Can Hayao Miyazaki Save Disney's Soul? 548
IronicGrin writes "Even hard-core House of Mouse apologists have to admit that Disney's Feature Animation division has lost its way. After a half decade of pathetic failures (Atlantis) and epic disasters (Treasure Planet), the company shut its fabled Orlando 2D animation studios last year and announced that it was jumping on the computer animation bandwagon. A big motivation for the move to CGI was, of course, the Magic Kingdom's tenuous relationship with Pixar--the source of all of Disney's recent animated hits. But Disney is overlooking a better example of just what its toon team has been doing wrong...right under its nose.
Howl's Moving Castle, which opened this weekend to rapturous critical acclaim, is the third masterpiece from Japan's Studio Ghibli that Disney has released theatrically. Today's New York Times has a feature by A.O. Scott [reg required, blah blah] calling Miyazaki the "world's greatest living animated-filmmaker"; meanwhile, last Thursday, I wrote a column for SFGate.com on why Disney animation, 3D rendered or not, is doomed to irrelevance if it fails to (re)learn some basic lessons from Miyazaki and his cohorts at Ghibli. What do you think? Is Disney destined to fade to black, or can a little Ghibli flavor (mmm....Ghibli) get it back on track?"
Management (Score:5, Interesting)
PS: Here's an excellent series of articles about what went wrong [savedisney.com] with Disney feature animation.
Meh, they will just abuse this relationship (Score:5, Interesting)
I still don't think Disney learned their lesson. Eisner didn't have one creative bone in his body, all he did was bleed dry whatever he could(and took a lions share of cash for himself) while Disney's main properties languished. I suspect the same will go for this relationship.
Will Anime last? (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course I could be completely wrong and anime would be more than just a fad, in which case this would be a good move for Disney. I guess that's the gamble.
I think maybe, no. (Score:5, Interesting)
A lot of the animators have started up their own studios though. I think Firefly Studios is one? Regardless, I think the Disney that Walt had imagined is long gone and far from coming back. They need to stop pumping out sequels and start creating movies with good stories.
It doesn't matter what medium the movie is delivered in; it's the story that delivers.
We've been here before (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Solution: don't focus on blockbuster/masterpiec (Score:5, Interesting)
The best example recently is the Heffalump movie. It's a little-kid movie, not the traditional epic, but its great for little kids (I'd say under 5, maybe up to 7 or 8 depending on the child). We saw it with my 2 year old in the theater. When it came out on DVD, we got it. So, if you were head of marketing, and you had a fairly big DVD release, how would you handle the marchandising? Lots of Roo and Lumpy stuffed animals, right? Midshare, get the kids playing with them. Give them something tangible to reinforce the whole Pooh franchise, right?
WRONG! Not only do most of the retail outlets have nothing in the Pooh line except - maybe - a stuffed Pooh bear that isn't tied to the release at all, but even the freakin' Disney Store online doesn't have a Lumpy. None. Nada. Zilch. Now, they did have two Lumpys in the local Disney Store . And those were left over from the shipment after the theatrical release, when the original (meager) shipment of Lumpy and Roo sold out in about a day and a half. Flew off the shelves, according to the DS worker.
No, in my opinion somebody at the top has purposely set the 2D animations up to fail.
Re:Management (Score:5, Interesting)
I can tell you, the respect goes both ways, too. I was at the Ghibli Museum in Japan last semester on a trip with my classmates, and they had one of the areas of the museum dedicated to Pixar, with tons of sketches, figures, models, etc. It was amazing and inspiring to see two animation houses in separate countries share their art with each other.
Disney and intellectual property (Score:4, Interesting)
One might expect that being a victim of abuse, Disney should never be abusive to the others. However, in real life it's almost always the opposite. When you are a victim, you don't dream about the perfect world, where nobody is a victim - you dream of the world where YOU are no longer a victim. I think this could partially explain this company's attitude to patents, copyright and trademark. "There was no mercy for me - why should I have it now for anyone?"
Re:"Howl's Moving Castle" ruined with dubbing (Score:5, Interesting)
Rumor is, Miyazaki even sent them a genuine katana with a note to that effect attached to drive the point home.
Re:Hamlet? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Solution: don't focus on blockbuster/masterpiec (Score:4, Interesting)
The Lion King [kimbawlion.com] wasn't planned to be a big hit but it was, of course it wasn't really their movie at all, just a prettier version of someone elses, likely. [straightdope.com]
Re:Will Anime last? (Score:4, Interesting)
This is exactly right. Ghibli movies are not good because they are anime. They are good in their own right and they just happen, as animation produced in Japan, to fall under the label of "anime".
Don't get me wrong. I watch a fair amount of anime. In fact, I'd even go so far to label myself an anime fan. But the simple fact is that 95% of the anime that gets produced is dreadful. And, believe me, I'm including an awful lot of the popular stuff in that assessment. For every Evangelion, Noir, Excel Saga or Mononoke-hime, there's at least a dozen formulaic "big robots hitting each other" shows, Pokemon clones, Dragonball clones and insanely-insulting-to-the-intelligence precisely-pitched-at-the-desperate-fanboy-market "Love Hina" style harem shows. Oh, and most of it *is* for kids.
In short, anime is like pretty much any other genre. A few titles which really stand out in the mind and endure, set against a sea of tripe. Not so different from the broader TV and cinema output of the US or the UK, really.
Right now, Miyazaki is one of the most talented people making "family" movies. In fact, Studio Ghibli and Pixar are basically the only people in the world making animation that's entertaining for both children and adults. That's the real story here.
As for Disney's woes, its animation division desperately needs to break out of its tired formula for mass producing identikit movies. Can we PLEASE get lead characters who aren't wisecracking late-teens-early-twentysomethings. In fact, while I'm on that particular rant, I'll address it to the anime industry (excluding Ghibli and one or two others) as well. How about some characters who actually fall outside the 16-21 age range for once? Please? Oh, and Square-Enix, how about letting me have an FFXI avatar who looks as though he needs to shave more than once a week.
Ok, just got completely sidetracked and can't even remember where I started. I'll shut up now.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
It's fascinating to see the Ghibli Museum in Japan, as Miyazaki designed, or helped design, pretty much all of it. Nothiing about it is "standard" or "normal". Even the tickets are fascinating (and keepsakes), they contain a frame of film in them (from one of Ghibli's films.) There are nooks and crannies and crawlways all over the place, kids really have a blast exploring. Even the bathroom was amazing, with some incredible stuff displayed in them. (Yep I said the bathroom.) We had a female friend with us on the trip and from talking to her we learned that not only was the women's bathroom the same way, it contained different stuff!
Re:Different strokes (Score:2, Interesting)
I agree with your assessment completely. But I'm not sure Anime's lack of acceptance here is a bad thing necessarily.
I don't know about the average Joes, but I know I loved Spirited Away moreso for its subtleties. The problem is that popular movie culture on this side of the ocean is, as you said, so much more physical/action-oriented than cerebral, and that is what sells over here. North American producers don't dub/sub and release Anime over here for the sake of the artform. They do it to make money. And while they understand that they are selling to a niche market over here, they still want to appeal to the widest possible audience.
Take the recent release of Ghost in the shell: Innocence. Aside from the fact that Dreamworks screwed it up and put the closed caption track[breeze blows] into the subtitles track, they also tried marketting it as an action-oriented flick(Compare the American DVD cover to the Japanese DVD cover) when it most certainly was not. But they understand that this is what sells over here.
It is also why I think traditional Anime will never be accepted in mainstream North America. Then again, I prefer it this way, Personally. :)
Anime versus Disney versus Miyazaki versus... (Score:3, Interesting)
More specifically, if you restrict yourself to anime, you've cut your audience--some people just won't see it or else consider it crazy, far out, and inaccessible (because, let's face it, a heck of a lot if anime is crazy, far out, and inaccessible, just in an entertaining way). And, like American animation, there is some very good anime (Cowboy Bebop, a choice I hope is non-controversial) and plenty of lame ones (I'm not going to cite any examples because that's just begging for flamewars. Think so some anime you hate and put it here). Hence, you've restricted your market by your choice of style, but anime is just that-a style. It's no guarantee of quality by any means, and Miyazaki has done some amazing work, (though let's be honest with ourselves--Mononoke and Nausicaa were more or less the same movie), but part of that may be because he hasn't whored himself out as a profit moachine, but rather as a dedicated animator, and you don't need to convert to and anime-based approach to find that, you just need a Disney willing to hire people (like those who work at, say, Pixar) who share his dedication.
And, though it's responding to flamebait, American animation isn't crap. I would go so far as to say that it's objectively better than Japanese animation. Please don't take this as an insult to anime, potential flamers, (Bebop is in fact my favoritest show ever, blah blah blah), merely an observation. The drawing in American animation tends to be less elaborate than that in anime (also somewhat less stylistically limited. It's a rare anime that doesn't include at least one of the following: drawing hair as an impossibly elaborate system of spikes sprouting of characters' heads, "expressive" eyes that take up half of people's faces, or chins likes knives). However, the animation is much better. The elaborate drawing required of anime, and in particular its frequent conversion from the still medium of manga, results in a great deal of scenes defined by minimal physical movement, or action scenes that jerk through a series of 1-second stills. Conversely, American animation, especially Disney, is always very, well, animated. Compare something like Trigun or DBZ (as examples of shows in which motion is very important) to Aladdin or Beauty and the Beast and the differences in the way motion is portrayed are just phenomenal, and there's more and smoother motion in American animation, hands down. Miyazaki's work is to some extent a partial violation of this tendency--Studio Ghibli's work at times reaches American fluidity--but the fact of the matter is that, in general, American animation is objectively better as animation. American animation tends towards the fluid and anime towards the static and elbaorate. I'm not saying either is "better," but any contention that work like Disney's represents "crap" represents the work of someone who enters a battle of wits unarmed.
Disney was always in league with the devil (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Animators won't save Disney... (Score:4, Interesting)
They highly favor Yugiho/Pokemon over Mickey mouse for example. Is it me or are Japanese the only ones creating fucked up anime-ish characters for kids? Americans play their character creation process too safe, fearing political correctness. In the end American characters are boring.
Re:Will Anime last? (Score:4, Interesting)
Especially not 'Spirited Away'; although that film included some Japanese characteristics, it wasn't in-your-face stereotypical anime (I'd say it was Japanese at a deeper, and more interesting level).
In terms of visual style, it borrowed from 'Alice in Wonderland' as much as it did from anime. It's also notable that Chihiro wasn't drawn in stereotypical "big-eyes cute" fashion; in fact, she looked fairly ordinary, which I guess was all to the benefit of the film.
And yeah, the story was the thing. 'Spirited Away' was so good because it was multi-layered and had depth. OTOH I'm not sure it would appeal to (e.g.) children under 7- perhaps a bit scary, but also not simplistic enough.
That having been said "Kiki's Delivery Service" struck me as more of a (very good) competitor for Disney; although as a 29-year old guy I didn't enjoy it that much (didn't have the same broad appeal as 'Sprited Away'), I've no doubt that were I a 9-year old girl, I'd have loved it to bits...
Re:Is there something wrong with me? (Score:3, Interesting)
Atlantis, IMHO, is underrated, if only for the humor. Yeah, the story's nothing new, but the characters are engaging, and some parts make me laugh even though I've seen it a dozen times.
Don't get me started on the sad, sad release of Atlantis 2, or Tarzan 2, or Lion King 1 1/2, or Cinderella 2, or...
As a parent of four... (Score:2, Interesting)
I can tell you what spelled the death of Disney.
Direct to video
My kids would rather see Land Before Time XIX than Cinderella 2. Has Disney (not Pixar) even released any animation over the last three years that didn't have a number after it?
My kids certainly don't have the fondness or loyalty to Disney that my siblings and I had in the seventies...
Re:Different strokes (Score:3, Interesting)
At least compare equally. Pit "Spirited Away" or "Princess Mononoke" vs the two from Disney. Even the aging "Ghost in the Shell" fares well.
Re:Will Anime last? (Score:3, Interesting)
Can you see Disney _ever_ being willing to explore a mature theme in a "cartoon" they make? They've walled themselves off into the G rating only corner and seem to like it there. That's not to say a G rated animation has to suck, just that Disney seems to think it can't have any mature themes period.
Disney is simply delivering what American parents want. Have you forgotten last November already? Some of us realize that it is futile and counterproductive to try to hide kids from reality, but we are in the minority. Some of us also realize that not all animation is appropriate for all age groups, but again, this is not the majority. Put the two together, and it makes sense that Disney would aim low in terms of MPAA ratings - that's where the money is.
US-produced children's entertainment is in a big rut right now, partly because of "family values" and partly because of the success of Japanese imports (often even after excessive and senseless editing). Like what happened in the comic book industry, the animation industry is afraid of running afoul of the morality police. Look at what happened when PBS was set to air something that showed kids that homosexual couples exist (without this even being the focus of the episode). Look at where almost all of the complaints to the FCC come from. Creativity in this country is being stifled "for the children."
As with most things however, this is just a temporary setback that will disappear in a few decades when a generation or two of parents have died off. All of these "values" issues are non-issues to the younger generations, and thanks to Japan, kids are being exposed to "mature" themes without bringing on the end of the world. In fact, not only are horrible things not happening, but kids are actually taking an interest in things like reading as a result of Japan's influence. Graphic novels might not be the height of modern literature, but anything that gets kids into bookstores on a regular basis can't be all bad. Change happens, but it is a slow process.
Re:Animators won't save Disney... (Score:2, Interesting)
Because Disney isn't about animation anymore, its about Parks, Hotels, T-Shirts and films signed off by the sort of people who next week will sign off the building of a 500 room "luxury" hotel.
Until Disney drives its animation division as a seperate company run by people (business people) who understand that market it will be doomed.
Perhaps, but the same people were actually fairly successful for a long time. One of the problems I find, repeated through much of their films is lack of imagination. Most of their characters are terribly overused cliche's and the scripts are predictable. Pixar has been far less so as has Miyazaki. Robin Williams and Elton John saved Aladin and Lion King, where if you think about it, if they were pretty much any other people these films, too, would have been mediocre.
IMHO Disney has let the business of imagination be taken over by Dreamworks and others while they simply try to broker small, new talent for profit.
Re:Animators won't save Disney... (Score:3, Interesting)
I take exception to that. Treasure Planet captured the spirit of the story and most of the details. The whole eighteenth century with robots and rockets style was cool. The soundtrack was good. The voice for Billy Bones was great. It had the most creative version of Ben Gunn since Miss Piggy in the Muppet version. The scene where Israel Hands flies out into space from the mast instead of dropping into the sea was a nice way to reimagine the story's most exciting moment.
Treasure Planet was good. I think it was too esoteric to be a commercial success.
Re:Management (Score:4, Interesting)
This does NOT encourage creativity, or encourage innovation. Why take risks (and possibly get-sacked) when you can stick with the status-quo and make bags of money.
Disney's formula is depressingly predictable - take the hero or heroine, give them a sidekick (usually an animal), insert a predictable "bad guy/girl" who's just evil because they want to be. Sing a few songs, dance a few dances, everything looks like it's going the protagonist's way until something goes wrong near the end, add a bit of action, everything turns out OK (cue another musical number).
Is it any wonder that Disney, and other big companies are scared to death about losing the intellectual property they have? They're not really capable of creating new work, so the lifeline they're clinging-to are the "classics".
N.
Re:Animators won't save Disney... (Score:3, Interesting)
I dunno about when it lost its way or if it was ever a "do no evil" sort of company. But, as an animator who was born in 78, I can tell you their glory days are certainly creating positive ripples even today. There's a book floating around called "The Art of Life" (err I hope that's the title, memory's a little fuzzy) that talks about all the advances they did with animation over the years. It's a VERY interesting read and it's certainly changed my life with regards to my career. Basically, those dudes turned animation into a huge main-stream business. It's difficult to watch a Pixar movie without seeing some of their influence.
What happened in the 40's aside, Lion King and Aladdin were both largely responsible for entering the field I'm in now. Can't say I'm a huge fan of their business today, but I do remember when Disney was 'magical'. Hmm I'm not sure that really answers your question, but it wasn't all that long ago that I didn't despise them.
slashdot needs a "factually incorrect" mod option (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Will Anime last? (Score:3, Interesting)
Which brings me onto something curious; I like the "look" of Japanese cartoons (including non-'Manga' stuff like Hello Kitty, and those anthropomorphic household appliances in manuals for electronic applicances). Although my interest was pretty superficial, I wanted to use this as the basis for my own cartoon style. And....
My own drawings ended up looking *very* Max Fleischer-esque. Guess who was another big influence on the Japanese?
Re:Animators won't save Disney... (Score:2, Interesting)
This is my take. (Score:2, Interesting)
Well, an on-topic quote from the master himself (Score:3, Interesting)
So, maybe he's onto something here. The characters in his stories struggle, but don't fall into the trap of demonizing their enemies. It's touching, really. He's not saying that Good will vanquish Evil, he's saying Good can transcend the very division of the world into Good and Evil.