wasn't that the last studio Disney had that was still doing hand drawn

Along with Snow Whit & Dumbo..

No, that was a Winnie the Pooh movie made later.

i didn't say last hand drawn movie, but the last studio that was still doing hand drawings since most were converted to digital or closed.

The end scene originally had a plane flying through a city but they changed it after 9/11.

Good ol Snow Whit.

I'm jk it happens, it's cool to know this movie was unique in a way. It's beloved, I love it myself .

Oof, that was a rough read. So glad it got made, though.

Crap, guess it's too latee to sneak that letter in now..

The 2000s weren't a good decade for Disney's own animated films and really, Lilo and Stitch was probably the best animated film released by them in that decade.

I don't count Pixar as that was made under their name and Disney didn't formally acquire Pixar until the middle of the decade.

[deleted]

That was an incredible read. Wow.

Edit: There were two weird feelings reading this. First, wondering, "why don't they keep production teams together? Surely that matters?" Does anyone know? Second, what if they let those two guys become 'Miyazakis' - turn the Florida Studio into something totally other that can do those things. Let them go and see what happens?

Atlantis and Treasure Planet would like a word. Awesome movies

Lilo and stitch is a masterpiece

FTA:

>Schumacher: The two movies that I get asked about more than anything else are Emperor’s New Groove and Lilo & Stitch. Those two movies, in their own moment, people were like, “What are they doing?”

Timeless art, folks: that's what they were doing. Things just got bumpy along the way.

[deleted]

LILO and stitch can go suck a fat one but not really. But it essentially led to Treasure Planet being buried by Disney.

Afaik Treasure Planet underperformed, because of bad marketing. Which is sad because it is a beautiful movie.

Brown kids in Hawaii loved that they got to be in a movie. It's hard watching kids grow up where every one up there looks like someone else.

Lilo & Stitch is the best Disney movie ever. The upcoming live action one will, however, be terrible.

Cartoon Saloon (Secret of Kells, Song of the Sea, Wolfwalkers) still creates beautiful 2D animated movies! There's also a lot of other non USA studios that are still doing hand drawn animation

I recently discovered Wolfwalkers - beautiful and really fun film! The plot and some of the scenes did remind me very strongly of Princess Mononoke though. Song of the Sea is my favourite animation film.

They are ok movies but not really up to Disney standards

It had to compete with Lord of the Rings and another blockbuster hit that I'm forgetting, on opening weekend.

They're not owned by Disney. OP was specifically saying that the studio that made Lilo & Stitch was the last studio Disney had that was doing hand drawn animation.

Harry Potter

Emperor's New Groove is so great. The story behind the making of that one is even wilder: https://www.vulture.com/article/an-oral-history-of-disney-the-emperors-new-groove.html

I re-watched Treasure Planet last year, and it is wonderful. If that came out today, it would probably be a big hit. I haven't watched Atlantis in years. I should re-watch that one as well. So many flops in this period for Disney that later became beloved.

I personally think having a random mix of human and anthropomorphic characters is a mistake. Choose a lane.

I think this is an arbitrary criticism that has no meaningful or empirical reason to be

OK, let's get all this sorted out:

1. The Florida studio was (at the time) the last Disney studio to make hand-drawn theatrical films.

2. But they aren't now. Disney revived the traditional animation department in California for Princess and the Frog (and Pooh 2011).

3. And of course Disney owns several animation studios outside the feature animation division; those studios didn't switch to CG at that time. Remember all those mediocre direct-to-video sequels with hand-drawn animation in the 00's? And then there's the television animation division, which still does some hand-drawn shows today.

It may appear arbitrary, but note that such a mix is highly unusual. I can think of no other example. I cannot think what artistic contribution it can provide, and makes the pitching of the movie more difficult.

That still makes your criticism completely arbitrary with no empirical reasoning behind it. And you're completely wrong. Plenty of media with a mix of human and non human characters. Stupid criticism just complaining for the sake of it.

Just watched Atlantis for the first time with my daughter the other day. Beautiful movie, great characters and writing. All around great animated movie, even if it didn’t do well at the box office.

Didn't know if the comment I was responding to was aware of other 2D studios, that's all

I’m still confused what they are getting at. Treasure Planet came out after Lilo and Stitch. Because it was hybrid it isn’t hand drawn? My understanding was that Home on the Range the last hand drawn film before they stopped and that was done in Glendale.

Apparently when I was younger, I asked my sister why I got a funny feeling down there while watching treasure planet 🙃

Home on the Range was the last hand-drawn film Disney released before the switch to CG, but Brother Bear (produced at the Florida studio) was finished later. (Disney flipped the release dates on those two for various reasons.) So technically, the Florida studio was still doing hand-drawn animation after the California studio had moved on. It's a silly distinction really, but a lot of the coverage of the Florida studio closing down focused on how they were the last holdout for 2D feature animation in America.

>And you're completely wrong.

Not only am I not wrong, we are talking about a film which by any estimation was a box office bomb.

However this mix of styles is characteristic of the film in general, which mixes 3d and 2d animation, and 18th century technology and futuristic.

To my surprise reviews of the film were not particularly positive (69% nice on Rotten Tomatoes). To quote Robert Ebert

>I am not concerned about technical matters. I do not question why space ships of the future would look like sailing ships of the past. I can believe they could be powered by both rockets and solar winds. It does not bother me that deep space turns out to be breathable. I do not wonder why swashbuckling is still in style, in an era of ray guns and laser beams. I accept all of that. It's just that I wonder why I have to. Why not make an animated version of the classic Treasure Island ?

On the whole he gave the film a thumbs up, but he questioned the overall motives for these clashing decisions. Ultimately people's tolerance mileage is going to vary for its various flights of fancy. For me, it's seeing that the deuteragonist is a doctor who happens to be a bipedal dog whom all the characters pretend is not a dog. For others it might be using an 18th century galleon as a faster than light vessel.

>I can think of no other example.

Alice in Wonderland, Shrek, Beauty and the Beast, Who Framed Roger Rabbit, Space Jam, Jungle Book, Snow White, so many more. Movies mixing people with anthropomorphic characters and having them interact is in no way rare.

The Cheshire Cat in Alice in Wonderland or Donkey in Shrek, are a cat and donkey respectively. Never mind their fantastical setting, if you had Donkey walking on two legs and declaring he was an engineer I would raise an eyebrow.

Same deal with the Jungle Book, if Bagheera had a doctorate and a snazzy waistcoat it would be... odd. Not saying you can't do it, but you'd usually want to have a good reason. Who Framed Roger Rabbit has a good reason - the distinction between humans and toons is the entire premise of the movie.

It's like Ebert said... it's not that you can't suspend disbelief, but what's the reason for?

Disney murdered Treasure Planet - the two animators/directors who made the Disney Renaissance of the 90s a thing continually asked Disney's CEO for years for a chance to reimagine Treasure Island, only to be told to do movie after movie they didn't really wanna make, eventually though they got the greenlight. By the time the movie was ready however said CEO was gone and a new board of directors had taken charge, and they didn't care that Treasure Planet was a passion project by their best staff, instead only caring it had went over budget and been delayed, so they gave it a bad release date, a low advertising budget, spoiled the end of the movie in said low budget ads, and also hammered it in in said ads that the movie would be on DVD within a short amount of time, in effect dissuading theaterviewing.

>I cannot think what artistic contribution it can provide

It's interesting, it's a unique take on the original story, it stirs up the imagination... not everybody would agree, of course, but those are some possible things.

Also, something you're not mentioning is that the characters are literally aliens. Fictional aliens may take visual inspiration from real creatures, even if they're sapient. Halo is another example where this occurs.

>The Cheshire Cat in Alice in Wonderland or Donkey in Shrek, are a cat and donkey respectively. Never mind their fantastical setting, if you had Donkey walking on two legs and declaring he was an engineer I would raise an eyebrow.

Alice in wonderland has the rabbit that sits at a table and drinks tea and other things. Shrek has Puss in Boots, gingerbread man, honestly a ton. You say it is rare but it really isn't.

Atlantis at least is a weak movie with excellent art direction.

Lilo and Stitch is superior

Most of my memories of Disney from the early 2000’s was watching what came out in the 90’s, Pixar(bc my parents loved them) and watching Pirates of the Caribbean

amazing story and well written