The Motion Picture Academy has its new rules for visual effects and animation.
“An animated feature film is defined as a motion picture with a running time of greater than 40 minutes, in which movement and characters’ performances are created using a frame-by-frame technique. Motion capture by itself is not an animation technique. In addition, a significant number of the major characters must be animated, and animation must figure in no less than 75 percent of the picture’s running time.” ...
Motion capture, it's not animation. Check.
So, what about motion capture that an animator has reworked so that it flows and doesn't look, you know, "weird?" And does this mean that Snow White, who had a lot of 1930s style motion capture (also known as rotoscope) in her DNA, wouldn't qualify as an animated character?
How do we deal with a character who's 40% motion capture and 60% animation? (More importantly, how do we tally the percentages?)
A few years back, I sat in a meeting hall and listened to the director of Monster House explain how they began the film with motion capture, but reworked all the raw data and it ended up "about 60-70% animated."
So I guess my final question is, where is the dividing line?