Jump to content


Welcome to IPS!

Feel free to browse our community to get a feel for how our community software operates. Post in the pre-sales forum with any questions you have before purchasing or use the Test Posting forum to post a few messages yourself! You can also get a free demo to try the IPS Community Suite yourself.

Already an active IPS client?

Login with the same email address and password you use for the client area to access client-only areas.





Photo - - - - -

Disnar and Pixey

Posted by Rikki, 25 January 2006 · 38 views

I thought it'd be good to comment on yesterdays purchase of Pixar by Disney, since it could affect me at some point in the future. Wishful thinking? Yeah perhaps, but my hopes are high.

In case you live under a British spy rock, you'll probably know that yesterday morning Disney bought Pixar for $7.4billion dollars in stock. Steve Jobs is now a very rich man..... even richer than he already was. By $3billion (it's OK for some).

What does this mean for the animation folk, and the industry itself? Well, no-one knows for sure yet, we'll just have to see how things pan out over the coming months, but here's my take on things.

Disney is the king of animation (perhaps former king is fairer nowdays, but I'll stick with king). They virtually invented the industry single-handedly. 99% of the skills I'm learning on my course are traced right back to the work that Walt Disney himself and the group of 9 lead animators did 60+ years ago. However, in the late 70's and 80's, Disney fell into bit of a pit. They couldn't release great animated movies (understand at this point that animated movies are separate from live-action movies at Disney, I won't bother making the distinction again). They managed to find their feet again in the 90's, releasing films such as Aladdin and Lion King. True Disney classics, I think we'll all agree.

Disney has fallen backwards into that pit again over the past several years. They're struggling to make really classic movies. In fact, most of Disneys animated movies this decade have been relatively low-budget, straight-to-video sequels of their other, better movies.

Pixar on the other hand came out of virtually nowhere with Toy Story and has been on fire since. I think they probably took Disney by surprise - if they didn't, then one has to wonder why Disney sat on its hands and let them get away with it. Sure Pixar can't make brilliant movies forever and at some point they'll make one that isn't as successful as the rest, but they know how to make great movies.

Disney haven't bought Pixar so that they get the rights to those great movies; Disney got 60% of the profit from them anyway in what I think was a pretty unfavourable distribution deal with Pixar. Disney have bought Pixar to get at the creative talent sitting inside that Californian studio. It's evidently worth its weight in gold to Disney.

My fear as an animator is that Disney will end up using Pixar as a 'spare parts' collection. They've realise they've got the talent now, so they'll decide to pillage it, assigning it to their (and I don't think I'm being unfair...) lame sequels that they've been producing. Pixar deserves more than that. The whole ethic of Pixar is what has made it a success, and I just hope Disney recognises that and allows it to continue.

There have been some good signs though. Firstly, Steve Jobs is still playing a major role. He's now the biggest individual shareholder in Disney (he owns 7% of it now) and will sit on the board of directors. From what I've read about him, he won't keep quiet if he doesn't like something. So I'm sure he's going to make sure his ideas are heard, and I do think Disney want to listen to him: after all, recently he has been a success where they've been a bit of a failure.

They've said that Pixar and Disney will retain their own names and locations; the Pixar campus isn't going anywhere just yet, then.

Perhaps the best sign is that Disney have simply handed their entire animation studio to the Pixar crew to deal with. The two guys that arguably have made Pixar a success now hold lead creative positions in Disney (one, John Lasseter, who has been the creative lead in most of Pixars movies, is even heading up the department that does the theme parks). That's a pretty big thing when you think about it. Disney, the studio that invented modern animation, has basically admitted defeat and handed itself on a plate to relative newcomers with only 20 years in business (nothing compared to Disneys reign).

It's going to be interesting to see how things work out. I hope they stay mostly the same in practice, both are great places even if Disney has been in a rut.

Of course, one plus point is that I now have the chance to work at Disney and Pixar all in one go. Two ambitions with one stone!




Well, I'm not in animation, but I'd sorta fear the "spare parts" thing as well. However, the mere presence of a new chief executive at Disney got Pixar back to the table, and then, if you will, right on top of the table, something that Eisner couldn't claim in a million years. So, I'm hoping that this fresh new management will be able to stay off their high horse and bring back Disney's days of glory, and leave Pixar to do what they do best, make movies.
I am just waiting for Car. The quality on the HD trailer looked great. Good luck with your ambitions Rikki, it's good to aim high and I am sure you will get there in the end.
I've got a DVD from Disney which features Donald Duck, Mickey, Goofy and all the other classics. This in itself is not so special, but they are animated with the computer, rather then drawn. It looks amazing... Would it not be a simple case that drawn animations simply have had their time and that the computer animations are taking over the drawn pictures... In that scenario it is more then logical that Disney took over Pixar to get the needed knowledge in house. Name me one recently released drawn animation movie (which is new)? I cannot name one... they are all computer animated now-a-days.
Are you thinking of the christmas one where they are in 3D? If so that was a special case and it wasn't done by Disney.

Although a lot of 2D animation is done on the computer (particularly the colouring), most of the initial animation is still hand-drawn.

Personally I don't think it's the case that hand-drawn has had its day. Pixars style is certainly 'in', but it's more than just their style that makes their films great. It's the story and humour. Both of those will make a good film whatever style it is. Disney had the knack until a while ago, there's no reason why they can't carry on doing great 2D movies if they get the creative sides sorted out original.gif
Yes I meant that one... It figures that it was not done by Disney... as before they took over Pixar they did not have the knowledge to do it. It really looked a lot better then the 2D ones. Amazingly the figures still had the original Disney style, with all the expressions and stuff. Once I saw that I can't help to feel that we will see less and less 2D. Offcourse it is not the technology used that makes a great movie. It is the overal story, jokes and what not. But isn't it so that in the end a 3D one is cheaper to make? Once you have the character with is expressions and stuff... Will that not save a lot of time to make let's say one scene, instead of drawing it all out? This does come from a person who doesn't know a thing about animation wink.gif
With Japanime taking control of young kids' minds (and, admittingly enough, me too), I really don't think that hand-drawn is out of the woods by any means. Perhaps a bit of a merger (ala Ghost in the Shell), but definately not gone. I don't expect American film makers to follow in this process, but with the recent boom of pop-culture loving anime in the US, I do expect a lot more dubbed import movies, in relation to animation.
QUOTE(W1lz0r @ Jan 25 2006, 11:23 PM)

Yes I meant that one... It figures that it was not done by Disney... as before they took over Pixar they did not have the knowledge to do it. It really looked a lot better then the 2D ones. Amazingly the figures still had the original Disney style, with all the expressions and stuff. Once I saw that I can't help to feel that we will see less and less 2D. Offcourse it is not the technology used that makes a great movie. It is the overal story, jokes and what not. But isn't it so that in the end a 3D one is cheaper to make? Once you have the character with is expressions and stuff... Will that not save a lot of time to make let's say one scene, instead of drawing it all out? This does come from a person who doesn't know a thing about animation wink.gif


3D is actually sometimes described as being harder than 2D (obviously not if you can't draw like me though wink.gif) With 2D you can sit down and draw away, but 3D requires a knowledge of the software too. Now, you can be taught any piece of software so the software you use isn't important, it's the animation theory, but going from 2D to 3D is probably quite difficult because you've suddenly got to know all these controls and functions. Not only that but developing a character takes a lot longer because not only do you have to design it (like in 2D), but you have to build it, rig it, texture it, debug it etc. etc.

On the other hand, with 3D you get as many chances as you want at something. With 2D, if a drawing is wrong you have to chuck away a load of drawings and redo them.

It's swings and roundabouts, each method has its pros and cons, it's the animation principles that are important.

February 2012

S M T W T F S
   1234
56789 10 11
12131415161718
19202122232425
26272829   

Recent Entries

XBox Live Gamercard

Disclaimer

Please note that none of my blogging is official IPS business. Opinions and other things I say are mine and not IPS'.

0 user(s) viewing

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users