AnimationNation Forum

AnimationNation


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» AnimationNation   » General Discussion   » Bye bye cheapquels!!!

   
Author Topic: Bye bye cheapquels!!!
Striker
IE # 210
Member # 470

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Striker   Email Striker         Edit/Delete Post 
Looks like these dastardly tings have seen their end:

http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=pageone&article_no=3224

--------------------
Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open.
- Thomas Dewar

IP: Logged
droosan
IE # 4
Member # 2225

Icon 1 posted      Profile for droosan           Edit/Delete Post 
I guess the Tinkerbell and Winnie the Pooh DTV's aren't considered 'sequels', then .. because those are still going strong.

But this is good news. [Yes]

I'll bet mbaker is dancing in the streets! [tipsy]

IP: Logged
SoleilSmile
IE # 120
Member # 1483

Icon 11 posted      Profile for SoleilSmile   Author's Homepage   Email SoleilSmile         Edit/Delete Post 
Perhaps there will be a new shorts program.

I don't feel one way or another about the sequels. It was a way to work for Disney and on something that could appeal to the light hearted while you were still a bit of a novice or in a liminal state between TV and feature animation. I guess when everyone at Disney Toons is laid off, they'll have to work on the Family Guy which is the only ongoing gig in town these days....as well as other projects of that genre.
I really hope there will something for people who want to work for Disney or Disney-like genres to cut their teeth on, because you'll never get into Disney drawing characters as simple as Peter what's-his-name and Homer Simpson.

--------------------
HipChick Comics and Animatress Blog

www.hipchickcomics.com
http://www.animatress.blogspot.com/

IP: Logged
droosan
IE # 4
Member # 2225

Icon 1 posted      Profile for droosan           Edit/Delete Post 
The way I read the article, DisneyToons still exists; DTV's will continue to be made .. they just won't be making any 'sequels'. But apparently, 'spin-offs' are unaffected; Fairies is still in production, after all.

I have several friends who work/have worked for DisneyToons; I've even applied there, myself (but didn't make it in).

By saying that this is 'good news', I certainly didn't mean to imply that I wish to see DisneyToons shut down .. only that I'm glad they're shifting their focus from making 'sequels' to 40+ year-old movies, to something (hopefully) more original and exciting. [Smile]

IP: Logged
SoleilSmile
IE # 120
Member # 1483

Icon 1 posted      Profile for SoleilSmile   Author's Homepage   Email SoleilSmile         Edit/Delete Post 
I know what you and the original poster meant Droosey. I just wanted to state what a great training ground potential feature animation caliber artist artists had with the "cheapquels".
An Extremely Goofy Movie was one of my favorite projects. Disney Toons worked like a feature division where they me let me go out and research people for my character designs and let me talk to my fellow crew members so I could really sink in to the project. You can't do that on a Futurama schedule, where artists are barley allowed to leave their desks to relieve themselves, let alone converse with their peers for advice. You have to already BE a Family Guy character in real life so you can hit the ground running, acting wise, after you're hired. There's no time to grow into your role(s).
And I'm sorry, I would NEVER want to be a Family Guy character in real life...

I'm more of a Tinkerbell


Kittens and Unicorns,

Soleil

--------------------
HipChick Comics and Animatress Blog

www.hipchickcomics.com
http://www.animatress.blogspot.com/

IP: Logged
Jasen
IE # 129
Member # 2721

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Jasen   Author's Homepage   Email Jasen         Edit/Delete Post 
This might cause my vision to clear up because whenever I seen a number 2 or 3 behind an animated DVD, it would cause a strange uncontrollable nervous reaction causing both eye pupils to roll back into my skull.

--------------------
http://jasenstrong.artstooge.com/
http://jasenstrong.blogspot.com/

IP: Logged
Jasen
IE # 129
Member # 2721

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Jasen   Author's Homepage   Email Jasen         Edit/Delete Post 
We might be on a roll here... let's see if we can also stop movies like Underdog and alike.

--------------------
http://jasenstrong.artstooge.com/
http://jasenstrong.blogspot.com/

IP: Logged
Semaj
Member
Member # 3131

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Semaj   Email Semaj         Edit/Delete Post 
At least now, Disney has taken a step towards demolishing their reputation as a company that makes crappy babysitter movies that sell big at your nearest Wal-Mart. We all know that THAT'S not what Disney is about.

I don't think spin-offs will be a real problem. Some spin-offs were done back in the olden days, weren't day? I still remember those educational shorts starring Jiminy Cricket, and the few times Figaro co-starred with Pluto and Minnie. Of course now, they have to figure out how to make these DVD stories appeal to more than just a limited child demographic.

IP: Logged
andim8
IE # 232
Member # 626

Icon 1 posted      Profile for andim8   Email andim8         Edit/Delete Post 
For those of us feature animators who didnt have anywhere to go after the big lay off, disneytoons was a good home . We still got to draw. i have my own issues with sequels, especially to movies from the golden age, but this division kept many artists who didnt want to go digital, in work, benefits and working on a fairly high standard of animation. while we would all prefer to work on original content, i havent seen too many people decrying shreks with various numerals behind it...no.4 being in the planning stages, or any number of cg movies that spawned sequels.
and i am much fonder of the little Mermaid sequel I'm working on than the embarassing bomb that Home on the Range turned out to be. i, for one, am immensely grateful that we had the chance for a few years, to work in our chosen field, be paid a decent wage and stay part of disney.

IP: Logged
SoleilSmile
IE # 120
Member # 1483

Icon 1 posted      Profile for SoleilSmile   Author's Homepage   Email SoleilSmile         Edit/Delete Post 
Bravo Eliza!...or Henry Higgins.
Yet...
Now perhaps you'll be able to work on some really beautiful SHORTS. I miss Disney shorts. I still have yet to chance upon them on DVD.
Remember the Reluctant Dragon? Pigs is Pigs? It's Tough to be a Bird? Perhaps everyone at DTV?Disney Toons will be able to work on more treasures like those in addition to the spinoffs.

Good Luck!

I hope to join you one day soon!

--------------------
HipChick Comics and Animatress Blog

www.hipchickcomics.com
http://www.animatress.blogspot.com/

IP: Logged
Matt Wilson
IE # 139
Member # 1520

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Matt Wilson   Author's Homepage   Email Matt Wilson         Edit/Delete Post 
I do think Disney is trying to revive the concept of worldwide theatrical shorts... they showed Boat Builders and Working For Peanuts behind Meet the Robinsons and they're developing new Goofy material.

Makes me wish that Warner didn't completely abandon the 2004 Looney Tunes before they had a chance to get off the ground. I remember Doyle wanted to start a brand new slate of Merry Melodies shorts but they never even got that far. I think only one of the shorts actually premiered in an American theater and the rest were dumped off to DVD.

I never minded the concept of animated sequels, but Lasseter hit the nail on the head when he demanded purpose. Did a second Hunchback film have to be made, for example? Was it a story that absolutely could not be left on the drawing board? It seemed like the films had no purpose other than the sake of existing.

I didn't understand why that division couldn't have cooked up new, original properties for their DTV movies. If you think about it, it's a much smaller budget, and a much smaller risk. Why not break a few eggs? Rather than put all those eggs into one basket with the features? That's all I'm wondering.

IP: Logged
Steve G
IE # 12
Member # 169

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Steve G   Author's Homepage   Email Steve G         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
I never minded the concept of animated sequels, but Lasseter hit the nail on the head when he demanded purpose. Did a second Hunchback film have to be made, for example? Was it a story that absolutely could not be left on the drawing board? It seemed like the films had no purpose other than the sake of existing.
Actually the same could be said of any sequel including Godfather2. A film is usually designe with a specific character/story arc and conflict in mind and a resolution. When that resolution is acheived than those characters have served their purpose and a brand new set of problems (that usually didn't exhist in the original) have to be imagined/created and dealt with.

And to be even more specific to your example of HoND - due to the story that Disney created in the original it could be argued that there could be a need for a sequel since, for once, the hero/main character hadn't found a specific person to have a 'happily ever after' with. Maybe they were reaching for loftier story/character goals than that, but it still remains that there still seemed to be some story that could be told.
Whether what the DTV came up with was worth it or not doesn't change the fact that unlike many of Disney's films (especially the fairytales) the story could continue. There are others that a sequel seems more natural, but I agree that many didn't need them - including Toystory.

--------------------
http://stevenegordon.blogspot.com
http://stevenegordon.com

IP: Logged
Methuselah
IE # 148
Member # 401

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Methuselah   Email Methuselah         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
i havent seen too many people decrying shreks with various numerals behind it...
You haven't read too many AN shrek threads, have you?. [Big Grin]

Seriously, the reason the direct to videos were done wasn't that there was any crying need for a Hunchback 2...it was all merchandising . Remember, that was the era of a former Disney Stores exec running the world's best theme park, gutting areas of charm in favor of endless venues to sell t shirts while cutting spending on things like employees and maintenance. They pushed and pushed stacks of Pooh shirts until they oversaturated the park and blew it, turning off many visitors who'd come for something special.

Merchandising. Something that companies need to grease the wheels, yes, but not a tail that should wag the dog. Artists know that if you build a great film experience(or a great TV show), toys and licensing will follow. The videos were simply ways of keeping characters on the shelves while spending a tiny fraction of the cost of an original feaure film. The fact that they required and often got above average and sometimes top talents working on them wasn't here or there to the people who greenlit the dtvs in those days.

Things are different now.

IP: Logged
JATG
IE # 29
Member # 65

Icon 1 posted      Profile for JATG   Author's Homepage   Email JATG         Edit/Delete Post 
There are plenty of films I'd love to see coming from Disney in a not necessarily theater release:

I want a Duck Tales movie!
Heck, I want a GizmoDuck movie!

A Rescue Rangers movie? You betcha!

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing what Bernard and Bianca are up to these days. Gotta love the Rescue Aid Society.

There are plenty of characters and stories to tell without tacking a "2" on the end of a fairy tale that has already spun its yarn.

IP: Logged
Semaj
Member
Member # 3131

Icon 10 posted      Profile for Semaj   Email Semaj         Edit/Delete Post 
The best part about this news is that I no longer have to wonder if they're making a Pinocchio sequel.
IP: Logged
mbaker
Member
Member # 2012

Icon 1 posted      Profile for mbaker   Email mbaker         Edit/Delete Post 
Now all we need is for Disney would put an end to all the 'Lizzie McGuire', 'That's So Raven', and 'High School Musical' garbage, and maybe, just maybe, they'll finally get back on the right track.
IP: Logged
Doodles
Member
Member # 565

Icon 1 posted      Profile for Doodles   Email Doodles         Edit/Delete Post 
Actually, mbaker, Disney has been doing live action TV that focuses on that particular age range as far back as the 1950's (MIC-KEY MOUSE CLUB, MIC-KEY MOUSE CLUB), so their present offerings are right in line with that philosophy. And they're the only group putting on such a volume of work on a daily basis, as opposed to just one or two shows on a Saturday morning (when not pre-empted by sports), so to them it's a virtual lock.

JTAG, I'd say you're a decade too late for most of the ideas you'd like to see. I'd love to see them, too, but we're just too small a group to make such things worth putting in an A-level effort into the production. Or even C-level. And that would mean that whatever gets created would end up diminishing rather than enhancing our memories of the original shows. (I mean, if I had my druthers I'd like them to do a Gummi Bears flick, but no way would that make it through the usual studio BS.)

IP: Logged
mbaker
Member
Member # 2012

Icon 1 posted      Profile for mbaker   Email mbaker         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Actually, mbaker, Disney has been doing live action TV that focuses on that particular age range as far back as the 1950's (MIC-KEY MOUSE CLUB, MIC-KEY MOUSE CLUB), so their present offerings are right in line with that philosophy. And they're the only group putting on such a volume of work on a daily basis, as opposed to just one or two shows on a Saturday morning (when not pre-empted by sports), so to them it's a virtual lock.
While that kind of stuff dosen't appeal to me as much as the cartoon aspect of Disney, it seems that what they make now for that age group seems more shallow by comparison.
IP: Logged
eboles
IE # 266
Member # 917

Icon 1 posted      Profile for eboles   Email eboles         Edit/Delete Post 
I caught Bambi 2 recently, and while they did about as worthy a job as you could've hoped for, the whole problem was the same. Just another pointless go-nowhere story that didn't really have anything to say that hadn't already been said in the original. The animation was good and fluid and all, but always kind of generic. Everything's done to a very high standard, but it all winds up feeling rather artless.

It'll be interesting to see what they choose to focus on at DisneyToon if sequels are off the agenda. Hopefully they'll get to try some original stories.

I remember reading that The Aristocats was originally intended to be a TV movie, and that's the kind of project I think they could be doing direct to video these days. Stuff that's not quite cinematic enough for the big screen, but has enough promise that you wouldn't totally want to bin it. Or it could be the opportunity for directors to maybe even try some original but risky ideas with a dtv budget.

But another thing that strikes me is that there's so many studios in the feature animation game these days that there may not be as big a market for direct-to-videos as there was in the nineties. I guess we'll have to wait and see what materialises.

IP: Logged
BeltaneTheBat
IE # 209
Member # 3163

Icon 1 posted      Profile for BeltaneTheBat   Author's Homepage   Email BeltaneTheBat         Edit/Delete Post 
I hope they are not making a Pinnochio sequel too, well said Semjai.
But make no mistake, there will be an ongoing rehash of property Disney owns that has made them tons of money. They are answering to shareholders, don't forget. The Winnie the Pooh franchise is what is the biggest money spinner for Disney and that will surely continue.Other properties will be re-hashed too, it's just way too profitable for a company not to do that.
And sometimes good things can come out of that too, as Anim8tor pointed out. Let's just hope they don't do it to the properties that are animation sacred. So far, I don't think that has happened, but where you draw the line is up for discussion, I guess.

--------------------
Re vera, cara mea, mea nil refert.
http://umbackagain.blogspot.com

IP: Logged
BeltaneTheBat
IE # 209
Member # 3163

Icon 1 posted      Profile for BeltaneTheBat   Author's Homepage   Email BeltaneTheBat         Edit/Delete Post 
I've got both member's names I quoted here entirely wrong, hah, but you know what I mean.

--------------------
Re vera, cara mea, mea nil refert.
http://umbackagain.blogspot.com

IP: Logged
E. Allen
IE # 301
Member # 3297

Icon 1 posted      Profile for E. Allen   Email E. Allen         Edit/Delete Post 
Youn know, I'd say that this news would be too good to be true.

But, it probably is true, although for some reason I'm still hesitating to break out the wine glasses and everything. I mean, that's a big statement to make, proclaiming the end of Disney "cheapquels".

IP: Logged
JATG
IE # 29
Member # 65

Icon 12 posted      Profile for JATG   Author's Homepage   Email JATG         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
JTAG, I'd say you're a decade too late for most of the ideas you'd like to see. I'd love to see them, too, but we're just too small a group to make such things worth putting in an A-level effort into the production. Or even C-level.
Oh...I don't know...I mean, we're seeing all sorts of childhood favs being created for those very same kids all grown up... Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie... Transformers movie...

Granted they're being made as live action but honestly...everything old is new again, y'know?

Another 10 years or so we'll be seeing live action "grown up" Pokemon movies.

All of the Disney Afternoon properties are rich for revisiting...especially now that the kids who used to watch them are grown up and HAVE MONEY.

IP: Logged


 
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Animation Nation

Animation Nation © 1999-2012

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0