Frozen: Part V

[Warm Regards]

It's about the money. I hate having to say that so bluntly, but there it is.

For one, hand drawn requires more manual labor. CG is more independent and needs less (paid) animators. (At least in regards to character animation).

Hollywood can give two craps about the story or medium. Art in Hollywood is about how much money you make; you ain't worth Jack if you don't provide. And for whatever reason in recent years (over exposure, 3D ticket prices, slimply better stories), CG has made more money than hand drawn.

This leads to the mentality that CG is risk free.

But, and an important but, CG has proven to have it's ruts as well. ("Mars Needs Moms", "Food Fight", "Legends of OZ", etc.) I do think one day CG won't be seen as "risk free" as many higher ups think now. That's when the bandwagon will need to get a new horse, I think.

[thedisneyspirit]

I don't get your point of "a company that was created solely to do hand drawn animation" bc when Disney first started out, CGI didn't exist, so...

And it's funny, you never mention something else, like CGI incorporated in 2D films, like the stampede in Lion King or the ballroom in Beauty and the Beast. What, 2DDisney, are those also "abominations"?

Wreck It Ralph works best as a CGI film, it fits the setting so much more than if it had been in 2D. Big hero 6 would look in 2D, but I think being in CGI gives it its own unique touch (and not being compared to the countless Marvel and DC animated DTV films they churn out)

[2Disney4Ever]

I don't get your point of "a company that was created solely to do hand drawn animation" bc when Disney first started out, CGI didn't exist, so...

And it's funny, you never mention something else, like CGI incorporated in 2D films, like the stampede in Lion King or the ballroom in Beauty and the Beast. What, 2DDisney, are those also "abominations"?

Wreck It Ralph works best as a CGI film, it fits the setting so much more than if it had been in 2D. Big hero 6 would look in 2D, but I think being in CGI gives it its own unique touch (and not being compared to the countless Marvel and DC animated DTV films they churn out)

Actually, I did share my thoughts on CGI used in 2D movies several pages back. In fact, I'll quote it again here:

Well it's not like I've always had this bitter vendetta against CG movies. My stance with CGI in Disney films is that I was always happy with it back when Disney used it to enhance their 2D films, not replace them. It was always understandable how CGI could help in things that couldn't easily be done just with hand-drawn animation. Things such as the carpet's very elaborate pattern in Aladdin, the stampede in The Lion King, or the fight with the Hydra in Hercules where it had to grow so many heads every time Herc chopped one off. I even favored the experimental type stuff like Silver in Treasure Planet having a CG robotic arm. CGI in those movies was always used as a tool for very specific things, but never something used to take the place of an entire art form or the need and artistic value of drawing characters by hand. The problem with studios like the Disney of today is that they're threatening to make computer animated films into the very definition of "animation", and it is absolutely absurd that every single animated character now has to be a computer model in order to be considered acceptable to the studios or the general public (and not just for very specific characters to be blended into a 2D film). In fact out of the many CG movies out there today, I'll bet you could find quite a few with no real argument story-wise for why they couldn't be hand-drawn, except that they have to be so by studio demand. That said, I still believe that Frozen should not have been forced by Disney into being another 100% CGI film when the CGI could be restricted to the things that absolutely need it.

All-in-all, I'd probably be enjoying the animation world so much better if CGI were still taking a back seat to 2D animation. Would I hate CG films so much if the original Toy Story had been the only one of it's kind, or Pixar the only studio of it's kind. No, but I hate them now for consuming the animation market with their imposing threat of self-superiority that wants to make 2D animation as a film making art go the way of black and white movies. When black and white cartoons went to color, it didn't replace the art of hand-drawn. It only enhanced it. That's what CGI used to do for hand-drawn as well.

As far as I'm concerned, Disney is and should be a hand-drawn studio. Let's look at the options...

Should Disney only make CG movies at the expense of 2D animation?: NO!

Should Disney do both 2D and CG movies?: They could, and have tried, but even then it makes them look really stupid to be doing their own CG movies and have Pixar making them CG movies. Besides, if Disney not letting Frozen be 2D based on how successful Tangled looked to them proved anything to me, it's that Disney can't be trusted to do both, even if they really were trying to do both. They should just focus only on the 2D style of animation, cause studios like DreamWorks sure aren't going to and somebody should.

And I'm sorry, but even if Wreck-It Ralph does work best in CGI, it's just such a pointlessly made Disney movie to me when I view Disney as a studio that should be doing 2D works.

[Old Fish Tale]

And traditional animation isn't dead elsewhere. For example, we're getting 'Song of the Sea' this year.

[thedisneyspirit]

Get over it, 2DDisney, Disney doesn't owe us anything. They're allowed to do any movie they want in any medium they please.

I thought you had issues with Frozen like the writing, characters, songs...But something like the animation...

[disneyprincess11]

Georgina Haig is Elsa in OUAT!

http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/07/03/once- ... ad2650b4f3

[unprincess]

I too would have enjoyed Frozen a lot more if it had been 2d. Hand drawn is just the asthetic i prefer. Doesnt mean I didnt like Frozen but it would have been more special to me. On the other hand I loved PATF for being 2d but actually think its only an okay film. I prefer the story & characters in Frozen better.

oh & can we please do away with the myth that snow(or insert whatever inanimate object) looks "better" in cgi? You could say that Tarzan would have been better in cgi cuz the vines would have looked better or HOND b/c the buildings would look better in cgi or Little Mermaid b/c water effects look better in cgi. No its not really that its better artistically, its all about personal preference. I liked Frozen but I thought as far as a movie showing a snowy winter landscape it sorta lacked atmosphere in alot of scenes. Heck i thought Balto( a movie that's considerd a nonentity as far as 2d films go) did a better job of doing a snowy cold landscape than Frozen ever did.

now are some film's effectseasier to make in CGI than 2d? oh yeah Im sure it would have been much harder to make ice & snow effects the old fashioned way. Im sure it would have been easier to make the water in LM or the stone cathedrals & streets in HONT in CGI...But that doesnt mean it would have looked better asthetically.

But, and an important but, CG has proven to have it's ruts as well. ("Mars Needs Moms", "Food Fight", "Legends of OZ", etc.) I do think one day CG won't be seen as "risk free" as many higher ups think now. That's when the bandwagon will need to get a new horse, I think.

at the rate Dreamworks is going they better start reconsidering what can be done with the cgi medium b/c it looks like people are tiring of their output. But rather than experimenting or trying something different with the medium, they are more likely going to just close shop in the US & move the entire operation to China to make things cheaper. B/C cutting money is always the solution.

[Warm Regards]

Kristoff face character makes his first appearance in the parade!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saNrKmKjkqc[/youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saNrKmKjkqc

[Avaitor]

Kristoff sure has the nose down! I do wish that he was a little chubbier, but that's okay.

[Mooky]

I too would have enjoyed Frozen a lot more if it had been 2d. Hand drawn is just the asthetic i prefer. Doesnt mean I didnt like Frozen but it would have been more special to me. On the other hand I loved PATF for being 2d but actually think its only an okay film. I prefer the story & characters in Frozen better.

oh & can we please do away with the myth that snow(or insert whatever inanimate object) looks "better" in cgi? You could say that Tarzan would have been better in cgi cuz the vines would have looked better or HOND b/c the buildings would look better in cgi or Little Mermaid b/c water effects look better in cgi. No its not really that its better artistically, its all about personal preference. I liked Frozen but I thought as far as a movie showing a snowy winter landscape it sorta lacked atmosphere in alot of scenes. Heck i thought Balto( a movie that's considerd a nonentity as far as 2d films go) did a better job of doing a snowy cold landscape than Frozen ever did.

now are some film's effectseasier to make in CGI than 2d? oh yeah Im sure it would have been much harder to make ice & snow effects the old fashioned way. Im sure it would have been easier to make the water in LM or the stone cathedrals & streets in HONT in CGI...But that doesnt mean it would have looked better asthetically.

OMG! Marry me!

[Warm Regards]

Little Mermaid b/c water effects look better in cgi.

Which suddenly reminds me (of something slightly off tangent):





Little Mermaid in CG.

http://ar-i-ell.tumblr.com/post/8468227 ... that-world

[Avaitor]

And don't forget Mickey's Philarmagic at Magic Kingdom for more CGI-Ariel. Although I'd recommend seeing the whole show in person if you ever get to go to Florida- it's great!

[2Disney4Ever]

I suppose it's one thing for Disney characters well established as 2D characters to be portrayed differently in any sort of video games or spin-off media (Disney characters in Kingdom Hearts look 3D, but originate from 2D films), but if Little Mermaid was another new Disney movie today and it had to be CGI, then again, it would just be undermining the value of hand-drawn animation the same way that Frozen does. People should know that artistic beauty can be found in the way things are drawn and not always in how realistic you can make things look in a computer.

[Disney's Divinity]

I personally think TLM in 3D wouldn't have looked half as good. Perhaps the locale itself may have looked better, but the bubbles and lighting effects look better than anything in Finding Nemo, for instance. Ariel herself could never be created to satisfaction in 3D. Despite the fact that humans never look great in 3D, her head would look inflated because of the eyes, the eyes themselves wouldn't be nearly as expressive, and her hair and tail would end up more clunky than graceful.

Of course, TLM itself is nothing compared to the water scenes in Pinocchio and Fantasia.

[disneyprincess11]

Here's the problems of Hans, being evil that I just realized:

We didn’t know what he was going to do with Arendelle. Was he going to give it to the Duke? Was he going to enslave everyone? Was he going to kill people? Was he trying to take over other kingdoms and build an army with this?

Yes, technically, he’s an evil monster for attempting murder for 2 people. But, was he only doing murder to be king and rule the kingdom with good intentions? Couldn’t he do that to other princesses (who was an only child)?

See, with Elsa being the villain, she at least had an evil motive: Build a snowman army to destroy/enslave everyone. Heck, even with the Duke, he was a red herring and he still had a motive and a really evil act.

With this being said, you can tell that Hans as a villain was a last second thing. They should have given him an evil motive, like Turbo in Wreck-It Ralph. Esepecially that the writer of WIR was a director in this. Heck, Turbo was more developed as a villain.

The directors really should have fleshed Hans out to make us think, “Oh, that’s why he’s a evil villain” even more. To me now, Hans is just a lost soul with a bad backstory. Not one of the greatest Disney villains of all time. Still love him though

[rs_milo_whatever]

They did, though. His older brothers would inherit any and all power before he would and he wanted to have a kingdom of his own. Heck, during Love is an Open Door he is pretty much giving his bad guy monologue. Villains don't have to have a motive, it's what makes them evil. Why did Cruella want the coat? Why did Hades want Zeus off the throne? Why did Scar want to kill Simba and Mufasa?


We don't really need a tragic back story to feel bad for every villain; especially when you take into account how many grey areas Frozen already plays with.

[Victurtle]

Whilst I agree neither CGI/2D effects are automatically better than the other, I will clarify to say that I think both of them can be beautiful. Had Frozen been traditionally animated, we would not have seen the beautiful CGI ice effects. We would have seen, hopefully, beautiful 2D ice effects.

As CGI ice effects to this scale had never been seen before (compare to Ice Age or even HTTYD2), it was a bit of a wow factor for me. Disney CGI pushes technology to strive for previously unseen beauty. Disney is still consciously stylising reality, simply compare their films to Pixar's. Meanwhile, 2D special effects are the risk of retreading previous work, after all Disney has 70 years worth of material. Just look at the same rain they used from Bambi to TLK.

[Mach Full Force]

Whilst I agree neither CGI/2D effects are automatically better than the other, I will clarify to say that I think both of them can be beautiful. Had Frozen been traditionally animated, we would not have seen the beautiful CGI ice effects.

Actually, I think we would. Remember the CGI ship at the start of the Little Mermaid, or the CGI ballroom in Beauty and the Beast? I'm sure they would have done something similar with the ice castle.

[unprincess]

OMG! Marry me!

that CGI LM fanart is really nice. I have nothing against CGI per say and think it has its own unique sort of beauty. Its just not fair that the animation studios have decided it is the only option for animated films today.

I agree that Frozen could have remained 2d and used CGI for certain ice effects. You know, just like they used to do it in the 90's. Best of both worlds.

[Disney's Divinity]

disneyprincess11, I don't think any of that indicates Hans became a villain because of a last-second decision. Those arguments could easily apply to Ursula, Hades, Jafar, or Scar--all who wanted to be rulers for the sake of it. Unlike those others, however, he has less power and couldn't rule as a dictator without possible consequences (an uprising for instance). The same couldn't be said for the other four I mentioned, all who could rule as dictators without any real repercussions--Scar being the least of them, but he did have the hyenas as his ace until Simba returned to inspire the lionesses.

Regardless of whether or not Hans would've been a kind ruler because he wanted to be or had to be, killing the two rightful heirs for his own power is immoral and so Hans = a villain. I agree that he's not the greatest villain of all time. I think the only villains from 2000 onwards that would even contend for the top 10 greatest Disney villains would be Yzma.