200609150243Speaking of CGI, earlier this week, the LA Times thoroughly examined Sony Pictures’ new animation unit, and their debut production OPEN SEASON, based on the cartoons of IN THE BLEACHER’S Steve Moore. It’s just one of an ever increasing number of CGI films, some of which have failed to find an audience:

But the genre’s success has triggered a computer-animated boom some worry might turn into a glut. Nearly 30 animated films will be released from 2006 to 2008, a record number according to box-office tracking firm Exhibitor Relations Co. The production frenzy is reminiscent of a decade ago, when Disney’s traditionally animated blockbusters such as “The Lion King” spurred others to jump into the business — only to lose their shirts in a string of box-office bombs that led to widespread layoffs.

Although few are predicting a similar downturn, there are signs audiences are tiring of animated movies that seem derivative. Recent misfires include Warner Bros.’ “The Ant Bully” and Disney’s “The Wild.”

“It used to be you could bring out an animated movie once every two months and, if they were marketed well and released by a studio with a strong branding, there would be an audience there waiting,” said Paul Dergarabedian, president of Exhibitor Relations. “That’s no longer necessarily the case.”

Much more in link. Always insightful Amid has his own views at Cartoon Brew, where we found this link. It seems the animation unit is having a bumby ride, with directors being fired off the upcoming Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs. Things are rarely peaceful in Toontown, alas.


  1. Since when did animation (CGI or otherwise) become a “genre?” Surely, it’s a “medium?”

    Unless they were specifically talking about children’s movies; I guess that could be called a genre. Although one might question the automatic “animated movies=children’s movies” assumption…

Comments are closed.