What does Disney have to lose if they made all their theatrical

Theyll be seen as "old"


2d feature animation is over. Let it go

Unless they continued to make them bad on purpose, all the hard work they went into tricking people into thinking 3D is what they want.

>>93966478
can't hold it back anymore

Money.

>>93966478
They're a 90-year old company with a withstanding legacy that's ingrain into the consciousness of anybody who has access to a screen. They'll never not be seen as "old".

Besides, the shorts have always been where they take chances with crap. Why not use it to gauge interest in 2D?

>>93966478
Lets not rush to any conclusions before we know how the ponies did

>>93966429
2D animation is more expensive. Unless you mean flash or something, which just looks bad.

>>93966429
hundreds of millions of dollarydoos

next stupid question

>>93966478
When Disney finally releases a 2D short: "You're Welcome"

File: maxresdefault.jpg (105KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 1280x720px

>>93966933
>>93966966
As expensive as what they were trying to achieve with Paperman? I don't think so.

>>93967025

that was 5 years ago, it's probably scrapped by now.

>>93967415
What the hell are you talking about?

>>93967025
Apparently the technique is still too undeveloped to do a full-blown movie with it.

>>93966873
Every single 2D animated movie has bombed commercially for the past 14 years. Disney themselves have tried four times in that period, with action movies like Treasure Planet, princess movies like Princess and the Frog, and more general disney fare like Whinnie the Pooh. Each time was a failure. Disney will never ever bring it back.

>>93967694
Well, so much for legacy then, right?

>>93967694
TP was a mess
PatF was about blacks and frogs in a swamp
Winnie the Pooh, movie for toddlers, competed with Harry Potter finale

>>93967868
Disney Animation Studios has never been about legacy. Only twice, in their 80 years of making movies, has their flagship studio attempted to call back to earlier eras (Fantasia 2000, Winnie the Pooh). Both times were abject failures. DAS has always been about what will be successful right now. Sometimes this means selling out and copying competitors (Chicken Little, The Black Cauldron). Sometimes this means keeping with current trends (Big Hero 6, the package film era). Sometimes it means taking great risks and either falling flat on your face (Fantasia) or reaping great rewards (The Little Mermaid). For better or worse, no one can accuse DAS of relying/making decisions based on their legacy.

>>93966873
>Why not use it to gauge interest in 2D?

Because they already did that with Princess and the Frog and "discovered" people liked/loved it and wanted more traditional 2d films. So much so that they said they would make more. Only they really didn't want to because of cost issues. So they wanted to bury 2d with a bad movie and made a new Winnie the Pooh film, and decided to really burrry it so they opened it against one of the Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows films. It of course did poorly so they were able to tell people "See? 2d is dead! Let us go back to c.g. films"

They just want 2d for tv or shorts. They really have no intention of makibgv another full length 2d film. It all goes down to cost and time, both of which is cheaper to do on a computer.

File: BigBadFox3-1000x817.jpg (92KB, 1000x817px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1000x817px

>>93968790

so fuck disny, they're stale as fuck nowadays. let's root for small guys now.

>>93967569
I find that hard to believe.
The Japs have been using CGI references to trace complex frames in anime since its inception.

>>93968790
2D animation is loads cheaper then CG, the problem is that you can't change things at the last minute with 2D animation like you can with CG.

Frozen was animated with less then six months to go because of a big rewrite of the whole movie.

>>93969466

made shitload of money, but looks like crap now.
somehow they manage to avoid this issue with zootopia

How do they lose money off shorts anyways? I thought it was dependent on the feature it's attached to.