Friday, March 4, 2011

Between The Mouse & The Moon...

Sabbatical or retreat...







Some interesting stirrings in the Hat Building of late...

Or perhaps that should be out of the Hat Building? With the stunning hit that is Walt Disney Animation Studios' "Tangled," one would think that the success has everyone with their heads a bit in the clouds. This starting out as Glen Keane's pet project, it would seem that his head would be up there as well. And it is, or was. Right now Glen is on sabbatical from Disney and enjoying a much needed, and much deserved break from the grind of animating.

That said...

It appears that some folks (Bothans included) think that Glen isn't happy with the current slate of projects at WDAS and is looking for greener pastures to ply his trade. Or maybe he's simply just looking for a change? And a certain animation studio knows this. They dream of working with the likes of someone of Keane's stature. And it has the Suits at this particular place in Glendale trying/attempting to woo him over to this side of the valley. And they're wooing him very aggressively.

Glen has had meetings with people at that studio recently and while no decision has been made, they want him and are wooing him with opportunities and dangling carrots in front of his face to get him to make that walk across the long yard from Burbank to Glendale.

Nothing is set in stone, but losing Glen Keane, who is one of the premiere talents and master animators that have defined the Second Golden Age of Disney Animation, would be a major blow to the recently revived studio. He's my favorite living animator, a living legend, a true talent and a genuinely nice guy. Hopefully, he'll decide to stay, but the very fact that he's entertaining the offer is something that is frightfully scary. It would be like Babe Ruth leaving Boston Red Sox for the New York Yankees. A truly monumental leap for someone who has been iconically linked to the Disney name for over three decades.

Then again, maybe with starting the Third Golden Age for Disney, he feels it's time to move on to a new, and different chapter of his life?

Time will tell...

69 comments:

Anonymous said...

Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

Well....there goes loyalty.....who wants to work at that dream company if you can the men @ Disney....his lose imho!

Hannah Barbontana said...

Loyalty? Keane has been there for over thirty years. I think that's pretty loyal. He's got the right to go somewhere else and if Disney isn't willing to let him pursue a project he's interested in then DWA might just let him produce or direct it.

This would be Katz's ultimate catch if it happens.

Anonymous said...

Wait, wait guys. Calm down. Honor said he's taking meetings. It doesn't mean he's gone and left already. Keane may turn them down and decide to stay at WDAS.

Let's wait and see what happens.

HypaTRONic said...

Hey, maybe /Film will post this and pretend they put it up first like they did the Tron Uprising thing that Honor posted first?

Jones said...

When it comes to loyalty, we should mention Andreas Deja, who always said he would not do CG - and never did! I really admire him for being so loyal to his art and craft.

Woodrow said...

Why can't we just have GlenK and JohnL finish their "Where the Wild Things Are" experiment under the Disney roof. Then all would be well in my little world and I could eat my supper while it's still warm.

Anonymous said...

Of course he's allowed to do whatever he chooses, as he has been with the studio for decades now, but it would be a real tragedy for Disney to lose him :(

Anonymous said...

Maybe the goddamn suits at Disney should let Glen create the new animation projects, then, if they want to keep him. I assume that some of the lamer stuff, like King of the Elves and the Bear and the Bow, aren't Keane's ideas?

Frankly, none of the upcoming animation projects from WDAS that I've heard of or read about has me excited as a moviegoer. What WOULD excite me would be a Snow Queen movie, or a movie based on Epic Mickey.

Anonymous said...

I saw Glen at the Dreamworks Oscar brunch last week. I wondered what was up with that. Like it or not, there's a lot more reciprocated loyalty at DW than there is at today's WDA.

Anonymous said...

Met Glen last year. Really nice guy and so talented. Disney Feature animation needs to get their act together. Lasseter just seems to be using his post to ram all that Pixar crap down our throats. I remember I was in awe the first time I saw the intro to Jungle Book in the theaters. No sense of awe inspiring moments in Disney's animated features these days. Disney talents are thinned out through the company's dabbling in so many different ventures-merchandise, theme parks, cruiseships, crappy short films(where's Goofy?), and of course tv shows(Disney Channel was awesome 20 years ago/DTV!) Dreamwork seems more focused in films-for now.

Steve Walker said...

I can't understand this at all. How can Glen be unhappy with the current direction when Disney is finally returning to it's roots? If he goes to Dreamworks the only projects he'll be allowed to pitch will be cynical, pop culture pieces of crap with more celebrity cameos than an episode of Glee.

But hey, if he wants to go to the dark side, that's his choice.

Pixie Arrhh said...

"I assume that some of the lamer stuff, like King of the Elves and the Bear and the Bow, aren't Keane's ideas?"

The Bear and the Bow is Pixar so no, that is not Keane's idea.

And let's remember that he hasn't left yet. He's had meetings with them. It's not like he's out the door.

daisy said...

I think Glen want to do another fairy tale but Disney said stop fairy tales.
I agree with Glen Keane, I don't like new Disney projects, I want to see a great Snow Queen movie or another classic, it could be very interesting and great, but I want to see a sincere fairy tale, which was what Glen wanted to do with Rapunzel before the change. I liked Rapunzel but I think this movie isn't what Glen wanted to do, the story was very different, too modern and the art and quality isn't what Glen wanted to do with CGI inspired by Fragonard art.
Disney, let Keane free to do his new projet and stop frustrate him, otherwise, I think Glen will leave and I will agree with Glen.
Glen is my favourite animator and I think Disney will be stupid to lose him.

Anonymous said...

I tried to tell everyone that this 3rd golden age of Disney isn't happening.

No one listened.

Anonymous said...

"I tried to tell everyone that this 3rd golden age of Disney isn't happening."

Tangled is the beginning of the 3rd Golden Age, you dope.

Slinky Dog said...

What upcoming projects does WDAS have right now?

scissorhands said...

I am devastated! As a true and passionate Disney fan this is one of the saddest news in a while excedded only by the news that this rumor could become true.
Glen is the symbol of the modern Disney, he is a Disney Legend. He can't go to Dreamworks, not in the end of his carrer. I know that this thoughts could sound simplistic and childish. An artist should have the freedom to express himself and his creativity... but this can't stop me to be sad and disappointed...
Please Glen don't do this... :(
Please Disney, don't let Glen go... it will be a shame

Bear E. Sanders said...

"What upcoming projects does WDAS have right now?"

You need to read Blue Sky more often. Roughly, this is what could happen. Remember, dates aren't set and things could change:

2011 - Winnie the Pooh
2012 - Nothing
2013 - Reboot Ralph
2014 - King of the Elves
2014/15 - Mort
2015 - Possible Chris Buck project (his last one was shelved)

Anonymous said...

What's this "Nothing" project that is coming out in 2012?

I've never heard of it.

j said...

Disney/JL better not f*ck this up!

Losing Glen will definitely be a tough pill to swallow. And I'd expect some heads will roll if this happens.

Anonymous said...

Wait, wait. Is there conflict between Lasseter and Keane? When did this happen?

Anonymous said...

Who said anything about conflict?

Bob said...

Why shouldn't Glen leave? Everyone else Lasseter burned went to DreamWorks Animation and has been doing fine.

Lasseter may be making Disney Animation great again. But he's also making the competition better too.

Anonymous said...

"Tangled is the beginning of the 3rd Golden Age, you dope."

First is was Bolt, then it was Princess and the Frog, now it's Tangled... Disney is not having a new renaissance, simply a run of mediocre films that are better than the previous crap it came out with.

Anonymous said...

What a bunch of jerks here, DreamWorks is heading in a better direction as of late. They already have SO many Disney animators there - let's not forget James Baxter! DreamWorks treats their employees top notch, and I'm sure that sounds great to Glen. They are starting to use 2D/3D in 'Shadows', I'm sure they'd love Glen's artistic input there! Hell, I'm sure they'd consider a 2D project with Glen - they have enough animators that have traditional animation background. Wouldn't that be nice?
Also, you are not allowed to call this Disney's 3rd Golden Age - 'Tangled' was great, but Disney's future sure still feels uncertain. :\
Either way - leave Glen alone! He's a grown man! :)

Animated Response said...

"First is was Bolt, then it was Princess and the Frog, now it's Tangled... Disney is not having a new renaissance, simply a run of mediocre films that are better than the previous crap it came out with."

Those were Lasseter's first films at WDAS, they weren't what we would call a 3rd Golden Age. Tangled is another case entirely. And it's far from mediocre. It is in my opinion the Little Mermaid of this generation and now we can look forward to Reboot Ralph in a couple years.

Anonymous said...

I could see this happening. Disney has a habit of taking a lot of time developing their projects (that's not a bad thing)whereas a studio like Dreamworks really pumps out its films on a constant basis. Some much more successful then others.Keane maybe doesnt want to wait around.

Darrell said...

Bolt was also far from mediocre, it was the best animated film Disney's put out since Beauty and the Beast; in fact it's quite close to being Pixar-grade.

Disney's future still feels quite uncertain. Winnie the Pooh? No way. King Of the Elves? Not likely at all. No idea what Reboot Ralph or Mort are about, so can't make a judgment of them yet.

If Glen were to go to Dreamworks, that would finish the excellent turn that they've made lately. They already make great films, but HtTYD just jolted me out of my seat. It was so much better than I expected. Visuals were fabulous, story *MUCH* better than normal... and MegaMind continued this trend, even if to a slightly lesser extent.

Course, if Glen did do that, that would probably hurt Disney Animation even more than they already are doing... at least Lasseter would still be there.

Doopey said...

Does WDAS even have a slate of projects? It doesn't look like it. Reboot Ralph is in some nebulous stage of development, King of the Elves was put in turnaround, and what else is there? Nothing's been announced. From the outside, they just don't seem to have a clear direction or vision. It's a shame, b/c starting w/ Meet the Robinsons all the way to Tangled there's been a real progression of improvement. DreamWorks, for better or worse, is constantly developing new projects. I can see the appeal in that.

Honor Hunter said...

""Reboot Ralph" is in some nebulous stage of development, King of the Elves was put in turnaround, and what else is there? Nothing's been announced."

"Reboot Ralph" is moving along smoothly as far as I know. It's tentative release is still set for 2013.

"King of the Elves" went from turnaround to the next film from Chris Williams and is expected slightly after Ralph.

It appears Doopey hasn't been reading Blue Sky quite enough lately or he'd know this. Tsk, tsk, D.

Doopey said...

Ha -- Honor, I apologize! But still, what else is going on over there? It seems like they move extra slowly and cautiously on everything unless it's a sure thing (i.e., Cars 2, Monsters 2) or low risk (Pooh). Maybe that's for creative reasons, or maybe it's business reasons (can it be marketed, franchised, etc.) I'm not a fan of everything that DWA has done, but they sure know how to churn out product. If you're a frustrated animator (C. Sanders, G. Keane), DWA may give you the best opportunity to get a project made.

Anonymous said...

Even if Tangled actually shows a profit, let's be honest - it sure has heck was no Beauty and the Beast. It wasn't even Aladdin. It was just a little better, maybe, than Bolt. Not exactly a return to a Golden Age.

Anonymous said...

All the best to Keane, I hope DW offers him exactly what he wants and more. The DW campus looks like Shangri-la and they are one of the best companies in the world to work for. If I were DW I'd offer him free reign, complete control, whatever he wants.

Good for him, he deserves the freedom to choose now.

Smart move by DW if this is all true.

Honor Hunter said...

The offer is out there, so it's true...

As for if Glen signs and moves over? That's what we'll find out. I personally hope that he decides against it and stays.

JK can figure out something else to blog about then...

Anonymous said...

"Why shouldn't Glen leave? Everyone else Lasseter burned went to DreamWorks Animation and has been doing fine."

This.

2.0 and Beyond said...

Considering the way Disney treats it's talent (all levels), if I were courted by Dreamworks (PLEASE??), I'd be there!

Sylvain Decaux said...

I think that if Glen Keane is thinking about leaving Disney, after 30 years (!) of working for them, that means that there are some EXTREMELY serious problems there. It's true that the quality of their movies have slowly started go up with movies like The Princess and the Frog and Tangled, but they are still very, very conservative story-wise and style wise...

Maybe he's just tired to work on princess meets prince movies. Disney's image and history has become more of a burden to them than an advantage, they've become a caricature of themselves. Because of this, their last movies (like The Princess and the Frog, Bolt, Tangled) are refreshing but always fail to really surprise me because they feel very shallow, too watered down. Even if you do feel a spark somewhere in there, you can totally see they restrained themselves from being too shocking or scary or stress-inducing, unlike their classics where there has been a place for real darkness and real suspense, where the characters were in tangible danger.

Dreamworks are more varied in their themes, more open. Glen is almost 60, maybe he just wants to be able to make a project that is very dear to him, more personnal, without studio interference. I'm sure he has a lot of amazing stories he wants to tell us. It's up to him to decide how he should accomplish his goals.

Jeremy said...

Having visited both studios in the past couple years, Dreamworks was a productive studio that, from an outside point of view, treats their employees fairly well. The employees in the hat building felt much more tense. Lots of great talent on both sides and no matter where Glen goes, I look forward to seeing his work.

coNs Oroza said...

Look, as long as the job fulfills his needs and he feels happy, I don't mind where the storytelling comes from! What I want to see is great movies, like Dragon or Toy Story; don't mind the studios!

Anonymous said...

I would love to see him with more creative input. Disney's ideas are stale and contrived, and Tangled was a well-animated, aweful film, among the other well-animated aweful films Disney is crapping out. It's almost infuriating to see them funnel so much talent and creative energy into something that is fundamentally bad. I really hope he leaves and revives 2d somewhere better. They need to get out of the 3d and fast.

Anonymous said...

Well I hope he's looking forward to working on Madagascar 3 or Puss N Boots 2.

Also he better get up to date on the last 20 years of pop songs, he's going to have to help figure out which character should dance to what at a given time.

Darrell said...

If Glen were leaving because of being sick of the princess meets prince thing, then I'd cheer him on.

MetFanMac said...

I think I just threw up a little in my mouth :( The Babe Ruth comparison is quite apt, although a case could be made for Tom Seaver as well...

King Louie said...

It seems that everyone has this notion that Dreamworks has really stepped up lately given that it has made two near-PIXAR quality films (Kung Fu Panda and HTTYD). Does anyone remember what else they've released around those two good films? Let's see..uneccessary sub-par sequels to Madagascar and Shrek, as well as mediocre wacky comedies like Bee Movie, Monsters vs. Aliens, and Megamind. And how does Katzenberg honor these two quality films? He slates two sequels for HTTYD and four (that's right, FOUR) sequels for Kung Fu Panda. Bolt, Princess and the Frog, and Tangled were near-PIXAR quality as well. How close is up for debate but the fact is Disney is putting out good stuff now 'a days. If Glen wanted to leave why not when they were producing dreck like Home on the Range and Chicken Little? If he makes the walk to Glendale he's either going to be making ludicrus comedies or a gem that will be sequalized into oblivion, with or without his consent. But who knows, it could be fun to direct Kung Fu Panda 4, Glen.

Anonymous said...

Problem with the likes of Andreas Deja is he's just not a particularly good animator. No where near the skill and acting level of Glen Keane. If Keane should leave, it's most likely about money.

LimogesBoxCollector said...

Disney always seems to get the best of everything. With each new film, they outdo the previous ones!

Jones said...

"Problem with the likes of Andreas Deja is he's just not a particularly good animator" (Anonymous) - Is it just me, or has the whole world gone crazy? Please name 3 other active animators that are in the same league as Deja! I´m always willing to learn...

Anonymous said...

James Baxter
Segio Pablos
Rodolphe Guenoden

Anonymous said...

Why hate on studios like DreamWorks for putting out sequels that audiences want to see?

The Shrek sequels have done excellent box. So have the Ice Age films. KFP did well enough to justify more films, now that a solid cast of characters has been established to exploit with new adventures. Ditto for Dragon. Having at least one Dragon sequel would make sense.

But oh no, we cannot have sequels. Even though you're conveniently forgetting about Pixar and their sequels.

I've read nothing but praise on this site - and rightfully so - for Toy Story 3.

TOY STORY 3 WAS A SEQUEL!

Now we're getting Cars 2 and Monsters, Inc 2.

And many here, when perfectly honest with themselves, would love to see Incredibles 2 as well.

Where's the hate for Pixar and their sequels?

Why only bash DreamWorks for theirs?

Got hypocrisy much?

Anonymous said...

I hope he doesnt leave disney
he is my favourite animator and if he left disney i would be very depressed
I actually almost started crying after reading this
DreamWorks is not hing compared to disney
and Tangled was awsome it showed a new a refreshing disney the songs and the animations reminded me of the old disney i cant stop listening or singing them

Please don't leave disney Glen

Anonymous said...

As long as Disney has Pixar and Marvel now, they have no reason to put much into their own roots. Disney is about money now in my opinion and thus have let go many of the projects that I think Disney could tell well. If more go to DreamWorks, than serves Disney right for turning their back on the very backbone Disney himself, built.

Anonymous said...

Well I hope he's looking forward to working on Madagascar 3 or Puss N Boots 2.

Yeah, because that's what they'll "make" him work on if he agreed to go there. Uh-huh, yup.

Adjust your tinfoil hat & keep drinking the koolaid!

Jones said...

Anonymous said...

James Baxter
Segio Pablos
Rodolphe Guenoden
Baxter: Yes, impossible to argue with that!
Pablos: Good man, but that Dr. Doppler...
Guenoden: Not really the style I like, but that girl from PoEgypt, forgot her name, yes, there was sth about her :-)

King Louie said...

Huge difference between PIXAR sequels and Dreamworks: PIXAR has proven they make them when neccessary and do them wonderfully. Can you clame Madagascar 2 or the last two Shrek sequels were anything but uninspired. Meanwhile Toy Story 3 gets nominated for Best Picture 2010 and Toy Story 2 has 100% on Rotten TOmatoes with the most collected reviews. They can make whatever sequels they want.

Anonymous said...

**As long as Disney has Pixar and Marvel now, they have no reason to put much into their own roots. Disney is about money now in my opinion and thus have let go many of the projects that I think Disney could tell well. If more go to DreamWorks, than serves Disney right for turning their back on the very backbone Disney himself, built.**

^Quoted for truth. Disney has lost the magic it once had for audiences. Now it's no different from any other media company that buys characters and talents instead of developing them in-house.

Walt would roll over in his grave if he knew what bean-counters like Eisner and Iger have done to his company. Sure, they made it bigger and richer, but they sold its soul to do so. Pathetic...

Anonymous said...

"Huge difference between PIXAR sequels and Dreamworks: PIXAR has proven they make them when neccessary"

That's crap. Pixar makes sequels for the same reason that DreamWorks makes sequels: to make money.

If you have a solid profitable franchise, you milk it. All studios know this. It's Hollywood 101.

You claim the DWA sequels are "uninspired" whereas the Pixar sequels are somehow above all that. Really?

Do you believe Cars 2 is going to be nominated for Best Picture? I have doubts it will even win Best Animated Feature (the original Cars did not). What about Monsters, Inc 2? Think it will be nominated for Best Picture as well? Probably not. Toy Story 3 was a unique situation we may never see again.

Other studios are finally catching up to Disney and Pixar. DreamWorks puts out quality films now, whether or not you personally enjoy them. The Shrek series will continue with the Puss in Boots spin-off, while Kung Fu Panda and Dragon continue with their sequels. Blue Sky is making a fortune with the Ice Age series, so I don't see that one slowing down anytime soon.

It's all about the money. As long as the sequels make money, they'll continue to be made. This whole notion of Pixar not making sequels unless they're "necessary" is a fan myth. Pixar will continue to do what other studios do in order to remain profitable. And if that means making sequels, like Cars 2 and Monsters, Inc 2, then that's what they'll do. That's the only requirement that makes any sequel "necessary."

King Louie said...

Considering the Cars and Monsters Inc sequels haven't come out yet, I would think it's a bit premature to make judgements on them whereas there's physical evidence that Dreamworks (and Blue Sky for that matter) can't pull off sequels too well. (Look them up on Rotten Tomatoes if you want quality proof). If PIXAR wanted to "milk" their franchises, why wait eleven years to do so? They could've used those Circle 7 ideas and made them at PIXAR but didn't even look at them. Everyone wants to be cynical about PIXAR and Disney's intentions when it comes to sequels but the fact is they are one of the only studios to bother to wait until or even IF they have a good story premise. Given this, I wouldn't completely rule out the possibilty of Cars 2 or MI2 getting a BP nomination. We'll have to wait until we've seen them to have that debate.

Darrell said...

Pixar themselves have said that "If we have a great story, we'll do a sequel." Yes, they probably enjoy money, but they have said both when and when not referring to sequels that story is first at Pixar.

Anonymous said...

To be fair to Dreamworks, their movies are all they've got. They're an independent studio, and all they produce are films. To remain profitable and functioning, they've got to keep producing product, and sequels are a sure-fire way to make money.

As long as they keep creating original entertainment (and they do have a number of original movies in development), I can't really complain about Kung Fu Panda 5 or whatever.

jedited said...

I think annoymous above NAILED it! Disney is a multi=platform MULTI-Billion dollar media corporation whereas Dreamworks is an animation studio ONLY.
Disney Animation and/or Pixar could stop making movies for the next 5-10 years and Disney would still be a viable company. Dreamworks MUST make mutiple movies EACH year to stay viable. Disney/Pixar has the luxury of waiting multiple years between movies, Dreamworks does not.
Now I'm not bashing Dreamworks (although I tend to stay away from them because they tend to be MUCH more "adult" for my young children), but they are a TOTALLY different kind of company than Disney. It looks like DWA seems be making one sure-fire hit (usually a sequel) and one new concept each year. I agree that they are getting better (and getting more family friendly). I wish them the best of luck. I think that Disney/Pixar needs Dreamworks and Dreamworks needs Disney/Pixar to keep eachother on their toes.

Anonymous said...

"Look them up on Rotten Tomatoes if you want quality proof"

Quiz time.

Which of these two scenarios would publicly traded companies like Disney/Pixar and DreamWorks rather achieve:

1) Highly acclaimed films with poor box office.

2) Poorly reviewed films with boffo box office.

It's not rocket science.

Studios are in the business to make money. It doesn't matter that the Shrek sequels or the Ice Age sequels didn't score high on the Tomato-Meter. These films made buckets of money!

Ice Age 2 came out a few months before Cars. IA2 took $655 mil worldwide, whereas Cars earned $462 mil.

Shrek 3 came out at the time Ratatouille was released, and earned $800 mil. Ratatouille made $623 mil.

Ice Age 3 was released shortly after UP. IA3 pulled in over $880 mil, while UP earned only $731 mil. Both films were offered in 3D.

Shrek 4 is the only loser in this comparison for the past few years. It was released in 3D shortly before TS3 and made $750 mil. TS3 was also released in 3D, and earned over one billion.

Four sequels from DWA and Blue Sky, and only one Pixar competitor earned more at the box the year it was released. And this is a failed business strategy why?


If you wish to live in some animation utopia where producing films is mainly about the creative process and not about developing profitable franchises that appeal to large segments of the movie going public, that's your choice. But that's not the world that studio execs live in. All that matters to the executives and the shareholders they represent is profitability.

Anonymous said...

I think that Disney/Pixar needs Dreamworks and Dreamworks needs Disney/Pixar to keep eachother on their toes.

I agree with this completely. Competition is healthy.

King Louie said...

Perhaps I sound as if I'm doing too much bashing of Dreamworks. I understand their strategies and why they do what they do. What I'm trying to say is that there is more artistic integrity at Disney/PIXAR currently (ya know, after Chicken Little and such) and if that is what Glen is looking for, and I assume he would be given what a talented artist he is, then I would suggest staying where he is. In regards to PIXAR, just because they can make a ton of money off sequels doesn't mean they're doing it for that reason, especially since they haven't made a sequel since 1999 whereas Dreamworks made four in that time while planning out seven more and a spin-off while Blue Sky made two with a planned third. Comparing the Dreamworks sequels to PIXAR movies intake it seems that those sequels did perform stronger, but making $731 million with an original idea compared to making $880 million with a low-quality sequel doesn't scream "we need to get some sure-fire money-raking sequels made...NOW!" I guess a world where art is made for art's sake and not a cynical world where it's made strickly to rip money out of our pockets without trying does sound better. I'll take that utopia anyday.

Anonymous said...

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Glen Keane is my hero!! PLZ DON'T LEAVE! PLZ PLZ PLZ!! DISNEY NEEDS HIS SUPER FANTASTIC AURA OF AWESOME!! HE'S MADE THE GREATEST MOVIES AND HAVE MADE THE GREATEST MOVIE!! I LOVE TANGLED! HE DOESN'T MATCH DREAMWORKS!! HIS KIND OF DRAWING IS MEANT FOR DISNEY!

Anonymous said...

"Comparing the Dreamworks sequels to PIXAR movies intake it seems that those sequels did perform stronger, but making $731 million with an original idea compared to making $880 million with a low-quality sequel doesn't scream "we need to get some sure-fire money-raking sequels made...NOW!"

But this is precisely why Cars 2 and Monsters, Inc 2 are being made. It's about Disney wanting to milk more money from popular Pixar characters. Just like DreamWorks and Blue Sky are doing with their sequels. To suggest that Pixar is "above all that" is nonsense.

And chastising Blue Sky for making $150 million more with IA3 than Pixar made with UP is ridiculous, especially since IA3 cost about half as much as UP to produce ($90 mil vs $175 mil). More people on the planet saw Ice Age 3 than UP, and those film goers certainly didn't think it was "low-quality" or else they wouldn't have bought the tickets. Ice Age is a popular, well-written, entertaining franchise that millions more people enjoyed in 2009 than UP. Just because you didn't enjoy it doesn't mean it's "low-quality."


"I guess a world where art is made for art's sake and not a cynical world where it's made strickly to rip money out of our pockets without trying does sound better. I'll take that utopia anyday."

Thankfully, you're not in charge of a studio. That kind of silly sentimentality would drive your shareholders crazy, and eventually, you out the door. Creating movies for simply the sake of creating high art is only for fanboy billionaires with too much money and time on their hands.

And your Pixar elitist attitude is getting tiresome. All of these studios obviously "try" to make the best films possible, but you seem to think that only Pixar can be successful at it. Wake up to the new reality, King Louie. Pixar ain't the only quality game in town now.

MetFanMac said...

"Thankfully, you're not in charge of a studio. That kind of silly sentimentality would drive your shareholders crazy, and eventually, you out the door. Creating movies for simply the sake of creating high art is only for fanboy billionaires with too much money and time on their hands."

Or he could be Walt Disney, who indeed drove his shareholders crazy by creating movies for simply the sake of creating fine art, a practice that did not prove financially successful until long after his death (many of today's "Disney Classics", such as Dumbo and Fantasia, were yesterday's flops).
Just sayin'.

Scar said...

More people need to read Blue Sky, it's the shuzit!

Keep up the news, Honor. Love your perspective and scoops.

Now, you have to find out where Andreas is headed!

kenneth said...

Now, one year later, 2012, Glen Keane has left Disney.

I want to see a follow-up article, please!