Hand-Drawn Animation Dead at Disney

[SWillie!]

Hahaha leave it to you guys to absolutely twist Lasseter's words. Yes, his comments are strange, but he most certainly did not say that he "doesn't like when 2d films are artsy."

[unprincess]

Steven Spielberg, the biggest name in movies and one of the founders of DreamWorks Pictures, had to fight hard to get Disney to let him make Lincoln to the point where he almost made it as a mini-series for HBO.

reminds me of a James Cameron interview with EW about the hell he went through to make Avatar the way he wanted. Yeah if Cameron & Spielberg have to please the suits, you can bet its even worse for Lassiter.

[Kyle]

Sofia the First uses cel shading which gives a 2D/3D mutant feel. I wonder if this technology could be improved? Sofia the First can look stiff.

The Paperman technique is the next step, ie controlling and distressing the line more. I'm already seeing variations of it in other things, like the recent Power puff girls special. They still have some ways to go though.

[Patrick]

Sofia the First uses cel shading which gives a 2D/3D mutant feel. I wonder if this technology could be improved? Sofia the First can look stiff.

The Paperman technique is the next step, ie controlling and distressing the line more. I'm already seeing variations of it in other things, like the recent Power puff girls special. They still have some ways to go though.

I was pretty impressed with the new PPG. Stylistically I thought it was bit over the top, and not everything needed a sharp contrasting shadow over it, but it was pretty cool for a series. I love that studios are able to produce stylistically interesting shows now (Gravity Falls, Steven Universe, Adventure Time, PPG). Compared to other cartoon juggernauts (Spongebob, Fairly Odd Parents, Phineas and Ferb [and no offense to them]) things seem to be looking up for 2D animation. Adventure Time is actually getting a 4 part season finale which they're calling a "movie." I don't know, I think things will swing back. I hope that Disney will be the company that produces the defining film that makes 2D popular again.

[Kyle]

Now that I think about it, the Powerpuff girls special kinda illustrates what John was talking about in that the style can pull you out of it. I didn't care for the look of the new power puff girls. The tech supporting it was sound, but the lack of outline around the characters, the lack of contrast in the composition, color, etc made it hard to follow visually for me. Animation wise the timing and posing needed more work, the actions lacked punch. I do appreciate the attempt to be different, but the style works better as concept art, which to me resembled a lot of pixar's concepts. there's a reason the incredibles looks the way it does and not like the heavily stylized concepts seen in the art of book.

But now I'm probably getting too off topic.

[TsWade2]

I dont understand why Lassiter is interested in exploring CGI programs that incorporate a handrawn organic look, but at the same time he doesnt like when traditional styles look too arty or distracting. Nothing is more distracting that the hyperrealistic effects & textures of most cgi films anyway. If audiences can get used to that Im sure they'll have no problem accepting something with a painterly look.

I still think the biggest problem is the glass ceiling that is the suits, who just arent interested in something that doesnt look like traditional CGI. It doesnt matter how much Lassiter loves the 2d style, he cant overide the suits desicions. At the same time he cant just put the blame on the suits in interviews(IOW, use the blunt truth) for why Disney isnt doing 2d(not if he wants to keep his job). So he's forced to come up with excuses, or do this runaround where he's like "yeah we still do 2d! but not really... but we're experimenting with new hybrid stuff! but it may be too distracting, but yes, but no, but maybe... blah blah blah...."

You know, instead of Mother Knows Best, it could of been either Execs Knows Best or Chairman Knows Best. Hey, maybe I should write a parody song for that. This is what I called abusive for John Lasseter.

[thelittleursula]

Absolutely. Tangled, WiR and Frozen have been great. For now 2D shorts has to be the way for Disney to continue - build up some interest in 2D animation and rebuild some confidence in it. At least we are getting 2D shorts.


Tangled, Wreck it Ralph and Frozen won't ever feel like Beauty and the Beast, but then Beauty and the Beast doesn't have the same feel as Bambi or Snow White. It is just things moving on. It happens and different styles emerge.

^ This

* Insert famous Walt Disney quote that it's better to move on here *


Chicken Little is rubbish, it was Disney trying too hard to be that DreamWorks/ Shrek thing that was popular during the 00's and failed miserably. When people say that The Black Cauldron is the worst Disney movie, lol no.

[MeerkatKombat]

Thanks thelittleursula

I honestly didn't mind The Black Cauldron at all. It was dark and creepy but there was a story to be found in it. I'm no fan of Fox and the Hound but it's old enough to be classic Disney so I own it.
My plan was to own all the animated classics and any collectors editions it was possible to get my hands on but I don't see the point buying films I have no interest in watching. I'd like to get some more of the treasures but they are so expensive.

[unprincess]

I checked out this PPG thing you guys were mentioning. Was this made using CGI or flash? looks lke CGI models for the girls & flash for the background characters. Anyway I noticed the city scenes looked somewhat like what we saw in Paperman but at a much smaller more retro-stylized scale. Id love to see a studio take this technique & combine it with a larger more theatrical scope & more classical style animation...even if its CGI animation like Frozen. I think it would look amazing!

[TsWade2]

Okay, if it makes me feel better, is there another hand drawn/CGI short in the works like from Paperman and Get A Horse?

[Sotiris]

No, he probably most likely change the painterly style of Tangled because of the budget, as well as time. Tangled was already had a fucking huge budget they must try to regain from BO. Do you realize how huge the money and cost for it had it gone the the painterly route? So huge that most likely the project would of gotten shut down.

Budget had nothing to do with it. The decision to abandon the painterly technique was a creative one, not a financial one. They even admitted to that in The Art of Tangled book: "Although it was visually rich, many of the project team agreed that both in art and story it was losing the feel of an animated fairy tale". I can't help but feel that "many of the project team" is really a euphemism for Lasseter.

It's no secret that Lasseter has been resistant in embracing more bold visual approaches. John Kahrs even indicated to that when he was talking about the prospect of using the Paperman technique in a feature: "I think it’s a really watchable technique. It draws me in, as a viewer, and it doesn't distract me. For John, it’s a big deal that it won’t be a distraction and that it draws you into the storytelling".

Yes, his comments are strange, but he most certainly did not say that he "doesn't like when 2D films are artsy."

That's what he said pretty much. He expressed his surprise that The Tale of Princess Kaguya despite its unconventional hand-drawn style was not distracting and he was able to be immersed into the story. That's a pretty narrow-minded, borderline ignorant presupposition. Not only the style employed is not that avant-garde to begin with, Isao Takahata used it before in My Neighbors the Yamadas. Has Lasseter, who prides himself in being an avid Ghibli fan, never heard of that film before?

[Atlantica]

Sorry Sotiris, would you mind if I asked you a question?

I didn't know Lasseter was more….reserved, if you will, in what he likes in animation style. Are there any cases where he has said he doesn't like a certain style / has wanted something changed in a Disney / Pixar ? (Bar Tangled).

[Sotiris]

I didn't know Lasseter was more….reserved, if you will, in what he likes in animation style. Are there any cases where he has said he doesn't like a certain style / has wanted something changed in a Disney / Pixar ? (Bar Tangled).

I don't think he's ever gone on record saying anything of the sort. The only other example I can think of besides Tangled where he changed the initial style of a feature is Bolt/American Dog. I've heard that not only Lasseter didn't like the story which he allegedly referred to as "too quirky for its own good", but that he was not that fond of Chris Sanders' signature design style and the overall visual language of the film either.

Incidentally, I've found an old interview of Lasseter from 1989 where he talks about hand-drawn animation. It's interesting how radically his views have changed since then.

Q: Where do you see computer animation and yourself being in ten years or so? Do you see an end to hand-drawn animation?

John Lasseter: Never. Never, never, never, never. Computer animation is different than hand-drawn animation. One of the misnomers that a lot of people think about is that computers go into other industries and replace hand workers. It's not that way at all with computer animation; it's a very different look.

Where I see the future, to be honest, is something I want to do more of: a combination of character animation done by hand, and character animation done by computers, and backgrounds done by painting and computer combined together. The technology we're developing is going to make it a lot more feasible to do that sort of thing, so it blends together better than in the past. Cel animation looks so different than computer animation, but I think with developments like what we did in the Wild Things test, and like in Roger Rabbit the shading that they achieved you'll be able to make cel animation look a little rounder, more like you can do with computer animation.

Source: http://www.harrymccracken.com/luxo.htm

[TsWade2]

Incidentally, I've found an old interview of Lasseter from 1989 where he talks about hand-drawn animation. It's interesting how radically his views have changed since then.

(Sigh) Tell me about it.

[Sotiris]

There's a new interview with veteran Disney animator Nik Ranieri where he talks about hand-drawn animation. While I don't agree with some of the things he says (like the comparison of 2D animation to black-and-white films or that CG is more sophisticated than 2D), it's interesting to hear his views on the matter nonetheless.

Q: What is your take on the evolution of animation—specifically the turn most companies have made entirely to CG?

Nik Ranieri: Is it evolution or just another style? Evolution supposes that the former dies out to make way for the new. Is hand-drawn animation dead? Was hand-drawn animation created because they didn’t have computers yet? Or is it an art form unto itself? Most people feel that, as with silent films to sound films, hand-drawn animation has been replaced with the more sophisticated CGI work. Maybe a better way to look at it is a comparison of black & white films to color. No one makes silent movies anymore but black & white films are produced once in a while. B&W has a different feel to it and a different look. It can set a different mood to that of color film. It’s a technique that’s still valid today and it is my hope that hand-drawn animation will be thought of in the same way.

Q: What major strides do you think CG has made toward believability? What pitfalls do you still see it falling into?

Nik Ranieri: The amount of detail is incredible. Movement can get so subtle that even slight eye darts are possible. Unfortunately, I feel that the exaggeration and caricature of traditional animation is abandoned in favor of realism. In some cases, the “magic” and fun are lost.

Q: Personally, I think the characters (girls specifically) in ‘Tangled’ and ‘Frozen’ could have been so much more, well, animated if they’d been done in hand-drawn. This is largely based on Glen [Keane]’s gorgeous concept art and sketches, not to mention some elements in sequences like “Let It Go” that I found somewhat boring and lifeless. What’s your take on those films specifically and maybe Disney Animation generally?

Nik Ranieri: Both drawings and computers have a place in film. There are positives and negatives to both CGI and traditional. It all depends on your preference. I don’t think these films would have been better in hand-drawn. They just would have been different. I heard some people say certain hand-drawn films would have looked amazing in CG. They might have. Hey, “Casablanca” would have looked amazing in color….or maybe not. Maybe black & white suited the tone of the film better.

Q: When can we open up our own traditional animation company?

Nik Ranieri: Two words: Mega Millions

Source: http://animationfascination.wordpress.c ... k-ranieri/

[Atlantica]

Thank you Sotiris; it is extremely interesting seeing that older interview with him as well.

Sad he didn't like Sanders look though …. I love how it came over in Lilo and Stitch. Such a happy style of animation.

[Disney's Divinity]

John Lasseter: Never. Never, never, never, never. Computer animation is different than hand-drawn animation. One of the misnomers that a lot of people think about is that computers go into other industries and replace hand workers. It's not that way at all with computer animation; it's a very different look.

Kind of hilarious in retrospect.

I don't find it difficult to believe Lasseter would hate any animation style that isn't completely generic. That's why I don't like most Pixar films; everything seems aimed as much as possible at pleasing every person in the audience.

[unprincess]

that old Lasseter interview is just sad...

Is Ranieri still employed at Disney? I do agree that 2d has become the next b&w, somethng that you'll only see one in a while.

I just wish that theatrical classical style 2d, like the style Disney & Don Bluth made, could be affordabe enough for indie filmakers to make. If it were as easy & affordale as live action then I think we'd see alot more 2d films being released in the independant circuit & alot more variety of themes too.

[TsWade2]

that old Lasseter interview is just sad...

Is Ranieri still employed at Disney? I do agree that 2d has become the next b&w, somethng that you'll only see one in a while.

I just wish that theatrical classical style 2d, like the style Disney & Don Bluth made, could be affordabe enough for indie filmakers to make. If it were as easy & affordale as live action then I think we'd see alot more 2d films being released in the independant circuit & alot more variety of themes too.

Here here. It's ridiculous.

[Super Aurora]

No, he probably most likely change the painterly style of Tangled because of the budget, as well as time. Tangled was already had a fucking huge budget they must try to regain from BO. Do you realize how huge the money and cost for it had it gone the the painterly route? So huge that most likely the project would of gotten shut down.

Budget had nothing to do with it. The decision to abandon the painterly technique was a creative one, not a financial one. They even admitted to that in The Art of Tangled book: "Although it was visually rich, many of the project team agreed that both in art and story it was losing the feel of an animated fairy tale". I can't help but feel that "many of the project team" is really a euphemism for Lasseter.

So basically it's more of merely your warped assumption rather than a solid fact.

I'm all for stylize stuff in animation myself and trying out new techniques and ways, but if you're going to make a movie or tell a story and rely too much on style alone or focus too heavily on it, your story could end up falling apart or get weaken. Sleeping Beauty is pretty good example of that(which is weird and ironic considering John praise that movie to high hell but whatever.) There's reason that people sometimes say "Style vs Substance".

I not trying to defend the guy, I do know he has some bias himself but many people do, especially in this forum lol, BUT I think you people are really over thinking way too much of it to point you're all sounding like a crazy conspiracist.

It's no secret that Lasseter has been resistant in embracing more bold visual approaches. John Kahrs even indicated to that when he was talking about the prospect of using the Paperman technique in a feature: "I think it’s a really watchable technique. It draws me in, as a viewer, and it doesn't distract me. For John, it’s a big deal that it won’t be a distraction and that it draws you into the storytelling".

As I mention before, it's great to have some bold and new creative ways in visual approaches, but I think Lasseter isn't really wrong or lying in that a story telling should come first. Especially in a canon Disney animation movie where it's stories is probably one of the most defining and beloved aspect about Disney along with it's iconic imagery. This isn't studio like say Gainax where they can take bold liberties in artist styles and direction which is usually what makes and define a Gianax studio production. They can make all those wacky ass visual styles and not have to worry too much on story telling. Shows like Tenggen Toppa Gurran Laggen, FLCL, Panty and Stockings, and even fucking Evangelion. They are all well known more so for it's radical visuals or symbolism as oppose to something in Disney like Pinocchio, Cinderella, TLM etc, Hell even Fantasia- a movie about several segments told in movement by music, still was made in telling a story in a different manner.

Even if the assumption you and most here say might be true to some extent, I don't think it's as crazy as Lasseter trying to enforce some secret bias agenda where he's out to get rid and prevent all hand drawn/ and creative direction to ever reaching Disney again. I think SWillie and I believe you people are taking way over than you think.

I think you're be right if Lasseter goes "George Lucas". If or ever he does, then I'll give in that you're right. But for now, I think its a bit of over exaggeration.