Would you want to see traditional animation come back?

It still had like 20 minutes of CGI. There would have been more, but in 1982, they were already taxing four very powerful computers to their limits.

Tangled is for me another movie for which CGI makes sense because of the hair...plus, I think they did a really good job matching the character design with the background in this one. It's really pleasant to look at overall.

Frozen...I honestly admit that the background animation impressed me. I was "woah!!!!" most of the time. I would have loved to get more from the stuff they did in the "Let it go" scene....but I also think that this is jet another CGI movie in which the character design clashes with the background. It's hard to explain why Tangled works so well for me while Frozen doesn't in this regard, but I guess that's because for all the "realism" in Tangled, the design of the Corona, of the Ugly Duckling aso has a "this is a fairy tale" note to it which mashes fairly well.

Either way, as I said I have nothing against CGI in principle, but as long as CGI basically means that we get to see basically the same style over and over again, as long as there is stuff you can only do with traditional animation, I want more than that.

I also want to see more out of CGI animation than the same style over and over again. At least, it seems like the new Peanuts movie is going to do something different with the CGI style, which looks pretty interesting!

It's been said before, but I wouldn't mind something animated in a similar way to Paperman.

AM I missing something? To me the new Peanuts movie looks like the animation they had before - in plastic. I don't think that what I have seen so far is particularly pleasing to the eye.

Eh, I personally see nothing wrong with the style of the New Peanut Movie. It looks pretty unique imo.

I also would like to see a movie that's similar in style to Paperman.

I also don't see anything wrong with the style of the new Peanuts film. It seems faithful enough to the old styles of the Peanuts franchise.

It would be interesting to see how traditional animation would work in the mainstream movies nowadays. I wonder if they are going to animate the movies in the style of Paperman or something different.

Considering how expensive and time-consuming Paperman was to make, doubt it.

It was expensive and time-consuming because they were dealing with new technology. It will eventually become more frequently used and then studios will have a handle on using it, so it will be done more efficiently by then.

Yes, but certainly not in the near future. Sorry, I meant to specify that.

I heard that Disney wanted to explore more with the animation of Paperman, but they were going to wait on that for a few years.

Won't Feast utilize the technology from Paperman?

Oh, I meant like as a mainstream movie like Frozen and Tarzan, not as short animated features (even though I'm glad that they are still doing animated shorts that are traditionally animated for the most part).

I heard Moana would use it, but it turns out it's a rumor where I only heard it revoked by ONE source.

Hell yeah!

It's ironic how 2D animation died (in terms of movies): the companies thought that it was no longer profitable and chose not to give 2D animated features good marketing (like The Powerpuff Girls Movie in 2002, coming out the same weekend as the much inferior Men in Black 2 didn't help matters either)

Again, hand-drawn animation didn't die. It's PEOPLE who made the conscious decision not to use it for American feature film. It's a shame, because so much of our world perception of animation is modeled off American film! There is simply too much competition and the studios are run by money-hungry bean counters who only want to cash in on the latest trends.

edited 12th Jul '14 12:01:44 PM by Shota

I agree with this. If the studios just started taking more risks with animation instead of just sticking to the same thing all the time, then we would have more diversity in animation.

But the argument would go...

"We need to take risks!"

"But what if we LOSE money when we DO??"

"Okay... but what if ...... we MAKE! Money when we do??"

"But what if we don't?"

"But what if we do??"

"But what if we don't?"

"But what if we do??"

"But what if we don't?"

"But what if we do??"

ad nauseum. There is no science to what makes a successful film, and it's not an easy thing to solve. That's why so many studios are scared to do it.

edited 12th Jul '14 12:18:22 PM by Shota

Yeah, I guess that's right.

Well, at least France still makes traditionally animated movies, and there's Song of the Sea to look forward to. Maybe one day we will have one movie that is revolutionary enough to make public demmand increase a lot more.

England, France, Argentina, Japan, China, India, etc, all still make hand-drawn flippin films!

I'm looking forward to Song of the Sea also! I hope that there is a traditionally animated film that would be revolutionary enough to convince more viewers to demand for more traditional animation.

I'd definitely like to see traditional animation come back, particularly in Disney movies. While I really love how beautifully animated their CGI films are (especially films like The Incredibles and Frozen), I don't want them to completely turn away from traditional animation. It has a timeless feel to it, and Disney is known for its timeless films.

edited 12th Jul '14 6:16:42 PM by Explosivo25