-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
So hand drawn 2D animation is now considered childish by the masses?
- Thread starter madara
- Start date
- Status
Even newer "hand drawn" movies done by Disney are all "cg" as you put it. Just made to look like a 2d cartoon. L2 animate.
Alladin is when they first started to use CG, with the help of actual drawings, to look like a 2d hand drawn film. Now anything, including shit like South Park, is all CG done from concept art.
I don't have problem with actual CG kids films. It still takes tons of artistic skill, and lots of "hand drawings". The artists that would have drawn the frames, are now drawing the environments and characters. Nobody is losing jobs.
Alladin is when they first started to use CG, with the help of actual drawings, to look like a 2d hand drawn film. Now anything, including shit like South Park, is all CG done from concept art.
I don't have problem with actual CG kids films. It still takes tons of artistic skill, and lots of "hand drawings". The artists that would have drawn the frames, are now drawing the environments and characters. Nobody is losing jobs.
Zapperkhan
Member
Does anyone else think Blizzard's CG team should make a full length movie?
Littleberu
Banned
Zapperkhan said:
The real question is "Could they", not "Should they".
Littleberu said:
yes they can.
It's personally disheartening to hear people crap all over 2-D, but I get it. It's the same reason people hate B&W films. It's old and "out dated". I just think there is a transition period where people will be wowed and ooh'd awwed by cg, but then 2D will have a resurgence whether its because of nostalgia or because people really want to see it again its going to happen. It's definitely not a dead business. Art students are still studying it and wanting to get in on it in the future.
Zapperkhan
Member
Hmmm good point. How about 2 hours with a series of 20 trailers?maharg said:
SundaySounds
Banned
WHAT?!?!? THE GREAT MOUSE DETECTIVE WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST MOVIES OF ALL TIME!!!!
And I remember it being really fucking dark. People died!!!! I remember being really sad as a kid. Damn, I need to watch that movie again.
And I remember it being really fucking dark. People died!!!! I remember being really sad as a kid. Damn, I need to watch that movie again.
VistraNorrez
Member
Animated anything is seen as childish to the masses. Simply because of the unreality associated with it. Animation on TV in America has always been cartoony, which most adults consider entertainment for children. It doesn't matter how well told the story or how artistically driven the animation.
I think you're making a lot of assumptions why the mother thought one movie was more childish than the other, and even if she thought it was the style of animation, she doesn't represent everyone.
Also, I have no preference to CG or hand drawn. I'd like to see more hand drawn, but I ultimately care about the quality of the art and story, neither of which is exclusive to one style. There's no better, it's about good cinema and bad, and both are capable of producing good cinema.
I think you're making a lot of assumptions why the mother thought one movie was more childish than the other, and even if she thought it was the style of animation, she doesn't represent everyone.
Also, I have no preference to CG or hand drawn. I'd like to see more hand drawn, but I ultimately care about the quality of the art and story, neither of which is exclusive to one style. There's no better, it's about good cinema and bad, and both are capable of producing good cinema.
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
shuri said:
I'm going to have to disagree with this. While piracy is a contributing factor, it really isn't the main cause that's leading to the downfall of anime in the US. What it comes down to is that there is a "war" by US companies against it. It makes a lot of sense too. For instance, Cartoon Network used to have Toonami which exclusively played anime, and then Adult Swim brought more anime to the forefront (usually more mature anime, at that). The problem was that anime makes them literally no money. Anime is created in japan, and then it is licensed for distribution in the US, who then licenses the anime to TV networks to air. The revenue stream became very convoluted, and additionally the majority of the profits did not go to domestic interests, but rather foreign interests.
By the time the new millennium rolled around anime was peaking in popularity, and it was quickly overtaking domestically produced shows in popularity, which further drove domestic studios profit margins down. There were two solutions, both of which were used. The first was to make anime domestically, which in turn produced the notable series Avatar: The Last Airbender. The other approach was to replace the less profitable anime series with new domestic IPs, which is largely the approach seen by Cartoon Network. Ben 10 lead the daytime lineup changes, and adult swim completely changed face from being an anime dominated lineup to a lineup emphasizing unique, mature comedy shows, interspersed with some hugely popular franchises (family guy, futurama). Anime on adult swim was relegated to the very early hours of the morning, if it's on at all anymore. This has worked to the advantage of the stations because revenues from these shows go directly to the domestic IP holders.
There have been a few stations that have stepped up and taken advantage of the lack of programming, notably Sci-Fi with Animondays, and IFC. All in all however, as far as I can tell the prevalence of anime on western TV has decreased overall with the levels it used to be at.
Now, to get back on topic, I'm not sure why 2D animation would ever be considered childish. I've never been a huge fan of the Pixar films. They're ok, but I don't think they've ever stacked up to what Disney used to produce. There is a place for them in the market, but it's sad to see 2D fall out of favor. I imagine it will take a very clever studio to make another 2D masterpiece to bring it back in to favor.
SuperAngelo64
Banned
I actually think all these new "Animals/Inanimate Object in an environment they're not used to must find their way home" CG movies are loads more childish than the 2D animated Disney classics.
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
Foxix said:
It is sad. Whether or not you're a fan of anime it did do one thing, and that was legitimize the medium of animation as something that isn't just for children. There are some themes that just seem to work better in animation than they ever would in live action. Animation as a medium allows the watcher to more easily suspend disbelief, which in turn allows them to accept certain facets of the plot or setting more readily, which can greatly enhance their viewing experience. Case in point, it's usually uncommon to see live action movies with anthropomorphism unless that anthropomorphism is a folly of the plot (Mr. Ed and kin). However, cartoons commonly use anthropomorphism as a method of allowing the watcher to more easily place their viewpoint in that of the characters. More precisely, if you see another person taking an action you're more likely to judge that person than use that persons worldview as a basis for examination. Anthropomorphism, and more broadly animation itself, allows this separation of self and suspension of disbelief to be streamlined, which makes it a very viable platform for storytelling, often moreso than any other medium.
That said... I fucking HATE anthropomorphism. I understand that it's a useful tool but I see it as either a replacement for people having to put effort into viewing a work or a gross stereotypical categorization of a character. It also often ruins the experience for me, as I have no desire to sympathize with a talking animal, and find human characters to be much more engaging. I'm not a fan of human/animal/catgirl combinations either, but I can tolerate them to much greater effect than I can other forms of anthropomorphism.
WordAssassin
Member
How about at its inception when animation was made for adults? Betty Boop? Really fucking adult, dark, and overtly sexual. Loony Tunes? Full of sexual undertones and racism. Ever seen any of the cartoons Disney made during the war? Yeah. Cartoons were invented as entertainment for adults. Disney made it accessible to everyone, and from there other studios made it into a children's medium. It's slowly making its way back to where Disney started, thanks to Pixar, and UP looks like a step back into the adult section, as it deals with some very morbid and adult themes.maharg said:
Duck Amuck said:
Why would you ever, EVER abuse 2D animation to make something that is possible in real life? Comedies support animation 1000%, it lets you use the tool of animation to do slapstick jokes that are impossible with live action. You make a non comedy movie with animation and you get some seriously boring Miyazaki bullshit about a girl who falls in love with someone two grades up from her. Nice movie, but a fucking waste of time as an animated one.
Duck Amuck said:
JzeroT1437 said:
Buckethead already nailed it, but if WALL-E had died it would have completely undermined and destroyed what the entire movie was about.
speculawyer
Member
You took what some soccer mom said in Target seriously?
WTF is wrong with you?
WTF is wrong with you?
the_zombie_luke
Member
A Diablo, StarCraft, or especially WarCraft CG movie would do gangbusters at the box office.maharg said:
WordAssassin said:
When has Miyazaki ever done that movie? Many of his pictures are quite complex, especially Mononoke and Spirited Away. And with Totoro and Kiki and Ponyo he does something Disney never does. A movie without conflict and danger, just life, however fantastical. Miyazaki never seems to fall back on absolute evil in his movies or clear villians.
the_zombie_luke
Member
Say what?HK-47 said:
the_zombie_luke
Member
At least we'd probably get a good game movie for once.JayDubya said:
the_zombie_luke
Member
At least for me I want to see a Diablo movie someday just to see Tyrael alone. As long as it doesn't sidetrack any of their games, I don't care what they do. StarCraft would be make a great movie too. They are making a WarCraft movie with Legendary Pictures, who knows if it will ever be completed. At the very least a WarCraft movie might up subs for WoW and WoW fans would see it. But you are right that it won't be easy money like WoW is for them.JayDubya said:
Aaron Strife
Banned
Pixar is the only hope left of animated movies returning to glory.
see: Wall-E, Up.
Disney tried getting more dramatic with their movies as well - Pocahontas and Hunchback represent more "mature" themes yet still tried to market themselves directly to kids. Fortunately it doesn't seem like Pixar is falling down that trap.
see: Wall-E, Up.
Disney tried getting more dramatic with their movies as well - Pocahontas and Hunchback represent more "mature" themes yet still tried to market themselves directly to kids. Fortunately it doesn't seem like Pixar is falling down that trap.
No one is interested in 2D animation today because they stick to the same style they were using in 1928. People have become bored with it, and Disney has compounded the problem by tying animation to children movies in people's minds. Of course, this is nothing new.
2D animation can be so much more, Fantasia 2000 hints at this.
2D animation can be so much more, Fantasia 2000 hints at this.
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
Duck Amuck said:
I just love when trains are used to represent the pulsing, throbbing virility of a man's passion.
Why do people always say that all cell animation is 2D? I mean, take a look at Disney movies. You will see the characters from various angles, you will see rotation, perspective, and an overall sense of depth. Just because it is hand drawn, it doesn't mean that the world the animators are illustrating is flat and two dementional.
SundaySounds
Banned
agrajag said:
Yeah, they draw it in a three dimensional perspective, but the image is flat. Whereas when it's computer generated, the image just appears to be more deep. I guess.
SundaySounds said:
the image is still flat -_- The characters and environments are 3D models, but you only see a flat image, if you move your head, the image doesn't change. So the models appear no more deep than hand drawn characters. Maybe more realistic and shiny, but that depends on the artists, IMO. I've seen paintings that look photo realistic.
The vast majority of animation produced has been done in a very similar style for years (look at the style of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs to Lilo and Stitch, they're not extremely different). There are exception to every rule, but it is a strong rule when you look at major 2D animation movies released in the US since 1937 and cartoons since Mickey Mouse in 1928.Duck Amuck said:
Look at the art style in the dream sequence in Kung Fu Panda or the different art style hinted at in Firebird Suite in Fantasia 2000, that is what I mean by different style. Heck Waking Life is another good example of breaking the very traditional 2D style.
Mr. Spinnington
Banned
let me tell you about how old rotoscoping is....tak said:
Not just Disney. Anime was guilty of this for a number of years and still is in a lot cases (though it has gotten a lot better over the years, unlike the US). Kids Cartoons have been very guilty of this too, everything from Looney Toons to Sponge Bob to Rugrats (though Sponge Bob throw a little Ren and Stimpy breaking the model into the mix). Nickelodeon has (kind of) a few exceptions currently as pointed out by Duck Amuck, but this has only recently started to happen. Heck, look at the 2d Animation movies produced by other studios like Cats Don't Dance or Osmosis Jones.agrajag said:
Disney started it, but everyone followed. Look at the art world, it is rich with style, but 2D animation is not. There are exceptions in animation, but they're few and far between, specially in major projects that studios don't want to fail.
What does that have to do with art style? That is a animation technique.Mr. Spinnington said:
Mr. Spinnington
Banned
i know. i'm just more angry that you referenced waking life because i hate it. i wish things had started with a scanner darklytak said:
Mr. Spinnington
Banned
hi5tak said:
IcebergSlim3000
Member
madara said:
My 4 year old daughter was watching the new Winnie the Pooh. It's all CG and completely devoid of any character it once had.
tak said:
So Disney, Anime, Looney Toons, Sponge Bob and Rugrats all look the same? I'm sorry, I'm just not seeing what you're getting at. Certain animation studios fall into a rut, yes, but on the whole animation has been very diverse. Also, look at some European, especially Russian cartoons for some inspired art. And Russian cartoons have never been exclusively made for kids. I've seen so much bizarre and post-modern stuff in Russian cartoons that will have the biggest coffee house nerds scratching their heads.
Yes, all those things you point out look different, but the difference are not major. I know there are very good exceptions to the (for lack of a better term) Disney style, but we're not seeing the vast majority of these exceptions coming from major studios and being released to the masses.agrajag said:
Look, I'm not saying 2D animation is not diverse, there is diversity. It just we don't see the as much diversity with major 2D animation projects as we do in the art world.
I don't want to get engaged in this heated debate so I'll just add a relevant link to John Kricfalusi's (the creator of Ren & Stimpy) blog: http://johnkstuff.blogspot.com/
It's chock-full with what he thinks makes 2D cartoons great. Lots of images, explanations, examples and even clips.
It's chock-full with what he thinks makes 2D cartoons great. Lots of images, explanations, examples and even clips.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked