At least there seems to be a lot of interest in the movie:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... y+Rapunzel
The one with the girl and the squirrel was added just one week ago, and already there has been 16,445 views. And we are talking about just a few seconds of pre-production materiel from a movie that is at least two years away. Just wonder what the actual trailer will look like.
Looks promising for Rapunzel
-
Rumpelstiltskin
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:05 pm
- Gender: Male
-
kurtadisneyite
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:14 pm
- Location: los angeles, ca
-
Rumpelstiltskin
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:05 pm
- Gender: Male
Yes, Glen Keane has big plans for the film. He has the ambitions of bridging the gap between 2D and CGI:
"Keane admitted that he considered starting over in 2D with RAPUNZEL after Lasseter took over Disney Feature Animation, but was too committed to 3D to abandon it. “After two years of finding that there is something special about hand-drawn pushing CG in a direction that can happen, I realized that this is a necessary drive. I want to make the computer bend its knee, to execute what an artist envisions, to make it respond like a pencil.
There are a lot of ways of making the world inside the castle incredibly imaginative and then exciting when she gets out for the first time. There’s no photoreal hair. I want luscious hair, and we are inventing new ways of doing that. I want to bring the warmth and intuitive feel of hand-drawn to CG.
http://news.awn.com/index.php?ltype=cat ... m_no=17907
"I loved 'Shrek,' " Mr. Keane responded. But the characters, particularly Princess Fiona, looked plastic to him. "Every frame of that film was a bad drawing to me, personally," he said."
It was especially the shoulders he found stiff and unnatural. So he has decided to make this movie very fluid in the spirit of 2D films.
What seperates it from a 2D movie is basically all the details, the depth and dimensions. A three dimensional drawing/painting.
I often read that some people hate computer animated movies, but it is not often I see a reason for the hate. Why not like both? Stop motion and 2D are very different, but I like them both. Some of the hate is maybe caused by the feeling that 2D is becoming more and more replaced by CGI. That would of course be tragic, but it doesn't all computer animated movies are terrible. They are still devolping, evolving and branching.
"Keane admitted that he considered starting over in 2D with RAPUNZEL after Lasseter took over Disney Feature Animation, but was too committed to 3D to abandon it. “After two years of finding that there is something special about hand-drawn pushing CG in a direction that can happen, I realized that this is a necessary drive. I want to make the computer bend its knee, to execute what an artist envisions, to make it respond like a pencil.
There are a lot of ways of making the world inside the castle incredibly imaginative and then exciting when she gets out for the first time. There’s no photoreal hair. I want luscious hair, and we are inventing new ways of doing that. I want to bring the warmth and intuitive feel of hand-drawn to CG.
http://news.awn.com/index.php?ltype=cat ... m_no=17907
"I loved 'Shrek,' " Mr. Keane responded. But the characters, particularly Princess Fiona, looked plastic to him. "Every frame of that film was a bad drawing to me, personally," he said."
It was especially the shoulders he found stiff and unnatural. So he has decided to make this movie very fluid in the spirit of 2D films.
What seperates it from a 2D movie is basically all the details, the depth and dimensions. A three dimensional drawing/painting.
I often read that some people hate computer animated movies, but it is not often I see a reason for the hate. Why not like both? Stop motion and 2D are very different, but I like them both. Some of the hate is maybe caused by the feeling that 2D is becoming more and more replaced by CGI. That would of course be tragic, but it doesn't all computer animated movies are terrible. They are still devolping, evolving and branching.
She says to the squirrel that she doesn't believe in magic, well I say to you that I don't believe in CGI!
And I'm very disapointed with Glen Keane for ruinning what could be the new disney rennaiscence...
They at least could make a mix between 2d and CGI, (and keep the characteres in 2d) - like Treasure Planet...
Let's hope the Frog Princess will be better!
And I'm very disapointed with Glen Keane for ruinning what could be the new disney rennaiscence...
They at least could make a mix between 2d and CGI, (and keep the characteres in 2d) - like Treasure Planet...
Let's hope the Frog Princess will be better!
They took us to a magical journey under the sea, they show us how a beautiful girl can look into a heart of a beast, they even made us fly on a magic carpet...
Someday the magic will return!
-
Disney-Fan
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3381
- Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 8:59 am
- Location: Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense
- Contact:
How is pursuing a movie using CG going to prevent a renaissance? It's the quality of Disney's movies that should change, not the style. Besides, I think the situation now is more than fair. We get some in CG, some traditionally drawn. The best of both worlds!And I'm very disapointed with Glen Keane for ruinning what could be the new disney rennaiscence...
EDIT: Stupid spelling mistake!
Last edited by Disney-Fan on Tue Feb 20, 2007 7:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
"See, I'm not a monster. I'm just ahead of the curve." - The Joker
He already had the best of both worlds, they already have produced good CG movies like Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Monsters Inc... (by Disney-Pixar!) There's no need to include the CG movies in the hand-draw classics line...Disney-Fan wrote:I think the situation now is more than fare. We get some in CG, some traditionally drawn. The best of both worlds!
They could have two lines of movies, one for all the CG movies and the other for Disney hand-draw classics (and save the classic princess stories - like Rapunzel - for the last one)
They took us to a magical journey under the sea, they show us how a beautiful girl can look into a heart of a beast, they even made us fly on a magic carpet...
Someday the magic will return!
I think that rapunzel could very well be the beginning of a new disney "rennaissance". I mean, why not? At the moment disney is strong, but not as strong as it was in the 90s, so they're producing a lot of sequels and simple, crowd-pleasing stories such as "chicken little", but nothing truly memorable. Now they finally return to a fairytale. This happened in the late 40s with Cinderella and the late 80s with Little Mermaid. I also seem to recall reading how making Snow White as an animated feature was considered to be "disney's folly". No one believed an animated movie would work - they were wrong, and here we are having a similar conversation about Rapunzel. We have our doubts, but it would be just like the disney company to surprise us and prove us wrong just as many begin to lose faith in them.
-
Rumpelstiltskin
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:05 pm
- Gender: Male
Today, in the modern era, there will alway be a mix of CGI and handdrawing in 2D films. Not just in Treasure Planet, there will also be it in The Frog Princess. The challenge is to integrate it in such a degree it is hard to notice, but I don't think that should cause any problems.
The difference between Snow White and Rapunzel, is that in the days when Snow White was made, there wasn't any internet. Meaning nobody could post topics where they would tell everyone how terrible to movie was going to be or what a moron Disney was. Back then, this was the job of the critics in the media. Personally, I think it will be very interesting to see what is actually possible to produce using the combination of all the technology and talents who are working on it.
Imaging if it was impossible to tell the difference between a frame from a CGI movie and a piece of individual artwork done with by hand using a pencil and oil based colors (like the oil paintings by Carl Barks). And when the movie was played, all the movements was as fluid as one could hope for and the characters moved in a three dimensional space. If Keane succeeds in this, then he will really have reach his goal. In that case, I don't know if it is possible to improve this direction of animation any further, which started with Walt Disney who wanted realistic characters (drawn, not rotoscoped) and used a multiplane camera to add depth to the movies.
The difference between Snow White and Rapunzel, is that in the days when Snow White was made, there wasn't any internet. Meaning nobody could post topics where they would tell everyone how terrible to movie was going to be or what a moron Disney was. Back then, this was the job of the critics in the media. Personally, I think it will be very interesting to see what is actually possible to produce using the combination of all the technology and talents who are working on it.
Imaging if it was impossible to tell the difference between a frame from a CGI movie and a piece of individual artwork done with by hand using a pencil and oil based colors (like the oil paintings by Carl Barks). And when the movie was played, all the movements was as fluid as one could hope for and the characters moved in a three dimensional space. If Keane succeeds in this, then he will really have reach his goal. In that case, I don't know if it is possible to improve this direction of animation any further, which started with Walt Disney who wanted realistic characters (drawn, not rotoscoped) and used a multiplane camera to add depth to the movies.
-
kurtadisneyite
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 241
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:14 pm
- Location: los angeles, ca
Well, there is very powerful animation software being developed by a number of companies, here and overseas.
Glen may have tapped into some of that as well as his own extnsive skill and experience.
Glen has also been given a lot of time to perfect his work - most CGI animators (and projects) do not get that time, nor respect.
But in the end, it will be how the CHARACTER, the STORY, and the rest of RAPUNZEL come together as a whole. CGI shows like "TRIPPING THE RIFT", though laughably bad at times wrt character animation, did well on the SiFi channel because of its story and characters.
Glen may have tapped into some of that as well as his own extnsive skill and experience.
Glen has also been given a lot of time to perfect his work - most CGI animators (and projects) do not get that time, nor respect.
But in the end, it will be how the CHARACTER, the STORY, and the rest of RAPUNZEL come together as a whole. CGI shows like "TRIPPING THE RIFT", though laughably bad at times wrt character animation, did well on the SiFi channel because of its story and characters.
2D isn't Ded yet!
-
SpringHeelJack
- Platinum Edition
- Posts: 3673
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:20 pm
- Location: Boston, MA
- Contact:
I'm as big a fan of 2D animation as anyone, but this looks gorgeous. It "feels" like a traditional hand-drawn feature, but also has the oil-painting look described. I can't wait for this. I'm hoping it's going to be in the vein of "Beauty and the Beast", in that it's not going to be flat out comedy, which Disney should have realized by now doesn't consistently cut it.
Anyhow, though, this is older footage from a while back, and it's been posted before. I think voices have changed since then, too.
Anyhow, though, this is older footage from a while back, and it's been posted before. I think voices have changed since then, too.
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"
The animation is so lush; it looks so incredible! It almost seems as if it is glowing, which gives it warmth and beauty.
I think this was only test animation, and the whole storyline and voices have changed as well.
If this was Disney / Glen Kene only testing, I cant wait to see the final product! I hope it wont be a whole big comedy thing, as Glen wants it trational Disney, like The Little Mermaid. Beauty and the Beast, Cinderella etc. Light comedy relief, but not slapstick.
I think this was only test animation, and the whole storyline and voices have changed as well.
If this was Disney / Glen Kene only testing, I cant wait to see the final product! I hope it wont be a whole big comedy thing, as Glen wants it trational Disney, like The Little Mermaid. Beauty and the Beast, Cinderella etc. Light comedy relief, but not slapstick.
-
Rumpelstiltskin
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 9:05 pm
- Gender: Male
Well, what the story in concerned, I heard that they are putting a lot of effort in it to make sure it lives up to its expectations. And it will not be some Shrek inspired movie, like the origianal intention was, but in the spirit of the old classics. (Walt himself was not happy witht the xeroxed animation in 101 Dalmatians, but it was still a success because of the story and the other elements who made it an entertaining movie.)
Reese Witherspoon is doing the voice in the clip, but it is Kristin Chenoweth who will be the voice in the finished film.
I don't know how old the clip is, it was posted two weeks ago on you tube(it said one week a couple for days ago). The clip itself was shown at SIGGRAPH in 2005, in that time the technology should have evolved even further. It is not possible to see the whole test clip, or the rotating image with Rapunzel on a swing, and I guess the two very short clips was put out in the net by some fans among the audience who filmed it with the camera on a mobile phone or something. Probably without permission, but it only makes people even more curious about the finished product.
The barbie movies looks nothing like this movie, which has a much softer and warmer look, among other things. The barbie movies looks stiff, hard and plastic. But then again, Barbie is after all a plastic doll, so it make sense she seems like a living doll too. Maybe it is the face and hair which is the reason why she is connected to Barbie?
Reese Witherspoon is doing the voice in the clip, but it is Kristin Chenoweth who will be the voice in the finished film.
I don't know how old the clip is, it was posted two weeks ago on you tube(it said one week a couple for days ago). The clip itself was shown at SIGGRAPH in 2005, in that time the technology should have evolved even further. It is not possible to see the whole test clip, or the rotating image with Rapunzel on a swing, and I guess the two very short clips was put out in the net by some fans among the audience who filmed it with the camera on a mobile phone or something. Probably without permission, but it only makes people even more curious about the finished product.
The barbie movies looks nothing like this movie, which has a much softer and warmer look, among other things. The barbie movies looks stiff, hard and plastic. But then again, Barbie is after all a plastic doll, so it make sense she seems like a living doll too. Maybe it is the face and hair which is the reason why she is connected to Barbie?
Really?! Wow! I'm a fan of Glen Keane's work! A shame he hasn't worked on anything since Silver from Treasure Planet. Thanks for letting us know that kurtadisneyite! I thought he was just directing the film.kurtadisneyite wrote:Very fluid for CGI. Keep in mind Glen Keane, master 2D animator, is Rapunzel's 3D animator.
