Why did 2D Disney films never get noticeably better at camera work? I've noticed that most of the time their films are usually presented with very plain medium shots. It seems like such a contradiction to have the precise tool of animation, but to constantly stage everything like it's theater, or something. This is obviously a carry over from old Hollywood, if anything.
Webm semi-related, it's from a director who understands how to utilize and execute dynamic movement better than anyone else.
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
youtube.com
twitter.com
What is it about Japanese animation that gives it it's "force"? Like I could hear the explosion when I saw it.
God damn do I love Porco Rosso. I can't say exactly why, but it's my favorite Ghibli movie.
The presentation and anticipation here is what makes it good. Also it is dynamically interesting/ambitious, like I mentioned in the Op.
This is something the Japanese just seem to be very good at; even works from the 60s and 70s have pretty interesting shot angles that they use a lot, even in utterly dire stuff like Chargeman Ken; they're a lot less on model and the animation is choppy but you don't really see the Hannah-Babera from-the-side angle a lot.
For some reason(s), western animation has never really cared much about camera work or directing and photography tricks. At its worst, it instead embraces and sticks to golden rectangle proportions for their characters' positions on a scene.
It has less to do with animation ability and more with composition. American animation, especially recently has become very flat. Large shots where everything happens in one sequence with no cuts to emphasize force, momentum, or impact. The Japanese do not suffer this problem, although it is sort of creeping into anime more and more too.
>American animation, especially recently has become very flat
Nope. Disagreed. 3D is much easier for camerawork, which is why I specified as 2D.
I didn't mean literally flat you retard. The 3D movies have shit camera composition too.
No clue, but Porco Rosso is a top tier movie
It's comfy as fuck and it has seaplanes in it.
>everyone keeps fapping to miyazaki when it comes to animation cinematography
>just got done watching a bunch of stanley kubrick movies
honestly, nobody aside from like satoshi kon really "gets" film making for animation. People really need to stop getting inspiration from more of the same incestuous pit of animation and expand to general cinema inspiration, because holy shit even the newer 3d stuff just feels way behind and unimpressive compared to some of the shit directors are doing now with supplementary cgi.
miyazaki and kubrick's filmmaking styles are nothing alike, why even bring it up?
From the example you posted, probably background artists who gave a shit.
well im just saying what i feel like but in that webm's case the camera shake, the wing vibrations from the explosion, the downward push of the engine, and the way the explosion quickly expands all give a sense of the explosions force without requiring sound.
the bullet impacts happening first makes your eyes focus on the engine so you see it as it then explodes
Because American animation has its own traditions, those traditions have more to do with how western animation were made during its early years and its technical limitations.
Japanese animations, especially more recent ones are more influenced by Hollywood than anything. The approach is more results driven. Although personally I don't think this is necessarily better than the other, its just different.
But that's his point.
it's a stupid point, it's saying there's only one guy who makes movies right and there's only one right way to make movies. if that were the case everyone would and should make movies exactly the same because the formula will have been figured out and that would be fucking boring.
This is my favorite bit of camera work in all of 2D animation due to how cool but absolutely fucking pointless it is.
i think his point was that there are more directors people can/should draw inspiration from, Kubrick being one of them.
Are you dense?
What is the point? That he prefers one to another? Who cares.
>What is it about Japanese animation that gives it it's "force"?
Well-animated explosions. Seriously, nothing is better than a movie-quality '90s anime explosion. That kind of shit is my fucking jam.
>animation should have the same cinematography as live action
That's retarded. They're completely different mediums with completely different realms of possibility
No, he clearly said it : people need more points of reference than the usual same stuff over and over again, because it creates incestuous works.
Hell, I attended an art school which had an animation division, and every student I met there was either shillign to work at Disney/dreamworks, or acting smug and elitist with sentences like "everyone is all over Disney. Come on! There's other stuff like Miyazaki!"
At this point Miyazaki is as mainstream as Mickey Mouse, and people constantly steal from him, making their stuff samey.
Miyazaki might be the new Tim Burton.
Everyone fancies them special because they like and emulate him.
Although he's probably been replaced by now too.
Doesn't mean they can't learn from one another, especially when looking at different filmmakers and styles.
Lol because lots of wannabe filmmakers haven't ripped off Kubrick jej.
The point is not Kubrick himself.
jesus...
earliest example I can think of.
American animation in its formative years was largely inspired by vaudeville comedy and the fact that it started as 10 minute theatrical shorts. Japan didn't have an animation industry until postwar.
Examples?
A lot of common tropes in American animation like certain slapstick gags and children acting like pint-sized adults came out of vaudeville.
>Gertie the Dinosaur was over a hundred years ago
His point is opposite, that animation has cinematography that is MORE stiff than live-action, even though there's potentially almost no limit to what you can do in animation because changing camera angle does very little to budget (especially in 3D)
The oldskool Disney movies like Snow White seem to have been mostly based on stage plays and theater.
That's because they were intended as prestige pieces and back in those days, the theater was considered "high" art and for proper, sophisticated storytelling while vaudeville was lowbrow entertainment that relied mainly on slapstick and racist jokes.
>Miyazaki might be the new Tim Burton
That's ironic considering Miyazaki is like 30 years older
He's 17 years older than Tim Burton.
Yes but I mean in terms of popularity amongst teen nerds from, like the last 30 years maybe.
Of course I could be wrong, but I think Burton was the special snowflakes darling a little before Miazaky got his break into mainstream western media.
I'm mostly basing this on the fact that so many current students suck Miyazaki's ding dong like crazy, but Burton seems to have fallen out of grace.
>throws Jumbo into the water
What an asshole
Anime wasn't as big in the US back in the Nightmare Before Christmas days when Burton was really hot and all animation students worshiped him.
Stop motion animation has kind of dwindled as 3D took over.
So that confirms what I said then.
The late 90s into the early 2000s was when anime really blew up here so young animators who used to watch Toonami as kids idolize Miyazaki.
Uh huh. Now if you compare guys like Trey Parker and Matt Stone who got their start in the 90s, there's a lot more of Tim Burton in their style.
Which is fine really. The gist of it is they need to also look elswhere, which they often don't really do.
I used Burton as inspiration for one of my works, but very quickly figured i'd be better off using german expressionism directly.
I mean, it's simple, but going from what inspired the thing you love actually opens so many new doors and sets you apart from all the people who love the same stuff. Especially when it's mainstream, because it becomes mundane very fast.
Hell, look at Burton. I can't decide if he's lost his touch, or if we just got used to it, but he's lost his appeal.
And that's exactly what Miyazaki has said many times, that animation dies when it becomes incestuous rather than looking to outside sources for inspiration.
>Hell, look at Burton. I can't decide if he's lost his touch, or if we just got used to it, but he's lost his appeal.
Everything gets stale after a while. You can only be edgy and revolutionary once.
>98187416
Different animation styles make certain actions and shots look weird. It'd look incredibly weird for Disney movies to suddenly do what most anime films do, as certain things only work in certain styles. For example, Disney animation is too cute and cartoony for the many bombastic shots that Anime has.
True.
The thing is he was very popular during a certain period, and these days he's not. And like I said I can't figure out the cause.
Is he out of touch? Or are we too used to it?
A little of both and as I said, Burton was at the peak of his relevance in the 90s, so naturally animators who came up in that time will have been most influenced by him.
Yes. When learning how to draw, draw from life rather than master your favorite cartoons' art style.
I’ve been meaning to post a thread on this for a while now, but this thread seems appropriate.
There is one part of Aladdin where the cinematography has pissed me off ever since I was a child.
It’s the part where Jasmine decides she wants to sneak out of the palace and make it on her own. She says goodbye to her tiger then climbs over the wall.
I don’t know how to describe it, but the way it’s animated makes it seem like she climbs up the wall, then back down the wall on the same side without ever actually climbing over. Anyone else know the scene I’m talking about and interpret it the same as me? I’d look for a YouTube clip but now is a bad time. I can’t put my finger on why exactly, but I always felt that that scene was animated poorly and it always stuck out to me.
>got done watching a bunch of stanley kubrick movies
Oh no way bro! Have you got a blog I can follow?
too bad ghibli quality animation is fucking gone, now they just rotoscope everything
You're forgetting about backgrounds.
Changing angles requires additional paintings, more fully realized sets, and shot planning. Panning shots that alter angles require backgrounds with panoramic perspective.
These are things the Japanese did exceptionally well. Disney relied on multiple layers of backgrounds for a parallax effect that just reinforced stage-like shots.
youtube.com
I think this is the scene you're talking about? I think the reason is odd is because they don't actually show her going over the wall. They cut to Raja than back to Jasmine and she's over the wall. The funny thing is the branch she used as a step is gone
Nice job getting triggered at a famous director getting mentioned and ignoring everything else he posted.
You Sup Forums bro? Haha Sneed bro. XD
This.
You seem pretentious as fuck but yeah satoshi kon made some great movies. Perfect Blue and Paprika had some really amazing transitions.
>just got done watching a bunch of stanley kubrick movies
you're the film equivalent of "born in the wrong generation"
Modern films sucking ass isn't a contrarian opinion anymore, my plebbit friend.
That's because nobody remembers the shitty films from 40 years ago.