"The movie cost a reported $150 million" this is from an article about the Princess and The Frog.
The thing that gets me is that Disney used an ultra small staff here in the Burbank studio, so small in fact that many of us, 100 or more, give or take, weren't even offered positions on the film and rather most of the work was shipped overseas or across the country to small independent studios for the explanation of, "to keep the costs down".
The costs were not kept down at $150 million and that is a shame because they are setting it up to be a box office failure and thus putting the nail into the coffin of 2D films.
The article by Julia Boorstin also said that the reason 2D films weren't making money was this, "hand-drawn animation tends to appeal primarily to kids while Pixar movies draw all ages." I would like to smack her because this is simply not true. Story is what appeals to all ages, and it has nothing to do with the medium.
It makes me sad that Disney isn't even expecting a decent box office, and yet they spent all that money, when they could have done it for a lot less and kept the most of the crew in house, here in Burbank like we did on the films in the 90s.
As well, in my experience whatever they are telling the media is usually A LOT less than the real cost of the film, so again, I wonder, why the fuck didn't they just hire a full crew out here and save $50 -70 million and gain more at the box office?