Closing the animation studios Monday

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by adambreakey
Its not so much what has been outsourced -- but what projects did they cancel?

The big one that was recentley cancelled is "A Few Good Ghosts" -- That project was being worked on by WDFA-F - and now it is a no-go.

Yes ... true. Ghosts was cancelled because the story didn't pass muster. And, as many have said here, it's not about the animation, it's about the story. So ... is it better to keep an animation force working on a bad story or the kill the project and let the animators go? It's a loss either way, but if your charge is to do what's best for the company, then you kill the project and let the animators go rather than continue putting money into a project that will fail to meet targets.

I didn't, by the way, say it was right. I said it was understandable.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by raidermatt
Why exclude CGI?

OK, then .... what projects -- of any type -- are on the docket that could have been handed to Florida? With the knowledge that Disney Feature Animation Florida was mostly staffed by traditional 2d animators who were in the process of mastering CGI techniques, but were not yet ready to take on a feature of their own (according to my friends who work there, in both animation and technical areas). They could have done piecework, maybe, but it's financially irresponsible to keep a studio running and full of animators if there's not a project for them to work on.

 

[raidermatt]

Yes ... true. Ghosts was cancelled because the story didn't pass muster.

I missed this... who determined the only reason its a no-go is because of the story?

Really now, if that were the only reason, dontcha think something with a better story could be found? If others can find them, why can't Disney?

No, "Ghosts" weak story, real or perceived, had nothing to do with it.

 

[raidermatt]

OK, then .... what projects -- of any type -- are on the docket that could have been handed to Florida? With the knowledge that Disney Feature Animation Florida was mostly staffed by traditional 2d animators who were in the process of mastering CGI techniques, but were not yet ready to take on a feature of their own (according to my friends who work there, in both animation and technical areas). They could have done piecework, maybe, but it's financially irresponsible to keep a studio running and full of animators if there's not a project for them to work on.

Same point as my last post... there are plenty of potential projects out there.

Further, if the group is capable of telling a good story, then the investment in retraining would have been well worth it.

But its easier to let others do the work, and simply take advantage of the brand name.

Look, there is ONE overriding decision to make, and that is whether to produce animation in-house or outsource it. Whether its CGI or "Hand Drawn" is irrelevant. If Disney still believed that creating its own core product was beneficial to them, they would make the films themselves. If they felt they needed to do so only in CGI, they would do it. They'd either retrain Orlando, or shut it down and do the CGI somewhere else.

Since they are doing neither, we know they have chosen outsourcing. But then again, we already knew that...

 

[Another Voice]

"is it better to keep an animation force working on a bad story or the kill the project and let the animators go?"

Option three - fix the story.

I mean, was it better to shut down Burbank because Empire of the Sun wasn't working or fix it and make The Emporer's New Groove? Or why didn't they shut down Florida two years ago when Brother Bear hit a bad spot?

"Story problems" simply joins "no one wants 2D movies" as the lame excuses of a lazy company.

 

[freediverdude]

What really got me was this thing I read over on Jim Hill about the new Stitch's Great Escape attraction. Stitch obviously has to appear in a Stitch-themed attraction right? And Stitch was created where? At the Walt Disney Feature Animation Florida Studio, just a few miles from the attraction, correct? Well apparently, since they're letting all the animators in Florida go, they're actually having to OUTSOURCE the Stitch animation for the Stitch attraction! So now probably somebody in Asia or somewhere is going to have to learn how to copy the animation of Stitch (probably the same people that do the Stitch TV show on the Disney channel), and then ship the whole thing to Florida, and probably ship pieces back and forth while it's being tweaked and everything (just my assumption there), when they had a whole team of animators just a few miles away who had already done the original movie! Talk about absurd and boneheaded......

 

[freediverdude]

Oh, and I just looked at the article again, and it says the Stitch attraction animation was outsourced to Renegade animation- I don't know if they make the TV show or not. If they don't, then they'll even have to learn how to draw the characters and everything from scratch.....talk about absurd.

 

[All Aboard]

Matt, thanks for noticing. I wasn't sure if anyone was going to get that joke.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by raidermatt
I missed this... who determined the only reason its a no-go is because of the story?

Really now, if that were the only reason, dontcha think something with a better story could be found? If others can find them, why can't Disney?

No, "Ghosts" weak story, real or perceived, had nothing to do with it.

Did I SAY "the only reason?" No. But I can see how might think that from my post, so I'll apologize and be much clearer next time. However, for you to say that the weak story "had nothing to do with it" is also incorrect. If "Ghosts" was a slam-bang, sure-fire, gonna-make-up-its-cost-in-the-first-weekend animated feature with a top-notch story and tons of merchandising opportunities, they wouldn't have stopped production regardless of the other things in play. It's not like "Ghosts" got handed to the California team. It was dropped totally. So, while the weak story may not be the ONLY reason, I would argue that it is a big PART of the reason.

They’ve been working on that film for years – first as “My Peoples”, then as something else (a title I can’t remember that had to do with "My Ugly Sister" or something like that) and finally as “A Few Good Ghosts.” They have played with the story. And, while there certainly are other stories out there, if you've got a group of animators working on something, they have no need to look for another story to work on. Because they're already working. When you cancel the film because after years of playing with the story, it's still not right, and all the other projects are already in the hands of someone else -- Burbank or contractors -- you don't just say, "Oh look ... here's something in the files ... let's get you all drawing this." And you don't just pull something away from a contractor and give it to Florida. Even the stuff that's in story development now is in California, because that's how it was scheduled.

Now if "Ghosts" had been a California film and killing it meant shutting down the Burbank studios rather than the Florida studios, do I think that would have happened? No. Because it's still cheaper and easier to have the animation studio right there in California. So Florida was probably doomed either way.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by raidermatt
Same point as my last post... there are plenty of potential projects out there.

Name one.

The pattern has been to do a film in California, then Florida, then California, then Florida. "Ghosts" was the Florida film that was in development. Whatever Florida was planning to work on AFTER "Ghosts" had not yet been announced or handed off. So, when "Ghosts" went away, there was nothing else to work on. I suppose they could have taken a project away from the Burbank Studios and given it to Florida just to keep them open, but then you're putting California animators out of work for the sake of keeping Florida animators working. You don't win either way. And if your company base of operations is in California and you're trying to reign in costs, you don't take work away from CA and send it to FL.

As for Disney "not doing either" ..... "Chicken Little" (coming to a theatre near you in 2005) is the first Disney-made, CGI animated film. "Home on the Range" (this year) is also a Disney-made (2d, made in California) film. So it's not like Disney isn't still creating their own core product. They're just not doing all of it in-house. (And no, I don't think they should be outsourcing everything that they're outsourcing, but your argument is that they're not doing anything, and I'm refuting that.)

 

[Bill3]

Disney was making so much money with this animation studio and the tour was so popular that they could not handle the crowds it was generating.It was creating quite a traffic flow problem. So in spite of incredible crowds for the tour and huge profits from the animators Disney will close.You people still don't get it. If WDW thinks it is a viable attractin they will keep it going. You don't see them closing down th Tower Of Terror.We can lament all we want about the old days, but the old days were becoming less and less popular. People who read DIS are not "regular", we are fanatical about all things Disney. I think we represent a very small portion of the regular paying public.

 

[Luv2Roam]

Rumor I heard just yesterday -- Some FL animators are starting up their own animation company. Legends.
More power to them if that is correct.

 

[Another Voice]

"If WDW thinks it is a viable attractin they will keep it going. You don't see them closing down th Tower Of Terror."

Sometimes all you can do is shake your head and worry for the future of the republic.

 

[mitros]

Well, make what you will of it, but we just returned from 2 days at WDW. We walked around MGM and talked to a lot of CMs. The folks working in the stores were very upset about the situation of all the animators being layed off. Some of them were spitting mad when they spoke of Ei$ner. They blame him for all of the problems plaguing the Walt Disney company today. A lot of these folks lost friends in this layoff. It could be wishfull thinking on their part perhaps, but they all think something is going to break soon regarding Ei$ners position with the company. One person in particular was adamant about Ei$ner not saving the Disney company per-say in the first place. He said that it was Roy Disney and his people that fought off the takeover back in the early 80's by outsiders. They bought Michael Ei$ner in as a replacement for the head of the studio back then. So, according to him, technically Ei$ner did not "save" the company, he came in a ran it once Roy fought off the raiders.. We also talked to CM's back at the animation studios and they were a little more low key in the Ei$ner bashing department. Ther take was that "it's not over yet". But they also said in the meantime, they were just by-passing the last part of the tour regarding the on-site animators {who of course, are not there anymore} But they looked very unhappy, and were talking to each other in hushed tones in the corners. Anyway, this is what we heard and observed on Tuesday. And it is true that a group of former Disney animators have started their own studio.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by mitros
Well, make what you will of it, but we just returned from 2 days at WDW. We walked around MGM and talked to a lot of CMs. The folks working in the stores were very upset about the situation of all the animators being layed off. Some of them were spitting mad when they spoke of Ei$ner. They blame him for all of the problems plaguing the Walt Disney company today.

This type of cast member has always fascinated me. The type who will spout off about the company to guests. No one is forcing them to work at WDW. And if they don't like working for Disney, then they should quit and find a place to work where they're not spitting mad at management. It's not like there aren't other places to work in Central Florida. But if they don't want to quit, then they should save their opinions for their own time and do their job when they're at work. And their job, I thought, was to maintain the Disney magic and put forth the philosophies and standards set by Walt. If Walt were to walk by and find some cast member criticizing the company to a guest, that CM would be fired before they could finish ringing up the sale. But now it's seen as okay.

 

[Another Voice]

I believe the old joke goes "the beatings will stop when morale improves."

There was a time when most people actually were happy to work for Disney. The Company treated them with respect and you could be proud of what the company produced.

And now it comes done to a fan demanding that employees be hammered into submission.

Oh - what a happy place it is.

 

[WDSearcher]

Originally posted by Another Voice
I believe the old joke goes "the beatings will stop when morale improves."

There was a time when most people actually were happy to work for Disney. The Company treated them with respect and you could be proud of what the company produced.

And now it comes done to a fan demanding that employees be hammered into submission.

Oh - what a happy place it is.

I don't believe I ever said they should be "hammered into submission." I just think they should do their job. And I'm thinking that the job description of a cashier or attractions host or greeter or character at WDW probably doesn't include slamming the company in front of guests. I'm on vacation at Disney -- I don't need to hear why someone hates their job or their company. Just like I don't need to hear the guy at the bank talk about how long his hours are when I'm making a deposit, or the car dealer talking about how his commission got cut while I'm trying to get my car serviced.

There are a lot of people who don't like where they work, for a myriad of reasons. My point is that if they don't like it, they should find a job they DO like. And if they don't want to go back out into the job market and they choose to stay where they are, then they should treat their customers with respect and save the grousing for after work.

 

[raidermatt]

If its offered unsolicited, yes, its VERY bad show. If a guest asks and a CM talks, its still bad show, but to a lesser degree.

Regardless, yes its bad, and yes each individual CM should take the responsibility for themselves.

That said, when so many of the employees that touch the public are doing this, a company must also ask why its happening. Sure, there will always be a few malcontents that slipped through and haven't been weeded out yet, but the issues at Disney are much more than just the unavoidable percentage of goobers.

The root cause is the responsibility of the company.

So, when "Ghosts" went away, there was nothing else to work on.

There's nothing to work on because they weren't given anything to work on (maybe allowed to work on is a better term). Its like not stocking the shelves in a store and then closing it because it has nothing to sell.

DISNEY might not have enough projects, but that's simply because they choose not to do them.

 

[mitros]

To rectify things a little bit, we were not approached by CMs who said Eisner" stinks" and" hoist his head on a spear" or anything like that. What we did was walk around MGM talking to CMs, and asking them what their opinion was of what just happened less then 24 hours ago. And at the same time, asked them of their opinion of Eisner and the direction the company was going. I have to admit CMs tongues have become very loose in recent months, and they were not afraid to give their opinions as to what they thought was happening to their once beloved company {one of a CMs descriptions, not mine} The reason these folks are so upset is because they do love the company and enjoy the work they do and are quite concerned about what they perceive as a threat from an employer that they once enjoyed working for. I suspect the CMs at MGM are particularly upset because they feel that their positions can also be in jeopardy.

 

[Another Voice]

Of course bad-mouthing employees is bad show.

It's a question about how the company maintains a good show.

Does it treat their employees with respect and provide an environment where people actually enjoy their job and are truely happy - or does it brow beat them with "Greet Every Guest With A Smile!!" sign you see plastered up behind the counter at fast food restaurants throughout the country?

It's impossible to fill out a workforce the size of WDW and have everyone be pleasant if it's only a show. You can't find that many good actors to run the attractions, shops and merchanside locations. The only way you can make it work is to have truely happy employees.

The "shut-up and do your job" attitude only covers a problem instead of fixing it. If the cast members don't say anything, then that frustration will find an outlet elsewhere: people not "going the extra step", higher turnover, fewer applicants (which drives up wages), less attention to detail.

It would be interesting to find out the number of WDW cast members who have expecations or desires of moving up in the company. When you burn out the rank-and-file you are also burning out the future leaders of the business.