Matt O'Callaghan showed me this Sylvester and Tweetie extravaganza a few months ago. It's terrific.
... A new Looney Tunes short starring Tweety and Sylvester will debut Friday ... "I Tawt I Taw a Puddy Tat" [based on a song featuring Mel Blanc] comes on the heels of Warner Bros. Animation's three Wile E. Coyote and Road Runner 3-D shorts ...
"If you listen to the song, it is just a sweet duet," said O'Callaghan. "But there is nothing indicating a narrative or the Warner Bros. sensibility. You start working out gags and then you start drawing. Then you have to back into the gags and figure out what lyrics are going to lead up to that moment."
The cartoon is around two-thirds the length of a standard-issue short, but well worth seeing. I even liked it in 3-D, and I'm not crazy about 3-D.
Posts
13 comments:
I saw clips of the short on the internet. It sounds great, obviously, and it looks pretty good, but geez, all that TEXTURE...!
Ah, the deadly conjunction.
Crabby, aren't you?
^^ Huh?
What's your function?
It's too bad that WB didn't have the sense to take an originally un-used Mel Blanc track, and put the money into doing the cartoon in 2D hand-drawn animation. The CEO that did the dog and pony show several weeks ago said that no hand-drawn was being done because of the costs. Regardless of the fact of the money, the novelty of doing WB classic characters is in high demand, and here was their chance. They blew it. I saw the CG version, and it had good qualities to it, but the demand of putting together a crew of 2D artists today, to try and do something of quality as was done then, will always be a contentious issue. We certainly have the talent in this town, and will do so even decades on down the line. But there doesnt exsist the talent in management to put the team together that would do a cartoon the right way. That is why most WB cartoon product post-60's has looked the way is been done. Hacked out and un-interesting.
This doesn't look hacked out. Looks great.
I didn't say it looked hacked out. At all. I said the CG short that had the re-discovered Mel Blanc vocals applied to it had good qualities to it. You missed my point. The soundtrack could have been used for something we all want to see done the right way. You must have had a long day, being around all those hungry wide-eyed kids.......
If it were traditionally drawn it would get absolutely no attention. This a much better take on the characters than the new Looney Tunes Show.
Companies are in the game to make money. Hand-drawn animation is wonderful. But of late it hasn't made a hell of a lot of money.
We can all argue "It's the material! Not the medium!" But the front offices don't care. "The Princess and the Frog" under-performed. "Winnie the Pooh" under-performed.
Studios look for easy, obvious answers why products don't make money, and then behave accordingly. Corporate thinking is "CG cartoons make money. Hand-drawn cartoons don't."
Until somebody proves to them their thinking is wrong, CGI is the way they are going to go. No way were they going to do the new Loonies as hand-drawn shorts.
I completely understand your thinking. But a smart company would withhold such a soundtrack indefinately until a better idea is come upon. Now they did what they did, and what are the chances of an opportunity like this to happen again.
The Princess and the Frog WILL make money. They shall work it and work it beyond the next century. So will any of their other properties. WB as well. Whether they make money on them on initial release is basically the game, but an occasional intentional loss upfront might do any of the congloms good in the longrun. The trick is to keep it small. Which is why a Mickey Mouse feature has never been done. Too big a loss.
You might understand Steve's thinking, but I doubt anyone has a clue to what you're babbling about.
I do.
The Princess and the Frog WILL make money. They shall work it and work it beyond the next century. ...
I liked "The Princess and the Frog." But what I like is beside the point.
"Snow Queen" was initially conceived as a hand-drawn feature, then it got shelved. And then it got recast as a CGI animated feature.
Why do you think that is?
Because "Tangled" grossed much more than "Princess and the Frog." And Richard Ross isn't in the movie business for his health.
Post a Comment