Disney Feature Animation - Dead?!

[Joe Wagner]

Well it sounds like the other foot has dropped at Disney's Burbank studio in Cali. Rumor has it that the feature animation department is basically being destroyed. It looks like "Sweating Bullets" will be the last feature to make it out of this office and "The Bears" (a film I thought sounded pretty kewl) will probably never make it off of the ground.

For more info on this click here. (http://www.animated-movies.com)

Hopefully this all turns out to be a really bad rumor but somehow I have the feeling it isn't - I mean why keep the feature animation department open when CGI's appear to be extremely profitable and you can use your TV animation studios to produce features that lack stories, crisp animation and can be marketed quickly - via DTV or theatrical release. Personally I've disliked the idea of the "cheapquels" but if this rumor is true it means that not only have they killed their past successes but they've also managed to destroy any hope of getting future classics. Thanks a ton Eisner!

If there is one good thing that can come out of this - it might be that the other studios pick up the slack and start producing (and advertising) more cel animated stuff - esp Fox, WB and Dreamworks. I hope Spirit does great for Dreamworks and shows them what Disney's done wrong with all of these "cheapquels". That and I hope Fox realizes that Titan AE and Anastasia could have been huge if they would have marketed it the way they did Ice Age. Who knows maybe WB will realize the same thing with their lack of ads for the Iron Giant.

Either way - it looks like Disney is retiring from the thing they're most famous for.

Comments?

-Joe!

[oranthal]

i just read the article and i can not believe this. i think that kids today really like the CGI stuff though i think most everyone here prefers cel animation; there was a poll a few weeks back that suggests this. maybe disney is just laying off workers to save on cost. either way, it doesn't look good.

[Pilmedium]

Well, if this is false, I don't expect to be hearing about any good ones, anyway. If they've already ruined themselves, let them close! (no offense to fans of what they have been doing recently).

[Dee]

DISNEY SICKENS ME! My mother went to school with someone who became a disney Animator. He said once he go to where he dreamed, they made him switch over to CG!

SHAMEFUL! DISNEY IS A SELL OUT!

Traditional FOREVER!

[Batmex]

Their many cheapquels are a clear sign that they're barely breathing, using all means to stay alive(tuough not in the better shape)

[mbaker]

Run for your lives, the Zoogs are coming to take over the world! lock your doors, hide under your beds! Call the Militia!!

Just being sarcastic, but seriously folks. This is all Di$ney's fault. If they would just come up with new ideas, and try to break the image that so many average americans associate Di$ney with, they'd still be in business. They should've continued to use their TV unit to produce more quality shows instead of these dang cheapqules! Alot of people are to blame for this, especially Michael Eisner! I remember wanting to work there when I was younger, but I guess it wasn't meant to be since their output took a nosedive some time back. The other studios are no different either. The only language they understand is cash (Not that there's anything wrong with cash, but still.) I also agree that if Fox would've marketed Titan A.E. the same way they maketed Ice Age, maybe it would've been more sucsessful. (We can only hope that it becomes A cult classic sometime in the future.) Warner Bros. could've made some good films with the same kind of calibure as their cartoon shorts, and their silver age TV shows, but they keep missing the oppertunity to do so. Let's hope this will teach Di$ney, and the rest of the animation industry a hard lesson that the medium can do more than just sell toys, showtunes, and propaganda.

[Captin "Hank" Murphy]

Well they certainly put another foot in the grave with this idea.

*sarcastice*"And to celebrate the way his company is being run on his 100'th birthday, Walt Disney will begin rolling in his grave.(like he's been doing for quite some time now.)"

I made a topic some days erlier about the current state of Disney, you can view it here (http://forums.toonzone.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=22178) .

[Inkan1969]

An article about what's really happening is over here.

http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020318/200203190054000027_1.html

Disney is laying off 250 jobs from the Burbank Feature animation department.

You have to know that the Feature Animation department has two divisions. One in Burbank and one in Florida. It's the Florida division that made "Lilo and Stitch". What most people seem to believe is that Disney might convert the Burbank division to doing 3-D CGI films. BUT the Orlando division is still going strong, with projects to do after "Lilo and Stitch".

From what I've heard, "Lilo and Stitch" is supposed to be excellent. I think it'll do very well at the box office when it comes on in June. That should help spark a new interest in making "traditional" animated films.

- Inkan

[DerekPowers]

Originally posted by Inkan1969
An article about what's really happening is over here.

http://biz.yahoo.com/djus/020318/200203190054000027_1.html

Disney is laying off 250 jobs from the Burbank Feature animation department.

You have to know that the Feature Animation department has two divisions. One in Burbank and one in Florida. It's the Florida division that made "Lilo and Stitch". What most people seem to believe is that Disney might convert the Burbank division to doing 3-D CGI films. BUT the Orlando division is still going strong, with projects to do after "Lilo and Stitch".

From what I've heard, "Lilo and Stitch" is supposed to be excellent. I think it'll do very well at the box office when it comes on in June. That should help spark a new interest in making "traditional" animated films.

- Inkan

so this doesnt mean disney will stop making traditional animated films, just focus more attention than they have in the past on cgi films?? i couldnt read the whole article on yahoo since i dont have a yahoo id. can anyone confirm the details of this big event, because it seems that if disney keeps its orlando division as traditional, then all the worries us disney fans may have may be and over reaction. anyone know?

well i have mixed feelings about this. the sad (or good) fact is CG in movies and animation is the future. and its about time disney took a real shot at it, instead of the pathetic "dinosaur".

but where does that leave Pixar's relationship with disney?? i had the fortune of going to a screening of monster's inc a few weeks ago where john lasseter (who directed toy story 1&2, a bugs life, hes THE head honcho at pixar when it comes to their animated features) gave a lecture and answered questions. AND i asked him what the future had in store for pixar and disney's relationship after their 5 picture deal is up. he said that thier relationship is great and pixar would love to continue working with disney the way they are now even after the original deal is over. so will this change things???

but i find it quite ironic that most cg people, for example, the people who animated ice age, all have traditional animation backgrounds. i definately dont think cg could ever replace tradtional animation in any way. this is just a fad, imo. peace.

[Chibi Kageboshi]

seriously, what is their problem? i dont see whats so difficult about making hit movies or tv cartoons whin you have billions of dollares. their damn stupid

[Inkan1969]

so this doesnt mean disney will stop making traditional animated films,

At least for now, the Orlando division will still make traditional animated films. Hopefully a good performance by "Lilo and Stitch" will solidify the Orlando division's position. The Burbank division..., well right now it's a layoff, and there's "Sweating Bullets" and "Bears". But after that Disney at present seems only interested in 3-D CGI projects from that part of Feature Animation.


but where does that leave Pixar's relationship with disney??

Beats me. I do know that Disney Feature is developping two CGI films. Mark Dindal's "Chicken Little", and "The Snow Queen".

- Inkan

[William C. Maune]

For what it's worth, the official word from Disney is that they are not pulling out of traditional animation.

From Showbizdata.com:

DISNEY TO SLASH ANIMATION UNIT AGAIN
Today's Headlines
Disney is set to cut another 250 - 265 employees from its animation division, reducing it to about 1,000 -- half the size it was just three years ago, the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times reported today (Tuesday). The cuts come at a time when Disney's budgets for animated features have risen to well over $100 million and when ticket sales for those features have fallen sharply, the WSJ observed. They also come as other studios' animation units have begun to compete successfully with Disney, principally by producing computer-generated films. A case in point is Fox's Ice Age, which cost about $50 million to produce and which is expected to earn back its production cost in the first week of release. Nevertheless, Disney animation chief Tom Schumacher denied that Disney is planning to pull out of traditional animation. "We're an ambidextrous studio tht can create traditional and digital movies," he told the Times.

http://www.showbizdata.com/contacts/picknews.cfm?id=28776

[Pilmedium]

Of course they want to switch to CGI. Anything to make a profit! :rolleyes:

The Burbank division needs to be closed. :cool:

[mbaker]

I guess it's official. Di$ney has sold out. However, this shouldn't surprise me. Di$ney will do just about anything for the all mighty dollor ( You bent it, you bought it.) regardless of quality. Just look at the Disney Channel, or ABC's One Saturday Morning, and you'll see what I mean. I think The Powerpuff Girls episode, "Major Competition" is the perfect metaphor for this boneheaded decision. Ironically, in times of turmoil, great art emurges, so we can only hope for the best. Remember Mr. & Mrs. America, it's not about the pretty graphics, It's about the story!

Narrator: oh no, the city of townsville is under attack by a giant monster.

Girl: Nothing to worry about, Major Man will save us.

Guy: That's right, leave it to Major Man.

[pencilsharp]

Sigh... the Moronitis is spreading like wildfire in the animation industry. 'Natch, before Roger Rabbit, there wasn't really much of an animation industry to speak of.

Anyways, Moronitis has apparently spread from Viacom (MTV Animation shuttered, Nick fighting with their creators) to Disney. I don't believe that there was some kind of carrier betwixt the two, since Michael Eisner is plenty enough Moron for everybody, but I won't let this devolve into another "Eisner is the Queen of Hearts reborn" diatribe.

Aw heck, why not?

Mikey has been shooting for this for years, now. Ever since he established Disney toon studios in Australia, et al, for the TV shows and saw just how cheap Taiwanese labor can be, he's been looking for some excuse to rid himself of all those pesky unionized animators. Nothing like a down market to do that.

And the funniest thing? Ol' Walt isn't spinning in his grave over this. That stingy old coot wishes he could reach down (or up... :eek: ) and pat Mike on the back.

Once a Mickey Mouse operation, always a Mickey Mouse operation.

[Randy H]

Well, while I'm dissappointed with the news of the layoffs, you have to remember that Disney Feature Animation employs over 1000 people. Laying off 250 isn't going to shut them down. You can't blame a business for wanting to make money. That's what keeps food on Glen Keane's table. If the films can't make money, people can't keep making em. "Starving Artists" aren't necessarily good artists. Besides, how many of us went to see Titan AE or Iron Giant multiple times at the box office? Or Osmosis Jones? How many of us told our friends and got them going to those movies? Usually we waited till those films had flopped, then complained about it when we finally saw them on video. If we'd get out and see the movies, we could help the situation.

I think you guys are right about Lilo and Stitch. It's gonna' tear up the box office, and with Treasure Planet coming close after that, traditional animation will be back on track. Both of those films are supposed to have very good stories, and I'm already hooked on Lilo and Stitch. The trailer is pure gold, and really shows alot of depth.

Here's hoping!

~Randy H

[RogueMartian]

Wow. That's all I can think of to say. I always knew di$ney was going to go all out CGI but I didn't think it would be so soon..its kind of depressing considering how much I hate that medium. I don't like how it looks and I don't like how its used. Personally I always liked computer graphics as a back up to make 2D animation look cooler or smoother, but entire films of CGI just bother me. And now disney is going to focus on them. Its just depressing.

[Joe Wagner]

Originally posted by Randy H
Well, while I'm dissappointed with the news of the layoffs, you have to remember that Disney Feature Animation employs over 1000 people. Laying off 250 isn't going to shut them down. You can't blame a business for wanting to make money. That's what keeps food on Glen Keane's table. If the films can't make money, people can't keep making em. "Starving Artists" aren't necessarily good artists. Besides, how many of us went to see Titan AE or Iron Giant multiple times at the box office? Or Osmosis Jones? How many of us told our friends and got them going to those movies? Usually we waited till those films had flopped, then complained about it when we finally saw them on video. If we'd get out and see the movies, we could help the situation.

I think you guys are right about Lilo and Stitch. It's gonna' tear up the box office, and with Treasure Planet coming close after that, traditional animation will be back on track. Both of those films are supposed to have very good stories, and I'm already hooked on Lilo and Stitch. The trailer is pure gold, and really shows alot of depth.

Here's hoping!

~Randy H

While they may only be laying off 250 people this is going to put a huge strain on the remaining 1000 or so employees left, IMO. Disney is famous for working on multiple features at once - usually having one or two being produced at their Florida Studios and another one or two in production at Burbank. Overall this closing means we are going to see less and less of the traditional cel animation from Disney. While the Florida studios is finishing Lilo and Stitch + Treasure Planet, Burbank was finishing up Sweating Bullets and was supposed to be starting on The Bears (another Disney movie I thought had a lot of potential).

This pretty much comes down to the bottom line that if Disney wants to put out an animated feature once to twice a year they're going to be using their TV Animation Studios a lot more - and we all know what that means, more cheapquels - so everyone get ready for Cinderella 3!

I did get to go see Osmosis Jones in the theatre but didn't even know about Iron Giant and personally feel Fox dropped the ball on the way they marketed Titan AE.

Truthfully I do hope Lilo and Stitch tears it up (I've spread the word to virtually everyone - showing them the trailers and what not) as it does look like a really fun movie and I can't wait to see it.

One last piece of info - Glen Keane is currently doing sketches for the Snow Queen - yep Disneys next forray into the world of CGI.

-Joe!

[Randy H]

originally posted by jjwspider

While they may only be laying off 250 people this is going to put a huge strain on the remaining 1000 or so employees left, IMO. Disney is famous for working on multiple features at once - usually having one or two being produced at their Florida Studios and another one or two in production at Burbank. Overall this closing means we are going to see less and less of the traditional cel animation from Disney.


There isn't going to be a "huge strain" on the people who are left. They're just going to make fewer traditional films. PIXAR alone has three more films to release with Disney, so they're counting on those making money. With February releases like Recess:School's Out and Peter Pan doing well, it only makes sense to use the Television unit as the traditional 2D outlet, letting Pixar's films take the summer reigns for the next couple years. It could very well be that Disney simply doesn't want to keep 250 extra people around when they've got three PIXAR blockbusters up their sleeve. Once the PIXAR deal is over, it could very well be that Disney will hire many of those people back.

You mentioned that we'd be seeing less and less of the traditional animation from Disney. You're right. Less. Less doesn't mean Traditional is dead, it means less. In some ways, I could see how it would improve the state of affairs. The teams could be left with fewer people, allowing better communication, a tighter core, resulting in better films. Better films means more repeat viewings at theaters, which means more BO, which means better bottom line for Disney, which means animators get hired back, which means more traditional animation.

These things are cyclical. The reason CGI films have done well is because of PIXAR's great stories. People expect a great story when they see a CGI film, and they haven't gotten that in a traditional film of late. It's that simple. When traditional films get good again, people will go see them.

IMO, the last really good story film for traditional animation was Tarzan. Almost 3 years ago. And Prince of Egypt before that. Almost 3 1/2 years ago. That's just too long.

Nobody saw Iron Giant. I agree it lacked advertising, but that's not my point. People at large haven't seen it, so most people don't remember the last time they saw a good story in traditional animation. Even IG came out 3 years ago.

Atlantis- even though I saw it 5 times in theatres- didn't have a heart at all. It was all action. Action is good (look at Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker- a perfectly executed film IMO), but it's gotta' have a soul. You have to care about the people.



I agree on films like Cinderella not getting sequels. I think they should leave such films alone. But films like Atlantis, Jungle Book, or Peter Pan (and possibly even Tarzan) are fine sequel material. The Jungle Book and Pan are just collections ofshort stories anyway, so I don't mind them getting sequels. Atlantis has so many more story possibilities. The term Cheapquels is only a lazy way of expressing one's feelings. Sequels aren't bad in and of themselves. Disney wouldn't make things like Cinderella 2 if people weren't buying them. On films like Cinderella, I don't like the idea of sequels, because we already know that the stars live "happily ever after". If we know that, why make a sequel? But movies like the Jungle Book and Pan are great for return visits because it's the characters that were engaging in the first place, not some lofty epic story.

Look at the numbers. Pan costs $20 million, makes $50 million. Atlantis costs $80-$100 million, makes $80 million. Would you rather break even than make money? Rather lose money? Won't be in business for long. But try to make a buck, and you're a sell-out. This is people's livelihood. They've gotta' make money or they can't employ people. Simple as that. When films stop making money, you can't ask people to keep spending money to make them. It just doesn't work. Without budget constraints, Wal Disney would never have finished Snow White, much less the Jungle Book or Sleeping Beauty. It's a business. Eisner has to make decisions that bring up the bottom line. Calling him Satan doesn't do anything.

Here's hoping Lilo and Stitch will breathe some life into 2D animation..

Later!
R

[Joe Wagner]

Granted I understand that Disney is a business and that layoffs are almost inevitable - the thing I disagree with though is their lack of respect to the people purchasing their movies or tickets to see their movies. Anytime though a business gets rid of an entire studio for one area (this time cel-animation) the remaining people have to pick up the slack, leading to two things - possible delays, more work or less quality work.

While I have yet to see Peter Pan 2 I agree I can see a sequel to it - sure, that's all well and good. It's whenever they start raiding their other treasures that one becomes irritated - I mean is there really any good reason to create a Cinderella 2 or Snow White 2 other than for the fact it's character recognition and a quick dollar? Budget constraints are fine - every business should have them - but would Walt have raided his classics to make another dollar? No.

The answer is pure and simple - Walt had to much creative integrity to go back and do something he had already done before. While Disney has been focussing a great deal of time into creating sequels to 'timeless' legends they could be focussing more on creating something that is new and entertaining - a classic for today's generation to enjoy. There have been a lot of stories circulating through the once hallowed halls of Disney projects that will probably never see the light of day now. One of the rumored projects that seemed to have the 'heart' that you've been looking for was a "Three Muskateers Project" that would have starred Mickey, Donald and Goofy - it sounded like a good movie that would have been available to all ages.

Another thing is while Peter Pan 2 cost about $20 mil and earned roughly $50 mil as compared to Atlantis breaking even we haven't even considered how much they will pull in on Atlantis on video sales. In all honestly Disney probably didn't lose money on Atlantis but they would rather we thought they did so when they waste time on more Classic Sequels the fans will sit idly by and accept them as the work of "a struggling company". To say that Atlantis didn't make a profit for Disney would be a huge understatment, IMO, as a lot of people probably picked it up on video as soon as it was released. If Disney did break even, the video sales are just gravy and the eventual showing of the flick on ABC will be an additional sales bump - to both video and also thru ad sales.

I will not call Eisner the devil (nor have I) but I do have serious concerns about a businessman that is willing to undercut past successes in an effort to make the dollar here and now. Has he even considered that these 'sequels' could possibly damage Disney's once good name. A lot of critics have written about the lack of quality and substance in these sequels - their reviews being published in large newspapers and displayed on web sites that receive large amounts of hits each day. With a new generation growing up with these movies they will begin to think that animated features are for kids and are suppossed to lack the 'heart' you're looking for. In short, if Disney continues with these practices - we could be seeing a complete reversal of everything that good animation has accomplished in recent years and also the age of an all CGI Disney - with cel-animation regulated to only cheap films and DTV releases.

-Joe!

PS: On one good note it looks like the Bears are going to be headed to the Florida studio for animation to begin.

[Randy H]

Joe,

I have to disagree.

You mentioned Atlantis' DVD/video sales. What about the video/DVD sales for Peter Pan 2? The profit percentage for Atlantis is far less than Peter Pan 2. When it comes to video it will very likely be the same.

In regard to Eisner, I never meant to say that you, Joe, had called him Satan, but I have seen others do so.

I just want to know why people seem to think that the sequels somehow "harm" or "damage" the originals! If anything, it makes the originals even more special! These sequels are separate films, and should be viewed as such. Those who feel so strongly about the originals should simply feel even stronger about them, because these sequels only show the superiority of them. It gets the original stories more publicity as well, which drives younger viewers to enquire about them, helping drive rental sales and re-release sales later. The idea that the sequels somehow sully the reputation of the originals is absurd. It only makes the originals look better.

Later,
Randy H

[Joe Wagner]

Randy,

Actually my point about the video sales was to show that even though the profit percentage isn't as large they still do pull in a profit. As for the sequels I think it almost damages the reputation of Disney itself - granted it may make some people want to see the first one, but at the same time if you have a bad experience with say Hunchback 2 you're less likely to want to see the first Hunchback.

This in turn could actually hurt sales in the future for Disney. The people buying a lot of these DTV's are parents that won't sit down and watch these films with their children - when the child finally grows up and is able to purchase these videos do you really think they're going to aim for something they'll consider "for children" in a time when they're trying to act grown up. For most people the answer will be no. In a sense Disney is scrapping up the money now from the nostalgia these sequels are suppossed to bring about for the parent. After these parents stop buying them though Disney will not only lose it's prime purchase group but the new group will not have children of their own and would be less likely to pick up a movie from the company they remembered brought them "Snow White 3" or whatever movie they had to suffer through. Just my opinion tho.

I'm almost tempted to call this syndrome "Marvelitous" because Marvel comics did virtually the same thing in the early 90's. They marketed four-five Spidey books a month, created huge crossovers and created about 10-15 X books. All of this put together lead to pitiful stories and created a mess that took them almost 10 years before they finally started getting out of bankruptcy and allowing creators to do what they do best - think creatively and create good stories. Disney seems to be in this stage right now - market everything to sequelization and let a glimmer of hope appear every now and then to try and keep the people watching. It wasn't until Marvel realized that people wanted good stories that Marvel finally started becoming successful - hopefully Disney learns the same thing. If you give the people a good, well thought out story - more often than not they'll love it. On the other hand if they continue at their current pace people will tire of the over used plots (main character has a kid) and eventually will tire of purchasing anything done by their company. This is what happened at Marvel, people couldn't get the entire story or were tired of 28 titles a month that had poor artwork or writing so they just gave up entirely.

BTW Randy - we seem to make a habit of these ;)

-Joe!

[Captin "Hank" Murphy]

I'm almost tempted to call this syndrome "Marvelitous" because Marvel comics did virtually the same thing in the early 90's. They marketed four-five Spidey books a month, created huge crossovers and created about 10-15 X books. All of this put together lead to pitiful stories and created a mess that took them almost 10 years before they finally started getting out of bankruptcy and allowing creators to do what they do best - think creatively and create good stories.

Well I know where the pitiful crossovers are in Disney. House of Mouse anybody? :p I try as hard as ever to not watch that show, and when I do see a few glimpses of it, all I see is an insult to great disney movies. All that show is a pathetic way to recharge sales in there movies.

I'm also sure you know about The Vault, but Di$ney doesn't take that seriously anymore.(Snow White DVD, and Hunchback DVD anybody) I wouldn't be surprized if one day they decided to get rid of the vault idea so they can make more money.

You can tell Di$ney's getting desprate for money, I never seen so many Disney Comercials at the same time. I mean when was the last time you see Disney making cerial, they even begun advertising kids wear and lets not forget the Walt's 100'th birthday celebration which is nothing more than a big theme park advertising gimick.

[Heehaw]

There's more money in 3D, so it pure economics driving the changeover. Nothing surprising there. The 3D films have been much better than most of the American 2D stuff, so I don't mind. Doesn't mean I don't like 2D, anymore, I've just noticed the downturn in quality and the 3D stuff seems to be picking up the slack.

[Pilmedium]

More money to be made with CGI and greedy companies don't mix...

I don't watch the garbage on the Disney channel, but I did notice in the past that all their advertising is for themselves.

[The Mad Hatter]

Okay, I think I'm going to surprise you all. I'm a huge fan of Disney animation, and I think that their decision to close their Burbank studio... may be a good thing.

Stop and think for a moment. Remember how Disney was by the time of The Lion King and before? They didn't crank out an animated movie every year. And while we didn't get to see their stuff as often, a funny thing happened... the absence made each feature to be released seem a lot more special. It seemed like the Mouse House could concentrate a little more on each flick and give it a bit more polish.

But, when animation "came back" in the 90s, they wanted to release one a year. Which is fine in a way, but on the other hand it makes Disney films a bit more predictable. You expect them to come, and you just can't generate the excitement with them anymore. Ever since they had the one-a-year schedule, their box office has gone way down.

Maybe with just one studio, and one new movie every 2-3 years, Disney could generate the box office grosses they had in the past. While I love animation, I'd rather see a strong, respected Disney than a prolific Disney.

[Maxie Zeus]

I agree with Hatter -- sort of. I haven't gone to the theater to see a Disney animated film since "The Lion King," and a lot of it has to do with the predictable and uninspiring stories they were cranking out like Oscar Meyer wieners.

That said, I'm not convinced that simply throttling back on the release schedule will lead to an improvement. It could just mean that each film will spend that much more time being tweaked and niggled and focus-grouped and fiddled with by execs and marketing idiots.

[Joe Wagner]

Originally posted by The Mad Hatter
Okay, I think I'm going to surprise you all. I'm a huge fan of Disney animation, and I think that their decision to close their Burbank studio... may be a good thing.

Stop and think for a moment. Remember how Disney was by the time of The Lion King and before? They didn't crank out an animated movie every year. And while we didn't get to see their stuff as often, a funny thing happened... the absence made each feature to be released seem a lot more special. It seemed like the Mouse House could concentrate a little more on each flick and give it a bit more polish.


The only thing is that while they are closing their studion in Burbank they are only cutting the feature animation department. This pretty much means that the TV animation studios will still be streamlining out one DTV video a month or so and there will still be quite a few of these DTV's that will go directly to theatres. I seriously doubt that the closing of this studio will lead to less animated movies being released by Disney - just less original animated movies as compared to the sequels they seem intent on creating. And for the most part I am a Disney animation fan, I just don't like the way they've been handling their TV animation studios lately, esp when they start planning stuff like Snow White 2 and Bambi 2.

-Joe!

[Captin "Hank" Murphy]

Have you also knowtice the recent cell drawn animated series aren't any good.

Disney's Doug, Pepper Ann, Teacher's Pet, and Recess(has the formula of "same plots just differant characters and places + The main character always over exagerate things than they really are=What they "Think" is a hit cartoon show".)

Proud Family(A series I like, but I wouldn't be surprize if it was made just to keep the Black comunity happy, so they won't think Disney is racise.)

Teamo Supreamo(Do I even have to say anything for you to know how bad it is.) CHIKA!!!

[mbaker]

I absolutely hate the character designs for Doug, Pepper Ann, Teacher's Pet, and Recess. The Disney Afternoon shows from the late 80's & early 90's look so much better! Heck, David Feiss draws better than the crap I just mentioned. (Don't even get me started on the animated Lizzie McGuire!) Give me Genndy & Craig over Joe & Paul any day of the week!

[Andy Mancini]

I agree that the big problem with Disney is the sequels. The only Disney movie I can see having a sequel is "The Lion King". After all, isn't there more episodes of "Kimba the White Lion that took place after "The Lion King" ended? If they can rip of the Japanese once, they can do it again, can't they?

[Inkan1969]

Originally posted by Captin "Hank" Murphy
Have you also knowtice the recent cell drawn animated series aren't any good.

Disney's Doug, Pepper Ann, Teacher's Pet, and Recess(has the formula of "same plots just differant characters and places + The main character always over exagerate things than they really are=What they "Think" is a hit cartoon show".)

Proud Family(A series I like, but I wouldn't be surprize if it was made just to keep the Black comunity happy, so they won't think Disney is racise.)

I would not list "Teacher's Pet" in that group. It's actually a very funny series, and it has a great look to it. The art is in the personal style of the creator, Gary Baseman. The artists often illustrate the characters' thoughts with very imaginative dream sequences and sight gags. The show is very cartoony and gag oriented.
Check out

Animation Blast #8 (http://www.animationblast.com/inprint/)

The stories in "Pepper Ann" got really bad from its third season on. But I thought it had an
OK artistic style.

"Proud Family" is not made by Disney TV Animation. It's made by Hyperion Studios. It's stories are weak, but the art is good.

- Inkan

[Pilmedium]

The reason many recent disney shows were so bad is because they are paying more attention to CGI instead.

[Captin "Hank" Murphy]

Well it's not gonna get any better, because....
I found out, on upcomingmovies.com, out that Disney has already put a sequel script into development from the same writers who did the just premeared movie...... Sorority Boys. :p
and...
Eddie Murphy may star in Disney's Haunted Mansion movie. I found this out at ign.com