8 months? How long does it take to make an animated movie in this day and age? Shouldn't this have aired like last year?
The Frog Princess (2D!!)
-
-
I want this film to stand the test of time proudly next to the films that came before it and be able to watch it ten years from now and still smile.
I sure hope so. Because 2D is forever where my heart is.
-
8 months? How long does it take to make an animated movie in this day and age? Shouldn't this have aired like last year?
They fired the animation team who brought most of their works in the 90s. Because of this, none of their newest animated features shall come out fast.
-
They fired the animation team who brought most of their works in the 90s. Because of this, none of their newest animated features shall come out fast.
actually, 2d just takes longer
Just be glad this isn't the Thief and the Cobbler
-
I think the fact that the teaser was out almost a year before the movie's due to come out threw people off on the release date. They must've done that teaser piece first as they worked on the movie.
Still, I'm hoping what they mean by "Holidays 2009" is more Early-October than actual Christmastime. D: Too looooonnng.
I sure hope so. Because 2D is forever where my heart is.
Amen to that. 3D is nice and all, but it just doesn't compare to beautiful, hand-drawn classic animation (with stop-motion coming second). There's just something to it - fluidity, life, what have you - that makes it more.
-
actually, 2d just takes longer
Just be glad this isn't the Thief and the Cobbler
Beauty and the Beast- 1990
Aladdin 1992
Lion King 1994
Hunchback of Notre Dame- 1996
Pocahauntas- 1997
Hercules- 1997Yea 2-D sure is long.
-
Different animation teams work on different movies. Aladdin for example actually took a long ass time, and they were working around the same time as Beauty and the Beast. Just because you think the Japanese are the only ones that have animation teams due to episodes that come out once a week doesn't mean that an American company that makes an animated movie (2d or 3d) about once a year doesn't have teams for specific movies.
-
I might definately watch this movie, but I doubt I'm going to like it more then UP (which I am sure I will like better, since I did like Incredibles, WALL E, Nemo, and some others more)
-
Beauty and the Beast - 1991
Aladdin - 1992
Lion King - 1994
Pocahontas - 1995
Hunchback of Notre Dame- 1996
Hercules- 1997Yea 2-D sure is long.
Fixed it for ya.
-
Beauty and the Beast- 1991
Aladdin 1992
Lion King 1994
Pocahontas - 1995
Hunchback of Notre Dame- 1996
Hercules- 1997Yea 2-D sure is long.
Release dates don't tell the whole story though; for instance, Mulan and The Emperor's New Groove both went into production around 1994. Both wound up being completely different from what was originally intended, but Emperor came out a full two years later than Mulan. Of course, that was mainly because Emperor's production history could best be described as "a complete trainwreck".
-
Ubiq is right. They didn't begin production on the subsequent movie after the previous one, they were working on several projects for several years. When I was in high school, I had an animation teacher who worked for Disney and I got some inside information on stuff going on at the time. They were already making Hercules when Lion King was being released.
-
Generally speaking it takes about four years to make a feature length cel animated film.
There are exceptions though; notably, The Black Cauldron, which began actual production around 1977 and wasn't released until 1985. The Fox and The Hound, which began around roughly the same time, wound up coming out in 1981 while The Great Mouse Detective came out 1986.
Considering that Oliver and Company came out in 1988 and The Little Mermaid came out in 1989, that meant that Disney had four animated films either under production or in pre/post-production all at the same time at some point in 1985. They might even have been working on Who Framed Roger Rabbit? by that point as well.
That's probably the extreme end of the spectrum, but there's always going to be at least two or three movies underway at any given moment. If they shut down all production on all but one film, they could probably turn them out much faster, but that also means that that one film would have to be a major success or their whole studio could collapse.
-
Tomorrow at Wondercon there'll be a Disney animation panel where they'll be showing something from Princess and the Frog in some capacity, can't wait! Will let you guys know what it's all about.
I'm glad the green Bayou dress is her "iconic" look, her other dresses look nice but the Bayou one really has a sense of magic to it.
-
Beauty and the Beast- 1990
Aladdin 1992
Lion King 1994
Hunchback of Notre Dame- 1996
Pocahauntas- 1997
Hercules- 1997Yea 2-D sure is long.
dont try and get all sarcastic with me, i'm an actual animation student
i know things about animation that would blow your tiny little mind
-
Anywho…
So at Wondercon today there was a panel about Disney animation, in particular about the visual effects side of things, featuring Marlon West who's a Disney Animation vet.
The panel was a lot of fun, great for anyone interested in animation in the least bit, he covered both cg and 2D and what goes into animating the effects.
He showed off some unfinished animation of Dr. Facilier and Prince Naveen from Princess and the Frog towards the end of his presentation. He went step by step from storyboarding to more rough animated cuts, the kind you'd put temporary voice overs into to see how the movie is coming along.
First we saw Dr. Facilier doing some card tricks with a deck or Tarot cards, then we saw Prince Naveen being wrapped by snakes and then being transformed into the frog (only the transformation process, not the actual frog) This was especially cool to see because once the visual effects were added to the sequence you can only see Prince Naveen's sillhouette, and presumably in the final product it'll be the same case, but seeing it before the effects were added on and you just see Naveen being contorted. Lastly you see a bit of Dr. Facilier being surrounded by voodoo symbols and seemingly growing larger (presumably it's from the perspective of Naveen, shrinking into the frog)
I've gotta say, if the entire movie animates as beautifully as this rough animation of Dr. Facilier then this movie is going to be absolutely stunning! Just the few seconds long unfinished sequence of him doing card tricks was phenomenal to watch. He's got a really rad design too.
Marlon also mentioned during the Q and A segment that while nothing is official, hopefully the plan from now on will be a new digitally animated film every 18 months, and a new 2D film every 2- 21/2 years. That's a pretty fair timeline I'd say, and if it means 2D gets to stay then I'd be all for it!
-
Sweet - thanks for the info!
-
I've gotta say, if the entire movie animates as beautifully as this rough animation of Dr. Facilier then this movie is going to be absolutely stunning! Just the few seconds long unfinished sequence of him doing card tricks was phenomenal to watch. He's got a really rad design too.
I'm pretty sure this movie is going to be well animated. It's no longer about a kids movie, this movie is about sending a message to the public and business worlds, showing them that traditional animation is not a second rate art form. John Lasseter has his fingers all up in this, so I would be very very suprised if this movie was less than great.
-
I'm pretty sure this movie is going to be well animated. It's no longer about a kids movie, this movie is about sending a message to the public and business worlds, showing them that traditional animation is not a second rate art form. John Lasseter has his fingers all up in this, so I would be very very suprised if this movie was less than great.
Of course, if it tanks, then that's pretty much it for feature-length cel animation from major studios in the US as three out of Disney's four last cel films would be financial flops and the fourth of those being the moderately successful Brother Bear. Selling the idea of making anything but a CGI film under those circumstances would be all but impossible even for Lasseter and will probably be difficult no matter what if The Frog Princess isn't as big a hit as, say, Aladdin.
Normally, I'd be somewhat worried about that regardless of the film's quality, but I don't foresee Lasseter letting their marketing people mess this up.
-
Hopefully the timing will be right. There hasn't been a full-length 2d animated Disney in quite a while, so maybe this will seem fresh and interesting to the movie-going public, and the memories of the suckier ones hopefully fading.
-
There's also the nostalgia factor. I'm willing to bet that there are so many people who want desperately for hand drawn animation to come back into vogue that the movie does quite well at the box office. It's what the critics say and how the movie is received by the public that will determine 2-D's future in animation, I doubt the money will be much of an issue.
-
Of course, if it tanks, then that's pretty much it for feature-length cel animation from major studios in the US as three out of Disney's four last cel films would be financial flops and the fourth of those being the moderately successful Brother Bear.
You know, since the Disney films are numbered, and the theatrical releases are SPECIAL, only like 40 of them… it used to be amazing. Like "Lion King- The 32nd feature animated feature film from Disney!"... it annoys me that Brother Bear and... ack... Home on the Range... are part of the numbered franchise and always will be 44 and 45.
Home on the Range was so bad that there are rumors it was purposely made bad in order to support Eisner's point that the traditional animation was dead. Yes, its silly to believe that any company would intentionally make a bad product, but Eisner NEVER liked the animated movies and always brushed them off on Roy Disney as unimportant. It wasn't till Little Mermaid that the evil bastard went "ohhh... this can make money" But both Brother Bear and HotR were released within six months of each other, and NEITHER of them was in the moneymaking Christmas or in Summer season. Go fig...
I also miss the fact that the movies don't get theatrical re-releases every 7-10 years anymore, they just go back out to home video, which is kind of lame. I want to see Sleeping Beauty on the BIG screen, ya know? And the Lion King again.
There's no denying that from Little Mermaid up through Tarzan they were kicking ass pretty consistently, personal taste aside. But after that... Fantasia 2000 was a mess, Dinosaur SHOULD have been all silent, no talking like the initial trailer... It is nice that Emperor's New Groove eventually found the audience it deserves though. It just had really, REALLY terrible marketing, but was in fact, brilliant. Atlantis was so badly done that after seeing it, I left the the theater and then snuck in to see Shrek again to wash the bad taste out.
Lilo and Stitch was amazing, total A game, the last TRUE Disney film... Treasure Planet hit several notes right, (One of the best Long John Silvers ever) but was also also misguided and was the spiritual AND financial successor to Titan A.E.... (And ALSO had terrible commercials) And then, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little... yeah. Something has been missing at the company for a long time. The lost a couple key leaders some time ago that managed to make everything good. Makes me glad Lassetter is there, he knows whats up. We need more like him.
And this note just became way too long of a ramble on stuff. oh well.
-
And, y'know, Eisner got the boot.
-
@robbybevard:
Home on the Range was so bad that there are rumors it was purposely made bad in order to support Eisner's point that the traditional animation was dead. Yes, its silly to believe that any company would intentionally make a bad product, but Eisner NEVER liked the animated movies and always brushed them off on Roy Disney as unimportant. It wasn't till Little Mermaid that the evil bastard went "ohhh… this can make money" But both Brother Bear and HotR were released within six months of each other, and NEITHER of them was in the moneymaking Christmas or in Summer season. Go fig...
I didn't find Home on the Range as horrible as everyone says, its primary fault was being generic. It wasn't "fresh" in the non-RT sense at all.
And Eisner had good reason to believe in the strength of live action, Disney's animation was doing very poorly in the '70's and '80's while its LA has traditionally been very strong.
Many of Disney's old movies are god-tier. Darby O'Gill and the Little People, Blackbeard's Ghost, 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Old Yeller, Mary Poppins, Song of the South, Tron, Honey, I shrunk the kids…Disney's animation reputation outshines its LA by a longshot, so much so that many would have to think a bit to remember Disney isn't JUST animation.
With that kind of reputation, it would be hard to attract solid live action crew for future projects. Disney's opportunity to make magic in the LA business is limited.
@robbybevard:
There's no denying that from Little Mermaid up through Tarzan they were kicking ass pretty consistently, personal taste aside. But after that… Fantasia 2000 was a mess, Dinosaur SHOULD have been all silent, no talking like the initial trailer... It is nice that Emperor's New Groove eventually found the audience it deserves though. It just had really, REALLY terrible marketing, but was in fact, brilliant. Atlantis was so badly done that after seeing it, I left the the theater and then snuck in to see Shrek again to wash the bad taste out.
I've yet to see FY2K. Dinosaur was genuinely bad, Emperor's was indeed brilliant. Atlantis was merely mediocre, it was also produced during a time when sci-fi had saturated the market. Didn't help that few of the characters were genuinely interesting.
@robbybevard:
Lilo and Stitch was amazing, total A game, the last TRUE Disney film… Treasure Planet hit several notes right, (One of the best Long John Silvers ever) but was also also misguided and was the spiritual AND financial successor to Titan A.E.... (And ALSO had terrible commercials) And then, Brother Bear, Home on the Range, Chicken Little... yeah. Something has been missing at the company for a long time. The lost a couple key leaders some time ago that managed to make everything good. Makes me glad Lassetter is there, he knows whats up. We need more like him.
Anime has the same problem. Too many people are caught up in the FINANCE and not enough in the FINESSE.
If you have a good story, and decent production values, you can produce an incredible movie and or series. Many good movies were done on small budgets…like, Rocky? Terminator? These movies had just enough effects to bring the story out of the realm of fantasy onto the screen. But they were very, very good.
There's no substitute for talent, and art for story quality is no exception. Disney can't do anything about creativity, it's regulated by feedback inhibition. Someone comes out with something original, then EVERYONE after that is influenced by it…and are not original anymore, to some small degree. I've yet to see a new fantasy not derived from LotR or HP in major media right now.
Big demand for quality writers right now.
-
It's true that Disney's got some great LA (Mary Poppins is still one of my favorites, ever), but Eisner didn't give the animation department any respect, period. Yeah, they had a sucky period int he 70s and 80s, but that should have given him the motivation to make the animation department rebound and revolutionize. Like it or not, Disney = Animation in everyone's eyes, so if it loses that, then what's the point?
I mean, what the hell did Walt Disney found CalArts for!? To breed new generations of animators/writers!
-
It's one of those "incomprehensible" business practices - if something under-performs, under-cut it. If it magically gets back up to speed, fund it again. It becomes necessary to focus on strengths in tough economic times rather than riskier projects.
That was the situation in the 1970's and 1980's for Disney so I am not surprised in the slightest. The corporation was a mess back then anyway.
We're in one of those sink or swim eras as well. If Chicken Little, awful as it was, had failed at the BO, Disney animation in general would have been dead. Now, The Princess and the Frog is being tested to see whether or not 2D will remain buried or if it'll have a resurrection.
-
It's one of those "incomprehensible" business practices - if something under-performs, under-cut it.
Disney didn't always follow that rule though; each one of the films they made at their Florida animation studio was successful, but they killed it off anyway.
-
Walt Disney himself didn't always follow that rule, either. The man was constantly taking risks. Fantasia was a commercial flop, but then Disney went and took a risk again after Dumbo by making Bambi (which also initially bombed). Hell, Sleeping Beauty nearly bankrupted the company. And yet now all are considered classics and are consistent money-makers on home video.
I think Walt would have seen the 70s and the 80s as a challenge.
-
Ubiq, which movies came out of Florida?
Satsuki
Only Disney alone could have done that. He made so many miracles happen before, people would be willing to believe in his magic touch whether he produced a success or not. It's the kind of personal faith the US had in Roosevelt during the war, Eisner did not command that much trust nor did he wield that much power.
-
Oh, I'm sure Eisner couldn't have done that. But Eisner was pure buisnessman, he wasn't an artist like Disney. He was thinking purely in numbers.
So in his absence we have to rely on the studio and the principles he left behind. I have little faith in the corporate thugs employed by Disney (although I do hope Bob Iger does a better job than Eisner), but I do invest a lot of hope and confidence in the animators there. You can't go into that job if you don't love it.
As for Disney's "magic touch", well, let's just hope John Lasseter can do something. He's the closest thing we've got (although I'm a huge fan of animator Glen Keane as well).
-
Ubiq, which movies came out of Florida?
Mulan
Lilo and Stitch
Brother BearThey also did the various Roger Rabbit shorts and animated part of The Lion King. I think that they did "Just Can't Wait to Be King" and a few other segments.
Not only were their films successful or at least reasonably so, production costs at the Florida facility were lower than out in Burbank.
Oh, I'm sure Eisner couldn't have done that. But Eisner was pure buisnessman, he wasn't an artist like Disney. He was thinking purely in numbers.
I always thought that Eisner's view of animation was best described by the story of how Brother Bear reputedly came about.
-
If you have a good story, and decent production values, you can produce an incredible movie and or series. Many good movies were done on small budgets…like, Rocky? Terminator? These movies had just enough effects to bring the story out of the realm of fantasy onto the screen. But they were very, very good.
There's no substitute for talent, and art for story quality is no exception. Disney can't do anything about creativity, it's regulated by feedback inhibition. Someone comes out with something original, then EVERYONE after that is influenced by it…and are not original anymore, to some small degree. I've yet to see a new fantasy not derived from LotR or HP in major media right now.
Big demand for quality writers right now.
So so true. thats a nice encapsulation of what talent and creativty are. Well said.
Pixar has managed to be 9 for 9 because they go for story first. Even the weaker movies, or ones you personally do't like for whatever reason, manage to be outstanding and interesting from a story standpoint. With the enforced sequals coming down fromt he stockholders, Toy Story 3 and Cars 2, I imagine that track record is going to hit a bump soon, but still, an impressive record.
As for Disney's "magic touch", well, let's just hope John Lasseter can do something. He's the closest thing we've got (although I'm a huge fan of animator Glen Keane as well).
Chris Sanders is my boy. He was the lead on Lilo and Stitch and did… everything on that, as well as head of story in Mulan and lots of work on the films just prior to that. The man is talented like crazy.
I always thought that Eisner's view of animation was best described by the story of how Brother Bear reputedly came about.
I'm not familiar with this story. What happened there?
-
@robbybevard:
I'm not familiar with this story. What happened there?
Eisner saw the box office returns for The Lion King and checked the upcoming production list. When he saw that there weren't any animal pictures in the future, he ordered the animation department to make one. That might be the reason behind Home on the Range as well, though I don't recall seeing that mentioned in connection with that particular film.
I seem to recall hearing somewhere that he actually sent out a memo at one point that was basically "More talking animals," but that that be apocryphal.
-
Oh, I'm sure Eisner couldn't have done that. But Eisner was pure buisnessman, he wasn't an artist like Disney. He was thinking purely in numbers.
eisner was also fucking retarded
after they booted his ass out of disney, he started babbling on about how he was going to take Bazooka Joe and turn it into the next Mickey Mouse
BAZOOKA JOE
Chris Sanders is my boy. He was the lead on Lilo and Stitch and did… everything on that, as well as head of story in Mulan and lots of work on the films just prior to that. The man is talented like crazy.
he works for dreamworks now
Toy Story 3 and Cars 2, I imagine that track record is going to hit a bump soon, but still, an impressive record.
I expect these movies to be good, or in the case of Cars, surpass the original. It's the movies that they're starting to experiment with that I'm worried about (particularly, the Bear and the Bow. I liked Prince of Egypt, but I cant help but wonder if that serious type of story and character design will conflict with the normally soft and goofy style of pixar.).
-
Eisner saw the box office returns for The Lion King and checked the upcoming production list. When he saw that there weren't any animal pictures in the future, he ordered the animation department to make one. That might be the reason behind Home on the Range as well, though I don't recall seeing that mentioned in connection with that particular film.
I seem to recall hearing somewhere that he actually sent out a memo at one point that was basically "More talking animals," but that that be apocryphal.
Ahh, the same logic that led to Cinderella 2, Jungle Book 2, Fox and the Hound 2, Lady and the Tramp 2, Mulan 2, Lion King 1/2 and 2, and Little Mermaid 3. Gotcha. IMO, if so much time has passed that NO ONE who worked on the original movie is alive or avaialble to work on a sequal, it probably shouldn't be done.
Rescuers Down Under is a wierd anomly, but then it had the same voices and was made a mere 13 years later… and is really a far better movie than the original and greatly expands on the two leads, growing them as characters and moving them forward.
eisner was also fucking retarded
In ALL FAIRNESS to Eisner… when he first came to the company and he had Frank Wells to counter him, he made brilliant decisions about which movies to push forward and which films to rip off... Three Men and a Baby, Pretty Woman, etc. and there was a long chain of successful box office movie hits under his reign, he KNEW what he was doing and was VERY good at it for the first 10 years of his presidency at the company... he just took the animation department completley for granted and had a huge hatred and dislike of Roy Disney.
Then Wells died in a helicopter crash and Eisner apparently went insane and lost all perception and judgement and surrounded himself with yes men, at which point he started doing stuff like saying Sixth Sense, Lost, Lord of the Rings, Finding Nemo and Pirates of the Carribean would all be failures, and buying Fox Family for 6 billion... and Euro Disney...
So yeah. In all fairness, Eisner was a good solid choice for the first 10 years when he had people of equal authority that could talk him down... but lost it completley around 1994 when he became head honcho.
I expect these movies to be good, or in the case of Cars, surpass the original.
Considering Lasseter has always said they'd only do sequals if the story demanded it, but these are clearly stockholder mandates… but yeah, a 9 for 9 trackrecord gives Pixar a little leeway from me. I didn't care much for Bug's Life, Finding Nemo or Cars, but they all looked beautiful and had memorable characters and story (And Cars has actually somehow grown on me over time)
It's the movies that they're starting to experiment with that I'm worried about (particularly, the Bear and the Bow. I liked Prince of Egypt, but I cant help but wonder if that serious type of story and character design will conflict with the normally soft and goofy style of pixar.).
I personally want to see Pixar's answer to Princess Mononoke. I would love to see them do a true mature, no obvious villains grey area dramatic story like that. And also John Carter of Mars, but they keep pushing that back to the point its not even on the advance release schedule yet.
-
Considering Lasseter has always said they'd only do sequals if the story demanded it, but these are clearly stockholder mandates…
Every movie demands story, so I don't see a problem. It's the same as when they had to rewrite Toy Story I and II halfway through. As long as they aren't really truely REACHING for the story, ie after everybody in the original DIED or a major story line ended (like say adding a sequel to Return of the King), it's totally possible to continue on and have a good, if not better, sequel.
I personally want to see Pixar's answer to Princess Mononoke.
That's what I'm afraid to see the most, honestly. It's not that I dont think they can do it, I'm just afraid that there's no place for a film of that calibur in today's mainstream. Yet. I think we're getting closer everyday though
personally i'd kill to work on The Bear and the Bow. it sounds AMAZING and it's definentally the most exiting thing they've got lined up for the next 4 years
-
Bear and the Bow does sound awesome.
But Newt (the one after B&B) also looks promising.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_(filmTechnically this was done in Doctor Dolittle 2, but I look forward to seeing how Pixar handles the "two last remaining species who must mate but hate each other" angle. (it's basically a movie about sex, which in today's uber-PC-for-kiddies world will be interesting to see if only for the marketing strategy)
-
newt sounded kinda eh to me
like they're trying to cater to the kiddie talking animals crowd, which is perfectly fine. It's obviously a movie out to bring in some profit, while they work on other things
but they release two films that year so I'm not going to complain
-
But seriously, who's doing talking animals/objects better than Pixar right now? Nobody, that's who.
If anybody can get the "two newts in a lab who are supposed to mate but won't" thing right, it's Pixar.
-
eisner was also fucking retarded
after they booted his ass out of disney, he started babbling on about how he was going to take Bazooka Joe and turn it into the next Mickey Mouse
BAZOOKA JOE
Considering how Mickey's popularity is due almost entirely to Disney's massive promotional campaigns, it wouldn't be far-fetched to imagine Bazooka Joe attaining similar status with enough money.
@robbybevard:
I personally want to see Pixar's answer to Princess Mononoke. I would love to see them do a true mature, no obvious villains grey area dramatic story like that. And also John Carter of Mars, but they keep pushing that back to the point its not even on the advance release schedule yet.
Uh-uh. Not even other Japanese have been able to emulate Miyazaki's perspective on his films, an attempt at replicating the exotic feel of Mononoke would be dismal. All of Pixar's films have a very distinctive rhythm, probably due to Lasseter's involvement in each of them. Something like Mononoke would be far too alien to that formula, it would have to be channeled through a different division of the company.
-
I think mickey was popular cause mickey was good. bazooka joe sucks.
and i don't think that person wants a film that "replicates" mononoke, but they mean, they want a more serious film that is still good an enjoyable.
-
Considering how Mickey's popularity is due almost entirely to Disney's massive promotional campaigns, it wouldn't be far-fetched to imagine Bazooka Joe attaining similar status with enough money.
it also helps that mickey is a cute talking mouse and an important historical icon in animation, while bazooka joe is just some retard on some bubble gum
-
Every movie demands story, so I don't see a problem. It's the same as when they had to rewrite Toy Story I and II halfway through. As long as they aren't really truely REACHING for the story, ie after everybody in the original DIED or a major story line ended (like say adding a sequel to Return of the King), it's totally possible to continue on and have a good, if not better, sequel.
This is true, very often sequals are superior to the originals, since the setup is out of the way and they can get right to the meat… but usually the third installment in a series tends to suck, even when all the same people are involved, for reasons I just can't fathom.
That's what I'm afraid to see the most, honestly. It's not that I dont think they can do it, I'm just afraid that there's no place for a film of that calibur in today's mainstream. Yet. I think we're getting closer everyday though
Cartoons are just for kids, and all anime is giant robots, big eyes and girls in skirts. Tis a strange outlook our society tends to have…. I blame crappy cartoons. We need more Batman: TAS, Gargoyles, and Avatar, and a little less... uhm, pretty much everything else. (Yes, I can name a good 30 or so excellent shows from the last 3 decades off the top of my head... but thats a pretty pitiful rate honestly)
personally i'd kill to work on The Bear and the Bow. it sounds AMAZING and it's definentally the most exiting thing they've got lined up for the next 4 years
I'm really curious to see how that goes myself.
Uh-uh. Not even other Japanese have been able to emulate Miyazaki's perspective on his films, an attempt at replicating the exotic feel of Mononoke would be dismal. All of Pixar's films have a very distinctive rhythm, probably due to Lasseter's involvement in each of them. Something like Mononoke would be far too alien to that formula, it would have to be channeled through a different division of the company.
I don't want to see them do Mononoke per-se. I'm not saying I want to see Pixar do a movie in a forest with a guy running around on a deer with wolves and crazy god monster things…. (well okay, I DO, but...) I want to see them do something with that level of maturity and depth, willingness to be ambiguous with no clear cut villain, and possibly random violence. Even Ghibli hasn't been able to do Mononoke since Mononoke.
Like I said, I want to see their ANSWER to Mononoke, not Mononoke 2. (Tho that would be awesome) There's no market for it, I know. America just can't deal with a PG-13 cartoon.
Lilo and Stitch was the closest thing I can think of that reached the level of heart and maturity in the last few years and I loved the heck out of that one. But it was still a comedy kids movie. (And the following series meh-ed it down) A very very GOOD comedy kids movie that I ABSOLUTLEY LOVE, but...
and i don't think that person wants a film that "replicates" mononoke, but they mean, they want a more serious film that is still good an enjoyable.
Yes. That.
-
Wasn't The Incredibles just that, then?
-
i think it was still a little light hearted and kiddy.
-
i wish i had been the one to make this
i guess i'll just have to be content by being the one to post it
-
haha @ the face expression part.
-
Will this one have singing in it?
-
Yeah, it's a musical with at least one song written by Randy Newman and, apparently, features an alligator that plays a trumpet.
-
Yeah, it's a musical with at least one song written by Randy Newman and, apparently, features an alligator that plays a trumpet.
He's the composer, and hopefully he won't be doing any actual singing. Cats Don't Dance and his history with jazz gives him a lot of cred on this one.
-
Cats Don't Dance is a fantastic movie and it really makes me pumped for this to hear the same music writer will be in it.