Interesting Pixar article, has Pixar changed animation forever??

Bob O

<font color=navy>Voice of Reason<br><font color=re
Joined
Mar 2, 2000
Messages
2,508
Look, No Hands: Pixar's Killer App
By ELVIS MITCHELL

Published: April 25, 2004

OME ON THE RANGE" is only the latest example of an old-fashioned, line-drawn animated feature that lands with a thud at the box office. Like many recent hand-drawn cartoons, "Home on the Range" didn't take a lesson from Pixar: "It's all about presence, and how you enter the room," as one of the creatures in "Monsters, Inc." says. Although the statement is meant as parody — especially as uttered by James Coburn, in the portentous, velveteen tones of an "Inside the Actors Studio" interview — it could also refer to the way Pixar bestrides the cartooniverse these days.

Every few decades an entire field of filmmaking ends because of a single technical innovation. "The Jazz Singer" finished off silents by popularizing synchronized-sound movies. The introduction of Technicolor has been slowly choking off black-and-white pictures, with the exception of the odd music video or art-house film. And now, because of the successive digitally animated box-office winners from Pixar — "Toy Story," "A Bug's Life," "Toy Story 2," "Monsters, Inc" and "Finding Nemo" — hand-drawn animation seems to be on the way to theatrical obsolescence. "Home on the Range" followed the box-office duds "Sinbad," "Treasure Planet," "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron" and "Atlantis: The Lost Empire."

Even features that tried to blend pen-and-ink drawing with digital animation, like "Titan A. E.," couldn't attract audiences. So, the form that is one of America's few contributions to artistic expression, the hand-drawn cartoon, could soon go the way of the single-screen theater, the drive-in and Michael Jackson's credibility. The belief now is that kids are no longer interested in line-drawn animation features, and that computer-generated stuff is the way to go. It seems incredible that this movement away from traditional cartoons comes at a time when live-action movies are more like cartoons than ever; the trailer for the coming sci-fi film "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" (starring Gwyneth Paltrow and Jude Law) includes a scene of evil flying robots filling the skies that's lifted right out of the Fleischer brothers' gorgeous 1941 Expressionist Superman cartoon, "Mechanical Monsters."

What the leap into the hard drives of computer cartooning ignores is that the technology has been most successful in the hands of one studio: Pixar, where John Lasseter and his team of writers and animators have ingeniously and skillfully exploited the strengths of the technology in a series of films that now have a built-in audience. Surrendering the old ways of animation because of one house's success with the new would be akin to the studios' giving up on action movies because of Joel Silver's preoccupation with them — and that hasn't happened yet.

Mr. Lasseter directed "Toy Story" and its sequel, "Toy Story 2," and "A Bug's Life." He and his team deserve the praise accorded Pixar; their films display both the care they invest in their creations and an apparently intuitive understanding of the cartoon. All the Pixar features share a sense of wonder, which befits onscreen figures that don't quite look real. At some point, they all gaze up at a world much grander than anything they've ever imagined — that's a story point in all of the movies, and gaining an understanding of one's place in the scheme of things is the subtext of most successful fairy tales. (It also helps that most of the Pixar characters have the sleek, clean design of toys — most of the creations might as well have manufacturers' names stamped on their necks.)

The protagonists in the Pixar movies approximate the naïveté of the young audiences, while the narratives of the Pixar features communicate a sophistication that makers of presumably more adult fare should envy. The last scene of "Toy Story 2," in which a pair of playthings — Woody and Buzz Lightyear — reflect on their adventures, their bond cemented by a good-humored weariness, wouldn't be out of place in "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon" or "Rio Bravo." When a cartoon can genuinely evoke such summary worldliness without over-emphasis, it's a tribute to the moviemaking gifts of those behind it, as well as their marrow-deep comprehension of film tradition.

Mr. Lasseter was a consultant on the English-language version of "Spirited Away," the full-length animation film from another master, Hayao Miyazaki. The Pixar creative squad imposes a consistency on its products that recalls the majestic use of mystery, comedy and fear that Mr. Miyazaki displays in his work. Another brand of savvy comes into play, too, since Mr. Lasseter has chosen to recast Pixar as a family-friendly studio. In the version of the aqua-themed short "Knick Knack" that preceded "Finding Nemo" in theaters last year, the snowman trapped in a snow globe develops a crush on a similarly housed bathing beauty who has very obviously had breast reduction surgery: in the original 1989 "Knick Knack," she had the kind of comically enhanced upper carriage that could easily win her a slot on Fox's better-beauty-through-science reality series, "The Swan." Her less-pneumatic look in the revision is surely a concession to the family trade. (Intriguingly, the time-stamp limits of the technology are evident in "Knick Knack" — it looks like a screen-saver, now that its once state-of-the-art vibrancy has dated. Even the first "Toy Story" appears quaint and slightly rusty, as computer animation has become denser and richer.)

Pixar has brought more than a new technique to its films; it's brought that philosophy — making awe and curiosity part of the plot without condescension — as well. This is evident in looking back at all of them. And it's not so easy to imitate — which will become obvious when others eventually grind out knockoffs that crash to the bottom of the box-office charts. What animation comes down to, as does any other film genre, is the vision of those making it. This is why the old-fashioned hand-drawn works, in the right hands, can still dazzle an audience, as the imaginative and fluid "Lilo and Stitch" (2002) proved. That's the lesson studios should be taking from all of this. As Mr. Lasseter knows, it's all about presence.
 
As the younger "kids" that are used to video/computer games ages, I think we'll see less and less traditional animation. They are used to the "look and feel" of CGI. The world changes, whether we like it or not.
 
Indeed it does. I wish that this market shift wasn't happening, but it is. I don't, however, see hand drawn leaving forever - it may survive as a niche market. But in the current climate, I suspect that Brother Bear may be seen as the last fanfare to a wonderful genre (HotR doesn't count! ;) )



Rich::
 
This success- is-determined-by-the-format argument just doesn't wash with me. I still believe story matters so much more. My DSs and DD loved the Pixar stories and characters. Nemo was amazing to watch-visually, but that's not why they keep coming back. I have absolutely noooo desire to see HOTR because it just sounds dopey, not because it is or isn't hand drawn. Roseanne stopped appealing to me in about 1989. I'm not exactly holding my breath waiting for ChickenLittle, either.

I'd like to be wrong. We really liked Brother Bear, although I don't know if there's a DVD in our future.


And to further my story rant... how did Disney proper miss out on Ella Enchanted? Miramax got a homerun on that one. Too bad it doesn't have the full marketing machine behind it.
 

The writer seems to be making counter-arguments. First he suggests early in the article that hand-drawn animation is on the way out, that it "could soon go the way of the single-screen theater". In the last paragraph, though, he notes that it all comes down to "vision" (perhaps what we call "story" in our debates) and that "old-fashioned hand-drawn works, in the right hands". I think he is siding with the "it all comes down to story" argument, but it sure doesn't sound like it early on.

I haven't seen Home on the Range yet, but I loved some of the other less-successful hand-drawns, like Emperor's New Groove (I still think it's one of the funniest movies out there, period!) Until the success of Nemo, I had a theory that the movies with good music and good story were the right formula, but there's not alot of memorable music in Nemo, so perhaps that theory is shot down.
 
rwodonnell, your point regarding music is a good one. When we travel, the DSs and DW watch Spirit almost every trip and rewind the "breaking scene" over and over until DH has had enough because they love that Bryan Adams song. We all came home singing "tell everybody I'm on my way..." after Brother Bear. Disney music is part of the package; if they're going to skimp on story and lose that, then we're all doomed to hike it on over to Universal. They've got Cheap Trick.

Someone made a really good point on the Incredibles or Chicken Little thread hoping that the assumption does not become that a film will or won't makeit based solely on its format; I'd wished I'd said it first.
 
Story, design and music do all matter, but the format is still prime over all due to the sad reality known as trends.

Attitudes all change - but as I said, they ever fully go away. I can see CG taking over for a while, but as it is in itself a technology superceded from the very start (by real life :p ) it is bound to end up - think - as an eventual companion to hand drawn, IF no new fad kicks in during the mean time.

Leastways, I HOPE it'll end up as an equal to hand drawn - I don't want to see this particular tradition going any ime soon as it still has so much charm about it :)

ps. Open iTunes, click on Music Store, then Disney, then Finding Nemo. Play the first track. Personally, I think it's beautiful. Not all soundtracks need to be like Snatch to make an impact :)



Rich::
 
I think it's also about the story though. We finally took our kids to see HOTR this weekend. I was completely disappointed. The kids liked it a lot, BUT it just didn't have the story of the past Disney Movies such as Lion King, or Oliver & Co. or basically many of the movies of the past. They relied on a lot of cheap jokes and not to involving characters. Lilo & Stitch was regular animation and did very well, but most people really liked the story. So therefore people told other people and it did well.

The pixar movies all have an amazing look ,but beyond that the stories were all fantastic. That's what made me go see them and then buy the DVD's.
 
The article seems all over the map when it comes to opinion, but I agree that the vision behind the movie is what is the difference between a seller and a failure. Look at live action. Not every movie makes it, no matter what A list star is in it, because of the story. If it was just the format, Tron would have been as popular and well received as Last Starfighter.

Lasseter has that vision and it's very evident that he has a deep understanding of not only story, but the ability to create a film that spans the ages. Kids can find fun in their films, as well as adults. It's the adults that buy the tickets, and spread the word, not the kids, so it's important to be able to entertain them too. Pixar understands this. Disney no longer does since Katzenburg left. It's an important balance.

No matter what the format of the film (and computer animators will be the first to tell you that they want to make the techique as seamless as possible), without the proper vision and story that people can relate to, then it's all in vain.
 
Spirit is not a Disney movie.

I agree story and music are both much more of a driving factor that animation type.
 
I think it's all music and story. I'm a teenager myself, and when I participate in sports etc. at my school, most of the time the songs we sing on the bus are well known verses from movies we watched when we were little. "Part of Your World" and "Colors of the Wind" are practically what made the movies what they are. My friends and I a couple years ago went to see Lilo and Stitch, and although it was asthetically pleasing, every song we heard was Elvis, not our Elton. Disney Music=Disney Movies. That's why I loved Brother Bear as much as I did because it brought back some musical charm. And I also would like to point out, that although some of the movies lack Disney music, I still loved them because of the story. I LOVED Atlantis: The Lost Empire, I bought it the first day it came out on VHS and I still watch it on weekends occasionally. Disney is just so addicting.:earseek:
 
Bob,

Where's this article from?

The reason I ask is that it sounds like a heavy solicitation coming from within the company.

To me, in order for animation to succeed as a feature film at today's box office, it must include the dimensions and texture provided through 3D. That doesn't mean that somewhere in the future, a traditional classic can't be reborn on the big screen - it just means that the market has indelibly shifted.

Lasseter had a vision and jumped in this direction decades ago. He was absolutely right.
 












Receive up to $1,000 in Onboard Credit and a Gift Basket!
That’s right — when you book your Disney Cruise with Dreams Unlimited Travel, you’ll receive incredible shipboard credits to spend during your vacation!
CLICK HERE






DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter DIS Bluesky

Back
Top Bottom