a 'new' pixar/lucas/disney/questions

BRERALEX

That's a wrap.
Joined
Mar 8, 2001
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Following the path of Pixar Animation Studios, Dreamworks and other filmmakers, "Stars Wars" creator George Lucas (news) is forming a new group to make computer-animated films, a spokeswoman said on Monday.



The unit, called Lucasfilm Animation, is an offshoot of his special effects company, Industrial Light & Magic, that has been a pioneer in the field of digital effects and works on Lucas' own "Star Wars" films.


Lynne Hale, spokeswoman for his San Rafael, California-based Lucasfilm Ltd., said the new unit was "still in its beginning stages" and did not even have a project to talk about.


As a result, details were limited. Hale confirmed that Lucasfilm Animation will be formed from a nine-person team housed with Industrial Light & Magic. The new division will be headed by senior vice president Patty Blau.


Lucas is a vocal proponent of using digitally produced and computerized special effects in the movies. His companies have been active in designing new cameras for shooting digital films, and his most recent "Star Wars: Episode II -- Attack of the Clones" was shot in the digital format.


Until now, however, he has lacked a production company dedicated to making computerized animation movies such as "Shrek," "Monsters, Inc." or last year's "Ice Age."


Those three films have been smash hits with combined global ticket sales of $1.36 billion. On its own, "Monsters, Inc.," which was produced by Pixar and The Walt Disney Co., raked in $529 million in global ticket sales.


Lucas is no stranger to digital animation. Indeed, Pixar had been Lucasfilm's computer graphics division 17 years ago before Lucas sold it to Apple Computer's Steve Jobs (news - web sites) for $10 million.


Pixar now has a market capitalization of roughly $3.2 billion


Lucas, too, has tried to mount efforts to make digitally animated movies, such as a version of "Frankenstein" that was scrapped by Universal Pictures in 1999.


ok the point of posting this is, could this be the 'future' 'pixar' for disney if the current picxar doesnt work out? thats what was alluded to on another website, as more of just a possibility. anyone have any info?
iwasprettyboredandfoundthis.
 
I'd like to see Disney be the next Pixar. CGI is the future of animation. Keep everything in house, but do it right, and reap all the rewards.
 
i defintaly agree it just seems they will never loosen the purse that much ever again. I'd rather everything be disney not disney/PIXAR. I wish they would do it on their own but the way keep cutting creative depts from what i read here theres no chance of that.
 
Disney had their own inhouse CGI studio and shut them down as a cost saving measure. Disney decided instead to produce it's non-Pixar films produced by independent companies, just like they have Jerry Bruckheimer produce their mega films like Pearl Harbor and Pirates of the Caribbean. There are "rumors" such a CGI film will announced in the next few days.

Eisner sees the future of animation as inexpensive television and DVD fare marketed at children. He does not beleive a market exists for general audience animation and points to Atlantis and Treasure Planet as proof (Shrek was just a fluke).
 


So were Toy Story, Toy Story 2, A Bug's Life, Monsters Inc, and Lilo and Stitch all flukes as well. I could see declaring Shrek a fluke if it stood alone but that is hardly true.
 
In Einserland, anything that does less than Lion King sized box office is a complete failure if his money is involved.

He would much rather spend $15 million on Peter Pan 3 and make a $50 million box office/home video than spend $100 million to make The Snow Queen on the chance it would only bring in $200 million total take. This is the guy that had Disney invest more money in United Airlines airplane leases then they invested in Atlantis, Lilo and Stitch, and Treasure Planet combined. The returns on the movies may have been disappointed, but Disney lost every single penny it gave to United and no has absolutely nothing to show for it.

Long to produce animated movies no longer offer Eisner the quick return on his money he demands. He'd rather play Wall Street Master of the Universe than Big Shot Movie Producer.
 
Ok, I'm leaving for the airport to go to WDW in about 2 hours, and I haven't gone to sleep yet, but I had to comment on this...

I'd like to see Disney be the next Pixar.

That kind of statement just leaves me speechless for so many reasons.

(Not picking on you Vike, honest, because you're right, Disney could learn from Pixar. But man, how did things ever get to the point where we make statements like this, hoping Disney can "become the next X"? Didn't it used to be the other way around? :( )
 


I'd like to see Disney be the next Pixar.
That one caught my eye too. As long as someone makes the good films, then I'm OK with this for now. It's a shame that it has to be Pixar or Dreamworks or Lucas or whoever but as long as Disney doesn't seem to care so be it.

Shrek was mentioned as a fluke per Eisner, I guess that Ice Age would also be such a fluke? I've mostly seen commentary that Ice Age wasn't that good on the boards. I'm curious as to why it did so well. It was an enjoyable movie but what caught the public's eye? The squirrel? The premise? The animation? Just something I'm curious about.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top