Welcome to Jim Hill Media - Entertainment News : Theme Parks Movies Television

Toon Tuesday: Disney/Pixar tightens its belt while DreamWorks Animation stays the course

Toon Tuesday: Disney/Pixar tightens its belt while DreamWorks Animation stays the course

Rate This
  • Comments 30

You wanna know what's kind of ironic? One of the most memorable moments from the "Meet the Robinsons" trailer is when that film's villain -- the Bowler Hat Guy -- is tossed out in the street. With all of his belongings soon following after him ...


Copyright 2007 Disney Enterprises, Inc.

"So what's so ironic about that," you ask. Well, the animators & artists who are currently working on Walt Disney Feature Animation's next release just found out that some of them may soon be doing an Bowler Hat Guy impression of their very own in the not-so-distant future. Given that -- just last week -- WDFA announced that it will be making staff cuts once production of "Meet the Robinsons" is complete.


Photo courtesy of Google Images

Mind you, it's not just the talented folks in Burbank who have the blues. Up north in Emeryville ...


Photo courtesy of Google Images

... word has begun circulating around the Pixar campus that there's going to be staff reductions at that facility as well. Once production of "Ratatouille" is completed, that is.


Copyright 2007 Pixar / Disney Enterprises, Inc. 

"What's with all this belt-tightening," you query. "Wasn't Disney pleased with what 'Chicken Little' earned last year? And didn't Pixar's last release, 'Cars,' make beaucoup bucks at the box office this past summer?"

Well, yes. That John Lasseter film did make $244 million during its initial domestic release. Plus -- when you factor in the $208 million that "Cars" has earned (to date) overseas -- that brings the worldwide box office total for Pixar's newest animated feature to $452 million.

Which is admittedly a very big number. But it wasn't exactly what Wall Street had been hoping for.


Copyright 2006 Disney Enterprises, News Corp & DreamWorks Animation

Truth be told, only Fox's "Ice Age: The Meltdown" managed to meet the investment community's expectations this year. And that was only because this Blue Sky Studios film managed to out-gross the original "Ice Age" 's worldwide gross by over $250 million. 

On the other hand, DreamWorks Animation's "Over the Hedge" was labeled a disappointment because it "only" earned $155 million during its domestic release.


Copyright 2006 Columbia, Paramount and Sony Imageworks

"Monster House," "Barnyard: The Original Party Animals" and "Open Season" are also considered disappointments by the investment community because each of these films failed to achieve blockbuster status (I.E. Earning over $100 million during their initial domestic release).

Though -- to be fair -- given that "Open Season" has only been in theaters for 19 days now, it's still too early to say that this Sony Animation production won't actually be able to achieve blockbuster status.


Copyright 2006 Universal Pictures, Disney Enterprises and News Corp

Then there were "Curious George," "The Wild" and "Garfield: A Tale of Two Kitties." Three films whose only hope of recovering their production & promotional costs lies with the secondary market (I.E. Pay-per-view, DVD sales, etc.) ...


Copyright 2006 Warner Bros. & News Corp

... followed by this year's out-and-out bombs, "The Ant Bully" and "Everyone's Hero."

Soooo ... Though no one who works in the animation industry really wants to admit that the bad times have begun, Ed Catmull ...


Ed Catmull
President of Walt Disney Feature Animation
and Pixar Animation Studios
Photo courtesy of Google Images

... recognized what was going on. That this year's glut of animated features has seriously undermined audiences' enthusiasm for CG.

So even before the last two CG features for 2006 -- DreamWorks Animation's  "Flushed Away" and Warner Bros. "Happy Feet" -- hit theaters ...


Copyright 2006 DreamWorks Animation & Warner Bros.

... the combined president of WDFA & Pixar took action. Realizing that it could be quite a while before the box office for these sorts of films recovered, Catmull took steps to contain costs in both Burbank & Emeryville. Significantly scaling back the size of the crews that would be working on those studios' next animated features, "American Dog" and "W.A.L. - E."

Ed also put into place a plan that would temporarily scale back production levels at Disney Feature Animation. One that would put WDFA on the one-new-animated-feature-being-released-every-18-months that Pixar now follows. With the hope that this would then make it that much easier for the two companies to ride out the current CG glut.


Copyright 2008 Disney Enterprises, Inc.

Then after Catmull failed to persuade master animator Glen Keane to switch "Rapunzel" over from being a CG film to a traditionally animated feature ...


Copyright 2009 Disney Enterprises, Inc.

... Ed pinned his hopes on "Enchanted," Walt Disney Pictures' big holiday release for 2007.


Copyright 2007 Disney Enterprises, Inc.

Catmull is now counting on audiences to embrace this big screen musical fantasy which will stylishly mix live action with traditional animation. With the hope that this will then throw the door open for a full-fledged revival of traditional animation at Walt Disney Studios.

Which is where Disney vets John Musker (left) and Ron Clements come in ...


Photo courtesy of Google Images

Best known as the writing / directing team behind such animation features as "The Great Mouse Detective," "The Little Mermaid," "Aladdin," "Hercules" and "Treasure Planet," Ron 'n' John are already deeply into development of their next project for the studio, "The Frog Princess." Which is deliberately being designed to be a traditionally animated feature.  

Should first "Enchanted" and then "The Frog Princess" really prove to be extremely popular with the moviegoing public ... Well, that would eventually allow Ed to achieve his long term goal. Which is to turn WDFA back into a studio that specializes in traditional animation. Thereby leaving the CG to Pixar.

If Catmull were actually able to pull this off, that would then prevent these two divisions of the Walt Disney Company from directly competing with one another. Thereby eliminating situations like the one the studio faced last year with the release of "Chicken Little" ...


Copyright 2006 Disney Enterprises, Inc.

... Where -- at least during the first few moments of that movie -- it was virtually impossible to tell if you were about to see a Pixar film or a Disney animated feature.


Copyright 2006 Disney Enterprises, Inc.

Long range, what Catmull really wants to do here is create two different brands. Of course, the only problem with that scenario is determining the exact difference between what Pixar films are and what Disney animated features are. More importantly, making sure not to favor one brand over the other when it comes to the distribution of great story ideas. 
 
Mind you, Disney & Pixar aren't the only animation studios that have been going through a bit of a rough patch. DreamWorks Animation has also had a tough couple of weeks. What with investor Paul Allen ...


Photo courtesy of Google Images

... insisting that that studio begin selling shares in a secondary offering, thereby allowing Allen to finally make some profit off of his initial investment in the company. Then news leaked out that -- following the release of "Flushed Away" -- DreamWorks & Aardman Animation Ltd. will officially be parting ways.

That info -- coupled with recent stories that suggest that "Shrek the Third" may be testing poorly in its early preview screenings ...


Copyright 2007 DreamWorks Animation

 ... -- suggests that DreamWorks Animation may have a tougher time weathering the current CG glut than -- say -- Disney or Pixar. But that said, the studio is still moving ahead with a full development slate. Which includes a sequel to DreamWorks' 2005 hit, "Madagascar" ...


Copyright 2005 DreamWorks Animation

... which will feature the gang from the Central Park Zoo following Alex the Lion (voiced by Ben Stiller) back to Africa. Where this neurotic native New Yorker then meet up with his real lion cousins.

"Madagascar 2" is currently scheduled to hit theaters in the Fall of 2008. Hopefully, by then, we'll all be on the other side of this CG glut. More importantly, that Walt Disney Studios will have formally revived its traditional animation unit by that point.

But what do you folks think? Do you think Ed Catmull's plan (I.E. Shifting WDFA back over to traditional animation, so that that arm of the Walt Disney Company is no longer in direct competition with Pixar Animation Studios) will work? Or should Ed have followed DreamWorks Animation's example and just stayed the course?

Your thoughts

Blog - Post Feedback Form
Your comment has been posted.   Close
Thank you, your comment requires moderation so it may take a while to appear.   Close
Leave a Comment
  • * Please enter your name
  • * Please enter a comment
  • Post
  • "You wanna know what's kind of ironic? One of the most memorable moments from the "Meet the Robinsons" trailer is when that film's villain -- the Bowler Hat Guy -- is tossed out in the street. With all of his belongings soon following after him ..."
    ---
    (Particularly considering you're watching the trailer of the David Stainton cut, who wanted to sell the "funny" BHG in the first place...)  ;)
    ====
    "Thereby eliminating situations like the one the studio faced last year with the release of 'Chicken Little' ...
    Where -- at least during the first few moments of that movie -- it was virtually impossible to tell if you were about to see a Pixar film or a Disney animated feature."
    ---
    (And then those first few moments of the studio logo were over, and the characters opened their mouths...)  :)
    ===
    "That info -- coupled with recent stories that suggest that "Shrek the Third" may be testing poorly in early preview screenings -- suggest that DreamWorks Animation may have a tougher time weathering the current CG glut than -- say -- Disney or Pixar. But that said, the studio is still moving ahead with a full development slate. Which includes a sequel to DreamWorks' 2005 hit, 'Madagascar' "
    ---
    So...I'm not quite getting the point of the article, here:
    Are we to believe it's a -BAD- thing that Disney's taking an honest approach to making different animated movies, when they could grab the chance to go down with the ship and be psychotically industry-oblivious CGI-glutting looney-birds just like Dreamworks?
    Suppose you're right--They're just losing sleep over it.
  • The marketing for "The Frog Princess" should combine promotion of the film with nostalgia for the hand-drawn animated classics.  Sort of a "Stitch-without-the-irony" campaign that reminds us of why we love Disney classics.  Remind the public of why they love the Disney brand, seemlessly bring "The Frog Princess" into the Beauty and the Beast, Alladin, Snow White, Little Mermaid canon... and I think this 2-D/3-D divisional distinction will work both for the company and animation lovers. If this film is a musical, that will also help...

    AVOID! AVOID! AVOID! Marketing marketing this film as a rag-tag group of wise-cracking, jive-talking animals who burp and fart while coming together to learn the true meaning of family, etc.  I think that the CG glut has come about largely because of how indistinguishable all the marketing for these films is... Clements and Musker in a brilliant 2-D fairy tale really have a chance to stand out.
  • I don't think it's just a marketing problem with CGI. I doubt something like Barnyard is much different from what it was advertised as.
  • It seems to me that the "investor community" easily could stifle creativity at these studios (call me Captain Obvious).  It's awful that a creative company is always worrying about what "suits" think.

    "audiences' enthusiasm for CG"
    Don't most audiences have an "enthusiasm" for a good movie, period?

    "Then -- after failing to persuade master animator Glen Keane to switch "Rapunzel" over from CG to  traditionally animation"
    He had been working on this film for years...he wasn't just going to trash everything he and his team had worked on.  I'd love it if "Rapunzel" had been made in 2D, but it's crazy to think that Mr. Keane was going to 'delete' all of his hard work.  Since they supposedly got rid of the "Unbraided" part, both in the name and in the story, it should be a traditional Disney fairy tale, like "Cinderella" or "The Little Mermaid".

    "Ron 'n' John are already deep into the development phase of their next project for the studio, "The Frog Princess.""
    Although it's not "The Frog Prince", which is the traditional story, I'm excited.  Ron'n'John are great, and I'm sure they won't let us down.  "Aladdin" and "Hercules", even though they are more 'modern' than other Disney films, are still great films and don't pull a (pre)Shrek on us...so I have high hopes for "The Frog Princess".

    "Which is to turn WDFA back into a studio that specializes in traditional animation. Thereby leaving the CG to Pixar."
    That's what I'd like to see.  It makes sense to let Pixar do the CG movies, since that's what they do, and many people seem to like Pixar's CG movies better than Disney's (Well, than "Chicken Little", anyway).

    I'm hoping that "Enchanted" does well...I think the premise is great, but I'd rather have a real-world girl going into an animated world...more animation....but, I can't complain with any traditionally animated Disney feature film.  

    bhb007, I agree with what you said.  But, Disney's never marketed its films with the bodily functions, etc., as much as the other companies.  

    I'm sad that Disney is cutting so many jobs; those workers will just go to other companies and give them ideas.  Or make craptastic movies.  I'm hoping for the latter.  

  • I have a serious problem with dividing the style of animation (ie 2D and 3D) between Disney and Pixar. How can Disney be called the world's leading animation company if it doesn't even produce cg features? As the world leader, Disney should be able to create films in both 2D and CG.

    Also didn't Lasetter say that Disney would be moving between the two depending on what suited a particular story? So doesn't this clash with Catmull's plans?
  • I personally think that Disney bought Pixar so that they could have a branch of the company that focused on doing quality CG, one that was already established and producing excellent material.  Why compete with that arm when you can revive the original artform?  I applaud the decision, if that's what it comes to.
  • No matter what form the feature takes (CG or 2D) its always about the story.  CG features these days have been built around clever humor starting with the first Toy Story Movie.  Granted I love the first Toy Story movie because there was a central core and was clever.  All of these follow-on movies have moved from clever humor to cheap jokes and the public has been saturated with them.  

    I'm anxious to see a good classic animated feature no matter what medium it is presented in.  I think I would receive it better if it was done in 2D, but that is probably only because my view has been tainted by what CG has become.

  • Oh god. Screw the execs. The problem with current animation!?

    QUALITY

    It takes, LITTLE to NO talent. To animate using a computer. General knowledge of the programs, and the layout, and its just getting the machine to work for you.

    Pushing out 54 animation movies a year is just dumb. Its like at christmas when 1 news channel deems an item the 'must have item of the year!' Suddenly, millions of 'cattle call' parents are running out to target and wal-mart trying to obtain this toy, they never even realized they needed it, their children have never expressed a want for it. But they 'have' to have it.

    There was a time, when hand animating a movie took YEARS. So you only got a new disney feature animation movie every 2-4 years. Its not even the fact that theyre stuffing this CGI stuff down out throats. Its the fact that theyre greenlighting any idea, just to get something out there.

    People arent sick of CG. Theyre sick of crappy stories. Disney movies touch people. Which is why my mother, and 2 of my best friends and myself, couldnt get through the new mermaid DVD without crying. It TOUCHES us. I havent cried during a disney film since mufasa died in the lion king. And i sobbed during that. (and still do)

    Even if they went back to tradiontional animation, youd have to have good stories to sell. And currently, Disney hasnt had any. Ratouille is gonna suck imo. Who can relate to a rat living in france? It might be cute. But its not gonna be like Toy Story. The Robinsons will also be cute, but thats it.

    Im really hoping enchanted steals the show. Followed by Rapunzel. You know, the center of the magic kingdom (as well disneys logo) is a castle for a reason. Its not a kitchen in france. Or a boulder hat. Disneyworld and disney movies, take you to a place you could never be in real life. Let Dream works handle the what if this was your life and your an animal movies. Let Disney go back to traditional story telling.

  • "I personally think that Disney bought Pixar so that they could have a branch of the company that focused on doing quality CG, one that was already established and producing excellent material.  Why compete with that arm when you can revive the original artform?"

    Pixar movies have a particular style. If both Disney and Pixar released cg movies it would only effect the other's success if one was significantly better. Disney can still produce cg features without it being in direct competition with Pixar. Yes Pixar have the monopoly on cg movies but we have no way of determining Disney's success in that department because as of yet they have only released Chicken Little which was (regardless of quality) a success.
  • greenyskp said:
    " Who can relate to a rat living in france?"
    I understand your point, but some could argue, Who can relate to a beast living in France?  or to a bunch of bugs?  or to monsters?  Or to mice who rescue people?  
    Or to cars?
    Without seeing the film, I can't answer that question, but I'm looking forward to the film.
  • I made a pact with myself I would not respond, no matter what the topic, but I am uncontrolably pulled like a blog-aholic. It's a disease, but I have taken the first step and admitted I have a problem.

    I noticed there were a lot of films released last year in color - audiences are probably getting tired of color films. A lot more people went to the movie theatre when most of the films were black and white. I also think audiences are getting burnt out on films with THX - on average they're not performing as wellas they once did.

    Mr Norman, who writes the great articles for JHM, would be best suited to address this, but I get the impression that it was intimidating to work for Walt, or to present something to Walt. He expected your best and always pushed you to improve. One of Mr Norman's stories gave me the impression, "what am I doing in the story dept? Walt's gonna figure out I don't belong here and demote me." That is a big difference from the today's constant rumors, "people are gonna get be fired as soon as the project is over - regardless of talent or accomplishments."

    Remember driver's ed? There were some teachers that yelled at you as soon as you got in the car, and they never stopped yelling until class was over and you were 100 yards away from the car. Not really condusive to good driving - made ya kind of jittery. Well, if Lassetter's getting the treatment of "John, you just didn't make us Enough buckets of money with Cars," then you know it just gets worse the farther down the ladder you go. Oh, but pump out something that's timeless, humorous, and will set box office records anyway.

    QUALITY
  • greenyskp said: "People arent sick of CG. Theyre sick of crappy stories."

    I agree, mostly. The big problem is they haven't been paying enough attention to getting the story right. But I'm pretty sick of CG, too, and I assume there are others like me out there. There's a specific look to it that cannot, it seems, be gotten around. Even if the color and light in Rapunzel break new ground, I can't get over the impression that she just looks way too much like every CG human I've seen, fuzzy lighting notwithstanding.

    I like Maxfield Parrish's stuff a lot, always have. So I've been really interested to see a princess movie inspired by his art. That aspect of it looks great, but the characterization in the face and body in the picture above look about as refined as any Saturday morning CG cartoonist might have designed. Just as a for instance, look at the head size vs. the body - she's a lollipop. I'd call it artistic license, but it's everywhere lately, which makes it seem more foregone conclusion than an artistic choice. The eyes, the nose, the mouth, it's all too familiar.
  • I think now would be a great time to bring back an animated musical a la Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Hunchback (except for the snapping gargoyles song). It's been a while and weren't those damn good movies?!
  • Honestly I do not see this as that much of a bad thing. I love 3D, do it at work all the time, but it seems like studios have come to the conclusion that 3D alone will make a movie a hit. Without a solid story behind it all you have is a really well executed (Final Fantasy) 3D film.

    Audiences are sophisticated enough that they are not willing to shell out hard earned money for a movie that does not satisfiy on many levels. So the fact that the major studios that set the trends in this area recognize this and are scaling back is a good sign.

    Also, something that is sometimes overlooked as a reason a movie fails is bad marketing.....if a movie is not promoted properly, it can be lost in the shuffle. The best example of this would be The Iron Giant. Admittedly not a 3D film (although 3D figured prominently into certain key scenes), it is an animated film and the major audience for this kind of movie is still children. Kids knowing when something is coming out and being excited enough to nag their parents into commiting to taking them opening weekend cannot be overlooked as one of the driving market determiners for success.....which in Hollywood is the bottom line.

    Leslie
  • "People arent sick of CG. Theyre sick of crappy stories."

    The problem:  After the, what was it, 80 or so CGI features released after Cars this year, the connection between CG and crappy stories is beginning to sink in with the public.
Page 1 of 2 (30 items) 12