Once again that's assuming they don't toss out the entire EU though...
The Disney Thread: For Everything Concerning the House of Mouse
- Thread starter filmfanatic
- Start date
So are they cancelling that new Mickey Mouse movie they were working on now that they've canned all 2d animation? Because I really don't give two shits about Mickey if he doesn't look like him.
EVERYTHING that has been released up to this point has taken it into account. Every book. Every game. I seriously doubt they'd just toss it out, when it's the most obvious move after beating the Empire. It's not like Luke is some great general they need to coordinate troops and they have tons of great pilots.
....RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH! WHAT?! SERIOUSLY?! Fucking dammit! Just when I think Disney isn't evil- THEY CANCEL ALL 2-D ANIMATED FEATURE FILMS! In short I am angry.
Well, we don't actually know if they were planning on that being 2D animation or computer animation. Though, 2D animation would be a better approach when using characters like Mickey Mouse or Roger Rabbit.
North_Ranger
Staff member
...
Well.
F***.
Well.
F***.
I like Princess & the Frog. 
So do I, and the new Winnie the Pooh film was also pretty good.I like Princess & the Frog.
Oh man I completely forgot about that new Pooh film. I feel guilty now.
Seriously though, with them cancelling 2D films we all know what is going to happen: a surplus of crappy 3D films. Its bad enough Cars is getting a direct to DVD series about frickin' PLANES, who knows what crap they'll shill out? And then Dreamworks will compete with more schlock and Disney will do the same, and next thing you know we'll be in another animation dark age!
Seriously though, with them cancelling 2D films we all know what is going to happen: a surplus of crappy 3D films. Its bad enough Cars is getting a direct to DVD series about frickin' PLANES, who knows what crap they'll shill out? And then Dreamworks will compete with more schlock and Disney will do the same, and next thing you know we'll be in another animation dark age!
Planes is coming out to theaters in North America and Europe August 2013. Looks pretty good from what I've seen so far, there is a new trailer on the Wreck-It Ralph dvd.
Oh okay then, so there is an actual chance of this being good. I heard straight to DVD, and (Straight to DVD) + (Spin-off/sequel) = usually terrible.
BUT STILL- I do fear Hollywood may become too reliant on 3D animation, and Disney's ousting of classical animation may be a sign of that. The most I can look forward to in terms of a big time theatrical 2D film release...is that Looney Tunes reboot. THIS IS WHAT I LOOK FORWARD TO NOW!
Edit: Feel free to probe me wrong in terms of theatrical 2D animated features, I would really like that.
Dude, you're like a brother, but I will not "probe" you. EVER.
3d animation does offer more opportunities to do stuff with properties, but just the sheer amount of time required for 2d animation is going to work against it. I'm not really worried about it, honest, because of the attitude with the people running Disney right now, namely John Lassiter.
Not even after a couple of drinks?Dude, you're like a brother, but I will not "probe" you. EVER.
The problem with 2D animation is that it's VERY labor intensive if you want to get it done within any kind of reasonable time and it's not like Disney can just outsource the art to a studio in Japan or China, not for a major motion picture. That means they have to pay the big bucks for animators in the US, Canada, and Europe.
I think the real issue here is Lassiter is taking some serious flak from the board and share holders and he's just trying to shut them up.
I think the real issue here is Lassiter is taking some serious flak from the board and share holders and he's just trying to shut them up.
figmentPez
Staff member
I'm hoping that at some point computer assisted 2D animation reaches the point where it looks indistinguishable from fully hand drawn animation, but the labor cost is reduced enough to make it economical.
Here's hoping. In the meantime, I hope the tech they worked out for Paperman can be applied successfully to a feature-length animated film.
It's really not. 2d and 3d animation is pretty comparable budget wise. In fact Toy Story had a crazy high budget compared to the 2d Disney Movie that year. You're right about 3d advantages though, although they're really more labor saving than anything related to telling a story, free inbetweens, simulation of elements for animation (hair, balloons, fabric, etc.) and asset reuse.
There will probably be another some day, but it's not going to happen with the current board.
Mustn't ... hit ... disagree ... grak ...
Are you watching different Dreamworks movies than I am? They've been pretty consistently good, with a few exceptions.
...And Emma Watson has passed on the Cinderella film.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=101449
In other news, Disney is also planning a new live-action reimagining of Beauty and the Beast called...The Beast.
You know, Disney, I still do like you. But...I think some of the live-action stuff your planning needs to be reconsidered. Namely, raiding your animated films for live-action stuff. I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea. The Order of the Seven film (which has since been cancelled) sounded like an intriguing idea. Heck, even a new Cinderella film by Kenneth Branagh can hold promise. However, not everything from the "Disney Vault" needs to have a live-action version or reimagining (*cough* Alice in Wonderland *cough*). If you are so intent on taking animated films to expand, reimagine or re-adapt as live-action, take care to pick something that can actually work to have a new version and not just something that has name-brand value.
Yes, I am aware of how it can be ridiculous to make an argument about name-brand value when talking about Disney, but it just makes sense. Disney has plenty of name-brand stuff that people are at least familiar with. Pick something, then, that can work to have a new version of.
http://www.comingsoon.net/news/movienews.php?id=101449
In other news, Disney is also planning a new live-action reimagining of Beauty and the Beast called...The Beast.
You know, Disney, I still do like you. But...I think some of the live-action stuff your planning needs to be reconsidered. Namely, raiding your animated films for live-action stuff. I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea. The Order of the Seven film (which has since been cancelled) sounded like an intriguing idea. Heck, even a new Cinderella film by Kenneth Branagh can hold promise. However, not everything from the "Disney Vault" needs to have a live-action version or reimagining (*cough* Alice in Wonderland *cough*). If you are so intent on taking animated films to expand, reimagine or re-adapt as live-action, take care to pick something that can actually work to have a new version and not just something that has name-brand value.
Yes, I am aware of how it can be ridiculous to make an argument about name-brand value when talking about Disney, but it just makes sense. Disney has plenty of name-brand stuff that people are at least familiar with. Pick something, then, that can work to have a new version of.
No you're right, I thought those Open Season and Happily Ever After movies were Dreamworks. Man I mix up Sony pictures and Dreamworks a lot.
Seriously though, a live action Beauty and the Beast movie...called "The Beast"? Am I to assume that since there is no beauty in said title, that it is a prequel? If so- UGH! Now, I can get behind an "Oz the great and powerful" film, thats a back-story worth checking out. But the Beast? The Beast's back-story is covered in the freaking film! He was a dick to a witch, the witch cursed him(and for some reason his entire wait-staff) and then he became a furry. There is seriously no more to add. Unless they pull out all the stops with musical numbers I ain't botherin' with it.
Yeah, the only live-action Beauty and the Beast film I'm excited about is the one Guillermo del Toro is making for Warner Bros. (which is having Emma Watson as Belle).
In terms of Disney mining their vault for live-action material, here is what they have at various levels of development right now:
- Cinderella
- Maleficent (basically a Sleeping Beauty prequel exploring the story of Maleficent and how she became so evil)
- Mr. Toad's Wild Ride (based on The Wind in the Willows, barely anything happening developmentwise with it)
- The Beast (which I've already mentioned)
Honestly, the thing that most interests me of the batch is Cinderella (although I wouldn't mind a full-length Disney film of Wind in the Willows rather than just the earlier short, but I feel that might work better animated rather than live-action). If I were to do some mining in there for live-action stuff, I'd say to revive the Order of the Seven project and maybe make a feature based on Casey at the Bat.
No, it most certainly would not be a prequel. It would be a retelling, but with more of a focus on how dangerous The Beast is, but how much Belle believes she can change him with the power of her love.
You know, because Twilight.
Ooh boy, one of the good faires going to sing a song about being popular isn't she?
Well, the plot of the film will be about Maleficent (who is a fairy) being in pursuit of acceptance then having a fall into darkness, so...
Also, Angelina Jolie will be playing Maleficent.
Does anyone know if they are still doing that Gargoyles movie? You know, the one that ISN'T about the cult favorite franchise they already own for some reason?
I have NEVER seen a bad live action adaption of the Wind in the Willows. Here's a clip of the 1996 Terry Jones one, though I prefer the one with Bob Hoskins.
Nothing else is really happening with that Gargoyles movie. I'll have to keep an eye out for the one with Bob Hoskins. The Terry Jones one was enjoyable, I just wouldn't mind a full-length animated adaptation of the story from Disney.
By the way, there's a whole new wave of Mickey Mouse shorts on the way. Here's the first of them, entitled Croissant de Triomphe.
http://video.disney.com/watch/croissant-de-triomphe-4d7b3aae690a98650d776d97
If you live in the US and have Starz/Encore, I know they show the Bob Hoskins one all the time. This is the one I'm talking about.
...wait Disney is making a movie about Gargoyles and it has nothing to do with the show? What next, a movie called Kim Possible thats about a pharmacologist who sees ghosts? Because that would be weird.
There are things called gargoyles besides the characters in the Disney cartoon.
That's not the point. The point is that Disney hasn't done shit with Gargoyles as a franchise, aside from nightly airings of the series on Disney XD (which they might not be doing anymore) and a short lived comic (ended because Disney wanted a ridiculous licensing fee from Weisman). You can't even get all the series on DVD because Disney won't release it. This is despite it being one of the most critically acclaimed series they've ever had.
So why would they just get rid of all that instead of rebooting the series for a new audience?
Even as a kid, I could tell that Gargoyles was rife with sexual tension. Even little kid poe thought that Goliath and Elisa should just fuck and get it over with.
And Demona gave me strange feelings as a kid. This.. probably actually explains a lot.
Goliath had a similar effect for a friend of mine.
Basically, that cartoon gave everyone that watched it weird fetishes.