Director Robert Zemeckis, whose new epic Beuwolf arrives in November (see below), just gave a talk to the International Broadcasting Convention in Amsterdam where he said:
I love the ability to separate the technology [of performance capture] from the performance..."
Zemeckis stressed the distinction between performance capture and animation. "To call performance capture animation is a disservice to the great animators," he said...
I'm not sure he totally believes this, but it's nice reading that the statement came out of his mouth.
Posts
17 comments:
Let's not forget that Zemeckis was behind one of the films that started the animation renaissance in the late 80's. I think he does believe it, but he's first and foremost a live-action director, so mocap would naturally appeal to him. Still, he does have legitimate animation cred.
Zemeckis directed the live action for that one film(Roger Rabbit). By some accounts he hated the animation process/experience-it left him saying "never again". No doubt he started out loving old Warner Bros cartoons like everyone else on the planet, but that doesn't translate into "legitimate animation cred". But he knows what to say-what sounds right.
I love how the animation community will work overtime to find a way to be pissed off.
Zemeckis didn't have to say anything about "great animators", but he did. Can't possibly be sincere though, because that'd mean he understands the difference between what he does and actual animation. So let's just dismiss his comments as "knowing what to say" and return to our comfort zone of smug superiority.
Work for him, do you? Or a close relation? Because I can't imagine why else you'd take that comment personally.
I wasn't attacking anyone, just telling it like it WAS. If he adores and respects animators, great. I'm not smug nor do I feel "superior". But sure, please insult me if it makes you feel you've redressed the balance. I'm sure Zemeckis needs your defense to get through his day and that he'll appreciate it.
I love how the animation community will work overtime to find a way to be pissed off.
HAHAHA thats one of the funniest comments I've heard in a long time. It's so true.
I recently met Zemeckis at a small recruiting party. I can hardly imagine another top Hollywood director who would make such an effort.
And, he runs a UNION shop.
"Zemeckis directed the live action for that one film(Roger Rabbit). By some accounts he hated the animation process/experience"
Hi,
I worked on "Who Framed Roger Rabbit". I was just a lowly Assistant Animator, so not too much direct contact with Bob Z , but he was hands on, frequently dropping in to the studio (along with cinematographer Dean Cundey who was an even more frequent visitor) and in all those times I didn't get the impression that Bob "hated" the animation process, no more so than most of us regulars in animation "hate" the process... face it: it's Tedious work, with a capital T.
Only certain types of us crazy people stick with it. I know long-time regular animators who get to the end of a film (especially a technically challenging film like Roger Rabbit) and say "Never again!".
Of course, that vow usually wears off when they've had some time to rest up a bit and need to go back to work. For me the artistic payoff for all that tedious work and the endless waiting for the scenes to move from rough to clean-up to final color is in finally seeing the characters live on the screen (Magic = drawings that live. It's still a thrill to me after all these years). But the process itself is difficult and tedious, so I can understand how a live-action director like Bob Zemeckis would gravitate to Mo-cap.
I really appreciate Bob pointing out the difference between animation and performance capture to the press.
To David Nethery,
Thanks for a real, true life perspective...it sure beats trying to speculate on what others (Zemeckis) are thinking. Cheers, D.
Roger Rabbit was a TERRIBLE film, with mostly crappy animation. And it was ugly (those chalky tone mattes made things MORE flat, not less). Not only that, but when the profits were tallied up, the cost of the film and all the profit participants made it one of the least financially profitable animated films of the time.
Films like "Family Dog," "Brave Little Toaster," "Fun with Mr. Future," "Vincent," "Basil of Baker Street" and "Little Mermaid" did more to show the way. I suppose if roger rabbit did anything, the marketing of the technology raised people's awareness. But that doesn't make it a good film. It isn't.
"Roger Rabbit was a TERRIBLE film, with mostly crappy animation."
Uh, yeah, table for one, please.
Cheers, D.
I agree. Roger Rabbit IS a terrible film. It has hints of decent animation--especially the Daffy and Donald "piano-off." And a few of the Jessica Rabbit scenes are OK. But beyond that, not much. The story is a mess, and doesn't make much sense.
"I agree. Roger Rabbit IS a terrible film. It has hints of decent animation--especially the Daffy and Donald "piano-off." And a few of the Jessica Rabbit scenes are OK. But beyond that, not much. The story is a mess, and doesn't make much sense."
Guess you and your buddy up there, weren't part of the crowds of world class animators who lined-up night after night, all over the country, to celebrate this film and what it meant to them and the community as a whole...maybe you're luck enough to only have worked in a post "Toy Story" world. Really no need to respect any films before that. Cheers, D.
Regardless of one's opinion of Roger Rabbit, there is no denying that is was one of a handful of films that sparked the animation renaissance of the late 80's/early 90's.
If you weren't around (or aware) then, you have no idea what this film meant to the industry, but suffice it to say it's a big part of the reason you have an industry to work in today.
And to get this thread back on track :0), Thanks to David for providing some first-hand information on the production and Zemeckis' involvement in the animation aspect of it.
"Beowulf" looks like crap.
And it certainly wont attract legions of world class animators night after night.
I won't be in line either...rather go to the pub and have a cold one.
CHEERS!
Rufus.
Uh, Rufus did you read the post above you, or do you just enjoy lashing out, wildly and off-topic. Nobody's comparing "Beowulf" to "Roger Rabbit"...it may indeed "look like crap" to you, (I'm gonna wait and actually see the film before berating it, I'm odd that way), and it may fail to attract even one, world class animator into the theater...who said it would? Although, the "early money" is on you actually going... if not, enjoy that "cold one"...hope it's not to bitter. See ya, JL.
Off topic?!?
We are talking about Beowulf and mr. Zemeckis right?
So was I.
Anyway, if my beer is not bitter enough, I'll throw in an olive!!
Rufus.
"Guess you and your buddy up there, weren't part of the crowds of world class animators who lined-up night after night, all over the country, to celebrate this film and what it meant to them and the community as a whole.."
Been workin' in the industry since 1979. And whatever it meant to industry is irrelevant to whether or not the film was good. It wasn't. I can't find very many people who think it's a very good film. It did moderately well at the box office, but Little Mermaid had a much bigger impact on the industry. Hell, even Richard Williams has done better work, and would has said so.
Post a Comment