Disney Pixar Discussion

[Macaluso]

I thought Monster House was ugly too.

I'm not talking about motion capture being used in live action movies like what you listed. I'm talking about fully animated movies like a christmas carol. Though I'll admit that Avatar looked good.

[Whippet Angel]

I liked Monster House. The characters in that film weren't quite as lifeless and "zombie-like" as in the others.

[EricJ]

No, it was the opposite: It proved why you COULDN'T hitch up mo-cap to any old cartoony Pixar story like a cart-horse...
For the simple reason that cartoony characters that have solid dimensions and move like detailed real people look uncannily like humans in rubber Disneyland suits.

And the fact that Bob didn't know the difference said a lot about what he was trying to use the technology for--Namely, anything he could think of, as long as he didn't have to use another one.

[eddievalient]

Am I the only one who's going to mourn Imagemovers' passing? Regardless of how you feel about the visuals (I happen to think they're great and I don't understand all the complaints), ya gotta admit they were telling some good stories. Beowulf especially was epic.

Oh, and by the way, A Christmas Carol was successful. It was NOT a flop. If you don't believe me, look it up. It made over $320 million. What? That's not enough anymore? Since when have expectations been so ridiculous?

I, for one, hope that Zemeckis finds another source of funding because I like what he's been doing and I'd miss it if he couldn't do it anymore.

[EricJ]

Am I the only one who's going to mourn Imagemovers' passing?

Um, yes?
However much you may have liked the movies, Zemeckis had become an almost symbolic image of the Pixar-struck Fraud Poseur With Money who thought "how hard could it be?", once he finally went out and bought one of them-there whiz-bang computer gizmos...
Which could be extended to how most of the industry couldn't figure out the appeal of CGI to begin with, but for the moment, we were just concentrating on the self-indulgent idiots:

While Zemeckis wanted to remake Yellow Submarine--because that was what someone did the last time they were Amazing in animation, and now HE and his lil' machine were Amazing, too!--
But Disney wanted the studio to make Scrooge, and the Nutcracker (and five bucks says we would've gotten a Nativity movie as well), because they'd bought the studio for that cute-family first-November slot, and wanted 100 Ways to Remake Polar Express. (Among other reasons, because that was what Warner owned.)

...I'm trying to think of any other emotions besides Relief.

[estefan]

Anybody else think that Avatar might also have had something to do with this? Compare the Na'vi with any of the characters in Zemeckis' productions and it's so obvious who is not in Uncanny Valley.

[Whippet Angel]

I happen to think they're great and I don't understand all the complaints

It seems to be a personal preference. I've talked with quite a few people who actually loved Polar Express. And I also know several people who were repulsed by the style of the film, just as I was.

It's one of those things where either you "get it" or you don't. I don't get it. They look like zombies to me.

[EricJ]

The two things (and only two) I'll say in PX's defense are:

1) It was primarily Tom Hanks's baby more than Bob's--Hanks wanted to do a CGI film of a kids' book, any kids' book (he only made this one after losing "Where the Wild Things Are" and "Ant Bully"), wasn't that grounded on exactly how CGI films were made either, and, theoretically may have even been the one who GOT his techno-smitten Castaway/Gump buddy Zemeckis hooked on the drug when he needed someone to make it for him,
and
2) The "zombies" were trying to replicate the sketchy, watercolor look of Chris Van Allsburg into solid 3-D....And again, someone with a little sense of knowing what the heck they were doing might have pulled it off a little more successfully.

As it is, it looked like a film was tossed off on Gadget of the Week to sell some books at Barnes & Noble, and...that may not have been too far off.

[CGIFanatic]

It's always sad to hear this kind of news. I hope people there find work ASAP.

http://www.canadiananimationresources.ca/?p=1371
http://forums.cgsociety.org/showthread. ... 9&t=863341

[Ben]

While I am not totally surprised given that they have been beavering away at many smaller effects type projects rather than taking on big fully CG movies (though I heard there were two in the pipeline and wonder what will happen to those), this is a sharp, hard shock.

It's so unfair that they were used as a political pawn in the Disney/Pixar game as to end up with that studio dumping The Wild out there unsupported, since they were obviously more than capable of turning out top-notch visuals.

Bad management, eh? Same old story...

[ShyViolet]

Some interesting articles on Disney financially/creatively right now:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 23928.html


http://www.newsweek.com/2010/11/03/disn ... chine.html

[Duke Remington]

Okay, I officially hate this person now.

I've felt this for a while and while Iger is doing a great job when it comes to the animation branch of Disney, me thinks he seems set on turning the Company into one squarely aimed at tweens. Say what you will about Michael Eisner (who wasn't all that great, either), but at least he understood Walt Disney's philosophy of making the Company aimed at all ages, not simply one demographic.

Sorry, but you're completely wrong about Iger--he is not making the company to be aimed squarely at tweens. Iger DOES understand Walt's philosophies, even more than Eisner the Miser ever did.

The first half of Eisner's tenure was great, but after Frank Wells died, he turned into a jerk and had to be given the sack.

Why do you always seem to be so negative and hateful about almost everything, Estefan? Please learn to love.

[Dacey]

And...why are you already acting like you know everything about a member here when you've only made two posts so far?

[Duke Remington]

And...why are you already acting like you know everything about a member here when you've only made two posts so far?

Well, I'm a long-time lurker, first-time poster.

[estefan]

Why do you always seem to be so negative and hateful about almost everything, Estefan? Please learn to love.

I think if you were to look at my post history, you would find the same amount of negative and positive posts as any person here.

It seems especially interesting that you've chosen this thread to complain about me being overtly negative, when I'm nothing but extremely supportive of Pixar, even coming close to reaching fanboy levels of love for that particular studio.