|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Author
|
Topic: Walt Disney Feature Animation Florida closes!
|
Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 01-14-2004 04:38 PM
I'm surprised this hasn't surfaced on here yet.
After stopping production on "A Few Good Ghosts" and laying off 50 animators in October, as of Monday, Walt Disney has shut down the Walt Disney Feature Animation Flodia studio. Here is a commentary on the situation from the Orlando Sentinel:
quote:
THE END? A change in Disney animation strategy leaves a colorful legacy cloaked in black.
By: Roger Moore, Sentinel Movie Critic
Disney, the company that rode to glory on the colorful, animated backs of a mouse and seven dwarfs, took a giant step getting out of hand-drawn animation altogether Monday when it shut down Disney Feature Animation Florida, its Orlando studio.
It's a "cost-cutting" move from a company that isn't so much soul-searching as selling its soul -- and selling short. This follows years of overseas studio closures as well as recent layoffs here and at the studio's flagship animation operation in Burbank. Disney has even been selling off the animation gear, down to the desks the animators used to do their scribbling.
Disney isn't getting out of animation entirely. But the company is abandoning a way of making films that has connected with audiences for more than 70 years, an expensive, labor-intensive and painstaking style of animation that always had been worth the expense -- up to now.
That means that the Orlando-made Brother Bear and next April's computer-and-hand-animated Home on the Range will be the last Disney cartoons animated by artists sketching and painting and making the characters move. They will be the last films that Walt himself could have picked up a pencil and pitched in on, were he thawed out from that freezer where urban legend has long ensconced him.
No more Fantasia hippos in tutus, dancing with caped alligators, given their fluid, comic dimension by painstaking, cell-by-cell drawing and painting.
No more little elephants who can fly or little Hawaiian girls who go their own way, breaking our hearts because feelings transmit better when they go straight from hand to page, without a silicon chip in between.
Computer-animated movies from Toy Story and Finding Nemo to Dreamworks' Shrek have boasted of the increasing "realism" of the forms and motion. But nobody goes to a cartoon for the realism. We want abstract, the whimsy, the personality and humanity that rendering figures by hand, frame by frame, gives us. Disney, the studio that invented and perfected the "classic" hand-drawn animated feature film with 1937's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, 1941's Dumbo and 1967's The Jungle Book, will never win a best animated feature Oscar for the sort of handcrafted films that made the studio famous. That's ironic, given that this is an Oscar category pretty much invented to honor films such as Beauty and the Beast (1991), The Lion King (1994) and Tarzan (1999).
Sure, all those films had a bit of computer assistance, here and there. And Disney expects to share in Pixar's computer-animated 3-D glory if Finding Nemo cops the animation Oscar this year. But already the buzz is building for the eccentric and personal -- and decidedly hand-drawn -- French cartoon The4 Triplets of Belleville. Disney doesn't make them like that anymore. (And if you believe the Disney spin that it has two more traditionally animated features "in development," I have some Florida swamp land I'd like to show you -- right next to the multimillion-dollar animation headquarters being abandoned at Walt Disney World.
For Orlando, this is a bitter blow, and not just for the more than 250 animators who will either be uprooted or have to change careers. While Burbank was frittering away millions on ideas bad (Hercules, Atlantis: The Lost Empire, The Emperor's New Groove) and badly executed (Treasure Planet), the Orlando operation was Disney's home of the hits.
The little studio that started as a walk-through attraction at the Disney-MGM Studios theme park earned its stripes by making Roger Rabbit shorts. It later became home to much of the animation division's best work -- the Eastern-art inspired Mulan, the retro water colored Lilo & Stitch -- films that recalled the golden age of animation while reminding Disney that story and emotion are what brings cartoons to life.
Disney's historic difficulties in wrestling with stories that weren't the whitest of white bread disappeared when the work was done far from the eyes of the big bosses in California. The Chinese folk tale Mulan, a dazzlingly stylish telling of the African-American Legend of John Henry, the watercolor Hawaiians of Lilo & Stitch and the American Indians of Brother Bear all rolled out of Orlando.
If Brother Bear -- the weakest of the Orlando-made cartoons but still a moneymaker -- suffered from the same story and character problems that have troubled the Burbank factory of late, it may be because of neglect. The front office stopped sweating the details on these films years ago. It has long been more concerned with renewing its contract with Pixar, slashing costs and replicating the fluky box-office bonanza of The Lion King, the hand-drawn megahit that made accountants salivate and the studio overextend.
After the success of Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and finally The Lion King, the rare and doted-on animation "events" that came every few years -- roughly once in a childhood -- became something the studio wanted to count on a couple of times a year. Films that might have gone direct to video earlier now found their way into theaters. Worst of all, those cut-rate films, from 2000's The Tigger Movie to 2001's Recess, cost less than producing a classic -- and earned money.
The pricey "event" films became devalued -- compromised, formulaic, or attached too strongly to a single clever notion (Gerald Scarfe's distinct animation style in 1997's Hercules, for instance).
But that's happened before. Disney has weathered dry spells, when the ideas and the animators got stale and the management crotchety; the whole Robin Hood (1973) through Oliver & Company (1988) era was the most recent. Other animation houses wither outsourced their hand-drawn animation overseas or got out of it altogether.
But there was always somebody at Disney -- some credit Disney nephew Roy Disney, who just quit the board in a struggle over power and vision -- who wouldn't let the bean counters kill off Walt's animation division.
It took Jeffery Katzenberg to micro manage animation back to life. Now he's the K in Dreamworks SKG, making "tradigital" Disney knockoffs such as Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron and Sinbad.
Maybe the staggering success of the computer-animated Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and Shrek has truly rendered hand-drawing characters "old-fashioned" or impractical. Maybe spotting a common Florida lizard and being inspired to make an alien named Stitch skitter rather than walk, as Orlando animator Alex Kuperschmidt did, can be done better with fewer animators playing with a computer -- in Burbank.
But take away Nemo's 3-D novelty. Give its story and jokes to men and women with pens and ink. It wouldn't have been the same movie. The folks who drew Beauty and the Beast or Mulan might have made it even better.
Disney's current leadership can sputter all they want about the nature of animation evolving, about how they're not "killing" anything, about the need to slash costs to boost a deflated stock price. But the House that Walt Built may never be the same.
Disney boss Michael Eisner is at an age where he should start thinking about his Disney legacy. Killing the thing that made Disney Disney is not the way he should want to be remembered.
----
I got a few more articles with facts and figures i'll post when I find them...
=TMP=
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Reed
Better Projection Pays
Posts: 5246
From: Northampton, PA
Registered: Sep 1999
|
posted 01-16-2004 09:25 AM
quote: The type of animation doesn't matter. What really matters is a good story.
HEAR! HEAR! Mike has it pegged! Parallels are continually drawn (no pun) between 3D and traditional 2D animation, when they are two different things. 3D computer animation is simply another way to tell a story -- it is not a successor to cartoon animation.
What the article didn't state is that traditional animation lives on, mainly on television, and that work is being done on computers, too. It's not a 3D/2D, either/or thing. The drawings and animation are still done by hand. Only now, they're inked, opaqued, and shot on computers.
quote: By: Roger Moore, Sentinel Movie Critic
Oh, good, I was wondering what happened to him. He was my favorite "Bond".
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Christian Appelt
Jedi Master Film Handler
Posts: 505
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Registered: Dec 2001
|
posted 01-16-2004 09:06 PM
quote: 3D computer animation is simply another way to tell a story -- it is not a successor to cartoon animation.
Right, 3D computer animation is visually much closer to stop-motion puppet animation than to traditional cel animation. 3D characters move in a virtual world with photographic properties like textures, lighting, camera lens focal length, so going 3D is not an evolution of 2D animation.
What these idiots that run the Disney company forget is that Disney was not only a pioneer of animation technique, but he cared more about story than anybody else in the animation business. For many years, the company has been turning out xerox copies of old Disney films slightly updated, but they have lost any contact with new modes of storytelling.
I am very often surprised what good and funny animation is done for TV, but nothing of that comes from Disney. They also have neglected the possibility of making animation a medium for adult viewers, not in the Ralph Bakshi way, but in the serious way that good Japanese animation films like PRINCESS MONONOKE or AKIRA have. I would also have much preferred a new LOTR trilogy in good 2D or 3D animation style to the lice action version.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 01-16-2004 09:53 PM
Here's the disturbing thing. The asshole MBA "suits" out there are killing off the analog animation methods because they fantasize about cashing in on the 3D thing for a fast buck. Typically computer illiterate, these guys figure since it is all computerized it can be cranked out at light speed. Do these guys realize 3D animation is slower, more difficult and more costly than traditional hand drawn methods? In most fields of computer graphics, professional often start out with hand-drawn sketches and color comps before they ever touch the computer. It is just too slow and cumbersome as hell to do it all in the computer.
The suits also have to realize the limits of technology, time and the talent pool. Learning a 3D app like Maya isn't exactly like tackling the latest version of CorelDRAW. You have a monster learning curve, expensive hardware requirements, very few training centers and few users courageous enough to give the app a try.
Alias/Wavefront is so eager to grow the talent pool that it offers free "personal learning editions" of all their big name software. Not just Maya either. You can download PLE versions of Alias Studio (for industrial design) or even the Alias Auto Studio program, which runs upwards of $30,000 if you actually buy a copy. Jeez!
Anyway, I'm getting off on a tangent. The point I'm trying to make is that there are not very many people out there that can do 3D well. You've got Pixar, which arguably represents the top level talent in the world. PDI is not bad either and Square did some good work on "Final Fantasy." After that, things really get stretched. For instance, look at how much fake looking CGI we have to stomach in many live action movies!
I just don't see where this bonanza is that the suits are dreaming about. Their notion is especially silly considering how horribly difficult it has been for people working in the graphic arts industry over the past decade, particularly in recent years. How do they expect a new crop of talent to come along and invest in lots of expensive new hardware so they can learn expensive new software when most are barely able to even make ends meet!?
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Thomas Procyk
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1842
From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 01-17-2004 01:58 PM
Here's another article with a few more details: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040112/ap_on_bi_ge/disney_layoffs_4
[b]Disney Closes Orlando Animation Studio[b] By GARY GENTILE, AP Business Writer
LOS ANGELES - The Walt Disney Co. is shuttering its Orlando, Fla.-based animation studio, cutting about 258 jobs, as the company shifts from hand-drawn animated films to computer-generated features and videos.
Some of the employees will be offered jobs in Burbank, Calif., Disney said Monday in announcing the move.
The company has been steadily trimming its animation department for the past few years, from a peak of 2,200 employees in 1999 to 600, all based in Burbank after Monday's announcement. Disney has shuttered similar animation outposts in Paris and Tokyo, which were opened at the height of the boom in hand-drawn animation.
Over the past few years, as computer-generated 3-D films proved far more successful at the box office than traditional 2-D films, Disney shifted from having a large number of animators on staff to hiring on a per-film basis.
The move resulted in layoffs and major salary cuts and an emphasis on producing less costly 2-D films. The 2002 success "Lilo & Stitch," for instance, was produced for about $80 million compared with $140 million for the box-office flop "Treasure Planet," released the same year.
Disney has also been releasing a larger number of animated movies and sequels direct to video, a move that boots profits by vastly reducing the cost of production.
The Orlando studio, opened in 1989, has animated some of Disney's more popular films, including "Lilo & Stitch," "Mulan," and this year's "Brother Bear."
But Disney has had its most success with animated films it produces in cooperation with Pixar Animation Studio, which uses computers. Hits produced that way include "Finding Nemo," "Toy Story" and "Monsters Inc."
The closing of its Orlando unit may, in fact, signal that Disney is close to announcing an extension of its deal with Pixar, according to one analyst.
That deal is set to expire in 2006 with the release of "Cars," the fifth film in the agreement that has Disney and Pixar split profits from the movies. Pixar has been pushing for a new pact where it owns its movies and pays Disney a set fee to distribute them.
If Disney believed its Pixar relationship was about to significantly change or even fall apart, it would be beefing up its internal animation capacity instead of cutting it, according to David Miller, a financial analyst with Sander Morris Harris.
"It infers that Disney will be producing a lower number of animated films in the coming years," Miller said Monday. "Where is the film production going to come from? Most likely from Pixar, should they extend their co-production agreement."
Disney has only two animated films in production, both of which are computer-generated — "Chicken Little," due in 2005, and "A Day With Wilbur Robinson," set for release in 2006.
The studio canceled production earlier this year on "A Few Good Ghosts," which was a hybrid of hand-drawn and computer animation.
The Disney film "Home on the Range," a hand-drawn movie produced in Burbank, is set to open in April. The Disney film "Teacher's Pet," a big-screen version of its popular television show, opens in theaters this week.
The studio does have some traditional hand-drawn feature films in development, according to Disney spokeswoman Heidi Trotta.
Disney shares rose 1 cent to close at $24.88 in trading Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.
-----
Maybe part of the deal with Pixar was, "The only animated films you release will be from us if you still want to split profits." and Disney complied... that would be pretty stupid, though.
=TMP=
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 3 pages: 1 2 3
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|