Little Orphan Annie-mator sent me this e-mail late Saturday night:
Jim —
I just got back from today’s screening of “Dream On Silly Dreamer” at the Orange County Museum of Art. God, what a great little movie that is. Dan Lund & Tony West did a superb job of summing up what a truly special place Disney Feature Animation was to work. How thrilling & exhausting it was to work on movies like “Aladdin” and “Beauty & the Beast.” And how sad it was when we all lost our jobs because of sh*theads like Schneider & Schumacher. Who thought that traditional was too old fashioned & that computer animation was the way Disney ought to go.
When are those boobs in Burbank finally going to acknowledge that they made a colossal mistake? Admit that Disney NEVER should have gotten out of the traditional animation business and get back to making the sorts of movies that the studio used to make? Is that day ever going to arrive?
Well, Little Orphan Annie-mator … If the whispers that I’ve been hearing coming out of the Team Disney Burbank building lately turn out to be true, that fateful day may actually be a lot closer than you think.
“What’s up?,” you ask. Well, I’ll tell you what’s NOT up. The domestic grosses of the last three big Hollywood computer animated releases.
Dreamworks’ latest — “Shark Tale” — bowed in theaters back on October 1st. It pulled in a somewhat respectable $160 million. But — that said — “Shark Tale” was nowhere near as good a draw as “Shrek II.” Which pulled down an astounding $441 million during its May 2004 domestic release.
Pixar’s latest picture — “The Incredibles” — had a somewhat similar problem at the box office. Following its release back on November 5th, this Brad Bird film earned $261 million during its domestic release. Which is (admittedly) a very impressive sum … Until you compare that amount to the $339 million that “Finding Nemo” grossed during the Summer of 2003.
“Now wait, Jim,” I can hear all you industry experts out there starting to sputter. “It’s really not fair to compare the grosses of an animated film that’s released in the Fall to one that’s released during the Summer months. Summer releases always earn more money.”
Well, that may be true. But then how do you explain what’s going on with 20th Century Fox’s latest CG release, “Robots”? That Chris Wedge film got great reviews, had huge promotion. But — to date — “Robots” (which was released back on March 11th) has only earned $120 million during its domestic release.
Now compare that to what “Ice Age” (I.E. 20th Century Fox’s 1st CG release. Which was also directed by Wedge) earned back in March of 2002. That film was domestically released on virtually the same weekend as “Robots.” Yet it earned $171 million.
You picking up on a pattern yet, folks? How the box office numbers for these CG films suddenly seems to be sagging? Could it be that American movie-goers are now starting to get a wee bit tired with computer animation?
I’ll tell you this much. Hollywood execs were truly surprised & disheartened last year when U.S. audiences didn’t embrace expensive CG extravaganzas as “Sky Captain & the World of Tomorrow” (Which only earned $37 million during its domestic release) and “The Polar Express” (Which — admittedly — earned $162 million. Which would have been great … Except that “Polar Express” cost $165 million to make & an additional $60 million to market. Which is why this Robert Zemekis picture is still very much in the red).
And Disney executives … To be honest, these guys are starting to get a little panicky. Here, they’ve just spent hundreds of millions of dollars to convert the Mouse Factory from a studio that turned out top quality traditional animation to a state-of-the-art operation that will soon start spitting out cutting edge computer animation … Only to have audiences’ interest in CG begin to wane before Disney’s first full-on computer animated feature actually rolls into theaters.
That’s why all eyes right now are on Dreamworks’ next CG release, “Madagascar.” To see if this computer animated feature actually bucks the trend. As in: Will this Eric Darnell & Tom McGrath film do significantly better at the domestic box office than “Shark Tale” just did?
If that doesn’t happen … Well, you can look for people in power all over Hollywood to start hitting the panic button. As the new financial reality sinks in that not every CG release is going to automatically become a “Shrek” sized box office smash.
Given the cost of producing these films (Which has been steadily creeping up over the past five years), you’re going to see some computer animated films that are still in preproduction suddenly getting their budgets slashed. And other projects being canceled entirely.
As for the Mouse … While Disney has clearly no confidence in “Valiant” (Why do you think the studio suddenly chose to release this Vanguard Film during the dog days of August?), I’ve honestly been hearing some really good things about “Chicken Little” lately.
Mind you, this Mark Dindal film DID have some pretty significant production problems in the past. Mainly that the front half of the film didn’t actually match the look & tone of the rest of the picture. But “Chicken Little” ‘s production crew has been steadily hammering away at all the movie’s little imperfections. And somewhere over the past six months, this Randy Fullmer production went from being just good to DAMN good.
But — in Disney execs eyes — none of that is going to matter if “Chicken Little” doesn’t pull down truly huge numbers on its opening weekend. The Walt Disney Company has so much riding on this picture (I.E. “Chicken Little” has to prove to Wall Street that Disney made the right decision in shutting down traditional animation. More importantly, that the Mouse can continue as a studio that produces popular animated features even if it doesn’t renew its co-production & distribution deal with Pixar) that just strong ticket sales won’t cut it.
According to some studio insiders that I’ve spoken with, if “Chicken Little” only makes as much as “Shark Tale” did during its opening weekend (I.E. $47 million), execs will start commiting seppuku right there in the Rotunda (I.E. Disney’s oh-so-exclusive executive dining room). The only opening weekend gross that will be acceptable is something that falls between $62.5 million (Which is what “Monsters, Inc.” earned on its opening weekend back in November of 2001) and $70 million (Which is what “The Incredibles” earned on its opening weekend last November).
“If ‘Chicken Little’ isn’t a Pixar-sized hit, what happens then?,” you query. Well, nothing immediately. After all, Disney already has four other computer animated features in the production pipeline: “A Day with Wilbur Robinson” (Which is due out in 2006), “America Dog,” “Rapunzel Unbraided” & “Fraidy Cat.”
But I can tell you this much. From that point forward, Mickey will be paying very close attention to “Curious George,” that traditionally animated feature that Universal is releasing in February of 2006. And if that Matt O’Callaghan film does particularly well during its domestic release … Well, you’ll probably see a couple of things happen fairly quickly:
- Some very senior executives at Disney Feature Animation will be asked to clean out their desks.
- And then the word will go out to a very small, select group of traditional animators. As in: “All is forgiven. Please come home.”
Mind you, you’re never going to be able to get anyone in Mouse House management to admit that they actually made a mistake. That it was wrong for Disney to get out of the traditional animation business. After all, even current WDFA president David Stainton gave himself an out by saying — back in January of 2004 — that if the right project came along, Disney might make another traditionally animated feature.
But the next 9 months or so are crucial, Little Orphan Annie-mator. Or so say my sources inside the Team Disney Burbank building.
Sooooo … If “Madagascar” under-performs domestically AND then “Chicken Little” doesn’t do as well as Disney execs had hoped AND then “Curious George” kicks butt when it’s released to theaters next February … THEN traditional animation at Walt Disney Studios could be poised for a comeback.
But — for now — we’re just dealing with the first few dominos that have fallen. A trio of computer animated features that didn’t do quite as well as Hollywood had expected. Plus the fall-out from expensive CG projects like “Sky Captain” & “The Polar Express” under-performing.
Just be aware that there are a number of very bright people in the entertainment industry who are closely monitoring this situation. Not just at Disney, but at Dreamworks, Pixar & Sony too. All of these executives are wondering what these sagging domestic grosses for computer animated features actually mean. Is this just a temporary aberration? Or are these lower ticket sales really an early indication that American audiences may be growing weary of CG?
Either way, I can tell you that there are already execs within the Walt Disney Company who are saying (very quietly, mind you) “Maybe we should put together a study that tells us how much it would cost to revive traditional animation.” Mind you, no one’s saying this very loudly because A) Eisner & Stainton are still there and B) no one knows for sure what Iger’s true feelings about animation — either traditional or CG — are yet.
So all I can tell you folks is to keep an eye on “Madagascar.” If that Dreamworks film doesn’t earn at least as much as “Shark Tale” (I.E. $160 million) during its domestic release … Well, that’s the next domino to fall.
And — if enough of these dominos fall — Well, who knows? … Maybe Dan & Tony will eventually be forced to change the end of “Dream On Silly Dreamer.” Now wouldn’t that be cool?
Anyway … That’s the current scuttlebutt coming out of Team Disney Burbank. Soooo … What do you folks think of the scenario that I just laid out?