What Happened to Disney?

[brian577 120]

However, after 2000 (I'd say around the time The Emperor's New Groove was released), Disney again hit a slump, it's second dry spell. With DreamWorks and other CGI studios taking on Disney's "hand-drawn animation", Disney would ultimately lose with the new computer animation movement. Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, and Home on the Range are prime examples, losing to the Shrek franchise, Madagascar franchise, and even releases from overseas including the Miyazaki movie Spirited Away. I actually did enjoy Treasure Planet and Brother Bear, but as far as this certain period goes, only Lilo & Stitch was really successful with audiences, a movie that I wanted to throw in the trash. The period also marked the change in Disney's move to CGI films, including Chicken Little, Meet The Robinsons, and Bolt. Chicken Little was "meh" while the other two were just downright crappy. This is when people (AGAIN) started to lose faith in Disney (probably also didn't help that also during the late 90's and early 2000's that Disney Channel began producing utter teen shit and signing on talentless tween singers) and basically made the company a mockery again.

 

You did not just call Bolt crappy did you? You better have a good reason beyond "it had Miley Cyrus In it" it's my all time favorite Disney CGI film (yes, I liked it more than Tangled).

[AegisReflector 886]

You did not just call Bolt crappy did you? You better have a good reason beyond "it had Miley Cyrus In it" it's my all time favorite Disney CGI film (yes, I liked it more than Tangled).

 

It had a terrible plot, an awful cast, and it severely lacked any memorable scenes. It has basically trying to be more "mainstream" which is what Chicken Little and Meet The Robinsons were doing. Paying more attention to stupid humor and half-assed animation rather than making a masterpiece with vivid musical numbers, fluent environments, and memorable characters.

 

My opinion, though.

[Mephala 2,633]

I cannot say I am a fan of the old Disney.

They had their great films (Mulan and Pinocchio were my favourites) but then there was all of the whiny princess *hit.

I hated the princess movies.

I loved Tangled and I LOVED Wreck-It Ralph.

They still have their misses but it's not like everything is horrible.

So no say, really.

 

But they do produce the Ghibli movies in English, and since they are my favourite films I have to give them credit for that.

Edited November 3, 2012 by Azura

[AegisReflector 886]

I cannot say I am a fan of the old Disney.

They had their great films (Mulan and Pinocchio were my favourites) but then there was all of the whiny princess *hit.

I hated the princess movies.

 

That's like pure classic Disney though, like 30's - 60's.

 

The only Disney Renaissance film that really has a princess in distress is Aladdin with Jasmine.

[Mephala 2,633]

That's like pure classic Disney though, like 30's - 60's.

 

The only Disney Renaissance film that really has a princess in distress is Aladdin with Jasmine.

 

Meh, moot point.

I still don't really have any preference over "old Disney" and "new Disney" though.

Ghibli is best animation studio. XD

[AegisReflector 886]

Yeah, Ghibli is basically the Japanese equivalent to the Walt Disney Company. Would be neat to see them collaborate on an actual movie someday (instead of just releasing dubs)

[Black Star 62]

Disney's becoming less those movies because the people who were young when toy story, lion king, monsters inc, and finding nemo are now in their teens and older and I assume that's why they bought marvel and now lucas films so they can shift their focus to keep that generation (which I am part of) entertained and stick with them.

[brian577 120]

It had a terrible plot, an awful cast, and it severely lacked any memorable scenes. It has basically trying to be more "mainstream" which is what Chicken Little and Meet The Robinsons were doing. Paying more attention to stupid humor and half-assed animation rather than making a masterpiece with vivid musical numbers, fluent environments, and memorable characters.

 

My opinion, though.

 

Stupid humor? Like what? There is nothing half asses about backgrounds designed to look like they were painted. A Disney movie doesn't need musical numbers to be good. Many Disney movies manage to get by just fine without them. All three main characters are memorable and all are tragic. Mittens has adistrust of humans from being abandoned, Bolt has been actively deceived in to believing he is a super hero his entire life and Rhino has been fed the idea the television is real his entire life. IMHO of course.

Edited November 4, 2012 by brian577

[irobern2857 95]

Stupid humor? Like what? There is nothing half asses about backgrounds designed to look like they were painted. A Disney movie doesn't need musical numbers to be good. Many Disney movies manage to get by just fine without them. All three main characters are memorable and all are tragic. Mittens has adistrust of humans from being abandoned, Bolt has been actively deceived in to believing he is a super hero his entire life and Rhino has been fed the idea the television is real his entire life. IMHO of course.

 

I thought the movie was better then some but not one of their greatest. It did not need to be in 3D. i did like the cat she had a good story (that Dreamworks ripped off in Puss-and-Boots) but that hampster was a little lame and why did they have to make the dog think that he was a superdog with super powers and how did the dog not know that he was only and actor. I mean that even if he was sheltered then he would still figure out that he can't actually run supper fast or jump super high. in short he would have known that he was just a normal dog. the Pigions were great though.

[brian577 120]

did the dog not know that he was only and actor. I mean that even if he was sheltered then he would still figure out that he can't actually run supper fast or jump super high. in short he would have known that he was just a normal dog. the Pigions were great though.

 

Simple, if you've lived your entire life in a fantasy world how would know what reality is really like? For you really know, helicopters really do fly on wires.

[irobern2857 95]

Simple, if you've lived your entire life in a fantasy world how would know what reality is really like? For you really know, helicopters really do fly on wires.

 

But in the movie you see that he lives in a trailer so just by that he should know that his story line in the show is false. and you would think that when the "dead" ninja actors get up and walk away at the end of each scene and the movement of props around the set would shatter the illusion

[Kelvocity 211]

Personally, I think Disney's trying to get back in the game (even including Disney Channel, as long as you disregard all the stupid comedy shows). Pixar is and always has been consistantly good (in my opinion), and Tangled and The Princess and The Frog were a start of a new like of movies from Walt Disney Studios (don't forget Enchanted!). Wreck-it-Ralph is another new Disney movie that seems good (I haven't seen it yet, didn't it come out today?) And we're getting another musical (like Tangled and Princess and the Frog) called Frozen in 2013, which sounds good. A lot of Disney still sucks, but Disney's doing its best right now. I think Walt Disney Studios is going to go for more of a CGI/Traditionally animated route this decade. We won't know unless they start to get on a roll. And Disney Channel's got Phineas and Ferb, Gravity Falls, and in 2013 I think, Wander Over Yonder (Craig McCracken, Lauren Faust, etc.)

 

There are soooooo many haters on this topic lol. Disney has been producing great quality films for some time now, it's just people are so used to the early 2000's Disney where the creative drive just wasn't there to the point of ousting out Disney for every movie they release. Heck, just look at the Lucasfilm buyout. People aren't even giving Disney a chance with the Star Wars flims even though recent flicks like Tangled, Princess and the Frog, and Toy Story 3 all did pretty well at the box office and were filled with critical acclaim. I loved all of them. It shows that Disney is at least trying to get back into their 90's groove.

 

To me, Disney had 2 dry spells, both following with recovery periods. The first one was back in the early 70's when Disney's animation branch was at a major disadvantage following the death of Walt himself in 1966. Because of this, Disney shat out a lot of disappointing films including Robin Hood, the first Winnie the Pooh movie, Black Cauldron (which, actually, is one of my favorite animated films), and Oliver and Company. Especially after the box office failure of Black Cauldron, everybody thought Disney (much like today) had lost their touch and would continue to produce shitty movies and eventually go into bankruptcy, only to be proven wrong.

 

You all remember Who Framed Roger Rabbit? Possibly the greatest flick to hit the animation scene, Roger Rabbit created the whole basis of the "Disney Renaissance", a recovery period from about 1988 - 2000 in which Disney created a very fine set of classic films using young and innovative animators to get Disney's reputation back on track, including The Great Mouse Detective, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, and Fantasia 2000. People had restored faith in the company and when fans of the movies talk about the golden age of animation, they usually refer it to either the 60's or the Disney Renaissance, because all of these movies were finely animated and well acted, and truly a giant staple to the American culture.

 

However, after 2000 (I'd say around the time The Emperor's New Groove was released), Disney again hit a slump, it's second dry spell. With DreamWorks and other CGI studios taking on Disney's "hand-drawn animation", Disney would ultimately lose with the new computer animation movement. Atlantis: The Lost Empire, Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, and Home on the Range are prime examples, losing to the Shrek franchise, Madagascar franchise, and even releases from overseas including the Miyazaki movie Spirited Away. I actually did enjoy Treasure Planet and Brother Bear, but as far as this certain period goes, only Lilo & Stitch was really successful with audiences, a movie that I wanted to throw in the trash. The period also marked the change in Disney's move to CGI films, including Chicken Little, Meet The Robinsons, and Bolt. Chicken Little was "meh" while the other two were just downright crappy. This is when people (AGAIN) started to lose faith in Disney (probably also didn't help that also during the late 90's and early 2000's that Disney Channel began producing utter teen shit and signing on talentless tween singers) and basically made the company a mockery again.

 

However, when I saw The Princess and the Frog, I was immediately hooked. Going back to their hand-drawn animation with a little computer animation involved, this film goes back to the roots of the 90's, having awesome musicals, great animation reels, and a great cast of characters. I consider The Princess and the Frog the start of another recovery period. Tangled was the first Disney CGI film (not Pixar Disney, just straight-up Disney) that I really enjoyed, and the new Winnie The Pooh movie was absolutely adorable. Audiences agree too, as all three were box office successes.

 

Hopefully Wreck-It Ralph will continue the tradition of Disney CGI films that will leave me with a pleasant feeling as I leave the theater. I'll probably see it next weekend or something.

 

POINT IS THAT Disney is experiencing newfound greatness. Sure, it might not be as grand as the Disney Renaissance period, but it's a start. The company has bumped back before from a severe animation crisis, they are more likely to do it again as these last 3 films have proven. I assure you that Disney will be a creative tablet for many years to come, they just need to make the right business decisions and have the right creative consultants.

 

Oh, did I mention that I'm a huge DISNEY FAN?!

 

HOW DOES THIS POST NOT HAVE MORE BROHOOVES?!

 

This is pretty much everything I wanted to say but in much more detail and such. Basically that Disney went through one drought before it hit the Disney Renaissance, and another one afterward, but now Disney beginning to make a comeback.

[Castoro Chiaro 181]

Honestly, I think the quality of Disney features is subjective. A lot of people who grew up on older Disney have a bit of a nostalgia filter, so it's harder to judge them objectively when you have so many fond memories and emotions associated with them. I do think part of the perceived change is that writers and directors we grew up with are moving on to other projects, so newcomers are filling in their places. And they have to write to a different demographic than our generation: jokes need to be conveyed faster, the finished product needs to be as polished and flashy as possible so as not to lose interest, and sometimes characters suffer because of these things.

 

For people wondering whether to see Wreck-It Ralph, I urge you to give it a chance. I went in expecting a bunch of silly game jokes, some slapstick, and a typical "be yourself!" moral. But I got a lot more than that. The visuals are stunning, as well as the animation of the characters themselves. The plot did not play out like I'd expected it to, and what's even better, all of the characters contributed to the plot. There was never a quirky side-character that just slowed down the plot for the sake of humor, as can be the problem in some films; all of them serve a purpose and are just really darling and likable.

 

I think what made this film work so well for me is that it didn't feel like things were just thrown in to make kids laugh and for no other reason. There were a couple jokes like this, but for the most-part, the film respected its audience and their intelligence. If Disney keeps this up, I think they'll start putting out more winners in no time.

[irobern2857 95]

As a lot of you have said i have high hopes for wreck it ralph the story and animation look good its very original and has interesting characters in it. I also think that the writers tried to gear the film to our generation(13-20) as well with the cameos and the difernet types of games. We are the ones in the right age group to have played eight bit games, played the modern fps sci-fi games, and to have played the 90's kid games as well.

[Forlong 1,726]

But in the movie you see that he lives in a trailer so just by that he should know that his story line in the show is false. and you would think that when the "dead" ninja actors get up and walk away at the end of each scene and the movement of props around the set would shatter the illusion

I don't know if anyone told you but dogs aren't all that smart. They have intelligence below a 6-year-old human. At that intelligence level, it is likely he'll believe what he sees on TV is real.

[TailsIsNotAlone 3,695]

The "Downfall" of Disney can actually be pinned on a person, rather than the whole "Corperatization" thing. Michael Eisner.

 

Michael Eisner came onto the scene in 1984 along with Frank Wells, and was responsible for the success of The Little Mermaid, Duck Tales, The Lion King, Rescuers Down Under, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, the Hunchback of Notre Dame... in fact, he was in charge most of the way through the Animation Renaissance of the 90s. However, Wells died in a helicopter accident in 1994, and the quality of Eisner's direct began to diminish. By the 2000s he had problems with micromanagement and basically was sucking the soul out of the company. He was ousted by Roy E. Disney (Walt's great grandson) alongside efforts of Edward Catmull (President of Pixar) and was replaced by Robert Iger in 2005.

Since then, Disney's movies have started to improve, more or less.

 

Well said. Without Wells, Eisner didn't seem ready to trust anyone else with authority that was close to his own, and Disney's movies seemed to decline along with his vision from that point. I think Eisner's overly paranoid and competitive nature got the best of him, leading him to undermine and betray anyone he saw as a threat to him (particularly Jeff Katzenberg, who left to form Dreamworks). He put his ego (and paycheck) ahead of the company's well-being so many times that Roy E. Disney finally got enough support from the board to oust him after 20 years as CEO. So I guess we can thank him (1930-2009) for Disney improving as much as it has in the past 7 years.

 

The Sword In the Stone, The Rescuers, The Great Mouse Detective, The Little Mermaid...that was the Disney I loved. They're not back yet and maybe they never will be, but they've made progress.

[irobern2857 95]

I don't know if anyone told you but dogs aren't all that smart. They have intelligence below a 6-year-old human. At that intelligence level, it is likely he'll believe what he sees on TV is real.

 

I doubt that the movie used accurate animal intelligence. the cat knows the finner points of extortion, the hamster can operate a tv. and in an hour the dog can learn to beg for food.

[Shanks 10,816]

What happened to Disney is tragic but is hardly isolated, entertainment in general is going down the toilet how else do you explain all the "reality shows" and daytime talk/trash shows like the Jerry Springer or Maury Povich show? Yeah they were around in the 90's too when you actually had good shows on TV but they keep spreading like a cancer. It is not so much the sex and violence that concern me it is the complete and total lack of creativity and the willingness to appeal to the lowest common denominator. The Disney channel is mostly the teen garbage which is actually just the trite hackneyed cliched glorified soap operas dumbed down to the point where it is an insult even to 2 year olds, the only good shows they are airing that I am aware of are Ultimate Spiderman and The Avergers Earth's Mightiest Heroes both of which air on Disney XD. Nickelodeon has some of that same garbage but thankfully not nearly as much of it, it has Spongebob which although started out pretty good has started to get a bit stale in my opinion but I mostly just watch the latest Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cartoon. Cartoon Network has also gone downhill but is now at least starting to pull its head out of its butt and take some steps in the right direction, though I really don't understand why they just all of a sudden stopped airing new episodes of Young Justice and Green Lantern right when the new seasons started without any explanation whatsoever.

[irobern2857 95]

It seems like all the kids networks are slowly trying to do what disney started a few years ago with the live action shows. Some of them are decent but it seems that disney is starting a spiral of bad live action that is pull ing in other networks as well.

[leogal 74]

Disney seems to be making more and more CG-i films (Wreck it Ralph, Tangled, Bolt, etc.) instead of the hand-drawn animated movies we all love. Why are they using CG-i now? Isn't that what Pixar is for?

 

It's easier to make a CG film than hand drawing one...for instance, it would take you one week to design a character in CG, but then its made and you can pose it in almost any position. Hand drawn means it takes you that one week to create one scene from the movie...

And while I feel Disney has lost their touch, I honestly think they just need some new blood in the mix (ie: me as an animator/creator lol) :3