Disney to Close Last Animation Studio?

[Stitch Inside]

Say it ain't so Joe.

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I just read it on Yahoo.

"Disney signature sadly passé

ANYONE who has enjoyed a Disney animated feature from the earliest "Steamboat Willie' and Mickey Mouse cartoons to the first-ever full- length animated feature "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' in 1937, to "Fantasia' in 1940, to "Jungle Book' in 1967, to 1990s hits "The Little Mermaid,' "Beauty and the Beast,' "Aladdin' and "The Lion King' has to be saddened by the news that in mid-2006 Walt Disney Co. will close its last studio creating hand-drawn animated feature films. The company cited a "changing creative climate and economic environment.'
Translated, that means computer-generated films are popular such as "Shrek,' "Finding Nemo,' "Toy Story,' "Chicken Run,' "Monsters, Inc.' and "Robots' and they can be produced faster (and, thus, more cheaply) than painstaking hand- drawn animation.

But Disney is mistaking the reason for the recent popularity of computer-generated films. It's in the clever dialogue that appeals to adults and kids, appealing characters, a good story line and not primarily the style of animation. Those movies would be just as good with hand-drawn animation.

Recent hand-drawn flops, such as "Treasure Island,' failed not because of the animation but because the writing was bad. Does anyone believe computer- generated animation is artistically superior to hand-drawn animation? Certainly, it's different, but it's not better.

In a world where time equals money, it is the thousands of hours of drawing and painting it takes to produce hand-drawn animation that has killed Disney's signature art form. Its impending death means that an era of fine craftsmanship is over.

The Sacramento Bee"

 

[peter11435]

Say it ain't so Joe.

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I just read it on Yahoo.

"Disney signature sadly passé

ANYONE who has enjoyed a Disney animated feature from the earliest "Steamboat Willie' and Mickey Mouse cartoons to the first-ever full- length animated feature "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' in 1937, to "Fantasia' in 1940, to "Jungle Book' in 1967, to 1990s hits "The Little Mermaid,' "Beauty and the Beast,' "Aladdin' and "The Lion King' has to be saddened by the news that in mid-2006 Walt Disney Co. will close its last studio creating hand-drawn animated feature films. The company cited a "changing creative climate and economic environment.'
Translated, that means computer-generated films are popular such as "Shrek,' "Finding Nemo,' "Toy Story,' "Chicken Run,' "Monsters, Inc.' and "Robots' and they can be produced faster (and, thus, more cheaply) than painstaking hand- drawn animation.

But Disney is mistaking the reason for the recent popularity of computer-generated films. It's in the clever dialogue that appeals to adults and kids, appealing characters, a good story line and not primarily the style of animation. Those movies would be just as good with hand-drawn animation.

Recent hand-drawn flops, such as "Treasure Island,' failed not because of the animation but because the writing was bad. Does anyone believe computer- generated animation is artistically superior to hand-drawn animation? Certainly, it's different, but it's not better.

In a world where time equals money, it is the thousands of hours of drawing and painting it takes to produce hand-drawn animation that has killed Disney's signature art form. Its impending death means that an era of fine craftsmanship is over.

The Sacramento Bee"

While I agree with most of your thoughts. The fact is that CGI is not much cheaper than traditional animation, and while it does take slightly less time to produce the difference in time is not drastic.

 

[Above_the_Rim]

Say it ain't so Joe.

Sorry if this has already been addressed, but I just read it on Yahoo.

"Disney signature sadly passé

ANYONE who has enjoyed a Disney animated feature from the earliest "Steamboat Willie' and Mickey Mouse cartoons to the first-ever full- length animated feature "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs' in 1937, to "Fantasia' in 1940, to "Jungle Book' in 1967, to 1990s hits "The Little Mermaid,' "Beauty and the Beast,' "Aladdin' and "The Lion King' has to be saddened by the news that in mid-2006 Walt Disney Co. will close its last studio creating hand-drawn animated feature films. The company cited a "changing creative climate and economic environment.'
Translated, that means computer-generated films are popular such as "Shrek,' "Finding Nemo,' "Toy Story,' "Chicken Run,' "Monsters, Inc.' and "Robots' and they can be produced faster (and, thus, more cheaply) than painstaking hand- drawn animation.

But Disney is mistaking the reason for the recent popularity of computer-generated films. It's in the clever dialogue that appeals to adults and kids, appealing characters, a good story line and not primarily the style of animation. Those movies would be just as good with hand-drawn animation.

Recent hand-drawn flops, such as "Treasure Island,' failed not because of the animation but because the writing was bad. Does anyone believe computer- generated animation is artistically superior to hand-drawn animation? Certainly, it's different, but it's not better.

In a world where time equals money, it is the thousands of hours of drawing and painting it takes to produce hand-drawn animation that has killed Disney's signature art form. Its impending death means that an era of fine craftsmanship is over.

The Sacramento Bee"

Who wrote this article? Chicken Run wasn't at all CGI, and Corpse Bride and Wallace and Grommit coming up arent CGI either. And hand drawn animation really isn't to painstaking or any of that, you practice and learn how to do it. To people who cant do it they might see it as hard labor, but for experts at it it can be fast and easy.