Are the big animation studios right about people not wanting to watch traditional?

[Bn43]

I'm talking about movies. How can they be right if there still are all these successful 2D animated shows on TV, like Rick and Morty, Bob's Burgers, The Simpsons, Steven Universe, Archer, Family Guy, My Little Pony, the original stuff on Netflix...? I believe it's a huge misconception.

Personally, I'm not watching another CG animation anytime soon, unless invited. It's not that they are bad, but I prefer traditional by a mile and am just sick of CG. The lack of traditional animation embitters me.

[Monterey Jack]

Animation studios say that there's "no audience" for hand-drawn 'toons anymore, but that's an easy claim to make when there ARE no hand-drawn animated films put out there anymore. Disney hasn't tried to release one since The Princess & The Frog a decade ago. Make some, make them good, and an audience will show up for them.

[prkchopexpress]

No. Next question.

[fighthefutureofhd]

Yes. Same question.

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

Animation studios say that there's "no audience" for hand-drawn 'toons anymore, but that's an easy claim to make when there ARE no hand-drawn animated films put out there anymore. Disney hasn't tried to release one since The Princess & The Frog a decade ago. Make some, make them good, and an audience will show up for them.

Wrong-O! The last hand drawn animated release by Disney was in fact Winnie The Pooh.

[Poya]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

Yes. Same question.




Wrong-O! The last hand drawn animated release by Disney was in fact Winnie The Pooh.

And John Lasseter sabotaged by having that compete against the final Harry Potter film.

[Worship.my.wreck]

I also preffer 2D animation. I wish they would make more of them.

[Jezza]

Originally Posted by Poya

And John Lasseter sabotaged by having that compete against the final Harry Potter film.

Just to clarify, it actually came out about 3 or 4 months earlier in all other territories and had a pretty clear run. North America I believe was the last place it was released.

The real problem it had was it had little to no marketing and I find it hard to believe that Lasseter, the man who championed for The Princess and the Frog, would "sabotage" its release. Execs from above probably wanted it killed before it arrived to 'prove' hand-drawn isn't successful, after The Princess and the Frog under performed.

It's probably also worth remembering though The Princesa and the Frog was released just a week or two before Avatar. So is it any wonder why neither or them did well at the a BO.

[Todd Tomorrow]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List..._Studios_films

After peaking with The Lion King, the profitability of hand drawn animation features went into a decline, while CG animated movies became more profitable. Even before the arrival of Disney CG animated features, hand drawn animation became less profitable, while Pixar’s CG features soared at the box office. The final straw for Disney was The Princess and the Frog followed by Tangled, with the CG princess feature making twice as much money when compared the traditionally animated princess feature.

[UltraMario9]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trx9...ature=youtu.be

[Wildcat2000]

I have nothing against cgi. I’m just giving my thoughts on the subject.

Both hand drawn and CG take a lot of work but I’m guessing hand drawn is more painstaking because you’re literally drawing every frame without any “tools”.

So I’ve always thought can’t they just use cgi to make something look like hand drawn animation? Maybe they have. How could you tell right?

Although there was an error on the The Simpsons not long ago that makes me think it is computer animated now. Which is cool...that was a very rare glitch. (A lot of cartoons use flash I think).

Surely modern day CGI can replicate the look of 2D animation. Unless they just think 3D is more profitable. I don’t know maybe.

[tigertron]

Disney needs to go back to hand drawn animation, there is definitely still an audience for it otherwise people wouldn't be buying their catalogue on video.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by Wildcat2000

I have nothing against cgi. I’m just giving my thoughts on the subject.

Both hand drawn and CG take a lot of work but I’m guessing hand drawn is more painstaking because you’re literally drawing every frame without any “tools”.

So I’ve always thought can’t they just use cgi to make something look like hand drawn animation? Maybe they have. How could you tell right?

Although there was an error on the The Simpsons not long ago that makes me think it is computer animated now. Which is cool...that was a very rare glitch. (A lot of cartoons use flash I think).

Surely modern day CGI can replicate the look of 2D animation. Unless they just think 3D is more profitable. I don’t know maybe.

It’s a common misconception that 3D CG animation is less work intensive than traditional (hand drawn) animation. Traditional animation styles have utilised 2D software for decades now to lighten the work load and it’s actually far less work intensive than 3D CG animation. That why you see so much “hand drawn” animation on TV.

It is possible to make 3D animation look like 2D by rendering it flat and with outlines. An early example of that is the title character in The Iron Giant and recently Into the Spider-Verse used technology like it. It has its own look though and if you have an eye for it you can always see it. By far the most work intensive animation style is stop motion.

Btw, I’m a character animator who has worked in the field, including animated Hollywood movies, for 25 years.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by tigertron

Disney needs to go back to hand drawn animation, there is definitely still an audience for it otherwise people wouldn't be buying their catalogue on video.

There was an audience for the last traditionally animated movies Disney made. Unfortunately it was half the audience when compared to the CG animated movies Disney and Pixar made and that audience was steadily declining. We are not talking “no audience” we are talking “ far less of an audience”. That is how business works, it puts the investment and effort where the most profit is.

[Wildcat2000]

Originally Posted by Todd Tomorrow

It’s a common misconception that 3D CG animation is less work intensive than traditional (hand drawn) animation. Traditional animation styles have utilised 2D software for decades now to lighten the work load and it’s actually far less work intensive than 3D CG animation. That why you see so much “hand drawn” animation on TV.

It is possible to make 3D animation look like 2D by rendering it flat and with outlines. An early example of that is the title character in The Iron Giant and recently Into the Spider-Verse used technology like it. It has its own look though and if you have an eye for it you can always see it. By far the most work intensive animation style is stop motion.

Btw, I’m a character animator who has worked in the field, including animated Hollywood movies, for 25 years.

Oh ya Spider-man is a great example.

I know CG is a lot of work. I’ve watched videos and even just 2D flash animation requires a lot of effort. That’s why I hate when people complain that CGI is heartless, cashgrabbing etc.

Some have this notion that you’re just feeding a computer information and out pops a movie. People equate drawing by hand (and building by hand with practical effects) as “true effort”.

I wanted to make some animations with flash but I realized it would take a lot of time just to learn and get comfortable with it.

[goresnet]

Once Disney+ starts, they'll have good number to compare viewers of traditional VS CG properties. If they get an overwhelming amount of traditional viewers, perhaps they will be persuaded to make more in that style. At least for that service, if not theaters.

[CrazyBlu-RayFan]

Now while this movie wasn't anywhere near as expensive as other 2D animated movies, it still was 2D animation. Dragon Ball Super Broly got $30 million at the American box office, becoming the #3 highest grossing anime movie in America and getting a spot in the top 10 box office. Hell, anime itself is a big example of a demand for 2D animation, but the problem is that most movie studios try to make animated movies for a family audience while Japan/other countries see that animation can be anything. They could tell stories of real life, stories of horror, stories of real drama, etc. Animation is just the tool used to tell that story. And it just all circles back to America's lack of respect for animation. Not to say there isn't mature animation being made in America, there is, but it's mostly either adult comedies (like Sausage Party or South Park) or superhero/comic book stuff (like Batman The Dark Knight Returns or Constantine City of Demons). While shows like Bojack Horseman are starting to break the mold, western animation is still very behind the times in its storytelling. Even studios like Laika or Pixar are afraid to make a story that needs a PG-13 to be told. So a lot of anime fans aren't going to be interested in an American 2D animated movie because it won't truly be a story that's a risk, it will be a family movie (either comedy or fairy tale or musical or a combination of those things) to attract the most audience. And sure, Broly was PG, but it was a PG animated action movie, something that's very rarely made in the west. I prefer 2D to CGi for many reasons, but studios see that kids are more attracted to CGI, and so they go for the style that appeals to kids the most. I think we'll see more 2D animated movies at some point, but first our animation industry needs to grow up more before that can happen.

[Bn43]

Originally Posted by UltraMario9

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trx9...ature=youtu.be

I just watched The Giant's Dream from my Iron Giant Blu-ray (which I got just this month) because of this video. That was a really good documentary. The movie made me tear up and this doc made me tear up too. There might have been so many good traditional animations after The Iron Giant.

[Todd Tomorrow]

Originally Posted by CrazyBlu-RayFan

Now while this movie wasn't anywhere near as expensive as other 2D animated movies, it still was 2D animation. Dragon Ball Super Broly got $30 million at the American box office, becoming the #3 highest grossing anime movie in America and getting a spot in the top 10 box office. Hell, anime itself is a big example of a demand for 2D animation, but the problem is that most movie studios try to make animated movies for a family audience while Japan/other countries see that animation can be anything. They could tell stories of real life, stories of horror, stories of real drama, etc. Animation is just the tool used to tell that story. And it just all circles back to America's lack of respect for animation. Not to say there isn't mature animation being made in America, there is, but it's mostly either adult comedies (like Sausage Party or South Park) or superhero/comic book stuff (like Batman The Dark Knight Returns or Constantine City of Demons). While shows like Bojack Horseman are starting to break the mold, western animation is still very behind the times in its storytelling. Even studios like Laika or Pixar are afraid to make a story that needs a PG-13 to be told. So a lot of anime fans aren't going to be interested in an American 2D animated movie because it won't truly be a story that's a risk, it will be a family movie (either comedy or fairy tale or musical or a combination of those things) to attract the most audience. And sure, Broly was PG, but it was a PG animated action movie, something that's very rarely made in the west. I prefer 2D to CGi for many reasons, but studios see that kids are more attracted to CGI, and so they go for the style that appeals to kids the most. I think we'll see more 2D animated movies at some point, but first our animation industry needs to grow up more before that can happen.

With a few art house and independent movie exceptions, it’s true that US feature film animation is far more skewed towards a family audience than Japanese animation, where animation isn’t necessarily seen as something that has to be kid friendly. A lot of that has to do with Disney having shaped and dominated US feature film animation for so long. Another reason is that Hollywood animation features are very expensive to produce and therefore aim for the largest audience possible. I doubt that will change anytime soon.

My interest in animation came via animated short films and as that’s not under the same commercial pressures as animated features, the range of techniques and subject matter is huge. You’ll see a lot more traditional and stop motion animation there. A lot of it is not kid friendly. Apart from specialised film festivals, Vimeo is the place where you’ll find those.

[KMR]

For me, human characters have much more soul or spirit in hand-drawn animation than in 3D CGI animation. Story is the number one factor, so I might get more into a CGI movie if it has a better story. But if the same script were used both a hand-drawn film and a CGI film, I suspect that I would get into the hand-drawn one more easily.

As for The Princess and the Frog, that was an absolutely delightful film that I love. That it underperformed is quite sad, although I have a theory--concerning demographics--about what may have been part of the reason.

[Bn43]

Originally Posted by KMR

For me, human characters have much more soul or spirit in hand-drawn animation than in 3D CGI animation. Story is the number one factor, so I might get more into a CGI movie if it has a better story. But if the same script were used both a hand-drawn film and a CGI film, I suspect that I would get into the hand-drawn one more easily.

As for The Princess and the Frog, that was an absolutely delightful film that I love. That it underperformed is quite sad, although I have a theory--concerning demographics--about what may have been part of the reason.

I have a theory about that too. Kids are racist.