Walt Disney rescues hand-drawn animation

[BRERALEX]

I did not use the search function

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070208/film_nm/disney_animation_dc

By Gina Keating
Thu Feb 8, 6:45 PM ET



LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Hand-drawn animation, out of fashion in the computer age, experienced a rescue worthy of a fairy tale on Thursday, when Walt Disney animators announced they would bring back the art form to the big screen.


"We will be bringing back hand-drawn (two-dimensional) films," said Disney's Ed Catmull, the President of Pixar and Disney Feature Animation.

Animators refer to hand-drawn animation as "two dimensional," as opposed to computer-generated animation, referred to as 3D.

Pixar created "Toy Story" and other computer animation hits, but was acquired by Walt Disney Co. last year.

Speculation has swirled since then over whether Catmull and Chief Creative Officer John Lasseter, who took control of the ailing Disney animation facility, would reestablish the art form that made Disney the world's preeminenent animator.

All of Disney's feature animation films in production at the time of the Pixar deal were computer animated.

"Now that's we're a year into it, people want to know how it's going," Catmull told analysts at a Disney conference monitored by Web cast. He said Disney would do both computer animation and hand-drawn animation.

Lasseter spent several years as a Disney animator, but left over creative differences to form Pixar, where he was considered the main creative force. He revered Walt Disney, who with a group of legendary animators known as the "Nine Old Men," made such hand-drawn classics as "Cinderella" and "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs."

When Disney bought Pixar to try to revive its flagging animation program, Catmull and Lasseter took charge of both studios, which are run separately.

At least 300 Disney animation staff were laid off or reassigned in the months following the leadership change.

Catmull and Lasseter gave the first descriptions on Thursday on how they reshaped story lines of Disney films already in production, canceled others and restructured how the Disney artists work.

"Pixar is still Pixar -- nobody left," Catmull said. "At Disney, you have these remarkable artists there ... they were not kneaded together in the right way. At the heart of it there has to be a director and the director has to have a vision."

Catmull said there were no plans to merge the studios or to limit them to a certain type of animation.

"We always believed that quality is the best business plan," he said.

He and Lasseter showed clips from upcoming films, including "Ratatouille," "Meet the Robinsons," "Wall-E," "American Dog" and "Toy Story 3."

 

[DancingBear]

So Toy Story 3 really is on again!

 

[GrimGhost]

"We always believed that quality is the best business plan," Ed Catmull

It almost brings a tear to the eye.

 

[BRERALEX]

aintitcool is saying they found test footage of ratatoiouououew

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31519

and some TS3 "news"

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/31518

beware of language etc.

 

[ravenscroft1999]

"We always believed that quality is the best business plan,"

Somewhere up in heaven, Walt is smiling

 

[luv2nascar]

Me Too

 

[I'mNoPrince]

"We always believed that quality is the best business plan,"

Somewhere up in heaven, Walt is smiling

And so are we down here as well.

I have to say they have been real big on this as of late. Delaying openings of rides and attractions,DVD releases and other things that show they are trying their hardest to put out a Quality Product .

As much as I want to see new things ,I want to see them in a form worth looking at. They are listening to their Test groups and making changes where needed .

 

[Mickmse2002]

"We always believed that quality is the best business plan,"

Somewhere up in heaven, Walt is smiling

The only problem with this statement is that Walt very much compromised quality in many of the animated movies the studio produced. If Neal Gabler's book is to be believed then Walt felt many of the Walt Disney Productions animations were junk and he was trying to figure out a way to stop making them.

 

[raidermatt]

To say he felt that way about many of the them contradicts just about every other account I've ever seen. That's why most of them took so darn long to make.

However, there was a period, mainly in the 40's, when he did make some compromises. But those were out of absolute neceesity, the studio was struggling to maintain financial viability because the featues were so expensive to make, then the European market was cutoff with the outbreak of WWII, and then the studio was taken over by the Army when America entered the war. Under the circumstances, they actually produced some very good work.

Now, I don't doubt that he was eventually wanting to devote more of his time to new endeavors, like first Disneyland and then his vision for E.P.C.O.T., because that's consistent with his personality, and that is in fact what he did.

But that's different than saying he didn't practice "quality is the best business plan."

 

[raidermatt]

As for the original topic, where are all those who said we were clueless for saying axing hand drawn animation was not a solution to anything? I assume that those who held that position are now going to be equally as crtical of Lasseter and Catmull?

 

[Mickmse2002]

To say he felt that way about many of the them contradicts just about every other account I've ever seen. That's why most of them took so darn long to make.

However, there was a period, mainly in the 40's, when he did make some compromises. But those were out of absolute neceesity, the studio was struggling to maintain financial viability because the featues were so expensive to make, then the European market was cutoff with the outbreak of WWII, and then the studio was taken over by the Army when America entered the war. Under the circumstances, they actually produced some very good work.

Now, I don't doubt that he was eventually wanting to devote more of his time to new endeavors, like first Disneyland and then his vision for E.P.C.O.T., because that's consistent with his personality, and that is in fact what he did.

But that's different than saying he didn't practice "quality is the best business plan."

I never said he didn't. What I do infer from this book, and others, is that due to many factors Walt didn't always "demand the highest quality" in order to complete an animated feature. And to attribute the length of time a feature took to complete and release was due to quality isn't entirely accurate either.

 

[raidermatt]

Ok, I haven't read Gabler's book yet, but I did find this Q and A from him on Amazon:

Q: One thing that strikes you when reading the book is that Walt Disney never had any money. With all his success how is that possible?
A: It is astonishing that Walt Disney was always--and I do mean always--in dire financial straits until the opening of Disneyland. The primary reason wasn't that his cartoons weren't making money, because they were--at least until the war in Europe when the loss of that market meant disaster for the features. But even as they were making money, the studio was losing money because Walt was constitutionally incapable of cutting corners, enforcing economies, laying off staff. The only thing about which Walt Disney cared was quality. He thought that quality was the way to maintain his preeminence, though quality also had the psychological advantage of letting him perfect his world. The problem was that quality was expensive. To cite just one example, Walt spent more than a hundred thousand dollars setting up a training program for would-be animators, though even then the return was small because Walt was so picky that very few of the candidates actually qualified to work at the studio. Money meant very little to Walt Disney. It was only a means to an end, never an end in itself.

I ask this seriously, because as I said I haven't read the book, but Gabler seems pretty clear on the point of what quality meant to Walt in his work. Certainly it would follow that he would appreciate a Disney exec who says "We always believed that quality is the best business plan,", wouldn't it?

I never said he didn't. What I do infer from this book, and others, is that due to many factors Walt didn't always "demand the highest quality" in order to complete an animated feature. And to attribute the length of time a feature took to complete and release was due to quality isn't entirely accurate either.

He demanded quality as far as fiscal viability would allow. How much more would he need to do so that we could say without qualification that he is smiling at the "quality is the best business plan" statement?

As far as length of time, of course there are varying factors depending on the situation. But its pretty well documented by those who worked with Walt that the length was often due to Walt's demands on quality. Not just in terms of technical quality, but also as it relates to the story/plot, etc.

 

[YoHo]

Anyone else find the title of this thread and the general statement that:
"Disney" is rescuing Hand Drawn to be comical since Disney in fact killed 2d.

Really it's Catmull and Lassiter who rescued it. Catmull and Lassiter who said before they were even bought by Disney that Hand Drawn was worth it. That never fell into the CGI bring in the money trap despite beign the leaders.

All Disney did was spend $7Billion to hire back people that new what they were doing. $7Billion they wouldn't have had to spend if they hadn't screwed up in the first place.

 

[Mickmse2002]

Ok, I haven't read Gabler's book yet, but I did find this Q and A from him on Amazon:



I ask this seriously, because as I said I haven't read the book, but Gabler seems pretty clear on the point of what quality meant to Walt in his work. Certainly it would follow that he would appreciate a Disney exec who says "We always believed that quality is the best business plan,", wouldn't it?




He demanded quality as far as fiscal viability would allow. How much more would he need to do so that we could say without qualification that he is smiling at the "quality is the best business plan" statement?

As far as length of time, of course there are varying factors depending on the situation. But its pretty well documented by those who worked with Walt that the length was often due to Walt's demands on quality. Not just in terms of technical quality, but also as it relates to the story/plot, etc.

That is a very interesting quote. His book states it very differently. Gabler goes to great lengths in explaining how Walt basically divorced himself from animations during the war years and then again during the planning and construction of Disneyland......basically leaving all of the production and direction to others. Gabler went so far as to say that Walt basically wanted to abandon feature animation altogether and do nothing but live action. (his conclusion, not mine). You should read his book. I thought it was a very well cited and researched book as compared to some others I have read.

 

[Another Voice]

But it wasn't Walt hated his animators or that he suddenly hated animation - he just found a new toy to play with. There's absolutely nothing to suggest that Walt's interest in quality every diminished - examples include the reshoots on 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea right in the middle of building Disneyland and Mary Poppins during the Disneyland expansion, World's Fair and Project X periods.

Walt knew that he wasn't going to be around forever. His efforts in animation were in trying to create a sustainable organization that would carry on his work. He also knew he wasn't the best animator around; his involvement with the process always came and went. He saw himself as more of a motivator and coach. When he thought people were doing a good job, he could leave them alone to carry on.

 

[Mickmse2002]

But it wasn't Walt hated his animators or that he suddenly hated animation - he just found a new toy to play with. There's absolutely nothing to suggest that Walt's interest in quality every diminished - examples include the reshoots on 20,000 Leagues Under The Sea right in the middle of building Disneyland and Mary Poppins during the Disneyland expansion, World's Fair and Project X periods.

I don't think anyone said that Walt hated his animators or animation? The point I was trying to address, and apparently some have seen it as attack on Uncle Walt, is that he may not be smiling down about the company "rescuing" hand drawn animation and that he did frequently compromise on quality in order to get a product out. He may not have liked doing so but he certainly did it.

 

[raidermatt]

The point I was trying to address, and apparently some have seen it as attack on Uncle Walt, is that he may not be smiling down about the company "rescuing" hand drawn animation and that he did frequently compromise on quality in order to get a product out. He may not have liked doing so but he certainly did it.

The compromises were out of absolute necessity.

Over the last 20 or so years, Disney management has been far quicker to compromise quality.

Hence the comments about Walt smiling at the "quality is the best business plan" statement. Its much more in line with his business philosophy as opposed to recent Disney company philosophy.

 

[Mickmse2002]

The compromises were out of absolute necessity.

Over the last 20 or so years, Disney management has been far quicker to compromise quality.

Hence the comments about Walt smiling at the "quality is the best business plan" statement. Its much more in line with his business philosophy as opposed to recent Disney company philosophy.

I don't think anyone would ever argue that "quality is the best business plan". Everyone wants quality. Quality is also subjective. Some people think NASCAR is a quality entertainment pursuit. I happen to think it is a ridiculus waste of time. It doesn't make me right, just opinionated. I agree that the compromises Walt made were of necessity, that's been one of my points all along.

Here's an interesting thought, perhaps for a different thread: if the Disney company of Walt's time wasn't forced to compromise on his vision of quality, would the company have survived to the present?

 

[raidermatt]

I don't think anyone would ever argue that "quality is the best business plan". Everyone wants quality. Quality is also subjective. Some people think NASCAR is a quality entertainment pursuit. I happen to think it is a ridiculus waste of time. It doesn't make me right, just opinionated. I agree that the compromises Walt made were of necessity, that's been one of my points all along.

Its just odd (to me) that you make the comment about the compromises in response to the "Walt is smiling" comments, which are the result of compromises not made out of necessity, but out of a conscious change in business plan.

There's lots of companies that don't subscribe to the quality plan. Sure, they give lip service to it, but it gets trumped more often by other concerns. Its a continuum, yes, but there are companies all along that continuum, and the hope of those who make the "Walt is smiling" comment is that Disney is moving back towards that higher quality end, which is where they used to be.

Here's an interesting thought, perhaps for a different thread: if the Disney company of Walt's time wasn't forced to compromise on his vision of quality, would the company have survived to the present?

Eh, we've never been afraid of tangents before. Why start now?

I'm not quite sure I understand the context of your question though.

Is the scenario that WWII never happened, and therefore The Studio could have continued as they had prior?

Or is it if the Studio had refused to compromise on their product despite WWII and all its impacts? If it's this one, its going to be tough to answer, as they didn't have much of a choice given that the Army showed up at their door on December 8th, 1941, I believe. But I suppose we could set that piece of it aside and just consider the economic impacts?

 

[Mickmse2002]

Its just odd (to me) that you make the comment about the compromises in response to the "Walt is smiling" comments, which are the result of compromises not made out of necessity, but out of a conscious change in business plan.

There's lots of companies that don't subscribe to the quality plan. Sure, they give lip service to it, but it gets trumped more often by other concerns. Its a continuum, yes, but there are companies all along that continuum, and the hope of those who make the "Walt is smiling" comment is that Disney is moving back towards that higher quality end, which is where they used to be.




Eh, we've never been afraid of tangents before. Why start now?

I'm not quite sure I understand the context of your question though.

Is the scenario that WWII never happened, and therefore The Studio could have continued as they had prior?

Or is it if the Studio had refused to compromise on their product despite WWII and all its impacts? If it's this one, its going to be tough to answer, as they didn't have much of a choice given that the Army showed up at their door on December 8th, 1941, I believe. But I suppose we could set that piece of it aside and just consider the economic impacts?

WWII was only one factor that caused Walt compromises on quality. The Studio was always in financial troubles forcing product to be issued when Walt wanted to continue tweaking and changing. Mine is a purely theoretical question: If no compromises on quality were made, could the company have survived? Given the difficulties it was experiencing, pre-, during, and post-WWII I tend to doubt it.