Animation

Why Technology Makes Cartoons Better

Animation /

You’re familiar with Disney’s multi-plane camera, right? (If not, see above) It was, and still is today, a technological marvel that helped establish the Disney product as the most superior in the mind of the consumer. Although the films were dependent on the story and characters and such, the use of the multi-plane camera improved the look of the films so that they were far beyond what competitors had to offer.

Another example is CGI. When the original TRON was released, some animators at Disney refused to work on it because they felt it would eliminate their traditional way of doing things. While this did in fact occur, it also created a whole new area of animation that has seen plenty of traditionalists embrace the technique.

My point is that some people fear technology, especially if they perceive it as a threat to their way of doing things, but such fear is often unfounded. Improvements in technology can make things easier for the artist and can improve the quality of their output.

Just take a look at what technology can do today: you can have an entire multi-plane camera inside your own computer with no need for five technicians to operate it for you!

So embrace technological advancements, you really do have nothing to lose.

Why Technology Makes Cartoons Better Read More »

Today’s Post Brought to You By Glagnar’s Human Rinds

1 Comment / Animation /

Yes, the title is a reference to Futurama, as the image above implies.

Here’s a question for you to ponder: live-action films are stuffed to the gills with advertising, so much so, that each crew normally includes a person whose sole job is to ensure that no brand makes they’re way into a film unless they are meant to be there.

It’s a bit crazy isn’t it? Yet such paid product placement helps cover the rather large cost of these films. What’s interesting though, is that you hardly ever see such product placement in animated films.

Sure, you see references to brands all the time, but rarely any explicit mention of one.

It’s a topic I’d like to elaborate on further, and I will, once I see Morgan Spurlock’s new documentary, POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold.

If you have any thoughts about it now, feel free to add them below. 🙂

 

Today’s Post Brought to You By Glagnar’s Human Rinds Read More »

Women in Animation: Focusing on the Right Things

Animation, Opinion /

Apologies for the belated post today and the complete lack of one yesterday (*&%^ work schedule). Today’s topic has been doing the rounds recently as a result of two news items (both, incidentally, in the Los Angeles Times).

The first concerns Pixar’s upcoming film, Brave, which was already in the news for having its director, Brenda Chapman removed halfway through production. The second is that the premiere of DreamWork’s Kung Fu Panda 2 is also the first time a women, namely Jennifer Yuh Nelson, has directed a theatrical animated feature.

Brenda Chapman, in the LAT article, bemoans the fact that:

We’re in the 21st century and there are so few stories geared towards girls, told from a female point of view.

Two things:

  1. Well, duh
  2. Is being female even necessary?

I will be the first to admit that males and females ain’t quite into the same things (she’ll like cartoons someday, dammit) but Chapman is calling for the wrong thing.

Does it matter that females create content for females?

I don’t care who makes my entertainment, as long as it entertains me. As a kid, I definitely didn’t care who was writing, directing or animating my cartoons.

It’s not that I completely disagree with Chapman. Balance is a great thing and over-dominance of one gender over another is wrong, especially in the creative arts where both sides are equally capable of producing excellence.

Women absolutely should have a greater role in creating content for girls but one should not construe such a need as being all-conquering. Men can and do have a role in creating content for girls the same way women can and do have a hand in creating content for boys.

The real crux of the issue is that there is a gender imbalance in the industry and people in general (both men and women) still have their attachments to content aimed at their respective gender. Both of these need to be fixed before we see any changes.

This post is as good as any to highlight the exceptional work done by Women in Animation whose goal is to:

foster the dignity, concerns and advancement of women who are involved in any and all aspects of the art and industry of animation.

They’ve got a great website that should be an essential part of your bookmarks and they hold plenty of events too that aim to further the organisation’s mission.

 

Women in Animation: Focusing on the Right Things Read More »

Animation Is A Genre

2 Comments / Animation, Opinion /

At least it is according to the New York Times:

At the box office, animated films, which have recently been Hollywood’s most reliable genre, have fallen into a deep trough…

Animation encompasses many genres which is why it should not be considered one. It is part ignorance, part misinformation, but there are very few, if any excuses for such a sweeping generalisation an artform.

Besides, the films have been “reliable” because they’ve been good and have more often than not out-performed their live-action counterparts, not just because they are animated.

Animation Is A Genre Read More »

Passing Thoughts on The Disney Strike

2 Comments / Animation, Disney /

It was seventy years ago but the effects are still felt to this day such is the magnitude of what happened in Burbank all the way back in 1941. As you would expect, the TAG Blog has a nice writeup on the event that is worth reading.

There were problems on both sides of the picket, but as Steve points out in the post, some people on either side wold not talk to one another even decade later.

It’s important to remember that there is much to gain by putting others before yourself.

Passing Thoughts on The Disney Strike Read More »

A Sharp Reminder of How Animation Is Perceived In Some Quarters

Animation /

On Friday, Tim Cushing over at Techdirt posted a piece that discussed another article by Jeffrey A. Tucker in which he discussed Disney’s Tangled and the political allegories of the film. With me so far? OK. One facet that Jeffrey touched on was how ideas/stories can be, in his words, turned into 2.0 versions, that is to say, be remixed and improve upon the original.

Both are great articles and I encourage you to read them both, but it was in the Techdirt article’s comments where a flame war seemed to break out. Now I do not condone flaming or trolling, but sometimes it brings out the true nature in folks, poking the beast as it were.

Anyway, reading down the comments, I came across one that epitomises that particularly nasty attitude that seems to linger around animation sometimes:

What kind of grown man calls watching children’s Disney movies a “pleasure”? Seriously, do you have the intellectual capacity and interests of an 8 year old girl?

It refers to Disney, but then they are only one of the many that the comment could apply to.

There are eejits everywhere and, much like the guy who called me an asshole on Friday after I apologised for taking his parking space, it says more about who its coming from than who it’d directed at.

Does it really matter that a grown man finds watching Disney movies a pleasure? Why should you even care? They’re good films and being the free society that we live in, can’t anyone enjoy them? How about the way such a statement insults all the fine people who worked on such a film, do they have the same, limited capacity?

It’s disheartening to be reminded that people like that exist. Sadly, the very nature and behind-the-scenes nature of animation leads to that kind of attitude because some people are incapable of separating what they see on screen from how things are actually created. Well, that and the fact that they believe that something needs to be ‘grown-up’ in order to be considered entertainment.

A Sharp Reminder of How Animation Is Perceived In Some Quarters Read More »

Cars 2 in New York

Animation /

image

Apparently Mater is the only one. Is this a coincidence or does Disney/Pixar think they’ve got a winner on their hands?

It’s interesting to compare it to Tangled. Last November you literally could nor turn a corner I’m the city without seeing the poster with the smouldering eyes (you know the one) .

Comapritively I only saw one poster for Kung Fu Panda 2 too. Is animation in a bit of a lull? I hope not.

Cars 2 in New York Read More »

Hang Out With Indie Animator Bill Plympton and Friends Tomorrow Night

Animation, Event, New York /

Starting tomorrow night (Friday, May 27th), the Museum of the Moving Image is hosting not one, but two days of Bill Plympton-related screenings.

Friday will see a discussion with Bill and David B. Levy on their new book, Bill Plympton: Independently Animated and will include screenings of some of Bill’s shorts. As a bonus, Bill has promised every audience member a drawing of their very own! He will also be signing his book.

On Saturday (May 28th), there will be screenings of Bill’s feature films, Hair High and Idiots and Angels as well as a preview of the documentary Adventures in Plymptoons.

Below is the press release which contains all the details:

Museum of the Moving Image presents

INDEPENDENTLY ANIMATED: BILL PLYMPTON

May 27 – 28, 2011

Bill Plympton may be the only major animator who still hand-draws every single image of his own films. Though his approach to filmmaking may be old-fashioned, his offbeat and inventive artistic sensibility is unique. This two-day program of screenings and discussions celebrates Plympton’s new book, Independently Animated.

All screenings are free with museum admission unless otherwise noted.

Independently Animated: An Evening with Bill Plympton

Friday, May 27, 7:00 p.m.

Screening, discussion, and book signing with Bill Plympton and David Levy

The lavishly illustrated new book Independently Animated: The Life and Art of the King of Indie Animation, by Bill Plympton and David Levy, published by Rizzoli, is part biography, part retrospective, and part behind-the-scenes look at Bill Plympton’s life and career. It contains hundreds of pieces of art from his films, as well as never-before-seen doodles, drawings, and production notes. To celebrate the publication, the Museum presents a festive evening with a discussion, short films, and live drawing by Plympton, followed by a book signing. Everyone in attendance will receive their own original drawing from Plympton.

Among the highlights: a work-in-progress screening of an exciting new short film, Plympton’s hand-colored restoration of Winsor McCay’s 1921 film The Flying House, a charming film about a husband who turns his house into a flying machine, which bears remarkable similarities to the Pixar film Up; a screening of the popular short film Guard Dog and Guard Dog Jam, the result of an invitation to animators around the world to remake Plympton’s film by each contributing their own remake of one shot from the film.

Tickets: $10 public / Free for Museum members. Members may reserve tickets in advance by calling 718 777 6800.

Adventures in Plymptoons

Saturday, May 28, 3:00 p.m.

Preview screening With Alexia Anastasio in person

Dir. Alexia Anastasio. 2011, 98 mins. Digital projection. This new documentary about animator Bill Plympton follows his path from the many rainy days of a Portland childhood spent indoors drawing to a self-made career as an independent animator. The film includes interviews with family, friends, colleagues, critics, and fans.

Hair High

Saturday, May 28, 5:30 p.m.

Introduced by Bill Plympton

Dir. Bill Plympton. 2004, 78 mins. Digital projection. An outrageous gothic myth from the 1950s, Hair High is the legend of Cherri and Spud, a teenage couple who are murdered on prom night and left for dead at the bottom of Echo Lake. Exactly one year later, their skeletal remains come back to life and they return to the prom for revenge and their justly deserved crowns.

Idiots and Angels

May 28, 7:30 p.m.

Introduced by Bill Plympton

Dir. Bill Plympton. 2009, 78 mins. A misanthropic gun dealer who spouts an unwelcome pair of wings is the antihero of Plympton’s noir-flavored feature, which was entirely hand-drawn, mainly in gray pencil. According to the New York Times, the film, which is entirely without dialogue and has music by Tom Waits, Pink Martini, and others, “defies expectations. It is relentless, and brilliant.”

Hang Out With Indie Animator Bill Plympton and Friends Tomorrow Night Read More »

One Look At These Posters And You’ll Visit Film On Paper Too

1 Comment / Animation, Website /

If you’re not even a wee bit jealous of Eddie Shannon, then you’re clearly not into movie posters.

Film on Paper is his website where he is archiving his entire collection (literally thousands) and it is by far the most fascinating that I have come across. Filled with rare and foreign versions, the site includes a couple of animation ones, nice ones in fact. His ones for The Incredibles are unreleased, which makes them even more awesome (check out the one below if you don’t believe me).

Is this not the most badass poster you've seen for this film?

You could spend literally hours on the site and I absolutely recommend that you do. Movie posters are a fascinating artform in and of themselves and its nice to see them get some love from a devoted collector.

One Look At These Posters And You’ll Visit Film On Paper Too Read More »

Here’s How Digital Projectors Will Ruin Animated Films

Animation /

Via: Nina Paley’s Blog

Last August, I wrote about the wonderful analogue nature of going to the cinema and how the industry has been more resistant than most to the move to digital. Since then, there has apparently been a massive shift to digital projection after the technology finally improved enough to the point that it could rival traditional celluloid and since Sony began giving away their projectors in exchange for promotion rights.

What’s interesting though, has been the coincidental and simultaneous shift to 3-D projection. Naturally projecting in 3-D is a bit trickier and with new projectors are necessary, it seems only advantageous to also move to digital distribution as well, whereby films are downloaded directly from the internet rather than shipped in cans.

However, it occurred to me yesterday (as I read the Cartoon Brew post and the Boston.com article) that the advent of digital projection, while ushering in a whole new era for cinematic entertainment, is not without its teething troubles.

For starters, the claim that cinemas are short-changing patrons by leaving 3-D lens in for 2-D films is disheartening, but also how projector companies like Sony are using DRM in their projectors (yes, projectors) because they don’t want anyone to open them. So the end result is a dull picture projected onto the screen because the 3-D filter lens absorbs so much light.

That’s the first way digital projection can harm animation. If 3-D lens are not switched out, the picture is utterly ruined. In a live-action film this may not be so much of an issue due to the greater detail being projected, but for animation, there are often some very vivid and lively colours that will not ‘pop’ near as much as they should. Animation has been a traditionally very colourful artform and whose appeal rests largely on its creative use of colour.

The second way is resolution.

My computer monitor is a 22″ widescreen with 1920 x 1080 pixels. It’s nice and big, sure, but it’s resolution is lower than my mobile phone at about 72dpi. What does this have to do with film? Well, I remember when digital cameras first came out and how atrocious their resolution was compared to traditional film cameras. Now in fairness, they’ve improved a lot but only in the perceptive sense. A good quality SLR film camera will absolutely trump a digital camera when it comes to image quality simply because film has the capacity for storing images at much higher resolution than current digital technology.

My point? While digital projectors have improved greatly over the last decade, they are still at that early stage that digital cameras were at all those years ago. They represent a sufficient substitute for 35mm film, but only in the sense that the human eye cannot immediately detect the differences.

Personally, I would (and do) feel short-changed for paying extra to see a 3-D film and in return see a lower quality film in both colour and resolution.

What are your thoughts? Am I right or reading far too much into this for a Tuesday morning?

Here’s How Digital Projectors Will Ruin Animated Films Read More »