...Meet the Robinsons and Tangled were some of Disney's best work in years in my opinion.
I'd actually have to agree with that. Of the Disney CG films, I think right now they are the gold standard.
Just screw CGI. Who gives a rat's ass which rakes in more money?
Well, the studios care. People seem to forget this, but film is a business. That's quite it's called an industry. Obviously, they're in the business of making good products same as any other company out there.
I understand what your saying, and even have to agree that is how it is. Don't like it, but have to agree. I guess there are just some, deep down myself as well, that would love to see he kind of devotion to the art of animation that Walt gave in the mid to late 30's when he literally tied up all his assets, even personal, to raise the money to make "Snow White." The early days of Disney were filled with many more stories of high risk in the name of a getting a good story out there.
Today's Hollywood, even at Disney, is more interested in "the sure thing." That is why they are making more sequels and re-makes then original stuff. Did you know this year more sequels were made then any other year previous? They want "franchises." Even a lot of the original stuff this year is meant to produce sequels later, like "Green Lantern," "Thor," and "Captain America."
I understand why they do this, because at the end of the day, they are a business. But, I think it needs to be understood equally why more a more people are becoming weary of decisions made by Hollywood. Fact is, even though Box Office numbers can still be high, few tickets are being sold then in years past and the only way Hollywood can stay on top of it any more is by raising ticket prices like they have been.
I don't think hand-drawn animation will die.
I want you to be right, but I have to admit, I have my doubts about it's future. Guess we'll have to wait and see. But really, I think what is at stake is hand drawn's future in American movies. So I mostly agree with you, it's is completely dead right now.
It's not just hand drawn vs. CGI, per say. I'm just comparing movies (good and bad) and how both are, in a way, like kids. One gets more attention than it truly deserves (CGI films that are good, and some films that are really terrible with sucky stories, but many people see them anyway) as opposed to the more deserving one (the greats). And apparently, the terrible films gain more audiences than the better films. (ie: Alvin and the Chipmunks 2 vs. The Princess and the Frog, The Hangover Part II vs. Kung Fu Panda 2, etc.)
You're probably curious as to how Hangover 2 and KFP2 have anything to do with all this. Well, while both are sequels, Hangover 2 got more audiences than it really needed, since it was just a copycat plot to its predecessor. Yeah, I know they both have different target audiences, but KFP2's story was MUCH more original than HO2's rehash.
My point being that, for some ungodly reason, people obviously and unfairly favor terrible films with sucky plots and carbon copy sequels over the better films.
First, I'll never understand why the "Hangover" films are so popular. A bunch of drunk guys acting like idiots. Entertaining maybe for five to ten minutes, then it's just stupid.
I do feel, looking at both animation history and Hollywood history that there is a thing where some new nitch comes along (sound, color, 3D, CG) and movies get made exploiting said nitch and the film makers hope you focus more on the nitch then the story to bring you to the theater. It's a sad reality to that industry, again, realizing that it is more business then art house (despite what folks inside may say). But that's Hollywood. I agree with you though, I want more hand drawn films made! Between no more "Star Trek" in the pre-J.J. Abrams world, the end of the Toby "Spider-Man" films and this, I feel like my childhood and the few years after, are forever changed and i don't like it. But such is life, eh?