Let’s face it. The days of our youth are gone.
Sure, we all still glance at Cartoon Network when we’re channel surfing. Some of us have a stuffed animal still tucked away under our beds or in our closets. Maybe you’re like me and you enjoy the occasional Capri Sun or glass of chocolate milk.
But maybe we’ve distanced ourselves from childhood because what’s being offered today just isn’t that great. Haven’t we all looked at something our younger siblings or nieces and nephews watch and thought back to better days of solid Nickelodeon programming like “Doug” and “Salute Your Shorts” or family films like “Home Alone” and “The Sandlot?”
This can probably be chalked up to something that happens to every generation: A distinct sense of contempt for the generation that follows. But maybe there is substance to our claims. Today’s youth market is being saturated with substandard product and repetitive sequels. And no one is a bigger proponent of substandard material these days than the Walt Disney Company.
Again, gone are the days of “The Little Mermaid,” “Beauty and the Beast” and “Aladdin.” Quality animation, compelling storylines, and lovable characters no longer seem to be a priority for Disney. Instead, the company has chosen to go for the quick buck, making inexpensive sequels (“cheapquels”) to existing properties. So we are given direct-to-video titles like “Lilo and Stitch 2: Stitch Has a Glitch” and “Cinderella III: A Twist in Time,” both of which weren’t even produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios.
Like most of Disney’s poorly written direct-to-video sequels and spin-offs, these movies were produced at DisneyToon Studios, a division of the animation department used for making inexpensive sequels, as well as Winnie the Pooh films such as “Pooh’s Heffalump Movie” and Mickey Mouse films like “Mickey’s Twice Upon a Christmas.”
The story of how Disney animation got to this point isn’t hard to figure out. In the late 1990s, faced with the allure of computer animation, Disney decided that the reason their films weren’t doing as well anymore was because they still used traditional 2D animation. In 2000, Walt Disney Feature Animation was turned into an all-CGI operation, producing films like “Dinosaur” and “Chicken Little.” “Dinosaur” flopped and “Chicken Little” did well, but not enough to blow anyone’s mind.
Which brings me to my theory of why Disney wasn’t drawing the audiences it used to anymore. Disney had forgotten how to tell stories. Pixar films always do well, but more than that, they do better than other CGI features.Pixar takes the time to create characters and stories that are fun and smart, and that appeal to both children and adults without pandering to low standards (I’m looking at you, “Shrek.”).
Which is why, in 2006, when Disney purchased Pixar and appointed Pixar mastermind John Lasseter chief creative officer on all Disney animation projects, Disney began to make steps in the right direction. Lasseter’s first move was to cancel all future films to be produced at DisneyToon studios. What’s left in the pipeline is being released- and then it’s done.
Even better is the future ahead for Disney Animation. “Meet the Robinsons,” thanks to Lasseter’s assistance, was pulled out of development troubles and released in March to critical acclaim. The movie is clearly the best work Disney has done on anything in years, as it combines a fast-paced and engaging story with gorgeous visuals. If I hadn’t known it was Disney, I would have sworn up and down that it was a Pixar product.
Earlier this year, at the Walt Disney Company shareholder meeting (the official report of which can be found on Disney’s corporate Web site), Disney announced several upcoming films that audiences can look forward to.
“Enchanted,” a movie that will combine 2D animation and live action, will be released this November. “Enchanted” tells the story of Princess Giselle (Amy Adams), who lives in the animated fairy tale land of Andalasia. Giselle is engaged to Prince Edward (James Marsden) when the evil Queen Narissa (Susan Sarandon) banishes her to the real world, a.k.a. New York City. Once there, Giselle is taken in by a divorce lawyer (Patrick Dempsey), with whom she begins to fall in love. The best part about this film is that, in order to work, the 2D animation part must be flawless. It has to convince you that this is a real Disney film in order for you to buy how perilous it is that Giselle finds herself in the Big Apple.
Also on Disney’s slate is the completely traditionally animated “The Frog Princess.” In my opinion, this film will be Disney’s triumphant return to 2D animation. The film will be set in 1920s New Orleans and will star Disney’s first African-American princess. The film also promises to return to the Broadway musical style of storytelling that made Disney animation famous in the first place. Ron Clements and John Musker, who together directed “The Little Mermaid” and “Aladdin,” will direct “The Frog Princess.” The music for the film will be done by Randy Newman, who is responsible for much of the award-winning music of the Pixar films. In short, “The Frog Princess” will be a true return to form for Disney animation.
So if you’ve become dissatisfied with Disney for soiling the films of your childhood, don’t fret. They’re trying to make it up to us, so be sure to give them the benefit of the doubt and check out their upcoming films.
