Is 2D Feature Animation Truly Dead?
May 16, 2013 in ANIMATION, THE SIMPSONS NEWS
ANIMATION – Is 2D Feature Animation Truly Dead?
Simpsons Quotes:
“Don’t thank me, thank Hollywood for being completely out of good ideas.” ~ Herman Melwood
Are 2D feature animated films viable? Can they make money. Does the general public know the difference between 2D animated movies and CG animated movies? Do they care? Are American animated movies doomed to one genre of films? Namely, family movies?
There’s a lot of questions there. I don’t know the answers but I want to start the conversation here. This is what this week’s post is about.
You can either read the post or watch the video. The information in generally the same but not exactly:
Disney Throws Out Its 2D Department
As of the time of this writing, Disney pretty much got rid off all their 2D animators and have no plans to make any new 2D animated movies. They will all be CG.
I wrote about this a couple of weeks ago but I think it was kinda lost in the post. Especially since it was at the bottom the post and I didn’t make a video of version of my essay. I’m bringing it up again because I’d really like your opinion 
on this topic.
Last week my colleagues at The Corner Booth went to the “hat building” at Disney and spoke to Dale Baer. We asked him about 2D animation and he confirmed that it was dead. At least, as far as feature film animation is concerned.
An Earlier Discussion I had About This Topic
And of course, I wrote earlier about the huge discussion over this topic I had with Richie Chavez and Paul Wee.
Here’s a little of what I had written in that post. If you want to read the whole thing feel free to go and read it:
I’m still hopeful about 2d. I think audiences want to see 2d animated movies.
Richie, had a different opinion. He doesn’t think audiences care. He doesn’t even think audiences know the difference.
The reality is that the last two 2d movies Disney came out with didn’t do well. Never mind the fact that one wasn’t all that well written and the other didn’t really appeal to most people…
That second movie was referring to here was Winnie the Pooh. A movie based on a Disney franchise, I think, ruined by it’s direct to DVD sequels. There’s nothing special or exciting about the franchise anymore. What did they expect?
…How about the “average” person who never thinks about animation at all? Do they feel the same way about 2d animated movies?
We discussed what “average” person meant and narrowed it down to: “parents/families.” Someone looking for something with good values they can trust.
But this begged the question:
Is that the ONLY market for animated movies. Why not target other markets like anime does? The answer from the discussion was this:
-
Anime which is released in theaters that target those other markets, don’t really make all that much money. Even Studio Ghibli movies.
-
Rise of the Guardians, was more teen centric and it didn’t do all that well (and it was CG!).
Different Genres in American Animation
I think the main flaw with testing different genres of animated movies using anime is that anime has a negative stigma attached to it in the eyes of many people. And Rise of the Guardians being marketed to teens…well…bad idea. No teenager is going to get all excited to go watch a movie about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny just because they look “hip.” That’s just bad foresight on the part of Dreamworks.
That said, there’s a few 2D animated European movies, like The Illusionist, which have gotten a lot of acclaim, yet, I don’t think they’ve made much money here in the U.S..
I’m still of the opinion that 2D animation would work with the right story.
If you’re a fan of 2D movies, you will go see them. But if you’re not, why not? Why don’t you watch them? What would get you to go watch a 2D animated movie? If you used to like them but now you don’t, what happened?
I’d love to know. Let’s discuss. I’m in the inside looking out scratching my head.
This shouldn’t be happening, but why is it?
THE SIMPSONS NEWS – My Hiatus is Almost Over
This week is my last week of hiatus. I actually had more fun and relaxed more than I thought I would. Thanks to having our tax return show up just in the nick of time.
I’m going to miss the time off and spending time with the kids, but I’ll enjoy getting the paycheck every week.
Though I relaxed, I’ve still done quite a bit of work too and learned a few things.
For more comics and stories written by me: COMICS AND STORIES If you like what you read, please consider signing up to my rss feed.
I also have a store. Click Here and check it out.
My first introduction to animation, or at least when I really fell in love with it, was when I saw films like American Pop, and Wizards, and Heavy Metal. They weren’t ‘family’ features at all. I was too young for some (if not most) of the subject matter, but like most kids I wanted to grow up fast. The fact that they were animations made it easier for a kid to relate to more mature concepts because it was fantasy, not reality like live action versions of those movies would have felt like. I think animation these days is SO formulaic. Even good ones like Secret of Kells, you could see what was coming. Those old films had mystery and taboo. Things to get excited about or feel uncomfortable about. I’m really excited to see what Bakshi has in store with his new work. Animation needs a shot in the arm. Also, as far as making money goes, musicians have gone on tour to sell records for a long time now. Animated films don’t have to make money if the merchandising around them does. Robotech was another favorite of mine growing up. That franchise is still making money off those old animations. There’s a Kickstarter for a Robotech tabletop game with a goal of $70K. As of today they’ve raised $830K. It’s crazy. …and awesome!
Bakshi wants to make art not money. That’s fine for him. Let him. And Robotech is an animated TV show, which is not part of my argument. 2D is alive and well on TV. But audiences don’t want to come out en mass to support a 2D movie. This makes it a bad investment for investors who would put money down to make one happen. No support, no merchandize money. If 2D movies don’t make a good return on investment then no studio will hire 2D animators to make them. To be a 2D animator therefore, you either move to Europe or Korea.
Well I hope Bakshi makes both. Some art makes money. I thought the Beavis and Butthead movie did okay at the box office and maybe The Simpsons too. I’m not positive though. Maybe proving a concept at the TV level would make investors feel safer about a feature. As far as merchandising goes, I went to a design thing hosted at a local theater where local designers kind of did a show and tell of projects they’ve been working on over the past year. One guy spent the year drawing chibi type ninjas representing different professions and personalities and posted them to his blog. His following got so big that he’s now making a mint on merchandising and was approached by Nintendo to make a video game. I know that’s not animation, but why couldn’t it be? Why not create a following with your own 2D animation and then use merchandising to fund a feature? Years ago I think that was the plan of a guy who was doing an independent cg animation. Although I don’t think he ever finished: http://www.rustboy.com/rustweb.htm
YUP! those are the ways independents can make money off their art. As long as what is done resonates with enough people, there’s money to be made. TV to feature is a good way to go. The Simpsons movie was a huge success. I think, if there was another one, it would be the exception to the rule. But the Simpsons is not effected by what goes on in the animation industry at all. It’s its own industry.
I think your suggestion is very reasonable. I think that other properties that become “their own industries” are the only ones that successfully break this anti 2D feature film mindset.