 Posted: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:12 am Post subject: |
|||
That's true... I think my bone to pick with that bit of the article, though, was more about how the value Eisner placed in the company's reputation suddenly changed as soon as he found out they made a lot of money. I mean, from a business standpoint, I completely understand. However, from a more personal standpoint, it just seems like saying you believe in one value... but suddenly don't care about it when it benefits you to act against that value. If that makes any sense at all. |
|||
| Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2004 10:34 pm Post subject: |
|||
Eh, well... I don't think that doing any sequels at all are what hurt them: it was doing too many at once and flooding the market, so that Disney was competing with itself. |
|||
| Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:42 pm Post subject: |
|
| That was an interesting read.
I agree that this sequel thing has gotten way out of hand. Every movie seems to need a sequel of some sorts now, and it's getting rather annoying. I don't mind the sequels all that much, but I think that Disney should at least stop making so many, and instead perhaps focus more on the individual quality versus quantity. I'm sure (well, hoping anyway) that more people would prefer to buy a great DTV like Lion King 1 1/2 versus a terrible, just all over blah DTV like Pocahontas 2. I also completely agree with the section of the article involving the different animation studios. I hate when it's obvious when animators switch (I'm thinking of the trial sequence of KOT here- it goes from looking fantastic to looking terrible as soon as Iago shows up). |
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2004 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
| "Now at the time I was told that Peter Schneider, who was in charge of Feature Animation was at a meeting with Michael Eisner. Peter said, 'You shouldn't do sequels, their quality hurts the Disney reputation,' and Michael said, 'I'm not sure we should be doing these either.' The next part of the meeting was, 'It cost $3.5 million to make and made over $100 million. Well, what should the next one be?' "
As I was reading that, I was actually about to give Eisner some credit... then I read how he changed his opinion about reputation just based on the money it made. As much as I love RoJ and KoT, it somehow just seemed really pathetic to change his opinion about the company's reputation based simply off of DTV release grosses, which IMHO have little to do with actual quality. About Japan and Australia splitting the tasks... it's always been quite obvious to me when it changes from one studio to another - the look of the characters changed a lot. I always wondered at the fact that they didn't coordinate that better. |
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2004 4:30 pm Post subject: |
|
| Interesting. I don't think 90 percent of the Disney movies needed sequels. It just proves what people would go through these days to make a quick buck. | |
| Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2004 10:41 pm Post subject: Tad Stones on RoJ & KoT |
|
| Animation World Magazine has an interview with Tad Stones; the first three pages have to do with his work on RoJ and KoT:
http://mag.awn.com/index.php?ltype=pageone&article_no=2191 I've read a few other interviews with him, but I didn't know most of this stuff.  |
|