Award archives...

[Meg]

Are you sure? I was under the impression it was a DTV - at one point, anyway.

[Daniel]

Yes, I am.

[Ben]

Don't mess with The Dan.

[ShyViolet]

Disney won't hold back MTR. An Oscar nomination is an Oscar nomination and they won't pass up a good opportunity to earn one. Second, I don't know how close the threshold for 5 nominations will be at by the end of the year but holding back hurts those chances.

I see your points, James, but I think those other years that Disney films were nominated alongside Pixar ones (Treasure Planet, Brother Bear, Lilo and Stitch) bear a crucial difference to this year, as those films were all traditionally animated compared to Pixar's CGI.

They existed in a different plane from each other and everyone knew (back then) what was Disney and what was Pixar, partly due to the classical/CGI difference but also storyline. (2d or not, no one would mistake Brother Bear for Pixar.)

Meet the Robinsons and Ratatouille are both CGI. Because of this, unfortunately, they would both compete with each other for the Best Animated Film Oscar. It's a lot harder for audiences, even Academy voters who aren't as schooled in animation as fans like us, to discern between Disney and Pixar now, 'specially since Disney has tried to become like Pixar in the last few years.

If the higher-ups have indeed decided that, in order to avoid confusion, they'd rather WDAS stick to 2d and Pixar stick to CGI, I just really doubt that they'd allow a WDAS CGI film to be nominated ALONGSIDE a Pixar CGI film.

Also, after the stunning endorsement MTR got during its release time from Disney vs. the five or so people who went to see Ratatouille this summer (NOT ) who do you think is going to get full-page ads in Variety during Oscar season? In my opinion,it's not going to be the film with the time machine and funny dinosaur.

And most importantly, they won't hold back MTR to help Ratatouille because Ratatouille does not need the help!

Maybe not, but then why did Ratatouille get so much promotion vs. Meet the Robinsons if they "didn't need any help"? From their standpoint, (Disney) supporting MTR right before Rat comes out would have interfered with Rat's BO chances. Insert "Oscar" into that equation, and it's the same idea.

[DarrenBest]

The Animated Feature Film Oscar is relativelly new, but the winners show a very clear pattern:

1.) This branch of the Academy has always chosen the film with the highest combination of critical acclaim and box-office receipts, which makes perfect sense if they are giving out something that is "best of" honors. Examples: Shrek, Finding Nemo, and The Incredibles. The critics were very much behind these films, give or take a dissenting opinion here or there. Plus, they were all hugely successful at the box-office.

2.) Critical opinion may have more sway than total box-office. When there is no critically adored blockbuster, than they usually give the trophy and some of the filler nominations to a much-loved art-house film. Case in point: 2002, when none of the big ticket features came close to the international fervor for Spirited Away. Also, witness The Tripletts of Belleville getting nominated over The Polar Express and the entire 2005 line-up making it in over one of the big studio pictures.

3.) This category is voted on by animation professionals, which means they know what movies they want to push in order to give the medium the best image possible. Look at 2005: an unbelievable line-up of diverse animated features that did not skew CGI. Of course, when they have an embarrasment of riches to choose from, then they will invariably go with the film that is more well-know. Result: Wallace and Gromitt beating The Corpse Bride and Howl's Moving Castle.

4.) The category is not friendly to rotoscope or film capture techniques. Notice the complete shunning of Richard Linkletter's entries this decade. They also have not favored anime outside of Hayao Miyazaki, despite having many good quality films to choose from.

5.) Then there's the anomaly which was last year: three films with a solid box-office and generally well-reviewed but not loved by any major sector of the industry (most had 60-70% favorable scored on RT). They went against the grain and the Golden Globes by going with Happy Feet, which tells me they may be already inclined to spread the wealth.

So...who are this year's bunch of nominees?

I'm going to say that there's really only four contenders at this point: Ratatouille, The Simpson Movie, Persepolis, and Shrek 3.

Ratatouille for me, is the only lock. Big box-office and awesome reviews are getting Brad Bird his second nomination. I don't think anyone will dispute that.

Next, I think it's safe to say The Simpsons Movie will be safe, in that the people within the animation branch will be very fond of this beloved franchise and will want to honor it in some way. When you think about, I'm sure just about every member has had some hand in its creation throughout the year.

The wild card is Persepolis. It's THE critical darling of the year and has been gathering a huge storm around it at the recent film festivals. Plus, it got a huge boost last week when it was announced as France's foreign language submission. Sony Pictures Classics is going to do their utmost to get this film out there and I'm sure the animation department will bite. It's not as culturally removed as the anime films that have been submitted and it's not using a medium they try to avoid. I think if this film gets nominated, I think it could actually win, continuing the branch's "spread-the-wealth" mentality.

[EricJ]

Maybe not, but then why did Ratatouille get so much promotion vs. Meet the Robinsons if they "didn't need any help"? From their standpoint, (Disney) supporting MTR right before Rat comes out would have interfered with Rat's BO chances. Insert "Oscar" into that equation, and it's the same idea.

Disney reportedly considered both movies "Hard to promote", despite the final products winning over skeptical audiences:
MTR got "Home on the Range"'s Easter Vacation Slot of Hushed-Up Death as far back as post-Chicken Little, in the lawless days before Lasseter came on to oversee, back when the project was still considered "troubled" and needed a quick disposal in a back alley.
With "Ratatouille", they knew they had Pixar, but every ani-phobic media analyst was telling them "People don't want to see rats!" and "They won't be able to pronounce the title!", and other such complaints industry columnists make without actually seeing the movie first.

Now, it's just a matter of who gets the votes--
Both movies should be up this year, but it doesn't seem like a five-nomination year, so the Unpronounceable Rats will probably get the more proven studio support.

[ShyViolet]

EricJ said:

Disney reportedly considered both movies "Hard to promote", despite the final products winning over skeptical audiences:
MTR got "Home on the Range"'s Easter Vacation Slot of Hushed-Up Death as far back as post-Chicken Little, in the lawless days before Lasseter came on to oversee, back when the project was still considered "troubled" and needed a quick disposal in a back alley.

Now I'm not 100% sure at all about this, but according to my memory didn't Disney actually have high hopes for Robinsons at one point, when it was "A Day with Wilbur Robinson"? Wasn't there some kind of expected Christmas or Thanksgiving opening slated for MTR?

Oh wait, now it's all coming back...it got pushed back for re-tooling when LassenCo got there. OK, fair enough....but then why did they give it that "quiet death" April release date AFTER they'd "fixed" it? Wouldn't the fact that they supervised some changes on it make them MORE confident about it and more willing to release it in a better slot?

I could be wrong, but I don't think Eisner/Stainton/Schumacker chose that April date. And even if they did....LassenCo could have changed it when they got there to give it more of a chance.

EricJ said:

Now, it's just a matter of who gets the votes--
Both movies should be up this year, but it doesn't seem like a five-nomination year, so the Unpronounceable Rats will probably get the more proven studio support.

Could be! I kind of hope that they go for at least four noms, however, to make room for Bee Movie and Surf's Up.

DarrenBest said:

Critical opinion may have more sway than total box-office. When there is no critically adored blockbuster, than they usually give the trophy and some of the filler nominations to a much-loved art-house film.

True, but even Happy Feet and Monster House were well reviewed, but somewhat mixed. I think Box Office had a lot to do with why they got the noms.

[EricJ]

Now I'm not 100% sure at all about this, but according to my memory didn't Disney actually have high hopes for Robinsons at one point, when it was "A Day with Wilbur Robinson"? Wasn't there some kind of expected Christmas or Thanksgiving opening slated for MTR?

Oh wait, now it's all coming back...it got pushed back for re-tooling when LassenCo got there. OK, fair enough....but then why did they give it that "quiet death" April release date AFTER they'd "fixed" it? Wouldn't the fact that they supervised some changes on it make them MORE confident about it and more willing to release it in a better slot?

Originally, ADwWR was going to be a "brilliant" followup to the "success" Chicken Little was going to have in all those 3-D theaters...Um, okay, scratch those fantasies.
Before Lasseter came on board, there was no Evil Doris, very little of the Tom Selleck dad stuff, and no Walt Disney quoting of "Keep moving forward"--Basically, David Stainton wanted to set up wacky gags with the Family and the Bowler Hat Guy, and the entire impetus of the plot was stealing the invention. Only problem, accdg. to some reports, was that the Robinsons were so attention-deficit hyper-Stainton "wacky", no one, least of all Iger, wanted to Meet them.

They were already married to the Slot of Death (which happens to all midstream-rewritten animateds like "Range", just in case), but with Ratatouille the big picture for summer, the Spring slot gave Lasseter a little extra time for the overhaul.
(Although ask a diehard Treasure Planet defender sometime about the dangers of putting two studio animateds in the same year.)

[Josh]

Back in March 2006, Jim Hill wrote an interesting article that addressed the release date and story changes for Meet the Robinsons. I know not everyone here is a fan of Hill, but I think the article is worth a look.

[ShyViolet]

Thanks Josh! That's what i meant.

JHM said:

When asked why the film's release date was being pushed back by some three-and-a-half-months, they tried to put a positive spin on the story. Insisting that "Meet the Robinsons" was just being pulled out of the crowded 2006 Holiday field so that this WDFA film could then take advantage of a wide open release date in late March of 2007.

In the pre-Pixar days, ADWRR, like American Dog and Rupunzel, was the considered the Great Hope that would pull Disney out of the doldrums and actually be able to compete with Pixar. (Multiple sources have stated this, not just JHM ) I think Disney had much more support for it than it might seem in hindsight. Meaning...release it at Christmas.

Now, regardless of how it would have played out had Pixar NOT come on board, I don't think that, ("story problems" aside), ADWRR was ever slated to be dumped in March 2007 in The Stainton Days. And rightly so.

EricJ said:

They were already married to the Slot of Death (which happens to all midstream-rewritten animateds like "Range", just in case), but with Ratatouille the big picture for summer, the Spring slot gave Lasseter a little extra time for the overhaul.

But regardless of Rat's date or what the previous regime intended or didn't intend to do, (and, like EricJ said, I think it would have been promoted with the same fanfare that Chicken Little got in 2005) this doesn't change the fact that MTR was slated for a TERRIBLE time with minimum promotion on the part of Disney. Yes, Ratatouille was most certainly the big picture of the summer. But late March was a bad, bad, bad time to put Robinsons. Early May would have been tons better. And it still would have been almost two months before Ratatouille.

[Josh]

Thanks Josh!

You're welcome, Vi!

About the release date for Meet the Robinsons, I think of some films that have done very well with a March release. For instance, 300 and Wild Hogs did well this past March. Plus, the Ice Age films found great success while being released in March.

With that said, I don't the release date was Meet the Robinsons' problem; I think it was a very unenthusiastic marketing campaign.

[DarrenBest]

EricJ said:

DarrenBest said:

Critical opinion may have more sway than total box-office. When there is no critically adored blockbuster, than they usually give the trophy and some of the filler nominations to a much-loved art-house film.

True, but even Happy Feet and Monster House were well reviewed, but somewhat mixed. I think Box Office had a lot to do with why they got the noms.

There were no other viable options last year other than Over the Hedge, but the goodwill for that film had already died out by nominations time. All three of the films last year were equally mixed and could be classified as box-office successes. So I think they just went with the "hot-this-moment" choice.

[Kinoo]

Yeah, they probably should have moved the ROBINSON to RATATOUILLE's slot, competing against Transformers and Die Hard 4. Sure they would have meet expectations !!! roll eyes: !

Stop finding lame excuses, Eric explained the changes that have been made and without those, the movie would have been lame (it's not a good movie as it is already, i can't imagine the Stainton's version).

[ShyViolet]

Yeah, they probably should have moved the ROBINSON to RATATOUILLE's slot,

I didn't say that, Kinoo. I just said that Robinsons should have been moved to early May, (unofficial start of summer these days )a much better time than late March. And that it should have gotten at least as much marketing as Rat did. I just don't see what's so "bad" about that....

That way BOTH movies could have benefited, not just Rat. What's SO BAD about sharing the summer season??

Eric explained the changes that have been made and without those, the movie would have been lame (it's not a good movie as it is already, i can't imagine the Stainton's version).

I wasn't talking about the changes or Stainton's version in this particular case , but the release date. (BTW, I think it is a pretty good movie, and a Disney one--shouldn't Disney try to market, um, Disney movies? )

Like I said earlier, WDFA/Eisner/Stainton wanted ADWRR in Christmas time. Pixar came in, "fixed" the movie, but instead of moving it to an equally good date, moved it to the worst possible one imaginable with almost no promotion.

Just because a movie isn't Pixar doesn't mean it has to get short-changed. When there was so little marketing for MTR we were all like : "Oh, but hopefully there will be more marketing for Enchanted." Now it's: "Hopefully there will be more marketing for Bolt and TPATF" And....aren't they already talking about moving or having moved Princess to March or April?? Where does it END, I ask you??

. Sure they would have meet expectations !!! roll eyes: !

They might have....if they'd actually been marketed better. This is Disney we're talking about here. A name that (gasp!) actually used to carry as much if not MORE weight than Pixar's. Why in the world shouldn't Disney show some faith in their own projects the way they used to? It seems like they're SO sure their films are going to do badly now they don't even bother to advertise them anymore, just go with Pixar, end of discussion. That's called "defeatist".

[Josh]

Like I said earlier, WDFA/Eisner/Stainton wanted ADWRR in Christmas time. Pixar came in, "fixed" the movie, but instead of moving it to an equally good date, moved it to the worst possible one imaginable with almost no promotion.

Worst one imaginable? I don't know, Vi... I still think back to how well 300 and the Ice Age franchise have done with March releases. Again, I think it all goes back to how well a marketing campaign a film has.

As for Robinsons' old release date, keep in mind that it would have then faced Night at the Museum, which, domestically, was the second biggest film of 2006. Charlotte's Web competed against Museum for family audiences and ended up with about $15 million less than what Robinsons earned.