Will Disney buy DWA? No! Universal did!

[ShyViolet]

Interesting op-ed:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comi ... ertainment


KFP 3 to get co-director:

http://deadline.com/2015/02/kung-fu-pan ... 201378811/

[Ben]

Selling space and leasing it back rarely works.

Sure, it frees up a bit of cash short-term, but then they use some of that cash in paying up for a long lease and then find that when they go to renew the rent price has gone up again and they end up paying more than they would have done - and become less secure - than if that space was theirs.

That could then lead to downsizing when rent becomes an issue and they have to work from a smaller space for the same cost...or, on the flipside, if/when the company becomes highly successful again they're then going to need or want to own their own facilities again, leading to an unnecessary buy-up of that space again, or somewhere new, also bringing in moving costs.

Not a great long-term plan, unless JK sees the writing on the wall and is prepping the company to turn into something more akin to a smaller independent model that eventually is sold off/sets up shop within a studio division. Once you cut your ties with your roots (as has also been done with shutting PDI) then it's only a matter of time.

At this point, I can't see DWA being around in five years. Home and Boss Baby (yeah, it's very early to call it, but I am) will result in losses, while third go arounds for Panda and Dragons are going to see weaker returns, I think. With the rest of the slate in flux, it's not clear what else may make it out and, by then, it could be too late. Ironically I think the two projects that could have seen big critical and/or commercial success - Me And My Shadow and, yes, Madagascar 4 - have been put on the back burner.

In some strange way, the creation of DWA and its first few films was a reaction to Disney's success and later failures in the 1990s. Now that that studio has regained the high ground - especially in beating out "sure thing" Dragon 2 by nabbing Animated Feature *and* Animated Short at the Oscars on Sunday - maybe the nucleus of DWA's "reason d'être" has run its course?

They do say that when a student breaks away from their mentor, the student will eiventually become the new master, but here I think it's more a case of the student going into competition against the mentor, only for this move to cause the older competitor to become stronger again. At that point, consciously or subconsciously, the younger is defeated and to an extent, without a terrific sense of identity (I mean, just who is DWA "fighting" nowadays?), they slowly fade away...

[Randall]

Crazy idea: DWA should become the new flagbearer for hand-drawn animation. Think about it. They'd be the only game in town, and if succesful (okay, BIG "if"), it would push Dis into doing the same thing again.

I can dream.

[ShyViolet]

Go Rand! That's a great idea.

Also, very good and interesting points Ben about who is DWA "fighting" now? What is left to parody? Fairy tails made a BIG comeback with Tangled and Frozen, (and Brave as well). Shrek could never be released now: it's from a completely different era. Home and Boss Baby fit that category too: relics from the time of SharkTale and Shrek. As Rand pointed out, DWA needs to do something that is unique and hasn't been done before, or at least in a very long time (Like 2d).

[EricJ]

Crazy idea: DWA should become the new flagbearer for hand-drawn animation. Think about it. They'd be the only game in town, and if succesful (okay, BIG "if"), it would push Dis into doing the same thing again.

Not to mention the implied sadistic relish in forcing Katzenberg's "2-D is dead, because nobody saw Sinbad!" words back down his throat, twelve years after trying to make Shrek and Kung Fu Panda an industry--
Hot, steaming, and shovelful by shovelful, until he begs us to stop.
(Oh, sure, we might be getting back at '01-'05 Eisner, too, but we all knew Eisner was only committing his anti-2D atrocities because of Shrek 2, so it all comes back down to JK's fault anyway.)

It'd be all about long-awaited poetic justice--Some of us can dream, too.

In some strange way, the creation of DWA and its first few films was a reaction to Disney's success and later failures in the 1990s.
(I mean, just who is DWA "fighting" nowadays?)

Another bit of obsolescence is that when Shrek 1 fell in love with those magic critic words "Humor Adults Can Enjoy Along With Their Kids", it was '01, and Pixar-mania hadn't really hit yet:
Grownups had ignored A Bug's Life and were still publicly awkward about admitting they'd sniffled over Toy Story 2, but when Finding Nemo had its unnatural Frozen-like success in '03, it was really more a psychological blast of adult Pixar fans finally coming out of the "grownup closet", and admitting it was okay to like "kiddy" CGI films if they were written with enough heart and sensitivity to respond to.
They also started telling the difference between studios for the first time, and '02 analysts stopped talking about "The studio that made Toy Story and Shrek".

DWA were still stuck in pre-Pixar '01, thought adults were responding to nasty deconstructionism and sitcom gags, and if Dreamworks comedies ever needed an epitaph on their tombstone, it was the year they got all excited that Jerry Seinfeld was doing Bee Movie for them!
A studio that believes that Jerry Seinfeld cynicism is the key to creating animation that "Adults can enjoy with their kids" does not understand animation, does not understand why parents or kids respond to the movies, and, I think we can say in retrospect, never did.
No wonder they had to hire the Disney people--Who, even in the good times or bad times, had been trained to be so focused on story and characters that they couldn't give crap one about Seinfeld, Will Ferrell or Ben Stiller...Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[Ben]

All true.

We can all dream, and it's a beautiful fantasy, but I can't see DWA becoming a beacon of hand-drawn animation any time soon...if their films aren't a success now they would just be non-successful films that were hand-drawn, a double nail in the coffin.

This also popped into my mind last night, and Eric's comment on Seinfeld reminded me: DWA has often been compared to the Fleischer Studio in terms of its Disney competition and more streetwise attitude. Well...look what happened to them... Just sayin'.

[EricJ]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/comi ... ertainment

(DeBlois) said he hoped that “Dragon 2′s” Annie haul might provide a moment of hope,

And as it turned out, their Annie haul turned out to be....lah-de-dah.

This also popped into my mind last night, and Eric's comment on Seinfeld reminded me: DWA has often been compared to the Fleischer Studio in terms of its Disney competition and more streetwise attitude. Well...look what happened to them... Just sayin'.

If you want classic-toon analogies, I'd always thought of Katzenberg as the Friz Freleng to Pixar's Chuck Jones--
Freleng started back before the other directors and always seemed to be playing catchup, stealing the more successful shticks from Clampett, McKimson and Jones without really understanding them, and seeing his style of humor from his own harsher, angrier viewpoint of combative gags, punishment, and generally nasty characters. Later, when the other studio majors left, he took it all with him to his own production company, and tried to replicate the glory days for franchises, without any real instinctive sense of what the earlier directors had made appealing to the audience in the first place.

Personally, I find that comparison best manages to explain both the "Katz stole everything because he didn't know how to do it himself" and the "DWA comedies are so negative-vibed, they don't really seem to like anybody" complaints.

[Dacey]

DreamWorks isn't dead yet.

Just sayin'.

So, a lot of this "dancing on JK's grave" that I've been seeing around the internet seems really pre(im)mature to me. And pretending they "never had a clue how to make animated movies" makes no sense when you look at how many big hits they had. DreamWorks has had seven films to cross the $200 million mark in the states alone. Disney, by comparison, only has five (and that includes the grosses of BATB's two re-releases). Granted, that's obviously not including inflation, but there's no sense in acting like DreamWorks has just been flying around blindly all this time.

Yes, attempting to make three movies a year ended up being more than they could financially handle, but since when is ambition something we "darn" with so much glee? And why should I be happy for a company's downfall because of something its founder said more than a decade ago? And why do I think I'm starting to sound like Vi?

Seriously, though. No need to act like they're gone before they actually are.

[James]

DreamWorks is having the same problems Disney had a few years ago, but unfortunately there doesn't appear to be the same white knight out there to save them.

DWs creative output is being led by executives. And yes I include Katzenberg. Remember animation was dropped in his lap at Disney and he ended up enjoying it -- that's the entirety of his experience. Just like at Disney, this worked for awhile. But these days all the successful studios (Pixar, Disney, Aardman...) are creative led. Artists decide what gets made and who makes it and how it gets made.

Don't get tied up on semantics here. I know there are executives in the chain at Disney and artists in the ranks at DreamWorks. But the side that is in charge is clear. Look at the films DW has made over the past five years and tell me you don't see executive fingerprints all over it:

Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa
Monsters vs. Aliens
How to Train Your Dragon
Shrek Forever After
Megamind
Kung Fu Panda 2
Puss in Boots
Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted
Rise of the Guardians
The Croods
Turbo
Mr. Peabody & Sherman
How to Train Your Dragon 2
Penguins of Madagascar

First of all look at the sheer number! 14! A creative run studio would know that output is way too much to ensure quality. (For reference Pixar had 5 in that timeframe and Disney had 7.)

Second the number of sequels (and lets throw in TV show remakes). Hollywood is going to make sequels. But eight in five years was an executive decision.

Third, look at the originals. Monsters vs. Aliens, How to Train Your, Megamind, Rise of the Guardians, The Croods, Turbo. How many of those do you think were the pet projects of a creative, pitched and lovingly seen through production... and how many were bought, processed, and assigned by executives? Not saying assigned projects can't be done right or pet projects always work. But this is another link in the chain dragging DW down.

I'm not rooting for DW to fail at all. But their corporate culture is killing them. (They even used to have three executive initials in the company name!) They did a good job hiring a bunch of artists a few years ago, they just need to put them in charge!

[ShyViolet]

I'm definitely not dancing on DWA's grave--I'm grieving for them. They gave us some great films but are in a very bad spot now, no two ways about it.

If you want classic-toon analogies, I'd always thought of Katzenberg as the Friz Freleng to Pixar's Chuck Jones--
Freleng started back before the other directors and always seemed to be playing catchup, stealing the more successful shticks from Clampett, McKimson and Jones without really understanding them, and seeing his style of humor from his own harsher, angrier viewpoint of combative gags, punishment, and generally nasty characters. Later, when the other studio majors left, he took it all with him to his own production company, and tried to replicate the glory days for franchises, without any real instinctive sense of what the earlier directors had made appealing to the audience in the first place.

Personally, I find that comparison best manages to explain both the "Katz stole everything because he didn't know how to do it himself" and the "DWA comedies are so negative-vibed, they don't really seem to like anybody" complaints.

Sorry, I just don't agree with this. Some cartoons back in the day were definitely mean-spirited but when exactly did DWA have "generally nasty characters"? And when did they show "combative gags" and "punishment"?

In my opinion JK knew what made animated films great right from his early days at Disney, when he was being instructed by artists and "taught" by Walt Disney's notes in the archives. He may not have carried all of it when he went off to DreamWorks (although that's debatable when you look at POE and other projects that were never made such as The Whale and early versions of Sinbad and El Dorado).

And what makes you think that DWA "doesn't really seem to like anybody"? How can you say that after the sweetness we saw in Panda, Croods, and Dragon? (especially 2)

Not to mention the implied sadistic relish in forcing Katzenberg's "2-D is dead, because nobody saw Sinbad!" words back down his throat, twelve years after trying to make Shrek and Kung Fu Panda an industry--
Hot, steaming, and shovelful by shovelful, until he begs us to stop.

OK, now who's being "nasty" and "mean-spirited"?

And why do I think I'm starting to sound like Vi?

LOL Dacey! Everyone should sound like me. Ha!

[droosan]

Crazy idea: DWA should become the new flagbearer for hand-drawn animation. Think about it. They'd be the only game in town, and if succesful (okay, BIG "if"), it would push Dis into doing the same thing again.

I can dream.

While, personally, I'd love to see this happen, too .. DreamWorks in general (and JK in particular) kinda burned the bridge behind themselves with their sudden and complete transition from tradigital to full-CG.

I'm acquainted with a few super-talented traditional artists 'pushed aside' at that time who would never consider returning to DreamWorks .. and, indeed, may likely celebrate the day if the studio should close its doors for good.

[Dacey]

First of all look at the sheer number! 14! A creative run studio would know that output is way too much to ensure quality. (For reference Pixar had 5 in that timeframe and Disney had 7.)

Well, to be fair, three of those five Pixar films were sequels/prequels, which is a whopping 60% of that number.

Also, pretty sure Mads 2 came out in 2008, but now I'm just being nitpicky.

[James]

- I included Nov 2008 movies in the totals for all studios I listed

- If you're really being fair you can't compare Pixar unfavorably with DW when it comes to sequels.

Pixar has released 4 in 20 years and just has 2 slated on their upcoming calendar. DW has released 10 and until just a few weeks ago, when their financial issues starting catching up to them, had five more with release dates set.

DW released more sequels/spinoffs in the past five years than Disney or Pixar released total films.

- More "executive-think" from DW:

But [Katzenberg's] especially excited by sales opportunities for the 2016 film Trolls. It’s “probably going to be the greatest opportunity that we’ve had of any movie since we started the company,” the CEO says. “Having a team in place that can actually fully exploit and get value out of that is essential for us.” While merchandise is “s a nice business is growing very strongly for us …the lift off moment for them I think is going to be driven by Trolls.”

While merchandise is nice, this makes it sound like they are doing the film solely for merchandising opportunities... which most people probably assumed anyway.

[Ben]

Just wanna be clear and say that I'm not rooting for DWA to fail/close/die, but to say it's premature to speculate about it is naive. And to suggest it's immature actually dampens one of the best, most stimulating conversations we've had on these boards in ages!

It's no lie that DWA is in trouble. Serious trouble. And whereas Disney had a few lean years, they had a live-action unit to counter-balance them, as well as a network of television, theme parks and the little point of over 70 years worth of merchandising income to keep them afloat.

My original point - made out of a clear worry for the state of the company and not with any notions of dancing on anyone's grave - was that the company is resorting to fairly drastic measures to try and keep themselves going. Make no mistake...DWA has not been run especially well for the past several years and the results of that is now being felt.

My worry...and very valid it is...is that their upcoming slate doesn't look to carry the kinds of films that we used to love from DWA in the first place, and that the company will not be able to sustain itself over another four misfires in a row.

So...premature? Us speaking about it won't have any effect on the outcome, but it's a conversation that needs to happen. If no-one speaks about it then things stay the way they are, which is unsustainable. Immature? Certainly not...but the sad thing is that the obviously experienced executives really should be much more on the ball about this stuff.

It's also been clear for a while that they haven't been leveraging their properties as well as they could have done...this is a company with a rich past that hasn't been too quick to capitalise on it, and now faces an uncertain future that's too shakily reliant on a small number of variables,

[Randall]

Personally, I'm saddened that DWA hasn't continued on the path it started. I loved the alternation between tradigital and CGI films, and was a huge fan of Prince of Egypt, Antz, Road to El Dorado, and even Madagascar. I've liked most of their films, really. (Bee Movie being an obvious exception--- what happened there?!) Croods, KFP, Dragon films, even MVA and Megamind--- all bring a smile to my face.

But seeing them flounder about now, striving to please stockholders more than audiences... it's just sad.

Also sad is the general state of the entertainment industry--- i.e. corporate/executive driven, chasing big dollars with expensive tentpole releases. DWA is far from the only guilty party, but they've become the poster child at the moment.