PDA

View Full Version : Disney to do full cg Peter Pan


worker_bee
02-17-2005, 06:45 PM
Disney animation has optioned bestselling children's book Peter and the Starcatchers, by Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson. Variety says the story will be developed as a 3-D CGI feature. In the loose prequel to "Peter Pan," modern 8-year-old Peter leads a group of orphaned boys on the ship Never Land. Peter and shipmate Molly lead an effort to recover a trunk of magical starstuff, before it can fall into the hands of the pirate Black Stache.

The book was published by Disney Editions in August.


http://www.mickeynews.com/News/DisplayPressRelease.asp_Q_id_E_2175Pan

kmest
02-17-2005, 07:00 PM
oh no,that dont give sence.why they always want go with sequals and recently by prequals?what is wrong with original story?
it can be told again and again.the disney peter pan cartoon was perfect and the new live action movie was even lovely.
i HOPE this one to be good (not like the RETURN TO NEVER LAND)

digitalshaman
02-17-2005, 07:02 PM
What the bloody hell are they thinking?!?!?!

kmest
02-17-2005, 07:07 PM
What the bloody hell are they thinking?!?!?!

its not about of what are they thinking,its about on WHAT ARE THEY DOING!

digitalshaman
02-17-2005, 07:11 PM
lol i actaully originally posted 'doing' then change the word to 'thinking'...

agreenster
02-17-2005, 07:16 PM
That cow doesnt give milk anymore, yet they still suck on it day and night.

MAKE A NEW MOVIE. Even Chicken Little and Rapunzel Unbraided are rehashes.

Where's DFA's Incredibles, Nemo, Shrek, Robots, or Monster's Inc? Everything they do is completely unoriginal. It makes me sad, because all I want is for Disney to succeed, and they consistently shoot themselves in the foot.

SUB7NYC
02-17-2005, 08:19 PM
It was clear that disney is run by fools when they demolished there 2D animation dept.
They have no idea that the story is equally if not more important than the visuals. I for one am glad to see them fail.

JDex
02-17-2005, 08:24 PM
Won't this be like the 18th Peter Pan movie... at what point has a story been done enough?

The original Disney Peter Pan is wonderful and I can't imagine what these Numb-nutz disney execs are thinking.

Capel
02-17-2005, 08:29 PM
I for one am glad to see them fail.

hey, good attitude! thanks for supporting the cg community....
...man, some people just don't get it.

fattyLees
02-17-2005, 08:45 PM
Ok so it's been done a million times and beaten like a rented mule, BUT it does create greater demand for CG artists and IT staff.

my 2 cents
-Fatty

JDex
02-17-2005, 08:49 PM
Mmmm... just what our developing industry needs.

More jobs working on marginally bad ideas, re-hashing old stories that have been done a few times in the past 10 years.

I'd for one much prefer to see more jobs working on interesting new stories that may just make people say... "Hey honey, there's a new movie that everyone at work has been talking about. Do you want to go see it?"

Instead of... "Hey honey, there's another Peter Pan movie out, do you want to sit here and eat lead-paint chips or go see it?"

slaughters
02-17-2005, 08:55 PM
...what is wrong with original story?...Unless I missed something it *is* based on an original Story. A bestselling children's book called, "Peter and the Starcatchers", by Dave Barry and Ridley Pearson.

Yell at Dave and Ridley if you want. Or, is it just funner to yell at Disney?

Shaderhacker
02-17-2005, 10:03 PM
I, personally, don't understand some of you. Whether a story is original or not shouldn't be our concern as artists. We should be concerned about the market as a whole. To me, more movies mean more jobs...period.

I'd much rather have a good sequel or prequel than a bad original.

-M

kmest
02-17-2005, 10:08 PM
Yell at Dave and Ridley if you want. Or, is it just funner to yell at Disney?


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA....... :cry: :cry: :cry:

Mysterious X
02-18-2005, 02:50 AM
i officially hate peter pan now <------a disney victim

JDex
02-18-2005, 03:11 AM
I, personally, don't understand some of you. Whether a story is original or not shouldn't be our concern as artists. We should be concerned about the market as a whole. To me, more movies mean more jobs...period.

I'd much rather have a good sequel or prequel than a bad original.

-M

To me, more movies mean more jobs in the short-term, and a floundering market (read less jobs) in the long-term. Bird's two succesful story-driven movies create demand for more films... disappointing "marketing first, art second, story third (if at all)" sequals like Lion King 1-1/2 lower demand and saturate the emerging market making CG movies just a boing gimmick to the average movie goer.

IMHO There was a time when people went to Disney movies for a wonderful experience... Classics like Snow White, Bambi, Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King were a visual, audible and thought provoking experience, even for parents just taking their kids to a cartoon. Today it's just the audio/visual stimulation of a crap new story with weak character development, rushed story framework and/or a re-hash of the exact same story that we have all seen before.

The fact that this is not a remake of the Peter Pan tale that has been told over-and-over-and-over is the only redeeming bit of news in this particular story... but if it follows suit to the current Disney philosophy it will be another case of degrading our industry, the artform that enables it and the artists who create the beauty.

I for one hope Disney does not fail... I just hope that they get back to the vision that used to drive the company and off of the meglomaniacal, anything for a profit tragectory that they have been traveling on for the last 10+ years.

Gentle Fury
02-18-2005, 06:25 AM
ugh.....

nuf said

leuey
02-18-2005, 07:32 AM
If they make a 3D bambi I'm going to cry (and not just when his mother gets shot). Disney has become a conservative institution. They'll make sequels to Pixar movies and re-hash whatever old films they have in their vaults for the next decade or two.

Sad but true....

-Metallica


-Greg

Tocpe
02-18-2005, 01:30 PM
Just thought you guys would like to know, Walt's spinning has just increased to 15,000 RPM; up from the 12,000 RPM he was clocked at this time last year. If he keeps this up, we'll be able to use him to power Chicago in about 3 months...

Teyon
02-18-2005, 01:44 PM
Well, I am a little unclear why they went that route instead of doing something more fresh and I do feel as an artist, originality should count for something but I also need to pay bills and if I have to stoop that low to do it....well...hmm...actually, I don't think I would. lol. Seriously though, you never know, this may be the one sequel of theirs that didn't suck lemons. In fairness to them, what they're doing is no worse than say Land Before Time 24. Now there's a series I do wish would just up and die ( I mean, didn't the meteor hit yet?).

Gentle Fury
02-18-2005, 04:19 PM
Well, I am a little unclear why they went that route instead of doing something more fresh and I do feel as an artist, originality should count for something but I also need to pay bills and if I have to stoop that low to do it....well...hmm...actually, I don't think I would. lol. Seriously though, you never know, this may be the one sequel of theirs that didn't suck lemons. In fairness to them, what they're doing is no worse than say Land Before Time 24. Now there's a series I do wish would just up and die ( I mean, didn't the meteor hit yet?).

yeah, cuz every other direct to video sequel hasn't sucked yet.....hmmm 100% suck means the chances of this one being good are probably close to 0% ;)

powerwave3d
02-18-2005, 04:39 PM
To me, more movies mean more jobs in the short-term, and a floundering market (read less jobs) in the long-term.

I would have to 100% disagree. There's plenty of live-action movies that get made every year that sucks bad, does that stop the industry? Nope.


I, personally, don't understand some of you. Whether a story is original or not shouldn't be our concern as artists. We should be concerned about the market as a whole. To me, more movies mean more jobs...period.


I couldn't agree more. Unless your a hobbyist how can you honestly sit there and say a cg film shouldn't be made? I mean, come on. This is a business folks, it's as simple as that. I find it hard to believe that some of you would be saying the same stuff if it meant you working on this film or eating out of a dumpster behind the studio.

Saying it's a bad idea, ok, that's your right and nothing wrong with. But, to sit there and claim all these artistic rights and all the "i hope they fail." I mean, harsh, but wake up and join the real world.

poly-phobic
02-18-2005, 05:42 PM
here comes the "me-too" or "i hate Disney just because it sounds like others on this forum with more post than me do too" fanboys replies....

Tocpe
02-18-2005, 05:54 PM
yep...let the flaming and trolling begin!

Shaderhacker
02-18-2005, 06:06 PM
IMHO There was a time when people went to Disney movies for a wonderful experience... Classics like Snow White, Bambi, Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King were a visual, audible and thought provoking experience, even for parents just taking their kids to a cartoon. Today it's just the audio/visual stimulation of a crap new story with weak character development, rushed story framework and/or a re-hash of the exact same story that we have all seen before.

History tells us that nothing will ever stay on top. Having said that, we shouldn't expect for Disney or Pixar to always be on top. It just won't happen.

You may think that the market could get detracted in the long term. Maybe. But for now, whenever there is something new that's coming out, I smile to see the job openings.

-M

Shaderhacker
02-18-2005, 06:15 PM
Well, I am a little unclear why they went that route instead of doing something more fresh and I do feel as an artist, originality should count for something but I also need to pay bills and if I have to stoop that low to do it....well...hmm...actually, I don't think I would. lol. Seriously though, you never know, this may be the one sequel of theirs that didn't suck lemons. In fairness to them, what they're doing is no worse than say Land Before Time 24. Now there's a series I do wish would just up and die ( I mean, didn't the meteor hit yet?).


Disney has many movies coming out. Peter Pan isn't the only one. Dreamworks, and Pixar and Sony are following suite. I guarantee you that every CG movie that comes out in the next 4 years (original or not) isn't going to be a blockbuster classic. Period.

So what Disney wants to make sequels to Pixar movies? So what if you think most of their movies suck? What does it do to us as workers in the industry? Nothing. However, if they close down, and Dreamworks closes, or Sony stops their animation division, or R&H goes under...THEN you will be saying "Please, let something - anything be greenlit so I can work in CG again and not Best Buy!!"

Basically noone in their right mind working in the CG industry should wish ill on any company no matter what comes out of that company story-wise or artistic-wise. It's hard enough trying to find a job after layoffs when a film wraps up....

-M

Atwooki
02-18-2005, 06:48 PM
Couldn't agree more JDex - as to the other views: Money; Period :)

Atwooki

Capel
02-18-2005, 07:04 PM
To me, more movies mean more jobs in the short-term, and a floundering market (read less jobs) in the long-term.

it's official...... you're as stupid as you look.

JDex
02-18-2005, 07:07 PM
it's official...... you're as stupid as you look.

Nice... Real nice...

Boone
02-18-2005, 07:11 PM
Re: Capel.

As a certified member of the "Official JDex Fan Club" - I demand satisfaction! :eek:

RobertoOrtiz
02-18-2005, 08:48 PM
People keep personal insults of the forum, or I will close the thread.


-R

Capel
02-18-2005, 11:44 PM
Nice... Real nice...

well, think about what you just said, and then go watch "Alone in the Dark". Arguably the worst movie ever made, so i guess we can expect hollywood to come crashing down any day now, right? W.R.O.N.G. Bad movies have been flooding the market for years, but that doesn't stop people from making good movies, and this will remain true for the "Animated Feature" genre.

Saying that Disney will ultimately bring about the demise of the Animated Feature industry is just plain stupid, stupid, stupid.

...but if it follows suit to the current Disney philosophy it will be another case of degrading our industry, the artform that enables it and the artists who create the beauty.

...there are certain facts of life that you're gonna have to accept, and one of them is that in your life time, you're probably gonna work on quite a few shitty movies. That's gonna be true for pretty much everyone.

the point is this.... YOU'RE NOT WORKING AT SUBWAY, OR BLOCKBUSTER, OR TEARING TICKETS AT A MOVIE THEATER, OR EVEN SELLING INSURANCE!!! :banghead:

you get to do something that you love for a living, and a good living at that. So stop whining, pull your head out of Pixar's ass, and be grateful that you're employed, even if you're not working on the next Brad Bird film!

JDex
02-19-2005, 01:43 AM
OMG... an actual response...

Look, am not up Pixar's ass... as you so eloquently put it... I'm not even up Bird's... but it is a fact that the Iron Giant alone had more heart, more story and more of genuine classic feel than all of the collected Disney works since the release of The Lion King.

I will work on shit projects without question... I already have, and I shut up and did it... but that has absolutely nothing to do with the reality that if shit projects based solely on CG continue to be made, the public will lose interest... it's already happening with Live Action films... here in New England the local press and Hollywood moguls are pushing the new Martial Arts movie (the name of which escapes me) as the only film with no CG... as if that is something that should factor into my movie going experience...

People who visit my place of work (from all over the world) and see me studying hard ask me what I am studying and I say Cinematography and Computer Graphics... for the most part they respond well to the cinematography part and negatively to the CG part. This is common. I also through many follow up conversations with these people find that they are sick of CG... they want real movies... movies that should be made on their own merits and not to showcase some technological innovation.

CG has it's place in every production... and I want every talent artist to work... I would just prefer that the people deciding what films to make, would take some pointers from the dying breed of film-makers who ran Hollywood before the corporate-conglomerates came in and bought them all out.

If you disagree... cool, but calling me stupid without giving one ounce of effort to explain your opinion is like the pot calling the kettle black.

Capel
02-19-2005, 03:58 AM
... I would just prefer that the people deciding what films to make, would take some pointers from the dying breed of film-makers who ran Hollywood before the corporate-conglomerates came in and bought them all out.

If you disagree... cool, but calling me stupid without giving one ounce of effort to explain your opinion is like the pot calling the kettle black.

well no kidding!!! who WOULDN"T prefer that? Thanks for stating the obvious. The problem is that you come off blaming Disney and saying that their bad movies will result in the decline of this industry, which is a stupid STATEMENT. it doesn't mean YOU are stupid. So what if a lot of the people you talk to aren't interested in the CG stuff you do. So what if they're turned off. This has nothing to do with you bashing Disney for acting like a corporation, which *GASP*, guess what, THEY ARE!

if shit projects based solely on CG continue to be made, the public will lose interest... it's already happening with Live Action films..

You make it sound like bad Live Action films are a recent development... **NEWSFLASH** Bad movies have been around since MOVIES have been around... and yet movies are still being made...... WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU WORRIED ABOUT?!

And i'm sorry, but the world will never get "tired" of seeing CG in movies. Some INDIVIDUALS might, but never to the point where we have to worry that the American public is gonna go on strike with signs that say, "NO MORE CG ELEMENTS IN MOVIES!!!" it's assinine, and yet that's exactly what you seem to be worried about...

I also through many follow up conversations with these people find that they are sick of CG... they want real movies... movies that should be made on their own merits and not to showcase some technological innovation.

TRANSLATION - They are sick of bad movies that happen to have a lot of CG in them. It's not the CG that makes them bad.... it's the lack of story.

BillDoor
02-19-2005, 05:59 AM
this has got to be the hundredth thread i've followed about disney and their mismanagement of their properties and their general decline in quality in the recent past, and i've noticed that there's this whole subgroup of people who don't seem to mind shitty product because it means "more jobs" in some way, and that this is necessarily a good thing because everyone here wants to work in cg. and it might even be true that in the short run a glut of cg movies will create jobs for a bunch of new people and everyone's happy because, even though they have to work on some piece of junk dtv that's done at the lowest cost possible to make just enough money to justify its existence from people only trying to sedate their kids for 50 minutes and that no one will remember or care about in 5 years, hey, it's better than working at mcdonald's. and that's true, basically... but what most of the people advocating this view seem to miss, is that disney has already fired a great many of its 2d animators and turned the rest to 3d or a life of only dtv junk for the forseeable future.
now, i'm going off on a tangent. perhaps a bit of a rant... but it'll tie in later.
disney has declared 2d "dead" because the box office returns from the most recent american-made 2d films have been poor, and they think the reason for this is a problem with the medium. that somehow a movie like the lion king or the little mermaid was only popular at the time because there was some passing fad and now people's tastes have changed. this is a basic flaw of reasoning that most businessmen don't understand and that pisses off most of the more artistic people around. you have to take chances with stories and keep things new and interesting to be truly successful in this business. but disney has become so large and corporate that they've fallen into the trap of only doing what they've done before because they can prove that it's marginally profitable, and, as long as it's making some money, that's good enough.
if you want to see just how "dead" 2d is, look to japan, disney sure as hell is.
the medium isn't the problem, it's the story... but, since 3d animation has taken off at exactly the same time, the tards in charge assume that 3d is somehow the magical answer to their problems. this is why pixar is such such a great studio, because they're too new for people to have preconceived notions yet... they're allowed to be creative and come up with new and interesting stories. their success isn't in their animators or their great effects or their cg, it's in the fact that they tell interesting stories that people want to watch again and again... it's why sales of cinderella and snow white still continue and why most people don't even know there's a jungle book 2... or even a cinderella 2 >_< ...
now, how this all pertains to the previous point and then how this all relates to the original point of the thread....
all those disney animators were fired not because they were incompetent in their craft or were providing substandard product (disney had some of the best 2d animators in the world) but even though their animation is incredibly good, it can't make a bad story worth watching. it can only make it good enough for people to get the idea that animation is a "genre" instead of a medium and that the genre is only for kids who don't care that what they're watching is really poorly scripted. and why pay a lead 2d animator that can make theatrical quality animation a couple hundred thousand a year when you can get a kid out right out of school for nothing to churn and burn for you, or ship it off to another country where you can pay the workers nothing? western culture in general considers animated films to be for children, and after the hundredth crappy 3d film the public's intrest will drop enough that adults won't be interested in watching anymore and the audience will shrink to just children again... and then you get what happened to 2d here in the west. 3d animated movies will start bringing in less and less money and that will mean the movie companies will be less and less willing to put up money for new and untested stories. instead, they will go back into defensive mode and start recycling the same old shit that does "just enough" business to turn a profit. and why pay a lead 3d animator the big bucks when you can ship off the animation to a sweatshop in china or india or korea where you can train someone to set keyframes in no time and pay him 20 bucks a week? not that i'm suggesting that there are no creative artists in these countries, just that the ones that are good aren't likely to be happy working in a factory and will most likely be extremely overqualified.
obviously this is assuming the worst, but it's certainly possible. 10 years down the road a lot of guys could be looking for work because the opportunity to get the general public to accept animation as a legitimate medium for telling stories that can appeal to adult audiences was drowned out in a flood of bad 3d movies looking to make a quick buck and all the jobs went overseas to cut the costs of future ventures.
so... how does this pertian to disney making the two-hundred millionth peter pan spin-off?... well... it doesn't... not directly anyway. i can't truly judge with just the information i have now because i haven't read the book or the script or seen the movie, but i can make an educated guess from disney's past performance and the way their story writing pipleline works. i can assume the story itself is probably not all that great because it doesn't need to be told. the peter pan story has been ground into the dirt and should be left alone. but, even if the story is good, that doesn't mean that a good script will come out of it... and even if there is a good script, disney producers (who are basically just good at managing time and money, and not hired for their story writing skills) still have their say. and i've seen what happens to good jokes and funny lines after a disney exec has had his say on what he think will be "better". i'm tired of seeing bad film after bad film being released from disney. i want to see something good, and i don't think that it will be another telling of peter pan. i hope to be suprised, but i honestly don't think i will.
what this industry doesn't need is a flood of bad stories to make the general audiences indifferent to 3d animation.
a bunch of jobs created in the short run is great only if they can last into the long run. if you're seriously worried that your ability isn't good enough to get a job unless there's so many jobs available that unqualified people are being hired, you might want to think about investing in your paper hat in the near future.
it's not a question of whether or not i think i'm "too good" to be working on a shitty movie, it's a question of "if this shitty movie doesn't sell well, will i have a job tomorrow?"


ps. this discussion is not about CG ELEMENTS in live-action movies.... i would seriously doubt that anyone has any fear that people will "get tired" of seeing special effects in live-action movies. this is a discussion about CG ANIMATED FEATURE FILMS (which isn't a genre, but a medium... you can tell any genre of story using animation from kiddie care bears to sci-fi space adventures to porn) and since there's basically no true difference between 2d and 3d animated films (except in the minds of the audience that's grown up thinking 2d animation is cartoons for children, and hasn't yet got a firm place to set 3d animation on in their minds) if you show those same people that there's no difference and beat them into believing that 3d animated films are also only for children, then i don't see why there's any reason for 3d to not eventually follow what's happened to 2d, at least here in america.


pps. and yes, bad movies have been around since movies started and people still watch anyway. the difference is in the perception of the people making the films and backing them financially. 3d animation is only going to be taken seriously as long as it's making good money, and will only make GOOD money if enough people are willing to watch. the movie industry doesn't fold because of a bunch of bad movies because there will always be an audience for "conventional" films. 3d feature animation, however, is too small a niche in the industry to stand up to repeat failures. fail often enough in a niche like animation, and financial backers start to get the idea that "those cg films" were just a passing fad and aren't worth investing in anymore. if you doubt, just look at the current state of 2d feature animation.

Pixarman
02-19-2005, 09:27 AM
People complain way too much about movies anymore. There are plenty of really good films that come out each year and plenty of big popcorn flicks. I personally enjoy both. I can see a film like Eternal Sunshine and that same week see something like The Day After Tomorrow. I get enjoyment out of both films. It's a different kind of enjoyment, but sometimes you feel like a nut and sometimes you don't. The masses are not losing intrest in big-budget, effects-laden, movies. If anything they are spending more and more on them.

We've already been through a period of film without CG...it's called the 70's. And CG is still realativly new to the industry when compared to the "old school" ways of effects. It will continue to evolve and grow exponentialy each year...look at the evolution of the CG characters. They are now able to hold their own and act alongside the real actors without pulling viewers out of the moment.

All this business with Disney...it's just bad management. In the 70's Disney was in dark times as well...but they kicked into gear and made some really great movies in the past few years. They've just kind of lost focus...it happens. They'll gain it back when they boot Eisner. If they want to give CG films a go..more power to them. They have the potential to make something great again. I think it'll come, but they need some time to get used to their new digs.

People need to lighten up though. As long as there are kids in the world, Disney and CG movies will continue to be made. We will all have many jobs and even though there will be some bad films made..there will be some gems as well. I've seen some really bad Anime films...but they continue to crank them out daily it seems...

blakshep
02-19-2005, 04:34 PM
i'm very sad, that many people here doesn't care about what they make, the only important thing is the paycheck. It doesn't matter that film is good or bad or maybe it' about promoting killing people. It's a shame you're proud to be called an industry
personally i'm not very hapy to have another stupid 3d film, to make our children more stupid

eks
02-19-2005, 06:12 PM
i am sorry to be ambiguous, but i have to agree with capel and jdex. :p

because, the following statment is HALF-wrong:

And i'm sorry, but the world will never get "tired" of seeing CG in movies. Some INDIVIDUALS might, but never to the point where we have to worry that the American public is gonna go on strike with signs that say, "NO MORE CG ELEMENTS IN MOVIES!!!" it's assinine, and yet that's exactly what you seem to be worried about...

TRANSLATION - They are sick of bad movies that happen to have a lot of CG in them. It's not the CG that makes them bad.... it's the lack of story.

if you look at history of animation, the general public DID GOT TIRED of "technical achievments" in the begging of it all. James Stuart Blacktorn (http://www.google.com/search?q=James+Stuart+Blackton) could be compared to Disney nowadays, but he was an individual artist that used his "knowledges in animation" to astound the public with moving drawings. during a small period, the general public was really astounded by these films, but they lacked any kind of storyline, any kind of emotion. it was purelly show off. like some cg films nowadays.

this guy himself admitted that "once it wasnīt new, effect films became monotonous to matured minds". (this is his own quote loosely translated, i have it only in portuguese). he made some (or a lot, i dunno) of money during the late 1890 and the beggining of 1900 until his studio went broke. that happend with lots of artists that relied on this kind of "effect films" during the period.

the "animation industry" came back to track only when Emile Cohl and Winsor McCay started their works which relied on lot more than just moving drawings.

my point in all this disney thing is: yes, its bad for business. but maybe is something that comes for good. in animation, as any other form of artistic expression, what counts is the art, not the technic.

itīs just history repeating itself.



eks

specialbrew
02-19-2005, 11:10 PM
Of course, perhaps the real tragedy is that a 'proper' version, CG or otherwise, of PP has yet to be made - every version, from Disney's interpretation through to the recent live action retelling has yet to come anywhere near the sheer strangeness and meditative quality of Barrie's original text. Although certain children's properties (Alice in Wonderland particularly) are handled with a reverence they barely deserve, J.M. Barrie's masterwork is largely treated as a mere source of dramatic incident rather than something that should be faithfully transcribed, with all it's allusions to death and the experience of aging retained intact...

Sorry, it's a sore point. :shrug:

Ed Bittner
02-20-2005, 01:12 PM
In my humble opinion, Disney should take the high road for a change and attempt a semi-adult 2D animated film. Why not be the first American company to produce a serious, intelligent animated film like GITS2-Innocence? Everyone knows they've lost their way, what they need to do is show some real stones and target the market that made films like the Matrix so successful. I was personally blown away by the Animatrix, and I know I'm not the only one. It's not like they don't have the resources.....
E.

BRUTICUS
02-20-2005, 03:01 PM
it's official...... you're as stupid as you look.

that aint cool.


Anyways, im with Jdex aswell. Disney has an opportunity to breathe new life into Disney animation again. Instead they choose to stoop and make a prequel? Almost as if they're oblivious to the fact that the public views them as a company who consistently milks their previous franchises to the bone with sequels and prequels. Here they are proving the point.

The whole problem with Disney is the lack of will and the lack of balls to make something original.

They were on the right track with Lilo & Stitch unfortunately that didn't last.

They're kicking their own ass.

Gentle Fury
02-20-2005, 03:27 PM
OoOOOoOoOOOOooo.....thread lock countdown has begun!!

FlyByNight
02-21-2005, 01:00 AM
:Capel


What an A-hole.....

how u can come onto an art critique forum, and blab about the lack of need for creativity in this industry is ludicrous. When a product has been as saturated as pater pan has, their can be little justification for it. Promotion for these things WILL be the demise of the industry.

one thing i hate is art being exploited for commercial gain. It is necessary sometimes, but it is never necessary to promote this way of doing things

I also am slightly happy at the fact that disney is failing.. It only helps to illustrate the fact that good art work does not come from commercial, formulaic sources

you put way too much emphasis on such a stupid point.... and even began offending people.. ill be sure not to take ur views seriously again. You are probably not very creative urself.. i cannot imagine how u could be... to be any good you need to have the love for it, which does not allow for ANY exploitation of the medium

JDex
02-21-2005, 01:26 AM
:Flyby...

Please don't go the calling people names route. This thread needs to stay open as it is an important conversation. There is room for all opinions, regardless of who finds them valid or invalid.

If certain individuals would present their opposing views in a more professional (READ: "Less Emotional" manner"), perhaps more people would chime in to discuss the different industry philosophies that have reared their heads in this thread.

Capel
02-21-2005, 01:40 AM
they're oblivious to the fact that the public views them as a company who consistently milks their previous franchises to the bone with sequels and prequels.

only a small fraction of the public, (US!) even gives a rats ass... the general public may say, "Man, Disney movies aren't as good as they used to be." but that's it.

FLYBYNIGHT: ......geez, where do i even begin.....


:Capel


What an A-hole.......and even began offending people..

so i guess A-hole is no longer considered offensive, then?
Cuz i'm sure you'd NEVER chastize someone for insulting someone and then turn around in the same post and.... you know what, never mind... it gets even better.

how u can come onto an art critique forum, and blab about the lack of need for creativity in this industry is ludicrous.

are you reading the same thread as me? i'm not sure, cuz i don't remember saying that this industry doesn't need creativity...

one thing i hate is art being exploited for commercial gain.

then you're in the wrong industry, my friend. even the good folks at Pixar will tell you that.
without commercial gain, these companies wouldn't even exist.

ill be sure not to take ur views seriously again. You are probably not very creative urself.. i cannot imagine how u could be... to be any good you need to have the love for it, which does not allow for ANY exploitation of the medium

unfortunately it would be just about the lamest thing in the world for me to post a bunch of links to my work to try and "prove" that i'm creative, so i'm not going to.

to be any good you need to have the love for it, which does not allow for ANY exploitation of the medium

This is hilarious. wow, NO exploitation at ALL? Open your eyes, man. Look around you... EVERY studio and EVERY company exploits their product to SOME DEGREE, ELSE THEY WOULDN'T EXIST!!! and you know what.... It's O.K.A.Y., Mr. "i'm a true artist who creates solely for sake of the art work, therefore making only me and those who are like me, TRULY creative people." Give me a break...

i'm gonna make my overall point for this thread in as few words as possible, so that some of you won't rape and misinterperate them...

"We should be grateful for the jobs supplied by Disney instead of sitting around bitching about their creative decisions as a corporation."

Capel
02-21-2005, 01:41 AM
:

Please don't go the calling people names route.

thank you.

crazy3dman
02-21-2005, 06:27 AM
"We should be grateful for the jobs supplied by Disney instead of sitting around bitching about their creative decisions as a corporation."
Can't we do both - be grateful for the jobs AND complain about their creative decisions?

ringzero
02-21-2005, 06:41 AM
CG Talk at its best.

Yawn

DigiLusionist
02-21-2005, 06:56 AM
Dear God, another Pan movie? I thought the last one was really well done. Even then, ANOTHER Pan movie?

Antropus
02-21-2005, 09:25 AM
Hey I think we have some very interesting points here. Apart of the personal offenses this thread can be very useful for another people. So guys, please, keep the conversation in a good level and avoid personal attacks. Try to be as professional as you have to be to stay working in this industry.

Thanks.

FlyByNight
02-21-2005, 12:58 PM
Im sorry to others, but i got really offended at how u took the pi** out of some one on this forum... especially when they wer inocent enough to post a picture of themselves, only to have immature brutes with no self control like u, use that as a weapon against them. It was blatantly 100% out of line, and i am surprised that you are even still a member.... I have been banned for MUCH less....


so i guess A-hole is no longer considered offensive, then?
Cuz i'm sure you'd NEVER chastize someone for insulting someone and then turn around in the same post and.... you know what, never mind... it gets even better.


Sorry mate, but its way too late for U to start demanding any respect....


then you're in the wrong industry, my friend. even the good folks at Pixar will tell you that.
without commercial gain, these companies wouldn't even exist.


FOOLISH. the commercial gain came AFTER... they are succesful because of thier IDEAS... bcos of their luv for the medium.... not because they are money hungry commercialists.... Youre arguing the point that its good to get paid... i agree... but its about getting paid for doing something DECENT, and not FORMULAIC..... gheez

FlyByNight
02-21-2005, 03:12 PM
:Capel

Dude, class reel. i really like it... guess i was wrong about the creativity part... sorry

veljko-lemonade
02-21-2005, 05:01 PM
And i'm sorry, but the world will never get "tired" of seeing CG in movies. Some INDIVIDUALS might, but never to the point where we have to worry that the American public is gonna go on strike with signs that say, "NO MORE CG ELEMENTS IN MOVIES!!!" it's assinine, and yet that's exactly what you seem to be worried about...

hi:)
the americans are not the world-

i had to say it...

Whelkn
02-22-2005, 01:06 AM
Man I dont think his intent was to say america was the world--way to grap at something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.....o wait I just did the same thing.

Anyway I have to say I agree with Capel. He may have been a bit forward with his opinions but I think I sense some sarcasim in his replies. The more work the better. Its like this episode of south park I saw the other day. It was about the evil company wal-mart taking over all the small towns business. The people wanted Wal-mart to leave but they kept doing one thing----!!!SHOPPING at WAL-MART. So for disney and other "evil" corporations to change you have to speak with your dollars. anyway---im rambling on---but it was a good way to waste time between test renders.

Capel
02-22-2005, 02:48 AM
The people wanted Wal-mart to leave but they kept doing one thing----!!!SHOPPING at WAL-MART. So for disney and other "evil" corporations to change you have to speak with your dollars.

well said.

crazy3dman
02-22-2005, 05:40 AM
Thought this was relevent to this conversation -

Walt Disney on Sequels


Though Walt Disney did indeed make sequels to some of his popular short cartoons (The Three Little Wolves, Toby Tortoise Returns) and live-action films and television programs (Davy Crockett and the River Pirates, Savage Sam, Son of Flubber, The Monkey's Uncle), these efforts were few and far-between. He steadfastly refused to make sequels to the major animated classics, even when the studio's finances were in dire straits. And he spoke his mind on the subject quite clearly. Following are unrelated quotes from Walt Disney on the subject of sequels and originality:

"You hate to repeat yourself. I don't like to make sequels to my pictures. I like to take a new thing and develop something, a new concept."

"By nature I'm an experimenter. To this day, I don't believe in sequels. I can't follow popular cycles. I have to move on to new things. So with the success of Mickey, I was determined to diversify."

"I've never believed in doing sequels. I didn't want to waste the time I have doing a sequel; I'd rather be using that time doing something new and different. It goes back to when they wanted me to do more pigs. I reluctantly made three more pigs. They wanted me to make more with the dwarfs in it, the seven dwarfs, and I said no, Snow White will be the sequel. Let it be repeated again. So it worked out."

"You can't top pigs with pigs."

"Back in the '30s The Three Little Pigs was an enormous hit, and the cry went up - 'Give us more pigs!' I could not see how we could possibly top pigs with pigs. But we tried, and I doubt whether any one of you reading this can name the other cartoons in which the pigs appeared."

"Well, we had been stuck with mice and pigs. Now with Snow White a huge hit, the shout went up for more dwarfs. Top dwarfs with dwarfs? Why try?"

"I believe in being an innovator."

"We keep moving forward, opening new doors, and doing new things, because we are curious - and curiosity keeps leading us down new paths."


There's more at www.savedisney.com

FlyByNight
02-22-2005, 11:24 AM
those are excellent points for this argument.. absolutely perfect.... this only goes to prove that unoriginality is cyanide to the industry... It was never walt disneys idea or premise to suck his creations dry for commercial gain... he knew, just like any good desginer/artist knows that orginality is KEY... what a shambles this world is coming too.... pure financial gain... tut tut tut.....

veljko-lemonade
02-22-2005, 12:01 PM
!:) these are some good and funny quotes!

i guess the guy is turning in his grave....

Ibah
02-22-2005, 05:05 PM
ow my god!! disney, get creative allready..!!

they just copy the same thing time after time.. or they just get some japanees, or asian story, and turn it into some disney/pro american fairytale.

now its peter pan again....... there recycling works better then from the garbage dispozal:eek:

Rivendale
02-22-2005, 05:37 PM
This is hilarious. wow, NO exploitation at ALL? Open your eyes, man. Look around you... EVERY studio and EVERY company exploits their product to SOME DEGREE, ELSE THEY WOULDN'T EXIST!!! and you know what.... It's O.K.A.Y., Mr. "i'm a true artist who creates solely for sake of the art work, therefore making only me and those who are like me, TRULY creative people." Give me a break....

i'm gonna make my overall point for this thread in as few words as possible, so that some of you won't rape and misinterperate them...

"We should be grateful for the jobs supplied by Disney instead of sitting around bitching about their creative decisions as a corporation."

Hey man where is the rebel inside you, and what happened to saving the world? If your not goin to do it I'll have to do it by myself, and you can jump onto your threadmill and start running for the sweet dollar. You seem to lack the passion, mr. grownup, knowmuch dude.

CML

Shaderhacker
02-22-2005, 05:38 PM
All:

I have sat and read each one of these posts and I must comment on some things.

It seems that the consensus on these boards is that some people just don't like Disney (for whatever reason). That's ok. You are entitled not to like them.

It also seems as if a lot of people are bitter towards Disney for not working on 2d films anymore. They fail to look at Dreamworks (who also closed down 2d and laid off 2d artists) or any of the other companies that won't even explore the idea of making a 2d CG feature (Blue Sky, Sony, Pixar, etc..). In that, it is unfair to blame Disney for neglecting it. Period.

While I do agree with a lot of what Capel has said concerning the industry (he obviously works in the industry and understands what it is like), he may have gone about saying it in a very aggressive manner. I also do agree with some of the other people are saying about creativity. We all want that and we would all cherish that, but Disney and all the other big companies are, indeed corporate. Having said that, they will produce what they feel will make money. Pixar is young and their paradigm is to create new and original stories. They are confident, and that's good. IF, however, one of their originals flops and they are faced with trying to *make* money to hold up, then sequels *WILL* be discussed. Its the nature of the business.

All in all, don't bash Disney for making decisions that may not seem original. Other companies are doing it too (i.e. Dreamworks, Universal, Warner Bros, and all the other live-action movies that have come out with sequels)

crazy3dman
02-22-2005, 06:09 PM
All in all, don't bash Disney for making decisions that may not seem original. Other companies are doing it too (i.e. Dreamworks, Universal, Warner Bros, and all the other live-action movies that have come out with sequels)

I'm definitely not a Disney hater. I love disney, which is exactly why I get upset to see them going down the path they are on.

Just because "other companies are doing it too" doesn't make it the right thing for Disney to do.

Ibah
02-22-2005, 07:19 PM
Hey man where is the rebel inside you, and what happened to saving the world? If your not goin to do it I'll have to do it by myself, and you can jump onto your threadmill and start running for the sweet dollar. You seem to lack the passion, mr. grownup, knowmuch dude.

CML

true, capel, aldo i understand your point of view.. i think that view will destroy it all.
Disney is getting porer and porer in there storys, it wont be long untill they will be crushed by other.

aldo others may also copy a lot, they mostly dont show the restrictions that much, disney is to much focused on kids alone, and they repeat the same concept time after time, i really havent seen a cool new kindah thing in ages.

maybe if they wouldnt go for the dollar, and would give artists some more freedome.. and would not always go for the pg rating, than maybe something decent would come out.

They are to much like.. ow kids like us.. lets go through our routin for this genaration, and repeat it for the next genaration again, they wont know...:P

but we do. and francly if i had kids, i would take my kids faster to a dreamworks flic than a disney. not that dreamworks is all that.. but sometimes they do have something new, or kindah new, disney doesnt do a thing.


to reply on SHADERHACKER: i do not hate disney: but i think if you are so big as disney is, you could just go creative every once in a while, just get out of it break even.. maybe no profit. than maybe they would get a better status, and if not, than they would at least get more viewers that are interested, and give some more freely artist the opertunety to explore themselves and the company.

there would be no harm for them in any way.

Shaderhacker
02-22-2005, 07:24 PM
I'm definitely not a Disney hater. I love disney, which is exactly why I get upset to see them going down the path they are on.

Just because "other companies are doing it too" doesn't make it the right thing for Disney to do.

You aren't getting the point. If you are going to complain about business practices in general, then start a new thread and say such. However, it seems that people are going out of their way to bash Disney concerning theirs. They aren't the end-of-be-all of CG animation, so they shouldn't be treated as such.

-M

crazy3dman
02-22-2005, 07:56 PM
You aren't getting the point. If you are going to complain about business practices in general, then start a new thread and say such. However, it seems that people are going out of their way to bash Disney concerning theirs. They aren't the end-of-be-all of CG animation, so they shouldn't be treated as such.

-M

I'm not complaining about business practices in general. And I never said that Disney is the be-all-end-all of CG animation.

I'm just reacting to the topic of this thread - "Disney to do full CG Peter Pan" - To me, this seems like a yet another in a long line of releases from Disney that is derivative instead of original. And yes, you are right. There are a lot of studios out there who do this on a regular basis.

But in Disney's case, I think it is unfortunate that they've chosen to go that route. As you can see from the Walt Disney quotes I posted earlier in the thread, he went out of his way to make sure the studio did not repeat itself. And he seems to have had quite a bit of success with that approach.

So, once again, I'm not bashing Disney. But I am dissapointed in the creative decisions they've been making lately, because they seem to be in direct contrast to the ideals of their founder.
:shrug:

Shaderhacker
02-22-2005, 09:05 PM
I'm not complaining about business practices in general. And I never said that Disney is the be-all-end-all of CG animation.

I'm just reacting to the topic of this thread - "Disney to do full CG Peter Pan" - To me, this seems like a yet another in a long line of releases from Disney that is derivative instead of original. And yes, you are right. There are a lot of studios out there who do this on a regular basis.

But in Disney's case, I think it is unfortunate that they've chosen to go that route. As you can see from the Walt Disney quotes I posted earlier in the thread, he went out of his way to make sure the studio did not repeat itself. And he seems to have had quite a bit of success with that approach.

So, once again, I'm not bashing Disney. But I am dissapointed in the creative decisions they've been making lately, because they seem to be in direct contrast to the ideals of their founder.
:shrug:

Well, since new people continuously replace older people or people that are no longer there, it would be ludicrous to think that any company will keep to the vision of it's founder indefinitely. Things either digress or progress - depending on how one looks at it.

-M

BRUTICUS
02-22-2005, 09:30 PM
The more work the better?

How 'bout:

The more QUALITY work the better.

What I would hope for Disney when delving into the CG world would be something more along the lines of taking their classic style and recreating that style by means of computer animation. Take an original fantasy or old folklore tale and retell that story in Disney fashion, complimented by a classic animation style.

Pixar is kicking their ass, maybe they should take notes from Pixar instead selling their table scraps.

Capel
02-22-2005, 09:32 PM
If your not goin to do it I'll have to do it by myself, and you can jump onto your threadmill and start running for the sweet dollar. You seem to lack the passion, mr. grownup, knowmuch dude.

CML

yeah, i lack the passion to work at something in my room for three years, hoping that i can get good enough to land a job, learning from books and online tutorials, then packing up and leaving all my friends to move to LA where i don't know a soul because this is where all the jobs are and then finally landing a job without an ounce of schooling under my belt, just three years of self motivation and dedication to a dream..... oh wait.

Noone can survive in this industry WITHOUT passion! You think people are sitting in their cubicles just going through the motions of "putting animated features together"? sorry man, but getting into an industry who's requirements are talent and talent alone requires loads of passion. So while you're off "saving the world" whatever the hell that means, i'll be "running for the sweet dollar" to feed my family and have a freakin' roof over my head... yeah, i'm such a sell out.... food and shelter is sooooo overrated...

get over yourself.

Capel
02-22-2005, 09:35 PM
The more work the better?

How 'bout:

The more QUALITY work the better.


sorry, man. but with all the outsourcing going on, you just don't have the luxury anymore.
geez, so many prima donna's on this forum....

Guaranteed, most of you, given even a hint of a chance to work at Disney, would be salivating all over yourselves for the opportunity. and you know what, that's O.K.A.Y.

Capel
02-22-2005, 09:43 PM
true, capel, aldo i understand your point of view.. i think that view will destroy it all.

i don't know how, but some of you have gotten it into your heads that i WANT Disney to keep making sequels and bad decisions.... Of course i'd love for them to be up there with Pixar's quality. I'd love for them to be better than pixar. I'd love for every studio to be better than the last. Who wouldn't?!

My view that we should be grateful for the jobs that are out there is going to destroy it all? ...huh? you lost me there.

i do not hate disney: but i think if you are so big as disney is, you could just go creative every once in a while, just get out of it break even.. maybe no profit. than maybe they would get a better status, and if not, than they would at least get more viewers that are interested, and give some more freely artist the opertunety to explore themselves and the company.

there would be no harm for them in any way.

unless you've headed a big corporation like Disney and have had to make those kinds of decisions, you probably shouldn't talk like you have, cuz it just isn't very credible.... sorry.

crazy3dman
02-22-2005, 09:45 PM
Well, since new people continuously replace older people or people that are no longer there, it would be ludicrous to think that any company will keep to the vision of it's founder indefinitely. Things either digress or progress - depending on how one looks at it.

-M

Well, that does seem to be the case. But we can always dream can't we? :shrug:

FlyByNight
02-23-2005, 12:55 AM
capel u got some big time attitude problem. stop approaching evryone like uv got a personal problem with them, and like were all idiots... just make ur point and leave it at that....

u are promoting a methodology that declines the quality of the creative market..... that is 100% bad in my opinion.... u sound so patronising with ur 'food and shelter is so overrated' lines... if the industry continues to grow in this fashion then it will not go on for as long and be as profitable... therefore less jobs in the longterm....

down ith disney

BRUTICUS
02-23-2005, 01:35 AM
sorry, man. but with all the outsourcing going on, you just don't have the luxury anymore.
geez, so many prima donna's on this forum....

Guaranteed, most of you, given even a hint of a chance to work at Disney, would be salivating all over yourselves for the opportunity. and you know what, that's O.K.A.Y.

Man I haven't said anywhere it would be a bad decision for someone to work for Disney, that's not what i'm getting at at all. Im simply saying that a more creative force behind their decision making would benefit their company. It would benefit the industry and it would benefit the art of animation.

If you disagree, thats fine. Fly. Be free.

No need to try and insult people. The day everyone in this industry is as willing as you are to disregard their ideals will be a sad day for the animation genre.

Its encouraging to see you're so outnumbered with that point of view though.

Capel
02-23-2005, 07:13 AM
u are promoting a methodology that declines the quality of the creative market..... that is 100% bad in my opinion....

pleeeeease, read my posts at least three times before you respond. it's obvious that once just isn't cutting it... maybe i'm just too profound, but i'm betting it's something else...

i don't know how, but some of you have gotten it into your heads that i WANT Disney to keep making sequels and bad decisions.... Of course i'd love for them to be up there with Pixar's quality. I'd love for them to be better than pixar. I'd love for every studio to be better than the last. Who wouldn't?!

down with disney

...wow. ....just, wow.

Capel
02-23-2005, 07:44 AM
Im simply saying that a more creative force behind their decision making would benefit their company. It would benefit the industry and it would benefit the art of animation.

well no kidding... NOONE on this thread is arguing that point.

but THIS is what really frustrates me....

If you disagree, thats fine... ...The day everyone in this industry is as willing as you are to disregard their ideals will be a sad day for the animation genre.

are you even READING my posts before you respond? I'M ON YOUR SIDE, at least with the topic of Disney changing it's ways, and i've said it already. here, let me simplify it...

I like animating.
I like good movies.
I don't like bad movies.
I don't like that Disney makes bad movies.
I like to eat at Carl's Jr.
I don't like to work at Carl's Jr.
I would rather work on a bad movie than Carl's Jr.
I'm GRATEFUL that Disney provides dream jobs to people who don't want to work at Carl's Jr.

...will be a sad day for the animation genre.

That's today, actually. Because somehow we have people like FLYBYNIGHT making comments like, "Down with Disney.", and you're actually in his corner. Disney "going out of business" is as possible as it is "good" for the industry.

TRANSLATION - It will never HAPPEN. and we should be grateful.

They're providing jobs, hundreds of jobs... You can be grateful for that and STILL hope that they change their ways.... geez, that's gotta be the fifth or sixth time/way i've said that.

veljko-lemonade
02-23-2005, 04:23 PM
Hi, it seems this thread has turned into an "art or not" disscusion...
The way i see it i agree and disagree with most of the comments-
As everybody who runs a bussines you want to earn money with your products- You make descisions that you are comfortable with and that will get you the most profit and that will guide your company in the direction you want to go.

Animation,CG, modeling, texturing and all thoes nice things are first a CRAFT and then it is up to you what you will do with this craft. So if you are not interested in art and you just like the craft of making animation, modeling, texturing or whatever, and you make quality animation with no inovation or artistic value- Good for you.Not all animation has to be ground breaking, and not everybody wants to push the limit, be an artist. Some people just want to do the things they love doing, make money with it and live comfortable lives.
Will this attitude kill the art? Noupe i dont think so...Will disney kill the art? Heck no! They will just make standard quality disney animation that will earn some money and pay some paychecks-
Now, if some of you artist out there would take over disney your descisions would be different- so what?
Talk is cheap- let me see you try, and then talk-

clockwerkz
02-24-2005, 01:44 AM
Has anyone here actually picked up the book and read it? A lot of mud is being thrown around, and I for one would like to see some major changes at Disney, but maybe the book has a good story. So what if it's involving Peter Pan.
I picked up a copy because I happen to like Dave Barry. He's a great writer, and from what I've read, the book seems like a good read. I hope it lends itself to a great animated movie.


cW

Shaderhacker
02-24-2005, 02:56 AM
down with disney

Impressive. That comment alone would warrant not listening to anything you have to say.

Capel has a more realistic attitude about the industry. Some of you have never worked in the industry or have little experience in the industry. That's fine. But that also means that your comments about the industry may be a little shortsighted to someone who's been at it for a bit. Perhaps after some more experience, your vision of the industry may change to lean more toward understanding the reality in what he is saying.

-M

phyle
02-24-2005, 03:25 AM
They're providing jobs, hundreds of jobs... You can be grateful for that and STILL hope that they change their ways.... geez, that's gotta be the fifth or sixth time/way i've said that.

So just to make this clear, the thing we are arguing about is whether more crap CG movies is a good or bad thing for the industry, as opposed to less good ones.

I guess my concern about the whole thing is not directly aimed at Disney but the industry as a whole at the moment. I think most of you will agree that CG movies are pretty popular at the moment and studios are jumping on the bandwagon. There are so many CG movies in production right now, I feel that as soon as they arent being the amazing succes they have been in the past the studios will jump off the bandwagon just as quickly.

For me its more an issue of sustainable growth. Its great that the industry is growing and that there will be more jobs, its just that if we want the studios to continue to put enourmous amounts of money into these movies, they need to continue to be successful. Quality over quantity is the way to do this.

Shaderhacker
02-24-2005, 03:32 AM
So just to make this clear, the thing we are arguing about is whether more crap CG movies is a good or bad thing for the industry, as opposed to less good ones.

I guess my concern about the whole thing is not directly aimed at Disney but the industry as a whole at the moment. I think most of you will agree that CG movies are pretty popular at the moment and studios are jumping on the bandwagon. There are so many CG movies in production right now, I feel that as soon as they arent being the amazing succes they have been in the past the studios will jump off the bandwagon just as quickly.

For me its more an issue of sustainable growth. Its great that the industry is growing and that there will be more jobs, its just that if we want the studios to continue to put enourmous amounts of money into these movies, they need to continue to be successful. Quality over quantity is the way to do this.

Very good point. I, too, am concerned about it. However, I think that the kids market will always demand some form of entertainment that's not live-action. People are pretty much getting used to 3d now in kid films and so they assume that 2d is dead. There will have to be a LOT of 3d CG films coming out to warrant the market leaning away from it for the crappy ones that come out.

My argument is this: just because a company makes a sequel doesn't mean it's going to be crappy.

-M

FlyByNight
02-25-2005, 04:21 PM
Impressive. That comment alone would warrant not listening to anything you have to say.

Capel has a more realistic attitude about the industry. Some of you have never worked in the industry or have little experience in the industry. That's fine. But that also means that your comments about the industry may be a little shortsighted to someone who's been at it for a bit. Perhaps after some more experience, your vision of the industry may change to lean more toward understanding the reality in what he is saying.

-M

i am an idealist.... u have to be, to be good in this industry.... i say down with disney because jsut LOOK at how much they have changed from theit original ideals that were posted before... someone was saying that things change blah blah.... this is more than things changing... this is a complete 180 degree spin on the founders whole philosophy... people buy disney products because of the good name that WALT DISNEY had given it... people are starting to see that these ideals are no longer what the compnay believes in, and watch disney COME TUMBLING DOWN.....

whats wrong with me saying down with disney?? u guys need to take ur head out of ur asses and see what industry ur in... the problem with most of you is that u see it as JUST that.... an INDUSTRY.... this is an ART form..... this is something i have dedicated my whole life philosophy to.... this is something i believe in....

THEREFORE: my opinion is that disney is no longer a company that is innovating... so i have now lost interest..... obvioulsy i dont want the company to fail, but i wanttheir ideals to change.. if they dont? then DOWN WITH DISNEY....

KI** my A** if u dont agree..... U COMMERCIALISTS

FlyByNight
02-25-2005, 04:26 PM
btw... i dont like jobs... i like ART.... im fine with whatever money im making at the moment freelancing..... disgusting.... SHAME... the SHAME of it ALL!!

Shaderhacker
02-25-2005, 05:15 PM
i am an idealist.... u have to be, to be good in this industry.... i say down with disney because jsut LOOK at how much they have changed from theit original ideals that were posted before... someone was saying that things change blah blah.... this is more than things changing... this is a complete 180 degree spin on the founders whole philosophy... people buy disney products because of the good name that WALT DISNEY had given it... people are starting to see that these ideals are no longer what the compnay believes in, and watch disney COME TUMBLING DOWN.....

whats wrong with me saying down with disney?? u guys need to take ur head out of ur asses and see what industry ur in... the problem with most of you is that u see it as JUST that.... an INDUSTRY.... this is an ART form..... this is something i have dedicated my whole life philosophy to.... this is something i believe in....

THEREFORE: my opinion is that disney is no longer a company that is innovating... so i have now lost interest..... obvioulsy i dont want the company to fail, but i wanttheir ideals to change.. if they dont? then DOWN WITH DISNEY....

KI** my A** if u dont agree..... U COMMERCIALISTS

If you are a founder of a company that's in the process of putting out something new and innovative, then let's talk. Otherwise, stop trolling the forums with your newbie ideals about the industry.. You would save us all some time reading junk.


-M

JDex
02-25-2005, 05:23 PM
Okay... this thread is just screaming "CLOSE ME"

For whatever reason... not many people can have a mature, professional discussion... time to add "No Industry Philosophy" Discussions to the No Politics, No Religion, etc... rules.

FlyByNight
02-25-2005, 05:24 PM
that has got to be the most used and irrelevant newbie argument of them all....

Are you saying that i need to be the founder of a company for my point to be correct? stop taking it so personally fanboy. I already stated that i am freelancing so why are you asking rhetorical questions...

'LETS TALK' he says, i would never work with you.... too much atitude and not enough good ideas...

How about u actually tell me what it is that u didnt like?? instead of being argumentative.. if anything , ur post was a waste of reading time... U DIDNT EVEN STATE ANYTHING..... NOTHING in that last post was to do with the conversation or even CG....

Look at you, youre not even allowing someone the chance to state their opinion. I beleive that walt disney would be rolling in his grave knowing what is going on... as some1 has alredy even stated 'spinning' is more like it.....

but yea lets make rehashes cos some of you guys havent got a job...

Shaderhacker
02-25-2005, 05:49 PM
that has got to be the most used and irrelevant newbie argument of them all....

I guess it's as relevant as you saying "Down with Disney".


I already stated that i am freelancing so why are you asking rhetorical questions...

Which is my point. It is clear you don't understand some of our views in the industry. If you had some of the history that some of us have then you won't be so "picky".

'LETS TALK' he says, i would never work with you.... too much atitude and not enough good ideas...<snip>

As Capel has stated, everyone wants every CG movie coming out to be a grand innovative blockbuster. The fact is, all of them aren't going to be. Ok, we can deal with that. What we are most concerned with (as artists), however, is not "Well, I think this company sucks because they only put out sequels and I'll only work on films that are innovative and worthy of my employment". This is downright arrogant. How do you think ANY supervisor would take someone coming to interview at their company and stating: "Ok before I will allow you guys to hire me but before I view your company as worthy, let me see what you have coming down the pipe and evaluate whether it is new and innovative enough."?

It's not that we have our heads in our arses, it's just that we've been through the rollercoaster of the industry. Where before our tastes was like yours (only interested in the major studios that brought out the best stuff), we have a new insight on the industry. - "Everyone only cares about a buck". But we need to continue to have a job..

I can't really say anymore than that. It would be nice for Disney and all the other companies to have excellent blockbusters. But this isn't realistic. So we ACCEPT what these companies do and live with what we can get out of it.

-M

FlyByNight
02-25-2005, 06:40 PM
i get what ur saying.... its true.... theres no way of removing that part of the industry. We will constantly have to be shown rubbish... i just 'personally' dont like promoting this stuff.... and companies with as much know how, experience etc as disney, should be nearing the quality end of the market, beating the new companies such as Pixar.

It is definately good to have a well paid job, but thats not evrything... would u work for EA? i probably would work for EA and disney, just for portfolios sake... but i do not advocate any of their business methods...

this whole thread was talking about a new CG peter pan movie... i think that BLOWS big time... i havent enjoyed a disney feature since aladdin and the lion king... and its kinda looking to stay that way..... oh well.....

BRUTICUS
02-25-2005, 07:35 PM
i havent enjoyed a disney feature since aladdin and the lion king... and its kinda looking to stay that way..... oh well.....

[disney defense]Everyone always seems to forget about Lilo and Stitch, what was wrong with Lilo? [/end disney defense] Atleast it wasn't a direct copy of an animated television series and had a great level of originality.

Speaking of which, I don't want to take this too far off course but what about all the plagerism accusations?

Lion King and Kimba the White Lion http://www.kimbawlion.com/rant2.htm
Alladin and the "Thief and the Cobbler"
Finding Nemo and some other guys script http://forum.bcdb.com/gforum.cgi?post=39943
Now apparantly Disney is making a movie very similar to Madagascar?

Could it all be lies?

Do you really want to see Disney make a sequel of Monsters Inc.? Incredibles? Toy Story? Despite Pixar's discontent?Where does it end? Either way, why defend these types of practices?

Not that all of our bitching about it on a messageboard changes anything but atleast the opinions are voiced.
I think i've reached my maximum allowed statement in the form of a question for one day anyway.

Shaderhacker
02-25-2005, 09:23 PM
this whole thread was talking about a new CG peter pan movie... i think that BLOWS big time... i havent enjoyed a disney feature since aladdin and the lion king... and its kinda looking to stay that way..... oh well.....

Well, I think a movie about cars racing down a track blows. I also think that making yet another Batman movie blows. Heck, I don't even like the Episode Series of Star Wars. Alas, it's all well. I wouldn't start a thread saying how much it blows of those because it's moot. I'd still work at either of those places regardless of what they put out.:)

Oh, and Disney does have some original CG features coming out. They aren't just making sequels, and I'm not sure if Peter Pan is going to be direct to video or not.

-M

Capel
02-25-2005, 09:33 PM
i am an idealist.... u have to be, to be good in this industry....

I guess in the strictest sense of the word, yes, you are an idealist.

Idealist

1. One whose conduct is influenced by ideals that often conflict with practical considerations.
2. One who is unrealistic and impractical;

I just wasn't aware that you had to be unrealistic and impractical to be "good" in this industry. and all this time i was under the impression that you have to be talented... Here, i want you to try something. In your next interview, tell you prospective employer that you're influenced by ideals that will most likely conflict with the way they do things. Then say, "But hey, i'm an innovator!" See if they hire you.

I'm really starting to doubt that you've ever worked in this industry. Your ideas are just so backwards, and would only work if you were in a directors position, which i seriously doubt you are, cuz you wouldn't have the time to argue so much on these forums.

... people are starting to see that these ideals are no longer what the compnay believes in, and watch disney COME TUMBLING DOWN.....

not true. the public could care less. sorry, but disney will never "come tumbling down". but if you REALLY want it to, you could always wear a shirt labeled "idealist" and go pass out flyers...

whats wrong with me saying down with disney?? u guys need to take ur head out of ur asses and see what industry ur in... the problem with most of you is that u see it as JUST that.... an INDUSTRY.... this is an ART form..... this is something i have dedicated my whole life philosophy to.... this is something i believe in....

ok, we're in the 3d industry, and you're promoting the downfall of one of it's major players and job providers... MAYBE, and JUST maybe, that's what's wrong with you saying "Down with Disney."

ok, maybe you missed the memo, but.... this IS an industry. it's an art form as well, but the industry part comes first, believe me. The more you talk the more you scream, "I'm a newb who has little or no experience in this field!"

Whatever you "believe" in, you just come off sounding really pretentious:

Pretentious

1. Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified.

You aren't any kind of authority on this industry, so stop trying to define what it SHOULD be like when you haven't the distinction or merit.

KI** my A** if u dont agree..... U COMMERCIALISTS

Commercialist
1. An attitude that emphasizes tangible profit or success.

Did you get PAID for any of that freelance work you did? YOU COMMERCIALIST!!!

Shaderhacker
02-25-2005, 09:33 PM
[disney defense]Everyone always seems to forget about Lilo and Stitch, what was wrong with Lilo? [/end disney defense] Atleast it wasn't a direct copy of an animated television series and had a great level of originality.

Yeap that was an original one that received much praise.


Now apparantly Disney is making a movie very similar to Madagascar?

Ah! you must be talking about "The Wild" or "WildLife" being developed by some company overseas (I forget which - Core?). I believe Disney isn't making that.. they are distributing it (if it ever comes out). That's arguable though. That company has been working on that movie for some time. It's just that PDI/Dreamworks beat them to the punch on producing theirs.


Do you really want to see Disney make a sequel of Monsters Inc.? Incredibles? Toy Story? Despite Pixar's discontent?Where does it end? Either way, why defend these types of practices?

It's not that we are defending these practices. We are only stating facts. Ones we have to accept. It is a fact that Disney and Pixar had an agreement that should Pixar refuse to make sequels, Disney has a right to make them. It is a fact that Disney has sole rights to all characters and content in the first 6 Pixar films. It is a fact that Pixar developed them from scratch. It is also a fact that their relationship isn't going in the positive direction. Whether they should exercise their rights to make the sequels or not doesn't really matter. You can't say they suck just because they decide to exercise their rights that you (or any other person) wouldn't wish. You aren't going to say "Toy Story 3 is coming out but Pixar didn't do it so I don't want to see it..", are you? That's just like saying I won't see Shrek 3 because Dreamworks is doing it instead of PDI.


-M

worker_bee
02-26-2005, 07:04 PM
Ah! you must be talking about "The Wild" or "WildLife" being developed by some company overseas (I forget which - Core?). I believe Disney isn't making that.. they are distributing it (if it ever comes out). That's arguable though. That company has been working on that movie for some time. It's just that PDI/Dreamworks beat them to the punch on producing theirs.

-M


Correct. The Wild is being done by Disney up at Core in Toronto and was pushed at least a year due to story problems. The story is about 4 NY animals two of which are a Lion and Giraffe who go find there friend who is shipped to Africa....almost identical to Madagascar.

Shaderhacker
02-26-2005, 11:45 PM
Correct. The Wild is being done by Disney up at Core in Toronto and was pushed at least a year due to story problems. The story is about 4 NY animals two of which are a Lion and Giraffe who go find there friend who is shipped to Africa....almost identical to Madagascar.

Aye, but you are wrong in that Disney is NOT developing that film (therefore I don't consider it a Disney-made film perse). They may have contracted out to Core to make it, but in Burbank, that's not on the list of upcoming films developed by Disney.

-M

CGTalk Moderation
02-27-2006, 12:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.