Disney Takes Muppet Script Through Pixar

[Drtooth]

As for the Tinker Bell movie. Its true. The movie was very close to being a disaster, as evident by the deleted story reels on the DVD.
One deleted idea had Tinker Bell drowning her sorrows by stuffing her face with basket after basket of muffins.

Ugh.

The problem with those movies is that they're supposedly based off of European Disney comics about Tinkerbelle and other fairies. I have no desire whatsoever to watch any of these films... though I am curious to read one of the comics. \

But really? muffins? They stooped to Muffin humor? Waffles maybe... but muffins?

As far as Disney's 3d stuff, it can be hit or miss. I felt Dinosaurs was boring, but I LOVED Chicken Little and thought the animation and pacing was top notch.
Still, Disney 3d is a whole world better than DWA and Fox animation in my view.

Dinosaurs is one of the worst films I ever seen. And I snuck into it after seeing the Flintstones prequel. I have a high tolerance for crummy films.. but Dinosaur was the dullest thing I've ever seen. The whole thing might have been called Dinos of Arabia or something, since it was just a flat, boring trek through a dull looking desert. And the characters had no personality, and the voice acting (and their choice of voice actors) really spoke volumes about (and this is true) they decided to add in dialogue last moment.

Bolt was cute, but I think the Hamster (or whatever it was) stole the show from the rest of the movie... and I wish I could have seen the original American Dog concept. But Chicken Little was fun. Especially the Pig that talked entirely in song lyrics.

 

[Mupp]

Ugh.

The problem with those movies is that they're supposedly based off of European Disney comics about Tinkerbelle and other fairies. I have no desire whatsoever to watch any of these films... though I am curious to read one of the comics. \

But really? muffins? They stooped to Muffin humor? Waffles maybe... but muffins?

Dinosaurs is one of the worst films I ever seen....

Bolt was cute, but I think the Hamster (or whatever it was) stole the show from the rest of the movie... and I wish I could have seen the original American Dog concept. But Chicken Little was fun. Especially the Pig that talked entirely in song lyrics.

That is why that Tinker Bell scene was deleted.
I have rented the first two Tinker Bell films, and while I am clearly not the target audience, Generally the stories have been good.

As I understand it, the early animation and humor was terrible. John Lasseter gave his concerns to Bob Iger, and changes for the better were made. Including changing Tinker Bell's voice actress.

John Lasseter was the executive producer of the first two Tinker Bell movies, and he will no doubt executive produce the others. And remember, the executive producer is the person who hires everyone else on the project, and that includes the director.

From what I have heard, Lasster is an important guy at Disney Animation. He answers to no one, expect maybe Bob Iger.

I didn't like Dinosaurs either. It was bland. The decision to have the characters talk was a misfire. Perhaps it was doomed from the start. The management at the company was not exactly that great at that time.

The concept for American Dog looked interesting. Although just becuase concept drawings look interesting doesn't necessarily mean that it will all translate into a good film. In Lasseter's case, these creative decisions are not made lightly, and for the good of the story, changes had to be made. I enjoyed Bolt.

I felt rather underwhelmed by Bolt. Maybe it's because I saw it in "3d", which didnt feel very 3d given the backgrounds were painted and not polygons. But just like when I left the theater after Avatar, Bolt didnt weight on my mind. Up for instance, I couldnt stop thinking about and just felt like I had seen something very very special. As far as Disney's 3d stuff, it can be hit or miss. I felt Dinosaurs was boring, but I LOVED Chicken Little and thought the animation and pacing was top notch.
Still, Disney 3d is a whole world better than DWA and Fox animation in my view.

Really? Most Disney fans (and people in general) think that Chicken Little was a generally a bad film.

3D aside, you may want give Bolt another chance.
The main reason why 3D is used to much these days is to try and get people back to the theater.

I know, I have a soft spot for the film, but that's becuase it was one of the best Disney animated films I had seen in years. Striking the right balance between humor and heart.
Humor is essential, but there needs to be heart too. (That also something a good Muppet film should have)

 

[MelissaY1]

Just remember, even if a film is hand-drawn, that doesn't necessarily mean that its better than a CGI film. A hand-drawn film can still stink if it has a bad story.

Currently, Disney Animation plans to continue making both CGI and hand-drawn films. (A hand-drawn Winnie-the-Pooh film is coming up)
It is not fair to expect Disney to only make hand-drawn films, that would be imposing a certain technology on the studio. Walt Disney was a fan of innovation after all.

Story (the writing) is what is important, and I'm glad that John Lasseter knows that, and is having an influence on Disney Animation.

I'm also glad that they are spending so much time on the new Muppet film.

Oh I know, that's why I gave up on many of Disney's hand drawn films a long time ago because of the weak stories. The last one I really genuinely remember enjoying was Hunchback of Notre Dame. The new Winnie the Pooh film sounds great though. I just appreciate the art of hand drawn animation than CGI better, but again that's my personal opinion.

 

[MelissaY1]

I'm okay with CGI, although I much rather regular cartoons. The Toy Story trilogy was very good, though, particularly the last one.

I've only seen the first Toy Story film and even that was quite some time ago. It was cute but I wasn't amazed by it, so I never pursued the other two, though I heard the third one was really great.

 

[MelissaY1]

...Oh and one more thing, what would you rather see;
A badly written hand-drawn film, or a well written CGI film?

Honestly, hand drawn. I like hand drawn animation better, lousy story or not.

 

[MelissaY1]

I'm all for CGI assistance with puppetry, myself. Especially if it helps them fill out crowd scenes.

I don't know about that member, but I would like to see a well written CGI movie over Dreamwork's Sinbad. I assume that's the bad hand drawn one you mean.

Pixar wouldn't be Pixar if they didn't care about story first. They, after all, are story tellers, and none of their movies were outright terrible. Sure, Cars wasn't the best film they made, but it's still leaps and bounds over most. And we're passing this on to Brad Bird at some point.

He is, without a doubt, one of the most underrated animators of our time. He worked on the Simpsons during their best seasons. Heck, ALL scripts should go through Brad Bird, IMO...

I don't mind CGI as a tool at all. Disney was using CGI for certain effects in their mainly hand drawn films as far back as the mid to late 80s and early 90s. I have no issue with that at all. I just don't get the obsession with CGI and now the 3-D movies that half of them weren't really produced in 3-D but were made into 3-D in post production.

Because Avatar was such a success (another film I didn't care for, though the 3-D WAS impressive), every studio is trying to force the 3-D thing down our throats. But what they don't get is Avatar was MADE for 3-D effects. Now they're adding 3-D in post production and it actually takes away from the visual effects of the film. Who here saw the recent Tim Burton "Alice in Wonderland" in 3-D? I did it and it was AWFUL. It looked fuzzy and muddy and wasn't very "special" special effects.

But going back to the Pixar/Muppets discussion, that Alice in Wonderland also failed miserably in the story department. Perhaps if they had a better script it could've been a better movie because some of the CGI in that was cool.

 

[MelissaY1]

I know where you're coming from. I'm not a real big fan of CGI either especially with cartoon animation!

I'm happy they still do regular puppetry and do the digital puppetry on the side.

Yeah I totally understand wanting to experiment with new technologies and what not, heck, Jim Henson did it with his work, so I get that aspect of it. I just personally would rather watch a hand drawn old Disney film from the 1930s or 1940s than a CGI film today. That's just me.

 

[Drtooth]

John Lasseter was the executive producer of the first two Tinker Bell movies, and he will no doubt executive produce the others. And remember, the executive producer is the person who hires everyone else on the project, and that includes the director.

From what I have heard, Lasster is an important guy at Disney Animation. He answers to no one, expect maybe Bob Iger.

Someone has to toss some Paperinik (Duck Avenger/Disney UltraHeroes) or Double Duck comics on Lasseter's desk. Considering the Tinkerbelle movies are based off comics from Italy too... I'm sorry, but the story of Donald Duck's Batman meets Arsene Lupin alter ego (or at least his secret double life as a spy) needs to be made into a film or TV series of some sort. Super Goof too.

 

[D'Snowth]

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wirestory?id=11223472&page=1

HUGE news, as it looks like Disney is actually wanting to focus on the story and the character of the script, not just putting out a movie with Kermit and Piggy and Jason Segel in it. This can mean nothing but great things for the script and the movie at large!

See, that's the thing... it LOOKS like it, but is it really? No one can ever tell with Disney, anything "newsworthy" from them can only be taken with a grain of salt.

And your right... this CAN be nothing... nothing at all, that is... whatever's going on, it's 50/50.

 

[theprawncracker]

See, that's the thing... it LOOKS like it, but is it really? No one can ever tell with Disney, anything "newsworthy" from them can only be taken with a grain of salt.

And your right... this CAN be nothing... nothing at all, that is... whatever's going on, it's 50/50.

Oh please... there is no call for this constant pessimism with Disney, Snowthy. They've shown more times than you realize that they are taking the Muppets in the right direction, and they are taking TIME and MONEY to focus on them. Having Pixar look at the script is just another in a huge list of things they've done to prove that--especially with this film. Why can't you be confident here? Disney hasn't made a misstep since Studio DC. I challenge you to name one.