I'll add something to C-mart's comment.

it takes baby steps to achieve the goal. Disney gets my :up: for setting some standards when it comes to anime by giving original language and dubbed a chance to get seen by both fan bases. they are atleast starting to push it. Soon it will become a norm so that when they do eventually make it to the megaplex's you have a choice between dubbed or subbed. :)

LOL...Let me tell you...Who ruined D.B. was D.B.

Here's his last 5 movies
Titan A.E. (2000)
Bartok the Magnificent (1999) (V)
Anastasia (1997)
Pebble and the Penguin, The (1995)
Troll in Central Park, A (1994)

Blame that on Disney? you can try to....but you'd be foolish. Other Studios (Dreamworks) have released HQ animated stories and succeeded quite well.

I don't know, maybe because the Japanese have different tastes than mainstream America? :rolleyes: I've watched it, and it is not a story for the average J6P. (I own PM) Trust me, why Iron Giant is not as popular as it should be is, MUCH more of a valid question to me, than PM.

Bottom line, PM & Spirited Away are NOT film that the average american film goer is gonna talk up and get a huge box office. Look at My Big Fat Greek Wedding, THAT was a movie that had less coverage and advertising than PM & Spirited Away and still went on to great success. Because it's a word of mouth type of movie that caught on, PM & SA could not build a big audience regardless how well Disney markets them. So don't blame Disney if they would rather spend additional dollars on Treasure Planet or whatever.

So you're saying any film that doesn't do extremely well on word of mouth alone doesn't deserve to get promoted?

MBFGW, along with Clerks, and to a lesser extent Blair Witch and Crounching Tiger... were all flukes that somehow succeeded largely on word of mouth. Most movies do not succeed on word of mouth alone.

Also, MBFGW had the support of the studio. It opened to more theatres than Spirited Away, and did a much lower per-screen average. Regardless, the film was constantly released to more and more theatres every week. Surprisingly, allowing more people to see it brought in more box-office. Disney, meanwhile, has stagnated Spirited Away's release. Instead of making more prints for the theatres asking for them, Disney has decided to simple circulate the small number (around 250) of prints they already have.

Also, I hate when people compare Spirited Away to Princess Mononoke in terms of audience. Princess Mononoke was a much more adult anime, and Disney can be forgiven for being confused on how to release it. However, Spirited Away is a kid's film, something Disney has a little experience in promoting. Why everyone thinks Spirited Away is that much different from say Pinocchio or Alice in Wonderland is where I get confused.

It's true that most movies don't succeed on word of mouth. But word of mouth does go along way however. MBFGW may be an abboration but this is a case where word of mouth has gone a long way to get this film across to a wider audience. Factor in that the film was financed by Tom Hanks and you have an "indie" film that has more potential than most of the other indie films made in this country.

Spirited Away's critical accolades are well deserved. Disney should be commended for releasing it but at the same time I don't think it's unfair to be critical of Disney for shaping the way this country see animation. For decades Disney was the only major studio, besides Warner Bros., that had a funtioning animation department ( that wasn't saturday morning oriented). Disney worked hard in the United States to establish itself as THE premiere animation studio. A reputation that's well deserved. I will admit that Disney has been a pioneer in the field. But at the same time, what the Mouse has done is to help exile animation into the "children's" section of the video store if you will. Which is why now we have the perception in this country that "cartoons are for kids" and "cartoons are supposed to be funny". And don't forget the ever popular "cartoons aren't supposed to have 'people' in them"( many of these same people say this but at the same time have no problem watching Johnny Quest.. go figure). These are misconceptions that Disney helped shaped over the 50 plus years since Snow White debuted. So it's not suprising that when people look toward animation in America they use the Disney standard.

Someone asked that before Disney who distributed anime in America?. Ghost In The Shell and Wings Of Honeiamaise were both distributed by New Line Cinema back in the mid 90's. Both were met with critical acclaim but also with modest box office results. Now that Sony has apparently picked up the ball, it will be very interesting to see how far exactly they can run with it. I still think for Sony's release of Cowboy Bebop: Knocking On Heaven's Door to be considered a success it's going to have to at least garner about $30-$40 million at the box office. This may seem like an insurmountable task, but it's a challenge that I think Sony can rise to.

I still think that animation in America is ready to turn the corner. It's still a question of what will be the vehicle to get it there. Spirited Away, a wonderful film as it may be, is probably not it I'm sorry to say. For years the question has been amongst studios "how do we duplicate what Disney is doing?". For a studio to really establish themselves in the animation medium a better question should be "how do we seperate ourselves from Disney?". Dreamworks has had some success but it's merely seen as a Disney clone until fairley recently with the success of Shrek.

Which brings me back to the point I made somewhat earlier. I still believe that the perfect franchise to get people in the United States excited about animation is Star Wars. Granted it still has to be well written and well animated, but like I said before it has the one major thing going for it. And that's NAME RECOGNITION. Star Wars is almost like a "brand name" like Levi's or Coca Cola in this country. Much like Gundam in Japan, we already have an image of Star Wars in our minds. It's a familiar "product" that people would have no problem with paying $8.50 to see again, unlike a anime film that is steeped in unfamiliar folklore. I'm not saying it HAS TO BE STAR WARS. I'm stating that Star Wars would be the easiest "sell" to the American audience.

All it takes is one success. If one studio can have a successful animated feature that doesn't use the Disney forumal (i.e. singing animals, cute characters, catchey songs) then other will follow suit. The first step is often the hardest one.

:whofart:

Read what I wrote again. Small movies like MBFGW and PM need word of mouth to succeed. I knew more about SA when it opened (through advertising) than I did about MBFGW. But because MBFGW had great buzz from the greek communities it spread quickly and the reason it went wider was because the box office supported more theaters.

MBFGW opened in 108 theaters avg opening weekend was $597,362 It's box office GREW most weeks even when it kept opening in more theaters.

Weekend Chart Record
Date Rank Gross % Change Theaters Per Theater Total Gross Days
4/19/2002 20 $597,362 108 $5,531 $597,362 3
4/26/2002 16 $804,683 +34.71% 141 $5,707 $1,626,751 10
5/3/2002 16 $666,304 -17.20% 147 $4,533 $2,567,045 17
5/10/2002 11 $1,262,562 +89.49% 247 $5,112 $4,112,413 24
5/17/2002 10 $1,135,207 -10.09% 275 $4,128 $5,669,706 31
5/24/2002 11 $1,230,778 +8.42% 260 $4,734 $7,642,884 38
5/31/2002 11 $910,901 -25.99% 236 $3,860 $8,863,863 45
6/7/2002 12 $1,688,563 +85.37% 443 $3,812 $11,002,602 52
6/14/2002 12 $1,755,197 +3.95% 455 $3,858 $13,642,098 59
6/21/2002 14 $1,776,990 +1.24% 444 $4,002 $16,318,140 66
6/28/2002 13 $2,002,184 +12.67% 493 $4,061 $19,340,988 73
7/5/2002 11 $2,508,748 +25.30% 499 $5,028 $23,576,174 80
7/12/2002 12 $2,230,158 -11.10% 495 $4,505 $27,031,170 87
7/19/2002 14 $2,497,454 +11.99% 530 $4,712 $30,862,103 94
7/26/2002 10 $3,004,597 +20.31% 569 $5,280 $35,417,552 101
8/2/2002 9 $3,002,241 -0.08% 657 $4,570 $40,172,975 108
8/9/2002 8 $3,133,316 +4.37% 723 $4,334 $45,063,979 115
8/16/2002 6 $5,700,072 +81.92% 1,064 $5,357 $52,777,170 122
8/23/2002 4 $7,261,842 +27.40% 1,329 $5,464 $63,690,730 129
8/30/2002 2 $11,100,764 +52.86% 1,619 $6,857 $82,556,992 136
9/6/2002 2 $10,372,316 -6.56% 1,695 $6,119 $95,824,732 143
9/13/2002 2 $10,772,146 +3.85% 1,764 $6,107 $110,443,668 150
9/20/2002 3 $9,748,969 -9.50% 1,853 $5,261 $124,052,987 157
9/27/2002 4 $9,434,602 -3.22% 1,841 $5,125 $136,628,662 164
10/4/2002 4 $8,223,801 -12.83% 1,971 $4,172 $147,717,828 171
10/11/2002 5 $8,453,159 +2.79% 2,016 $4,193 $158,954,054 178
10/18/2002 4 $7,145,309 -15.47% 2,014 $3,548 $169,292,979 185
10/25/2002 5 $6,209,500 -13.10% 1,967 $3,157 $177,698,447 192
11/1/2002 6 $5,623,149 -9.44% 1,977 $2,844 $185,244,976 199

SPririted Away opened in 26 theaters avg opening weekend was $449,839 After 4 weeks it started decining in $$ even though it opened in more theaters.

Weekend Chart Record
Date Rank Gross % Change Theaters Per Theater Total Gross Days
9/20/2002 18 $449,839 26 $17,302 $449,839 3
9/27/2002 17 $527,719 +17.31% 53 $9,957 $1,110,559 10
10/4/2002 15 $611,047 +15.79% 97 $6,299 $1,855,297 17
10/11/2002 19 $634,901 +3.90% 138 $4,601 $2,668,591 24
10/18/2002 20 $519,252 -18.22% 151 $3,439 $3,424,435 31
10/25/2002 22 $415,924 -19.90% 149 $2,791 $3,997,219 38
11/1/2002 26 $312,224 -24.93% 136 $2,296 $4,417,007 45

Disney shouldn't spend more money to promote something that isn't getting a buzz on the street in an effort to gain box office.

That last sentence seems to negate the entire previous paragraph about word of mouth. You say Tom Hanks gave MBFGW an advantage, which means word-of-mouth alone did not make it a blockbuster.
But Spirted Away is "for kids" and is funny, and barely has any "people" in it at all. Spirited Away has the best shot of breaking into the mainstream, because it is what people expect from an animated film.
Whereas is Shrek looked upon as a PIXAR clone.
Perhaps the short anime series The Animatrix will bring adult anime to the mainstream.


And then....
They need word of mouth to succeed because they didn't get a marketing push. Believe it or not, advertising can work just as well, if not better, than word of mouth.
Chris then went on to post numbers which are better summed up with some hyperlinks:

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...eekwedding.htm

http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/...iritedaway.htm
You think it's box office growth had any connection to the fact that more people were able to see it? As for MBFGW somehow having more justifiable numbers than Spirited Away for expansion, let's look at the numbers.

MBFGW, in it's opening weekend, did 33% more business than SA while playing in 4 times as many theatres. MBFGW, with the exception of Labor Day weekend, never had more than an approx $6,000 per screen average. While it's per-screen average has remained fairly consistant, it's box-office has continued to rise, largely because more theatres are showing it.

SA meanwhile, has capped out at 150 screens. All the people who want to see it who can, have. Others who want to see it are stymied by the fact that the closest theatre showing it may be an hour or more away. Theatres that do want it are denied by Disney, which doesn't want to make more prints.

Now comparing SA and MBFGW may ultimately be apples and oranges, but it's clear that MBFGW at least got more support from it's studio, which at least let the film get out there.

I think you took some of what I said out of context. With Spirited Away it's not a question of content. It's a question of PERCEPTION that's keeping anime from breaking through to a wider audience. If you had included my other comments about Disney and how they have helped shape that perception over the years then maybe my statments would have made more sense.

Where MBFGW benefits from having Tom Hanks name attatched to it is in terms of getting the film actually in theaters. Then word of mouth takes it from there. Having star power is always a nice bonus. I didn't say it was the main reason for this films success but it certainly hasn't been detrimental.

The Animatrix is a good step forward, being on the net it's interesting to see what effect it's going to have.

And again as with my comments on Disney and Dreamworks, Shrek did set Dreamworks apart from Disney. So much so that I have read that Pixar wants out of their deal with Disney so they can make more "mature" films like Shrek.

I'm not talking about anime in general, I'm talking about Spirited Away in specific. SA plays into the perception that most American's have about animated films. You keep lumping SA with films like Mononoke and Cowboy Beebop, which are entirely different films.
Spirited Away had the benefits of having a giant in the animation industry backing it. Except it seems Disney hasn't really been backing it that well.
Monsters Inc was ten times more mature than Shrek, which seemed to earn the "mature" description by throwing in some pop-culture gags. If Pixar leaves Disney, it will most likely be because Disney won't give them a better distribution deal.

I’ve got to relax on this, buy Spirited Away if Disney does another 5.1 original language track and then buy a region free player. No matter what, they’re taking way too long to get around to the rest of the Ghibli material even if they do give it proper treatment.

Plus, maybe there’re more Lupin III DVDs outside of region 1. :fingerscrossed:

but Spirited Away is not JUST for kids. there are no songs or sappy romance like in most disney kids movies. and look at the audience that went and saw Spirited Away, it's mostly older people. Miyazaki's films are for kids but not just for kids. there are adult overtones and themes in all his movies.

im planning on getting R2 ghibli releases cause disney is taking forever in releasing them R1. i don't know one miyazaki fan who doesn't hate disney for what they've done regarding his work.

I never said that Spirited Away was just for kids. I said it was a kid's movie, meaning that it's largely aimed at, or at least considered safe for, kids. That's not to say it doesn't appeal to adults. In my ripe old age I have gone to theatres to see all the Pixar films, and this year saw Lilo and Stitch. I rented Iron Giant on video. All of this without kids.

However, while Spirited Away has some mature themes, it doesn't have any material that parents would find objectionable to show kids, like Princess Mononoke did and Cowboy Beebop probably will. Disney thought SA was safe enough to associate their name with, as opposed to Mononoke which thay gave to their subsidiary Miramax to handle. It is a "kid's movie," and as such, had a much better chance for success than the other anime mentioned. The most successful anime in the US has always been children's animation. The most successful anime films have been the Pokemon films, which are based on a popular TV series. Anime has been popular for kid's TV since Speed Racer and Gigantor. There really was no stigma attached to SA, except the one people in this group and appearently Disney imagined.

Disney will still be getting your money, as they released the R2 DVD, as well as being in charge of it's worldwide video releases. If you want to save some money, I'd reccommend the R3 DVD, which has the same video and audio quality for about half the price. It can be found here: http://www.dddhouse.com

American audiences need to get over the fact that not all "cartoons" are kid shows.

Disney is also all over SA because it's profitable. It's the highest grossing box office movie in Japan's history! Miyazaki's movies do play into Disney content wise better than most anime but Disney bought the rights to his movies because Disney knows it's profitable.

As I understand it Disney is only in control of the R1 release and the R2 dvd is completely out of their hands. and i would rather get the Japanese R2 than risk a HK bootleg R3.

Not to mention that Disney bought up SA after the Princess Mononoke disaster. The fact that they bought it and released it under the Disney label shows that they thought it had pontential.
First off, no bootleg would ever be R3. Bootleggers always make their DVDs all-region. This isn't to say that an all-region HK DVD is a bootleg though. www.dddhouse.com has an established reputation for only selling legitimate DVDs. Other such legit retailers include www.hivizone.com , www.dvdshelf.com , and www.coolashop.com .

Secondly, if you check www.nausicaa.net for the DVD releases of SA, you'll notice the Japanese R2 and Taiwan R3 DVDs are released by Beuna Vista Home Entertainmet, which is the home video branch of Disney. Disney has their hand in every release. The HK R3 is released by IVL, which licenses from Disney.

Finally, every current DVD release of the film (the R2 and R3s) suffer from a red tint. The entire film is slightly redder than it should be. BVHE has stated in Japan that the tint was intentional, to optimize the image for plasma displays. Still, the rumor is that the R1 will not suffer from the tint. the tint was discussed in a previous thread:
http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=224022

hmmm...interesting. thank you for the info. i think i will still have to get the R2 because im converting the dvd-rom drive in an old PC i have to Region 2 (i don't have an all region or region free dvd player). there's more out there for me on R2 than on R3.

do you have any idea when SA will be out on R1? I remember when Metropolis came out in theaters in the US last January it was released on dvd by April. so do you think we'll see SA on R1 by spring/summer? just curious?

You admit that America sucks when it comes to different ideas. My entire point is that the reason why America does suck is because corporate America spoon feeds and the public eats it up. Disney and Saturday morning cartoons have saturated and moulded the American perception of what animation is for and about - kids, furry animals, and musical numbers.

There are numerous examples of corporations manipulating consumer perceptions - animation being only one example.

I'll give them 5 points for attempting to release anime, and -1000 points for bungling the job and having no clue how to sell the product. But then again, it's their fault for laying the foundation for American ignorance of animation that suits all ages and genres in the first place, so they already have a handicap.

American movies are blockbusters in other countries. The simple reason is green and can buy you cadillacs and pet rocks.

:lol: I don't even know where to start with this paragraph. Spirted Away not a family movie? Interesting. As for Disney dumping movies to subsidiaries, I made my point with Princess Mononoke - they bungled it, and then weakly passed the ball to Miramax - a maneuver they use when they have no idea wtf to do with a film. As for TNBC, I'm not aware of the story behind its release - so I will not comment.

I'm sorry, did I state my opinion as if it were fact? While I can't predict the actual numbers of what would have happened with a large campaign or a wide release of the film, my point had more to do with Disney being a cancer to animation - rather then a boon.

I don't think the climate in North America is right for anime yet - it will take years of correcting the brainwashing that Disney, and to a lesser extent, other animation studios have caused.

In my opinion.

In your opinion.

I'm sorry, are you trying to say that the American moving going public's taste in film is represented by the Academy?? -eek-

Next...


You realize of course that Don Bluth not only was part of Disney for many years, but that he produces Disney-esque films, correct?

You also realize that the films you listed from DB Studios are little different in terms of content or animation quality from the Mouse, correct?

You also realize that if a film comes out with the name "Disney" promoting it, you already have millions of mothers in America considering the film for their children solely based on the name.

Market saturation. Don Bluth simply doesn't have the clout or market recognition or budget to compete with Disney. Surely, the studio made some serious financial blunders - but by all rights, the films they were releasing should have been accepted based solely on content. But sadly, content doesn't buy you an audience these days. I don't blame the entire fortunes of their studio on Disney - it was simply an example of what's wrong with the industry.

As for Dreamworks, they haven't exactly ripped up the sales with their animation studio either. Other then Shrek, they really haven't had a hit.

You make a point in a post further down about Disney "working hard to establish" itself as "THE" premiere animation house. Umm... they were THE animation studio to begin it all. Animation is indelibly linked to Disney because they were the ones who virtually started the genre. Hell, Tezuka, the Japanese "God of animation" mimicked Walt's very style. :lol: The analogy here is almost on par with Xerox being linked to photo-copiers - they virtually started the industry, so the public links the product to the company.

No doubt, Disney has strong marketing, but they had a huge jump on the game and have milked the formula for 60+ years. Congratulations to them - but they have also manipulated the perception of animation in America today based on their successful formula. That's why anything but Disney material is a hard sell here.

I do respect their successes, but I'm not about to pat them on the back and tell them "job well done!" for simply releasing Spirited Away and Princess Mononoke to a few theatres across the country. They have a long way to go in my book before I'll praise them.

You also make a point to mention that all a studio needs is a huge hit, a la Star Wars, to really hit the mainstream and create market recognition. I'm not so sure that's a good example. Can you name another film by Lucas that was a success? Can you name another sci-fi film in the vein of Star Wars that has hit it big?? Bad example I think.

Anyway, YMMV guys... I'm just stating my opinion on the matter. Perhaps I have a bit more vitriol towards Disney - but as an animation fan I believe I have good reason to be. Defending the Mouse is akin to defending Microsoft, IMHO. I just couldn't do it and not feel dirty. :D

-matt

Yes I do.

Is that "are A little different" or "not that different"? Because if you feel Titan A.E., Bartok the Magnificent, Anastasia, The Pebble and the Penguin, A Troll in Central Park are in the same league as Disney, well...(Anastasia was supposed to be very good, while the only Disney "blunder" of the last few years was the very anime-like Atlantis)

Ah! So by putting there name on SA, millions of mothers would consider it for their childern.

Sure he does, American Tail did quite well. Sure he had S.S.'s name attached but it was a great story and well done, something his recent movies HAVEN'T been.

We finally get to the bottom of it. You don't like Disney. But as an "Animation Fan" I think Disney has done WAY more good than bad. For the industry as a whole. They marketed SA better than D.B. has done for most of those movies above (Titan A.E. excluded)

You know something this is probably one of the better dialogues we've had on the movie forum in the short time I have been posting here. Just about everyone has brought a valid point to the table and it hasn't once degenerated into childish name calling or "bashing". Good work everyone.

I still think it's a pretty vaild point. What this means in terms is if there was an animated feature set in the Star Wars universe I think it would be a "success". And possibley it would pave the way for more mature types of animation that are not comedies. Star Wars would be the franchise that most people recognize. It also would be the most easily adaptable in terms of translating into an animated medium. I'm not saying it has a huge hit like Star Wars (i.e. grossing $400 million). That's aiming a bit high. A modest gross of $40 million would probably constitute a "hit" for this type of animated feature.

The other Lucas films that were "hits" are the Indiana Jones series and American Graffitti. Willow? Though it was a modest success, that left something to be desired, but that's just me. Howard The Duck(moving to the "bomb" category now)? I'd walk out on that movie even on an airplane. The other "big" sci-fi series, Star Trek, I don't think would translate well into animation. Lord Of The Rings was tried once before but with somewhat dissappointing results.

I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier, but there was one other "adult" animated film that had some mild success here in America ( and no it wasn't Fritz the Cat). It was Heavy Metal. When I used to tell people I was into anime and I'd describe it as having "more adult" qualities, people would instantly say "like Heavy Metal". Heavy Metal has garnered somewhat of a cult following. I never cared for it myself but that's the association people make in this country.

Okay I'm getting a little off topic. I do agree with just about all of you in saying that Disney could have done so much more with Spirited Away. Disney, though it should be commended, somewhat begrudginly, should also share much of the blame for this film being buried. This is getting a little extreme, but I'm sure that the last thing Disney wants is to have several thousand angry parents calling and writing them saying how their children were scare during this film. Then having someone like Senator Joe Lieberman getting involved to "uphold family values and morals". But that's not a valid excuse. For every rabble rouser there are probably thousands of people would have walked away with nothing but positve things to say about this film.

I just hope that this film can find it's audience on video and DVD.

:whofart:

Ok, first of all Raithen, while I do not always agree with what the academy gives awards to, they DO tend to go with the public perception. If a movie is anywhere near good, and does well at the box office, then it ends up as a nominee for best picture. Occasionally you see a smaller release as a nominee, but the 'bigger' box office always seems to win. The films I mentioned in relation to that comment all did well at the box office, when compared to most indie/foreign films. And when the Academy nominates and gives awards to these films, it only gives them more press, and more and more of the general American public is exposed to them. I tend to get more info from this board than anywhere else, but this board is no where near what the 'general American public perception' is.

Someone earlier stated that most of the audience at SA was adult/teen in nature... not where I saw it. I was the only adult in the theater that did not have a child with them. Maybe it was the fact that it was "Disney's" theater, and it was an afternoon show, but still. The line waiting for the next show as we left was much more in the teen category, and was comprised of a lot of Asian people but there were still a lot of kids there. So yes, a parent sees the Disney name and they assume it is safe for their kids to see... and SA is safe, much more so than most anime any way.

-CM-

I too initially thought that it might've been the scare factor that caused Disney to waffle on Spirited Away. Then I remembered such kids films as Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, Pinnochio, The Never Ending Story, and Lambrynth. Disney's Bambi probably caused more traumatic childhood experiences than any other film.

Factor in the fact that Spirited Away, unlike most of Disney's release, has zero deaths, not even of the 'bad guy.' So Disney can't even have that flimsy excuse to fall back on. The theatre I went to see SA in had many small children in it. And I didn't hear any outcries of terror, nor recall anyone having to leave the theatre with a terrified child in tow.

I flat out beleive that Spirited Away could've done very well for itself if it had been given half a chance. Of course, we'll never know, as Disney didn't even give it a third of a chance in theatres.

:rolleyes:
Disney expanded the movie into more theaters each week, UNTIL it started declining after about 4 weeks.
Decline # Screen Avg
-18.22% 151 $3,439
-19.90% 149 $2,791
-24.93% 136 $2,296

Are you saying Disney should have taken a bigger chance and opened the film wider? Or should kept expanding theaters when it is declining? Disney did the standard "Let's open it small, and if it keeps growing we will expand it further." Don't blame Disney for doing what most studios would do....

Excuse me? Are we confusing commercial success with artistic merit?? And also, your memory seems to be a bit short-termed - for example, The Emperor's New Groove was a box-office dud by Disney standards. I suppose it's all relative though - TENG may have been a hit for another studio.

Speaking strictly in terms of genre, plot and style, Bluth's studio is very similar in all accounts to the Mouse. Speaking in terms of budget, marketing and label-awareness, Bluth is obviously out of his league. Sad but true. Disney has simply permeated too deeply into the general consciousness for other studios to truly compete.

The advent of CG animation has put an interesting wrinkle in Disney domination - but it remains to be seen if Pixar can break free and survive on its own, and if Fox and Dreamworks can continue to compete.

But when it comes to more traditional 2D animation..........

Come now, did Disney really push this movie? Did Jane Six Pack really hear about this film? Let's not be naive...

He also did quite well with The Land Before Time - but two box office successes (read: surprises) are overshadowed by a steady list of poor box office performances.

Ahh... but I do like some Disney. I enjoy Aladdin, Sleeping Beauty, Beauty And The Beast and I plan on seeing Treasure Planet. That being said, I think they are more oppressive to the animation industry than liberating. I have listed reasons in this thread as to why I believe they are cancerous - I have also listed reasons in other threads, so there's no need to kick a dead horse here.

However, I think it's silly for you to remark that they've done a "better" job at marketing Spirited Away compared to Don Bluth films (I think you're over-estimating how much Disney actual did here) - think about it, they are a bloody behemoth of a corporation! ;) Of course they can afford a large marketing campaign for one of their products! But that being said, the film was criminally under-hyped and under-screened - they could have made the film a monster, but they chose not to go that route. And I question why (rhetorically anyway)!

Anyway, I respect your view and perhaps I am a bit too hard-lined and vindictive in my rants about Disney. Granted. But I think we all need to admit that there is a very narrow view here in North America with regards to the genre(s) of animation - and whether Disney should bear the most ire because of this or not, they are more than partly responsible.

I just feel they could do more, but they are slaves to the beast they have created. IMHO.... :D

Something to consider though is that Spirited Away's gross in countries such as France and South Korea dwarfed the box office receipts here. That says a helluva lot about the state of animation here in North America methinks.

C-Mart: The Academy gives into studio whoring. But that doesn't mean they always pick what the public believes should win - in fact, more than not they make surprisingly silly (and oft suspicious) picks for their awards show (or lack thereof, ie. Saving Private Ryan? Pulp Fiction? etc.). The Academy is about money, misplaced nostalgia and studio politicking. I believe there is very little in common with the Oscars and the movie-going public. But that's just my opinion on the matter (better saved for another thread? read: don't get me started!). ;)

However, I do agree with your perception about Spirited Away. It is most definitely a film for all ages. Of course, there are moments within that ask the viewer to dig deeper and care more than a lot of the trash/disposable animation we see on these shores. The movie has a fantastic balance of mature themes and fantasy/whimsy that Miyazaki so excels at. It's a movie made for all ages - and while I can't speak for all audiences, the one I was sitting in was a mixture of ages (probably the majority being late teens, early 20s). But I did get the idea that most of them were anime fans (I overheard some conversations...).

Cheers,

-matt

It all depends on what you view as the movie going public. In my opinion the movie going oublic consists of a lot of people that like the crappiest films, and a many with closed minds about films that are 'different' I even tend to stereotype in that matter... on Sat. I went to see 8 Mile and I was very surprised to see a couple that was in their late 40's. I suspect that most older adults would pass it off as a 'rap' movie and pass it by. That is a shame because it was a pretty good movie, despite the rap factor... considering that I hate rap (except about 4 Eminem songs.) What we tend to consider as the movie going public consists pf the people on this forum, and that simply isn't the case.

-CM-

Well said. This isn't nearly as uncommon as you would expect. It's one of the reasons (besides keeping costs down) that some of the majors are so excited about digital projection. Prints are a huge expense - and a wasted one if a movie under-performs.

yes they might have been doing that, but it made according to boxofficemojo.com $5,392,006 which i find very good for the fact that only 150 plus theaters played it in its entire run at the most.

That's exactly right. What's with the eye-rolling?

Frankly, I think a lot of you are being too nice and overanalytical. Disney has proven time and again that they are the kings of slimy business tactics in the film industry. They've given Spirited Away just enough of a release to prevent everybody and their grandmother from saying that they are deliberately suppressing it. The only mercy is that they were unable to cut it thanks to the contract, which they probably would never have signed if they had had any clue what they were getting into; all they looked at when they hooked up with Studio Ghibli was the box office figures.