Shakeup at Disney

[Maxie Zeus]

For what it's worth, excerpts from the story at inside.com:

"Walt Disney Studios chairman Peter Schneider stepped down today after a year and a half in the post. The move follows the poorer than expected performance of the company's two summer tentpole movies, Pearl Harbor, which has grossed $162.7 million to date, and Atlantis, which opened wide Friday to $20.3 million.

"Schneider, who has a reputation as a screamer who lacked people skills, never enjoyed the cozy relationship with the media that his predecessor Roth did. While his reign was marked by the release of a number of solid hits, there were no earth-shattering blockbusters in either live action or animation. The success of DreamWorks' animated feature Shrek, which passed the $200 million mark Tuesday, has been a thorn in the side for Disney, which built its brand on feature-length 'toons."

[Calhoun07]

So the chairman has that much effect over whether a movie makes or breaks, huh? I never knew that. So, who is taking his place?

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by calhoun07
So the chairman has that much effect over whether a movie makes or breaks, huh? I never knew that. So, who is taking his place?

Yeah, firing the CEO of the movie studio is like kicking the dog when something goes wrong.

And no word on a possible replacement.

[AlexPower]

Disney is a powerhouse. If they can't have a person in that position to move worlds, he shouldn't be there. Put someone there that have the ability to keep Disney on top!

[DerekPowers]

right on. like it or not, disney is the king of animation and i want them to stay that way. and i get kind of annoyed at how people always compare disney and dreamworks. shrek was good, but it was no disney movie, so why compare them? cause they're animated? thats retarded. they are two totally different movies. plus, imo shrek was good, but come on, i can name a bunch of disney movies which were better, especially atlantis. peace.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Everything ends, regardless of how well you do your job at keeping it alive. One day, many years from now, Disney will be second banana to another studio, or possibly shut down altogether. These things happen. You can try preventing it, but sometimes you just can't stop it no matter how hard you try. And frankly, it would be interesting one day to see another studio calling the shots in animation. Disney isn't all quality, y'know.

[DerekPowers]

true, but i doubt it will be dreamworks. i mean, shrek was a good movie, the cgi was the best i've seen in a movie so far (untill final fantasy that is), but as an overall movie, it was just good, nothing that spectacular. actually, mike myers's performance was really irritating untill the ending. just because it made alot of money doesnt mean its the next best thing. i think it made alot of money cause it made it a point to try and target adults, making adults finally come to the realization that, oh, animation may not be just for kids! every single review i've read for it (it makes sense since all the critics are adults) say something about how surprising it was that an animated movie had adult humor in it. i cant stand that, cause every well made animated movie isn't just for kids, but adults dont open their minds to it enough unless it specifically throws in an obvious adult joke, like in shrek (not that thats a bad thing in shreks case). all animated movies has something for everyone, kids and adults, even if it doesnt pander to them. but overall, i havent been all that impressed with dreamworks. antz was good, and the animation in the prince of egyt was very cool, and shrek's animation was amazing and i did like the overall movie alot, but i would still rank disney higher. imo, if any animation company is going to overtake disney's reign, it will be one that makes anime movies, or something like them. or one that does something completely different with animation that we never seen before, because disney coined the animated feature, they invented it and do it best, and most american companies like dreamworks and wb still make their movies using the format or vision disney created. although this post may sound otherwise, i dont really hold disney on a petastill, but i think if any company will be the next leader in animation, it will be anime or something very different from disney. well thats my little rant, peace. cough~seeatlantis~cough

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Leap Larry Jojo
Everything ends, regardless of how well you do your job at keeping it alive. One day, many years from now, Disney will be second banana to another studio, or possibly shut down altogether. These things happen. You can try preventing it, but sometimes you just can't stop it no matter how hard you try.

E.g., the MGM of Mayer, Thalberg, Stromberg and Selznick vs. the MGM of today. . . .

[The Clown Prince]

I wonder if this means now that we'll start seeing less and less of the "older audience" approach that Disney has taken lately. Dinosaur, Atlantis, Treasure Planet next year and Lilo and Stitch also next year. I really hope they don't start bringing back the song and dance animal routine. I liked Emporer's New Groove, but I can only handle so many animated comdey's.

Clown Prince

[Nightwing]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus
The success of DreamWorks' animated feature Shrek, which passed the $200 million mark Tuesday, has been a thorn in the side for Disney, which built its brand on feature-length 'toons."

I'm a big Disney fan myself, although lesser as my years have gone on because I really wish they'd drop the whole holier than thou corporation monstor thing that has happened. But I'm glad to report there's an ongoing fight within the entire enterprize between the good and evil forces. So it's not all bad.

I don't like the comparison with Disney and Dreamworks though. Leave them both alone and we'll see where they decide to go. Dreamworks is doing a great job though.

[Calhoun07]

Originally posted by DerekPowers
right on. like it or not, disney is the king of animation and i want them to stay that way. and i get kind of annoyed at how people always compare disney and dreamworks. shrek was good, but it was no disney movie, so why compare them? cause they're animated? thats retarded. they are two totally different movies. plus, imo shrek was good, but come on, i can name a bunch of disney movies which were better, especially atlantis. peace.

That's inevitable human nature. People always feel the need to compare new things with things they already know and are familiar with. Take the Beatles, for instance. How many bands that made it big after the Beatles were questioned as whether or not they would be the next Beatles. It's sad that Disney has such a foreboding shadow over the animation world that no matter who releases an animated movie and no matter what it is about, people will compare it to Disney just because that's what they already know and are familar with.

The hope is that Dreamworks and some others will do well enough that THEIR animated movies will be held up as the standard by which all others are compared.

Comparisons are inevitable, no sense in grumbling about them.

[DerekPowers]

hey nightwing, can you elaborate on the good and evil forces battling at disney? that sounds very interesting but i havent the slightest idea what your talking about. thanks. peace.

[Bud 'n Lou]

I think I'm just about the only person here who likes Disney. Their movies, animated shorts, and even some of the TV Shows. I dunno...I just like them. I realize that they often steal ideas from other works, but they use the ideas, for lack of better term, in cool ways. I mean, I never saw Kimba, but I liked Lion King. And these days, I'm beginning to see where Crazy8's is coming from regaurding anime. The more I see of it, the less I like it. It's a combination of things: the acting, the dialogue, the story, the way the story is developed, etc. I think the thing that most appealed to me was the art style. It was new and different, and looked cool (in most cases). But now, the appeal has worn off. That's why I think I probably wouldn't like Kimba if I saw it. Disney may have stolen the idea for their movie, but they probably accomplished the things I listed above better than the original. Plagiarism is wrong, I know this. But oddly enough, it doesn't stop me from liking Disney. I think they do what they do very well. I know some people here on these boards consider not liking anime to be like blasphemy, but that's just how I feel.

[Nightwing]

DerekPowers: I'm sorry if I sounded somewhat dramatic, Mr. Powers, but I simply meant what happens with all big organizations once they get too big. You've got the people wanting to make art and to make people happy, the money motivated jerks, and the just plain jerks. The travel agency my mommy works at gets frequent visits from representatives of Disney, Universal, Sandals (not an entertainment park but a vacation people nevertheless) which is where my basis for saying that came from.

Our Universal rep is great. He likes me and my mom and her travel buddies and he's a good talker. He heard I was into computers and had it as my major so he brings up the fact that the Spiderman ride my mom told him I enjoy so much uses over 350 computers to run it. Crazy? Don't I know it!

The Disney rep is equally knowledged of course, but this particular guy isn't very nice, and he doesn't come around much, according to my mom. So I don't really feel like meeting him, I just want the information he comes with.




Now, this will be the strangest position ever taken in an entertainment discussion, but here goes. I don't like anime, and what's worse is, I'm here to defend the characters of Dragonball Z. I'm not lookin to add fans, just to defend.

Originally posted by Bud 'n Lou
[B]And these days, I'm beginning to see where Crazy8's is coming from....

And I come from the same place of both Bud AND Crazy8s. America. I've studied Japan's language and culture and wholey macaronie it is extremely different than ours. It's very hard to understand (but very interesting). And I think that's why we don't like Anime. It's not from our culture, or in other words, it's not from our heads. Sailor Moon drives me bananas, Tenchi makes me twitchy, and Pokemon makes me cry. But I liked DBZ, despite the horrible editing and dubbing. I just overlooked it and looked soley at the characters (what first made me watch was the character and costume design). And I actually liked it. Did I like each episode enough to follow it as I do Batman and Superman, memorizing episode numbers and titles and wanting them on DVD? No, but after seeing the characters for a while, I saw things in them I really liked. Of course, it's understandable people don't like it because of decisions that were made. Like streeeeetching the episodes to keep it in sync with their comic book or what have you. Not to mention the fact that when I said there are things to look past, make no mistake, it is somewhat of a long list. But my bored/open mind paid off for me.

When I think about it, I think the main aspect of making me like the show was wanting to understand it. The characters and costumes were just the icing on the cake making me chose DBZ instead of some other anime show.

[Calhoun07]

It's not that I HATE Disney, just can do without more of their movies than they have movies I actually like! Lemme see....I liked Beauty and the Beast, 101 Dalmations (the animated version), Hunchback of Notredame, Emperor's New Groove, Herculese, Mulan, and probably a couple I am forgetting right now. Oh, and I like Pixar's movies, tho I don't usually like to mention them in the same breath as Disney because Disney is merely the studio that distrubutes Pixar's movies. Pixar makes them, so they are Pixar movies.

It's just that I don't want to see every Disney movie steal it's ideas from other movies. Nor do I want to see every Disney movie continue to overshadow all the other studios who are trying to make their own animated features. Those are my beefs with Disney. The overshadowing thing is something they can only have so much control over, tho, as prejudices in peoples minds are harder to break than anything else, but they can control stealing from other works. Has Disney ever made a truly original animated feature?

[The Clown Prince]

I think summer 2002's Lilo and Stitch just might be the original movie from Disney that we have waited to see. If this isn't true, please someone correct me.

Clown Prince

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by calhoun07
It's not that I HATE Disney, just can do without more of their movies than they have movies I actually like!

My opinion of Disney started to drop right about the time that they decided to make a new animated feature every 12 - 18 months. In the wake of such huge successes as Lion King and Aladdin, it makes perfect business sense, but it's a little like putting the goose with the golden eggs into a duckpress to try to get the eggs out quicker. There's nothing very special about each new release, and they begin to feel homogenized. I suspect the standard "every Disney film is a musical with dancing teacups and funny animals" complaint is less a complaint about musicals and animals AS SUCH, and more a complaint about the endless repetition of the same formula in such a short space of time.

As for Disney's semi-monopoly, a lot of that (as many have said before) is a function of public attitudes, but Disney's own attitude of "only we should be allowed to make successful animated movies" is a contributing factor, and grotesque one. If Shrek's success has left the Mouse brooding and the industry chortling, it's because Disney has made it plain in word and action that they will brook no rivals, and if they're suddenly losing, they're losing a game they insisted on playing.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


My opinion of Disney started to drop right about the time that they decided to make a new animated feature every 12 - 18 months. In the wake of such huge successes as Lion King and Aladdin, it makes perfect business sense, but it's a little like putting the goose with the golden eggs into a duckpress to try to get the eggs out quicker. There's nothing very special about each new release, and they begin to feel homogenized. I suspect the standard "every Disney film is a musical with dancing teacups and funny animals" complaint is less a complaint about musicals and animals AS SUCH, and more a complaint about the endless repetition of the same formula in such a short space of time.

Actually, Disney has always been repetitive, even when Walt Disney was there. There would be the odd film like Fantasia, but overall, they still followed a specific formula. You could even see it laid out in as old a movie as Dumbo. Cinderella disappoints in that much of the focus is on everyone else OTHER than Cinderella--another problem I have with Disney flicks. The main characters are often shafted for the teacups and talking mice.

That's not to say I don't enjoy some of them, but after wading through dozens of Disney movies and then going back to watch the old ones...well, they don't hold up very well. The plots are even more simplistic than today's Disney films, and the pacing tedious. I will argue that the design work, however, was more elegant in the older flicks. The character designs for Sleeping Beauty and Alice in Wonderlanf are among the best out there. Too bad the movies themselves weren't so entertaining.

[Maxie Zeus]

Originally posted by Leap Larry Jojo
I will argue that the design work, however, was more elegant in the older flicks. The character designs for Sleeping Beauty and Alice in Wonderlanf are among the best out there.

Didn't John Kricfalusi once remark that the Disney artists (and I'm pretty sure he was referring to the current crop) only know how to draw 3 basic expressions?

Yeah, Disney has always been repetitive, but it wasn't quite so obvious back when a new animated flick came out only once every 3 or 4 years.

[Leaping Larry Jojo]

Originally posted by Maxie Zeus


Didn't John Kricfalusi once remark that the Disney artists (and I'm pretty sure he was referring to the current crop) only know how to draw 3 basic expressions?

Yeah, Disney has always been repetitive, but it wasn't quite so obvious back when a new animated flick came out only once every 3 or 4 years.

I find that the current Disney artists resort to pantomime too often, rather than subtleties such as the slight arch of an eyebrow to express nervousness or the using the corners of the lips to express worry. And critics seem to prefer animation to exaggerate grossly rather than attempt subtlety. *sigh*

I agree that cutting back on the productions would help the company's maintenance of quality (ideally), but I would hardly call Disney as being visionary entertainment since the suits seem to have more control over the movies than the actual animators and writers.