It's official: No more 2D animation from Dreamworks


#1

From Animated Movies:

“We are extremely disappointed,” said Ann Daly, the head of animation for DreamWorks, noting that Sinbad would be the studio’s last traditionally drawn film. From now on, DreamWorks will use computers to animate its movies. Even Jeffrey Katzenberg concedes that the art form on which he made his reputation may be obsolete. “I think the idea of a traditional story being told using traditional animation is likely a thing of the past,” he admitted.

http://animated-movies.squareworld.com/News.html

There was an article in the New York Times, but you have to be a subscriber to read it online :frowning:


#2

It’s quick & free to sign-up for an account there, but for those who haven’t, here’s the full text from nytimes.com

Animated Film Is Latest Title to Run Aground at DreamWorks

LOS ANGELES, July 20 — Brad Pitt beaten out by a clown fish?

It has been that kind of summer at the box office, where ticket sales have slipped from last year’s record levels and the hottest movie is the computer-animation comedy “Finding Nemo,” the father-son fish tale from Pixar Animation Studios, which has taken in an estimated $303.8 million since opening May 30.

DreamWorks SKG, meanwhile, has been one of the latest studios disappointed by a collective shrug from moviegoers. Its hand-animated “Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas,” featuring the voice of Brad Pitt as the lead pirate, has generated an estimated $23.3 million since opening July 2, including an estimated $1.8 million this past weekend.

And “Sinbad” is not the only disappointment so far this year for DreamWorks. Of the four movies it has released, including live-action and animation, only the comedy “Old School,” starring Luke Wilson and Will Ferrell, has made more than $40 million at the domestic box office, according to Nielsen EDI, which tallies cinema receipts.

But “Sinbad” may be the failure that stings most. After all, Jeffrey Katzenberg, a founder of DreamWorks, is a former Disney executive who revived that company’s animation department with hits like “The Lion King” and brokered the distribution partnership between Disney and Pixar that has yielded animated hits like “Toy Story” and “Monsters, Inc.”

“Sinbad” may exemplify a market that has changed faster than even animation pros like Mr. Katzenberg could have anticipated. As a traditional-style hand-drawn animated feature, the movie took four years to make — a period in which audiences have come to prefer computer-animated comedies like “Shrek,” an Academy Award-winner made by DreamWorks, to serious animated action adventures.

Disney’s hand-drawn “Treasure Planet,” which bombed last winter, had perhaps given DreamWorks a sign of the apathy “Sinbad” might face, even though the popular actresses Michelle Pfeiffer and Catherine Zeta-Jones joined Mr. Pitt in putting words in the characters’ mouths.

“We are extremely disappointed,” said Ann Daly, the head of animation for DreamWorks, noting that “Sinbad” would be the studio’s last traditionally drawn film.

From now on, DreamWorks will use computers to animate its movies. Even Mr. Katzenberg concedes that the art form on which he made his reputation may be obsolete.

“I think the idea of a traditional story being told using traditional animation is likely a thing of the past,” he said. Among other factors, Mr. Katzenberg said, fast-evolving technology is making it easier to create images that a few years ago could only be drawn by hand.

The studio has much hope riding on the two computer animations set for next year: a sequel to the comedic “Shrek” and the much anticipated “Sharkslayer,” a wise-cracking undersea adventure about organized crime, using the voices of Will Smith, Robert De Niro and Martin Scorsese.

DreamWorks executives declined to say how much “Sinbad” cost. Some industry people have conservatively estimated that DreamWorks spent $70 million (not including marketing expenses), although the comparable “Treasure Planet” cost Disney about $140 million, according to animation industry executives. Ms. Daly said that whatever the losses on “Sinbad,” they would not be financially devastating.

With opening weekends more crucial than ever for movies — especially summer films — “Sinbad” was hurt badly by the failure of children and young teenagers to turn out in the first few days. That same weekend, many young girls and their mothers were off seeing Reese Witherspoon in “Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde,” while boys and men of all ages were watching Arnold Schwarzenegger in “Terminator 3: Rise of the Machines.”

Meanwhile, “Finding Nemo,” despite opening in May, still had legs — or fins, at least. Children and their parents who might have otherwise have gone to “Sinbad,” were in many cases opting to see “Finding Nemo” once again, said Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations, which tracks box office sales.

“Sinbad” was not the only hand-drawn animation overshadowed by the popularity of “Finding Nemo” with both adults and children. “Rugrats Go Wild,” released by Viacom’s Paramount Pictures this summer and based on two of Viacom’s Nickelodeon cable television shows, “The Rugrats” and “The Wild Thornberrys,” has brought in only an estimated $33.4 million at the domestic box office since opening in mid-June.

“There are a handful of movies grabbing the audience, and everything else is getting pushed aside,” Mr. Dergarabedian said. “Nemo is playing a lot longer than anyone would have thought.”

Errol Flynn is long gone, but the contemporary public is still sometimes willing to watch buccaneers ply their trade. Disney’s “Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl,” an action adventure starring Johnny Depp and based on the popular theme park attraction, brought in $46 million its first weekend two weeks ago and has now grossed an estimated $132.2 million.

The problem with “Sinbad,” like “Treasure Planet,” may lie more in the evidently flawed strategy that many large studios embarked on several years ago to produce animated action-oriented adventure movies to attract boys, said Jerry Beck, an animation historian. “Almost all these movies have failed,” Mr. Beck said.

Last year’s “Treasure Planet,” an outer-space update of Robert Louis Stevenson’s adventure novel “Treasure Island,” brought in only $38 million domestically. Another space adventure, 20th Century Fox’s hand-animated “Titan A.E.,” fared worse, bringing in $22.7 million in 2000.

Ms. Daly pointed out that the only animated movies (whether hand-drawn or computer-generated) that have done well recently are comedies, including “Finding Nemo” and last summer’s hand-drawn “Lilo & Stitch” from Disney.

And so DreamWorks executives are looking forward to next year’s jokey “Shrek 2” and “Sharkslayer.” Certainly the marketing onslaught has begun.

During “Sinbad’s” opening weekend, in fact, the studio gave people who attended the film a limited-edition read-along compact disc titled, “Shrek and Fiona’s Honeymoon Storybook.”

And in June the studio took out full-page ads in trade newspapers announcing the release schedule of “Shrek 2,” as well as giving out promotional baseball caps with the film’s logo and opening date.

For anyone who missed it: “Shrek 2” opens June 18, 2004.


#3

if the art form of 2d drawings is so dead, then why is everyone going wild about 3d cell shading?
…b/c we still like the 2d look!

I wanted to see Sinbad, but i’m not gonna pay to see movies in the theatre week after week. There were other movies i wanted to see more. It’s a rental though, for sure.

On a side note, what were the other 3 bombs from them? Only Old School was mentioned (as their hit)


#4

Originally posted by Neil
On a side note, what were the other 3 bombs from them?

Based on the-numbers.com the other bombs this year besides “Sinbad” were " Biker Boyz" and “Head of State.”

The previous animated bombs were “The Road to El Dorado” and “Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron.”

-j


#5

Dreamworks must be on Crack…

2D is not Dead, dreamworks cant make GOOD stories… or good anything as far as 2D goes…

Anyone remember ANY advertising for Sinbad? No i think it was wasted on a 31 flavors Tie in…

2d isnt dead… Dreamworks’s half ass 2d is…

-Will


#6

what a shame.

Tho I do not think 2d is dead…look at movies like spirited away, lilo and stitch etc…its gotta be really special.

I mean this not to sound rude, because I greatly respect the artists who did such movies as road to el dorado etc, but I thinkthe problem is all these movies have the same look…a cookie cutter aspect to them (el doroado, sinbad, treasure planet, titan ae) Yes the 2d movies that do well seem to have a style all their own.

Perhaps the secret to keeping 2d alive is really exploit what it is so good at, which in my mind is total freedom of style, not bogged down to physics o rreality of even 3d…

then again I could be talking out of my butt… it has been known to happen. :beer:

Hope all thsoe artists find work soon, I am sure they will.


#7

Did this have any effect on Pixar share price?

Jerry Beck might have a point about the “animated action-oriented adventure” being the main cause. I imagine if Sinbad was 3d is still would have bombed.

So while 2D may not be produced by the major studios, that doesn’t mean its dead.

Couldn’t you imagine another South Park movie, or The Simpsons THE MOVIE doing big box office?


#8

Originally posted by Neil
if the art form of 2d drawings is so dead, then why is everyone going wild about 3d cell shading?

the answer is in the article :
“fast-evolving technology is making it easier to create images that a few years ago could only be drawn by hand”


#9

2d animation isnt dead now and it never will be. Too many people enjoy it. The problem is that the studios arent producing interesting enough characters and storylines. I think most of the movies that tanked would still have if they were 2D, 3D, or live action. Just not interesting enough. Its also being hurt by trying to target specific audiences (such as young boys) instead of concentrating on a good story anyone could enjoy.

 Look at the interest in the Animatrix,  for instance...very stylized and extremely interesting.  Or Spirited away.  And the popularity of Anime's have always been high...2d just like 3d simply depends on the stories they are telling and the characters they promote.

#10

oh man, Cinematagraphy is going to have a heart attack!


#11

“I think the idea of a traditional story being told using traditional animation is likely a thing of the past,”

He manages to put it perfectly, the problem is that it’s the same overdone boring traditional story that’s not appealing anymore. It’s directed at kids story whise, while movies such as shrek or monsters inc find their way to a much bigger target audience (adults).

That’s also the reason why Japanese Animation (Anime) is making a huge march if it comes to popularity, both in Japan and The western world. They should take a look into that, before shutting down studios.


#12

This sucks…just when studios that do 2D just start doing animations that arent musicals…it all falls apart at the seams.

I mean if they started to do something original instead of the “looking for treasure” type of deal…maybe things wouldnt have been so bad.

I mean titan AE, atlantis, treasure planet…etc. These are almost the same exact plot.

I am so upset about this words cant even describe what I am feeling and thinking.


#13

I think that its not a matter of traditional animation being obsolete. As King said, Spirited Away was a resounding success. I believe that in the current market, all movies are suffering from the fact that the unemployment rate in America is the highest it has been in many years. Personally, I could not afford to see many movies. And when it comes down to seeing a super summer blockbuster, or a ‘cartoon’ that people are opting to go see the blockbusters instead. It all comes down to this: Any movie, whether its 2d, 3d, or filmed… is going to suck if the script sucks. You cannot save a bad script with exciting animation, no matter who you are. Look at Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within. Nothing could save that script.

Dreamworks has Shrek 2 coming out soon. And I for one am really looking forward to that. So, cheers to everyone, and keep up the work. Because Dreamworks seems to have opted for money over art.

Cheers


#14

Trust me the problem is with Dreamworks and their story and character development. 2D is the perfect compliment to the 3d and it will always be loved, but just like everything else, it needs to be done well.


#15

2D is dying…kinda sad really.

But nothing upsets me more than the loss of stop-motion monsters. Late 70’s - early 80’s horror movies will always have a place in my heart.


#16

At $73 million domestic gross, Spirit wasn’t particularly a bomb, except to the extent that may not have met expectations. I’d guess it made back its money after international and video.

– Mark


#17

personally, I think is the 2D style that Dreamworks has is dead. Why Spirited Away and other Japanese animations are still special? Because there so many different looks and feel to them. The look of animation that DW and Disney has… never change a bit.

but does that mean there won’t be another cell-shaded movie from DW? Probabely not. It only means the anmation will no longer be done by traditional animator (what a shame…) but computer animators. I guess the production cost is getting much cost effective than to have a crew of animator in house.


#18

i don’t think that 2d animation is dead… just the absurd combinations of 2d & 3d cell shaded, and cartoons trying to aim at the teen market… imo these are the common factors between all these recent big budget “2d” films that have bombed.


#19

As people have stated before, it doesn’t matter what medium you choose to create your art, it’s the message you are trying to convey. 2D shouldn’t be to blame. If there’s no story there’s no movie…

Moviegoers as a whole are constantly bombarded by crap storylines, but most of the time don’t care so long as it has that general public buzzword of ‘cg’. It almost makes me sick to hear friends that aren’t in the industry say, “I’m not going to see that movie because it doesn’t have enough cg”. I mean I pay almost $8 for a movie ticket, don’t I deserve to have a quality story told to me?

Maybe it’s time to take those hard earned $$ and go hit the library or barnes/nobles and read some classics and let imagination do the rest…


#20

Originally posted by Peter Reynolds
Jerry Beck might have a point about the “animated action-oriented adventure” being the main cause. I imagine if Sinbad was 3d is still would have bombed.

That’s a pretty intersting point of view. I have a feeling I would have been more inclined to see Sinbad if it were done in 3D. As long as the promos & story looked good, for me it would have been more inticing.
Despite the ads for Pirates, the story doesn’t appeal to me at all - even though it looks like it has great effects & CG. Maybe I will rent it. I never saw Lilo & Stitch in the theatre, saw Titan AE on video (didn’t like the story), saw Treasure Planet on video - it was better than I thought it would be, but for me I prefer the visuals of a 3D style picture vs 2D… Classical animation is not my background, and does not entice me as much as seeing something in 3D. And, like a few other people have said, with the cost of movies I have to pick and choose what I am going to see.

For some reason, when I think of “movie” I think live action (with effects & CG of course), or, come lately, 3D: Toy Story, Monsters Inc, Shrek, Nemo. When I think of 2D, I think of Bugs Bunny, Simpsons, Classic Disney, Hannah Barbara. I may be more like the general public in that unless it’s a movie for kids, my interest in seeing a 2D feature just isn’t there…