Should we get more hand drawn movies in our time?.

[Collgoff]

Well we all know that animated film are mostly computer animated in our time now,

But do you guys think we should have more hand draw animated films?

Well I think we should do !
Please tell me about yours thoughts about this and thank you.

 

[mr3urious]

Of course we should, but they need to have a strong story behind them no matter what the medium. Looking back, The Princess and the Frog didn't have much of an identity of its own, being a standard princess tale with standard wisecracking animal sidekicks. The message of how cooking brings people together I really liked, however.

 

[D'Snowth]

Sure, I think we should, but as we've discussed, we're not going to, because there's no longer a market for it: THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG and WINNIE THE POOH were attempts revive traditionally animated movies, but both flopped, so that pretty much shot down our last hopes for traditional animation in movies.

EDIT: mr3urious ziffeled me.

 

[mr3urious]

Sure, I think we should, but as we've discussed, we're not going to, because there's no longer a market for it: THE PRINCESS AND THE FROG and WINNIE THE POOH were attempts revive traditionally animated movies, but both flopped, so that pretty much shot down our last hopes for traditional animation in movies.

We just have to turn to Japan for our hand-drawn fix. They still make 'em like that most of the time.

 

[MuppetSpot]

Well Don Bluth said he would make the 2D dragon lair movie if he got enough money from crownfunding.

 

[Collgoff]

Those a really interesting points!

 

[fuzzygobo]

It would be great if Don Bluth could pull off one more 2D masterpiece (and at 78, he ain't getting any younger), but the format requires three major expenditures:
1. Time
2. Labor
3. Money
Then finding a strong story, a studio to finance and market your film, dealing with merchandising tie-ins, and hoping to break even. After that, it's a breeze.

 

[Yorick]

Count me in as someone who thinks the lack of non-CG animation is a drag.

As for the fantastic Mr. Bluth, I hope he can make that film! If it's a financial success, I'll be very happy for him, but the main thing, always, is an artistic success. So, as long as it's made the way he wants, that will be good enough for me.

 

[D'Snowth]

As much as I'd love to see Bluth make a comeback, I must admit, I've always been curious to see what a CGI film from him would be like . . . I understand he was originally approached with the first ICE AGE movie, but turned it down. THE TALE OF DESPEREAUX seemed like the kind of movie he would have made, I think: it had that kind of tone to it. RATATOUILLE feels similar to his style as well, and as I've said before, it's one of the reasons why Brad Bird's one of my favorite Pixar teamsters, because his sense of storytelling has more maturity to it without being too adult for kids to enjoy, which is exactly what made Bluth's movies stand out so much: they had a level of darkness and maturity that animated movies at the time were severly lacking.

Even if he is 78, I think he could still pull something like this off: Sid & Marty Krofft are in the 80s and 70s, and they're still working - in fact, Marty Krofft just recently did a new interview where he mentions how he and Sid have outlasted other similar companies such as Hanna-Barbera, Filmation, DePatie-Freling, Ruby-Spears, and others because they either went bankrupt, sold-out, or died. He was even asked why he hasn't already retired, and he said, "if you retire, and you wake up in the morning and watch daytime television, you'll be dead in a month." So neither he nor Sid plan on retiring. With independent companies like Krofft and Bagdasarian (Chipmunks) getting new chances to produce things for new audiences today, surely there's a chance for Bluth to put something out for us.

 

[Drtooth]

Of course we should, but they need to have a strong story behind them no matter what the medium. Looking back, The Princess and the Frog didn't have much of an identity of its own, being a standard princess tale with standard wisecracking animal sidekicks. The message of how cooking brings people together I really liked, however.

100% agreed. Disney hitched the 2-D animation to a princess film (one made to pad out the ethnicity of their lobotomized merchandise line) and a franchise they destroyed with bad preschool programming. If we look at the last massive success Disney had with 2-D, it was Lilo and Stitch. An off the wall concept with a quirky female lead that didn't need princesses or original songs to get 3 DTV sequels, a TV series, and 2 Japanese animated series. Of course, eh... then they tanked it with 2 even more off the wall concepts. Brother Bear (that in no way deserves the crap it gets, it's far better at Native American legend than Pocahontas ever was), and the way too out there Home on the Range that...well... I still can't decide if I liked it or not. I give them all the credit in the world for trying to emulate Disney's 1950's and 60's Casey Jones (the train guy, not the far superior hockey based vigilante) like cartoons.

What we need is a strong enough script and concept to work as any animated movie first. Home video/streaming and the oversaturation of terrible tenth party studios is hurting CGI. And Stop motion films just aren't getting the love they should be.

That said, even though it's mostly because of the brand, let's not forget Spongebob's latest movie did quite well, even though it was part live action and CGI, with the CGI marketed over the rest of the movie. But the 2-D animated bits were amazing, especially in 3-D. If Nick gave a crap about any of its other current shows, I'd love to see them make a movie out of one. Harvey Beaks would look great in a Ghibli-esque way with that high a budget animation. Too bad they've been trying to keep that one down.

It would be great if Don Bluth could pull off one more 2D masterpiece (and at 78, he ain't getting any younger), but the format requires three major expenditures:
1. Time
2. Labor
3. Money
Then finding a strong story, a studio to finance and market your film, dealing with merchandising tie-ins, and hoping to break even. After that, it's a breeze.

Oddly enough, depending on the studio and the size of the project, 2-D animation is actually cheaper than CGI. Even Stop motion somehow costs less. There's this stigma that CGI is a cheap substitute for something, but like I say, Green Lantern certainly didn't flop because it was cheap to produce. I'm sure some studio would glom onto the idea of a cheaper to produce film at some point. Especially when a heavy hitter like Dreamworks can't shake their recent string of barely past the budget making films they consider flops.

As for Don Bluth, I really would love to see him come back to his glory days of American Tail and Land Before Time One. He had a steady slide in the 90's and very early 00's, mainly because of the emulation of Disney they forced on him in that period. Thumbellina sucked. And things got worse until when he had Titan AE, which was too much of a money loser to keep things up. There's a Kickstarter to get Don to make the Dragon's Lair movie. Hopefully that pans out.