Meet The Robinsons

Post by **Movie-Man** » April 24th, 2006, 3:49 pm

Not unless somebody decides to do something different with 2-D animation besides next year there's going to be a Non-Disney 2-D animated film written and directed by cult animation favorite Ralph Bakshi.

Post by **askmike1** » April 24th, 2006, 3:50 pm

chernabog wrote:You can't compare the introduction of colour movies and sound to that of cg animation anyway. The former changed movies entirely and brought about a complete change whereas cg animation has only replaced traditional animation, not every form of film making.

Definitely disagreeing there. In 99% of all blockbuster and mini-blockbuster films now (with few exceptions like Passion of the Christ), CG plays a gigantic role. CGI has changed the industry entirely. It hasn't just replaced traditional annimation, it became the effects of live-action films (I'd say in most big movies now, at least 30% of what you see is purely CGI).

Also, many cg films are considered samey with a very obvious focus on comedy and have been extremely limited in terms of depth and emotion. Is it impossible to translate the formula of 2d to 3d? No. But as of yet no one has been able to crack it.

And eventually, somebody will. Remember, it wasn't until Walt made Snow White that people actually saw traditional animation as a respectable art form. Purely CGI films are still in it's youth & eventually, public opinion towards it will change.

-Michael

Post by **Movie-Man** » April 24th, 2006, 3:51 pm

But people might lose interest in CGI animated films but when it comes to live action with CG, people go for that instead.

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:01 pm

askmike wrote:CG plays a gigantic role.

Yes but it hasn't changed every form of film making. Actors, set designers, make up artists etc, are all still used. CG may be implemented but full CG features make up only a tiny proportion of the number of films produced each year.

We all know CG won't go away, but it won't replace traditional animation.

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:02 pm

What worries me is that the story of Rapunzel (girl taken from the modern world into a fairytale) is like a reversal of Enchanted (fairytale princess transported to modern day New York). I hope that with Enchanted being released first it doesn't steal some of Rapunzel's thunder.

Then again, we don't know how many changes Lasseter has ordered so maybe the modern day twist will be removed completely.

Post by **askmike1** » April 24th, 2006, 4:16 pm

chernabog wrote:What worries me is that the story of Rapunzel (girl taken from the modern world into a fairytale) is like a reversal of Enchanted (fairytale princess transported to modern day New York). I hope that with Enchanted being released first it doesn't steal some of Rapunzel's thunder.

Then again, we don't know how many changes Lasseter has ordered so maybe the modern day twist will be removed completely.

Don't know how true it is, but there are lots of rumors that Glen Keane has been trying to rework the story to remove the Unbraided part (even before the Pixar aquisition was made).

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:20 pm

Yeah I heard that as well. I really hope it has that 'magical' feeling to it, rather than resorting to pop culture references and post-modernism. With Glen Keane at the helm it has the potential to be amongst Disney's best.

Post by **Movie-Man** » April 24th, 2006, 4:29 pm

Disney should do an animated Horror film for once, it would at least earn my repsect.

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:32 pm

I'm sure they're kicking themselves knowing they haven't got YOUR respect.

Post by **Movie-Man** » April 24th, 2006, 4:36 pm

chernabog wrote:I'm sure they're kicking themselves knowing they haven't got YOUR respect.

But I still think that Disney should take a risk, do something different, do something that isn't a musical or a kids film.

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:39 pm

Disney don't make kids films, they make films suitable for kids. And to make a film which doesn't cater for children would never happen because it is not only their key demographic but the ideas of childhood and innocence are what the Disney brand is built upon. And Disney have always taken risks with their films, that's how they've produced so many variations of work and been the most innovative studio around.

Post by **Movie-Man** » April 24th, 2006, 4:41 pm

But Disney still hasn't taken the risk of making something for adults and not sutible for kids, I still think that Disney should do a Horror film, R-Rated Animated Horror and hopefully if I ever went to Disney an animated Horror film will be my only idea for them.

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:46 pm

Yes but what I am saying is that would never happen because it goes completely against the Disney brand name. And even if they were to do that (which they never would) it would be stupid anyway because the core base for animated movies are children and families so they would be losing out anyway.

Post by **askmike1** » April 24th, 2006, 4:48 pm

Movie-Man wrote:Disney should do an animated Horror film for once, it would at least earn my repsect.

If they were ever to make an animated Horror film, it would fall under the Miramax banner (or at the very least, Touchtone). The only thing close to being a Disney horror was Fraidy Cat and it got cancelled. And remember that a lot of people didn't like the dark tones of Hunchback.

Post by **chernabog** » April 24th, 2006, 4:51 pm

I never understood the whole backlash against Hunchback being too dark til' I got older. The most shocking thing for me is Frollo's lustful obsession with Esmerelda, but at the same time I think it's tastefully done. Regardless, itt remains one of my favourite Disney (and all time) films.