Former Member
inherit
guest@proboards.com
125360
0
May 18, 2024 14:55:05 GMT -8
Former Member
0
January 1970
Former Member
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 2:56:40 GMT -8
Post by Former Member on Jul 24, 2011 2:56:40 GMT -8
How do you feel about the way Disney has changed their animation style over the years? Since they've teamed up with Pixar, I find them much of a muchness, a dime a dozen. They're churning them out at 2 a penny and they all look the same, but with different characters and a different storyline.
When I was little, you'd get a new 'animated' Disney movie once every few years. They were something 'special'. I preferred the old style animation too, using real drawings done on a storyboard, not computer generated ones.
There's no comparison with the original Snow White say, and Pocahontas in my opinion. The older movies were far scarier for kids too!
|
|
inherit
46457
0
Sept 15, 2020 4:22:02 GMT -8
Austen
Hi
8,015
June 2005
austendale
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 3:08:44 GMT -8
Post by Austen on Jul 24, 2011 3:08:44 GMT -8
I loved old Disney movies. Not too sure on the new new ones =/ Last Disney movie I really enjoyed wasn't animated and it was Twitches & Twitches 2.
|
|
inherit
Dysfunctional Professional
137695
0
Nov 12, 2019 12:06:54 GMT -8
Søren
Totally zarjaz
6,334
February 2009
solicitudesilence
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 3:32:18 GMT -8
Post by Søren on Jul 24, 2011 3:32:18 GMT -8
I like them both. do miss the traditional had drawing style it looked nicer but computer generated things are always so perfect and finished its little boring
|
|
inherit
116077
0
Jan 28, 2023 14:32:29 GMT -8
LINDSEY
1,329
December 2007
crazycowgirl
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 3:43:46 GMT -8
Post by LINDSEY on Jul 24, 2011 3:43:46 GMT -8
If they are a good movie, I like them, so I have no beef with either or. I do love the old though, mostly because to me, it just holds a natural beauty to it.
|
|
inherit
88478
0
May 17, 2024 6:14:10 GMT -8
Robyn
22,549
September 2006
millsberryfanrob
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 4:44:01 GMT -8
Post by Robyn on Jul 24, 2011 4:44:01 GMT -8
Disney started to fail around 2000 or so with the introduction of Hanna Montana and the teen shows. When they started to advance to more live action stuff and get into more 'modern world' era, that's when they messed up and are now a horrible fail.
I have nothing against classic disney. They were the best. Walt Disney did things that no one could imagine doing back then. He started what many have continued. He will be forever missed. However, once the good people are gone, the bad ones slowly take charge and change things for the worse.
Pixar is amazing. I'm a fan boy, however I can honestly say that they as well as the other major computer animation companies are very good at the technology they work with. The reason why Pixar is so good is because they say STORY comes first, THEN animation. That's what makes their films so special. Which is why lately stuff such as Cars 2 have been lowered in standards because Disney, you know the modern one which wants sequels to everything because Disney doesn't care about us anymore? Yes, that Disney is trying to make Pixar do tons of sequels.
Disney Today is crap. There is so much crap that it had made that I lose my faith in it these days. Which is why stuff like the Winnie the Poo movie make me smiley and glee in joy because those are the true cartoons that need to be out again.
|
|
inherit
12045
0
Nov 19, 2012 14:52:05 GMT -8
Renegade
As unique as mice pudding milkshake
40,557
August 2003
renegade
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 5:10:02 GMT -8
Post by Renegade on Jul 24, 2011 5:10:02 GMT -8
Robert, I have a feeling you might not be the target audience for Hannah Montana. You can't expect every show or movie they make to be tailored for you... well I guess you can, but its kind of selfish, and missing the bigger point. Hannah Montana was a runaway success so I'd hardly say Disney messed up there.
In general I think Disney understand their audience pretty well. I'm fairly sure the movie and TV departments are different anyway, but I do think they do pretty well most of the time. Their TV audience is mainly young girls and me , so that's who a lot of the shows are targeted towards. Some of the current shows are pretty awful, but some of them are modern classics (Phineas and Ferb is one of the best cartoons I've seen in a long time).
I haven't seen many of the 2d animated Disney movies, although I have Aladdin on DVD, and really enjoyed that. I'll note that Aladdin, which was traditionally animated and one of the "true cartoons" you're all talking about, had two sequels and a TV series - its not like making sequels to popular movies is a new thing!
|
|
#eb7100
1480
0
1
May 18, 2024 11:56:24 GMT -8
Craig
208,894
September 2001
cmdynasty
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 6:15:31 GMT -8
Post by Craig on Jul 24, 2011 6:15:31 GMT -8
as did toy story, lion king, the rescuers amongst others.
|
|
inherit
12045
0
Nov 19, 2012 14:52:05 GMT -8
Renegade
As unique as mice pudding milkshake
40,557
August 2003
renegade
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 6:21:24 GMT -8
Post by Renegade on Jul 24, 2011 6:21:24 GMT -8
don't forget Pocahontas 2: Pocahontas in Space
jkjkjkjk but Pocahontas also got a sequel.
|
|
inherit
88478
0
May 17, 2024 6:14:10 GMT -8
Robyn
22,549
September 2006
millsberryfanrob
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 10:09:47 GMT -8
Post by Robyn on Jul 24, 2011 10:09:47 GMT -8
Robert, I have a feeling you might not be the target audience for Hannah Montana. You can't expect every show or movie they make to be tailored for you... well I guess you can, but its kind of selfish, and missing the bigger point. Hannah Montana was a runaway success so I'd hardly say Disney messed up there. In general I think Disney understand their audience pretty well. I'm fairly sure the movie and TV departments are different anyway, but I do think they do pretty well most of the time. Their TV audience is mainly young girls and me , so that's who a lot of the shows are targeted towards. Some of the current shows are pretty awful, but some of them are modern classics (Phineas and Ferb is one of the best cartoons I've seen in a long time). I haven't seen many of the 2d animated Disney movies, although I have Aladdin on DVD, and really enjoyed that. I'll note that Aladdin, which was traditionally animated and one of the "true cartoons" you're all talking about, had two sequels and a TV series - its not like making sequels to popular movies is a new thing! Yet I love Mickey Mouse, I love Winnie the Poo, I love toy story, I cried during the disney princess movies. It's simply not my taste to see a young girl singing and to 'fall in love' with her. I'd rather see fictional characters do fun stuff, not watch real people sing.
|
|
inherit
~~<3 ≥ ∞~~
39551
0
Aug 12, 2012 18:10:14 GMT -8
Less.Than.Three.
Fly me to the moon.
7,872
April 2005
chunky
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 10:18:28 GMT -8
Post by Less.Than.Three. on Jul 24, 2011 10:18:28 GMT -8
Oh no you di'n't. Disney/Pixar is one of the best things to happen to cinema in forever. D:
|
|
inherit
143665
wildgoosespeeder wildgoosespeeder wildgoosespeeder
0
Jun 14, 2018 5:59:55 GMT -8
wildgoosespeeder
ProBoards V5 be trippin'. I'm disoriented. :P
4,393
August 2009
wildgoosespeeder
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 10:37:02 GMT -8
Post by wildgoosespeeder on Jul 24, 2011 10:37:02 GMT -8
Disney is dead to me. Pixar should become it's own company and not be owned by Disney. I think they are being held back. Sure they've had many very good movies but it could be better. They are best in the 3D animation business currently but they could be even harder to beat and make Dreamworks rage quit if Pixar were independent.
|
|
inherit
12045
0
Nov 19, 2012 14:52:05 GMT -8
Renegade
As unique as mice pudding milkshake
40,557
August 2003
renegade
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 10:59:56 GMT -8
Post by Renegade on Jul 24, 2011 10:59:56 GMT -8
Yet I love Mickey Mouse, I love Winnie the Poo, I love toy story, I cried during the disney princess movies. It's simply not my taste to see a young girl singing and to 'fall in love' with her. I'd rather see fictional characters do fun stuff, not watch real people sing. Okay? So they made a show that isn't designed for you. Its not like Hannah Montana is their only production or anything. With Toy Story 3 just out last year, and the Winnie the Pooh remake out now, I don't see how you can justify saying Disney is "a horrible fail" or "crap" just because they make some shows you don't like.
|
|
inherit
29252
0
Sept 6, 2012 15:46:49 GMT -8
Derek‽
28,655
August 2004
kajiaisu
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 11:19:20 GMT -8
Post by Derek‽ on Jul 24, 2011 11:19:20 GMT -8
I really don't like what Disney does anymore, but I was never a super huge Disney fan to begin with. I have never liked their live-action productions, and their move towards more of that is disappointing to say the least. Modern 3D films? Love the idea, but few of them really appeal to me. Their "traditional" 2D productions were a staple of my childhood, but don't really hold much of a nostalgic value. But hey, Disney has to move with the times. Sure, we might hold an affinity for Mickey Mouse, but Disney is like a drug dealer; they have to grab their audience at a young age, which means giving them what they want. There's no point in trying to sell cocaine to meth heads, just like there's no point in trying to peddle outdated film styles to young kids. And it's the demand of the young kids that ensures the success of Disney films. It's kind of a shame that Disney isn't going to make anymore fairytale movies, which is what really set them apart from the rest, but their target audience (5-6 year old girls) don't aspire to be princesses anymore, so those kinds of films won't be as meaningful to kids today as they were in generations passed. The reason why Pixar is so good is because they say STORY comes first, THEN animation. That isn't at all true. From the word go, Pixar has been focused on rendering capabilities. From the moment Steve Jobs bought and incorporated the company, it was intended to be a computer hardware company, developing machines for graphical development and processing. To this day it still focuses on its rendering technology above all else, knowing programs like RenderMan are its key to fame and market dominance.
|
|
inherit
66829
0
Jan 16, 2020 19:36:30 GMT -8
Hero
I r teh n00b eater!
17,455
December 2005
herooftime3
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 11:28:44 GMT -8
Post by Hero on Jul 24, 2011 11:28:44 GMT -8
Disney still makes animated movies, just not as often. In the past 2 years we've had Winnie the Pooh (2011) and the Princess and the Frog (2009). Just because a movie is computer generated doesn't mean I think it should be discredited though. From a personal standpoint, I find the best Disney movies being those from the 90s and early 2000s (My top 5 are Mulan, Hercules, Aladdin, and the Lion King). I think most of it is just nostalgia speaking for the ones you grew up with. I'd also argue that Pixar movies (although animated) are definitely more adult-themed than any of the early Disney movies. Have you seen UP? Definitely deals with some series stuff in the first 5 minutes alone. I miss traditional animated movies just as much as the next guy, but there's some incredible CG movies out there worth checking out too. Oh - and if you want traditionally animated movies, check out Studio Ghibli stuff. don't forget Pocahontas 2: Pocahontas in Space
|
|
inherit
88478
0
May 17, 2024 6:14:10 GMT -8
Robyn
22,549
September 2006
millsberryfanrob
|
Disney
Jul 24, 2011 13:47:34 GMT -8
Post by Robyn on Jul 24, 2011 13:47:34 GMT -8
Yet I love Mickey Mouse, I love Winnie the Poo, I love toy story, I cried during the disney princess movies. It's simply not my taste to see a young girl singing and to 'fall in love' with her. I'd rather see fictional characters do fun stuff, not watch real people sing. Okay? So they made a show that isn't designed for you. Its not like Hannah Montana is their only production or anything. With Toy Story 3 just out last year, and the Winnie the Pooh remake out now, I don't see how you can justify saying Disney is "a horrible fail" or "crap" just because they make some shows you don't like. If a 18 year old guy likes that stuff then it shows that Disney failed with Hanna Montana. I really don't like what Disney does anymore, but I was never a super huge Disney fan to begin with. I have never liked their live-action productions, and their move towards more of that is disappointing to say the least. Modern 3D films? Love the idea, but few of them really appeal to me. Their "traditional" 2D productions were a staple of my childhood, but don't really hold much of a nostalgic value. But hey, Disney has to move with the times. Sure, we might hold an affinity for Mickey Mouse, but Disney is like a drug dealer; they have to grab their audience at a young age, which means giving them what they want. There's no point in trying to sell cocaine to meth heads, just like there's no point in trying to peddle outdated film styles to young kids. And it's the demand of the young kids that ensures the success of Disney films. It's kind of a shame that Disney isn't going to make anymore fairytale movies, which is what really set them apart from the rest, but their target audience (5-6 year old girls) don't aspire to be princesses anymore, so those kinds of films won't be as meaningful to kids today as they were in generations passed. The reason why Pixar is so good is because they say STORY comes first, THEN animation. That isn't at all true. From the word go, Pixar has been focused on rendering capabilities. From the moment Steve Jobs bought and incorporated the company, it was intended to be a computer hardware company, developing machines for graphical development and processing. To this day it still focuses on its rendering technology above all else, knowing programs like RenderMan are its key to fame and market dominance. I'm talking about Pixar's animation company. Just because they cherish modern technology does not mean that when making films their focus is in the technology.
|
|