No more 2D movies from Disney

[Simon Dunne]

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/...-plans-to-make-hand-drawn-animated-films.html

 

[Marc Wielage]

Sure, for animated films. Dreamworks Animation said the same thing about four years ago.

I don't think designing and adding 3D to cartoon features is that big an expense related to the total budget.

 

[Jason Goodman]

This is referring to CGI 3D animation, not stereoscopic 3D. This is like Pavarotti announcing that he's fat, already sort of obvious.

 

[Klas Persson]

Well, they have said the same thing before. Before Bolt and what not. Then they did The Princess And The Frog.

 

[Ketch Rossi]

This is referring to CGI 3D animation, not stereoscopic 3D. This is like Pavarotti announcing that he's fat, already sort of obvious.

WAS... May He rest in peace...

 

[Mark K.]

"No current plans" and "No more 2D films" are two very different statements. It's a very misleading thread title Simon.

 

[Jason Goodman]

where is the "like" button for Ketch's response :thumbup:

 

[Peter Proniewicz-Brooks]

This is referring to CGI 3D animation, not stereoscopic 3D.

When was the last major 3D CGI animation not to have a stereoscopic release? Hell a fair proportion of the ones released only in 2D are bein re released in 3D (as with cgi 3d animation a stereoscopic version is possible to do as well as if it was always made that way).

 

[Jason Goodman]

Rango was the last one I can remember, not that long ago. While your point is accurate, CGI does not inherently mean stereoscopic.