The New York Times plays the game of, "Who's made the successful jump from animation director to live-action director. And comes up with its list:
Kevin Lima ...
The Times fails to note that Mr. Lima also director the two live-action entries of 101 Dalmations. Added to which, it says Rob Minkoff isn't a "successful" live-action director, conveniently overlooking that Stuart Little, Mr. Minkoffi's first live-action undertaking grossed $300 million.
And the NYT claim that Walt Disney didn't direct any animated features is technically correct, but there is this from feature director Wilfred Jackson:
... Well, the first couple of features we made, Walt was very actively interested, and in it up to his hilt. I think it was right after "Pinocchio" that Walt began to pull away from being so closely involved, so intimately involved with each little thing that was done.
Up until "Pinocchio," absolutely nothing happened without his being in on it. All the color models he saw before they got okayed. All the rough animation. We ran it for him before anything moved into cleanup, and ink and paint. Nothing happened without his having his finger on it.
The directors, to a limited extent, could check his own thing into it, but under Walt's very careful eye. Just as the story man, just as the animators themselves. Animation was probably the one end of it where Walt had to depend more on the animators themselves, than he did on the other functions. ...
So Walt was maybe a feature director without being credited as a director?
The Times also failed to note that Brad Bird is not the only Pixar alum who is making the transition to live-action. There is also feature director Andrew Stanton with John Carter of Mars.
Posts
21 comments:
Steve, when you say "hand-drawn elements", does that mean that the characters will be hand-drawn or just some of the environment?
The original article is pretty awful. I guess they wanted to specify 'director of animated features' to leave out people like Frank Tashlin and other obvious examples who moved from animated shorts to live-action features. This is a spurious distinction, since prior to the last 20 years, there were so few feature animation directors except at Disney, and the writer's main point was that people in animation never move from the kiddie table to live-action.
Of course he's wrong about Walt, as you point out. And Barnes not only unfairly dismisses Minkoff, he missed Andrew Adamson and Mike Judge. Epic fail.
He also misleads in using Tim Burton as an example of a live-action director who 'successfully' moved to animation directing, when he was really more of an animator moving to live-action. And since the only animated feature Burton directed is Corpse Bride, which was as much a flop as anything Minkoff did, they shouldn't have cited him at all.
The original article says "Plenty of live-action directors have successfully taken on animated movies, including Gore Verbinski (“Rango”) and Tim Burton (“Corpse Bride”)." You'd think "plenty" would be more than two, and you'd think they'd be better examples. Was Rango really successful? Likewise, was 'Waking Life' or 'Fantastic Mr. Fox'?
As usual, major publications don't have a clue about animation or its history, and so they regurgitate nonsense that gets taken as fact.
rango was HARDLY "animated." And it flopped at the box office, financially. And it was awful.
But they also left off Terry Gilliam.
How was Rango "hardly animated"? I thought the animation was incredible.
Steve, when you say "hand-drawn elements", does that mean that the characters will be hand-drawn or just some of the environment?
Assuming we're talking about the next Ron and John feature, my understanding is that some characters will be hand-drawn. I've seen some early test footage.
One name missing: Mamoru Oshii. While his live-action films aren't as well known as some of his more successful anime films, all of his work is critically well-respected.
Mamoru Oshii?
I think the article said "successful" transition.
I had to endure that giant police robot movie a decade or two ago...
I mean good god, it's Ambien in animation form. Just snooze away.
I can just imagine his live action dealings... no wait...aaahhhh rwejrhj93j#$
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
So Walt was really involved on all the movies until Pinocchio...
Wait, there's only one animated feature before Pinocchio. Snow White.
How's this guy's memory holding up?
"Assuming we're talking about the next Ron and John feature, my understanding is that some characters will be hand-drawn. I've seen some early test footage."
So I guess that means it's not a total CG film after all. Very interesting. Nice to know that Disney hasn't TOTALLY abandoned 2D animation, even if it looks like they're mixing and matching with this Ron and John project.
Is the Mickey Mouse feature still in development or has it been axed? No one has heard anything about it in a long time.
The NYTimes writer was implying that there have been hardly any "transtions" from people who started their career in animation and moved to live-action ? (a step up from the "minor league" of animation the "big league" of live-action seems to be what he was really implying)
And he either ignores or discounts examples like Andrew Adamson, Kevin Lima, Rob Minkoff, Tim Burton, Terry Gilliam, Mike Judge. He didn't know about older directors like Frank Tashlin, Gregory La Cava , and David Swift from previous generations. So much for research. Now in his follow up article the guy seems want to backpedal a bit by saying: "No, I meant it had to be an example of a FEATURE animation director who successfully transitioned to live-action directing ; people who directed short subject animation (like Frank Tashlin , or Tim Burton) don't count." Lame. Just admit the lack of research in the original article and move on.
Another name to add to the list:
Savage Steve Holland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Steve_Holland
What, Mike Judge doesn't count?
Is the Mickey Mouse feature still in development or has it been axed? No one has heard anything about it in a long time.
Burny Mattinson did some beat boards for a Mick-Don-Goof project. Nothing has been developed beyond those at this point.
Related to the New York Times somewhat snarky profile of Brad Bird and whether as a "mere" animation director he is capable of making the leap to a "real" live action picture , this review of Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol:
http://www.avclub.com/articles/mission-impossibleghost-protocol,66619/
Quote:
"Bird’s direction — the work of someone with something to prove and the skills to prove it — puts the film over. From a prison break to a finale that orchestrates many moving parts at once, Bird brings a scary amount of assurance to Ghost Protocol. His action scenes are clean, coherent, thrilling, and visceral, never more than in a mid-film sequence in Dubai that piles setpiece atop setpiece as the action moves in, around, up, and down the Burj Khalifa skyscraper—the tallest building in the world. As Cruise clings to the side of the building using malfunctioning equipment, and a sandstorm looms in the distance, the question shifts from whether Bird can direct an action film to whether there’s anyone out there who can top him."
It may be too early to add them to the conversation, but in a couple months people may be adding Phil Lord Chris & Miller to this list. They directed Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, and are about to release 21 Jump Street:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k0mo_oJfn4
What an uninformed article.
What about, I dunno, Andrew Stanton?
Also, a more obscure one: Jimmy Hayward (animator at Pixar, then Director on Horton Hears a Who, then a director for Jonah Hex)
Gotta love the usual Rango troll.
Wasn't one of the Shrek directors a live-action director first?
Yes, Andrew Adamson (Shrek director) has been mentioned a couple of times here.
What seems pretty clear from the examples given is that animators who become live action directors do it much better than live-action directors who try their hand at animation.
"Wasn't one of the Shrek directors a live-action director first? "
Andrew Adamson's pre-Shrek IMDB credits show him as working in Visual Effects , not live-action direction.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0011470/
Andrew Adamson is another example of a successful animation director who moved to live-action directing. That's why he's been mentioned, because he's another counter-example to the lame NYTimes article.
Post a Comment