“We started out by thinking that animation can do anything — singing flowers, walking chairs, all that stuff,” Tartakovsky told Wired by phone, breathing sighs of relief that Hotel Transylvania’s box-office performance might widen his feature film horizons. “But then we moved to completely copying realism. Maybe this is a good time to start going back to the old ways, where anything can happen.” ...
I think what the last few years have shown is: Audiences respond to traditional animation (that is, stuff that is done by an animator) and don't respond to motion capture (that is "rotoscope from hell.")
Posts
4 comments:
I'm sure that's it.
Except for Tin Tin, (if you live in Europe.)
Except for Avatar.
Except for Gollum in Lord of the Rings.
I say bring on the performance capture. I like being transported to a world that is too fantastic to be live action, but not silly and goofy looking like a kiddie cartoon. Poor marketing is part of the problem. How much advertising did you see for Mars Needs Moms? Yeah, that's right, "hardly any."
Another carefully considered, non-divisive and objective statement from our union that nominally represents artists working with either technology. Come on guys. Quality matters, that's all. Skilled animators and effects artists accomplish that no matter the technology. Does the union represent quality conditions for quality work? Or does it represent a particular technology?
Mr. Elliot:
Mo Cap has proven itself inside live-action features: Avatar, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, etc.
In 100% animated features, it's been less successful. Tin Tin, as far as I know, won't get a sequel.
Post a Comment