tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post4886524916374955758..comments2024-03-05T21:05:36.848-05:00Comments on CommentaramaFilms: Why I Don't Like Computer-Drawn CartoonsAndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-17902997725121312422014-01-23T15:42:31.849-05:002014-01-23T15:42:31.849-05:00By and large, I think they are getting better at a...By and large, I think they are getting better at animating with computers. But they still make some big mistakes in my mind and they continue down this dead end of perfect symmetry. I guess we'll see how things go over the next ten years.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-12921217133670324382014-01-23T13:32:57.496-05:002014-01-23T13:32:57.496-05:00Just happened to think of another movie where they...Just happened to think of another movie where they handled the effects very well, Mighty Joe Young. It was a fun, engaging little alternative to the King Kong trope by mixing it up with "gentle giant" trope elements. Joe, the giant ape, was rendered very well throughout the movie. And, they included a lot of behavorial and environmental elements to sell his size. I was able to suspend disbelief quite easily.KRSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-65477519679276353612014-01-23T08:28:14.348-05:002014-01-23T08:28:14.348-05:00There was definitely improvement through the Toy S...There was definitely improvement through the Toy Story films, but that's because it's what . . . a fifteen year gap from the first to the third?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-67429393276435413382014-01-22T13:04:42.995-05:002014-01-22T13:04:42.995-05:00I think in Toy Story 3 the people, even Andy, are ...I think in <i>Toy Story 3</i> the people, even Andy, are better looking and a lot less creepy.Kithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453591141757808708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-70834036821298000432014-01-22T00:13:36.748-05:002014-01-22T00:13:36.748-05:00goldvermilion, I agree with you about the word &qu...goldvermilion, I agree with you about the word "warmth." There is a warmth/life/??? in handdrawn characters that vanishes in computer drawn characters.<br /><br />Agreed about <i>Toy Story</i> as well. The people are creepy, the rest are fine.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-1957573757203297412014-01-21T20:21:14.535-05:002014-01-21T20:21:14.535-05:00I agree with everyone that the motion capture movi...I agree with everyone that the motion capture movies are really really creepy. I've only seen two of them, and it was bizarre.<br /><br />I think I understand the point you're making, Andrew, about symmetry. There is something I might describe as a "warmth" in traditional animation that is lacking in computer animation. But, that being said, there is a degree of detail possible in computer animation that's not in traditional animation.<br /><br />I do think that the computer animation only works when it fully embraces that it's animation. So, for example, UP works for me visually, because you've got people and dogs with enlarged heads and tiny bodies sort of Peanuts style. Toy Story works when the toys are on the screen, because toys are fake looking by definition, and Toy Story works when that weird cartoony old man is cleaning Woody (Toy Story 2). When the people are on the screen in Toy Story, it's a tad eerie, because they're mostly normal looking. <br /><br />I guess, to me, it's just a different art form with the ups and downs of every art form. <br /><br />(On a related note, I find CGI in films to be a blessing and a curse as well.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-51793171879372133872014-01-21T16:55:27.448-05:002014-01-21T16:55:27.448-05:00I saw BEOWULF... not very memorable, but it wasn&#...I saw BEOWULF... not very memorable, but it wasn't trying to be cartoony, so it fell more into FINAL FANTASY territory. <br /><br />I'm sure glad Zemeckis ended up abandoning his plan a couple of years ago to make a mo-cap remake/re-imagining/something of YELLOW SUBMARINE. That would've been scary and awful.<br /><br />Tryanmax,<br /><br />Correct, the Gollum, and (despite the film's flaws) Kong in Jackson's remake of KING KONG, were well-done applications of mo-cap (with further CGI applied later). Like I said, mo-cap is an amazing tool, but oftentimes it isn't used to best effect by Hollywood.Backthrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02289433396695381105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-52170841019061195152014-01-21T16:31:43.575-05:002014-01-21T16:31:43.575-05:00Final Fantasy feels like a videogame, where the mo...<i>Final Fantasy</i> feels like a videogame, where the motion is both not quick enough to feel real and yet over-exaggerated so you notice it. The story is crap too -- I've reviewed that one.<br /><br /><i>Happy Feet</i> felt generic and unreal to me. Haven't seen <i>Beowulf</i>. <i>Monster House</i> was creepy.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-32691071712232596812014-01-21T16:29:29.392-05:002014-01-21T16:29:29.392-05:00KRS, I think imperfection is the key to good anima...KRS, I think imperfection is the key to good animation. Things don't feel real when they are too perfect. Everything has scuff marks and dirt and nothing is perfectly straight or symmetrical in real life. When they let their computers make things perfect on film, it just feels wrong. It comes across as fake.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-71599900636749992592014-01-21T16:29:00.604-05:002014-01-21T16:29:00.604-05:00Okay, I had to wikipedia it. There's five more...Okay, I had to wikipedia it. There's five more motion capture films I missed: <i>Final Fantasy</i> (haven't seen it), <i>Happy Feet One and Two</i> (haven't seen 'em), <i>Beowulf</i> (haven't seen it), and <i>Monster House</i> (creepy, dead-eyed kids). That's not counting use in live-action films like <i>Avatar</i> and <i>Tron:Legacy</i>. tryanmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881154741574720094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-3583380852674153622014-01-21T16:26:57.699-05:002014-01-21T16:26:57.699-05:00Tintin felt really odd as well. It was neither fi...<i>Tintin</i> felt really odd as well. It was neither fish nor fowl. Making it worse, I was watching it on a 120 HZ television so it had that videotape feel as well. Visually, it came across more like puppets than animation and it was just plain wrong.<br /><br />The story was dull too.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-23284180806375925662014-01-21T16:20:01.622-05:002014-01-21T16:20:01.622-05:00Ah! Forgot about Tintin. That's motion capture...Ah! Forgot about <i>Tintin</i>. That's motion capture, too! A pattern is emerging. tryanmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881154741574720094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-56705127892128287992014-01-21T15:21:47.070-05:002014-01-21T15:21:47.070-05:00I was okay with the kids in Polar Express - I went...I was okay with the kids in Polar Express - I went into it expecting some rough edges and the locomotive was wickedly cool - but it was the elves that stopped me cold. Those little demons look like the Flying Monkeys from Oz after being dipped in a vat of Veet gel. Eeeeyagh!!!<br /><br />I think the cgi movie that rode the hardest through the uncanny valley was The Adventures of Tintin. Don't drink alcohol when you watch it - it only makes things worse.<br /><br />That said, I'm cool enough with cgi - the opening sequence in Cars pretty much doesn't work any other way. But cgi has to be carefully applied. I remember watching Jurassic Park and rooting for the dinosaurs because they got more character development than the actors. On the other hand, when Dragonheart came out, I thought they excuted the interaction between characters, story and cgi very well. (I pretty much consider any movie with cgi characters to be animation).<br /><br />Bottom line is discretion. I think directors get a nasty case of the "happy feet" when animation geeks start playing with the screen. Practicing restraint is what's needed.<br /><br />And, as you point out, Andrew, imperfection is important. I remember seeing a vid on how a cgi bulldozer was created and it wasn't until the layer with the dirt and dings and chipped paint was applied that the thing looked like it had finally landed in the scene. But then, objects are far more believable cgi subjects simply because they are usually symmetrical by design.KRSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-37918202137602916672014-01-21T14:19:06.533-05:002014-01-21T14:19:06.533-05:00Mo-cap was also used in part to translate into Gol...Mo-cap was also used in part to translate into Golem in LOTR. He also received many refinements in the way of typical CIG manipulations. Animators are still learning how to use this stuff, much in the same way that Disney's Nine Old Men had to basically write the book on the principles of pen and ink animation.tryanmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881154741574720094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-46038947580217283332014-01-21T13:50:34.089-05:002014-01-21T13:50:34.089-05:00Backthrow, It strikes me that human motion and car...Backthrow, It strikes me that human motion and cartoon motion are actually very unrelated. So going the motion capture route seems like it is destined to fail.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-83110982637668599732014-01-21T13:45:02.573-05:002014-01-21T13:45:02.573-05:00* not counting WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT in the abov...* not counting WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT in the above Zemeckis comments, of course... the film says "directed by Robert Zemeckis" but the animation direction in it was handled by veteren animator/animation director Richard Williams.Backthrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02289433396695381105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-14874023708405573172014-01-21T13:39:22.656-05:002014-01-21T13:39:22.656-05:00POLAR EXPRESS (and other Zemeckis animated films),...POLAR EXPRESS (and other Zemeckis animated films), in addition to the "uncanny valley" aspect, also suffer a bit from the fact that they are, unlike Pixar (and Blue Sky, Dreamworks, etc), 'motion capture' (a.k.a. "mo-cap") rather than traditional animation technique. Not that mo-cap is intrinsically bad --it's an amazing tool-- but the problem lies in that it's most often used in all-animated feature films as short-cut for directors with a sole live-action background, who haven't picked up a pencil and drawn a decent (or any) cartoon in their life, to get to play being "animation director" right out of the box. <br /><br />While both live-action and animation directors share a lot of the same film-making disciplines, and can certainly "cross over" from one to the other, there are certain qualities to animation direction that are unique to the medium, so it seems a bit of a cheat to me when a Zemeckis can festoon Tom Hanks or Jim Carrey with a bunch of target dots, put him front of a green screen, then give the wire frame of that to some CGI team and then call himself an "animation director", as if he had the same years of training as a Brad Bird or Ralph Bakshi.Backthrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02289433396695381105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-44776209921456614372014-01-21T13:38:09.947-05:002014-01-21T13:38:09.947-05:00Yes, it was. I saw it for the first time this yea...Yes, it was. I saw it for the first time this year and I was shocked by how creepy, dark and unwatchable the film was. I'm not even sure what they were thinking in making that one.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-56687530906721707112014-01-21T13:35:12.028-05:002014-01-21T13:35:12.028-05:00A Christmas Carol starring Jim Carey, Jim Carey, a...<i>A Christmas Carol</i> starring Jim Carey, Jim Carey, and Jim Carey is the only other big one. That's just as creepy-unwatchable, if you ask me. tryanmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881154741574720094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-16164261105498618352014-01-21T13:32:59.225-05:002014-01-21T13:32:59.225-05:00Interesting. I always had the sense that Polar Ex...Interesting. I always had the sense that <i>Polar Express</i> was not quite ready for prime time. I also note that it seems to have been an evolutionary dead end as you don't see other films using the same techniques.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-43167721859532808442014-01-21T13:27:58.367-05:002014-01-21T13:27:58.367-05:00BTW, I think Polar Express used facial scan modell...BTW, I think <i>Polar Express</i> used facial scan modelling, as well (popular in sports games that feature real life players) which has it's own problems. That movie was little more than a glorified proof of concept demo that should never have been presented to the public. So much wrong. tryanmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881154741574720094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-35917514437560907102014-01-21T13:26:27.943-05:002014-01-21T13:26:27.943-05:00tryanmax, That's a good point too: the more r...tryanmax, That's a good point too: the more realistic something looks, the more the defects stand out.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-33987968397255767162014-01-21T13:23:52.480-05:002014-01-21T13:23:52.480-05:00Kit, on the mouth, the problem is the limited poin...Kit, on the mouth, the problem is the limited points of interpolation. That's a mathematical term that I can't pretend to fully understand, but basically what it means is that CGI mouths can only move at a fixed number of locations, while real mouth can move pretty much anywhere along its surface.(Teeth are fixed in the real world, so they probably weren't the problem, they probably just provided the point of reference to notice everything else that was wrong.) That's why it gets creepier the more realistic the subject looks--because the rightness emphasizes the wrongness. You see similar problems with hands, though stiff fingers are less creepy than awkward. <br /><br />Also, <i>Polar Express</i> is motion capture, which the Academy does not even recognize as animation. Not a particularly meaningful distinction for this conversation except to say that the capture technology is less refined than the animation technology. tryanmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09881154741574720094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-87477635958000394592014-01-21T13:21:35.166-05:002014-01-21T13:21:35.166-05:00LOL!LOL!AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7059293386881623259.post-40381398226318969752014-01-21T13:16:45.402-05:002014-01-21T13:16:45.402-05:00(Shudder)(Shudder)Kithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01453591141757808708noreply@blogger.com