No Thaw in Sight for the "Frozen" Ice Age

Photo by twoworldsonekingdom on deviantART

Because the Frozen train is still going full speed it seems, Disney World has announced that it will be building a Frozen attraction at Epcot in the Norway Pavilion. I've been mostly silent about the whole Frozen phenomenon, but I say to myself, "Hey, if everyone else is still milking this thing, why not me too!" 

I will qualify my following commentary with this: I do not think Frozen is a bad movie. It looks great, has some good music, and some of the characters that I thought would be incredibly annoying animated tropes and stereotypes were much more palatable. HOWEVER, it is also not as good as its rabid fan base may lead you to believe. At its core, Frozen is another paint-by-numbers Disney fairy-tale musical. It does plenty well enough, but besides some if its visuals it doesn't do anything remarkable. 

I could pontificate on this topic at some length, but instead I thought I would try something a little different. This will be short philosophical dialogue in the tradition of Plato that utilizes an adapted scene from Jurassic Park. For tonight's performance, John Hammond will be playing the role of Disney Animation CEO John Lasseter, and for the role of myself, his co-star Dr. Ian Malcolm. Enjoy...

Dr. Ian Malcolm: If I may... Um, I'll tell you the problem with the [animated] power that you're using here [in Frozen]: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now

[bangs on the table] 

Dr. Ian Malcolm: you're selling it, you wanna sell it. Well... 

John Hammond: I don't think you're giving us our due credit. Our [artists] have done things which nobody's ever done before... 

Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, yeah, but your [artists] were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.

John Hammond: [Wreck-It Ralph]. [Wreck-It Ralph] is on the verge of extinction... 

Dr. Ian Malcolm: [shaking his head] No...

John Hammond: If I was to create a [Wreck-It Ralph sequel] on this island, you wouldn't have anything to say.

Dr. Ian Malcolm: No, hold on. This isn't some [film] that was obliterated by [bad marketing], or the building of a [franchise]. [Musical fairy tales] had their shot, and nature selected them for extinction.

There you have it.  Let's hope that animation, uh, finds a way.

Better Know A Studio Part II: Pixar

My ongoing series about animation studios continues with Disney's new right hand man in feature films, Pixar.

Pixar's first film was Toy Story in 1995, but the company's history reaches back much farther.  Founded in 1979 by Ed Catmull, Alvy Ray Smith, and Steve Jobs, The Graphics Group, as it was originally known, was part of Lucasfilm and developed rendering software and special effects along with Industrial Light & Magic.  In 1983, Jobs bought the company outright from George Lucas who was starting to lose steam after Return of the Jedi.  The name Pixar derives from the Pixar Image Computer that the company produced and sold to high-end clients, including Walt Disney Studios which was at the time experimenting with computer animation to replace the traditional ink-and-paint system.  John Lasseter, a Pixar employee, had been creating short animated segments to show off the computers capabilities.  The first of these, Luxo Jr., features the hopping desk lamp that has since become the company's mascot. This is a much better mascot than the hideous baby that starred in Tin Toy.

Oh, God!  It has come to take our cute children!

After a few years of struggling to stay afloat, Pixar finally struck a deal with Disney to produce three computer-animated films.  The success of Toy Story started to build faith in the company, but the relationship between Pixar and Disney was often contentious until the former was purchased in full in 2006.

Pixar is the current critical darling of the animation scene.  Over the last ten years, they have produced some of the most acclaimed animated films ever and are always the horse to watch when award season rolls around.  This is partly due to the company's emphasis on nurturing creativity and story.  Employees are encouraged to work on their own projects using company resources when available, and the results are breath-taking.  My personal favorite is Enrico Casarosa'a La Luna.  The short is like a children's book come to life and fills me with a sense of wonder that only animation can achieve.

Story is king at Pixar.  Rather than cram in pop culture references and memorable one-liners, Pixar strives to create strong, believable narratives with rich characters that connect with audiences.  Several of them feel like folktales in the way they portray simple messages like love, family, and loneliness and touch something basic in the spirit of the audience.  If you have never felt a swell of emotion watching at least one Pixar movie, you have no soul.

After 25 years of success though, Pixar is starting to wander over a few speed bumps. For one, even though early on the studio had an unofficial policy about not cranking out loads of sequels, that's pretty much what we're getting now.  We've already had three Toy Story movies (with a rumored fourth) and Cars 2, plus a Monsters Inc. prequel later this year and a sequel to Finding Nemo called Finding Dory in the works.  I'm not saying all of these are bad; I'm excited for Monsters University and Toy Story 3 made me cry like Santa Claus just killed my dog in front of me.  Pixar just needs to make sure that they don't just become a franchise factory.

There have also been some issues about the studio being a boy's club.  This isn't unique to Pixar, but the controversy surrounding Brave, its hero Merida, and Brenda Chapman being fired as director all cast a bit of doubt over the studio's ability to embrace a female point-of-view.  Also, with John Lasseter now serving as the chief creative officer of both Walt Disney Animation and Pixar, the lines between the two companies have started to blur slightly.  Compare Brave, from Pixar, and Disney's Wreck-It Ralph.  The two have a slight feel of switched-at-birth syndrome.  I'm even concerned that Disney is placing all of its animation stock in Pixar so that it doesn't have to worry about making animated movies anymore.

The story of Pixar, much like a fairy tale, is the story of a young beautiful princess who goes to live with the successful prince.  The marriage is happy, but after a while, the politics of ruling start to change the way the princess looks at the world.  She's still beautiful, but she has to decide whether she wants to rule with grace or with power. Hopefully, Pixar will make the right choice.

Better Know A Studio Part I: Walt Disney Studios

With animated features becoming more and more successful and prevalent, it can sometimes get confusing about who makes which movie.  In this recurring series I'll cast some light onto each studio, it's history, and where it stands in the landscape of animated films today.  My other, slightly more selfish purpose for this series of articles is to try and teach that not every animated film is done by Disney, nor is every CGI one from Pixar or Dreamworks.  It's a serious pet peeve of mine, and dammit if I'm not going to try and do my part to educate the public.  Now then, onto the first (ironically enough): Walt Disney Animation.

Started by brothers Walt and Roy O. Disney in Kansas City in 1923, Disney is the oldest, the largest, and for decades was THE standard by which all other works of animation were measured.  The studio pioneered many early technological and artistic breakthroughs, including sound, color, the multi-plane camera, and the so called, "imitation of life," school of animation.  It was this ambition that led to the release of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves in 1937, the first cel-animated feature length film.  

Snow White was, of course, only the first in a long line of animated films produced by the studio. I have lumped the long history of the studio into three rough periods.  The first, and arguably the best artistically, extended from Snow White in 1937 to Sleeping Beauty in 1959.  This era contained some of the most beloved films (Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella, and Bambi) as well as some of the most experimental (Fantasia, Saludos Amigos).  These films had some of the best artists in the history of the medium working on them and they had no stifling limitations in regards to what was expected of them since they were the first.  The results were some of the best crafted and innovative films ever made.

The next era that I half-jokingly refer to as "The Disney Dark Ages" runs from One Hundred and One Dalmatians in 1961 all the way to Oliver & Company in 1988. Starting in the 60's, the quality of the films started to drop for a myriad of reasons. Walt's death in 1966 left the company and studio without his strong leadership and vision.  Additionally, the scores of talented animators who had worked on the earlier films had either moved on to other studios or were starting to get older and their skill had started to diminish. Finally the new, more efficient, method of xeroxing animation cels made production easier, but the image quality suffered, creating a signature look of slightly scratchy line work.  Not all of the movies produced in this time were not bad per se, and you definitely start to see an uptick in quality later on as the studio moved towards it's next big era.

The last major Disney epoch extends from The Little Mermaid in 1989 to the present. This is perhaps the most beloved era and contains some of the biggest and most popular Disney movies.  My generation was raised with these films.  Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, Mulan...I could go on and on.  After Tarzan, the studio started playing around again with less conventional stories (Lilo & Stitch, The Emperor's New Groove), all-CGI films (Dinosaur, Chicken Litttle), and some that we have collectively chosen to forget (Home on the Range, Treasure Planet).

After a few real misses in the last few years, the studio seems to be headed back in the right direction with Tangled and Wreck-It Ralph.  Pixar founder John Lasseter (more on him in a later post) is now in charge of the studio, and I had high hopes for what else is coming.  However, recent news about Disney laying off hundreds of employees has me worried that the company may in fact be moving away from producing animated films, or even original films at all.

I could do a separate article about each of the studio's fifty-two animated films, but for now this is where the studio is today.  Aside from Mickey Mouse & Friends, animated films are still the company's hallmark even though it has grown to be one of the largest corporations in the world. While the playing field has grown and more teams are springing up, Disney continues to be the Yankees of animation.  Love 'em or hate 'em the House of Mouse earned its place on the top of the pile, now they just have to not fall off.

Cartoon Shorts On The Rise (Hopefully)

Last week, the Motion Picture Academy announced its short list for the Best Animated Short category.  The news got me thinking: how often do people these days think about animated shorts?  If you showed a copy of the nominees list this year to the average person, I'd wager that most people would not recognize more than one or two of the entries.  

Even as an aspiring animation professional, I haven't had the opportunity to see most of the nominees since they usually only make the rounds on film festivals and art house theaters, and Orlando is seriously lacking in both when compared to New York, Los Angeles, or Toronto.  This troubles me because I love animated shorts.  They are my favorite form of animation and the fact they they no longer occupy the same level of notoriety in the popular consciousness that they once did bothers me.  Back in the Golden Age of Animation, shorts were a staple for the movie-going audience.  Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, Betty Boop, and Tom & Jerry, as well as many other classic cartoon characters, were born and reached their creative peak in theatrical shorts.

Disney and Pixar are perhaps the two best  places for quality shorts to be made and get a reasonable amount of exposure.  Both studios,  under the leadership of John Lasseter, have encouraged artists to come forward with their pet project ideas and to use studio resources to make them a reality.  Last year there was Enrico Casarosa's deeply personal La Luna from Pixar, and this year there is Disney's Paperman.  

The short, directed by John Kahrs and playing in theaters before Wreck-It Ralph, is a sweet little boy-meets-girl story, but where it really succeeds is the visuals.  A new blend of CG and traditional hand-drawn animation makes for a final product that has all of the expressiveness and artistry of traditional techniques, but also the depth and complexity of the new school.  Still images (like the one at the top of this post) do not do the film justice.  It must be seen on the big screen to truly appreciate its value.  It is truly remarkable to watch, and I sincerely hope that it breathes some new life into more classical ways of producing animation.

There has been a growing trend in playing animated shorts before films.  In the last year or so, it seems that most animated films have been preceded by some kind of short, be it Maggie Simpson in the Longest Daycare, I Tawt I Taw A Puddy Tat, or Paperman. Even TV seems to be gravitating towards shorter programming with many of Cartoon Network's shows now being broken up into 15-minute segments.  Maybe studios are starting to see the viability of making shorts, and while we will almost certainly not be able to get back to the state of cartoon shorts were in their heyday, it's at least nice to see that they are starting to come back.  Hopefully some of the wonderful shorts that were not released with major films will also one day find a way to reach a larger audience as well.  Now all we need to do is get out and watch them!