Talk:Walt Disney Animation Studios

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general): Filmmaking task force

	Animation Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject American Animation. (rated as High importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

I can think of only ONE Disney movie where the villain "falls", and that is Beauty and the Beast. The notion that it is commonplace is completely bogus.

Snow White, Cinderella (the cat), Sleeping Beauty (the witch/dragon after being stabbed), The Rescuers Down Under, Beauty and the Beast, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and Tarzan (a hanging) are all films in which the villian falls to their death. --FuriousFreddy 06:17, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Disney Pixar merger 2 Criticism Section Removed 3 Thoughts on moving the article? 4 No mention of Katzenberg? 5 CGI

[edit] Disney Pixar merger

The deal has been agreed and announced, but it hasn't closed (which might take several months). Until then, Pixar will continue to be a separate company, and the corresponding wikipedia disney-pixar article merger should be held off. Bwithh 21:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed. And even when it goes through I don't think it should be merged here as Disney-Pixar Animation Studios will still be a nominially seperate entity under the current Pixar managment.Gateman1997 22:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• I don't think Pixar should be merged. The merger does not change the fact that Pixar did exist and was a groundbreaking company in it's own right with work products labelled solely with that name. The existing Pixar article should remain as documentation of what Pixar (RIP) did while it was independent, and the post-merger accomplishments of the new entity should remain separate.   RandallJones 23:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
• There should be no merging of Wikipedia articles period. A seperate article on WDFA to cover historical content, a seperate one on Pixar to cover historical content, and a new one on Disney-Pixar Studios will keep each article within a readable scope. --FuriousFreddy 02:33, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Agree with FuriousFreddy. --Renesis13 03:29, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
• Agree with FuriousFreddy. --Padrhig 25 January 2006
• Agree with FuriousFreddy. LordBleen 04:31, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the merge tags. There is currently a merge-triangle between three articles (Pixar, Disney-Pixar Studios and Walt Disney Feature Animation) all wanting to merge into each other. Not only does this not make sense (they can't all merge into each other unless all three become one article) but there does not seem to be any support for merging. It appears as if though this was added with malicious or vandalistic intent. If anyone still feels like the merge tags are warranted, please add merge tags at more specific locations (let us know which sections should be merged and to/from where). Zukeeper 09:51, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, it has been stated that WDFA and Pixar will not be merged, but will remain seperate entities under a feature animation umbrella [1]. Therefore, there should be no "Disney-Pixar Studios" article period. --FuriousFreddy 01:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism Section Removed

I removed the Criticism section from the article because the criticism about direct-to-video sequels doesn't reflect what WDFA does. Disney direct-to-video sequels are not made by WDFA; they are made by Walt Disney Television Animation and DisneyToon Studios. This criticism only belongs in The Walt Disney Company article or the DisneyToon Studios article. This in no way belongs in the WDFA article because WDFA only made two theatrical released sequels, The Rescuers Down Under and Fantasia 2000. Jonyyeh 21:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

DisneyToon studios is now part of the new Disney Animation Studios, although it is still incorrect to include criticism of the DTS projects prior to this merger in this article. 204.128.192.3 17:16, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thoughts on moving the article?

According to Variety, Walt Disney Feature Animation has changed its name to Walt Disney Animation Studios and is putting out one pic every 18 months. So, should this article be moved to Walt Disney Animation Studios? SpikeJones 22:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, looks like the article has been moved. There you go. SpikeJones 20:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No mention of Katzenberg?

How could an article on Feature Animation not contain ANY mention of Jeffery Katzenberg and his unbelievable run in the 1990's? The closest parallel is the mention of Larson bringing new blood to the studio with new hires and a string of hits starting with the Little Mermaid. Katzenberg was the head of the Studios while that was going on and had almost complete control over the productions, etc. His infamous 5AM staff meetings, unsatiable thirst for Diet Coke, and non stop criticism of the Studio staff is legendary. --Buggsbuny 16:30, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] CGI

The Black Cauldron was not the first animated feature to use computer-generated imagery. See Lensman: Secret of the Lens. Alone Coder (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2008 (UTC)