Animation Innovation

Commments for Post 12

2005-11-30T18:49:00.000-08:00

Here are my comments....

Michelle and Joshua

Post 12 Toy Story and Rudolph

2005-11-30T18:48:00.000-08:00

Being the Christmas season, they gave the classic Rudolph the Red Nose Reindeer. This was a very interesting movie to watch, especially after season Toy Story 2 earlier in the evening. I have not seen either of these movies in quite a long time and was little surprised at all the things I realized when watching from a more analytical viewpoint. Both of these movies where using technology that was different to produce children’s films. One film uses computer technology and the other uses claymation. Using both techniques gives the characters a more three-dimensional feel but still very different. In claymation it appears three-dimensional because it is but in the other one it has the same feel although it is not.
I also want to discuss plot or story lines. I always remember Rudolph as a loving fun Christmas cartoon but watching tonight made me realize that they even show Santa Clause being mean to Rudolph, I don’t remember that anywhere in the song. I also felt that they went a little too far in endlessly repeating lines from the song. Kids know the song and where the movie came from was it truly necessary to keep repeating over and over the lines. I enjoyed the Toy Story’s plot line. I thought that the second film was indeed much better then the first one. I felt that there was more character development in the second one. You get to see this whole side the characters that isn’t there in the first one. I also felt that they handled the idea of eternal life well. I think a lot of cartoons that ask this questions in that cartoons can sometimes be a little heavy with the stuff and it takes away from the over all feeling of the film. In this film over I thought it was handled on a level that children could understand without losing sight of the movie!

Comments for 11

2005-11-16T19:48:00.000-08:00

Here are my comments for post 11

Lisa's Blog

Bryann's Blog

#11 Spirit

2005-11-16T19:37:00.000-08:00

Ahhh, where to start? I think this is the most appropriate question to ask first when taking about the film Spirit. Besides the fact that similar to Pocahontas they completely messed any history they were trying to present. They did not even present the history they promised to in the first minute of the film. In spite of all this I think I still could have learned to enjoy the film had it not been for one annoying little issue. THE MOVIE WENT FROM HISTORICAL TAKE ON HORSES TO AN HOUR AND HALF LONG BRIAN ADAMS VIDEO! I though it was cute how they poked fun at other movies and took little bits from them and made them there own. Other then that I think that I could safely summarize the movie as follows. A couple nay, Brian Adams song, Horse is caught, Brian Adams song, Horse gets free, Brian Adams song, horse meets mare, Brian Adams song, and so on. I know that we are supposed to be looking at the animation of the film, and I will, but I do believe Brian Adams paid someone a handsome some of money when he heard this film was coming out.
The animation of this video was interesting. I say this because most of it was hand drawn. As we discussed in class, there are some very beautiful scenes in this movie from a strictly artistic point of view. The backgrounds in this film were incredible for being hand drawn. Even though they were backgrounds there was such detail in them. The horses were also incredible. The amount of detail in the muscles of the horses and the accuracy of their movement makes this cel animation a labor of love.
This leads me to three conclusions. One, someone at DreamWorks either has a horse or a strong love for them. Two, perhaps they should have spent some of that love, and money, on a historian in addition to their equine scholars. Three, they should have spent some of the money on an artist other Brian Adams.

Post # 10 Pocahontas

2005-11-09T19:11:00.000-08:00

The movie Pocahontas was interesting considering the last time I saw this movie I was in the fifth grade. Time after time I say that the movies I enjoyed as a child were far better then the ones we have today. After watching this particular movie, however, I stand corrected. While I was a child, mind you, I was not nearly as cynical or analytical towards movies as I have become today but either way I can not see my self watching this movie on repeat now or then. Although this movie has completely messed with history it was not nearly as interesting as I used to find it.

One of the first things I noticed about Pocahontas was that she nearly glided through the air; she didn’t just walk but more closely floated. I don’t know if this was on the part of the animators to make her seem more graceful and almost gazelle like, so it was more in tune with nature. It was fascinating after Professor Petrik said she was modeled after a dancer. It was easier to understand why she was graceful but it still makes me wonder what actually made them choose a dancer in the first place.

Another thing I was interesting was that Disney was reusing their own characters. This

movie almost seems like it was just thrown together to sell a theme park. They didn’t have the time

to come up with new characters or this faces epitomized these characters so well that they had

been wasted in their original characters. I think Disney could have spent a little more time

researching the original history and making the characters.

Comments for Post 8

2005-10-26T19:07:00.000-07:00

Here are my comments for post 8

Bonnie's Blog
Lisa's Blog

#8 Rocky and Bullwinkle

2005-10-26T19:03:00.000-07:00

Even though I was not even born when the classic Rocky and Bullwinkle began I can still remember watching after school. The great thing about thing about the cartoons back then was that you could come home and watch a cartoon and unlike today’s cartoons, it will not have been a complete waste of thirty-five minutes. I often talk in my blog about yesterdays cartoons were far superior then today’s but please point out to me today where a kid can get entertainment and education, for even middle school age children, in one complete package. For that matter I would like to know where children can entertainment and education that is not located on Sesame Street.

As we talk about in class, you will always remember Napoleon with his hand in his coat because he needed suspenders. While the adventure was funny and you still got a great history lesson about France. One of things that make those history lessons great was the fact that they were short. Who would want to watch a Napoleon in GE electric commercial? They were also were mixed into a “variety” show format so children did not feel like they were just watching educational TV. Not that there is anything wrong with educational television but kid wants to come home after school and do more learning. I can also guarantee those are paying closer attention to that cartoon then they were in History class.

What made also made the show educational was that they did not dumb it down for children. I said this in an early post but I think this was a mark of early cartoons and was carried over from the twenties when both children and adults went to see them. I also think that it has something to with the fact that education was a much bigger push in the fifties. Since the cold war everyone wanted his or her children to be smarter. They tried to put education in as much of the child’s life a possible and what better then a cartoon.

Comments for Post 7

2005-10-26T06:33:00.000-07:00

Here are the comments for #7

Ann's Blog
Kristy's Blog

#7 Robots

2005-10-26T06:02:00.000-07:00

I finally got the chance to see the cartoon Robots after my nieces had been telling about it for ages. Aside from the initial seizure I thought I would have from all the colorful movement it turned out to be a decent movie. I say this not because I dislike cartoon movies but because today’s cartoons have a stigma for having poor stories, covered up with senseless violence. This was not the case for Robots, although the story had been told over and over through various formats, it still seemed fresh with great animation.

Upon first sight you get a whirlwind of color, almost more then any normal human can take. After allowing your eyes to adjust however you begin to see the cartoon for what it really is, superior animation. I do not know when the trend to make animation seem as though it is real but this is the case I find with most cartoons today. You know they are cartoons because they often feature animals, or in this case robots, which act like humans but in another you sense they seems just like actors who could walk off the set when it is all done. The computer graphics make the character looks as though they are real people. It also doesn’t help that many animators are now making the characters look like the celebrities voicing them.

This brings me to the next observation of the cartoon, the voices. After looking over the cast list I could at least count half of the main cast as a having a celebrity voice. I remember as a kid the cartoons never celebrities voices, they have professional people who did the voices of like five or six different characters on two or three different shows. I feel as though Nickelodeon was famous for this. I always remembering trying to figure what other voices that person did. I know that The Simpsons made it cool for celebrities to make an appearance on cartoons but generally they show up as a cartoon version of themselves. Sometimes celebrity voices work out great but other times I feel as though it brings the whole quality of the cartoon down. In this case even with the overwhelming amount of help from celebrities, this thing that truly brings this cartoon together is the animation.

Post 6 Comments

2005-10-18T19:55:00.000-07:00

Here are my comments for Post 6

Ann
and
Phil

Post #6 Snow White

2005-10-18T11:15:00.000-07:00

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs has never been one of my favorite movies. Looking at it from a purely analytical animation standpoint though, it becomes quite fascinating. It is easy to look at a cartoon and get caught up in the story and miss what you are really looking at. I feel this often happens with Disney movies. The tell such incredible stories that your are unaware of anything else. After watching Snow White and really looking at the film, it becomes clear that Mr. Disney had a way of using similar characteristics for characters even in different films.

I have not seen Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs in some time and it was interesting to watch it with fresh eyes. One of the first things I noticed was that Snow White seemed oddly familiar. Upon further watching the movie I realized where I had recognized her feature before, the blue fairy from Pinocchio. Although Pinocchio came out three years later, Snow White and the Blue Fairy had many similar physical characteristics. As a history major one of my areas of interest is 1930’s-1940’s mass culture. What really got me about the both women is that their features are different from all the other female characters in Disney. They have, of course, the big doe eyes all women in Disney do, but there is something about their tiny mouths and straight line eye brow that tie them directly to their time period.

Almost of the female characters in Disney cartoons have full eyes brows. While the Snow White have the trademark pencil thin ones popular in the forties, a la Greta Garbo. Another feature is there nose. Snow White and the Blue Fairies nose bridge seem to almost blend into their face giving them a very soft, round look. Other women in Disney, while they do not have pronounced noses there is serious definition in them. Finally their mouths, tiny and almost cupid’s bow like made famous by Jean Harlow.

Walt Disney’s later characters also had characteristics more suited to the time in which they were produced. None however stand out to me the way these two women were represented. Perhaps, this is one reason Disney has given up human animation, it is too hard to narrow down the ideal characteristics today.

Post # 5

2005-10-11T16:44:00.000-07:00

In a previous post I talked about Disney making children’s films with more adult
oriented themes. While this is true, it is not the first time that children’s cartoons were also
aimed at adults. I was watching some really old Porky Pig and Bugs Bunny cartoons the other day and realized that how sophisticated the nature of the cartoons was, by a graphics standpoint they were nothing magical. Judging from a story line and intellectual content they far surpass many of the cartoons watched today.
Porky Pig and Bugs Bunny could easily speak to a child audience as well as an adult. Unlike many of the cartoons today where the witty puns are for the adults and the animation was for children, these cartoons of the past use both language and animation for both children and adults. Many of the old cartoons used language that was not dumbed for children. They spoke as if it were an adult cartoon and even had adult oriented themes. Who could the memorable gangster character in Bugs Bunny? This cartoon was about gambling and illegal liquor. They shot guns and hid from police. Hardly what I call children’s content but the way it is presented it never glorified that lifestyle. Cartoons from the forties were unafraid to address any topic and also allowed an outlet for both children and adults to enjoy.

#5 Comments for Post 5

2005-10-06T17:33:00.000-07:00

here are my comments for Matt and Phil

Comments 3,4,5,6

2005-09-30T09:20:00.000-07:00

Here are my comments for post 3,4,5,6,
3
Ann's Blog
4
Mark's Blog
5
John's Blog
6.
Dinah's Blog

Post #4 Betty Boop

2005-09-30T09:02:00.000-07:00

Let me just say from the door Betty Boop has always been one of my favorite cartoons (See previous post). I thought it was fascinating how they represented her, childlike innocence with sex symbol status. After reading about Terry Toons in the book suddenly I understood why Betty had very few human friends. I am currently working on a 499 paper that will deals with cartoons and Betty Boop in particular. One of the things that I want to talk about in my paper is the change that occurs over the time of the Betty Boop series mimics the changes that are taking place in the US.
In the beginning episodes Betty is always out partying and having fun. She has no issues with dressing like a man. What it comes down to is Betty Boop is a party girl. This follows with what happens in the twenties. Women felt more liberated. Betty is obviously fashioned after a flapper, with the short hair and garters and the party all night life style. What we see after that is a subtle change in her character. Although she never changes physically, she we start to see her at home more. The cartoon begins to focus more in her house then out partying. In one episode Betty gets a job because she has no money. This begins to fall in step more with the depression during the thirties. Then by the early forties, and the end of Betty Boop’s career, we see more of a homemaker side to her. She doesn’t have a job, she does housework, takes care of a babies and when anything needs fixed, she calls on good ol’ grampy. I think to things influenced the change in Betty Boop. One, the reflection of women’s current status in the US. Two, the Hay’s code, which will be the reason Betty is ultimately shut down, she’s too risqué for the public.

Prince Achmed

2005-09-26T16:37:00.000-07:00

Ahhh…Where to begin with Prince Achmed. It was an interesting film. I had never before seen this technique used in any animation. I thought the art was incredible. I could take the time to cut and design that many sets and characters, and get the amount of detail Lotte Reiniger did. By using the black figures it really made the background colors pop out at you. I feel that it forced you to pay attention to what going on in the film. Unlike with regular cartoons you could not listen and understand without really paying attention. In Prince Achmed it took a lot of focus on the movie to understand where the plot was going and who the characters were. Sometimes, however, no matter how much you paid attention to the film, some of the action was lost because of the limitations of silhouette movement. In terms of just sitting and watching the film I think it would have been more interesting had it been remade today. I think the technology available today could have made the movements more fluid and understandable. I also think that it could have moved the story line along a little bit quicker. Perhaps, I have become jaded by all the action in cartoons films today, but I think Prince Achmed could have done with a little bit of speech. When watching this movie I often felt myself going back and forth on this point. While the movie would have much more fascinating with a little more communication, on the other hand it at times reminded me of a ballet, they way the characters could just flow into themselves and the dramatic scenery. I almost feel that some of the beauty in the characters elaborate dance would be lost with the addition of nonsense rambling.

Comments #2

2005-09-14T19:10:00.000-07:00

Here are my comments for the second entry. It is for Mathews blog.

#2 Boop-Opp-A-Doop

2005-09-14T18:47:00.000-07:00

One of my favorite cartoons as a child was Betty Boop. On a recent trip to Wal-Mart I was able to score a couple DVD’s of Betty for a dollar. Most of the cartoons on the DVD are from 1934 and 1935. Upon watching them again, I never realized that half of them were in black and white and half in color. Betty Boop was produced from 1930 until 1939. Betty looks the part of the ideal 1920’s flapper. One thing that I noticed after watching a couple episodes, beside the fact that they are only seven minutes long, is that the only humans in the show are Betty and Grampy. In a couple of the episodes, like the episodes titled Another Little King, they have other human characters, but in general Betty is friends with cars, animals and other inanimate objects. Betty Boop presented a chance for both adults and children to enjoy simple animation.

After being in class and looking at the 12 characteristics that make good cartoons, it was hard to criticize and evaluate each episode. It was suddenly easy to see that the cartoon to does not run as smooth as more modern ones do. Betty’s movements are even mechanical in episodes like Baby be Good. I also noticed that Betty only have four fingers, which is something that never fazed me before this class. On appeal characteristic she has the large doe eyes and unmistakable sexuality, who could not love her. I could definitely understand why they would never do a close up on Betty, her head is so large that it would take up a lot of screen space. A theme that is prevalent throughout the cartoon is the sexism. Betty is not that bright but she can and sing, dance and clean the house but when anything needs to be fixed or solved she can always call Grampy. I have not seen all the Betty Boop episodes but in the episode Making Stars there is a strong racial theme.

Betty Boop cartoons are easy to understand and fascinate both kids and adults. This in part due to the fact that the comedy and situations are not dumbed down for children. Many of the jokes throughout the episodes are very adult in nature but not so obvious as to be inappropriate for children.

#1 9/6/05 The Simpsons and Gertie Do Dinner

2005-09-06T16:39:00.000-07:00

Let me begin by saying that it is great to have class where the assigned homework is watch cartoons. To be honest other then watching cartoons for entertainment purposes, I have never really had in interest in how cartoons work or came to be. After Chapter 1, The Silent Era, it was really interesting to learn how the process of actually making cartoons has evolved. I never really understood how complicated making a simple cartoon could be. It was really interesting to read about all the layers that it took to make one cartoon move around. The progression of the cartoon from the moving the character and redrawing it over and over and then simply using transparency. I was watching the simpsons marathon the other day and began looking at the evolution if the cartoon. From the first episodes where the characters were simple drawings and many with similar characteristics. To the more current episodes, it is hard to place your finger on exactly what has changed. Better Colors, maybe or smoother lines possibly. It was something that I hadn't previously noticed either way. It reminded me of Gertie the dinosaur. Winsor McCay had to make people believe she was alive. He changed little things about her that the audience did not notice but he knew was different. This in turn gave her more life like qualities, now she could eat, drink, breath and laugh!!! Looking from Gertie to the Simpsons and then to movies like Toy Story it is unbelieveable far cartoons have come.

Test Post #0

2005-09-02T08:17:00.000-07:00

Hey Everyone! This is just a test post to make sure everything is up and running!