How Many Think The "History of Animation" Tropes Here Are Too Biased?

This may be a tad off topic, but I personally think The Millennium Age Of Animation is a bit of a weak name that's going to have to be changed sooner or later (naming it after a 1000 years is pretty much as bad as naming it The Decade Age of Animation). I think something like The Digital Age of Animation would probably work better.

edited 10th Oct '10 12:40:18 AM by Surenity

^Sure, why not?

Heh, I don't think we need worry too too much about the original topic, which seems to be deader than Diplocaulus. I actually don't mind "Millenium Age" as a moniker, because for some reason it makes me think of slickness and clever-clever-ness, which I generally see as the outstanding quality of the cartoons of the 2000s. Still, that's just me — and I generally seem to be the odd man out. O tempora! O mores!

I'll admit "Millennium Age" sounds weird. Cartoons in theatres are what, 100 years old?

As for "Golden" vs "Dark", it's highly subjective.

Also I like Heckle and Jeckle, Mr. Bug, AND Jungle Book. SO.

edited 10th Oct '10 10:58:11 PM by boobustuber

Millennium doesn't literally mean 1,000 years. It basically means the turn of the third millennium.

Generally speaking, ages are named after they end, so don't worry too much about the "Millennium Age" name sticking around.

Eh, just kinda invokes the Trope2000 trope to me. XD But whatever.

edited 14th Oct '10 2:24:58 AM by Surenity

Bump (sorry there's just too many good threads!)

Here's how I would categorize the animation periods and also some of my thoughts on the era ^^

30s- early 50s: Golden Age (I.e Warner Bros., Disney, MGM, Fleischer) Very fun to watch and study. Especially the late 30s to 40s. Developed some of most recognizable characters and principles for cartoons. Plus had great voice acting

Mid 50s- early 60s: Tv age of animation (I.e Yogi Bear, Flintstones, Beany and Cecil, etc.) Best period for limited animation imo. Can't compare to the golden age in terms of animation quality, but a lot still managed to have apoealing designs, good voice acting, nice dialogue, and memorable characters.

Mid 60s-mid 80s- Dark age (i.e "Realistic" looking cartoons, Scooby Doo imitations, 22 minute toy shows, remakes/adaptions, etc) I find the majority of these cartoons ugly, and depressing

Late 80s-mid 90s: Renaissance (I.e New Mighty Mouse/Beany and Cecil, Simpsons, Ren and Stimpy, Dexter's Lab etc.) Were usually throwbacks to mid 50s to early 60s or sometimes golden age

Late 90s-now: Modern/Whatever word that can be used to symbolizes a newer era Age (I.e Spongebob, Adventure Time, Regular Show, Avatar Invader Zim etc.) These shows seem to always have a big internet following, merchandise at Hot Topic, and some are very anime-sque lol. Tend to be hit or miss.

Man that was long! Btw Jungle Book and A Boy Named Charlie Brown were made in during the dark age yet they're my favorite animated films. Very fun and charming flicks with great songs

edited 28th Jul '14 12:17:44 AM by teddy

If'n we're going to be honest here, the so-called Dark Age of Animation, in my opinion, is like the real Dark Ages: we're overblowing their darkness.

The fact is, for however poor the limited animation of a lot of cartoons were, the writing was decent most of the time. I don't find a lot of this stuff to be the abominations most people say they are.

And even the animation wasn't that awful. The movement was at least fluid a lot of the time.

I'd really like to ask someone who worked on a typical Saturday morning cartoon of the 70s and 80s about whether they were actually trying in their work - were they deliberately writing crap or not?

I suggest we change the name to "the Middle Age of Animation."

edited 28th Jul '14 5:04:52 AM by Aldo930

The reason why most cartoons in the 70s weren't good was because executives and censors ruined their works by sending uninspired notes (for the former) and overcensoring cartoon scripts, even censoring jokes/situations that were even remotely sexual/violent (for the latter).

edited 28th Jul '14 1:13:26 PM by Buzzinator

Even the heads of the cartoon studios, apparently, thought that the censors were too hard on them.

I was reading Mark Evanier's story about how Scrappy-Doo came to be, and I felt a twinge of respect for Joe Barbera when he told the censors off by saying that Evanier "grew up on cartoons you people didn't fuck up."

If that is so, then it was the network executives who were hard on them and ruined any good potential.

edited 28th Jul '14 11:15:13 AM by Buzzinator

Actually, how I name the periods of Animation is like this:

Beginning (1920-1936)

Golden Age (1937-1941)

Package Age (1942-1949)

Silver Age (1950-1967)

Dark Age (1969-1985)

Twilight (1986-1988)

Renaissance (1989-1999)

Dork Age (2000-2008)

Modern (2009-now)

The censors aren't the executives.

The whole reason the censors became a powerful force was because of controversy over the Hanna Barbera superhero cartoons of 1966-1968, which were judged too violent for kids.

Of course, you watch them now... you wonder why these were considered violent. They're pretty tame.

Their opinions are mixed at best. On one hand you have people like Don Glut and John K who claim that most of their work on those cartoons was garbage mainly done for money, on the other hand you have people like Bob Camp and Buzz Dixon who are actually proud of the work they did on those shows, so i guess it depends on who you ask.

Then again... that's John K.

(Though I have met Bob Camp. He had some very kind words to say about David Feiss.)

I kinda want to know, though, were they trying to provide a product that was enjoyable and competent, or were they trying to hack it out with as little effort as possible?

edited 31st Jul '14 6:16:22 AM by Aldo930

I always thought the History of Animation page was more reflective Disney's performance then the performance of the animation industry as a whole. This was more true in the pages early days but I think it's still kind of true now. It could use some edits and perhaps different set of ages, unless this is something generally agreed by animation historians and people in the industry or something.

Definitely it could use some edits, but then again animation critics and historians have always been biased in one way or another. (Would you believe there was a time when Looney Tunes were looked down upon by cartoon critics?!)

My suggestion: change The Dark Age Of Animation to The Middle Age of Animation or something. As I've said before, those years weren't dark at all.

edited 31st Jul '14 7:12:11 AM by Aldo930

I think the problem is that the distinctions are not very precise...for example, I totally get behind "Dark Age" when it refers specifically to Western Movie Animation, but otherwise, I think it is a too broad term. And I dislike to use the term "Renaissance" as term for Animation in general, because it is specifically the "Disney Renaissance".

For my blog, I use my own categories.... http://swanpride3.wordpress.com/2014/06/18/the-history-of-western-animation-in-film/ That's how I categorize Western Movie Animation in General http://swanpride3.wordpress.com/2014/07/02/the-history-of-disney-movie-animation/ And that's how I categorize Disney Movie Animation.

I intend to eventually add articles for other movie companies too. There always is a certain rhythm if they stay around for long enough.