More Snooze Features from Disney doth cometh

[Luke]

Originally posted by beaker
Thanks for that dubious insight Murgatoad
(rhymes with wumbleteeds)

Hey thats an insult, you better take that back entropy boy - my critical opinion has far more impact than Murgatoads.

I guess until you've worked in TV you wouldn't understand how the strong opinions of hardcore fans (who actually know pretty much nothing about making television) sometimes have to be ignored. If you produce a show, your brief is to make the end product the best it can be for ALL the viewing audience. The question for a producer is whether using a different technique will give an advantage over traditional methods - with Disney animation there's probably not that much of a visible difference unless they're using really obvious CGI yet it would make the production process faster and cheaper. With Henson, i said to A CERTAIN EXTENT it wouldn't bother me if they dropped puppets for some reason, again IF it makes for better production. Do i think it would ? No, but i can certainly see some cases where using a CGI/puppets mix could work. Imagine Henson were doing this entropic 'Ghandi' masterpiece you have been raving about and they needed Gonzo to jump off a cliff, through a waterfall into a nosedive. How are they going to achieve that with the puppet .... put Dave Goelz in a wetsuit and safety harness ? Sometimes as fans we have to put our strong feelings of tradition aside to embrace new methods if it's going to mean we get rewarded with something really great.

 

[beaker]

Heh, good one Jamie! and in case some think Im just making that up...
to whoever hung with williams after the hbo show:
UR AWESOME!

And Nate, perhaps I use that word to much...you know what I really mean though when I say 'edgy'...I mean innovative, interesting, awe inspiring, something new, creative, etc.
Thats what I mean, I think its others who have hijacked the word into meaning something nasty or crude(ie: some of the crasser direction of VMC)

So yeah, I apologize for the overuse of the word...I mean more,
'innovative'. The two films Disney has planned is a far cry from what weve seen them produce when they wanna be epic(Fantasia 2000, Emperors New Groove, Aladdin, etc)

I think thats why I loved Spirited Away so much. It was painstakingly hand painted with very little cgi...sadly that monstrosity Treasure Planet got the priorities form Disney(and look what happened)

anyways, I just wanna see Disney do something different...these two features look to be a giant leap backwards in direction, appeal, and innovation.

 

[frogboy4]

I actually think these are great offerings from Disney. And, hey! I liked Song of the South. Disney is exploring new things and, in some ways, going back to their roots. I was unimpressed with New Groove, but appreciated it was something different. Atlantis and Treasure Planet demonstrated that they were trying to be something they are not. But good try.

I just hope they don't abandon traditional animation altogether. I think that would be a big mistake. GC is great, but traditional animation has its own special spark that cannot be captured by a computer. We should have a blend of all styles and talents. From puppetry and traditional animation to CG and digital film - everything has a place. There should never be one fascist format. I feel Disney may be trying to create a desire for traditional animation so they can bring it back later down the road. Mabye not, but I certainly hope so.

 

[beaker]

Luke, I was kidding buddy...just as you were kidding about JHC going full cgi. OF COURSE JHC needs the latest in cgi for certain scenes and characters. It would be massively fullish to expect JHC to only use puppetry and animatronics. I was commenting on how ya said "or even *gasp* to a certain extent if Henson dropped using puppets. " I mean c'mon now, thats just outlandish...

Originally posted by frogboy4
I just hope they don't abandon traditional animation altogether. I think that would be a big mistake. GC is great, but traditional animation has its own special spark that cannot be captured by a computer.

So so true my man! I think we could all agree on that. I mean so far all cgi films have been pretty much Pixar, with some not so good efforts by other companies.

As for Song of the South...yeah, I'd love to see it, if only Disney wasnt ashamed about it and would release it. If they are ashamed of that feature because of political correctness, why dont they retire the mouse(a character based on turn of the century black face cartooning)

But its just sad to see Disney going back in time and devolving.
I feel sorry for any kid that is forced to see these or any of the cheapquels the mosue is putting out.

 

[radionate]

Originally posted by beaker
So yeah, I apologize for the overuse of the word...I mean more, 'innovative'. The two films Disney has planned is a far cry from what weve seen them produce when they wanna be epic(Fantasia 2000, Emperors New Groove, Aladdin, etc)

Then why don't you consider these next two movies 'innovative"? They've not ventured into the territory of the old west, none the less told a story thru a herd of 3 cows. And the Bear story sounds pretty "innovative" to me too. All of their pictures over the last 15 years have been. Each one taking different angles to storytelling, and testing the boundries of what animation can do.

I think thats why I loved Spirited Away so much. It was painstakingly hand painted with very little cgi...sadly that monstrosity Treasure Planet got the priorities form Disney(and look what happened)

Unfortunatly, hand painted animation isn't really a reality anymore due to costs. I don't know about Spirited Away, but I'd seriously doubt it was all inked and painted by hand. And if it was, it was done in a country where they can afford to pay people next to nothing to do it. It sounds harsh, but thats the way it is.

 

[frogboy4]

There's a difference between hand painted and hand drawn animation. Since Beauty and the Beast, all traditionally drawn Disney animated films were painted inside the computer. Spirited Away wasn't. I can understand computer painting, but not making all releases CG. I do enjoy my collection of production cels. Sadly, a dead art (other than TV stuff).

 

[radionate]

Originally posted by frogboy4
There's a difference between hand painted and hand drawn animation. Since Beauty and the Beast, all traditionally drawn Disney animated films were painted inside the computer. Spirited Away wasn't. I can understand computer painting, but not making all releases CG. I do enjoy my collection of production cels. Sadly, a dead art (other than TV stuff).

Even TV cel animation is nearly dead. Isn't Disney using the computer now from start to finish? Or are the animators still using their desks?

 

[beaker]

Actually, Miyazaki himself had an insane hand in even the minute details of Spirited Away from all that Ive read, from ceoncept to execution. So he was able to oversea(heck maybe even do a lot of the actual hand painting...I mean only he could do some of the lush greenscape by hand...even though he runs Studio Gibli...itd be like Eisner hand painting the next Diz feature)

What worries me is Disney completely abandoning 2d. 2d looks GREAT with 3d elements(Fantasia 2000 is one of th emost astonishing things Ive seen)

To answer your question, the two films interest me about as much as Spirit interested the general public. When I and others think of Disney, we think of colorful pagentry and innovation. I mean just look at the color scheme of these two. Cowboys and Indians isnt exactly cutting edge faire in my book. Why cant they mine more 'out there' ideas like New Groove and Stitch?

 

[frogboy4]

Did you read the synopsis. The film is anythig but cowboys and Indians. That's what makes it interesting.

 

[radionate]

Its about 3 cows trying to save the cattle ranch. Not to mention that they are voiced by Judy Dench, Meg Tilly, and Rosanne.

I know that their will be one group of Disney fans that will be thrilled with that. Those three as cows will be adored by queens all over the country!