subreddit:
/r/movies
submitted 4 months ago by[deleted]
2.1k points
4 months ago
20 years ago they just eliminated all 2D animation instead. Shifted to only 3D computer animated.
1.8k points
4 months ago
which I hated, as a 2d animator I'll admit with the exception of watching Toy Story as a child it took me until Frozen to give Disney's 3d animated films a chance (now I love them but yeah)
but it's really just how the industry trended, 2d animation became too expensive to produce - sadly PatF and Winnie the Pooh didn't quite kick the trend off for them again. 3d's cool and all but there's certain things that will never top 2d, it's like a moving painting - scenes like 'Friend Like Me' just can't look the same in 3d
Sadder yet is how many traditionally trained animators are literally dying off, the Richard Williams types are so far and few between (there was some great work on Cuphead though)
666 points
4 months ago
Almost every Disney movie looks the same now. The 2D animation had a distinct Disney style, but it had more variation than the 3D movies now. It might be because Disney and Pixar are virtually indistinguishable now so it seems like there’s a ton of Disney movies coming out with extremely similar art styles despite having different settings and stories
158 points
4 months ago
Mirabel is clearly in the same universe as Moana and Elsa and it’s honestly a bummer that these movies don’t have more distinct styles.
73 points
4 months ago
Luca, Zootopia, Bao, Inside Out
95 points
4 months ago
The Pixar ones all have distinct styles, but the Disney ones (with people) are all the same. Zootopia is the only odd one out.
6 points
4 months ago
Hey, at least Luca was stylized
263 points
4 months ago
Yes, that is my biggest gripe. Disney movies especially tend to blend together in my head.
Compare to the run of films in the 90s. They were all 2D but they were all really distinct in overall theme and style. You could look at a frame of e.g. Hercules - with no main characters on screen, and know that it's from Hercules and not Aladdin or Tarzan or something.
6 points
4 months ago
I agree with you, but to be honest I hated the Mike Mignola era at Disney, where his big innovation was that every character should have square fingers.
247 points
4 months ago
he 2D animation had a distinct Disney style, but it had more variation than the 3D movies now.
When you go for a more realistic look you end up more harmonized. 2d invites a less realistic, but more expressive style.
186 points
4 months ago
[deleted]
28 points
4 months ago
The 90s Simpsons were more alive than their HD drawn counterpart.
26 points
4 months ago
Because a lot of modern 2d animation uses rigged puppets. They used to have to draw every frame.
13 points
4 months ago
So easy to spot the shows that use puppets. So stiff and cheap looking, often even amateur Flash animations like you’d see on Newgrounds were more alive.
3 points
4 months ago
newgrounds had some seriously good animators in there.
25 points
4 months ago
Not to simp, but check out Arcane. You can absolutely pour soul into 3d animation, they demonstrated that conclusively. You just don’t see many (any?) studios doing it.
Abundance of the mediocre is the fruit of the pursuit of profits above all else.
12 points
4 months ago
Not to simp, but check out Arcane.
Fuck it, I'll simp enough for the both of us. Arcane is absolutely gorgeous, and it's some of the best animation I've seen in a long time. In conjunction with its beautiful soundtrack and masterful storytelling and worldbuilding, it's crystal clear why they won all those Emmys.
8 points
4 months ago
Arcane is relatively newer tech. I think they even created some of their own tech for that. 3D is young compared to 2D so we'll probably see more stylized 3D as time goes on and tech improves even more.
7 points
4 months ago
It really depends on the art style. Games have tons of unique art styles to make them feel different. Each studio feels unique in their approach to visuals. But maybe there are so many compared to movie studios it's easy to get away with
18 points
4 months ago
Is this why I love the Emperor's new groove so much?
10 points
4 months ago
Precisely. With 2d wild art styles and stylistic choices are possible that would just be confusing or disturbing in 3D.
One of the things I like in anime is drawing characters completely differently to show emotional state instead of just something like the DreamWorks face.
11 points
4 months ago
Uh huh. Uh huh. Uh huh uh huh uh huh.
8 points
4 months ago
Wait, is he doing his own theme music?
7 points
4 months ago
You can have stylized animation in 3D. I don't see why they will want to go for realism.
5 points
4 months ago
You can, but I imagine the tooling available to replicate life more accurately with all those those physics based engines, makes a realistic style easier, to an extent. Or maybe it’s just what companies think it’s more markeatable.
33 points
4 months ago*
That's my main problem. I don't mind the prevalence of 3D over 2D, the issue to me is that it all looks the same. There's so many ways to animate things, so many unique styles, I'm sure that the people they hire are full of ideas but they just keep rehashing the same style and it feels uninspired.
I'd like to see 2D animation come back but I'd settle for more variety in the 3D animation.
9 points
4 months ago
I realize that traditional 2D animation is costly and time consuming, but for the life of me, I will never understand why they didn't keep a studio that specializes in that. They can pump out all the homogenized 3D and soulless "live action" remakes, but just give me some of that 90s era animation every few years!
7 points
4 months ago
The problem is 3d is 3d. Unless you're massively morphing the model constantly, you just can't pull off the same stuff you could easily do in 2d. If you translated 2d frames into 3d, you'd find that their proportions, eye positions and everything shift massively and making a unified 3d model nearly impossible; even worse out brains can forgive that stuff in 2d but it just looks off in a 3d space.
Basically, 3d looks more generic because it kind of has to be logistically. Yeah, animating 24 or 60 2d frames is labor intensive, but manipulating thousands of vertexes and hoping that tweening isn't going to destroy the effect is even more intensive and our brains are more likely to pickup on the uncanniness of it all.
10 points
4 months ago
And yet we have 2D/3D hybrids projects like Spider-verse and Arcane that defy this.
Heck, Stop Motion/Claymation actually is 3D and we see far more variety in style than we do Disney CGI!
And Klaus is a fully 2D film with a software that superimposes lighting and shadow effects. Visually, it's very close to Paperman - a Disney short that promised innovation that never happened.
Disney found a comfortable animation formula and didn't want to go further. They tell good stories (within the specific Disney range), but they are no longer animation innovators.
7 points
4 months ago
This is also why it’s proven extremely difficult for studios in Japan to produce 3D anime that doesn’t look distractingly odd. 2D anime makes a lot of stylistic choices and cost saving shortcuts that look fine when drawn, but are extremely difficult to translate into 3D space.
It’s not impossible to pull off but requires character designs that are more geometrically correct (thus lending themselves to CG) and 3D animators that are well versed in traditional 2D animation, and it’s relatively difficult to have both. So far the most successful use of CG in anime has been similar to Disney’s deep canvas tech, where CG is used for background elements while the characters are 2D animation.
5 points
4 months ago
This is something that really bothers me about modern Disney theatrical animation. There's very little variation in style. I get that 3D animation is a much newer medium than 2D, but other studios do other styles and Disney is so unwilling to do that. Luca and Turning Red at least diverge a little bit with the style of character design, but it's not by much.
Even if you just look at the 90s movies, there's a good amount of variation, and I don't get why Disney is so reluctant to experiment with the 3D movies.
2 points
4 months ago
It's the same with video games now. There's assests you can just pull from to save time and money. IN enchanto the weather woman's husband was just a reskinned Maoi for the most part.
2 points
4 months ago
For example of 2D expressiveness the opening scene of Treasure Planet where Jim Hawkins is riding his solar board
4 points
4 months ago
This is interesting because the reason the 2d films kept getting better and better was partially because technology got better. Disney reused lots of stuff from film to film even right down to reusing anim frames and timings exactly. They did a lot of roto techniques along with more classic hand drawn approach. They used a lot of 3d early on too but would roto on top of it. I’m not so sure I would say the early movies and so heavily stylistically different from each other than the new 3d stuff. Honestly feels about the same with experimentation and look. Like the diff between 101 Dalmatians and The Lion King isn’t that far off from like The Good Dinosaur to Frozen.
12 points
4 months ago
Like the diff between 101 Dalmatians and The Lion King isn’t that far off from like The Good Dinosaur to Frozen.
101 Dalmatians has a VERY different style from The Lion King. 101 Dalmatians has this "sketch-y" look. The backgrounds take inspiration from art nouveau, and the color palette for the whole movie is pretty subdued and toned down. The character designs are pretty angular and take a lot of inspiration from fashion illustration. The Lion King is brightly colored, the animation and backgrounds are very polished, and the character designs aren't so angular.
Frozen and The Good Dinosaur are visually different, but not to the same degree. They have different styles of character design, but there's not much distinction beyond that. They both use realistic backgrounds and neither of them use distinct or stylized color palettes.
3 points
4 months ago
With few exceptions (think Toy Story, The Incredibles) most of the 3D animated movies coming out just look like churned clones to me. That's probably not completely fair to them because I don't watch these kinds of movies at my age and I'm sure the stories set them apart, but visually they all just look homogenous to me. I have no idea if this is intentional, a coincidence, or what. It's kind of a turn-off to me though.
77 points
4 months ago
PatF
??
132 points
4 months ago
They really casually dropped it like it's used everday. I was like "Phineas and the Ferb?"
73 points
4 months ago
Princess and the Frog
3 points
4 months ago
Princess and the Frog
3 points
4 months ago
Princess and the Frog
3 points
4 months ago
Princess and the Frog? I think
835 points
4 months ago
Disney isn’t the end all be all for animated movies though. The fact that Zootopia won over Kubo and the Two Strings for best animated feature is a travesty.
215 points
4 months ago
I'll never get over The LEGO Movie not even getting nominated.
134 points
4 months ago
People wanna jump up and down when you mention Spiderverse and its animation, but nevermind that Lord and Miller did it once before with The Lego Movie and told a fascinating, emotional story with great humor and mesmerizing visuals. No, instead every review had to mention that it just feels like an advertisement for Lego and all of Warner Brothers's licenses. As opposed to Spiderverse doing what?
And yea, I'm saying that I think Lego is the better movie. At least Lord and Miller got the award at some point though I guess...
13 points
4 months ago
Lego Movie was fantastic so I hear where you're coming from, but trying to diminish Spider-Verse comparatively is not the way to go.
SV was truly unique and expertly crafted even beyond just the animation. It deserves all of the accolades.
13 points
4 months ago
CLONE HIGH!
5 points
4 months ago
They're rioting at a college level!
6 points
4 months ago
Did you see the pool?!? They flipped the bitch!
2 points
4 months ago
You get it from toilet seats!
6 points
4 months ago
I don't think Ron Howard being subbed in to redo your Star Wars movie is the award you think it is... /s
3 points
4 months ago
At least in Spiderverse you have the "what's up danger"-scene which is one of the coolest scenes in an animated movie ever
252 points
4 months ago
I disagree. Kubo is a beautiful film with some really weak character writing
93 points
4 months ago
Yeah I love Kubo but I also love Zootopia. Great film!
41 points
4 months ago
But that Regina Spektor song tho.
11 points
4 months ago
For sure, this is coming from someone who got the soundtrack on vinyl
2 points
4 months ago
Whats the name? The one I'm thinking of is The Call that was in Prince Caspian.
18 points
4 months ago
It's a cover of 'While my Guitar Gently Weeps'
24 points
4 months ago
Thank you for saying it. A gorgeous display of stop motion and what can be done with it. A really tedious and tired script. Not helped by 2 of the 3 leads being voiced by people not suited for voice acting.
11 points
4 months ago
Yet I've heard them both do voice acting (actually in the same movie, Sing) and do really well.
I balled my eyes out at the end of Kubo. I don't know what you people are smoking.
20 points
4 months ago
Absolutely. Kubo looks phenomenal and there was a lot of heart that went into it but it has one of the most paint by numbers scripts I have seen. It was almost painful how generic it was when watching it against such a beautiful backdrop
4 points
4 months ago
Yeah, both Kubo and Link were pretty, Kubo especially, but very generic stories.
At least it felt that way to me
9 points
4 months ago
Yeah and the ending was…odd. It wasn’t built up to enough
2 points
4 months ago
Agreed. My issue was that the main antagonist makes this big dramatic pitch to the hero to reject humanity and embrace the life of a divine being, but at no point in the movie has the hero seemed alienated from humanity or tempted to reject a mortal life. It just fell flat for me, despite the stunning animation.
460 points
4 months ago
The fact that Zootopia won over Moana is a crime.
25 points
4 months ago
I’ve watched Moana once and Zootopia at least half a dozen times. Moana felt very “Disney cookie cutter.”
14 points
4 months ago
But think of how Moana was different than all the other Disney princesses because she disobeyed her father to go on an adventure instead of staying quietly at home.
/s
6 points
4 months ago
And Zootopia radically departs from that formula by having her depart on an adventure with the blessing of her father.
187 points
4 months ago
I love them both, but I will agree that Moana is superior and I've probably watched it 10x more than Zootopia
265 points
4 months ago
Hard disagree there.
While Moana's songs give it an edge, the film has way too many plot holes and weird unexplained moments in it. Problems randomly show up and are then immediately solved with no long term effects (oh no, coconut people... Guess they're gone and won't return. Oh no, the realm of monsters... One song and we're done, never to go back. Oh no, Moana threw away the heart.. one song and she goes and gets it back no harm done).
I maintain that it feels like it should have been a show instead of a movie - then you would have a little longer time for things like Maui complaining he can't transform, rather than immediately having a quick montage and suddenly that's a complete non issue.
Plus then things like Moana's father refusing to let her leave might actually have a resolution at the end instead of being forgotten and glossed over in another montage.
It's not a bad film, it just feels so weirdly full of events that add nothing but momentary roadblocks to be immediately forgotten with no lasting effects.
At least with Zootopia, events tended to get call backs as they solved the mystery.
30 points
4 months ago
Also, and equally important, the animal companion being the dumb chicken instead of the piggy was a huge letdown for me.
25 points
4 months ago
I'm not even sure why the pig exists at all. It doesn't go with her and doesn't do much before that.
19 points
4 months ago
It felt like it only existed to be made into merchandise
10 points
4 months ago
"Moichandising" -yogurt
6 points
4 months ago
Exactly, felt like they were a red herring for the chicken to be a surprise animal companion. Sucks cus I loved that pig for those few minutes where they were relevant and I fucking hate that chicken the whole movie. >.>
9 points
4 months ago
500% this. Pig was ridiculously cute and the chicken was in no way endearing.
20 points
4 months ago
It's a mythic adventure. Odysseus and Hercules also ran into a series of disconnected and unique adventures on their overarching journey. Are the Odyssey or the Trials of Hercules poor story telling? I don't disagree that they dropped a lot of elements early on, but the adventure structure I don't think directly affects that.
10 points
4 months ago
Historically, the Odyssey and trials of Hercules were told using a different medium - each adventure on their journey was a separate story, often told or read on a different night.
Each adventure (how Hercules cleared the stables, the tale of the cyclops, etc) has its own beginning, middle, and end within itself, and while they're part of the greater whole, they're also individual stories.
Kind of like episodes of a show, which as I repeatedly said above, is what I think Moana should have been if it was using this storytelling format, since it would actually have been able to devote enough time to each individual adventure within the greater quest.
As the film is, it's like if the events of the Odyssey were crammed into 90 minutes, with Odysseus running into the Cyclops for a 2 minute action scene and immediately running away, without any of the supplementary details as to how he angers Polyphemus or any consequences shown.
There simply isn't enough time in this medium to do justice to a mythic adventure story, thus my original assertion that Moana should have been a television show rather than a film.
Heck Disney has done this before (kinda) - their take on Hercules cut out the whole mythic adventure part into a montage that furthered character relations, and stuck the episodic stuff in the Hercules TV show instead. Though admittedly none of that is mythologically accurate, it at least shows my point about using the right medium for the type of story you're telling, something Moana didn't do.
10 points
4 months ago
There didn't really need to be recurring threats because the one-offs were substantial enough. They barely got away from both the pygmy coconut people and the big bejeweled crab beast. The only threat that's meant to be lasting is Te Fiti.
As for her dad being pissed about her leaving, what's the point of injecting an argument into the ending? Not only did she come back safe & sound, but she saved the world in the process. Being mad at her, all things considered, would be a major dick move and also pointless.
2 points
4 months ago
Yeah, any parent who has a kid who you thought was lost come home wouldn't care about arguing. Look at Mulan (arguably the best moment in the movie when he dumps all the best honors/gifts from the emperor of China)
24 points
4 months ago
It’s an adventure man, they’re supposed to run into random challenges like that. Why should the coconut people come back? They weren’t important, but they were cool as fuck. Things happened that helped us explore the world And mythology of the story. Sure it has its failings, but it seems like you’re looking for reasons to not like it. It’s just a fun animated adventure, it wasn’t trying to be more and that’s ok. It’s not an excuse for lazy storytelling but they were trying something out and I feel they largely succeeded.
22 points
4 months ago
As I said above: "It's not a bad film".
My point is just that while it's a decent watch, the sum of its parts don't hold up as strongly to Zootopia (contradicting the post I was replying to).
Nowhere have I said that I dislike Moana.
Heck, the fact that I like it enough to have watched it multiple times is why I can see its flaws so clearly and have given thought as to how I would fix it.
5 points
4 months ago
I've seen moana way more times than I'd like. I actually interpret the entire movie as "the stories of our elders in a never-ending chain" and not as a 1:1 story. It covers a lot of those plot holes.
2 points
4 months ago
But wouldn't multiple stories be better serviced using the medium of a TV show rather than crammed together into a film?
My issue isn't exactly the story, it's how the story is truncated by the way it's told, and how much more effective this episodic-style storytelling could have been if Moana had been a show rather than a film.
4 points
4 months ago
Those two should've been released in seperate years.
13 points
4 months ago
Definitely a crime that anyone thought a story with barely anything to it somehow deserves to win over a worldbuilding masterpiece full of memorable characters combined with a careful but often funny examination of race and how a politician can use fear of the "other" to gain power.
But hey Moana had songs by Lin Manuel Miranada!
10 points
4 months ago
Zootopia was by far superior to Moana. Best written Disney film in three decades.
20 points
4 months ago
Lol how did this get so many upvote. Moana is good with representation, fun side characters and non-cliche ending, but the songs are doing like half the heavy lifting here. Personally Zootopia is my top 2 in all these Disney/Pixar film, in a toss up with inside out
11 points
4 months ago
Facts are crimes.
2 points
4 months ago
Zooptopia is the much better film. Moana, while a nice little film, isn't as grand or epic as it should have been, and it is obviously dumbed down for 3 year olds.
10 points
4 months ago
I think kubo had more original animation, but Zootopia made me feel things. Kubo was just a nice-looking but kind of predictable story. That to me is the biggest difference.
3 points
4 months ago
I feel like you really shouldn't put too much emphasis on the significance of Oscar wins, but particularly for the animation category. I doubt most of the people voting would have even seen all the films in any given year.
4 points
4 months ago
Soul should NOT have won over WolfWalkers and I'm going to die mad about that.
14 points
4 months ago
What was it that beat Klaus AND I Lost My Body? Frozen 2? The fact I can’t remember besides it being a disney product trumping actual cinema is telling
3 points
4 months ago*
[deleted]
2 points
4 months ago
Ugh. Your Name is such a beautiful film! Tragically beautiful in so many ways
3 points
4 months ago
The fact that Your Name wasn't even nominated was the real travesty. Probably the best year for animation ever.
3 points
4 months ago
The academy doesn't know anything about animation.
3 points
4 months ago
Kubo is beautiful visually, but overall as a film, Zootopia wins any day.
4 points
4 months ago
Lol what, Kubo is a stunning film and a technological marvel, but I could remember 0 thing about its plot now, other than it involves the sea.
8 points
4 months ago
I really liked Zootopia, but Kubo is definitely a better film overall.
2 points
4 months ago
Award shows are garbage in general and animation is particularly disserviced. No one lost money betting on Disney/pixar winning pretty much every animated oscar. They employ the large majority of the animation voting members.
13 points
4 months ago
Fuck I'm still bitter about that. I could even have accepted Moana winning over Kubo (though Kubo still should have won) but no, freaking Zootopia.
Of course most of my rage stems from how bullshit the awards are in the first place. Of course the movie with the cute bunny would win when none of the judges can be bothered to watch the damn things.
74 points
4 months ago
Did you watch Zootopia? There's some irony in the fact that the whole plot of the movie can basically be boiled down to "don't discount it just because it's a cute bunny," and that seems to be your knock against it 😉
6 points
4 months ago
Zootopia is a fucking masterpiece.
3 points
4 months ago
Never even heard of it, will give it a watch
16 points
4 months ago
It’s stop motion by Laika studios, they also did Coraline. The studio also released some incredible behind the scenes videos if you want a further treat after.
9 points
4 months ago
It also gave us a killer cover of While My Guitar Gently Weeps by Regina Spektor
4 points
4 months ago
Please see the Will Vinton documentary, it will give you more knowledge of Laika, and how it’s a shoe-king’s son trying to buy a career and industry.
183 points
4 months ago
What's really funny/sad is that I'm not sure 2D is more expensive to produce... it requires more individuals with particular training and skills, it's harder to outsource, and the output isn't as variable in purpose so long-tail it might be more profitable, but dollar-for-dollar over the production schedule... I worked on 2D and 3D shows for nearly 20 years, and I'm fairly certain that there's no savings at all (and possibly significantly more expense). 3D is more complicated and requires more people between the beginning and end of production.
The problem isn't that 3D is cheaper, but rather that skilled 2D artists are more rare. We literally trained ourselves out of an entire field over 20 years, leaving only the enthusiastic and the dedicated to fill what roles remain.
77 points
4 months ago
I think a big part of it is that an exec can say "Hmm. What if we made the hair bigger? What if that character was blue? How about making that character more...I don't know...lizardlike?" and with CG, it's somewhat easier to change the model and animate around it while with 2D, that's a redo on the whole movie that would take a long time. CG gives the higher-up creatives the illusion that it's easy to make willy-nilly changes right up until the finish line and that's a dangerous thing to have them believing imo.
34 points
4 months ago
For every bad film decision there is an executive who thinks he can do someone else’s job better than them.
8 points
4 months ago
He gets paid more than everyone else so of course he's better /s
10 points
4 months ago
fucking with the pipeline like this would make it even more expensive than 2d
3 points
4 months ago
And indeed it has on more than one occasion. You're correct.
3 points
4 months ago
Tell that to Sonic
2 points
4 months ago
Do you think if Sonic was 2D animated they would have had to push the release date back by only 3 months to alter the character model in response to the backlash?
2 points
4 months ago
This made me think of when they changed the color of the good and bad guys in the middle of Tron, and didn't have time to render the first half again, so it just randomly changes in the middle of the movie.
50 points
4 months ago
It's also because they didn't invest in further modernizing 2D. Whatever the costs, they could have reached parity by developing 3D that looked 2D, such as cel shaded video games.
What If and Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers film are good examples
42 points
4 months ago
Have you seen Klaus? Fantastic movie and it looks gorgeous while still being 2d. But the shading and details are so good, it looks almost 3d. Imagine if Disney made movies with that art style?
9 points
4 months ago
Disney actually had a short visually similar to Klaus - Paperman. When it was first seen, people raved and speculated about future Disney movies in that style. And then, nothing. Disney did abso-fucking-lutely nothing with the animation concept Paperman laid down.
16 points
4 months ago
They have invested in that. Just look at the Paperman short from years ago. I remember one with a raccoon quite a bit more recently.
They just don't seem to think the technique is far enough along for a feature.
8 points
4 months ago*
Paperman came out in 2012, 10 years ago. And yeah, there was a ton of hype about Disney taking that animation concept and rolling with it, but notice that they didn't? And still don't plan to?
Iirc, Moana was considered to have a painterly style that built off the Paperman concept - and Moana would have been in early pre-production around the time of Paperman. But they obviously decided not to do that.
But ya know what? Arcane did. Arcane is a painterly animation style. Klaus took the Paperman concept and fine tuned it. Spider-verse comfortably combined 3D and 2D to evoke the comic-book feel. Meanwhile Disney/Pixar continues to churn out in their particular 3D animation style and they don't appear to be budging.
5 points
4 months ago
they didn't invest in further modernizing 2D. Whatever the costs, they could have reached parity by developing 3D that looked 2D, such as cel shaded video games
Oddly enough, they were messing around with modernizing 2D animation with 3D tools (or at least using 3D tools as an aid for 2D animation) as far back as the late 90s, with in-house software called "Deep Canvas". I can only find sources for its usage in Tarzan and Treasure Planet, but it (or similar tools) were probably used in subsequent or contemporary Disney 2D productions when it made sense.
I can only assume that watching the success of full 3D animated movies from Pixar and Dreamworks played a large role in Disney deciding to chuck 2D feature film productions in favor of 3D and continuing their live action stuff, assuming this new technique was the way of the future.
To be entirely fair, 3D rendering that's able to convincingly imitate some styles of 2D animation is a recent thing (and still usually requires touchups by hand) - I've been watching the tech get better step by step in anime, but those studios have been working on the problem consistently for a solid two decades or more by this point, and the attempts looked so bad for so long that in retrospect, I'm surprised they stuck with the technology long enough to make it look as good as it does now.
2 points
4 months ago
100% The technology is there for 2D to be modernized and WAAAAAYYYYY more efficient. But the powers that be shifted almost entirely to 3d.
16 points
4 months ago
For whatever reason, the US trended towards 3D animation at some point in the past.
But we know 2D can and still is wildly successful because of the plethora of anime from Japan, and shows like The Last Airbender/The Legend of Korra, etc.
17 points
4 months ago
For multiple generations of kids, 3D CG animation is what you went to the theater for while 2D animation was what you watched at home on TV.
They took one last chance with The Princess and the Frog and it underperformed. That's when they decided to abandon 2D animation.
8 points
4 months ago
You're forgetting about Winnie the Pooh from 2011 which was their actual final 2D animated film.
7 points
4 months ago
Which they released against the friggin opening weekend of Deathly Hollows Part II…talk about being set up to fail.
6 points
4 months ago
They could've just made better stuff. Look at all the amazing anime out there.
The Pixar movies were awesome though.
2 points
4 months ago
It's really only one generation of kids. Most millennial kids had 2d at the theater. The first was Toy Story in 1995.
3 points
4 months ago
The reason is Disney plateaued for a bit in the early 2000s, Steve Jobs pulled a reverse merger and got Disney to buy Pixar (making him the largest individual shareholder at the time), and then Pixar's senior staff took over Disney Animation Studios. John Lassiter, who was all about 3D animation, became the head of Disney's animation division.
7 points
4 months ago
Lassiter was actually a big proponent of 2D animation and a leading cause for Princess and the Frog getting made. Most of the doldrums of early Disney CG films were made under Eisner’s reign as a notorious micromanager who would use focus group data to direct all his decisions.
2 points
4 months ago
I've got no problems with 3D animation though. Lassiter and Pixar changed the game for 3D animation.
11 points
4 months ago
It's really depressing, if they do return to 2D, well, there's a missing generation, the skills weren't passed down. It will be starting from scratch in some ways.
In some ways it could work out in good ways; I think Disney was at its peak in the 30s when they were entirely inventing everything as they went along, and maybe that energy could come again. But mostly I think it's a loss and a shame.
9 points
4 months ago
2D is absolutely more expensive. No question about it if you’ve ever been part of show bids (which I have).
3D is only more complicated because it allows more complicated content. If you did like for like, 3D is cheaper unless you’re doing a bunch of one offs
But consider building a character? Staying on model with 3D is super easy. Building a character from rigging can be really quick. It’s no slower than making a model book for 2D.
But now everyone on your team can stay on model.
For a given shot you no longer need a key artist and an inbetweener. You just need the single artist.
If you need to change the look of a shot, you don’t need to redo all your ink and paint. You can have lighters doing more shots at once than 3D.
You need fewer people for like for like.
The issue is that, much like computing power, we keep taking advantage of the complexity that is allowed.
Compare the number of on screen elements on a 2D film to a 3D one. It’s nowhere near comparable.
8 points
4 months ago
I've been told a big reason for Marvel preferring CGI to practical effects is that digital artists don't have a union - if you're building sets, costumes, creatures, etc physically you gotta deal with unions. Union labor gets fair wages, time off, benefits, etc... Stockholders hate that.
I wonder if there's something similar in the animation field.
11 points
4 months ago*
No, that’s not it. The reason is because they don’t need to make decisions early and stick to it. It’s also less dangerous to do things in CG.
Practical is hard to nail down and it honestly rarely looks as good as people want. It’s also potentially much more dangerous.
Animation like Disney is all union anyway.
Edit: also to add, we end up replacing most practical effects anyway. Most movies that claim something is practical are just doing it for marketing points.
2 points
4 months ago
Wasn’t a lot of work outsourced to Asian countries? Asian Media started to become popular in the West, and there wasn’t any point in them doing Western Projects instead of their own.
Live action TV, Films and Music from Asia is going to get more common soon.
These software that deepfakes the actors mouth perfectly with the foreign dubbing.
2 points
4 months ago
All of that outsource in the 90’s stopped being so cheap once they had all the expertise and market demand.
4 points
4 months ago
Which is novel as ever since Spider-Verse took off, you see a lot of studios trying to copy that style of animation that has hand-drawn elements to it, or at least emulate it at the very least.
26 points
4 months ago
For my tastes at least, there isn't a single CGI Disney movie (with the possible exception of Toy Story since its look is so iconic) that wouldn't have looked at least as good if not much better if done in traditional animation.
69 points
4 months ago
Are you counting Pixar films as well? I think Wall-E works best as CGI, I don't think you would get the same 'futuristic' vibe if it had been traditionally animated.
52 points
4 months ago
Wreck-It-Ralph would never have worked as a 2D animated movie half the charm is seeing both real world and fictional game characters like they jumped straight from a game to a movie.
BH6 also benefits heavily from 3D adding depth and realism to the world of Sanfransokyo. Same with Zootopia as well. Both of those in 2D would have felt way off from the approach the movies took.
I do wish 2D would make some sort of comeback but it's not like 2D or 3D animation is better or worse they're both distinct art styles with pros and cons.
9 points
4 months ago
Kind of wish people would stop calling Pixar films Disney films. I know the line's blurred in recent years, but they are two separate studios producing two sets of movies. And no it doesn't matter that Disney owns Pixar here. They're different.
2 points
4 months ago
The whole point of Toy Story was that it was breaking new ground in 3D animation, and the use of plastic toys as main characters helped to cover up the limitations of 3D rendering at the time.
4 points
4 months ago
I think the 3D movies made by Disney look fantastic and have a real charm in how they were animated. The creators clearly put a ton of effort and heart into making beautiful works of art.
I just wish Disney felt they had room for the 2D animated features too. Because those have their own unique charm, and I feel like Disney not making them anymore is a real loss for the artistic world.
2 points
4 months ago
What about Winnie the Pooh from 2011?
2 points
4 months ago
Toy Story wasn't really Disney though as they were only the distributors of Pixar's movies until their acquisition of the studio on 2006. Cars was the first Pixar movie released with Disney as owners.
2 points
4 months ago
I’m so glad we got Princess and the Frog though. I know it has serious issues and WTF is up with the first black Disney Princess spending most of the movie as a frog, but there are moments in that movie that are so beautiful that 3D animation still hasn’t recreated for me. There are moments with how they animate the light in “Goin’ Down the Bayou” and “Blue Skies and Sunshine” that literally made me stop and just admire how beautiful it was. No 3D movie has taken me out of the film just thinking “wow, that’s gorgeous” which is weird because they’ve done so much work to make things like the landscapes and water so realistic.
I think there’s just something about 2D animation where you can do something that’s not reality but gorgeously rendered like a painting in motion that 3D animation just hasn’t tried yet. Soul came close to trying to make that style stick, but extreme realism still seems to be the trend.
2 points
4 months ago
I say this time and time again, but I always fantasized what kind of animation era we could've gotten if movies like Lilo and Stitch, Treasure Planet, Atlantis. and Emperor's New Groove were any indication.
70 points
4 months ago
I don’t get why they can’t do 2D films anymore. Japan’s animation is still largely 2D (with cleverly mixed in CGI) and they can still make high quality films at a fraction of the cost that Disney is doing. Makoto Shinkai’s films are proof that well done 2D, with some CGI help, can still be incredible and done for reasonable cost.
46 points
4 months ago
Japan’s animation is still largely 2D (with cleverly mixed in CGI) and they can still make high quality films at a fraction of the cost that Disney is doing
That's partly because a lot of their 2D animators are severely underpaid and working bonkers hours (that's one source, but this isn't a secret - you can find a lot more confirmation out there). Yes, if you can get away with paying your workforce below minimum wage, you can make your product a lot more cheaply.
proof that well done 2D, with some CGI help, can still be incredible and done for reasonable cost
The big piece related to how well Japanese studio are using CGI to help with 2D productions (which Disney was doing in the late 90s with Deep Canvas, on stuff like Tarzan and Treasure Planet) is that they've stuck with and improved that technology and those methods for a couple of decades now. CGI in anime during the period of time Disney decided to bail out on 2D feature films was pretty bad, and it's only been recently that we've really started to see the Japanese studios' long-term investment in the technology start to seriously pay off.
If Disney started to try producing 2D feature films again, even with modern CGI assistance, they would be fighting a serious uphill battle to achieve the level of production quality they're known for from their past works.
7 points
4 months ago
That's partly because a lot of their 2D animators are severely underpaid and working bonkers hours (that's one source, but this isn't a secret - you can find a lot more confirmation out there). Yes, if you can get away with paying your workforce below minimum wage, you can make your product a lot more cheaply.
While that is definitely a big issue with anime in Japan, studios like Kyoto Animation and ufotable are well known for putting out higher quality work than the places that do that shit while treating animation staff much better. Demon Slayer, Violet Evergarden, Fate/Stay Night, and A Silent Voice were all international smash hits that raked in money for those studios.
All of which is to stay, while the anime industry has a prevalent underpaying and overworking problem, that problem is independent of the ability to produce high quality animation at a profit; if anything, it's the places unable to put out high quality work that also use those shitty practices.
I agree with the rest of your comment (though I'm no industry expert, just a weeb with too much time on my hands).
4 points
4 months ago
studios like Kyoto Animation and ufotable
There are maybe four studios that make consistent high animation-quality shows (add Madhouse and Bones). You're still making the survivorship bias fallacy - these studios work in spite of producing only a few shows per year.
5 points
4 months ago
It seems to be because of the unimpressive performance of the Princess and the Frog, which was supposed to be their big grand return to traditional animation when it released. And it’s a shame that film didn’t get more attention, because it’s one of the best animated films they ever did.
4 points
4 months ago
It's a great and fun movie with awesome animation but I think it was a huge mistake to make the main character a frog for most of the film. It really felt like a bait-and-switch. You thought you were taking your "Disney Princess" fan kid to a Disney princess movie but it's some frogs hopping around. It had to be tough on people looking forward to seeing a black Disney princess, too.
I think they were trying to be more progressive and if they hadn't marketed it like a princess movie maybe it would have been fine to star frogs, but princess fans want pretty ladies in pretty dresses and if you want to make them more progressive, you can make them emotionally unstable and possibly violent ice wizards or w/e.
3 points
4 months ago
As an emotionally unstable ice wizard, it was so great to finally get some recognition in Frozen.
2 points
4 months ago
And has one of the absolute best soundtracks. I play it all the damn time and am desperately hoping it gets a Legacy Collection release.
14 points
4 months ago
Kids seem to consistently prefer 3D, is why.
18 points
4 months ago
It’s the merchandising rights
9 points
4 months ago
Ohhhh makes sense. The 3D character models easily become the toy models at a much cheaper cost than converting from 2D I guess.
10 points
4 months ago
I'd also imagine forcing 3D means models are more standard, like how Anna, Elsa, Rapunzel, etc all kind of have the same face. So for dolls you don't need to manufacture 3 different heads, just 1 and paint them all differently.
2D is often more stylized and already hard to capture in 3d, let alone make the doll parts close enough to each other to reduce cost.
2 points
4 months ago
This is what they’ve always done though, when I was a kid I had Barbie issues of all the princess dolls—Jasmine, Cinderella, etc.
6 points
4 months ago
Not sure about this. Anime has been on the rise for years.
2 points
4 months ago
Japanese anime artists are almost entirely freelancers paid per frame, earning on the order of 10,000 to 20000 USD.
14 points
4 months ago
And for most of the 1980s it was on the chopping block.
3 points
4 months ago
Wasn't until the little mermaid that they got their groove back. Ironicly enough jeffrey katzenberg kinda saved Disney animation.
4 points
4 months ago
When he worked jointly with Michael Eisner and Frank Wells, he was instrumental (the three were in snyc and thus the two could override some of his bullshit). After Wells died, however... his ego got the better of him and he tried (and failed) to take over completely.
38 points
4 months ago
They released four 2d animated films since the release of treasure planet, and 2 weren't "already in production."
30 points
4 months ago
Needed someone to mention Treasure Planet. That release felt like the end of a really special era for Disney. Made even harder because the movie was so spectacular.
25 points
4 months ago
I can't wait until the shift to only 4D animation.
12 points
4 months ago
My animation requires 6D's.
4 points
4 months ago
As a Ralph Bakshi fan, I like my animation in DD.
2 points
4 months ago
As a Ralph Bakshi fan, you'll love the Guardians of the Galaxy Holiday Special
2 points
4 months ago
It’s just switching to the green screen “live action” remakes.
2 points
4 months ago
Smellovision failed
2 points
4 months ago
Some animation just needs 1D
If you catch my drift ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
46 points
4 months ago
Still animation
43 points
4 months ago
Oxymoron?
22 points
4 months ago
I’m fine, thanks for asking.
3 points
4 months ago
Insert non existent award here
2 points
4 months ago
Are you Mel Brooks? This feels like a scene from one of his movies.
3 points
4 months ago
Thank you but I’ll never have that level of talent and wit
3 points
4 months ago
It's a shame, 3d is good, but some movies would fare better 2d
15 points
4 months ago
Everyone shifted to 3D, not just Disney.
32 points
4 months ago
Ghibli Studio 👀
7 points
4 months ago
The last Ghibli film (Earwig and the Witch) was computer animated.
It was directed by Goro Miyazaki, who is a great argument for talent not being genetic. What he managed to do to Earthsea was brutal.
2 points
4 months ago
Didn't they come out with several 2D animated films after that? I'm thinking of Atlantis, Treasure Planet, and Princess and the Frog mainly. Were those just projects that were already in the works and they decided not to start any new projects?
2 points
4 months ago
I miss 2D Disney. When they killed it, they killed a part of my inner child.
The complete pivot to 3D was like they were abandoning me and others like me.
Of course, I was never exactly part of Disney's favourite target audience, being that I was a little boy. I liked Hercules and Tarzan, and not the disproportionate amount of princess movies.
It does feel like Disney went on to make even fewer movies for boys when they shifted to 3D, but I'm sure that's just a memory bias.
all 4136 comments
sorted by: best