>>193220
>Care to back that up with some facts? If it wasn't cheaper, why is 2D being so abandoned in favor of it?
Because, back in the early aughts, companies were flooding theaters with 2D animated films and having them flop (Regardless of whether the film was good or not) meanwhile Pixar, O Entertainment, DreamWorks, and Blue Sky Studios were making money hand over fist with their 3D productions simply because it was something different. On top of companies experiencing, then recent, major box office failures such as
Titan A.E.,
The Iron Giant,
Treasure Planet, and
Sinbad: Legend of the Seven Seas.
<But, why haven't they returned to making 2D films then? It's been almost two decades.
Because they
DON'T want 2D films to exist. Why? I have no clue. Where's my evidence of this ploy?
Princess and the Frog and
Winnie the Pooh. Why do these two films matter? To put it simply, when Disney released
Princess and the Frog back in 2009, the film was
NOT suppose to be a success. The film was suppose to flop to provide the company a reason to shelve 2D animation altogether. However, because the film succeeded, it did show that the public did want to watch traditionally made 2D animated movies. And, the company heads couldn't have that. So, they pulled the then
Winnie the Pooh short film, that the animation studio was playing around with, and demanded a full feature length film.
And, then set the film to be released the same weekend as final Harry Potter film, with zero marketing, and unironically going out to the public and stating that the nostalgia of
Winnie the Pooh is going to beat out the theatrical conclusion to the unstoppable autism of J.K. Rowling's angsty fantasy teen drama.
Needless to say, Disney closed up shop on all of their 2D animation and have never looked back since.