanger	Feb 26th, 2002 12:42:25 PM
Well, I am going to miss traditional cell animation... anyway, I still don't think disney has made anything good since lion king, and the whole CGI mickey just sounds like they are jumping on the band wagon to me. The question is if they are going to hire decent writers or not. And then there is there raping of the classics lately(peter pan, cinderela), with these shitty-ass sequels. Oh, and pixar is the best western animation company right now. More because there movies(espically toy story) are going for a more general audience with good writing rather than the CGI. CGI may be the way things are going, but it doesn't do anything for me. It's all rather bland-looking. Now a GOOD mixing of computers and traditional animation would be interesting.
chicken little... by m@cleod	Feb 26th, 2002 12:49:24 PM
was the name of the kiddie porn magazine in Ricochet that Lithgow used to frame that dude. I don't know why I remember that.
My bad... by Z-Man	Feb 26th, 2002 01:15:08 PM
From now on I'll stick to commenting on zombie and Godzilla movies, and shut the fuck up about shit I know nothing about.
I was at the meeting in Hartford by moviezzz	Feb 26th, 2002 01:28:02 PM
The 3-D Mickey film looked great, as did the Lilo trailers (and they are very funny). However, the TREASURE PLANET wasn't all that impressive. Some interesting animation, but looked too much like ATLANTIS character wise.
"Yeeeeeeesss Miiiiiiiisssssssssss Diiiiiiiiimmmmmmmpppppplllllee by Lenny Nero	Feb 26th, 2002 01:46:43 PM

Disney/Pixar Relationship by Rudi T	Feb 26th, 2002 02:45:11 PM
You all have it wrong. Pixar is not a division of Disney, but Disney is way more than just a distributor of Pixar films. Basically, it's a joint vetnure. Disney pays half of all production/marketing costs, gets half the profit and "co-owns" each movie. It therefore has the right to approve the story "treatment" before production on a movie starts and, as a practical matter, Disney controls the creation and distribution of all "deriviative" works, i.e., sequels, television series, computer games, etc. This is not a LucasFilm/Fox type deal. Also, all you folks waiting for Pixar to split from Disney shouldn't hold your breath. Under their deal, Pixar can't release a movie with anyone else until a year after its last Disney film is released. Since Pixar still has three more movies left on this deal, you're looking at 2006 at the earliest. In fact, Pixar can't even enter into an agreement with any other distributor until after its next film, Finding Nemo, is released summer 2003. Besides, at this point, I tend to dismiss all these rumors of "bad blood" as exactly the type of negotiation posturing you would expect from two of the toughest, smartest SOB businessmen (Eisner and Jobs) around, who both want to make sure their next deal (if there is one) is as lucrative for themselves as possible and who both have plenty of leverage to play. I know you film geeks think it's as simple as Pixar flipping Disney the bird, but the Disney brand and its marketing/distribution machine is a huge plus for Pixar. On the other hand, Disney would truly miss Pixar's creative genius (unfortuneately lacking in its own animation dept. these days), as well as its technological assets. If I had to, I'd bet the two make a new deal within the next 12-24 mos., which may even be an outright purchase of Pixar by Disney. We shall see.
CGI Mickey is looooong overdo. by woj123	Feb 26th, 2002 02:48:21 PM
Disney used to be the pioneers of all that was Cartoons and Movies. I mean look at the animation: Walt was the first to use sound, the first to use color, the first to pioneer the layered background depth of field. Its just a shame that they are jumping into CGI a little late in the game. As far as Mickey as CGI I think that its great!!!! I was beginning to feel that the studio looked at Mickey as more of a money-corporate-logo, rather then the real living entertainment entity that he really is. As for as Disney's competition, Pixar is the major one to worry about. I think we all realize now that SHrek was a piece of garbage. That movie was definetely NOT timeless!
Iron Giant, Atlantis and a correct step by holyRoller	Feb 26th, 2002 03:07:14 PM
I agree that we need more things such as Iron Giant. It is unfortunate that so many people are rejecting Atlantis wholesale. While there was much left to be desired with this movie, it was the first movie from Disney that did not have characters singing mediocre tunes, and one of the first not to have a cutesy sidekick, in many years. Now, Atlantis did have a good deal of animation trouble and the characters were pretty limited in expression (confused, astounded, sad), but this was a big step toward more serious animation and was more aimed at adults than anything from the "new style" animation department. I was just watching the Snow White DVD and it was interesting to see how dark the black magic was of the queen and how evil they made it, kind of like the Night on Bald Mountain sequence. They would never do that now. On a similar note, they also took the old evangelism to the Native Americans section out of Johnny Appleseed, which I want to say right here really pissed me off, since that, at least, was historical fact from the life of Johnny Appleseed. Grrrrr.
Mickey doesn't need to be 3-D by TimBenzedrine	Feb 26th, 2002 04:05:17 PM
He just needs better writers and animators working on him. Mickey the little guy that lives in the suburbs is not very interesting and never has been. The mouse only gets a chance to show his range as a performer when he's placed in a larger than life situation. That's why they should be writing more action adventure stories that place him out west , or on a pirate ship, or in a haunted house, or even in outer space. Concentrate on situations that allow him to be heroic, like back in the days when when he was mixing it up with giants and ghosts and Peg Leg Pete. This is the only thing that will salvage his career and make him relevent to a new generation. Otherwise all you created is a new "gimmick" that will grow stale over time. And get rid of House of Mouse and bury it somewhere. That stuff is embarrassing.
Disney in WWII by m2298	Feb 26th, 2002 04:35:46 PM
ZeroCorpse: Disney won an Academy Aeard for Best Short Subject for DER FUEHRER'S FACE(1943) starring Donald Duck. There were also at least seven other wartime-themed shorts.
WWII continued by TimBenzedrine	Feb 26th, 2002 05:33:40 PM
Disney Studios made several films for the War dept . during WWII. They just don"t get shown on TV like the short subjects that were made at MGM or Warners' . Donald Duck and The Seven Dwarfs were featured in films that promoted War bonds. Disney made a feature film called Victory Through Air Power, as well as an anti-facism short short called Education for Death, which featured a charactature of Hitler as Seigfreid. Disney's art dept also supplied all branches of the armed services with special insignia designs for any military division that asked.They also did gremlin designs of their own for a feature that was never made long before Clampet's "Falling Hare" and "Russian Rhapsody" were made. Almost every animation studio in the country was involved in the war effort in some form or another . Do your research before you post.
Hey, I liked Atlantis! by BurninBullwinkle	Feb 26th, 2002 06:10:27 PM
First off, what's with dissing the design? I happened to be a big fan if only because a) it was done in conjunction with master illustrator Mike Mignola b) it's different from the way the Mouse usually designs things and c) I thought it fit the movie's story very well. Comic bookish and stylized. Onto other things. I'm looking forward to Lilo and Stitch. I thought Hercules and Emporer's New Groove were very funny and think the Diz animators can be hilarious if allowed to be. The chicken little film sounds a bit too much like the Aardam Tortoise and the Hare film that was abandoned. CGI Mickey? Oh joy... Will it be brilliant like Runaway Brain or vile like House of Mouse? TP sounds interesting and I'll likely be checking it out. So.... anyone else up for shooting Eisner in the gut with a musket? The more I think about the guy, the more I hate 'em. I choose to rest all problems with the Disney company squarely on his ego-centric shoulders.
CGI is just FANCY PUPPETRY by SnapT	Feb 26th, 2002 07:00:51 PM
The CGI animated movies do good because they have GOOD stories and the hand-drawn animated movies do badly because they have BAD stories. TOY STORY could've been a hand-drawn movie it still would've raked in the dough. Hand-drawn movies need good stories just like CGI movies do (witness FINAL FANTASY). The End.
No mention of Tron: Killer App? by Darth 3p0	Feb 26th, 2002 07:20:53 PM
The Tron 20th Anniversary DVD makes mention of 'Killer App' being on the drawing board for 2003. What's up with that?
Defending ZeroCorpse by MCVamp	Feb 26th, 2002 07:31:10 PM
He wasn't referring to stuff from Walt's day. He was referring to recent films ("Atlantis" mentioned "the Kaiser," but that was pretty much it, and "Peter Pan 2" opens during WWII.) Although to be fair, Zero, even though it wasn't "Saving Private Pan," part of the deal was that it was Jane's point of view, and that wartime was no time for silly stories about a flying fruitcake and his magical mini-tart.
No, Zero Corpse was commenting on the absence of anti-Nazi films by TimBenzedrine	Feb 26th, 2002 08:11:43 PM
Which is simply not true.
Whoops, my bad. by MCVamp	Feb 27th, 2002 12:22:09 AM
I was skimming and all I caught was the last line about WWII. Never happen again.
chastain86, Mickey Mouse last real theatrical film appearance by TimBenzedrine	Feb 27th, 2002 01:16:04 PM
Aside from a few minutes of new linking animation in Fantasia 2000, Mickey starred in The Prince and the Pauper about 12 years ago. It was a featurette attatched to The Rescuers Down Under when that film was first released. Personally , I felt they could have expanded its storyline and released it on its own as a feature.
You forgot Mickey was the star of "RUNAWAY BRAIN" by Bregalad_	Feb 27th, 2002 03:10:16 PM
But that was just a theatrical 7-minute short that played for a week. His appearance in Fantasia 2K just doesn't count. It's pretty much true that younger kids have no real relationship with Mickey anymore. Disney is long overdue in giving him a feature film of his own.
The State of Disney by badbunny9	May 10th, 2002 07:44:21 PM
I have been Disney-obsessed since the tender age of four when I first saw Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs in the same theater with Roy Disney and the late Adriana Casselotti (Snow's voice actress for the uninformed). I know more about the House of Mouse than even I thought I'd want to. I've even been a Disney Store whore for 18 months. Disney as a company is not perfect anymore than Disney the man was. The major difference between then and now, though? Good ole Walt made movies he was passionate about. Eisner makes movies for the cash. Direct to Video sequels are the devil's handiwork, if you ask me. And Mr. Moneybags Eisner is already planning a DTV sequel to Lilo and Stitch complete with spin-off TV series! Lilo and Stitch looks to be the first Disney movie since 1996 that isn't just playing for the kiddies. The only way Disney is going to make a much needed comeback is to start doing grittier, experimental animated movies. I see Atlantis as the Black Cauldron of this Disney era...A desire to do something more adult, more relevent but failing because of the animators' fascination with themselves. Here's hoping that Lilo and Stitch and Treasure Planet and even flipping Chicken Little become the Little Mermaid and Lion King and Toy Story of a whole new generation. But I'm not really holding my breath.

Talkbacks

Jim Hill on the future of Disney Animation via a Stockholder's Meeting in Hartford!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks