From the MegaCollector's collection, a rough by the master animator Fred Moore (1911-1952). If you need to know the movie this came from you're probably reading the wrong blog (hint: © Walt Disney Productions).
(Interesting point, at least to me: The bulk of this picture's production came in 1937, the year of its release. Later Disney features were produced -- by that I mean animated, inked, and put into color -- over a longer time span, but this first one got made fast since the Mouse House was under the financial gun to get it finished and out.
Interestingly, most of Bolt, Disney's latest, was produced in nine to ten months -- Hulett)
Posts
3 comments:
I think animated movies actually benefit by having some heat applied to their "rear end."
It helps you to focus. And, poor stories suffer from a lack of focus.
ABSOLUTELY!!! The worst thing for an animated feature is sitting in production for years on end. total death to a picture.
I agree. A lack of dawdle time prevents nit-picking and pie-fingered input from the armada of supervisors, overseers, budget-crunchers, perfectionists and Uncle Walt wannabees desperately hanging onto the "final approval" card when they weren't dealt a full deck to begin with. Focus tends to cultivate spontaneity and vitality which always plays better than over-worked, perfect, slick and boring. I'll take the perfectly delightful and charmingly imperfect Snow White over a slick, incessant and flawlessly rendered CG floater any day. Most artists I know do their best work when there's no time to do it perfect, no time to make the lines pretty and no time to do it over.
I think applying heat to some rear ends is not the motivation or the solution. The heat is usually turned up after the "approvers" have squandered all the time originally set aside for creativity and execution. It's not the fault of the artists. But it's always the artist's asses that get torched.
Post a Comment