DVDizzy Forum

TsWade2 wrote:Good! This proves everybody is sick and tired of CGI and want hand drawn animation back.

I don't think it proves that everyone is sick of CGI, when Frozen made a bomb.

After watching the trailer for Legends of Oz, it looks really poor. It looks cheap and reviews will put people off.

ONE MINUTE.....Legends of Oz had a budget of £70 million?!!
That obviously went to pay the voice actors and not on improving animation or making attractive designs. The design of Dorothy is so bland and inoffensive and that's the best thing I can say about any of the character design. She actually looks out of place among the other characters.

I think the failure of Legends of Oz is the film's fault and not due to wider audience reactions to CGI.

Yeah, I'm not surprised at the critical bashing and certainly can't argue against it. This is just one man's opinion, mind you, but I didn't like Legends of Oz at all. The whole thing just annoyed me. The characters and voice acting just grated on my nerves (especially Martin Short, who I usually like and an owl who is given some of the worst jokes in the movie) and while the background art is nice enough, the animation definitely left a lot to be desired. I also found the songs some of the worst I've heard in an animated movie. They're the only times the characters stop yapping, but the music isn't any better. For a movie centered around Oz, I found it surprisingly devoid of much imagination except for possibly the final battle between the heroes and bad guys. But that was too little too late.

But as I said, this is just my own opinion and should have no influence whether you see the movie or not. Though it should be noted this is a children's movie, not a family movie. It wasn't exactly made with the over-12 crowd in mind. So maybe kids will like it more than the average teenager or adult, only to later see it doesn't hold up and apologise to their parents down the road for asking to see it.

disneyprincess11 wrote:So much for their franchise plans.

They're really counting their chickens before they hatch. They have acquired ten Oz books, a second film is already in development as well as a TV series and a stage play.

Sotiris wrote:They're really counting their chickens before they hatch. They have acquired ten Oz books, a second film is already in development as well as a TV series and a stage play.

This is so embarrassing!

Kind of reminds me of what happened to Atlantis: The Lost Empire and Treasure Planet. At least Dreamworks doesn't greenlight a franchise until the BO numbers are in.

All right, that's enough about Legends of Oz. Let's get back on topic, shall we?

Oh, for Pete's sake, Wade, will you freaking SHUT UP?!?! I'm getting a little tired of you whining like crazy when it comes to the future of 2D!

DisneyJedi wrote:Oh, for Pete's sake, Wade, will you freaking SHUT UP?!?! I'm getting a little tired of you whining like crazy when it comes to the future of 2D!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zANvYB93u2g

A new Floyd Norman gag cartoon.


Source: http://floydnormancom.sqsp.com/blog/201 ... espectable

I think he tackles all the points I believe in one passage:

Floyd Norman wrote:Animated motion pictures clearly have value. Consider the new players continually moving into the animation arena. Studios and producers who never considered this business are now rushing for a place at the table. Why? It’s because animated feature films make money. Animated properties have value. Sadly, the creators - the artists who make the product appear to have little value. Traditional animation was the first to go, and one day I fear CGI will quickly follow. It’s not difficult to see the plan. When you no longer need a Milt Kahl, Freddy Moore or a Frank Thomas to make an animated motion picture the producers have gained clear leverage. That means the animated motion picture can be outsourced to any competing studio in the world. I’ll say it again. Any studio in the world. And because it can - it will. Outsourcing might prove disastrous for stateside employment or it might be a blessing that moves animation to the next level. Once we’ve had our fill of sequels and franchises we might start being creative again. And, who knows? Being a traditional hand drawn animator might just become respectable again.

Well, that is the most............touching statement I've ever heard in my life. I never thought I say this, but thank you Sotiris for finding that article to give us more hope.

I disagree with him that any studio in the world can make the same sort of animated movie with the same quality of animation. Nobody, even the most ignorant of viewers, is going to confuse Legends of Oz with the animation coming out of Pixar or Blue Sky.

And there are quite a number of notable names in computer animation who have produced some stunning work. I think Jeff Gabor is the best CG animator working today (he's currently animating Snoopy on the Peanuts movie, fyi) and the character animation done by Glenn McQueen, Doug Sweetland, John Kahrs, Line Anderson, Tony Smeed are all top-notch. So I disagree that star animators will be no more and that people working in that field will become obsolete.

estefan wrote:I disagree with him that any studio in the world can make the same sort of animated movie with the same quality of animation. Nobody, even the most ignorant of viewers, is going to confuse Legends of Oz with the animation coming out of Pixar or Blue Sky.

And there are quite a number of notable names in computer animation who have produced some stunning work. I think Jeff Gabor is the best CG animator working today (he's currently animating Snoopy on the Peanuts movie, fyi) and the character animation done by Glenn McQueen, Doug Sweetland, John Kahrs, Line Anderson, Tony Smeed are all top-notch. So I disagree that star animators will be no more and that people working in that field will become obsolete.

Agreed.

Not to mention the value of a director's contribution--and no great director with a passion for working in the animated medium is going to be happy with pinning his or her reputation to substandard outsourced execution.

estefan wrote:I disagree with him that any studio in the world can make the same sort of animated movie with the same quality of animation. Nobody, even the most ignorant of viewers, is going to confuse Legends of Oz with the animation coming out of Pixar or Blue Sky.

And there are quite a number of notable names in computer animation who have produced some stunning work. I think Jeff Gabor is the best CG animator working today (he's currently animating Snoopy on the Peanuts movie, fyi) and the character animation done by Glenn McQueen, Doug Sweetland, John Kahrs, Line Anderson, Tony Smeed are all top-notch. So I disagree that star animators will be no more and that people working in that field will become obsolete.

Don't forget Wayne Unten (supervising animator of Ralph and Elsa) and Kathy Zielinski (who is one of the best around).

DisneyJedi wrote:Oh, for Pete's sake, Wade, will you freaking SHUT UP?!?! I'm getting a little tired of you whining like crazy when it comes to the future of 2D!

You're one to talk buddy!

Legends of Oz is projected to open to $3.9 million. Obviously no one cares about this movie so shut up about it!

Lady Cluck wrote:

DisneyJedi wrote:Oh, for Pete's sake, Wade, will you freaking SHUT UP?!?! I'm getting a little tired of you whining like crazy when it comes to the future of 2D!

You're one to talk buddy!

Legends of Oz is projected to open to $3.9 million. Obviously no one cares about this movie so shut up about it!

Thank you.

estefan wrote:I disagree with him that any studio in the world can make the same sort of animated movie with the same quality of animation. Nobody, even the most ignorant of viewers, is going to confuse Legends of Oz with the animation coming out of Pixar or Blue Sky.

Do you think the average viewer cares about animation quality? Because I really don't think they do.

I'm far from an average viewer, but personally, I can't watch animation that is stiff. (Think Hoodwinked or Happily N'Ever After.)

But I have no say what kiddies + their parents would do.

Warm Regards wrote:I'm far from an average viewer, but personally, I can't watch animation that is stiff. (Think Hoodwinked or Happily N'Ever After.)

But I have no say what kiddies + their parents would do.

Not average here either, but I can tell you I try to keep my kids from getting excited about crap.

I got Disney in the divorce, so their mother takes them to see the stuff that I won't. It means they see films I'd never take them to--tomorrow's Mother's Day, and she's trying to decide between Oz and Rio 2. It's a bit of a pain, but it's fair. And it's gotten to be a lot of fun. We had a fairly lengthy conversation about the Top 100 list that came out not long ago, we've discussed the differences between hand-drawn and CG animation...last night I put on Fantasia as they were going to bed, and they wanted to watch the Pastoral enough that I let them stay up a little while longer; we talked about Greek mythology during the viewing. Anyway, my kids aren't going to be average animation viewers either. They're still *huge* fans of the old Donald shorts, a number of the Silly Symphonies--even went through a period during which all they really wanted to see was Oswald.

Look what I found on Deviantart: http://www.deviantart.com/art/Awaking-A ... n-45669487