Re: Animation offerings, should Disney

[DVC-Landbaron]

I do recall it being a BIG deal that Elton John & Phil Collins wrote (and subsequently recorded the music for their respective films). I cannot fathom that you don't believe that this adult awarness brought to these animated features didn't have huge affects on these films outcome.

I think you guys are looking at the music aspect backwards. It’s to make money selling the music from the film. Not to pack ‘em in the theaters. Just like the song from titanic. No one went to the movie to hear that song… But WOW!! Did it rake in the cash afterwards!!

 

[SPAGo 98]

Star power, whether teen or older, will not always increase box office revenues. examples:

On the Line, starring Nsync's Lance Bass, made 4 million dollars.

Glitter, Mariah's movie, made 4 million dollars.

A Walk to Remember, with Mandy Moore, made 39 million. Not a bad take, but hardly a blockbuster.

Crossroads, Brit's movie, is only at 31 million, and its box office take is quickly slipping. I doubt it will break 50 million.

Granted, none of these movies were magnificent, but I think they show that star power is not all it's hyped up to be. Disney is smart enough not to hire unproven names like Aaron Carter.

 

[raidermatt]

Baron- To a certain extent I agree. Certainly they want music that can sell on CDs. But, when they are doing things right, they want music that works in the film as well. I think Elton's music did both in LK.

Obviously, based on Atlantis, having a popular music soundtrack is not a pre-requisite at Disney.

Pirate- I respectfully disagree about the impact of star power in animated films. Phil Collins' career was not exactly on fire when he was hired to do Tarzan. His name alone may have added some credibility but his name alone wasn't enough to sell his own records anymore, let alone get people to go to a movie. Phil and Elton were hired because they are talented individuals who Disney felt could write music that would work in the movies, and also hopefully sell records as they did in the past, IMHO.

 

[Peter Pirate]

raidermatt, I think it's the terminology and degree of 'star power' that we disagree on for I basically agree with ALL of the content of your last post. Elton & Phil WERE hired for their talent, but (IMO) you still can't discount the adult draw...Or course, we can't prove it quantitatively either.

Spago, good points all, but in regular Hollywood they're all stars. Animation isn't built around the same format, I wouldn't think (although I'm SURE AV will point it out if I'm wrong). For a star kid, like Aaron Carter (and it makes no difference how any of us view Aaron Carter) would certainly have increased the interest in Atlantis (if he had been used) among the younger set. I guess the only question is would it have been tangible? Most here obviously think not...

Baron, perhaps you're right with your general assesment, but I'm saying one song in Titanic, which stood on its own merit, is different than a whole score by Phil Collins for an animated feature. The music in these films generally does mean something to the presentation and the fact that Phil or Elton were used instead of relatively unknown talents (like Ashman & Menken) show that something else was being aimed for, doesn't it? Note: Please don't blast me for calling Ashman /Menken "unknown". Certainly we all know & appreciate their work, as did iside Hollywood, but the vast majority of fans of these great animated hits still don't know who they are...
(mia)

 

[Another Voice]

Putting pop stars into movies makes a lot of people rich. Those people tend to be the agents, the lawyers, and the marketing companies – but not the studios because they all flop! If SHOWING the pop star can’t bring the kids into the theater, how can using just their voice do it?

The rule around Hollywood is that using a “star” can open a movie (e.g., bring in people the first weekend), but after that it’s up to the movie itself. The problem with ‘Atlantis’ wasn’t Michael J. Fox– it was that ‘Atlantis’ was a rotten movie. You could have had Aaron Carter, all of the Backstreet Boys, Tom Cruise, and a year of pin-ups from Tiger Beat magazine; it wouldn’t have made a difference.

There are “actors”, there are “stars” and there are “celebrities”. While they may look similar, they are very different species. Celebrities are useful for marketing auto insurance, but they aren’t useful for making movies. Stars can be used in movies when the movie itself is weak and the director can use a star rather than having to work at creating a character. Actors, however, are vital if you want to make a good movie. Movies work best when the audience sees the character, not the person playing (or voicing) the role on the screen. Look at the list of the top grossing movies. Very few had “stars” in them when they were made. People respond to story, not marketing gimmicks.

The fact that Disney switched to “stars” like Elton John, Phil Collins and Sting for the music in their movies is because Disney lost confidence. At best, it was a poor creative choice. But mostly it was a marketing decision to use flash instead of talent. Instead of creating interesting stories and strong characters, it’s much cheaper and faster to toss in a name rather than work at creating something good.

As for the music – having Elton John do the music for ‘Road to El Dorado’ sure didn’t help that movie at the box office. Why didn’t all those people who flocked to see ‘The Lion King’ for the music go to that one? Or, for that matter, why didn’t they show up for ‘Aida’?

Lastly, it sure seemed like ‘Beauty and the Beast’, ‘Little Mermaid’, and ‘The Lion King’ sure hit it big at the box office without Brittany Spears.

 

[YoHo]

AV brings up a good point although he doesn't package it the way I will.

Somebody show me the proof that Lion King's music was a bigger draw then B&tB or Aladdin or Little Mermaid.


In fact, Pocahontas, Lion King, Aladdin, B&tB, The Little Mermaid All have Won for Score.
Phil Collins won for you'll be in my Heart. Alan Menken, Stephen Schwartz - "COLORS OF THE WIND" from POCAHONTAS Elton John, Tim Rice - "CAN YOU FEEL THE LOVE TONIGHT" from THE LION KING Alan Menken, Tim Rice - "A WHOLE NEW WORLD" from ALADDIN Alan Menken, Howard Ashman - "BEAUTY AND THE BEAST" from BEAUTY AND THE BEAST Alan Menken, Howard Ashman - "UNDER THE SEA" from THE LITTLE MERMAID


Maybe I'm missing something, but it doesn't look to me like having "Stars" made any sort of difference at all.

 

[Peter Pirate]

Voice, that was a very well stated post and I didn't even feel any direct hits...Of course, I had to accept the fact that every single thought, idea or supposition I had was, and is apparantely always wrong...But hey landbaron's been telling me that for over a year now, so I guess I should be used to it.

Seriously though, those were some very compelling reasons as to why Disney should never use big names in their animated films...But if the text of your post is all true, why should any studio ever hire a 'star' at an inflated price when the new talent will fit the bill?
(mia)

 

[raidermatt]

I agree with AV except that I don't think star/celebrity/actor are mutually exclusive terms. There certainly are those that can be classified as more than one.

Going with Elton or Phil was an easier choice, since they are stars/celebrities. If the music stinks, the public is more likely to blame them than to blame whomever hired them. However, there is no doubt that the two are also talented. The musical equivalent of actors. So its hard to argue with the choices. The question is, does their style fit the project. I think that's where Sting became a bad choice. His style is a tad 'different'. Of coure, the biggest question is always whether the project is any good to begin with. So I don't believe Elton or Phil's name sold anymore tickets, and only a few albums. But the quality of their work did contribute to the overall quality of the project. But when a film is just not good (or at least not accpeted by audiences), even good work by these or any other individuals isn't going to help much.

Hiring somebody whose talent for composing music is somewhat more, shall we say questionable, like Aaron Carter, Britney Spears, et.al., would clearly be the type of move AV was describing. But I disagree that Elton or Phil fit that mold.