More nails in the 2-D coffin

[Sunset Girl]

In case you missed the link to the article on the front page of dvdtoons.com, here you go:

http://www.mouseplanet.com/david/dk030814.htm

So.. . the studio was actually selling off the animator's furniture while production was winding down? More animators have been laid off? Schumacher seems happy that the public still thinks that all animation is done by Disney? (i.e.: Ice Age)

I saw this coming. I recall Glen Keane stating in Entertainment Weekly that the future of 2-D was in trouble if Treasure Planet failed. But I didn't want to think about it.

So what does this mean for the future? Do you think the audience will eventually get sick of CGI and want 2-D back? And will there be anyone left that can still animate by hand by then? Not that the audience really cares which it is (well, except for us hardcore fans). This is so sad. I think of how promising the future was a decade and a half ago. This uncertain era of change is rather scary.

It goes without saying that success depends on story, story, story, not cgi, cgi, cgi. But no matter how many times we point that out, it won't make any difference.

. . .

"Hey, great-grandma, did they really draw all those cartoons by hand when you were a kid?"

"They deny it, but it's true. I remember. They've all been replaced with what they call CGI. They'll tell you I'm just a senile old lady but they're wrong! I can remember, I swear. Some say they've all been locked into the Disney Vault, never to return, but I say they burned the original versions years ago to hide the fact that they were actually better. This way, they can't admit they didn't know what they were doing! Maybe some underground fans still have the edited DVDs; perhaps some of the original material still lives on. . ."

"But great-grandma, what are DVDs?"

. . .

[RandCanuck]

Well, you said it all already Karen. As the fellow who put up the link to that story, I find it terribly sad and misguided. Disney has lost its vision through corporate over-management. I believe that hand-drawn animation will eventually rebound, as what was old becomes new again. (I can see the ads now: "And now, due to popular demand... Animation in the classic tradition!!!"), but as you pointed out, we may lose at least a part of a generation of talent and experience before that happens.

Many likely know this already, but this was just the latest round of layoffs and closures. The last I heard, the Disney French studio was closing down, the Florida studio was a shell of its former self (at best) and the two Canadian studios run by Disney closed 2 or 3 years ago.

I used to live in Orlando, and was at one time thinking of pursuing an animation career at Disney. I used to go to the studio at Disney-MGM and dream... and now I'm actually quite content with making other choices. If I had broken in, this news would *really* break my heart.

[Sunset Girl]

Ever since I could remember, my dream was to be one of the people at Disney that made those drawings magically come to life, and for better or for worse, life just didn't take me in that direction. But to think that they only have 60 traditional artists left. . . I, too, would have been so much more heartbroken if I had been caught in the middle of it all, even if I had been one of the survivors that crossed over into CGI. It sounds like a terribly sad and scary place to work these days. Who will be laid off next? If not me, one of my friends, one of my mentors? Wasn't this supposed to be fun? Will my desk even be there tomorow? Disney has survived the near death experience of its animation department before, but what does the future hold this time? Do all we have left to look forward to is CGI remakes of the old classics?

I literally feel empty inside.

[Special_Ed]

It's getting even worse! My sources at Disney have informed me that they are already gearing up for Motion capture starting with Rapunzel. Eisner hopes to get more films done with cheaper production costs. Do you know how bad this will look? Still if the stories were great I think it could work out, but not at the expense of 2-D! Besides we all know that the stories will get even worse with the fast pace these productions will take on...

[Sunset Girl]

I've read that Rapunzel will be the directorial debut of Glen Keane. As you probably all know, he was among the first to combine his hand-drawn animation with CGI. When asked about the new film having CGI characters, he thought it might work, *if* he was still able to draw the face by hand. I think he is an amazing artist and I trust his judgement, but I wonder what kind of image he has in his head. I don't know how one could combine it that way and make it work. A CGI background with traditional characters? Fine! A CGI arm on an otherwise traditional character? Great! But a hand drawn face on a CGI character? I don't know. . .

What exactly is Motion Capture?

[sonofjesusfreak]

Somebody else can probably explain better than I can, but here is my go at it.

Motion capture is a process by which the physicality of an actor is captured onto a computer model (a synthoid as Samuel Jackson call's them, a digital actor). An actor/stuntperson is put in a jump suit covered with sensors and then asked to perform everything from simple walking and running to talking, emoting (facial muscles), and fighting. The actions are saved and applied in any order needed onto the digital actor. This process is especially nice for large animated groups like armies, where you can apply the same motions to more than one character. A good example of this is seen in Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, the CGI orc hordes are animated with the aid of motion capture. Several stuntmen (stuntpersons?) performed the various actions needed for the Helm's Deep battle (climbing ladders, falling, etc.)

The process can also be used, though it's much more time-consuming, for a single character. Except, in this case, I believe it is more beneficial for the actor to go through the entire scene in the motion suit. Gollum from Lord of the Rings is the best example of a motion captured individual character. In that case, the actor, Andy Serkis, spent months working with motion capture suit, acting and reacting the same scenes until the digital character performed what was needed. First he would have to perform with his fellow actors on set (to give them someone to talk to.) then he would have to recreate his performance in the motion capture suit. Another recent example of extensive motion capture was The Hulk. In this case, the director, Ang Lee, acted out the character's actions. Sometimes this process fell flat however, due to the difference in size between the actor being capture and the character being animated.

[ohmahaaha]

This "Death of 2D" is so bogus it's pathetic. I mean I believe that the studio suits are turning their backs on it, I just can't believe they've all forgotten about "Spirited Away." Hel-loooo!!! That was just this past year.

Ultimately it will just turn out to be a lot of smoke, hyped to the max by the multi-media as usual. 3 or 4 digital flops will get you some hand-drawn animation, my friends!

[RandCanuck]

I agree this may happen in the long term, but meanwhile Disney's already sold off its equipment. It would be a huge investment to buy it all again. Plus, their animators will be scattered all over. It's not just the lack of film development that really hurts, it's the giving up of all its assets.

[ohmahaaha]

True, but unfortunately they are Big Businessmen, and like most apathetic Big Businessmen, they know that they're in a can't lose situation. If Digital stays hot, they make money. If Digital goes cold and 2-D comes back, they know that they will be able to find people to do it probably for less than what they were paying everyone that they just let go. Happens all the time, I guess. :(

[Sunset Girl]

They also haven't seemed to realize that Kim Possible is doing quite well, despite the fact that it's in 2-D. And yeah, I know that TV animation and theatrical animation are two different breeds, but now that I think about it, maybe they have some sort of back-up plan in case 2-D *does* make a comeback. All they have to do is farm it out to another studio! Simple, eh? No need to hire people, let alone buy furniture for them. And don't they still have studios in Japan and Austrailia? Maybe this is the only way those studios might get a chance to work on something of their own rather than a TV series or an under par Disney sequel. The future looks grim any way you look at it, though. I wonder if there will ever be a Kim Possible movie, especially with the current trend of turning family-type TV series into movies. I would like that, as long as they keep the look and feel of the original show.

Speaking of Kim Possible, I picked up the DVD last night. It has some absolutley horrid CGI of Rufus as filler between the episodes. It was a cute idea and would've worked fine if kept as the same style of the show, or even if the CGI has something cool or unique about it, but it wasn't even done well. I think they added it for the sake of having some CGI on there. Yeesh. . . I hope this isn't leading to something more ambitious, like a CGI Kim Possible movie!

[DWOMT]

Me and my girlfriend are fans of the Winnie the Pooh animated TV show and the animated movies when they come out. Really enjoyed the Tigger movie and Piglet's Big movie. I hope to god these lay offs don't affect Pooh and the 100 acre woods. I think a CGI Winnie the Pooh would be horrible.

[Jack Sparrow]

I just read that article about the 2-D animation. I don't think that its the 2-D animation movie category that is failing, but rather that its the stories they're telling. Disney's stories they're telling in 2-D animation aren't nearly as good as they use to be. They don't have the appeal that the older movies have, even from a couple of years ago like Tarzan. As a matter of fact I think that was the last good Disney 2-D animated movie. If they make the stories better I think more people will see they're movies and they'll become successful instead of flopping. (However Brother Bear doesn't look that bad.) That is just my thought on this.

[Special_Ed]

I think Glenn Keane just hacks stuff out now. The nine old men were just hacking stuff out near the end of their careers too. I know for a fact he is planning to leave Disney after he dirests Rapunzel or the Snow Queen. His ong John Silver work was really hacked out. His best work was his Ariel/Beast/Aladdin stint.

Gollum was tweaked by animators though. In that sense I think Motion capture can work, but what I've read is that Disney is doing straight out motion capture with no tweaking.


Kim Possible is the only new show I watch now on Saturdays. One of my friends turned me onto it. I really like the designs and sories.

Tarzan was horrid. THey really blew that one. Could have been the best thing since Beauty and the Beast. Shame really. Lilo and Stitch was the last great Disney film.


Business folk could care less about Spirited Away as it didn't make oodles of money stateside.

[canonball7]

Well I dont havea side in this. Wether it be live action. cgi, hand drawn, whatever. If its good its good. I like 2d better than anything, but if were leaning more torwards the crap that dreamworks is pumping out, then I say go forward and do cgi. I have never seen an animated Disney movie I didnt like. Never. Sure there are some that are way down on the list, but they still have there good points. I have never seen a dreamworks animated movie I did liek. Even the cgi ones. There crap.
Now I have no problem with Disney putting there old characters into 3d. If done right it can be cool.( Kingdom Hearts anyone?) But they do nead to be carefull with it. I dont see the CGI craze lasting to much longer. Look at Finding Nemo. Yes it made more money than any other animated movie ever, but its not a good movie. The story is just horrible. Sure it looks nice, but its a story that has been doen before, and didnt do anythign to origonal with it. Now we have SHreck 2 coming out, seeing as how Im like the only person who hated the first one, I think this is goign to be just awfull. I dont think it will be able to touch the sucsess of the first. Thats when peopel will relaize that CGI is just a fad.
I like Kim Possible, and I gauarntee that by the end of next year Disney will anounce a theatrical movie for it. The Rapunzel thing could work out ok. But Whenever I hear motion capture I think of the crappy Mortal Kombat games. That is the best and worst example of motion capture. Now Disney has used a form of motion capture before. They mimick the actors movements, and incorporate that into the characters. So this could work, but I dont see it doing so hot in theaters. The story of Rapunzel just isnt as cool as it was 100 years ago. ANd thats what it all bopils down to. If kids like then it will make money. If not then it will fail. And everyone will be blaming it on the animation medium used. Even though its not the animations fault.

[Sunset Girl]

I don't blame Glen for leaving once his contract is up. As I said above, it must be such a sad pace to work at these days. He wanted to leave before Tarzan but was able to make a favorable compromise with the studio. It wouldn't surprise me if he wanted to go off and do some independant study and/or do something for another studio. He's written and illustrated those wonderful christain children's books, his storyboards are gorgeous, and I still think his animation is richer and has more feeling than most. Even with Tarzan and John Silver. I was a fan of his even before the Little Mermaid made him better-known and I really wish that I could make charcoal renderings as powerful as his.

I have said before that I really liked Finding Nemo, despite the fact that it's the type of film that soccer moms would flock into their minivans to take there kids to. It's got more broad appeal than the average recent 2-D Disney film, a fact that (at least, I think) turned off *some* die-hard Disney fans. But there was a lot of subtlety to it that I think a lot of people completely miss. And that's part of why I love it. I love the fact that it's a kid movie about a parent *and* a child instead of just the child and that its about how they both grow and change through the course of events. It's not about a rescue, it's about self-discovery. I think those are the best kinds of movies. I love how there is no clear villain to fight. We have a chance to take in the atmosphere. Even the supporting characters are well-thought out: Dori is cute but becomes surprisingly fragile and endearing. I can't wait for the DVD.

[Special_Ed]

Keane is a great artist, I never said he wasn't. He just doesn't care anymore. You can tell by his work. The passion is gone. His design for long John Silver was a combination of the designs he'd do in the early 80's.

I didn't really like he story of Nemo either, my mom loved it. I figured it was because I don't have my own child.

[Sunset Girl]

He doesn't care anymore? Well, I think I know what you mean. The real reason he signed on for Tarzan was so that he could do independant study in Paris, wasn't it? He had already lost interest in the studio at that point.

I think I could see a lot of myself and other people I know in Marlon. You know, being overly worried about the scary world surrounding him and being overly protective of the one good thing in the world that he has left. I've often wondered if I'll be overprotective whenever I have children when I remember how my parents were with me. My mom wouldn't let me behind the wheel of a car for eons and I didn't get my driver's license until I was almost seventeen (even though I passed driver's ed with flying colors). The reason? My brother had been killed in an accident just a few years before. I couldn't blame her, in a way. I also had a cerfew of nine pm when I was eighteen. Eighteen?!!! My fourteen-year-old best friend could stay out later than me! I felt smothered and began sneaking out, causing more trouble than I would have been in had I been given just a little more freedom. My dad was just as bad. After my mom passed away, he and I lived together. I was single at the time and we both enjoyed the company. But at the age of twenty-five, I was expected to be home by midnight! Yeesh.

Wow, I seem to be going off on a tangent again! But I guess you get the point by now. I really related to parts of Nemo. I like when Marlon catches himself saying "You think you can do these things, but you can't, Nemo!" and he wasn't even talking to Nemo. He realizes how he's been stifling Nemo because of what happened to the rest of his family, and that they can't really begin to live until they, well, begin to live. I live for those "eureka-type" moments.