SheepFactory
01-13-2004, 05:06 PM
a very interesting article:
http://www.jimhillmedia.com/articles/01132004.1.htm
some quotes:
"The crowd -- already angered by that "core people" comment -- peppered him with pointed questions. Which supposedly started with: "Why is the Walt Disney Company flooding the feature animation market with all these low quality direct-to-video sequels?'
Now Stainton (who -- it should be pointed out -- up until very recently was actually in charge of Disney Television Animation, the division of the Walt Disney Company that makes those direct-to-video films) supposedly tried to defend his old division, saying "Now they're not low quality films ..."
... Only to be shouted down by all those assembled.
David reportedly tried to continue, insisting that "the public couldn't really tell the difference between the direct-to-video stuff and the films that Feature Animation actually produces." This comment was also met with boos.
Sensing that he wasn't exactly going to be able win this crowd over by answering that question, Stainton quickly moved on to another query. Which allegedly was: "For the footage that I've seen so far of 'Chicken Little,' it's clear that we're just trying to copy Pixar now. Why isn't Disney trying to make its own kind of CG films?"
David reportedly tried to reply by saying that it was Pixar that was copying Disney, not the other way. That Pixar had borrowed Disney Animation's old production model (I.E. Keeping all of its artists under one roof, concentrating all of its resources on one film at a time). How Pixar had established this "braintrust" of directors and story people who helped each other, who worked together so that that studio could always get the most out of every single project.
"
what do you guys think?
http://www.jimhillmedia.com/articles/01132004.1.htm
some quotes:
"The crowd -- already angered by that "core people" comment -- peppered him with pointed questions. Which supposedly started with: "Why is the Walt Disney Company flooding the feature animation market with all these low quality direct-to-video sequels?'
Now Stainton (who -- it should be pointed out -- up until very recently was actually in charge of Disney Television Animation, the division of the Walt Disney Company that makes those direct-to-video films) supposedly tried to defend his old division, saying "Now they're not low quality films ..."
... Only to be shouted down by all those assembled.
David reportedly tried to continue, insisting that "the public couldn't really tell the difference between the direct-to-video stuff and the films that Feature Animation actually produces." This comment was also met with boos.
Sensing that he wasn't exactly going to be able win this crowd over by answering that question, Stainton quickly moved on to another query. Which allegedly was: "For the footage that I've seen so far of 'Chicken Little,' it's clear that we're just trying to copy Pixar now. Why isn't Disney trying to make its own kind of CG films?"
David reportedly tried to reply by saying that it was Pixar that was copying Disney, not the other way. That Pixar had borrowed Disney Animation's old production model (I.E. Keeping all of its artists under one roof, concentrating all of its resources on one film at a time). How Pixar had established this "braintrust" of directors and story people who helped each other, who worked together so that that studio could always get the most out of every single project.
"
what do you guys think?