Pixar Doing Live Action!
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25381
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
But Disney was a production company that started out in live-action and animation with the Alice combination pictures.
Pixar was created as a <I>computer animation company</I>, not even an animation company, but one <I>specifically</I> interested in developing computer animated properties.
That's what Disney was buying, not another regular production outfit that dabbles in all things.
Then again, "the film should be what it wants to be", be it classical, compuer or, now it seems, live-action...
Pixar was created as a <I>computer animation company</I>, not even an animation company, but one <I>specifically</I> interested in developing computer animated properties.
That's what Disney was buying, not another regular production outfit that dabbles in all things.
Then again, "the film should be what it wants to be", be it classical, compuer or, now it seems, live-action...
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 228
- Joined: November 26th, 2005
- Location: Birmingham, England
- Contact:
I have a feeling this has been taken out of context. There would be no logical reason for Pixar to begin making live action films. For one thing they don't have the facilities. They're also stepping up production from one to two films a year so they're going to need a larger workforce as it is. And thirdly, Disney has already said that it's cutting down the production of films outside of the Disney label.
Personally I think he may have been speaking about the employees at the company rather than the company itself. Brad Bird is interested in going into live action and so apparently is Andrew Stanton.
Either that or Pixar may be employed to do digital effects for live action films rather than ILM or Weta.
Personally I think he may have been speaking about the employees at the company rather than the company itself. Brad Bird is interested in going into live action and so apparently is Andrew Stanton.
Either that or Pixar may be employed to do digital effects for live action films rather than ILM or Weta.
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9057
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
Totally, and even though they "merged" with Disney 18 months ago, they're all like: "Oh we're evolving and we want to do our own thing now, etc..etc..."
Steve Jobs does his own thing, Pixar does their own thing, Brad Bird is doing his own thing, Andrew Stanton is doing his own thing, etc..etc..
Are any of these people actually, like, working for Disney??
Steve Jobs does his own thing, Pixar does their own thing, Brad Bird is doing his own thing, Andrew Stanton is doing his own thing, etc..etc..
Are any of these people actually, like, working for Disney??
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 3845
- Joined: May 31st, 2005
- Location: Maryland
Man, I don't go on the internet for a day, and this is what happens!
Not sure how I feel about this. Don't get me wrong, I love Pixar, but one of the reasons they're so awesome in my book is because they make *animated* movies.
Perhaps this is to show the rest of Hollywood that putting story first works in live-action as well as animation?
Not sure how I feel about this. Don't get me wrong, I love Pixar, but one of the reasons they're so awesome in my book is because they make *animated* movies.
Perhaps this is to show the rest of Hollywood that putting story first works in live-action as well as animation?
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 228
- Joined: November 26th, 2005
- Location: Birmingham, England
- Contact:
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 10022
- Joined: September 1st, 2006
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9057
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
Yeah, I'm back. Very Happy
Yay!
And I don't like this news! It sounds pointless! But perhaps it won't be that bad. (At least I'm hoping. Razz):
Same here Dan.....I'll try to be "positive" here and say maybe there's more to this than meets the eye.....
.....maybe.
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 248
- Joined: August 23rd, 2005
- Location: Brisbane, Australia
- Contact:
Ok. Now maybe Disney/Pixar will still have Pixar Animation Studios, but they might also have a seperate studio under the Pixar name but for live action. This would give the ability for Pixar artists, if they wanted to, have the option also to work on live action films, as well as pixar cg anims and disney 2d anims.
"But I'm your No. 1 Fan!"
- Buddy a.k.a Syndrome
- Buddy a.k.a Syndrome
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9057
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
Yeah, but I'm just doubtful I mean...
...how many "mini studios" are they going to have? I thought the whole point was to get everything under the "Disney umbrella", not branch off into separate little studios...?
I like Disney in the 80's and early 90s 'cause back then there was only three studios: Touchstone, Hollywood Pictures and....Walt Disney Feature Animation. Period.
Oh, and the family live-action films were released under Disney BUT I'm pretty sure that the "Touchstone" label appeared as well.
That was so much better IMHO.
Like Ben said, they're losing focus.... At least it feels that way.
Well....I don't mean to be argumentative or anything, but just for principle's sake: if Pixar guys get their own separate live-action/SFX studio or whatever it's going to be, shouldn't WDFA guys get the same thing? Aren't they "both Disney"??
....and I'm very doubtful that Pixar guys are going to want to leave Emeryville to work on WDFA 2d or WDFA anything, unless some serious changes are made to the whole nature of these deals. (and to the unstable nature of WDFA jobs compared with Pixar guys' jobs security.)
Lassetter and Catmull have made it very clear that their guys are staying right where they are, WDFA is WDFA and Pixar is Pixar--exactly like before the merger.
...how many "mini studios" are they going to have? I thought the whole point was to get everything under the "Disney umbrella", not branch off into separate little studios...?
I like Disney in the 80's and early 90s 'cause back then there was only three studios: Touchstone, Hollywood Pictures and....Walt Disney Feature Animation. Period.
Oh, and the family live-action films were released under Disney BUT I'm pretty sure that the "Touchstone" label appeared as well.
That was so much better IMHO.
Like Ben said, they're losing focus.... At least it feels that way.
This would give the ability for Pixar artists, if they wanted to, have the option also to work on live action films, as well as pixar cg anims and disney 2d anims.
Well....I don't mean to be argumentative or anything, but just for principle's sake: if Pixar guys get their own separate live-action/SFX studio or whatever it's going to be, shouldn't WDFA guys get the same thing? Aren't they "both Disney"??
....and I'm very doubtful that Pixar guys are going to want to leave Emeryville to work on WDFA 2d or WDFA anything, unless some serious changes are made to the whole nature of these deals. (and to the unstable nature of WDFA jobs compared with Pixar guys' jobs security.)
Lassetter and Catmull have made it very clear that their guys are staying right where they are, WDFA is WDFA and Pixar is Pixar--exactly like before the merger.
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 9057
- Joined: October 25th, 2004
- Location: Binghamton, NY
Perhaps this is to show the rest of Hollywood that putting story first works in live-action as well as animation?
DreamWorks SKG (not DWA in this case, I think of them as a whole separate issue) has already shown that years ago....now that they're with Paramount I'm kinda doubtful about that whole "let artists do what they want" thing they had going back in 1994....but from 1997-2005, DreamWorks SKG's live-action films were INCREDIBLE...
Gladiator, American Beauty, Meet the Parents, Galaxy Quest, Almost Famous, Old School, The Ring , etc....IMHO they're the closest--if short lived--example of how a Hollywood studio that makes live-action films can embrace art and storytelling and make pretty darn amazing films.
And just FYI I mostly attribute that to Spielberg/Parks/McDonald, not Katzenberg, who was mostly into the animation side of things.
Or Don Hahn and Mark Dindal...although I pray Hahn isn't totally gone and that Mark Dindal returns...
If animators want to make "real" films, why can't they go the way of Tashlin, Lima, Minkoff, etc...and leave the studio?
You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!