Drew Struzan and the Lost Art of Maui Mallard
The story of the Maui Mallard game is a real investigation. Having previously interviewed a dozen of its creators, I still have not been able to fully figure out the history of Maui art from the iconic Hollywood poster artist.
Already in the mid-90s, Drew Struzan was in the status of a living legend, having created posters for more than 150 films, including such series as Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Back to the Future, Harry Potter, etc. It was Drew who became the author of the super rare art for Maui Mallard.
How come a world-famous artist was hired by Disney to create art for the game, but his final work was never published? When and for what purpose was it created? To answer these questions, I had to turn to two people who are not related to Maui Mallard: the owner of the Struzan's works gallery and the current owner of the treasured art. My name is still Max Nasikan. And this time I took a stronger shovel with me. Let's start digging!
Русский перевод (Russian translation) интервью доступен здесь
CONTENT
Introduction
Interview with Adrian Olivera
Interview with Ben Stevens
Conclusion
Introduction
I first became aware of Drew Struzan's involvement with Maui Mallard about 12 years ago when I came across this photo in a portfolio on his website. A work on a board 30'' long and 20'' wide.
At that time it was the only source of the photo on the Internet. As I later found out, the description under the work on Drew's site contained several errors: the name of the developer (the original game was created in-house by Disney Interactive, Eurocom ported it to the SNES), the year the art was created, and… the purpose of the art. Apparently, the description was taken by the artist from the Wikipedia page of the game at the time.
In 2020, this art, in much better quality and lighting, was again exhibited on the Galactic Gallery website with the other works of Struzan. This is the highest quality image currently available. Very soon it moved into the category of sold.
The lucky owner of the artifact was Adrian Olivera. What was my surprise when he himself wrote to me first. He wanted to ask his questions to me, but we ended up with a cross-interview with questions to each other. And here's what I found out from him.
Interview with Adrian Olivera
The current owner of the art
Hi Max. I am reading over your tremendous interview regarding the making of Maui Mallard. I had a question for you if you have a moment.
Hi Adrian. Thank you for appreciating my work. Of course, ask what you want.
I'm curious to know what you found out about this piece of art. I purchased it in 2020 and have reached out to some of the individuals that you interviewed, but I received mixed information. Struzan says on his website that it was created for the box cover. The only place I see this composition is on the back of the PC box, but it is different art.
Congratulations on your purchase! Unfortunately, I also have very little information about it. And I'm still trying to figure out why a rawer (or earlier) version of the drawing was placed on the back of the PC version box. The horizontal composition of a picture signals to me that it is highly unlikely that it could have been created for a vertical cover.
The horizontal aspect makes me think of the SNES release.
Can you photograph that art?
Here it is! Feel free to use wherever.
Great! Thanks a lot! Are you a fan of the game itself?
I’ve actually never played it, but I am a big fan of the Disney video games from the 90’s, especially The Lion King and Aladdin. Played Duck Tales and Chip’n’Dale on original Nintendo.
If it's not a secret, how much did this work cost?
The art was quite expensive but video game art is incredibly difficult to find these days. I paid $7,500.
Wow! By Russian standards, the price of Maui art is simply exorbitant.
Yes, no doubt. The video game art community is beyond private with excruciatingly large price tags. One collector was asking $600,000 for a nice pencil sketch from Super Metroid. This is why I jumped at the opportunity to purchase the art, even if I don’t know the game from back in the day. Certainly familiar with it by name at least.
Can you send a photo of the back side of the art?
Sure! On the back of the art it says: «Copyrighted, 10 November 1995», so it was created no later than that date.
November 1995! This is the estimated European release time of the original game on the Mega Drive (November-December 1995). Thank you for this information!
Would fit with the timing of the SNES release
Unlikely. Genesis and SNES releases have always used the same art in vertical and horizontal orientation. The European releases of the SNES version use the same art as on the cover of the Mega Drive version (with MudDrakes). The SNES version was completed in October 1995, and was released in December of that year in Germany. In this case, it's too late to make art at the end of November.
Would it not make sense for the US SNES release?
The cover art for the US SNES version was adapted from the vertical art (by another artist) from the cover of the PC version of the game. There was a figure of Ninja (Cold Shadow), and it was easy to place it on both formats. In the case of Struzan's horizontal composition, it was impossible to adapt it to the vertical format of the cover (Genesis or PC one).
Here's what John Fiorito, the game's lead artist, told me:
“If my memory serves me, the image you included was commissioned late in the project – the poses of Maui and the Ninja are actual animation keyframes from the game. I did not realize until you wrote me that Drew Struzan was the artist. I was a big fan of his when I was in art school. I am pretty sure that the piece was for marketing/PR and maybe was planned to be used on the inside of the box versus the cover.“
He’s spot on, because the artwork is pretty late compared to the release of the game.
Not really. Before the game was completely canceled in the States, it was still intended to be released in the spring or summer of 1996. The Genesis version was even presented at CES in January 1996 (as stated in the press). This means that Struzan's art was not made late at all for the release of the original game in the USA.
I also wonder why Drew placed the copyright to his name. Other Disney properties are copyrighted by Disney. As seen on the artwork and his site, copyright on Maui belongs to Drew Struzan.
Good question! Five years earlier, Drew had already painted the Disney cover for Duck Tales the Movie: Treasure of the Lost Lamp (1990). And there the copyright belongs to Disney.
I also find it interesting that it seems he didn’t do any more work for Disney after 1995...
This is kind of a crazy thought, but what if the original design for the transforming duck was his? Could that be possible? Could have been painted in 1994 but not copyrighted until later. I don’t see how else the copyright could be in his name. We can say with certainty it is painted no later than November 1995, but it is possible it was earlier.
This is out of the question. His drawing is entirely based on animation frames from Creative Capers, as John said. It was Creative Capers who created the final look for all the characters. Without them, Struzan simply would not have known what to draw. That is, he drew by looking at the animation frames.
By the way, this is the Spyro art preliminary by Drew Struzan. Maybe just an odd coincidence, but Spyro: A Hero’s Tail was also developed by Eurocom.
In the case of his art for Spyro, it is immediately clear that this is a cover. A lot of characters in the frame, the scenery of the level behind. For Maui, he clearly drew promo art not for the cover.
It makes sense. The Spyro isn’t on board, which makes me think the Maui Mallard piece is final but simply revised.
I noticed that your Spyro art is also alternate. There is a slightly different art on the cover of the game. Spyro and the character in boots differ the most.
I was thinking. Is it possible that Drew did the other artwork? Perhaps what I have is the original design, then they asked him to make a second with some alterations.
Everything is possible. But, as for me, the alternate version looks a little clumsy. Maui's pose no longer repeats a frame of the original sprite from the game. As if this art was drawn by someone else. The most complete version of this drawing I could find on the Nintendo Power Magazine (February 1998, Issue 105), which reviewed the Game Boy version.
In the ruins of the temple, a MudDrake is clearly visible, which were no longer in the plot of the canceled sequel (except for one that became a partner to Maui himself, but looked very different). That is, an alternate version of the art based on Struzan's original work is most likely drawn for the original game, and not for its sequel.
Wow, go figure! That’s amazing work connecting these things. I agree with your logic, it seems fitting that the artwork by Struzan was intended for the original game.
What is especially strange, the head of the stone idol has clearly human features, which is absolutely unusual for the duck universe of Donald. In the game, all the idols were with beaks. And here the statue has a human nose. This makes me think that the artist of this art was left to himself and did not really follow the canons of depicting characters in the Disney duck universe. Although the cover of the Quackshot game (1991) with Donald also has the head of an idol with human features.
Makes perfect sense. Which perhaps also explains why they cut that portion off from the box. I would think he would recreate the art himself or they would use his first design. Anything else seems to point to some kind of dispute.
Adrian, thank you so much for finding me and sharing this information. We can get closer to unraveling the mystery.
Thank you, Max. I appreciate all the work you’ve done and thank you for sharing your knowledge with me.
Intrigued by Adrian's story, I later approached the owner of Galactic Gallery, which sells Struzan's work.
Interview with Ben Stevens
The owner of Galactic Gallery
Hi Ben! I interviewed more than a dozen creators of the Maui Mallard game, for which Drew Struzan created art in the mid-90s. But despite all my efforts, none of them could answer me about the purpose and fate of Struzan's drawing, which was never published on any medium. For me, that question still remains a mystery.
Hi Max. There isn't much to be said about the piece.
Some time ago, the original art was bought by Adrian Olivera through your Gallactic Gallery site. I managed to chat with him. This gives me a lot of questions.
When Adrian bought it he asked all the same questions and Drew didn't recall anything about the work. They would often get a request. Paint it, drop it off, and go on to the next job.
On the back of the art now owned by Adrian, there is a stamp with the date: November 10, 1995. Is it possible to say with complete certainty that this is the date of creation of the drawing?
That’s typically the day he finishes it, ships it out. Or they pick it up.
Do I understand correctly that Drew sent the original of each of his works to the customer (in our case, Disney)? The customer scanned the drawing and returned the original work to the artist back. Right?
Correct, or potentially an ad agency in between client and artist.
The description of the work on the gallery website says that the drawing was made by 'Acrylic & Prisma on Board'. Is it thick cardboard? Does Prisma stand for Prismacolor pencils?
Yes, Prisma pencil. And an art board.
Drew rarely painted video game covers. As far as I know, the second time was his cover art for Spyro: A Hero's Tail (2004). Was Maui Mallard art his first illustration for the world of video games?
Drew had other video game art as well. Crimson Sky comes to mind. I know Star Trek: The Next Generation was done in 1994. It created just for the game and used. Back To The Future games as well predate Maui Mallard.
Drew's final (sold) art with Maui was never used or published anywhere. Only on the back of the PC box of the game (autumn 1996) was a heavily modified version of his artwork used. Did Drew create this second version of the art or does he have nothing to do with it?
They don't remember if Drew did the altered version or not.
My next question concerns the most radical assumption. In the early 90s, Drew did several covers for Disney projects. Around the mid-90s, after doing art for Maui, he stopped drawing Disney cartoon covers (correct me if I'm wrong). This led me to the odd idea that Drew might have had some kind of conflict with the Disney people, and so they ended up using something other than his original work on the back of the box of the PC version (let's say they did not have the rights to its use), but the second version redrawn by someone else with the head of a stone idol.
Did he have such a conflict, after which he interrupted his collaboration with Disney? I understand that these assumptions of mine may sound ridiculous (or even unethical), but in any case, the answers to these questions will cut off false assumptions and bring me much closer to unraveling the mystery.
There was never a conflict with Disney back in the day. This was just another job that came in.
All art that Drew created for Disney is copyrighted by The Walt Disney Company. For example: Beauty and the Beast, Pocahontas, Duck Tales: The Movie. Throughout the bottom of the pages on Drew's site it says: © Copyright The Walt Disney Company. But only in the case of the art for Maui, the copyright is left to Struzan himself. Is it possible that the art was not accepted or approved by Disney and therefore the copyright belongs to Drew?
He stamps that on all his originals. In the case it is ultimately not used (and they don't pay for it), the copyright remains with Drew.
This means that this work was not accepted. And he wasn't paid for it. Therefore, alternate art was used on the cover.
I dug a little bit in their database and found where Drew did paint the alternate version. The reason it didn't show on other searched is (I'm guessing) because that piece is missing and never returned to Drew. Sadly, no hi-res exists of it since he never got it back to be scanned.
Wow! Thanks a lot! Until this day, I thought this art was drawn by someone else based on Struzan's final art. Now everything fell into place.
Can I get a direct link to this database to try to download that picture at least in the size that it is?
No links sorry. That's all I can share. Image attached.
Until recently, I doubted that the alternate art was created by Drew, precisely for it looks less detailed on the figures of the characters. It was like Struzan was doing it as a color sketch for final/sold art.
If we compare them, then even the figure of a Ninja with a staff, whose pose is identical on both arts, is more elaborately worked out on the sold art. It seems to me that that alternate art was preliminary. Maybe that's why the pose of the Maui in a Hawaiian shirt there doesn't match animation keyframe from the game.
Drew often made rough preliminary sketches of posters and covers, including in color. Adrian bought one of these preliminary color covers for the Spyro: A Hero's Tail game on your GG website. But his art with Spyro is drawn on paper, while the alternate art with Maui, according to the description in your database, is drawn on board. Could Struzan draw the preliminary art on board, or did he only use this medium for the final art?
Comprehensive work was done on both paper and board. It really just depended on the job. Both of these Maui works are on board. The one with the painted background being the final submitted which matches that image you have for the back of the box.
Thanks a lot, Ben! At least I got the information.
Glad to help, Max!
Conclusion
As I was able to find out, Drew Struzan created two versions of art for Maui Mallard in late 1995. Judging by the horizontal composition and the absence of other characters and game locations, both illustrations were intended for promotional materials for the original game. Because MM game never made it to Genesis in the States, no art was printed in the gaming press. The second and most detailed art (Maui is copied from the animation keyframe) for some reason was not paid for by Disney and the rights to it remained with the artist.
A year later, for the release of the PC version in the fall of 1996, a fragment of Struzan's alternate art was used on the back of the box. Two years later, it also appeared on the pages of Nintendo Power in a review of the Game Boy version. Since then, that alternate (or the final one?) art disappeared without a trace. And the second art, years later, was first presented to the public and finally found its happy owner. End of story.
Copying any exclusive material from this article, be it text or concepts, is possible only with the link to the article and the community.
© Max Nasikan. September 2023.