DVDizzy Forum

I think it's really just that many of the 3D animators probably see hand-drawn (and its animators) as inferior. In other words, why would they want tips from their inferiors? I wouldn't be surprised if many animators brought over from Pixar see Disney as inferior, too, at least before Tangled, WIR, Frozen, etc. started to be made.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's generally an age divide, too, with most of the 3D animators being younger.

I might buy the age difference thing, but not the part about being inferior. Hand drawn animators do More work since they have to animate on a frame to frame basis. These are smart people, not tumblr fanboys and youtube commenters.

unprincess wrote:Also I sometimes get the feeling that CGI animators resent their technique being seen as cheap and artless and compared negatively to the more artsy hand crafted 2D animation style.

Yes, they do seem to have a chip on their shoulders about it even though CG animation is celebrated by audiences and critics alike and only a very small minority considers CG animation inferior to 2D.

Kyle wrote:That doesn't really line up with the quote in Sotiris' post though about how "no one was gunning for anyone’s job".

I think that part meant that the CG animators already employed there weren't going to get fired or laid off because of the 2D animators coming in and so their feeling threatened was unwarranted.

Kyle wrote:I might buy the age difference thing, but not the part about being inferior.

They do see 2D animation as inferior and they don't want help or tips from 2D animators. They've made that clear again and again.

Jules wrote:Shouldn't the CG animators at Disney supposedly be great fans of the Disney hand-drawn films, and, hence, of classical 2D animators?

I guess they'll claim they do, but are hypocrites.

Another CGI sequel another record-breaking opening. Other than us 2D nostalgic nuts, no one is clamoring for 2D Animated Features.

Have you noticed that on the blue WDAS wall, Tiana and Naveen are NOWHERE to be seen?

I don't think that the success of Hotel Transylvania really shows anything about how audiences feel about hand-drawn animation. Since no mainstream American animation studio has been releasing hand-drawn films for the past few years, I don't think we can gauge how audiences as a whole feel about "CGI vs. hand-drawn" today unless a mainstream studio takes the plunge and attempts to make and market a good hand-drawn film (not like how Disney shafted Winnie the Pooh or how Nickelodeon mainly marketed the CGI portions of the newer Spongebob Movie). Princess and the Frog should have already done this since it did very well considering its competition (Avatar) and its "girl-oriented marketing with a black female lead" (which I hate mentioning, but that's enough to dissuade someone from picking a film to see apparently), but that "wasn't enough" according to certain people. Sure, Tangled did better, but Tangled was not marketed as a traditional Disney Princess fairy tale.

Besides, since then, Disney's newer CGI films (mainly Frozen) seem to have ignited nostalgia for their older 2D films, and the public perception of hand-drawn seems to have improved since the Disney ripoff/"cheapquel" days of the early 2000s, I do think that audiences as a whole are appreciating hand-drawn animation more and more as time passes. Heck, even Hotel Transylvania's success could point to those trends, since Hotel Transylvania's art style could basically be described as an old-school Warner Bros. cartoon done in CGI. Also, hooray for Genndy Tartakovsky being successful.

You know what I don't understand? How people can claim to be tired of the Disney Renaissance formula and yet the amount of Ice Age sequels getting released are making tons and tons of money. It just makes no sense. And not only that, but 20 years have gone by since Pixar made Toy Story. We've noticed that they've made failures yet they're still treated like animation gods. If anything, regardless of the formula or not, the films of the 90s tried to be as different from each other as can be. Now, everything's pretty much a laugh-out loud comedy in mainstream animation.

Pixar has never made a failure. Sure, they've made one that got a "rotten" score on rotten tomatoes, but financially it still made buttloads and I doubt most kids cared.

Kyle wrote:Pixar has never made a failure. Sure, they've made one that got a "rotten" score on rotten tomatoes, but financially it still made buttloads and I doubt most kids cared.

I meant failure on a critical level.

I was in a hurry when I wrote my last post and forgot to add: the Pups of Liberty shorts are really cute! Always nice to see these animators finding some fulfilling work out there!

as for Gendy and TH 2. I saw the first film recently and the best thing about it was the animation. That was some really lively expressive CGI! They are getting better at mimicking the 2d style. Gendy gets it. It doesnt have to all be hyperrealism. Too bad the movie was so mediocre.

Articles about the new animated scenes in The Iron Giant.

Duncan Studios to Provide Animation for New Sequences in “The Iron Giant: Signature Edition”
http://www.toonzone.net/2015/09/duncan- ... e-edition/

Immersed in Movies: 'The Iron Giant' Returns to the Big Screen With More Footage
http://blogs.indiewire.com/animationsco ... e-20150928

A Conversation with Ken Duncan: Expanding ‘The Iron Giant’
http://www.skwigly.co.uk/ken-duncan-iron-giant/

Ken Duncan Talks About Creating New Scenes for ‘The Iron Giant: Signature Edition’
http://www.cartoonbrew.com/feature-film ... 20116.html

'The Iron Giant' Gets Two New Scenes For Its Remastered Edition — Here's How They Came Together
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/89188 ... scenes.htm

Brad Bird Talks ‘Iron Giant: Signature Edition’, the Original Ending, and More
http://collider.com/brad-bird-iron-gian ... al-ending/

DVDanger: Building The Iron Giant
http://www.austinchronicle.com/daily/sc ... ron-giant/

Oral history of ‘The Iron Giant’: From failure to modern classic
http://www.sfchronicle.com/movies/artic ... 237968.php

‘Iron Giant’ artists find vindication in movie’s delayed success
http://www.sfchronicle.com/movies/artic ... 238125.php

Hoping ‘The Iron Giant’ finally gets its due
http://www.toledoblade.com/KirkBaird/20 ... aking.html


Former Disney animator, Ken Duncan, talks about how diverse 2D animation can be as a medium.

Q: The animation industry took off on a CGI tangent after The Iron Giant, but now 2D is coming back around.

Ken Duncan: I keep saying this, but I find more and more young people to be curious about 2D, and even accepting of it, maybe because they’ve seen so much CG. I personally feel that 2D, especially with a mixture of technology, can provide different looks and explore acting styles. In my opinion, it still has a way to go. It’s kind of sad that 2D died, as they say, just as the technology was getting better and giving animators different tools to use.

Q: Yeah, I think films like Song of the Sea are illustrating how powerful a mix of 2D and technology can be.

Ken Duncan: Exactly. Hand-drawn animation is an open door, as far as what can be done. Why not use it for detective stories, or horror films? The problem is that producers and distributors are usually skittish about working with something that is so unique. They want to see something that has been done already.

Source: http://www.cartoonbrew.com/feature-film ... 20116.html

No 2D animated features but THIS franchise continues......If only The Princess & the Frog wasn't so unhip

DisneyEra wrote:No 2D animated features but THIS franchise continues......If only The Princess & the Frog wasn't so unhip

Parents... do yourselves and your kids a favor. Don't submit yourselves and them to these tortures. It's time to move on.

I do find it a tad amusing that Fox's biggest retaliation against a franchise they were once associated with is Alvin and the Chipmunks of all things. The three previous movies made over $300 million a piece, so it makes sense they would greenlight a fourth one. I just wonder if the audience hasn't moved on in the four years since Chipwrecked. I also get the feeling Disney is going to bombard kids with so much Star Wars marketing, this will be relegated to Plan B for parents if Force Awakens is sold out.

DisneyEra wrote:No 2D animated features but THIS franchise continues......If only The Princess & the Frog wasn't so unhip
http://41.media.tumblr.com/c2db1df85059 ... o7_540.jpg

Living proof financially successful and "good" are only sporadically in the same sentence.

I think its too early to say 2d is making a comeback. Its still niche to non-existant. I really hope Duncan can find more work and that somebody sees the potential in this studio and helps them support a full length feature someday.
If Disney really still cares about traditional animation why not strike a deal with Duncan Studio for one animated full length film, give them a budget to maintain they are comfortable with, and see what happens from there. At least it would be a better attempt at maintaining their legacy than just having a couple animators standing around the studio drawing over model rigs or giving advice to CGI artists that dont even appreciate their help.

Pardon if my question may seem ignorant/naive, but why does exactly people (and CGI animators and the Disney executives) have against hand drawn animation in the first place? Is it because they consider it too juvenile? Or too passé? Or are there other reasons?

unprincess wrote:as for Gendy and TH 2. I saw the first film recently and the best thing about it was the animation. That was some really lively expressive CGI! They are getting better at mimicking the 2d style. Gendy gets it. It doesnt have to all be hyperrealism. Too bad the movie was so mediocre.

This is what bothers me about the reviews towards this movie. Most movie critics only see "another corny movie from Adam Sandler", and that's all they ever WANT to see from anything with his name on it.

The truth about Hotel Transylvania is that both films are NOT just the same ol', same ol' from Adam Sandler. On his part, it shows that he CAN make a dent in animation, long after Eight Crazy Nights suggested otherwise. But it also shows that 2D-trained artists do not have to be slaves to CGI, where in this case, Genndy has conquered the medium in a way where it instead conforms to HIS sensibilities. To that regard, Sandler's marquee value is secondary to Genndy Tartakovsky's art.

DisneyFan09 wrote:Pardon if my question may seem ignorant/naive, but why does exactly people (and CGI animators and the Disney executives) have against hand drawn animation in the first place? Is it because they consider it too juvenile? Or too passé? Or are there other reasons?

CGI Animators: I think it's because they see how 2D animators are struggling. If CGI somehow becomes replaced by 2D or starts only being outsourced to non-American countries, then dozens of CGI animators are without a job. They don't want the tables turned, since they know that their talent, like the talent of hand-drawn animators, can easily be let go. That, or CGI animators simply build up a superiority complex because their line of work is currently more successful than hand-drawn animators.

Plus, the mere idea of "hand-drawn vs. CGI" enforces unnecessary competition between the people who work on both mediums, as if it's a game that a single team can win.

Disney executives: Because 2D films have proven to be less lucrative in the 2000s than CGI. Truly, however, there are a huge number of factors besides 2D animation that could have lead to the "failure" of Disney's newer hand-drawn films, but Disney executives don't want to admit they're wrong or at fault. It's easier to blame the audience for "growing out" of hand-drawn.

Plus, if Disney decides to do both CGI and hand-drawn films, then they'll have to pay for equipment and crew members for both mediums. Restricting themselves to only one medium means that they don't have to divide their company's resources and office space.