DVDizzy Forum

Ok, it sounds like this is going to become the trend with disney and we've seen it with others, but I thought it would be good to start an opinion thread about the value of completely computer Generated movies. And not only for cartoonish ones. I've seen a new trailer for the Polar Express at http://www.apple.com/trailers/wb/the_polar_express/ which looks like it is going to be completely computer generated. In some ways I understand the reasoning because it was an illustrated book and that can be a way of keeping the same visual style, but the people in it are looking very realistic and I'm wondering if it would have just been better to use real people and impose them in environments because it tends to turn a movie into "look this was completely computer generated" as opposed to "look this is a great story".

Thoughts?

rumour has it, that PIXAR is now making 2d films aswell... 2d isn't dead.. never was dead... ...

Well, I am actually in the beginning stages of making a career move in the hopes that Traditional Animation isn't dead. So it's nice to hear that Pixar might be moving that way.

Wow that looks so realistic! I highly doubt that these movies will be a new trend in the "real" movie world. I mean, actors need their pay and they will get less when they only have to voice a character they can even do themself (like Tom Hanks in this movie). It looks really great though! I bet it will be a big succes!

I hope traditional 2D does make a strong comeback. I think that the technology is just taking over because it is the hot craze in hollywood right now. Don't get me wrong I like 3D, but I hope 2D will move forward and make a strong comeback in years to come.

Personally I don't think that Brother Bear or any other 2D appearing movie would be the same in 3D. I say appearing because all "traditionally" animated movies nowadays use some level of 3D in them, but I like the 3D that still looks traditional. Spirit is probably the best example of that. The 3D horses were great. The environments looked painted and not 3D rendered. That is what I like. Something that has a marriage of both.

I don't dislike 3D either though. I really liked Finding Nemo and all of the Pixar films.

Quiden, I know what you mean In fact, The Lion King even had 3d in it. The stampede was done in 3d and the 3d models were given a special texture that looks like it has been drawn. I would rather see those ones coming, as you don't actually see the difference. It would make the artist's job so much easier. The time they spend on animating a character in 2d can be done in 3d WITH adding more details to them. Hasn't anyone thought of that?

Jens wrote:Quiden, I know what you mean In fact, The Lion King even had 3d in it. The stampede was done in 3d and the 3d models were given a special texture that looks like it has been drawn. I would rather see those ones coming, as you don't actually see the difference. It would make the artist's job so much easier. The time they spend on animating a character in 2d can be done in 3d WITH adding more details to them. Hasn't anyone thought of that?

Yes. Disney. That's what Chicken Little is supposed to look like.

Oh, didn't know that. I barely heard anything about this movie. Where can I get some information about it?

Animated-Movies had a page on the film, but it's gone now, along with Animated-Movies

http://www.magicalears.com/films/animat ... /notes.php is the best I can find, but this doen't mention the 'handdrawn' look - perhaps this idea has been dropped now.

But they were intending to do it that way, as they were intending the sequels to Dumbo and Bambi to have a 'handdrawn' CGI look. I'm sure Disney are still researching the technology for future use, even if it doesn't get used in any of the in-production films.