It wasn't Pooh, it was the media analysts still trying to continue '03's "2D is Dead" script by saying that, well,"since everything will be in flux after Eisner's departure, it'll be a mess, the new guys won't know what to do, and their failed attempt to rally Classic 2D animation can never stand up to the Holy Might of Shrek!--Is Disney's death-blow permanent?" (Meaning DreamWorks/CGI in general, we'd had the third movie.)ShyViolet wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 8:25 pmAnd where exactly did THAT plan go??? Relegated to brand-spanking-new Disney’s dustbin of abandoned ideas. I know it’s because Princess wasn’t the blockbuster they’d hoped for but seriously??? It still did well and there was NO reason to just leave 2d out to dry like that (I know, Pooh was released theatrically but IIRC it wasn’t to very much fanfare, although I might not be remembering correctly, so bear with me, um, no pun intended. I THINK it turned out some kind of profit, but it obviously wasn’t enough.)
And to add insult to injury, it wasn't enough that P&tF's messy, improvised story, repetitive in-your-face messaging and lack of likable characters was following that script, but when Tangled, "the good one", came out in CGI, did the story, music and characters take the credit in the industry press for its runaway success? Nope--Guess what did.
(Although at the time, some stories reported that first-night audiences went away thinking Tangled had been in 2D animation, and when they were reminded it was CGI, they recalled it being in 2D because, quote, it "should have been!" or "felt like it!")
Also interesting to look back at the necro'ed 2010 thread...We had so many posters back then.